2020
DOI: 10.1016/j.chemosphere.2020.125871
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Anaerobic co-digestion of Pennisetum hybrid and pig manure: A comparative study of performance and microbial community at different mixture ratio and organic loading rate

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
1
1
1

Citation Types

1
4
1

Year Published

2020
2020
2024
2024

Publication Types

Select...
8

Relationship

0
8

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 18 publications
(7 citation statements)
references
References 44 publications
1
4
1
Order By: Relevance
“…Bearing these considerations in mind, the data obtained in the present work are comparatively of relevant interest because they indicate that it is possible to obtain a similar production in biogas (energy) and treat a higher volume of effluent in the same period and, at lower process temperature, conditions that will certainly provide an energy balance more attractive for the operating unit. Considering the co-digestion of Pennisetum hybrid and pig manure (50:50) under a mesophilic range of temperature (35 ± 1 • C) [55], the results obtained are comparable to those of this work, although with a lower methane content: biogas production of 1. The variations in biogas volume under HRT 6.7 d (Figure 2) were certainly stressed by the failure to feed the reactor on Sundays.…”
Section: Anaerobic Digestion Of the Bww And Pe Mixturesupporting
confidence: 81%
“…Bearing these considerations in mind, the data obtained in the present work are comparatively of relevant interest because they indicate that it is possible to obtain a similar production in biogas (energy) and treat a higher volume of effluent in the same period and, at lower process temperature, conditions that will certainly provide an energy balance more attractive for the operating unit. Considering the co-digestion of Pennisetum hybrid and pig manure (50:50) under a mesophilic range of temperature (35 ± 1 • C) [55], the results obtained are comparable to those of this work, although with a lower methane content: biogas production of 1. The variations in biogas volume under HRT 6.7 d (Figure 2) were certainly stressed by the failure to feed the reactor on Sundays.…”
Section: Anaerobic Digestion Of the Bww And Pe Mixturesupporting
confidence: 81%
“…The benefits of including grass in methane concentrations have also been verified by LIANHUA et al (2020) when they co-digested the swine manure with Penninsetum in the proportion of 25:75, respectively, and verified yields 5% higher in this inclusion of forage compared to when only 50% was added. MAO et al (2017) found higher methane yields when it was added 30% of rice straw to the swine manure in anaerobic digestion, compared with the isolated digestion.…”
Section: Methodsmentioning
confidence: 84%
“…The methods employed for measuring the content of TS, VS, elemental C, elemental N, pH, total ammonia nitrogen (TAN), volatile fatty acids (VFAs, including butyric acid (Ba), propionic acid (Pa), and acetic acid (Aa)), alkalinity (intermediate alkalinity (IA), partial alkalinity (PA), and total alkalinity (TA)), and CH 4 were described in a previous study [28,29].…”
Section: Methodsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Samples for determining the microorganism communities during co-digestion were collected on days 13 (GM11-2 and GM31-2), 51 (GM11-2.5 and GM31-2.5), 83 (GM11-3.5 and GM31-3.5), 112 (GM11-4 and GM31-4), 144 (GM11-4.5 and GM31-4.5), 172 (GM11-5 and GM31-5), 198 (GM11-5.5 and GM31-5.5), and 235 (GM11-6 and GM31-6) at OLRs of 2.0, 2.5, 3.5, 4.0, 4.5, 5.0, 5.5, and 6.0 g VS/(L•d), respectively. DNA extraction, polymerase chain reaction amplification, and phylogenetic analysis were performed as described previously [29].…”
Section: Analytical Methods For Microbial Communitiesmentioning
confidence: 99%
See 1 more Smart Citation