Environmental Science and Pollution Research

, Volume 20, Issue 3, pp 1225–1238 | Cite as

Extent of intracellular storage in single and dual substrate systems under pulse feeding

  • Asli S. Ciggin
  • Simona Rossetti
  • Mauro Majone
  • Derin Orhon
Review Article

Abstract

The study investigated the effect of acetate/starch mixture on the formation of storage biopolymers as compared with the storage mechanism in systems fed with these compounds as single substrates. Experiments involved two sequencing batch reactor sets operated at steady state, at sludge ages of 8 and 2 days, respectively. Each set included three different runs, one fed with acetate, the other with starch and the last one with the acetate/starch mixture. In single substrate systems with pulse feeding, starch was fully converted to glycogen, whereas 25 % of acetate was utilized for direct microbial growth at sludge age of 8 days, together with polyhydroxybutyric acid (PHB) storage. The lower sludge age slightly increased this fraction to 30 %. Feeding of acetate/starch mixture induced a significant increase in acetate utilization for direct microbial growth; acetate fraction converted to PHB dropped down to 58 and 50 % at sludge ages of 8 and 2 days respectively, while starch remained fully converted to glycogen for both operating conditions. Parallel microbiological analyses based on FISH methodology confirmed that the biomass acclimated to the substrate mixture sustained microbial fractions capable of performing both glycogen and PHB storage.

Keywords

Acetate Starch Storage Wastewater treatment Filamentous growth Glycogen Polyhydroxybutyric acid (PHB) 

