Denitrification of groundwater using a sulfur-oxidizing autotrophic denitrifying anaerobic fluidized-bed MBR: performance and bacterial community structure

Zhang, Lili; Zhang, Chao; Hu, Chengzhi; Liu, Huijuan; Qu, Jiuhui

doi:10.1007/s00253-014-6113-9

Cited by 109 publications

(50 citation statements)

References 51 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Proteobacteria was by far the largest phyla in the three communities (59.9, 69.5 and 70.3% for SAD, MD-M and MD-E, respectively). The enrichment of Proteobacteria, Chlorobi, Chloroflexi and Bacteroidetes has been detected in previous studies on heterotrophic and chemolithotrophic denitrification (MorganSagastume et al, 2008;Fern andez et al, 2009;Zhang et al, 2015;Zhao et al, 2013;Shao et al, 2010). At the class level, the majority of the sequences belonged to Betaproteobacteria, Epsilonproteobacteria, Deltaproteobacteria, Anaerolineae and Ignavibacteria (Fig.…”

Section: Bacterial Taxonomic Identificationmentioning

confidence: 87%

“…S1 which is the same as reported by Zhang et al (2015). In this study, two identical AnFB-MBR systems were operated under the same conditions except for external carbon.…”

Section: Anfb-mbr Setup and Operationmentioning

confidence: 89%

“…Changes in the transmembrane pressure (TMP) were monitored with a vacuum pressure meter. The AnFB-MBRs were operated at 28 ± 3 C. The composition of the feed solution can be found elsewhere (Zhang et al, 2015), which was tap water amended with the NO 3 À concentration as N, the PO 4 À concentration as P, the total alkalinity of the feed and trace element solution.…”

Section: Anfb-mbr Setup and Operationmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…The protein content was determined using the modified Lowry method (Frølund et al, 1995). Both N 2 and N 2 O were determined by gas chromatography (GC) using a 6890 N system (Agilent Technologies, USA) and a SP3410 gas chromatograph (Beijing Beifen-Ruili Analytical Instrument Co. Ltd., China), respectively, as described by Zhang et al (2015). The N 2 and N 2 O samples were collected from the headspace of the sealed serum flasks using a gas tight syringe and directly injected into the gas chromatography.…”

Section: Chemical Analysesmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Recently, AnFB-MBRs have been considered as a suitable technology for handling dilute wastewater (Gao et al, 2014;McCurry et al, 2014;Sahinkaya et al, 2015). For example, lab-scale extractive and diffusive MBRs have been applied for the heterotrophic/autotrophic denitrification of drinking water (McAdam and Judd, 2007;Zhao et al, 2013), whereas a sulfuroxidizing autotrophic denitrifying AnFB-MBR had also been developed for the treatment of nitrate-contaminated drinking water (Zhang et al, 2015).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 4 more Smart Citations

Sulfur-based mixotrophic denitrification corresponding to different electron donors and microbial profiling in anoxic fluidized-bed membrane bioreactors

Zhang

et al. 2015

Water Research

Self Cite

141

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

a b s t r a c tSulfur-based mixotrophic denitrifying anoxic fluidized bed membrane bioreactors (AnFB-MBR) were developed for the treatment of nitrate-contaminated groundwater with minimized sulfate production. The nitrate removal rates obtained in the methanol-and ethanol-fed mixotrophic denitrifying AnFB-MBRs reached 1.44e3.84 g NO 3 À eN/L reactor d at a hydraulic retention time of 0.5 h, which were significantly superior to those reported in packed bed reactors. Compared to methanol, ethanol was found to be a more effective external carbon source for sulfur-based mixotrophic denitrification due to lower sulfate and total organic carbon concentrations in the effluent. Using pyrosequencing, the phylotypes of primary microbial groups in the reactor, including sulfur-oxidizing autotrophic denitrifiers, methanol-or ethanol-supported heterotrophic denitrifiers, were investigated in response to changes in electron donors. Principal component and heatmap analyses indicated that selection of electron donating substrates largely determined the microbial community structure. The abundance of Thiobacillus decreased from 45.1% in the sulfur-oxidizing autotrophic denitrifying reactor to 12.0% and 14.2% in sulfur-based methanol-and ethanol-fed mixotrophic denitrifying bioreactors, respectively. Heterotrophic Methyloversatilis and Thauera bacteria became more dominant in the mixotrophic denitrifying bioreactors, which were possibly responsible for the observed methanol-and ethanol-associated denitrification.

