Since the industrial revolution, the rapid development of industry has caused various
environmental problems that have global effects, including more intense El Nino and
La Nina events, tsunamis, global warming, fine dust pollution, etc. Subsequently,
developed countries have discussed on various environmental issues in the
international conventions and made many rules. As a result of the London Convention
Protocol 96, ocean dumping of all organic wastes have been banned and It took effect
since 2009 in Korea. And animal manure ocean dumping has been banned from 2012 in
Korea. For this reason, the demand for efficient methods of organic waste disposal
has been steadily increasing.Organic waste has been recycling through various technologies, it typically involves
composting, anaerobic digestion (AD), biochar, and purification methods. These
biomass recycling technologies break down organic matter or convert it into other
forms and could reduce pathogens for biological safety [1,2]. Among them,
bio-gasification converts organic matter, which consists of carbon, hydrogen, and
oxygen, into biogas through the microorganisms under anaerobicconditions. The
process of methane production classifies as hydrolysis, acidogenesis, acetogenesis,
and methanogenesis [3] and they need organic
substrates, which is consist of carbon and nitrogen, as a feedstock. Carbon type has
an effect on microbiota during AD [4], it may
lead to changes in the fermentation pattern. For this reason, the carbon type is
very important in the methane generation process. Nitrogen must require for
microbial growth, especially it is a basiccomponent of amino acids, and it uses
when synthesis for microbial protein. During the AD, carbon to nitrogen (C/N ratio)
has effects on methane production yield and it is a very important factor for the
stable operation. When C/N ratio is too high, biogas yield does not show the optimum
due to acidogenic bacterium rapidly consume nitrogencompared with methanogenic
bacteria. When C/N ratio is too low, most microbes rapidly consume nitrogen for
growth. Although this has a positive effect on methane production rate. However, the
lack of carbon type cause that decreases in acid forming, nitrogen accumulates in
the form of ammonium ions (NH4) that increase the pH [5] which adversely affects biogas
production.In ruminant nutrition research, the concept of synchronization between the carbon and
nitrogen sources has proposed to help stabilize rumen nutrient degradation by
combining the different degradation rates of carbon and nitrogen [6]. Although the effect of synchronization seems
to have little or no advantage for the aspect of nitrogen recycling in ruminants
[7,8], this concept considered that might help control the shock by substrates
due to no reabsorption of nitrogen in the AD, unlike rumen. However, in AD studies,
there was a lack of research on the interaction between the carbon and nitrogen used
as substrates.Therefore, this study was conducted to evaluate the effects of different carbon
types, and the interaction between carbon types and the C/N ratio, on methane
production during the AD.
MATERIALS AND METHODS
Substrates: carbon and nitrogen sources
The carbon types used in this study were selected starch (from corn, CAS Number
9005-25-8), cellulose (CAS Number 9004-34-6), and xylan (from beechwood, CAS
Number 9014-63-5), and the nitrogen source was used urea (CAS Number 57-13-6)
only, to regulate the ratio of C/N. Nitrogen source was fixed to evaluate the
effect of carbon linkage characteristics and the interactions between carbon
types and C/N ratios during the AD.