References

  1. Amann RI, Binder BJ, Olson RJ, Chisholm SW, Devereux R, Stahl DA (1990) Combination of 16S rRNA-targeted oligonucleotide probes with flow cytometry for analyzing mixed microbial populations. Appl Environ Microbiol 56:1919–1925Google Scholar
  2. Basak S, Ubay Çokgor E, Orhon D, Insel G (2012) Acute effect of benzo[a]anthracene on the biodegradation of peptone under aerobic conditions. Environ Sci Pollut Res. doi:10.1007/s11356-012-0866-4
  3. Beccari M, Majone M, Massanisso P, Ramadori R (1998) A bulking sludge with high storage response selected under intermittent feeding. Water Res 32:3403–3413CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Beun JJ, Paletta F, van Loosdrecht MCM, Heijnen JJ (2000) Stoichiometry and kinetics of poly-β-hydroxybutyrate metabolism in aerobic, slow growing, activated sludge cultures. Biotech Bioeng 67:379–389CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Beun JJ, Dircks K, Van Loosdrecht MCM, Heijnen JJ (2002) Poly-β-hydroxybutyrate metabolism in dynamically fed mixed microbial cultures. Water Res 36:1167–1180CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Björnsson L, Hugenholtz P, Tyson GW, Blackall LL (2002) Filamentous Chloroflexi (green non-sulfur bacteria) are abundant in wastewater treatment processes with biological nutrient removal. Microbiol 148:2309–2318Google Scholar
  7. Carta F, Beun JJ, van Loosdrecht MCM, Heijnen JJ (2001) Simultaneous storage and degradation of PHB and glycogen in activated sludge cultures. Water Res 35:2693–2701CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Ciggin AS, Karahan O, Orhon D (2009) Effect of high nitrate concentration on PHB storage in sequencing batch reactor under anoxic conditions. Bioresour Technol 100:1376–1382CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Ciggin AS, Rosetti S, Majone M, Orhon D (2011) Effect of feeding and sludge age on acclimated microbial ecology and fate of slowly biodegradable substrate. Bioresource Technol 102:7794–7801CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Ciggin AS, Rossetti S, Majone M, Orhon D (2012a) Dynamic feeding of carbon source in sequencing batch reactor affects the substrate removal mechanism more than the microbial composition of activated sludge. J Environ Sci Heal A 47:192–203Google Scholar
  11. Ciggin AS, Insel G, Majone M, Orhon D (2012b) Respirometric evaluation and modelling of acetate utilization in sequencing batch reactor under pulse and continuous feeding. Bioresource Technol 107:61–69CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Cortassa S, Aon JC, Aon MA (1995) Fluxes of carbon, phosphorylation, and redox intermediates during growth of Saccharomyces cerevisiae on different carbon sources. Biotechnol Bioeng 47:193–208CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Daigger GT, Grady CPL Jr (1982) The dynamic of microbial growth on soluble substrates. A unifying theory. Water Res 16:368–382CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Daims H, Bruehl A, Amann R, Schleifer KH, Wagner M (1999) The domain-specific probe EUB338 is insufficient for the detection of all Bacteria: development and evaluation of a more comprehensive probe set. Syst Appl Microbiol 22:434–444CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Dionisi D, Levantesi C, Renzi V, Tandoi V, Majone M (2002) PHA storage from several substrates by different morphological types in an anoxic/aerobic SBR. Water Sci Technol 46:337–344Google Scholar
  16. Dionisi D, Beccari M, Di Gregorio S, Majone M, Petrangeli Papini M, Vallini G (2005) Storage of biodegradable polymers by an enriched microbial community in a sequencing batch reactor operated at high organic load rate. J Chem Technol Biot 80:1306–1318CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Dircks K, Beun JJ, van Loosdrecht MCM, Heijnen JJ, Henze M (2001) Glycogen metabolism in aerobic mixed cultures. Biotechnol Bioeng 73:85–94CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Dizdaroglu-Risvanoglu G, Karahan O, Cokgor EU, Orhon D, Van Loosdrecht MCM (2007) Substrate storage concepts in modeling activated sludge systems for tannery wastewaters. J Environ Sci Heal A 42:2159–2166CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Ekama GA, Dold PL, GvR M (1986) Procedures for determining influent COD fractions and the maximum specific growth rate of heterotrophs in activated sludge systems. Water Sci Technol 18:91–114Google Scholar
  20. Frigon D, Muyzer G, van Loosdrecht MCM, Raskin L (2006) rRNA and poly-β-hydroxybutyrate dynamics in bioreactors subjected to feast and famine cycles. Appl Environ Microb 72:2322–2330CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Gangurde NS, Sayyed RZ, Kiran S, Gulati A (2012) Development of eco-friendly bioplastic like PHB by distillery effluent microorganisms. Environ Sci Pollut Res. doi:10.1007/s11356-012-1021-y
  22. Germirli F, Orhon D, Artan N (1991) Assessment of the initial inert soluble COD in industrial wastewaters. Water Sci Technol 23:1077–1086Google Scholar
  23. Goel R, Mino T, Satoh H, Matsuo T (1998a) Comparison of hydrolytic enzyme systems in pure culture and activated sludge under different electron acceptor conditions. Water Sci Technol 37:335–343Google Scholar
  24. Goel R, Mino T, Satoh H, Matsuo T (1998b) Intracellular storage compounds, oxygen uptake rates and biomass yield with readily and slowly degradable substrates. Water Sci Technol 38:85–93CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Grady CPL, Smets BF, Barbeau DS (1996) Variability in kinetic parameter estimates: a review of possible causes and a proposed terminology. Water Res 30:742–748CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Hanhan O, Artan N, Orhon D (2002) Retrofitting activated sludge systems to intermittent aeration for nitrogen removal. Water Sci Technol 46:75–82Google Scholar
