Microbial diversity differences within aerobic granular sludge and activated sludge flocs
- 1.7k Downloads
In this study, we investigated during 400 days the microbial community variations as observed from 16S DNA gene DGGE banding patterns from an aerobic granular sludge pilot plant as well as the from a full-scale activated sludge treatment plant in Epe, the Netherlands. Both plants obtained the same wastewater and had the same relative hydraulic variations and run stable over time. For the total bacterial population, a similarity analysis was conducted showing that the community composition of both sludge types was very dissimilar. Despite this difference, general bacterial population of both systems had on average comparable species richness, entropy, and evenness, suggesting that different bacteria were sharing the same functionality. Moreover, multi-dimensional scaling analysis revealed that the microbial populations of the flocculent sludge system moved closely around the initial population, whereas the bacterial population in the aerobic granular sludge moved away from its initial population representing a permanent change. In addition, the ammonium-oxidizing community of both sludge systems was studied in detail showing more unevenness than the general bacterial community. Nitrosomonas was the dominant AOB in flocculent sludge, whereas in granular sludge, Nitrosomonas and Nitrosospira were present in equal amounts. A correlation analysis of process data and microbial data from DGGE gels showed that the microbial diversity shift in ammonium-oxidizing bacteria clearly correlated with fluctuations in temperature.
KeywordsAerobic granular sludge DGGE Diversity Functional stability amoA
This study is partly funded by DHV and STOWA in the framework of the Dutch National Nereda® research programme. Thanks to Kartik Chandran from the Columbia University for the supply of genomic DNA.
- Cai-Yun W, Heleen DW, Ludo D, Chris T, Jun-Bin L, Li-Nan H (2011) Biodiversity and population dynamics of microorganisms in a full-scale membrane bioreactor for municipal wastewater treatment. Water Res 45(1):1129–1138Google Scholar
- Chapin FS, Carpenter SR, Kofinas GP, Folke C, Abel N, Clark WC, Olsson P, Smith DMS, Walker B, Young OR, Berkes F, Biggs R, Grove JM, Naylor RL, Pinkerton E, Steffen W, Swanson FJ (2010) Ecosystem stewardship: sustainability strategies for a rapidly changing planet. Trends Ecol Evol 25(4):241–249PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
- Ebrahimi S, Gabus S, Rohrbach-Brandt E, Hosseini M, Rossi P, Maillard J, Holliger C (2010) Performance and microbial community composition dynamics of aerobic granular sludge from sequencing batch bubble column reactors operated at 20, 30 and 35 °C. Appl Environ Microbiol 87(4):1555–1568Google Scholar
- European-Water-Framework-Directive (2000) Directive 2000/60/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 23 October 2000 establishing a framework for community action in the field of water policy. 1–73Google Scholar
- Gujer W (1977) Design of a nitrifying activated sludge process with the aid of dynamic simulation. Prog Water Technol 9(2):323–336Google Scholar
- Henze M, van Loosdrecht MCM, Ekama GA, Brdjanovic D (2008) Biological wastewater treatment: principles, modelling and design. IWA Publishing, ISBN: 9781843391883Google Scholar
- Hornek R, Pommerening-Roser A, Koops HP, Farnleitner AH, Kreuzinger N, Kirschner A, Mach RL (2006) Primers containing universal bases reduce multiple amoA gene specific DGGE band patterns when analysing the diversity of beta-ammonia oxidizers in the environment. J Microbiol Meth 66(1):147–155CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- Legendre L, Legendre P (1979) Numerical ecology, developments in environmental modelling. Elsevier, AmsterdamGoogle Scholar
- van Nostrand JD, Wu L, Wu WM, Huang Z, Gentry TJ, Deng Y, Carley J, Carroll S, He Z, Gu B, Luo J, Criddle CS, Watson DB, Jardine PM, Marsh TL, Tiedje JM, Hazen TC, Zhou J (2011) Erratum: Dynamics of microbial community composition and function during in situ bioremediation of a uranium-contaminated aquifer. Appl Environ Microbiol 77(14):5063CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- Winkler MH, Kleerebezem R, Khunjar W, Bart de B, van Loosdrecht MCM (2012) Evaluating the solid retention time of bacteria in flocculent and granular sludge. Water Res., acceptedGoogle Scholar