Biochemical methane potential test
The experiment was performed using a completely randomized design; treatments
were set to a 3 × 3 factorial design using three carbon types (starch,
cellulose, and xylan) and three C/N ratios (10, 25, and 40) (Table 1). The AD was carried out using a
125-mL serum bottle at a constant mesophilic temperature (37°C) and it
was performed as six replications to measure gas production, gas composition,
and fermentation characteristics. A total of 132 bottles, which including 4
treatments × 3 replications × 11 sampling points, were prepared
and the sample was collected gas and all inner material of bottles every
sampling time. The inoculum, which was collected from the fed-batch type
mesophilic anaerobic digester (37°C), was used in order to help with
initial digestion. The digestor has produced about 200 mL-CH4/g-VS/d
of biogas with an organic loading rate of 3 g-VS/L/d and a methaneconcentration
of 60%. The chemical composition of inoculum on pH, total solids (TS) and
volatile solids (VS) showed 7.86%, 12.31%, and 10.55% (of wet basis),
respectively. Medium used according to the method of Chaney and Marbach [9] during the AD. The pH of the medium was
adjusted to 7.1 using CO2 gas and stored at 37°C until
performing the AD. The inoculum was injected 10% of the working volume into
serum bottles according to the method of Healy and Young [10]. The sample was injected 0.25 g in each serum bottle,
and the working volume was 50 mL. In BMP assay, calculated S/I ratio was 0.474
and the organic loading rate was 4.5 g-VS/L in each digestor. Nitrogen gas was
flushed to make up anaerobic state in the digestors, AD was performed in a
shaking incubator (IS-971R, Jeiotech Co., Korea) for 18 days, and it was shaken
automatically at 0.336 ×g. Sampling was performed to measure gas
production, gas composition, pH, and ammonia nitrogencontent at 0, 1, 2, 3, 4,
5, 7, 9, 12, 15, and 18 days. Gas production was measured with a 50 and 100 mL
glass syringe (Hypodermic Glass Syringe, DHS Medical Co., Korea) and gas samples
were collected using gas tight syringe [Gastight model 1001 (22 gauge), Hamilton
Co., Reno, USA] for analysis of gas composition.
Table 1.
Formulation of carbon and nitrogen source used in this study
Carbon type
Substrates
C/N ratio
10
25
40
Starch
Starch (g)
0.230
0.242
0.245
Urea (g)
0.020
0.008
0.005
Actual C/N ratio
10.06
25.78
41.50
Cellulose
Cellulose (g)
0.230
0.242
0.245
Urea (g)
0.020
0.008
0.005
Actual C/N ratio
10.66
27.34
44.02
Xylan
Xylan (g)
0.230
0.242
0.245
Urea (g)
0.020
0.008
0.005
Actual C/N ratio
10.38
26.60
42.82
C/N ratio, carbon to nitrogen ratio.
C/N ratio, carbon to nitrogen ratio.
Analytical method
Total solids and VS were determined by AHPA standard methods [11]. Element analysis of C, H, N, S, and O
was measured using an elemental analyzer (EA 1110, CE Instruments, Italy). The
pH was determined using a pH meter (Orion 420A+, Thermo electron Co., USA).Gas production was determined using a 50 and 100 mL glass syringe by the method
of Owen et al. [12]. The measured gas
production was calibrated to standard temperature and pressure (STP 0°C,
1 atm) considering the temperature-dependent volume using the following
calibration equation (1):where V is the gas production at 0°C and 1 atm, Vat T°C
is the gas production at T°C, T is the temperature at the time of volume
measurement, P is pressure at the time of volume measurement, and Pw
is the saturated water vapor pressure at T°C. The gas composition was
determined using a gas chromatography (HP 6890, Hewlett-Packard Co., USA) with a
thermal conductivity detector (TCD). The gas sample was injected 0.2 mL into the
gas chromatography with a column temperature of 60°C, using helium as the
carrier gas with a flow rate of 1.5 mL/min. The sample gas concentration was
calibrated using a standard gas mixture consisting of 40% CH4-60%
CO2 and 60% CH4-40% CO2.The amount of methane production from the serum bottle was calibrated using the
calibration equation (2) [13]:where CCHis the calibrated methaneconcentration (%),
CCHis the measured methaneconcentration (%), and
CCO is the measured carbon dioxideconcentration
(%).
Ultimate biodegradability
Total volatile solids (TVS) was consist of biodegradable volatile solids (BVS)
and non-BVS. The residue of TVS (TVSe) after degradation was
calculated using Equation (3),
(4), and (5). In Equation (4), V0 mean
calibrated gas production using Equation (1). The Ultimated biodegradability was calculated that the
ratio of TVSe and initial total total volatile solids before
degradation (TVS0) was ploted on Y axis and the reciprocal of the
operating time (1/time) on the X axis by method of [14].
