Skip to main content

Modeling effects of granules on the start-up of anaerobic digestion of dairy wastewater with Langmuir and extended Freundlich equations

Bioprocess and Biosystems Engineering volume 33, pages 833–845 (2010)Cite this article

Abstract

The effects of granules-inocula on the start-up of anaerobic reactors treating dairy manure were studied in a batch-fed reactor. The effects of start-up period and ratio of granules to feed were analyzed. Results indicated that the effects of start-up period could be described by Langmuir model, while the Extended Freundlich model could be used to model the effects of ratio of granules to feed on cumulative biogas production. In addition, transmission electron microscopes (TEM) and scanning electron microscope analysis were conducted to elucidate the distribution of microbial population and micro-colonies in granules and manure. From the TEM micrographs analyses, the ratios the Syntrophobacter and methanogens in granule and manure were shown to be 1.57 ± 0.42 and 0.22 ± 0.20, respectively. These results demonstrated that granules-inocula could reduce the period required for onset of biogas by 25%.

This is a preview of subscription content, access via your institution.

Access options

Buy single article

Instant access to the full article PDF.

USD 39.95

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

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3
Fig. 4
Fig. 5
Fig. 6

References

  1. USDA-SCS (1992) Agricultural waste management field handbook. United States Department of Agriculture, Washington, DC

    Google Scholar 

  2. Griffin ME, McMahon KD, Mackie RI, Raskin L (1998) Methanogenic population dynamics during start-up of anaerobic digesters treating municipal solid waste and biosolids. Biotechnol Bioeng 57:342–355

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  3. Show KY, Wang Y, Foong SF, Tay JH (2004) Accelerated start-up and enhanced granulation in upflow anaerobic sludge blanket reactors. Water Res 38:2293–2304

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  4. Vavilin VA, Angelidaki I (2005) Anaerobic degradation of solid material: importance of initiation centers for methanogenesis, mixing intensity, and 2D distributed model. Biotechnol Bioeng 89:113–122

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  5. McMahon KD, Stroot PG, Mackie RI, Raskin L (2001) Anaerobic codigestion of municipal solid waste and biosolids under various mixing conditions—II: microbial population dynamics. Water Res 35:1817–1827

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  6. Fang HHP (2000) Microbial distribution in UASB granules and its resulting effects. Water Sci Technol 42:201–208

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  7. Schmidt JE, Ahring BK (1996) Granular sludge formation in upflow anaerobic sludge blanket (UASB) reactors. Biotechnol Bioeng 49:229–246

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  8. Lettinga G, Van Velsen AFM, Hobma SW, Zeeuw W, Klapwijk A (1980) Use of the upflow sludge blanket (USB) reactor concept for biological wastewater treatment, especially for anaerobic treatment. Biotechnol Bioeng 22:699–734

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  9. Hulshoff Pol LW, De Castro Lopes SI, Lettinga G, Lens PN (2004) Anaerobic sludge granulation. Water Res 38:1376–1389

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  10. Baloch MI, Akunna JC, Kierans M, Collier PJ (2008) Structural analysis of anaerobic granules in a phase separated reactor by electron microscopy. Bioresour Technol 99:922–929

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  11. Baloch MI, Akunna JC, Collier PJ (2007) The performance of a phase separated granular bed bioreactor treating brewery wastewater. Bioresour Technol 98:1849–1855

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  12. Batstone DJ, Keller J, Blackall LL (2004) The influence of substrate kinetics on the microbial community structure in granular anaerobic biomass. Water Res 38:1390–1404

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  13. Bhatti ZI, Furkukawa K, Fujita M (1995) Comparative composition and characteristics of methanogenic granular sludges treating industrial wastes under different conditions. J Ferment Bioeng 79:273–280

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  14. Cruz CCV, Da Costa ACA, Henriques CA, Luna AS (2004) Kinetic modeling and equilibrium studies during cadmium biosorption by dead Sargassum sp. biomass. Bioresour Technol 91:249–257

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  15. Sibbesen E (1981) Some new equations to describe phosphate sorption by soils. J Soil Sci 32:67–74

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  16. Hussein H, Ibrahim SF, Kandeel K, Moawad H (2004) Biosorption of heavy metals from waste water using Pseudomonas sp. Electron J Biotechnol 7:30–37

    Article  Google Scholar 

  17. Dianati-Tilaki RA (2003) Study on removal of cadmium from water environment by adsorption on GAC, BAC, and biofilter. In: Proceeding of the 7th international conference—diffuse pollution and basin management, Dublin, Ireland

