| Literature DB >> 34065265 |
Khadijah Nabilah Mohd Zahri1, Azham Zulkharnain2, Claudio Gomez-Fuentes3,4, Suriana Sabri5, Khalilah Abdul Khalil6, Peter Convey7, Siti Aqlima Ahmad1,4,8.
Abstract
Hydrocarbons can cause pollution to Antarctic terrestrial and aquatic ecosystems, both through accidental release and the discharge of waste cooking oil in grey water. Such pollutants can persist for long periods in cold environments. The native microbial community may play a role in their biodegradation. In this study, using mixed native Antarctic bacterial communities, several environmental factors influencing biodegradation of waste canola oil (WCO) and pure canola oil (PCO) were optimised using established one-factor-at-a-time (OFAT) and response surface methodology (RSM) approaches. The factors include salinity, pH, type of nitrogen and concentration, temperature, yeast extract and initial substrate concentration in OFAT and only the significant factors proceeded for the statistical optimisation through RSM. High concentration of substrate targeted for degradation activity through RSM compared to OFAT method. As for the result, all factors were significant in PBD, while only 4 factors were significant in biodegradation of PCO (pH, nitrogen concentration, yeast extract and initial substrate concentration). Using OFAT, the most effective microbial community examined was able to degrade 94.42% and 86.83% (from an initial concentration of 0.5% (v/v)) of WCO and PCO, respectively, within 7 days. Using RSM, 94.99% and 79.77% degradation of WCO and PCO was achieved in 6 days. The significant interaction for the RSM in biodegradation activity between temperature and WCO concentration in WCO media were exhibited. Meanwhile, in biodegradation of PCO the significant factors were between (1) pH and PCO concentration, (2) nitrogen concentration and yeast extract, (3) nitrogen concentration and PCO concentration. The models for the RSM were validated for both WCO and PCO media and it showed no significant difference between experimental and predicted values. The efficiency of canola oil biodegradation achieved in this study provides support for the development of practical strategies for efficient bioremediation in the Antarctic environment.Entities:
Keywords: Antarctic bacterial consortium; one-factor-at-a-time; pure canola oil; response surface methodology; waste canola oil
Year: 2021 PMID: 34065265 PMCID: PMC8161070 DOI: 10.3390/life11050456
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Life (Basel) ISSN: 2075-1729
Range and level of variables affecting WCO and PCO degradation by the selected Antarctic bacterial consortium (BS14) assessed using the Plackett-Burman design.
| Factors | Name | Unit | Experimental Value | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Low (−1) | Centre (0) | High (+1) | |||
| A | Salinity | % ( | 0.00 | 0.13 | 0.25 |
| B | pH | - | 7.00 | 7.25 | 7.50 |
| C | (NH4)2SO4 concentration | g/L | 0.50 | 0.75 | 1.00 |
| D | Temperature | °C | 10.0 | 12.5 | 15.0 |
| E | Yeast extract | g/L | 0.75 | 1.00 | 1.25 |
| F | Initial oil concentration | % ( | 0.50 | 1.25 | 2.00 |
Figure 1Percentage of (a) WCO and (b) PCO degradation by Antarctic bacterial consortia obtained from 28 soil samples over a 5 days incubation period.
Figure 2Effect of (a) salt concentration, (b) pH (dotted lines: acetate, solid lines: phosphate, dashed lines: Tris-HCl), (c) different nitrogen sources, (d) ammonium sulphate concentration, (e) temperature, (f) yeast extract, (g) initial substrate concentration on bacterial growth (filled circles) and WCO degradation (filled triangles).
Figure 3Effect of (a) salt concentration, (b) pH (dotted lines: acetate, solid lines: phosphate, dashed lines: Tris-HCl), (c) different nitrogen sources, (d) ammonium sulphate concentration, (e) temperature, (f) yeast extract, (g) initial substrate concentration on bacterial growth (filled circles) and PCO degradation (filled triangles/grey squares).
Analysis of variance (ANOVA) for Plackett-Burman design (PBD) for WCO degradation.
| Source | Sum of Squares | DF | F Value | Prob > F |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Model | 8404.79 | 6 | 2190.80 | 0.0005 *** |
| A | 33.73 | 1 | 79.13 | 0.0124 * |
| B | 17.16 | 1 | 40.26 | 0.0239 * |
| C | 32.69 | 1 | 76.70 | 0.0128 * |
| D | 3048.79 | 1 | 7152.30 | 0.0001 *** |
| E | 63.29 | 1 | 63.29 | 0.0067 ** |
| F | 2349.43 | 1 | 2349.43 | 0.0002 *** |
| Residual | 149.29 | 5 | ||
| Cor Total | 8405.65 | 11 | ||
| 0.9999 | Pred | N/A | ||
| Adj | 0.9994 | Adeq Precision | 128.8396 |
A: salinity (% w/v), B: pH, C: (NH4)2SO4 concentration (g/L), D: temperature (°C), E: yeast extract (g/L), F: WCO concentration (% v/v) * p < 0.05, ** p < 0.01, *** p < 0.001.
Analysis of variance (ANOVA) for Plackett-Burman design (PBD) for PCO degradation.
| Source | Sum of Squares | DF | F value | Prob > F |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Model | 13,637.68 | 6 | 591.70 | 0.0001 *** |
| A | 10.24 | 1 | 3.56 | 0.1558 |
| B | 85.28 | 1 | 29.60 | 0.0122 * |
| C | 51.68 | 1 | 17.94 | 0.0241 * |
| D | 26.10 | 1 | 9.06 | 0.0572 |
| E | 274.27 | 1 | 95.20 | 0.0023 ** |
| F | 4402.62 | 1 | 1528.15 | <0.0001 *** |
| Residual | 298.30 | 5 | ||
| Cor. Total | 13,646.32 | 11 | ||
| 0.9994 | Pred | 0.9827 | ||
| Adj | 0.9977 | Adeq Precision | 55.992 |
A: salinity (% w/v), B: pH, C: (NH4)2SO4 concentration (g/L), D: temperature (°C), E: yeast extract (g/L), F: WCO concentration (% v/v) * p < 0.05, ** p < 0.01, *** p < 0.001.