Kinetic modeling
Biogas yield were simulated using the Gaussian and Gompertz equation during the
AD. The specificmethane yield was simulated using the modified Gaussian
equation. This equation describes the daily methane yield in the batch-type
digesters assuming that destruction of methanogens and microbial kinetic growth
follow a normal distribution over the AD process [15]. The Gaussian equation is presented in Equation (3):where y is the methane production rate (N mL g/ VS/ d); t (d) is the time over
the digestion period; a (N mL g / VS / d) and b (day) are constants; and
t0 (d) is the time where the maximal methane production rates
occurred. The parameters of a, b, and t0 were extimated by using the
“Solver” in MS Excel. The modified Gompertz equation is prestented
in equation (7) [16]:where M is the cumulative methane yield (N ∙ mL/g VS); P is the methane
yield potential (P, N ∙ mL/g VS); Rm is the maximum methane
production (N · mL/g VS); λ is the lag phase and
t is the time based on the cumulative methane production M is calculated. The
parameters of P, l, and Rm were estimated by using the
“Solver” feature in MS Excel.
Statistical analysis
Data were analyzed using a MIXED procedure of SAS package program (SAS Inst.
Inc., Cary, NC, USA) as a complete randomized design. The model was,where μ is an average value, Ci is carbon type value,
CNj is C/N ratio value and Eij(t) is the error value.
The fixed effects are carbon type and C/N ratio in the procedure. Orthogonal
contrasts were used to determine carbon type, C/N ratio and its interaction
using CONTRAST option. Statistical difference and tendency were accepted at
p-value less than 0.05 and 0.10, respectively.
RESULTS AND DISCUSSION
Volatile solid reduction
In the graphical statistical analysis, as shown in Fig. 1, the result of refractory fraction showed a different pattern
among carbon types. The VS of the starch group decomposed faster than those of
other groups during the start-up phase, it considers that caused by more
containing non-structural carbohydrates [17]. As the previous study reported that cellulase and xylanase were
more quickly increased on the xylan treatment compared with the cellulose
treatment [18], and a similar result was
obtained in this experiment. However, cellulose was more quickly degraded among
other treatments from 2 days (<0.5 operating times), xylan degraded most
slow until the end of digestion.
Fig. 1.
Ultimate biodegradability values of carbon source and C/N ratio
during anaerobic digestion start-up phase.
Values means ± SE of three replicates. ○ = C/N 10, □
= C/N 25, ∆ = C/N 40. TVSe, remaining volatile solids; TVSo,
initial total volatile solids; C/N ratio, carbon to nitrogen ratio.
Ultimate biodegradability values of carbon source and C/N ratio
during anaerobic digestion start-up phase.
Values means ± SE of three replicates. ○ = C/N 10, □
= C/N 25, ∆ = C/N 40. TVSe, remaining volatile solids; TVSo,
initial total volatile solids; C/N ratio, carbon to nitrogen ratio.The degradation rate of cellulose has been reported as 89% [19] and 85% [20] at
mesophilic temperatures, and the degradation rate of starch has been reported as
85% [20] at mesophilic temperatures. The
degradation rate of xylan, conversely, has been reported as 65% [21] and 53% [22]. In this study, the degradation rate of starch,
cellulose, and xylan showed greater than those of previous studies, it may be
due to the refining substrate using in the experiments. And this suggests that
the degradation of feedstock could be affected by processing, storage methods,
and grain type [23]. The maximum
degradation rate of cellulose was greater than the other treatments at 18 d
(Table 2), which means that a
sufficient pretreatment can improve the rate of cellulose degradation.
Table 2.
