| Literature DB >> 31935958 |
Lin Li1, Yaqi You1, Krishna Pagilla1.
Abstract
Mechanistic understanding of how activated sludge (AS) solids density influences wastewater treatment processing is limited. Because microbial groups often generate and store intracellular inclusions during certain metabolic processes, it is hypothesized that some microorganisms, like polyphosphate-accumulating organisms (PAOs), would have higher biomass densities. The present study developed a density-based separation approach and applied it to suspended growth AS in two full-scale domestic water resource recovery facilities (WRRFs). Incorporating quantitative real-time PCR (qPCR) and fluorescence in situ hybridization (FISH) analyses, the research demonstrated the effectiveness of density-based separation in enriching key microbial functional groups, including ammonia-oxidizing bacteria (AOB), nitrite-oxidizing bacteria (NOB) and PAOs, by up to 90-fold in target biomass fractions. It was observed that WRRF process functionalities have significant influence on density-based enrichment, such that maximum enrichments were achieved in the sludge fraction denser than 1.036 g/cm3 for the enhanced biological phosphorus removal (EBPR) facility and in the sludge fraction lighter than 1.030 g/cm3 for the non-EBPR facility. Our results provide important information on the relationship between biomass density and enrichment of microbial functional groups in AS, contributing to future designs of enhanced biological treatment processes for improved AS settleability and performance.Entities:
Keywords: FISH; activated sludge; ammonia-oxidizing bacteria (AOB); density-based separation; enrichment of microbial functional groups; nitrite-oxidizing bacterial (NOB); phosphate accumulating organisms (PAOs); qPCR
Mesh:
Substances:
Year: 2020 PMID: 31935958 PMCID: PMC6981482 DOI: 10.3390/ijerph17010376
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Int J Environ Res Public Health ISSN: 1660-4601 Impact factor: 3.390
Description of the two full-scale domestic water resource recovery facilities and characteristics of activated sludge.
| Parameters | TMWRF 1 | STMWRF 2 |
|---|---|---|
| Source of Wastewater | 50% Domestic, 50% industrial | Mainly domestic |
| Biological Process 2 | EBPR | C, N |
| Solids Retention Time (day) | ~2.5 | 12 to 15 |
| Floc size 3 (μm) | 40 | 60 |
| Filament Abundance 4 | Some | Common |
| MLVSS (mg/L) 5 | 31.0 | 32.5 |
| Influent Flow Rate (×1000 m3/day) | 141 | 15 |
| Influent BOD 6 (mg/L) | 250 | 330 |
| Effluent BOD (mg/L) | ~5 | 7 |
| Effluent Total N (mg/L) | 0.2 | 8.4 |
| Effluent Total P (mg/L) | 0.4 | 2.1 |
| Effluent TSS 7 (mg/L) | 2.6 | <5 |
1 TMWRF, Truckee Meadows Water Reclamation Facility (Reno, NV, USA); STMWRF, South Truckee Meadows Water Reclamation Facility (Washoe County, NV, USA); 2 The biological processes are classified as carbon (C) removal, nitrogen (N) removal, and phosphate (P) removal; EBPR, enhanced biological phosphorus removal; 3 Floc sizes were determined as the average of 20 randomly selected flocs; 4 Filament abundance was determined by six scales (few, some, common, very common, abundant, and excessive) according to a previous study [18]; 5 MLVSS, mixed liquid volatile suspended solids; 6 BOD, biochemical oxygen demand; 7 TSS, total suspended solids.
Density Composition of Suspensions.
| Suspension Label | Net Density (g/cm3) | Supernatant of AS After Centrifuge (cm3) | Percoll (cm3) | Total Volume (cm3) |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| a | 1.030 | 79.4 | 20.6 | 100 |
| b | 1.036 | 74.6 | 25.4 | 100 |
| c | 1.042 | 69.8 | 30.2 | 100 |
Figure 1Density-based homogeneous separation of AS biomass. (A) A visualization of separation of AS from the EBPR facility TMWRF, using three density suspensions a, b and c as detailed in Table 1. AS was separated into two fractions, either lighter (e.g., 1030T) or denser (e.g., 1030B) than the net density of the suspension (e.g., 1.030 g/cm3 for the density suspension a). (B) Mass distribution of AS from an aeration tank in the EBPR facility TMWRF and from an oxidation ditch with nitrogen removal function in STMWRF performing conventional treatment.
