From macro to lab-scale: Changes in bacterial community led to deterioration of EBPR in lab reactor
Adam Muszyński , Maria Łebkowska , Agnieszka Tabernacka , Aleksandra Miłobędzka
AbstractA laboratory scale sequencing batch reactor (SBR), fed with synthetic wastewater containing a mixture of organic compounds, was operated for nearly six months. Despite maintaining the same operational conditions, a deterioration of enhanced biological phosphorus removal (EBPR) occurred after 40 days of SBR operation. The Prel/Cupt ratio decreased from 0.28 to 0.06 P-mol C-mol−1, and C requirements increased from 11 to 32 mg C h−1 g−1 of mixed liquor suspended solids. A FISH analysis showed that the percentage of Accumulibacter in an overall community of polyphosphate accumulating organisms (PAOs) and glycogen accumulating organisms (GAOs) dropped from 93% to 13%. An increase in abundance of Gammaproteobacteria (from 2.6% to 22%) and Alphaproteobacteria (from 1.8% to 10%) was observed. The number of Competibacter increased from 0.5% to nearly 9%. Clusters 1 and 2 of Defluviicoccus-related GAOs, not detected before deterioration, constituted 35% and 27% of Alphaproteobacteria, respectively. We concluded that lab-scale experiments should not be extended implicitly to full-scale EBPR systems because some bacterial groups are detected mainlyin lab-scale reactors. Well-defined, lab-scale operational conditions reduce the number of ecological niches available to bacteria.
|Journal series||Central European Journal of Biology, ISSN 1895-104X, [1644-3632 ]|
|Publication size in sheets||0.6|
|Keywords in English||Polyphosphate accumulating organism (PAO), Glycogen accumulating organism (GAO), Microbial ecology|
|ASJC Classification||; ; ;|
|URL||From macro to lab-scale: Changes in bacterial community led to deterioration of EBPR in lab reactor - Springer http://link.springer.com/article/10.2478%2Fs11535-013-0116-2|
|Score|| = 20.0, 13-08-2020, ArticleFromJournal|
= 20.0, 13-08-2020, ArticleFromJournal
|Publication indicators||= 13; = 13; = 25.0; : 2013 = 0.633 (2) - 2013=0.748 (5)|
|Citation count*||25 (2020-09-12)|
* presented citation count is obtained through Internet information analysis and it is close to the number calculated by the Publish or Perish system.