Influence C/N ratio on ultimate biodegradability and volatile solids
removal during anaerobic digestion at 18 d
Carbon type
C/N ratio
Ultimate biodegradability (%)
Volatile solid removal (%)
Biodegradable volatile solids
removal (%)
Starch
10
100.0
82.7
82.7
25
99.2
86.4
87.1
40
99.5
89.3
89.8
Cellulose
10
99.5
88.3
88.3
25
99.5
91.9
92.3
40
99.5
95.4
95.9
Xylan
10
93.7
79.3
84.7
25
99.7
84.1
84.3
40
99.9
85.5
85.6
SEM
0.44
1.19
1.11
p-value[1)]
C
0.001
<0.001
<0.001
CN
<0.001
<0.001
<0.001
C × CN
<0.001
0.935
0.048
C, effect of carbon type; CN, effect of carbon: nitrogen ratio; C
× CN, interaction between carbon type and carbon: nitrogen
ratio.
C/N ratio, carbon to nitrogen ratio; SEM, standard error of
means.
C, effect of carbon type; CN, effect of carbon: nitrogen ratio; C
× CN, interaction between carbon type and carbon: nitrogen
ratio.C/N ratio, carbon to nitrogen ratio; SEM, standard error of
means.Although, in graphical statistical analysis, the interaction between carbon type
and C/N ratio not showed clearly, the result of BVS showed the interaction which
as increase C/N ratio of 10 to 40, BVS removal were greater during same periods
AD (Table 2).
Methane production
Maximum methane production rate
In the specificmethane yield using the Gaussian curve fitting, as shown in
Fig. 2, methane production showed
different patterns among carbon types. The maximum daily methane production
rate was similar between starch and xylan (Fig. 2), those of cellulose was slower compared with other
treatments. Generally, non-structural carbohydrates decomposed faster than
structural carbohydrates by microbes. However, in this study, the methane
production rate of xylan treatment was similar to those of starch treatment
during AD start-up phase. Furthermore, the maximal methane production
occurred time, which t0 in Gaussian curve fitting value, was
showed that it was similar between starch and xylan treatment (Table 3). In starch treatment, methane
production pattern was different according to the C/N ratio, starch feeding
might mean the factor which threatens stable methane production during the
AD process. Furthermore, the property with rapid degradation of
non-structural carbohydratescauses pH decrease, it could cause easily shock
the AD process [24], and it is
difficult to use easily as a carbon feedstock in an AD plant due to the high
cost. For these reasons, many biogas plants have been used structural
carbohydrates as carbon feedstock. Comprehensively, it suggests that proper
pretreated fibrous materials could be a useful feedstock that has a similar
methane production rate and more stable compare with non-structural
carbohydrates.
Fig. 2.
Influence of carbon source and C/N ratio on specific methane
yield during anaerobic digestion start-up phase.
Values means ± SE of three replicates. Experimental and model
derived results are shown. ○ = C/N 10, □ = C/N 25,
∆ = C/N 40. C/N ratio, carbon to nitrogen ratio.
Table 3.
Influence of carbon type and C/N ratio on Gaussian parameters for
specific methane yield during anaerobic digestion start-up
phase
Carbon type
C/N ratio
Maximum specific methane yield
(N mL/g VS/ day)
t0(days)
a (N mL/g VS day)
b (days)
Starch
10
53.5
9.9
44.7
3.9
25
60.5
9.9
54.4
2.9
40
59.1
10.0
56.5
2.8
Cellulose
10
50.5
12.7
46.1
4.5
25
47.3
14.9
44.1
6.1
40
52.7
16.3
49.1
6.2
Xylan
10
42.2
9.4
43.1
3.9
25
48.7
10.3
46.8
3.8
40
42.0
10.4
41.1
4.3
SEM
2.14
0.82
2.87
0.57
p-value[1)]
C
0.001
0.001
0.008
0.000
CN
0.158
0.096
0.160
0.777
C × CN
0.054
0.330
0.096
0.154
C, effect of carbon type; CN, effect of carbon: nitrogen ratio; C
× CN, interaction between carbon type and carbon:
nitrogen ratio.
