, Volume 26, Issue 6, pp 465–474 | Cite as

Bioaugmentation with isolated strains for the removal of toxic and refractory organics from coking wastewater in a membrane bioreactor

  • Xiaobiao Zhu
  • Rui Liu
  • Cong Liu
  • Lujun ChenEmail author
Original Paper


The bioaugmentation strains for phenol, pyridine, quinoline, carbazole, and naphthalene degradation were employed to treat coking wastewater in a membrane bioreactor (MBR). The results showed that the bioaugmented MBR was much better in pollutant removal than that of the control MBR with conventional activated sludge. Compared to the control MBR, the bioaugmented MBR displayed an additional 3.2 mg/L of phenol, pyridine, quinoline, naphthalene and carbazole in total by the addition of the degrading strains. Also, about 10 % of the chemical oxygen demand in the effluent was further removed by the bioaugmentation. The pyrosequencing analysis of the sludge in the MBRs revealed that the microbial community shifted in response to the addition of the degrading strains. The diversity of the microbial community increased during the bioaugmentation, and some bacterial taxa favorable to the removal of toxic and refractory pollutants appeared in the bioaugmented MBR. The results indicated that the use of high-efficiency bacteria was a feasible method for industrial coking wastewater treatment.


Bioaugmentation High-efficiency bacteria Microbial community MBR 



This study was supported by the National Natural Science Foundation of China (No. 51308319).

Supplementary material

10532_2015_9748_MOESM1_ESM.doc (226 kb)
Supplementary material 1 (DOC 226 kb)


