| Literature DB >> 34946661 |
Emmanouil Tsochatzis1,2, Ida Elizabeth Berggreen3, Francesca Tedeschi4, Konstantina Ntrallou5, Helen Gika5,6, Milena Corredig1,2.
Abstract
Polystyrene (PS) is a plastic polymer extensively used for food packaging. PS is difficult to decompose and has low recycling rates, resulting in its accumulation in the environment, in the form of microplastic particles causing pollution and harming oceans and wildlife. Degradation of PS by mealworms (Tenebrio molitor) has been suggested as a possible biological strategy for plastic contamination; however, the biodegradation mechanism of PS by mealworms is poorly understood. It is hypothesized that the gut microbiome plays an important role in the degradation of PS by mealworms. This study carried out a comparative analysis of the gut microbiome of Tenebrio molitor larvae under different feeding strategies, and of the formation of degradation compounds (monomers, oligomers). A diet of bran:PS at 4:1 and 20:1 ratios was tested. The diet with the low ratio of bran:PS led to the presence of higher amounts of these compounds, compared to that with the high ratio. In addition, it was demonstrated that the addition of H2O significantly improved the biodegradation of PS monomer and oligomer residues, which could be identified only in the frass. The protein and nitrogen contents in insects' biomass and frass varied amongst treatments. The diets resulted in differences in the gut microbiota, and three potential bacterial strains were identified as candidates involved in the biodegradation of PS.Entities:
Keywords: Tenebrio molitor larvae; biodegradation of polystyrene (PS); degradation compounds; gut microbiome; insects
Mesh:
Substances:
Year: 2021 PMID: 34946661 PMCID: PMC8708845 DOI: 10.3390/molecules26247568
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Molecules ISSN: 1420-3049 Impact factor: 4.411
Identified bacterial counts in the digestive tracts of mealworm larvae after degrading PS following different feeding protocols.
| Family | Genus | Species | Control | Diet 1 | Diet 2 | Diet 3 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
|
|
| 68,567 | 55,880 | 66,520 | 77,787 |
|
|
|
| 31,778 | 12,065 | 3602 | 877 |
|
|
|
| 2038 | 10,977 | 8787 | 3485 |
|
|
|
| 602 | 0 | 4689 | 474 |
|
|
|
| 217 | 425 | 1542 | 253 |
|
|
|
| 114 | 348 | 390 | 449 |
|
|
|
| 210 | 7 | 986 | 25 |
|
|
|
| 0 | 968 | 0 | 0 |
|
|
|
| 198 | 193 | 103 | 389 |
|
|
|
| 122 | 157 | 88 | 201 |
|
|
|
| 19 | 53 | 0 | 45 |
|
|
|
| 13 | 19 | 0 | 6 |
|
|
|
| 21 | 5 | 8 | 0 |
|
|
|
| 0 | 14 | 0 | 14 |
| Total | 103,953 | 81,188 | 86,776 | 84,133 | ||
Identified fungi counts in the digestive tracts of T. molitor after degrading PS following different feeding protocols.
| Family | Genus | Species | Control | Diet 1 | Diet 2 | Diet 3 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
|
|
| 0 | 0 | 0 | 36 |
|
|
|
| 0 | 0 | 0 | 27 |
|
|
|
| 0 | 0 | 0 | 27 |
|
|
|
| 16 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
|
|
|
| 5 | 0 | 0 | 10 |
|
|
|
| 0 | 13 | 0 | 0 |
|
|
|
| 0 | 0 | 0 | 9 |
|
|
|
| 0 | 8 | 0 | 0 |
|
|
|
| 0 | 0 | 8 | 0 |
|
|
|
| 0 | 6 | 0 | 0 |
|
|
|
| 0 | 6 | 0 | 0 |
|
|
|
| 5 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
|
|
|
| 0 | 0 | 0 | 5 |
| Total | 26 | 33 | 8 | 114 | ||
Identification and quantification of formed PS monomers and oligomers in insects’ frass.
| Target Analytes | Average Mass Fractions in Frass (μg/mg) (±SD) | |||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Control | Diet 1 | Diet 2 | Diet 3 | |
| 1,1-diphenyl ethylene | 0 | 0.016 | 0.008 | 0.007 |
| Styrene | 0 | 0.005 | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| 2,4-diphenyl-1-butene | 0 | 0.014 | 0.004 | 0.004 |
| trans-1,2-diphenyl cyclobutane | 0 | 0.013 | 0.005 | 0.003 |
| 1e-tetrealin * | 0 | 0.006 | 0.004 | 0.005 |
| 1a-tetralin ** | 0 | 0.014 | 0.006 | 0.005 |
| Acetophenone | 0 | 0.180 | 0.070 | 0.050 |
| 2,4-di-tert butyl phenol | 0 | 0.100 | 0.050 | 0.040 |
| 2,4,6-triphenyl-1-hexane | 0 | 0.173 | 0.051 | 0.030 |
Note: SD = standard deviation. * Full chemical name: 1e-phenyl-4-(1-phenylethyl)-1,2,3,4-tetrahydronapthalene. ** Full chemical name: 1e-phenyl-4-(1-phenylethyl)-1,2,3,4-tetrahydronapthalene.
Figure 1Chemical structures of identified monomers and side reaction products (acetophenone).
Figure 2PCA biplot for the analysis of the applied diets in relation to the associated microbiome (purple dots: monomers/oligomers/plastic-oriented compounds; red dots: physical condition and protein/nitrogen of insects; green dots: microbial species).
Figure 3Identified degradation products and metabolic pathways for: (A) anaerobic degradation and (B) aerobic degradation (abbreviations: SMO—styrene monoxygenase; SOI—styrene oxide isomerase; SDO—styrene-2,3-dioxyxegenase; VC12O—vinylcatechol 1,2-dioxygenase; VC230—vinylcatechol 2,3-dioxygenase; SOI—styrene oxide isomerase; PAD—phenylacetaldehyde dehydrogenase; SOR—styrene oxide reductase; PAD—phenylacetaldehyde dehydrogenase) (adapted from [21,23,29]).
Composition of the barley bran used, as provided by the feed supplier.
| Component | Protein | Starch | Fat Content | Soluble Fibers | Insoluble Fibers | Ash Content |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
| 14.7 | 22.0 | 4.5 | 2.8 | 43.2 | 5.6 |
Feeding diets, including amounts of nourishment and PS plastic, provided to the larvae for each biodegradation experiment.
| Feeding Diets | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Control | Diet 1 | Diet 2 | Diet 3 | |
| Rolled barley (g) * | 20.0 ± 0.01 | 3.99 ± 0.06 | 20.1 ± 0.03 | 20.1 ± 0.03 |
| Polystyrene (PS) (mg) | 0.0 | 1000 ± 10 | 980 ± 16 | 1015 ± 17 |
| Water (mL) ** | 0 | 0 | 1.5 | 0 |
* The composition of the barley bran is presented in Table 4 (Section 3.1). ** Equal volume was administered at the beginning of the experiment and every 4th consecutive day.