Skip to main content
Log in

Interactions among cellulolytic bacteria from an anaerobic digester

  • Published:
Microbial Ecology Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

High cellulolytic activity of particular strains did not cause dominance of one, or a few, species of fiber-digesting bacteria in a cattlewaste anaerobic digester. The population contained a large number of species and varieties with different cellulolytic and fiber-digesting activities. Although mixed cultures of some of these bacteria showed no intereffects, with others, cellulolysis was less or in some cases greater than that shown by individual components of the cultures. The interactions were probably related to effects on growth of the bacteria rather than on activities of components of the cellulase enzyme complex, and culture filtrates of two of the more numerous cellulolytic species ofClostridium affected growth of other cellulolytic bacteria. The inhibitory factor(s) appeared to be of bacteriocin type, but the stimulatory factor(s) was unknown. It was suggested that these interactions are localized or short-lived in the digester, and so the population remains in a “dynamic” steady state.

Some inhibitions of growth of rumen cellulolytic bacteria were caused by the digester bacteria, but it was suggested that factors other than these inhibitions are responsible for the absence of rumen bacteria from anaerobic digesters.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Bousfield S, Hobson PN, Summers R (1979) A note on anaerobic digestion of cattle and poultry wastes. Agric Wastes 1:161–164

    Google Scholar 

  2. Bryant MP (1973) Nutritional requirement of the predominant rumen cellulolytic bacteria. Fed Proc 32:1809–1813

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  3. Coen JA, Dehority BA (1970) Degradation and utilisation of hemicellulose from intact forages by pure cultures of rumen bacteria. Appl Microbiol 20:362–368

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  4. Dehority BA, Scott HW (1967) Extent of cellulose and hemicellulose digestion in various forages by pure cultures of rumen bacteria. J Dairy Sci 50:1136–1141

    Google Scholar 

  5. Gradel CM, Dehority BA (1972) Fermentation of isolated pectin and pectin from intact forages by pure cultures of rumen bacteria. Appl Microbiol 23:332–340

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  6. Hobson PN (1971) Rumen microorganisms. Prog Ind Microbiol 9:42–77

    Google Scholar 

  7. Hobson PN (1979) Straw as a feedstock for anaerobic digesters. In: Grosbard E (ed) Straw decay and its effects on utilisation and disposal. Wiley, Chichester, England

    Google Scholar 

  8. Hobson PN (1983) The kinetics of anaerobic digestion of farm wastes. J Chem Technol Biotechnol 33B:1–20

    Google Scholar 

  9. Hobson PN (1985) A model of anaerobic bacterial degradation of solid substrates in a batch digester. Agric Wastes 14:255–274

    Google Scholar 

  10. Hobson PN, Bousfield S, Summers R (1974) The anaerobic digestion of organic matter. Crit Rev Environment Control 4:131–191

    Google Scholar 

  11. Hobson PN, Bousfield S, Summers R, Mills PJ (1980) The digestion of piggery and poultry wastes. In: Stafford DA, Wheatley BI, Hughes DE (eds) Anaerobic digestion. Applied Science Publishers, London

    Google Scholar 

  12. Hobson PN, Mann SO, Oxford AE (1958) Some studies on the occurrence and properties of a large gram-negative coccus from the rumen. J Gen Microbiol 19:462–472

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  13. Hobson PN, Shaw BG (1974) The bacterial population of piggery-waste anaerobic digesters. Water Res 8:507–516

    Google Scholar 

  14. Leatherwood JM (1969) Cellulase complex ofRuminococcus and a new mechanism for cellulose degradation. Adv Chem Ser 95:53–59

    Google Scholar 

  15. Maki LK (1954) Experiments on the microbiology of cellulose decomposition in a municipal sewage plant. Antonie van Leeuwenhoek 20:185–200

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  16. Mann SO (1968) An improved method for determining cellulolytic activity in anaerobic bacteria. J Appl Bact 31:241–244

    Google Scholar 

  17. Sharma VK, Hobson PN (1985) Isolation and cellulolytic activities of bacteria from a cattlewaste anaerobic digester and the properties of someClostridium species. Agric Wastes 14: 173–196

    Google Scholar 

  18. Siebert ML, Torien DF (1969) The proteolytic bacteria present in the anaerobic digestion of raw sewage sludge. Water Res 3:241–250

    Google Scholar 

  19. Summers R (1978) The microbial breakdown of straw in the rumen and the breakdown of straw and manure for methane production. In: Report on straw utilisation conference, Oxford. MAFF, Agricultural Development and Advisory Services, Oxford, England

    Google Scholar 

  20. The Anaerobe Laboratory Manual (1977) 4th ed. The Anaerobe Laboratory, Virginia Polytechnic Institute and State University, Blacksburg, Virginia, USA

  21. Updegraff DM (1969) Semi-micro determination of cellulose in biological materials. Analyt Biochem 32:420–424

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  22. Van Velsen AFM (1979) Adaptation of methanogenic sludge to high ammonia-nitrogen concentrations. Water Res 13:995–999

    Google Scholar 

  23. Wilkins TD, Thiel L (1973) Modified broth-disc method for testing the antibiotic susceptibility of anaerobic bacteria. Antimicrob Agents Chemotherapy 3:350–356

    Google Scholar 

  24. Wood TM, McCrae SI (1979) Synergism between enzymes involved in the solubilization of native cellulose. In: Brown RD, Jurasek L (eds) Hydrolysis of cellulose: mechanisms of enzymatic and acid hydrolysis. American Chemical Society, Washington, DC

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Sharma, V.K., Hobson, P.N. Interactions among cellulolytic bacteria from an anaerobic digester. Microb Ecol 12, 343–353 (1986). https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02098575

Download citation

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02098575

Keywords

Navigation