Advantages of intermittently aerated SBR over conventional SBR on nitrogen removal for the treatment of digested piggery wastewater

  • Xiaoyan Song
  • Rui LiuEmail author
  • Lujun ChenEmail author
  • Baogang Dong
  • Tomoki Kawagishi
Research Article
Part of the following topical collections:
  1. Livestock Waste Management and Resource Recovery


An intermittently aerated sequencing batch reactor (IASBR) and a traditional sequencing batch reactor (SBR) were parallelly constructed to treat digested piggery wastewater, which was in high NH 4 + -N concentration but in a low COD/TN ratio. Their pollutant removal performance was compared under COD/TN ratios of 1.6–3.4 d and hydraulic retention times of 5–3 d. The results showed that the IASBR removed TN, NH 4 + -N and TOC more efficiently than the SBR. The average removal rates of TN, NH 4 + -N and TOC were 83.1%, 96.5%, and 89.0%, respectively, in the IASBR, significantly higher than the corresponding values of 74.8%, 82.0%, and 86.2% in the SBR. Mass balance of organic carbon revealed that the higher TN removal in the IASBR might be attributed to its efficient utilization of the organic carbon for denitrification, since that 48.7%–52.2% of COD was used for denitrification in the IASBR, higher than the corresponding proportion of 43.1%–47.4% in the SBR. A pre-anoxic process in the IASBR would enhance the ammonium oxidation while restrict the nitrite oxidation. Anoxic duration of 40–80 min should be beneficial for achieving stable nitritation.


Anoxic stress Carbon source Digested piggery wastewater Intermittently aerated SBR (IASBR) Total nitrogen 



This study was supported by Major Science and Technology Projects in Zhejiang (No. 2014C03022), MRC Cooperation Program with Mitsubishi Rayon, Science and Technology Program in Jiaxing (No. 2015AY23004) and Youth Fund of Yangtze Delta Region Institute of Tsinghua University-Zhejiang.