  27. Hanhan O, Insel G, Yagci NO, Artan N, Orhon D (2011) Mechanism and design of intermittent aeration activated sludge process for nitrogen removal. J Environ Sci Heal A 46:9–16CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Henze M (1992) Characterization of wastewater for modelling of activated sludge processes. Water Sci Technol 25:1–15Google Scholar
  29. Henze M, Gujer W, Mino T, Matsuo T, Wentzel MC, Marais GR (1995) Activated sludge model No. 2, IAWPRC Scientific and Technical Report No. 2. IAWQ, LondonGoogle Scholar
  30. Hess A, Zardai B, Hahn D, Haner A, Stax D, Hohener P, Zeyer J (1997) In situ analysis of denitrifying toluene- and m-xylene-degrading bacteria in a diesel fuel-contaminated laboratory aquifer column. Appl Environ Microbiol 63:2136–2141Google Scholar
  31. Hocaoglu SM, Insel G, Ubay Cokgor E, Orhon D (2011) Effect of sludge age on simultaneous nitrification and denitrification in membrane bioreactor. Bioresource Technol 102:6665–6672CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Hu Z, Zhang J, Li S, Xie H (2012) Impact of carbon source on nitrous oxide emission from anoxic/oxic biological nitrogen removal process and identification of its emission sources. Environ Sci Pollut Res. doi:10.1007/s11356-012-1018-6
  33. ISO 6060 (1986) Water quality-determination of the chemical oxygen demand. International Standards Organization, SwitzerlandGoogle Scholar
  34. Jenkins D, Richard MD, Daigger GT (2004) Manual on the causes and control of activated sludge bulking, foaming, and other solids separation problems, 3rd edn. CRC Press LLC, Boca RatonGoogle Scholar
  35. Karahan O, Van Loosdrecht MCM, Orhon D (2006) Modeling the utilization of starch by activated sludge for simultaneous substrate storage and microbial growth. Biotechnol Bioeng 94:43–53CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. Karahan O, Orhon D, van Loosdrecht MCM (2008) Simultaneous storage and utilization of polyhydroxyalkanoates and glycogen under aerobic conditions. Water Sci Technol 58:945–951CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. Karahan-Gul O, Artan N, Orhon D, Henze M, Van Loosdrecht MCM (2002a) Experimental assessment of bacterial storage yield. J Environ Eng-ASCE 128:1030–1035CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. Karahan-Gul O, Artan N, Orhon D, Henze M, Van Loosdrecht MCM (2002b) Respirometric assessment of storage yield for different substrates. Water Sci Technol 46:345–352Google Scholar
  39. Krishna C, Van Loosdrecht MCM (1999) Effect of temperature on storage polymers and settleability of activated sludge. Water Res 33:2374–2382CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. Levantesi C, Beimfohr C, Geurkink B, Rossetti S, Thelen K, Krooneman J, Snaidr J, van der Waarde J, Tandoi V (2004) Filamentous Alphaproteobacteria associated with bulking in industrial wastewater treatment plants. Syst Appl Microbiol 27:728–736CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. Lew S, Lew M, Szarek J, Babinska I (2011) Seasonal patterns of the bacterioplankton community composition in a lake threatened by a pesticide disposal site. Environ Sci Pollut Res 18:376–385CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. Liao JC, Hou SY, Chao YP (1996) Pathway analysis, engineering and physiological considerations for redirecting central metabolism. Biotechnol Bioeng 52:129–140CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  43. Loy A, Schulz C, Lücker S, Schöpfer-Wendels A, Stoecker K, Baranyi C, Lehner A, Wagner M (2005) 16S rRNA gene-based oligonucleotide microarray for environmental monitoring of the betaproteobacterial order Rhodocyclales. Appl Environ Microbiol 71:1373–1386CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  44. Loy A, Maixner F, Wagner M, Horn M (2007) ProbeBase an online resource for rRNA-targeted oligonucleotide probes: new features 2007. Nucleic Acids Res 35:800–804CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  45. Majone M, Massanisso P, Carucci A, Lindrea K, Tandoi V (1996) Influence of storage on kinetic selection to control aerobic filamentous bulking. Water Sci Technol 34:223–232Google Scholar
  46. Majone M, Beccari M, Dionisi D, Levantesi C, Ramadori R, Tandoi V (2007) Effect of periodic feeding on substrate uptake and storage rates by a pure culture of Thiothrix (CT3 strain). Water Res 41:177–187CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  47. Manz W, Amann R, Ludwig W, Wagner M, Schleifer K-H (1992) Phylogenetic oligodeoxynucleotide probes for the major subclasses of Proteobacteria: problems and solutions. Syst Appl Microbiol 15:593–600CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  48. Manz W, Amann R, Ludwig W, Vancanneyt M, Schleifer K-H (1996) Application of a suite of 16S rRNA-specific oligonucleotide probes designed to investigate bacteria of the phylum cytophaga-flavobacter-bacteroides in the natural environment. Microbiol 142:1097–1106CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  49. Martins AMP, Heijnen JJ, van Loosdrecht MCM (2003) Effect of feeding pattern and storage on the sludge settleability under aerobic conditions. Water Res 37:2555–2570CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  50. Martins AMP, Karahan O, Van Loosdrecht MCM (2010) Effect of polymeric substrate on sludge settleability. Water Res 45:263–273CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  51. Meier H, Amann R, Ludwig W, Schleifer K-H (1999) Specific oligonucleotide probes for in situ detection of a major group of gram-positive bacteria with low DNA G + C content. Syst Appl Microbiol 22:186–196CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  52. Mino T, Arun V, Tsuzuki Y, Matsuo T (1987) Effect of phosphorus accumulation on acetate metabolism in the biological phosphorus removal process. In: Ramadori R (ed) Advances in water pollution control. Vol 4. Biological phosphate removal from wastewaters. Pergamon Press, Oxford, pp 27–38Google Scholar