  1. APHA (2005) Standard methods for the examination of water and wastewater, 21st edn. American Public Health Association, Washington, DCGoogle Scholar
  2. Aslam Z, Im WT, Kim MK, Lee ST (2005) Flavobacterium granuli sp. nov., isolated from granules used in a wastewater treatment plant. Int J Syst Evol Microbiol 55:747–751CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  3. Bai Y, Sun Q, Zhao C, Wen D, Tang X (2008) Microbial degradation and metabolic pathway of pyridine by a Paracoccus sp. strain BW001. Biodegradation 19:915–926CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  4. Bai YH, Sun QH, Zhao C, Wen DH, Tang XY (2010) Bioaugmentation treatment for coking wastewater containing pyridine and quinoline in a sequencing batch reactor. Appl Microbiol Biotechnol 87:1943–1951CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  5. Bai Y, Sun Q, Sun R, Wen D, Tang X (2011) Bioaugmentation and adsorption treatment of coking wastewater containing pyridine and quinoline using zeolite-biological aerated filters. Environ Sci Technol 45:1940–1948CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  6. Bai Y, Shi Q, Wen D, Li Z, Jefferson WA, Feng C, Tang X (2012) Bacterial communities in the sediments of Dianchi Lake, a partitioned eutrophic waterbody in China. PLoS ONE 7:e37796PubMedCentralCrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  7. Boon N, Top EM, Verstraete W, Siciliano SD (2003) Bioaugmentation as a tool to protect the structure and function of an activated-sludge microbial community against a 3-chloroaniline shock load. Appl Environ Microbiol 69:1511–1520PubMedCentralCrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  8. Fuller ME et al (2014) Laboratory evaluation of bioaugmentation for aerobic treatment of RDX in groundwater. Biodegradation 26:77–89CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  9. Huson DH, Auch AF, Qi J, Schuster SC (2007) MEGAN analysis of metagenomic data. Genome Res 17:377–386PubMedCentralCrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  10. Ikuma K, Gunsch CK (2012) Genetic bioaugmentation as an effective method for in situ bioremediation: functionality of catabolic plasmids following conjugal transfers. Bioengineered 3:236–241PubMedCentralCrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  11. Jones SE, Lennon JT (2010) Dormancy contributes to the maintenance of microbial diversity. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA 107:5881–5886PubMedCentralCrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  12. Kim YM, Park D, Lee DS, Park JM (2008) Inhibitory effects of toxic compounds on nitrification process for cokes wastewater treatment. J Hazard Mater 152:915–921CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  13. Kim YM, Cho HU, Lee DS, Park C, Park D, Park JM (2011) Response of nitrifying bacterial communities to the increased thiocyanate concentration in pre-denitrification process. Bioresour Technol 102:913–922CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  14. Kraigher B, Kosjek T, Heath E, Kompare B, Mandic-Mulec I (2008) Influence of pharmaceutical residues on the structure of activated sludge bacterial communities in wastewater treatment bioreactors. Water Res 42:4578–4588CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  15. Lee TK, Doan TV, Yoo K, Choi S, Kim C, Park J (2010) Discovery of commonly existing anode biofilm microbes in two different wastewater treatment MFCs using FLX titanium pyrosequencing. Appl Microbiol Biotechnol 87:2335–2343CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  16. Lu Y, Yan LH, Wang Y, Zhou SF, Fu JJ, Zhang JF (2009) Biodegradation of phenolic compounds from coking wastewater by immobilized white rot fungus Phanerochaete chrysosporium. J Hazard Mater 165:1091–1097CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  17. Manefield M, Griffiths RI, Leigh MB, Fisher R, Whiteley AS (2005) Functional and compositional comparison of two activated sludge communities remediating coking effluent. Environ Microbiol 7:715–722CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  18. Park S, Yu J, Byun I, Cho S, Park T, Lee T (2011) Microbial community structure and dynamics in a mixotrophic nitrogen removal process using recycled spent caustic under different loading conditions. Bioresour Technol 102:7265–7271CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  19. Paul L, Herrmann S, Koch CB, Philips J, Smolders E (2013) Inhibition of microbial trichloroethylene dechorination by Fe(III) reduction depends on Fe mineralogy: a batch study using the bioaugmentation culture KB-1. Water Res 47:2543–2554CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  20. Puyol D, Monsalvo VM, Sanchis S, Sanz JL, Mohedano AF, Rodriguez JJ (2015) Comparison of bioaugmented EGSB and GAC-FBB reactors and their combination with aerobic SBR for the abatement of chlorophenols. Chem Eng J 259:277–285CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Scheutz C, Durant ND, Broholm MM (2014) Effects of bioaugmentation on enhanced reductive dechlorination of 1,1,1-trichloroethane in groundwater: a comparison of three sites. Biodegradation 25:459–478CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  22. Schloss PD et al (2009) Introducing mothur: open-source, platform-independent, community-supported software for describing and comparing microbial communities. Appl Environ Microbiol 75:7537–7541PubMedCentralCrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  23. Shokrollahzadeh S, Azizmohseni F, Golmohammad F, Shokouhi H, Khademhaghighat F (2008) Biodegradation potential and bacterial diversity of a petrochemical wastewater treatment plant in Iran. Bioresour Technol 99:6127–6133CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  24. Wagner M, Loy A (2002) Bacterial community composition and function in sewage treatment systems. Curr Opin Biotechnol 13:218–227CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  25. Weisburg WG, Barns SM, Pelletier DA, Lane DJ (1991) 16S ribosomal DNA amplification for phylogenetic study. J Bacteriol 173:697–703PubMedCentralPubMedGoogle Scholar
  26. Yin N, Yang G, Zhong ZX, Xing WH (2011) Separation of ammonium salts from coking wastewater with nanofiltration combined with diafiltration. Desalination 268:233–237CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Zhao C, Zhang Y, Li X, Wen D, Tang X (2011) Biodegradation of carbazole by the seven Pseudomonas sp. strains and their denitrification potential. J Hazard Mater 190:253–259CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  28. Zhou NA, Lutovsky AC, Andaker GL, Gough HL, Ferguson JF (2013) Cultivation and characterization of bacterial isolates capable of degrading pharmaceutical and personal care products for improved removal in activated sludge wastewater treatment. Biodegradation 24:813–827CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  29. Zhu X, Tian J, Chen L (2012) Phenol degradation by isolated bacterial strains: kinetics study and application in coking wastewater treatment. J Chem Technol Biotechnol 87:123–129CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media Dordrecht 2015

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.College of Chemical EngineeringBeijing University of Chemical TechnologyBeijingPeople’s Republic of China
  2. 2.School of EnvironmentTsinghua UniversityBeijingPeople’s Republic of China
  3. 3.Key Laboratory of Water Science and Technology of Zhejiang ProvinceJiaxingPeople’s Republic of China

Personalised recommendations