| Literature DB >> 30302054 |
Zhixuan Yin1,2, Xuejun Bi1,2, Chenlu Xu1,2.
Abstract
An increase in the number of publications in recent years indicates that besides ammonia-oxidizing bacteria (AOB), ammonia-oxidizing archaea (AOA) may play an important role in nitrogen removal from wastewater, gaining wide attention in the wastewater engineering field. This paper reviews the current knowledge on AOA and AOB involved in wastewater treatment systems and summarises the environmental factors affecting AOA and AOB. Current findings reveal that AOA have stronger environmental adaptability compared with AOB under extreme environmental conditions (such as low temperature and low oxygen level). However, there is still little information on the cooperation and competition relationship between AOA and AOB, and other microbes related to nitrogen removal, which needs further exploration. Furthermore, future studies are proposed to develop novel nitrogen removal processes dominated by AOA by parameter optimization.Entities:
Mesh:
Substances:
Year: 2018 PMID: 30302054 PMCID: PMC6158934 DOI: 10.1155/2018/8429145
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Archaea Impact factor: 3.273
Figure 1Schematic illustration of ammonia oxidation pathways in ammonia-oxidizing bacteria (a) and archaea (b). The figure is reproduced from Kozlowski et al. and Nishizawa et al. [66, 67]. Abbreviations: HAO, hydroxylamine dehydrogenase; NIR, nitrite reductase; NOR, nitric oxide reductase.
Comparison of AOA and AOB in different wastewater treatment systems.
| Biomass samples | Influent | Process parameter | AOA | AOB | AOA?AOB | Reference | |||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Wastewater type | Ammonia level (mg N/L) | COD (mg/L) | Temperature (°C) | DO (mg O2/L) | |||||
| ASa | Municipal wastewater | 14–33 | 116–233 | 18.2–25.4 | 3.08–4.50 | 8 × 101–2 × 103 copies mL−1 sludge | 1.2 × 106–4.1 × 106 copies mL−1 sludge | AOA < AOB | [ |
| AS | Municipal wastewater | 5.4–38.6 | 24.8–152.0 | N/A | 0.5–3.25 | 3.28 × 104 ± 1.74 × 104–2.23 × 108 ± 1.92 × 108 copies mL−1 sludge | 8.05 × 103 ± 5.20 × 103–5.72 × 106 ± 5.69 × 105 copies mL−1 sludge | AOA > AOB | [ |
| AS | Municipal wastewater | 16.3–76.6 | 115–580 | N/A | N/A | 6.3 × 105–4.5 × 106 copies g−1 sludge | 7.2 × 103–1.7 × 105 copies g−1 sludge | AOA > AOB | [ |
| AS | Municipal wastewater | 5.6–11.0 | 23.4–68.0 | N/A | N/A | 1.05 × 105 ± 6.74 × 104–7.48 × 108 ± 2.08 × 108 copies mL−1 sludge | 3.73 × 105 ± 3.07 × 105–9.05 × 107 ± 2.77 × 107 copies mL−1 sludge | AOA > AOB | [ |
| AS | Municipal wastewater | 14–58 | 154–603 | N/A | 0.2-3.5 | 9.38 × 102 ± 4.74 × 101–1.11 × 106 ± 1.46 × 106 copies g−1 sludge | 1.50 × 105 ± 6.90 × 104–3.32 × 108 ± 6.10 × 107 copies g−1 sludge | AOA < AOB | [ |
| AS | Municipal wastewater | 15.9 | 174 | 30 | 1.2 | 1.11 × 103 ± 3.02 × 101–2.35 × 103 ± 7.34 × 101 copies ng−1 DNA | 6.35 × 101 ± 2.3–1.76 × 102 ± 1.56 × 101 copies ng−1 DNA | AOA > AOB | [ |