  53. Mino T, Liu W-T, Kurisu F, Matsuo T (1995) Modeling glycogen storage and denitrification capacity of microorganism in enhanced biological phosphate removal processes. Water Sci Technol 31:25–34Google Scholar
  54. Mino T, van Loostrecht MCM, Heijnen JJ (1998) Microbiology and biochemistry of the enhanced biological phosphorus removal. Water Res 32(11):3193–3207CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  55. Neef A (1997) Anwendung der in situ Einzelzell-Identifizierung von Bakterien zur Populationsanalyse in komplexen mikrobiellen Biozönosen. Doctoral thesis, Technische Universität München, MünchenGoogle Scholar
  56. Orhon D, Ubay Çokgor E, Sözen S (1998) Dual hydrolysis model of the slowly biodegradable substrate in activated sludge systems. Biotechnol Tech 12:737–741CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  57. Orhon D, Karahan O, Sozen S (1999) The effect of residual microbial products on the experimental assessment of the particulate inert COD in wastewaters. Water Res 33:3191–3203CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  58. Orhon D, Cokgor EU, Insel G, Karahan O, Katipoglu T (2009) Validity of Monod kinetics at different sludge ages—peptone biodegradation under aerobic conditions. Bioresource Technol 100:5678–5686CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  59. Pereira H, Lemos PC, Reis MA, Crespo JPSG, Carrondo MJT, Santos H (1996) Model for carbon metabolism in biological phosphorus removal processes based on in vivo 13C-NMR labelling experiments. Water Res 30:2128–2138CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  60. Roller C, Wagner M, Amann R, Ludwig W, Schleifer K-H (1994) In situ probing of Gram-positive bacteria with high DNA G1C content using 23S ribosomal-RNA-targeted oligonucleotides. Microbiol 140:2849–2858CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  61. San Pedro DC, Mino T, Matsuo T (1994) Evaluation of the rate of hydrolysis of slowly biodegradable COD (SBCOD) using starch as substrate under anaerobic, anoxic and aerobic conditions. Water Sci Technol 30:191–199Google Scholar
  62. Smolders GJF, van der Meij J, van Loosdrecht MCM, Heijnen JJ (1994) Model of the anaerobic metabolism of the biological phosphorus removal process: stoichiometry and pH influence. Biotechnol Bioeng 43:461–470CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  63. Methods S (1995) Standard methods for the examination of water and wastewater, 19th edn. American Public Health Association/American Water Works Association/Water Environment Federation, Washington, DCGoogle Scholar
  64. Tas DO, Karahan O, Insel G, Övez S, Orhon D, Spanjers H (2009) Biodegradability and denitrification potential of settleable chemical oxygen demand in domestic wastewater. Water Environ Res 81:715–727CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  65. Tomei MC, Annesini MC (2008) Biodegradation of phenolic mixtures in a sequencing batch reactor. A kinetic study Env Sci Pollut Res 15:188–195CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  66. Van Aalst-van Leeuwen MA, Pot MA, Van Loosdrecht MCM, Heijnen JJ (1997) Kinetic modeling of poly (β-hydroxybutyrate) production and consumption by Paracoccus pantotrophus under dynamic substrate supply. Biotechnol Bioeng 55:773–782CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  67. Van Loosdrecht MCM, Pot MA, Heijnen JJ (1997) Importance of bacterial storage polymers in bioprocesses. Water Sci Technol 35:41–47Google Scholar
  68. Van Loosdrecht MCM, Heijnen JJ (2002) Modeling of activated sludge processes with structured biomass. Water Sci Technol 45:13–23Google Scholar
  69. Wilderer PA, Irvine RL, Goronszy MC (2001) Sequencing batch reactor technology, Scientific and Technical Report No. 10. IWA Publishing, LondonGoogle Scholar
  70. Xia Y, Kong Y, Nielsen PH (2008) In situ detection of starch-hydrolyzing microorganisms inactivated sludge. FEMS Microbiol Ecol 66:462–471CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  71. Yagci N, Insel G, Artan N, Orhon D (2004) Modelling and calibration of phosphate and glycogen accumulating organism competition for acetate uptake in a sequencing batch reactor. Water Sci Technol 50:241–250Google Scholar
  72. Yagci N, Insel G, Tasli R, Artan N, Randall CW, Orhon D (2006a) A new interpretation of ASM2d for modeling of SBR performance for enhanced biological phosphorus removal under different P/HAc ratios. Biotechnol Bioeng 93:258–270CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  73. Yagci N, Insel G, Tasli R, Artan N, Randall CW, Orhon D (2006b) A new interpretation of ASM2d for modeling of SBR performance for enhanced biological phosphorus removal under different P/HAc ratios. Biotech Bioeng 93:258–270CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  74. Yagci N, Dulekgurgen E, Artan N, Orhon D (2011) Experimental evaluation and model assessment of coexistence of PAOs and GAOs. J Environ Sci Heal A 46:968–979Google Scholar
  75. Zhan P, Chen J, He G, Fang G, Shi Y (2010) Microbial dynamics in a sequencing batch reactor treating alkaline peroxide mechanical pulp and paper process wastewater. Environ Sci Pollut Res 17:1599–1605CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2012

Authors and Affiliations

  • Asli S. Ciggin
    • 1
  • Simona Rossetti
    • 2
  • Mauro Majone
    • 3
  • Derin Orhon
    • 1
    • 4
  1. 1.Faculty of Civil Engineering, Environmental Engineering DepartmentIstanbul Technical UniversityIstanbulTurkey
  2. 2.Instituto di Ricerca Sulle Acque C.N.RMonterotondoItaly
  3. 3.Department of ChemistrySapienza University of RomeRomeItaly
  4. 4.Turkish Academy of SciencesAnkaraTurkey

Personalised recommendations