C/N ratio, carbon to nitrogen ratio; SEM, standard error of
means.
Influence of carbon source and C/N ratio on specific methane
yield during anaerobic digestion start-up phase.
Values means ± SE of three replicates. Experimental and model
derived results are shown. ○ = C/N 10, □ = C/N 25,
∆ = C/N 40. C/N ratio, carbon to nitrogen ratio.C, effect of carbon type; CN, effect of carbon: nitrogen ratio; C
× CN, interaction between carbon type and carbon:
nitrogen ratio.C/N ratio, carbon to nitrogen ratio; SEM, standard error of
means.
Cumulative methane production
The profile of simulated cumulative methane yield using the Gompertz curve is
shown in Fig. 3 and determination
coefficients (R2) were 0.99 for all curves.
Cumulative methane production (M), Cumulative methane production potential
(P), maximum methane production rate (Rm), and lag phase
(λ) are listed in Table 4. Maximum cumulative methane production did not
differ among treatments at 18 d (Fig. 3
and Table 4). Cumulative methane
production potential showed the greatest in the cellulose treatment compared
with other treatments (p < 0.05) and the lag phase
showed that was mainly affected by carbon type (p <
0.05). The interaction between carbon type and C/N ratio significantly did
not show in the methane production. The reason why the cumulative methane
potential of cellulose treatment showed greater than other treatments, it
considers because carboncontent differed among each treatment and the
Gompertz parameters were affected by the result of simulated using its data
(Table 1). As Raposo et al.
[20] reported that methane
production was similar for starch and cellulose in AD under mesophilic
temperature conditions using various inoculum, the methane production is
expected to be similar under the same carboncontent. For this reason, the
maximum methane production considers that it might not differ according to
the carbon type, and it only affected by the carboncontent. However, the
daily methane production pattern showed that it was affected by carbon type
and C/N ratio (p < 0.05) (Rm in Table 4) as similar to the result of
specificmethane yield (Table 3).
Interestingly, the noteworthy is that the lag phase was only affected by the
carbon type (p < 0.05). Nitrogencontent generally
has a great effect during the overall AD process, the cumulative methane
production yield of this study significantly did not differ by the C/N ratio
among the treatments. Conclusively, when minimum nitrogen exists to grow
microbes, these mean that the effect of nitrogencontent on the methane
yield might be very small.
Fig. 3.
Influence of carbon source and C/N ratio on cumulative methane
yield with Gompertz curve during anaerobic digestion start-up
phase.
Values means ± SE of three replicates. Experimental and model
derived results are shown. ○ = C/N 10, □ = C/N 25,
∆ = C/N 40. C/N ratio, carbon to nitrogen ratio.
Table 4.
Influence of carbon source and C/N ratio on Gompertz parameters
of cumulative methane yield during anaerobic digestion at 18
d
Carbon source
C/N ratio
M (N mL / g VS)
P (N mL / g VS)
Rm (N mL / g VS /
day)
λ (days)
Starch
10
191.3
198.4
20.1
2.7
25
191.8
205.2
18.1
3.0
40
187.1
199.2
18.8
3.2
Cellulose
10
195.3
217.0
16.3
3.3
25
203.1
237.5
15.2
3.3
40
233.0
223.2
14.5
3.5
Xylan
10
196.7
201.3
20.9
2.2
25
197.6
210.4
19.5
2.5
40
195.8
208.5
18.6
2.3
SEM
5.12
5.61
0.77
0.23
p-value[1)]
C
0.123
0.001
0.001
0.000
CN
0.627
0.022
0.020
0.304
C × CN
0.932
0.600
0.815
0.762
C, effect of carbon type; CN, effect of carbon: nitrogen ratio; C
× CN, interaction between carbon type and carbon:
nitrogen ratio.
C/N ratio, carbon to nitrogen ratio.
Influence of carbon source and C/N ratio on cumulative methane
yield with Gompertz curve during anaerobic digestion start-up
phase.