  18. Guibal E, Saucedo I, Jansson-Charrier M, Delanghe B, Cloirec P (1994) Uranium and vanadium sorption by chitosan and derivatives. Water Sci Technol 30:183–190

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  19. Varzakas T, Arapoglou D, Israilides C (2006) Kinetics of endoglucanase and endoxylanase uptake by soybean seeds. J Biosci Bioeng 101:111–119

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  20. Dianati-Tilaki RA, Mahvi AH, Shariat M, Nasseri S (2004) Study of cadmium removal from environmental water by biofilm covered granular activated carbon. Iranian J Publ Health 33:43–52

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  21. APHA (1995) Standard methods for the examination of water and wastewater, 19th edn. American Public Health Association, American Water Works Association, Water Environmental Federation, Washington, DC

    Google Scholar 

  22. Howgrave-Graham AR, Wallis FM (1993) Quantification of bacterial morphotypes within anaerobic digester granules from transmission electron micrographs using image analysis. Biotechnol Tech 7:143–148

    Article  Google Scholar 

  23. Dudley BT, Howgrave-Graham AR, Bruton AG, Wallis FM (1993) The application of digital image processing to quantifying and measuring UASB digester granules. Biotechnol Bioeng 42:279–283

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  24. Benguella B, Benaissa H (2002) Cadmium removal from aqueous solution by chitin: kinetic and equilibrium studies. Water Res 36:2463–2474

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  25. Ratkowsky DA (1986) A statistical study of seven curves for describing the sorption of phosphate by soil. J Soil Sci 37:183–189

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  26. Lettinga G (1995) Anaerobic digestion and wastewater treatment systems. Antonie van Leeuwenhoek 67:3–28

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  27. McCarty PL (2001) The development of anaerobic treatment and its future. Water Sci Technol 44:149–156

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  28. Sekiguchi Y, Kamagata Y, Nakamura K, Syutsubo K, Ohashi A, Harada H, Nakamura K (1998) Diversity of mesophilic and thermophilic granular sludge determined by 16S rRNA gene analysis. Microbiology 22:2655–2665

    Article  Google Scholar 

  29. Harmsen HJM, Akkermans ADL, Stams AJM, De Vos WM (1996) Population dynamics of propionate-oxidizing bacteria under methanogenic and sulfidogenic conditions in anaerobic granular sludge. Appl Environ Microbiol 62:2163–2168

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  30. Macleod FA, Guiot SR, Costerton JW (1990) Layered structure of bacterial aggregates produced in an upflow anaerobic sludge bed and filter reactor. Appl Environ Microbiol 56:1598–1607

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  31. Morvai L, Mihaltz P, Czako L, Hollo J (1991) Application of UASB-reactors in industrial wastewater treatment: performance data and results in granulation control. Acta Biotechnol 11:409–418

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  32. Wu W, Hickey RF, Zeikus JG (1991) Characterization of metabolic performance of methanogenic granules treating brewery wastewater: role of sulfate-reducing bacteria. Appl Environ Microbiol 57:3438–3449

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  33. Sow D, Ollivier B, Viaud P, Garcia JL (1989) Mesophilic and thermophilic methane fermentation of Euphorbia tirucalli. Microb Biotechnol 5:547–550

    Article  Google Scholar 

  34. Fiebig K, Gottshalk G (1983) Methanogenesis from choline by coculture of Desulfovibrio spp. and Methanosarcina barki. Appl Environ Microbiol 45:161–168

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  35. Whitford MF, Teather RM, Forster RJ (2001) Phylogenetic analysis of methanogens from the bovine rumen. BMC Microbiol 1:5

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  36. Jarvis GN, Strompl C, Burgess DM, Skillman LC, Moore ER, Joblin KN (2000) Isolation and identification of ruminal methanogens from grazing cattle. Curr Microbiol 40:327–332

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  37. Stewart CS, Flint HJ, Bryant MP (1997) The rumen bacteria. In: Hobson PN, Stewart CS (eds) The rumen microbial ecosystem, 2nd edn. Blackie Academic and Professional, New York

    Google Scholar 

  38. McAllister TA, Okine EK, Mathison GW, Cheng KJ (1996) Dietary, environmental and microbiological aspects of methane production in ruminants. Can J Anim Sci 76:231–243

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  39. Bergen WG (2004) Quantitative determination of rumen ciliate protozoal biomass with real-time PCR. J Nutr 134:3223–3224

