Advertisement

Biotechnology Letters

, Volume 23, Issue 22, pp 1889–1892 | Cite as

Analysis of the methane production in thermophilic anaerobic reactors: use of autofluorescence microscopy

  • R. Solera
  • L.I. Romero
  • D. Sales
Article

Abstract

Methanogenic activity in thermophilic, anaerobic reactors was determined by comparing the amount of methane generated in single- and two-stage systems with the size of the methanogenic population, as determined by microscopy. The methanogenic activities were 2.71 × 10−9 ml methane cell−1 d−1 and 1.10 × 10−9 ml methane cell−1 d−1 for 10 and 4 days of the hydraulic retention time (HRT), in the single-stage system. In the two-stage system, 7.49 × 10−9 ml methane cell−1 d−1 in the acidogenic reactor and 1.56 × 10−9 ml methane cell−1 d−1 in the methanogenic reactor for 4 days of the HRT. A high correlation was evident between the methane production and methanogenic population [0.1354 ln(x) − 2.1375](R2 0.8619).

activity anaerobic process biogas methanogens waste water treatment 

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. Clescerli LS,Greenberg AE (1990) Standard Methods for the Examination of Water and Wastewater, 19th edn. Washington DC: American Public Health Association.Google Scholar
  2. Doddema H,Vogels G (1978) Improved identification of methanogenic bacteria by fluorescence microscopy. Appl. Environ. Microbiol. 36: 752-754.Google Scholar
  3. Fynn GH,Withmore TN (1982) Colonization of polyurethane reticulated foam biomass support particle by methanogenic species. Biotechnol. Lett. 4: 577-582.Google Scholar
  4. Jain M,Zeikus G,Bhatnagar L (1991) Anaerobic Microbiology. A Practical Approach. New York: Oxford Press, pp. 223-245.Google Scholar
  5. Jawed M,Tare V (1999) Microbial composition assessment of anaerobic biomass through methanogenic activity test. Water SA 25: 345-350.Google Scholar
  6. Lazarova V,Manem J (1995) Biofilm characterization and activity analysis in water and wastewater treatment. Water Res. 29: 2227-2245.Google Scholar
  7. Nebot E,Romero LI,Quiroga JM,Sales D (1995) Effect of the feed frequency on the performance of anaerobic filters. Anaerobe 1: 113-120.Google Scholar
  8. Pérez M,Romero L,Sales D (1997) Performance of fixed-film reactors for anaerobic treatment of wine-distillery wastewater: effect of the influent pH conditions. Chem. Biochem. Eng. 11: 133-137.Google Scholar
  9. Shang Y,Sung S (1998) Comparison of temperature-phased and two-phase anaerobic digestion of cellulose. Proc. Water Environ. Fed. (Annu. Conf. Exp.) 71: 431-442.Google Scholar
  10. Solera R,Romero LI,Sales D (2001) Determination of microbial population in thermophilic anaerobic reactor: comparative analysis by different counting methods. Anaerobe 7: 79-86.Google Scholar
  11. van der Berg L,Kennedy KL (1981) Potential use of anaerobic process for industrial waste treatment. Biotechnol. Lett. 3: 165.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Kluwer Academic Publishers 2001

Authors and Affiliations

  • R. Solera
    • 1
  • L.I. Romero
    • 1
  • D. Sales
    • 1
  1. 1.Department of Chemical Engineering, Food and Environmental Technologies, Faculty of Marine and Environmental SciencesUniversity of Cadiz, Campus Río San Pedro s/nCadizSpain

Personalised recommendations