| AS | Municipal wastewater | 35.8 | 336 | 16 | 1.7 | <LODb | 1.36 × 103 ± 3.68 × 101–2.71 × 104 ± 1.35 × 104 copies ng−1 DNA | AOA < AOB | [ |
| AS | Municipal wastewater | 15.9 | 110 | 22 | 1.4 | <LOD | 3.69 × 104 ± 1.5 × 103 copies ng−1 DNA | AOA < AOB | [ |
| AS | Municipal wastewater | 18.3 | 100 | N/A | N/A | 23–39 copies ng−1 DNA | 16–220 copies ng−1 DNA | AOA < AOB | [ |
| AS | Municipal wastewater | N/A | N/A | 13–23 | N/A | 1.6 × 102–1.9 × 102 copies ng−1 DNA | 1.1 × 103 copies ng−1 DNA | AOA < AOB | [ |
| AS | Municipal wastewater | N/A | N/A | 10–18 | N/A | 1.0 × 102–4.0 × 102 copies ng−1 DNA | 1.1 × 103–1.3 × 103 copies ng−1 DNA | AOA < AOB | [ |
| AS | Municipal/industrial wastewater | 20.5–474.8 | 365.2–2508.7 | N/A | 1.5–7.5 | <LOD-1.9 × 107 copies g−1 sludge | 4.625 × 104–9.99 × 109 copies g−1 sludge | AOA < AOB | [ |
| AS | Industrial wastewater | 35.2–262.0 | 524–2730 | N/A | N/A | 5.7 × 103–9.9 × 103 copies g−1 sludge | 2.6 × 107–3.6 × 109 copies g−1 sludge | AOA < AOB | [ |
| AS | Industrial wastewater | 36.1–422.3 | 192–1410 | N/A | N/A | <LOD | 2.78 × 106 ± 1.32 × 106–4.25 × 107 ± 9.65 × 106 copies mL−1 sludge | AOA < AOB | [ |
| AS | Spiramycin production wastewater | 249 | 4575 | N/A | N/A | 1.72 × 105 ± 3.02 × 105 copies ng−1 DNA | 3.25 × 104 ± 3.17 × 102 copies ng−1 DNA | AOA > AOB | [ |
| AS | Oxytetracycline production wastewater | 164 | 3200 | 22 | N/A | 3.6 × 101 ± 3.0 × 101 copies ng−1 DNA | 3.9 × 104 ± 1.94 × 103 copies ng−1 DNA | AOA < AOB | [ |
| AS | Landfill leachates | 2180 ± 611 | 5565 ± 3397 | N/A | 0.3–2.5 | <LOD-1.1 × 104 ± 2.0 × 102 cells in extracted DNA | 2.1 × 103 ± 4.0 × 101–1.3 × 105 ± 1.0 × 103 cells in extracted DNA | AOA < AOB | [ |
| Biofilm | Municipal wastewater | 9.8 | 104 | N/A | N/A | 6.0 × 105 copies g−1 sludge | 3.6 × 104 copies g−1 sludge | AOA > AOB | [ |
| Biofilm | Municipal wastewater | 0.3–7.2 | N/A | 10–22 | 2–5 | 2.2 ± 0.3–7.8 ± 0.9 copies | 9.2 ± 0.7–128.0 ± 4.0 copies μL−1 DNA | AOA < AOB | [ |
| Biofilm | Municipal wastewater | N/A | N/A | 10–22 | 2–5 | 4.5 × 105 ± 0.1 × 105–1.9 × 106 ± 0.3 × 106 copies μL−1 DNA | 4.5 × 103 ± 0.1 × 103–1.1 × 104 ± 0.1 × 104 copies μL−1 DNA | AOA > AOB | [ |
| Biofilm | Municipal wastewater | 2.7–11.7 | 43–121 | 10–22 | 5 | 2.2 × 106 ± 0.1 × 106–1.0 × 107 ± 0.1 × 107 copies μL−1 DNA | 3.4 × 104 ± 0.3 × 104–1.0 × 105 ± 0.3 × 105 copies μL−1 DNA | AOA > AOB | [ |
| Biofilm | Municipal wastewater | 10.6 | 38 | 23.6–24.0 | 0.9–4.6 | 6.32 × 103–3.8 × 104 copies ng−1 DNA | 20.6–105.2 copies ng−1 DNA | AOA > AOB | [ |
| Wetland soil | Effluent from WWTP | 20–30 | 45–70 | 5.5–24 | N/A | 2.1 × 106 ± 0.2 × 106–1.8 × 107 ± 0.2 × 107 copies g−1 soil | 1.2 × 105 ± 0.2 × 105–5.2 × 107 ± 0.2 × 107 copies g−1 soil | AOA > AOB | [ |
aAS, activated sludge. bLOD, limit of detection.
Figure 2The proposed AOA/AOB in response to the varying environmental factors (ammonia, organic loading, oxygen level, and temperature) (based in part on Guo et al. [68]).