  1. 1.
    Zhao B, Li J, Leu S Y. An innovative wood-chip-framework soil infiltrator for treating anaerobic digested swine wastewater and analysis of the microbial community. Bioresource Technology, 2014, 173: 384–391CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Liu R, Chen L J, Wang G R, Ye Z X. On the pollution with antibiotics, heavy metal and conventional indicators in digested wastewater from large-scale pig farms in Jiaxing City, China. Environmental Engineering and Management Journal, 2016, 15 (10): 2253–2260Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Deng L, Zheng P, Chen Z, Mahmood Q. Improvement in posttreatment of digested swine wastewater. Bioresource Technology, 2008, 99(8): 3136–3145CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Yamamoto T, Takaki K, Koyama T, Furukawa K. Long-term stability of partial nitritation of swine wastewater digester liquor and its subsequent treatment by Anammox. Bioresource Technology, 2008, 99(14): 6419–6425CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    MEPPRC (Ministry Environmental Protection of People’s Republic of China). Discharge Standard of Pollutants for Livestock and Poultry Breeding (draft), 2014. Available online at http://www.zhb. Scholar
  6. 6.
    Vázquez-Padín J R, Fernández I, Morales N, Campos J L, Mosquera-Corral A, Méndez R. Autotrophic nitrogen removal at low temperature. Water Science and Technology, 2011, 63(6): 1282–1288CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Yao H, Liu H, He Y M, Zhang S J, Sun P Z, Huang C H. Performance of an ANAMMOX reactor treating wastewater generated by antibiotic and starch production processes. Frontiers of Environmental Science & Engineering, 2012, 6(6): 875–883CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Kartal B, Kuenen J G, van Loosdrecht M C. Sewage treatment with anammox. Science, 2010, 328(5979): 702–703CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Molinuevo B, García M C, Karakashev D, Angelidaki I. Anammox for ammonia removal from pig manure effluents: effect of organic matter content on process performance. Bioresource Technology, 2009, 100(7): 2171–2175CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Obaja D, Macé S, Costa J, Sans C, Mata-Alvarez J. Nitrification, denitrification and biological phosphorus removal in piggery wastewater using a sequencing batch reactor. Bioresource Technology, 2003, 87(1): 103–111CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Rajagopal R, Rousseau P, Bernet N, Béline F. Combined anaerobic and activated sludge anoxic/oxic treatment for piggery wastewater. Bioresource Technology, 2011, 102(3): 2185–2192CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Yang D, Deng L, Zheng D, Wang L, Liu Y. Separation of swine wastewater into different concentration fractions and its contribution to combined anaerobic-aerobic process. Journal of Environmental Management, 2016, 168: 87–93CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Yang Y D, Zhang L, Shao H D, Zhang S J, Gu P C, Peng Y Z. Enhanced nutrients removal from municipal wastewater through biological phosphorus removal followed by partial nitritation/ anammox. Frontiers of Environmental Science & Engineering, 2017, 11(2): 8CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Yang J, Trela J, Zubrowska-Sudol M, Plaza E. Intermittent aeration in one-stage partial nitritation/anammox process. Ecological Engineering, 2015, 75: 413–420CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Bortone G, Libelli S M. Anoxic phosphate uptake in the dephanox process. Water Science and Technology, 1999, 40(4–5): 177–185CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Zhang M, Lawlor P G, Wu G, Lynch B, Zhan X. Partial nitrification and nutrient removal in intermittently aerated sequencing batch reactors treating separated digestate liquid after anaerobic digestion of pig manure. Bioprocess and Biosystems Engineering, 2011, 34 (9): 1049–1056CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Pan M, Henry L G, Liu R, Huang X, Zhan X M. Nitrogen removal from slaughterhouse wastewater through partial nitrification followed by denitrification in intermittently aerated sequencing batch reactors at 11 degreeC. Environmental Technology, 2014, 35(1-4): 470–477CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Song X Y, Liu R, Shui Y, Kawagishi T, Zhan X M, Chen L J. Stability of Short-cut Nitrification Nitrogen Removal in Digested Piggery Wastewater with an Intermittently Aerated Sequencing Batch Reactor. Environmental Sciences, 2016, 37(5): 1873–1879 (in Chinese)Google Scholar
  19. 19.
    MEPPRC (Ministry Environmental Protection of People’s Republic of China). Standard Methods for Water and Wastewater Monitoring and Analysis, 4th ed. Beijing: China Environmental Science Press,2002, 238–239; 252–256; 260–263; 266–269; 345–356 (in Chinese)Google Scholar
  20. 20.
    Yu L F, Wang S W, Guo T C, Peng D C. Nitrifiers accumulation with reject water and bio-augmentation for nitrification of sewage at short SRT. Environmental Sciences, 2008, 29(2): 332–337 (in Chinese)Google Scholar
  21. 21.
    Rotthauwe J H, Witzel K P, Liesack W. The ammonia monooxygenase structural gene amoA as a functional marker: molecular fine-scale analysis of natural ammonia-oxidizing populations. Applied and Environmental Microbiology, 1997, 63(12): 4704–4712Google Scholar
  22. 22.
    Huang Z, Gedalanga P B, Asvapathanagul P, Olson B H. Influence of physicochemical and operational parameters on Nitrobacter and Nitrospira communities in an aerobic activated sludge bioreactor. Water Research, 2010, 44(15): 4351–4358CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    Ovreås L, Forney L, Daae F L, Torsvik V. Distribution of bacterioplankton in meromictic Lake Saelenvannet, as determined by denaturing gradient gel electrophoresis of PCR-amplified gene fragments coding for 16S rRNA. Applied and Environmental Microbiology, 1997, 63(9): 3367–3373Google Scholar
  24. 24.
    Baek K, Park C, Oh H M, Yoon B D, Kim H S. Diversity and abundance of ammonia-oxidizing bacteria in activated sludge treating different types of wastewater. Journal of Microbiology and Biotechnology, 2010, 20(7): 1128–1133CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. 25.
    Li J, Meng J, Zhao BW, Ai B L. Main influence factors for shortcut nitrification in a SBR treating anaerobic digested piggery wastewater. Journal of Harbin Institute of Technology, 2014, 46(8): 27–33 (in Chinese)Google Scholar
  26. 26.
    Anthonisen A C, Loehr R C, Prakasam T B S, Srinath E G. Inhibition of nitrification by ammonia and nitrous acid. Journal- Water Pollution Control Federation, 1976, 48(5): 835–852Google Scholar
  27. 27.
    Grady C P L, Daigger J G T, Lim H C. Biological Wastewater Treatment. 2nd ed. American: Marcel Dekker Inc.,1999, 397–400Google Scholar
  28. 28.
    Wentzel M C, Loewenthal R E, Ekama G A, Marais G R. Enhanced polyphosphate organism cultures in activated sludge systems—Part I: Enhanced culture development. Water S.A., 1988, 14(2): 81–92Google Scholar
  29. 29.
    Wentzel M C, Ekama G A, Loewenthal R E, Dold P L. Enhanced polyphosphate organism cultures in activated sludge systems—Part II: Experimental behaviour. Water S.A., 1989, 15(2): 71–88Google Scholar
  30. 30.
    Wentzel M C, Dold P L, Ekama G A, Marais G R. Enhanced polyphosphate organism cultures in activated sludge systems- Part III: Kinetic model. Water S.A., 1989, 15(2): 89–102Google Scholar
  31. 31.
    Fu G K, Zhang C L, Yu X Q, Zhang Z, Zhou Q. Research on the optimum operation strategy for deficient carbon source urban sewage treatment plants. Journal of Hunan Univerisity, 2012, 39(8): 61–66 (Natural Sciences)Google Scholar
  32. 32.
    Daverey A, Hung N T, Dutta K, Lin J G. Ambient temperature SNAD process treating anaerobic digester liquor of swine wastewater. Bioresource Technology, 2013, 141: 191–198CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. 33.
    Nowak O, Svardal K, Schweighofer P. The dynamic behaviour of nitrifying activated sludge systems influenced by inhibiting wastewater compounds. Water Science and Technology, 1995, 31(2): 115–124CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. 34.
    Tappe W, Laverman A, Bohland M, Braster M, Rittershaus S, Groeneweg J, van Verseveld HW. Maintenance energy demand and starvation recovery dynamics of Nitrosomonas europaea and Nitrobacter winogradskyi cultivated in a retentostat with complete biomass retention. Applied and Environmental Microbiology, 1999, 65(6): 2471–2477Google Scholar
  35. 35.
    Chen W, Westerhoff P, Leenheer J A, Booksh K. Fluorescence excitation-emission matrix regional integration to quantify spectra for dissolved organic matter. Environmental Science & Technology, 2003, 37(24): 5701–5710CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Higher Education Press and Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2017

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Zhejiang Provincial Key Laboratory of Water Science and Technology, Department of Environment in Yangtze Delta Region Institute of Tsinghua University-ZhejiangJiaxingChina
  2. 2.School of EnvironmentTsinghua UniversityBeijingChina
  3. 3.Aqua Development CenterMitsubishi Rayon Co. Ltd.ToyohashiJapan

Personalised recommendations