Values means ± SE of three replicates. Experimental and model
derived results are shown. ○ = C/N 10, □ = C/N 25,
∆ = C/N 40. C/N ratio, carbon to nitrogen ratio.C, effect of carbon type; CN, effect of carbon: nitrogen ratio; C
× CN, interaction between carbon type and carbon:
nitrogen ratio.C/N ratio, carbon to nitrogen ratio.
Stability
pH content
The pH content is shown in Fig. 4.
during the AD start-up phase. During the experimental period, the minimum pH
showed 6.85 and those of maximum pH showed 7.83. The pH is one of the
important parameters to indicate stability during AD and methanogenesis is
most active near pH 7 [25], On the
other hand, it is inhibited in the condition of over pH 8 [26]. In this study, the pH change seems
that it did not inhibit methane production process in all treatments. The
pattern of pH change showed that has differed by carbon type, and it showed
that did not significantly differ by the C/N ratio. Furthermore, as the pH
of xylan treatment is less change than those of other treatments in the
condition of a similar methane yield, it suggests that xylan is more stable
and useful than starch and cellulose as feedstock.
Fig. 4.
Influence of carbon source and C/N ratio on pH content during
anaerobic digestion start-up phase.
Values means ± SE of three replicates. Experimental and model
derived results are shown. ○ = C/N 10, □ = C/N 25,
∆ = C/N 40. C/N ratio, carbon to nitrogen ratio.
Influence of carbon source and C/N ratio on pH content during
anaerobic digestion start-up phase.
Values means ± SE of three replicates. Experimental and model
derived results are shown. ○ = C/N 10, □ = C/N 25,
∆ = C/N 40. C/N ratio, carbon to nitrogen ratio.
Ammonia nitrogen
The ammonia nitrogen is shown in Fig.
5. during the AD start-up phase. High ammonia nitrogenconcentration
cause increasing pH content, it showed that inhibited AD process in the
those of over 3,000 mg/L [27]. In
this study, the ammonia nitrogenconcentration was not enough to inhibit the
AD process. A noteworthy phenomenon is that the ammonia nitrogenconcentration was significantly higher in C/N 10 treatment than those of
other treatments (p < 0.05). In this study, the
nitrogen amount of C/N 10 treatment was higher 2.5 and 4 times than those of
C/N 25 and C/N 40 treatment, respectively (Table 1). And, the carbon amount of C/N 10 was lower 5% and 6%
than those of C/N 25 and C/N 40 treatment, respectively (Table 1), it differs very small amount
compared with a difference of nitrogen amount. These results suggest that
ammonia nitrogenconcentration more depends on the amount of nitrogen, the
carbon amount few effects on the ammonia nitrogenconcentration.
Furthermore, ammonia nitrogenconcentration did not differ among the carbon
type treatments of the same C/N ratio during the entire experimental
period.
Fig. 5.
Influence of carbon source and C/N ratio on ammonia nitrogen
during anaerobic digestion start-up phase.
Values means ± SE of three replicates. Experimental and model
derived results are shown. ○ = C/N 10, □ = C/N 25,
∆ = C/N 40. C/N ratio, carbon to nitrogen ratio.
Influence of carbon source and C/N ratio on ammonia nitrogen
during anaerobic digestion start-up phase.
Values means ± SE of three replicates. Experimental and model
derived results are shown. ○ = C/N 10, □ = C/N 25,
∆ = C/N 40. C/N ratio, carbon to nitrogen ratio.
CONCLUSION
Carbon type affects various characteristics of AD during the startup phase. Maximum
methane production was only affected by carboncontent and the methane production
rate was affected by both of carbon type and C/N ratio. Interestingly, the lag phase
was only affected by the carbon type. However, the interaction between carbon type
and the C/N ratio did not show during the experiment in all results. This research
into carbon type characteristics is useful for the pretreatment and formulation of
the substrate during the AD process as basic information and will contribute to
improving the methane production rate of the start-up phase.