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  40. Tokura M, Chagan I, Ushida K, Kojima Y (1999) Phylogenetic study of methanogens associated with rumen ciliates. Curr Microbiol 39:123–128

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  41. Coleman GS (1979) Rumen ciliate protozoa. In: Levandowsky M, Hunter SH (eds) Biochemistry and physiology of protozoa, 2nd edn. Academic Press, New York

    Google Scholar 

  42. Samsoon PALNS, Loewenthal RE, Wentzel MC, Marais G (1990) Effect of nitrogen limitation on pelletization in upflow anaerobic sludge bed (UASB) systems. Water Res 16:165–170

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  43. Fang HHP (1997) Inhibition of bioactivity of UASB biogranules by electroplating metals. Pure Appl Chem 69:2425–2429

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  44. Stroot PG, McMahon KD, Mackie RI, Raskin L (2001) Anaerobic codigestion of municipal solid waste and biosolids under various mixing conditions-I: digester performance. Water Res 35:1804–1816

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  45. Lovely DR (1985) Minimum threshold for hydrogen metabolism in methanogenic bacteria. Appl Environ Microbiol 49:1530–1531

    Google Scholar 

  46. Shea TG, Pretorius WA, Cole RD, Pearson EA (1968) Kinetics of hydrogen assimilation in the methane fermentation. Water Res 2:833–848

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  47. Ejlertsson J, Karlsson A, Lagerkvist A, Hjertberg T, Svensson BH (2003) Effects of co-disposal of wastes containing organic pollutants with municipal solid waste—a landfill simulation reactor study. Adv Environ Res 7:949–960

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  48. Raposo F, Banks CJ, Siegert I, Heaven S, Borja R (2006) Influence of inoculum to substrate ratio on the biochemical methane potential of maize in batch tests. Process Biochem 41:1444–1450

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  49. Raposo F, Borja R, Martín MA, Martín A, de la Rubia MA, Rincón B (2009) Influence of inoculum–substrate ratio on the anaerobic digestion of sunflower oil cake in batch mode: process stability and kinetic evaluation. Chem Eng J 149:70–77

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  50. Liu Guangqing, Ruihong Z, El-Mashad HamedM, Renjie D (2009) Effect of feed to inoculum ratios on biogas yields of food and green wastes. Bioresour Technol 100:5103–5108

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  51. Gonzalez-Fernandez Cristina, Pedro A, Garcia-Encina (2009) Impact of substrate to inoculum ratio in anaerobic digestion of swine slurry. Biomass Bioenerg 33:1065–1069

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  52. Barlaz MA, Schaefer DM, Ham RK (1989) Bacterial population development and chemical characteristics of refuse decomposition in a simulated sanitary landfill. Appl Environ Microbiol 55:55–65

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  53. Karim K, Hoffmann R, Thomas Klasson K, Al-Dahhan MH (2005) Anaerobic digestion of animal waste: effect of mode of mixing. Water Res 39:3597–3606

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  54. Dubourguier HC, Archer DB, Albagnac G, Prensier G (1988) Structure and metabolism of methanogenic microbial conglomerates. In: Hall ER, Hobson PN (eds) Anaerobic digestion. Pergamon Press, Oxford

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgments

This study was conducted with financial support from Dr. Shulin Chen’s Research Program (Dr. Chen is a Professor of Biological System Engineering at Washington State University).

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Agricultural and Biosystems Engineering, Iowa State University, Ames, IA, 50011, USA

    Pramod K. Pandey & M. L. Soupir

  2. Department of Biological Systems Engineering, Washington State University, Pullman, WA, 99164-6120, USA

    Pius M. Ndegwa & Marvin Pitts

  3. Department of Statistics, Washington State University, Pullman, WA, 99164-3144, USA

    J. Richard Alldredge

Authors
  1. Pramod K. Pandey
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Pius M. Ndegwa
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. J. Richard Alldredge
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Marvin Pitts
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  5. M. L. Soupir
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Pramod K. Pandey.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and Permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Pandey, P.K., Ndegwa, P.M., Alldredge, J.R. et al. Modeling effects of granules on the start-up of anaerobic digestion of dairy wastewater with Langmuir and extended Freundlich equations. Bioprocess Biosyst Eng 33, 833–845 (2010). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00449-010-0406-x

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00449-010-0406-x

Keywords

  • Start-up
  • Anaerobic digestion
  • Granules
  • Dairy manure
  • Langmuir model
  • Extended Freundlich model
  • SEM and TEM