Primers Used in This Study and qPCR Performance.
| Target Gene | Primer | Sequence (5′-3′) | Annealing Temp (°C) | Length (bp) | qPCR Performance | Reference | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| R2 | Efficiency | ||||||
| Eubacterial16S rRNA gene 1 | 27F | AGAGTTTGATCMTGGCTCAG | 60 | ~1500 | -- | -- | [ |
| 1492R | GGWTACCTTGTTACGACTT | ||||||
| Eubacterial 16S rRNA gene | 1369F | CGGTGAATACGTTCYCGG | 60 | 124 | 0.9966 | 91.09% | [ |
| 1492R | GGWTACCTTGTTACGACTT | ||||||
| PAOs 16S rRNA gene | 518F | CCAGCAGCCGCGGTAAT | 65 | 351 | 0.9985 | 95.56% | [ |
| 846R | GTTAGCTACGGCACTAAAAGG | ||||||
| amoA-1F | GGGGTTTCTACTGGTGGT | 60 | 491 | 0.9990 | 91.62% | [ | |
| amoA-2R | CCCCTCKGSAAAGCCTTCTTC | ||||||
| NSR1113F | CCTGCTTTCAGTTGCTACCG | 60 | 150 | 0.9994 | 93.82% | [ | |
| NSR1264R | GTTTGCAGCGCTTTGTACCG | ||||||
| Nitro119F | ACCCCTAGCAAATCTCAAAAAACCG | 60 | 227 | 0.9994 | 92.40% | [ | |
| Nitro1423R | CTTCACCCCAGTCGCTGACC | ||||||
1 Used in conventional PCR to generate nearly complete 16S rRNA gene for cloning.
Oligonucleotides Used for FISH.
| Target Prokaryote | Probe | Sequence (5′-3′) | Formamide (%) | Fluorochrome | Reference |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Eubacteria | EUB 338 | GCTGCCTCCCGTAGGAGT | 35 | ALEX488 | [ |
| β-Proteobacterial AOB 1 | Nso1225 | CGCCATTGTATTACGTGTGA | 35 | CY3 | [ |
| Genus | Ntspa1026 | AGCACGCTGGTATTGCTA | 20 | CY3 | [ |
| Genus | NIT3 | CCTGTGCTCCATGCTCCG | 40 | CY3 | [ |
| PAOmix | PAO462, PAO651 and PAO846 | 35 | CY5 | [ | |
| PAO462 | CCGTCATCTACWCAGGGTTTAAC | 35 | CY5 | ||
| PAO651 | CCCTCTGCCAAACTCCAG | 35 | CY5 | ||
| PAO846 | GTTAGCTACGGCACTAAAAGG | 35 | CY5 |
1 AOB, ammonia-oxidizing bacteria; 2 Competitor probe: CCTGTGCTCCAGGCTCCG.
Figure 2Enrichment factors for each microbial functional group achieved in sludge fractions separated using various homogenous densities. For example, 1030T designates the fraction lighter than 1.030 g/cm3 and 1030B designates the fraction denser than 1.030 g/cm3.
Figure 3CLSM images showing morphology and spatial organization of AS containing (A) AOB (yellow), (B) Nitrobacter spp. NOB (yellow), (C) Nitrospira spp. NOB (yellow), and (D) PAOs (red), along with total eubacteria (blue). Shown here are (1) unseparated TMWRF sludge, (2) TMWRF sludge fraction with the best enrichment effects (denser than 1.036 g/cm3), (3) unseparated STMWRF sludge, (4) STMWRF sludge fraction with the best enrichment effects (lighter than 1.030 g/cm3). Scale bar indicates 20 µm.
Figure 4Distance-based redundancy analysis (db-RDA) of microbial enrichment achieved in various sludge fractions (constrained inertia = 42.76%). Enrichment factors were constrained by facility types (TMWRF employing EBPR vs. STMWRF performing conventional treatment). Both facility operational condition (SRT) and sludge characteristic (DNA amount per gram of MLVSS) explained variations in enrichment (SRT: R2 = 0.126, P = 0.085; DNA/MLVSS: R2 = 0.302, P = 0.003).