Analysis variance (ANOVA) for central composite data design (CCD) for WCO degradation response.
| Source | Sum of Squares | DF | F value | Prob > F |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Model | 33,527.03 | 27 | 11.32 | <0.0001 *** |
| A | 4.45 | 1 | 0.041 | 0.8412 |
| B | 24.02 | 1 | 0.22 | 0.6418 |
| C | 321.12 | 1 | 2.93 | 0.0930 |
| D | 36.49 | 1 | 0.33 | 0.5666 |
| E | 459.53 | 1 | 6.15 | 0.0153 * |
| F | 35,966.50 | 1 | 481.58 | <0.0001 *** |
| A2 | 0.066 | 1 | 6.001 × 10−4 | 0.9805 |
| B2 | 54.77 | 1 | 0.50 | 0.4829 |
| C2 | 12.37 | 1 | 0.11 | 0.7383 |
| D2 | 87.52 | 1 | 0.80 | 0.3758 |
| E2 | 579.62 | 1 | 7.76 | 0.0067 ** |
| F2 | 211.53 | 1 | 1.93 | 0.1708 |
| AB | 0.32 | 1 | 2.947 × 10−3 | 0.9569 |
| AC | 0.67 | 1 | 6.137 × 10−3 | 0.9379 |
| AD | 0.023 | 1 | 2.108 × 10−4 | 0.9885 |
| AE | 13.32 | 1 | 0.12 | 0.7289 |
| AF | 26.56 | 1 | 0.24 | 0.6247 |
| BC | 65.03 | 1 | 0.59 | 0.4448 |
| BD | 142.47 | 1 | 1.30 | 0.2596 |
| BE | 42.90 | 1 | 0.39 | 0.5344 |
| BF | 5.75 | 1 | 0.052 | 0.8197 |
| CD | 9.02 | 1 | 0.082 | 0.7754 |
| CE | 15.89 | 1 | 0.14 | 0.7050 |
| CF | 1.38 | 1 | 0.013 | 0.9111 |
| DE | 86.64 | 1 | 0.79 | 0.3782 |
| DF | 565.20 | 1 | 7.57 | 0.0074 ** |
| EF | 2.30 | 1 | 0.021 | 0.8853 |
| Residual | 4071.35 | 53 | ||
| Lack of Fit | 4071.45 | 49 | 4.94 | 0.0642 |
| Pure Error | 0.00 | 4 | 0.00 | |
| Cor Total | 43,246.92 | 80 | ||
| 0.8688 | Pred | 0.8416 | ||
| Adj | 0.8618 | Adeq Precision | 55.8624 |
A: salinity (% w/v), B: pH, C: (NH4)2SO4 concentration (g/L), D: temperature (°C), E: yeast extract concentration (g/L), F: initial WCO concentration (% v/v) * p < 0.05, ** p < 0.01, *** p < 0.00.
Analysis of variance (ANOVA) for central composite data design (CCD) for PCO degradation.
| Source | Sum of Squares | DF | F value | Prob > F |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Model | 8831.46 | 14 | 8.28 | 0.0001 *** |
| A | 555.71 | 1 | 7.16 | 0.0145 * |
| B | 0.30 | 1 | 3.927 × 10−3 | 0.9509 |
| C | 335.79 | 1 | 4.41 | 0.0531 |
| D | 434.13 | 1 | 5.59 | 0.0283 * |
| A2 | 1622.05 | 1 | 20.89 | 0.0002 *** |
| B2 | 1466.52 | 1 | 18.89 | 0.0003 *** |
| C2 | 301.62 | 1 | 3.88 | 0.0627 * |
| D2 | 3105.00 | 1 | 39.99 | <0.0001 *** |
| AB | 0.018 | 1 | 2.413 × 10−4 | 0.9878 |
| AC | 56.01 | 1 | 0.74 | 0.4047 |
| AD | 1363.48 | 1 | 17.56 | 0.0005 *** |
| BC | 603.67 | 1 | 7.77 | 0.0113 * |
| BD | 477.31 | 1 | 6.15 | 0.0222 * |
| CD | 17.89 | 1 | 0.23 | 0.6350 |
| Residual | 1142.88 | 15 | ||
| Lack of Fit | 821.09 | 10 | 1.28 | 0.4161 |
| Pure Error | 321.79 | 5 | ||
| Cor Total | 9974.34 | 29 | 8.28 | |
| 0.8443 | Pred | 0.6001 | ||
| Adj | 0.7743 | Adeq Precision | 10.4597 |
A: pH, B: (NH4)2SO4 concentration (g/L), C: yeast extract concentration (g/L), D: initial PCO concentration (% v/v) * p < 0.05, ** p < 0.01, *** p < 0.001.
Figure 4Three-dimensional (3D) response surface plots for the significant factors identified in CCD as influencing degradation of WCO ((a): temperature and initial WCO concentration) and PCO degradation ((b): pH and initial PCO concentration, (c): (NH4)2SO4 concentration and yeast extract, (d): (NH4)2SO4 concentration and initial PCO concentration) by the BS14 Antarctic bacterial consortium.
Validation of predicted response surface model.
| Type of Oil | Degradation (%) | Efficiency (%) | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Expected Value | Actual Value | |||
| WCO | 44.84 | 44.96 | 0.985 | 99.73 |
| PCO | 46.90 | 50.39 | 0.801 | 93.07 |