| Literature DB >> 30643814 |
Seyed Amirebrahim Emami Moghaddam1, Razif Harun1, Mohd Noriznan Mokhtar2, Rabitah Zakaria2.
Abstract
The interest in utilizing algae for wastewater treatment has been increased due to many advantages. Algae-wastewater treatment system offers a cost-efficient and environmentally friendly alternative to conventional treatment processes such as electrocoagulation and flocculation. In this biosystem, algae can assimilate nutrients in the wastewater for their growth and simultaneously capture the carbon dioxide from the atmosphere during photosynthesis resulting in a decrease in the greenhouse gaseousness. Furthermore, the algal biomass obtained from the treatment process could be further converted to produce high value-added products. However, the recovery of free suspended algae from the treated effluent is one of the most important challenges during the treatment process as the current methods such as centrifugation and filtration are faced with the high cost. Immobilization of algae is a suitable approach to overcome the harvesting issue. However, there are some drawbacks with the common immobilization carriers such as alginate and polyacrylamide related to low stability and toxicity, respectively. Hence, it is necessary to apply a new carrier without the mentioned problems. One of the carriers that can be a suitable candidate for the immobilization is zeolite. To date, various types of zeolite have been used for the immobilization of cells of bacteria and yeast. If there is any possibility to apply them for the immobilization of algae, it needs to be considered in further studies. This article reviews cell immobilization technique, biomass immobilization onto zeolites, and algal immobilization with their applications. Furthermore, the potential application of zeolite as an ideal carrier for algal immobilization has been discussed.Entities:
Mesh:
Substances:
Year: 2018 PMID: 30643814 PMCID: PMC6311242 DOI: 10.1155/2018/6563196
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Biomed Res Int Impact factor: 3.411
Advantages of cell immobilization over suspended cell.
| Advantages of immobilization | References |
|---|---|
| Simplifying biomass harvesting | [ |
| Higher cell density | [ |
| Enhancing operational stability | [ |
| Avoiding cell washouts | [ |
| Increasing cell resistance to unfavorable factors | [ |
| Occupying less space | [ |
| Easier to handle | [ |
| Using repeatedly | [ |
Immobilization methods of microorganisms and their advantages and disadvantages (Figures adapted from [4, 62]).
| Method | Definition | Advantages | Disadvantages | Figure | References |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Adsorption | Based on physical interaction between biomass and support surface | (i) Simplicity | (i) Relative weakness of the adsorptive binding forces |
| [ |
|
| |||||
| Covalent bonding | Based on bonding reaction of some groups (e.g. —COOH or —NH2) at the surface of microorganism | (i) More stable than adsorption | (i) Involves toxic bifunctional reagents |
| [ |
|
| |||||
| Cross-linking | Based on linking bio-macromolecules to each other by covalent bonds using multifunctional reagents (e.g. glutaraldehyde) | (i) Simple method | (i) Very difficult to control |
| [ |
|
| |||||
| Encapsulation | Based on encapsulating microorganisms into synthetic or natural polymers | (i) Natural polymers | (i) Diffusion limitation |
| [ |
|
| |||||
| Entrapment in a matrix | Based on microorganism entrapment in porous polymer support | (i) Natural polymers (Higher nutrient/product diffusion rates and more environmentally friendly) | (i) Transfer limitations |
| [ |
Figure 1Primary and secondary building units of natural zeolite (adapted from [69]).
Various types of zeolite-immobilized biomass and their applications.
| Type of zeolite | Immobilized biomass | Applications | Findings | References |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Clinoptilolite |
| Copper and iron removal | Biosorption capacity of 28.65 mg/g copper and 34.72 mg/g iron | [ |
| Mg-modified zeolite |
| L (+) lactic acid production | Overall productivity of 1.41 g/L/h | [ |
| Zeolite |
| Succinic acid production | Productivity of 2.83 g/L h | [ |
| Zeolite (type 13X) |
| Lactic acid production | Productivity of 1.69 g/ L | [ |
| Chilean natural zeolite |
| Ammonium removal | Adsorption capacity of 2.7 mg/g | [ |
| Zeolite 13X |
| Chromium removal | 100% removal | [ |
| Trace metal |
| Biogas production | Methane increase by 53% | [ |
| Zeolite NaY |
| Chromium, cadmium, iron, nickel removal | 100% removal for iron | [ |
| Natural zeolite |
| Chromium removal | 18% removal | [ |
| Natural zeolite |
| Anaerobic treatment of Wastewater | COD removal efficiencies as high as 90% | [ |
| Natural zeolite |
| Ethanol fermentation | Ethanol concentration 2% (w/v) | [ |
| Zeolite |
| Alcoholic fermentation | Productivity of 35.6 g ethanol/L.h | [ |
Figure 2The process of metal sorption by living algal cells: M: metal ions, Mc: metal ion complex, F: functional groups, H: hydrogen ion, SH: sulphydryl (adapted from [17, 95, 99]).
Various types of immobilized microalgae and their applications.
| Microalgae strain | Kind of support | Applications | Findings | References |
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
| Chitosan nanofiber mats | Nitrate removal | Around 87% removal | [ |
|
| Sodium alginate beads | Copper and zinc removal | Biosorption capacity of 33.4 for copper and 28.5 mg/g for zinc | [ |
|
| NaCS-PDMDAAC | Total nitrogen (T-N) and phosphate (PO43− -P) | Removal rate of 12.56 for T-N and 10.24 mg/g biomass per day for PO43− -P | [ |
|
| Ca-alginate beads | Removal of Cu(II), Zn(II) and Ni(II) | Maximum adsorption capacity of 75.6, 55.2 and 30.4 mg/g for Cu(II), Zn(II) and Ni(II) | [ |
|
| Chitosan | Removal of nitrate and phosphate | 70% nitrate and 94% phosphate removal | [ |
|
| Loofa sponge | Removal of Cr(III) | Maximum biosorption capacity of 69.26 mg Cr(III)/g biosorbent | [ |
|
| The twin-layer system | Removal of nitrogen and phosphorus | Removal to less than 10% of the initial concentration | [ |
|
| Calcium alginate | Removal of Cu and Cd | Removal of all Cu and removal of around 20% of total Cd | [ |
|
| Calcium alginate beads | Phosphorus (P) and nitrogen (N) uptake | 0.012 mg P h−1 and 0.009 mg N h−1 for Scenedesmus intermedius and 0.009 mg P h−1and 0.006 mg N h−1 for Nannochloris sp. | [ |
|
| Loofa sponge | The removal of nickel(II) | Biosorption capacity of 60.38 mg nickel(II)/g | [ |
|
| Filter paper | Removal of inorganic nitrogen sources | The removal rate of total inorganic N ion of 5.11 mg N l−1day−1 | [ |
|
| Vegetable sponge of Luffa cylindrica | Cadmium removal | The cadmium sorption capacity of 192 mg/g | [ |
|
| Luffa sponge discs | Removal of Ni(II) | The removal of 97% of equilibrium loading | [ |
|
| Calcium alginate beads | Removal of N and P | 100% removal of NH4+-N and around 95% reduction of PO43−-P | [ |
|
| Sodium alginate | Biosorption of cadmium, zinc and gold | Near 100% metal removal for cadmium and zinc and 90% removal of gold | [ |