show abstract

Section: Bacterial Taxonomic Identificationmentioning

confidence: 87%

“…S1 which is the same as reported by Zhang et al (2015). In this study, two identical AnFB-MBR systems were operated under the same conditions except for external carbon.…”

Section: Anfb-mbr Setup and Operationmentioning

confidence: 89%

Section: Anfb-mbr Setup and Operationmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Chemical Analysesmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 3 more Smart Citations

Sulfur-based mixotrophic denitrification corresponding to different electron donors and microbial profiling in anoxic fluidized-bed membrane bioreactors

Zhang

et al. 2015

Water Research

Self Cite

141

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

Using kinetics and modeling to predict denitrification fluxes in elemental‐sulfur‐based biofilms

Wang

Sabba

Bott

et al. 2019

Biotech & Bioengineering

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Elemental sulfur (S 0 ) can serve as an electron donor for water and wastewater denitrification, but few researchers have addressed the kinetics of S 0 -based reduction of nitrate (NO 3 − ), nitrite (NO 2 − ), and nitrous oxide (N 2 O). In addition, S 0based denitrifying biofilms are counter-diffusional. This is because the electron donor (S 0 ) is supplied from the biofilm attachment surface while the acceptor, for example, NO 3 − , is supplied from the bulk liquid. No existing mathematical model for S 0 -based denitrification considers this behavior. In this study, batch tests were used to determine the kinetic parameters for the reduction of NO 3 − , NO 2 − , and N 2 O.Additionally, a biofilm model was developed to explore the effects of counterdiffusion on overall fluxes, that is, the mass of NO 3 − or NO 2 − removed per unit biofilm support area per unit time. The maximum specific substrate utilization rates (q) for NO 3 − , NO 2 − , and N 2 O were 3.54, 1.98, and 6.28 g N g COD −1 ·d −1 , respectively. The maximum specific growth rates (μ) were 0.71, 1.21, and 1.67 d −1 for NO 3 − to NO 2 − , NO 2 − to N 2 O, and N 2 O to N 2 , respectively. Results suggest that the observed NO 2 − accumulation during S 0 -based denitrification results from a lowq for NO 2 − relative to that for NO 3 − . The highq for N 2 O, relative to that for NO 3 − and NO 2 − , suggest that little N 2 O accumulation occurs during denitrification. A counter-diffusional biofilm model was used to predict trends for NO 3 − fluxes, and confirmed NO 2 − accumulation in S 0 -based denitrification biofilms. It also explains the observed detrimental effects of biofilm thickness on denitrification fluxes. This study allows a more accurate prediction of NO 3 − , NO 2 − , and N 2 O transformations in S 0 -based denitrification.

show abstract

Sulfur‐driven autotrophic denitrification of nitric oxide for efficient nitrous oxide recovery

Wang

Wei

et al. 2021

Biotech & Bioengineering

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Nitrous oxide (N2O) was previously deemed as a potent greenhouse gas but is actually an untapped energy source, which can accumulate during the microbial denitrification of nitric oxide (NO). Compared with the organic electron donor required in heterotrophic denitrification, elemental sulfur (S0) is a promising electron donor alternative due to its cheap cost and low biomass yield in sulfur‐driven autotrophic denitrification. However, no effort has been made to test N2O recovery from sulfur‐driven denitrification of NO so far. Therefore, in this study, batch and continuous experiments were carried out to investigate the NO removal performance and N2O recovery potential via sulfur‐driven NO‐based denitrification under various Fe(II)EDTA‐NO concentrations. Efficient energy recovery was achieved, as up to 35.5%–40.9% of NO was converted to N2O under various NO concentrations. N2O recovery from Fe(II)EDTA‐NO could be enhanced by the low bioavailability of sulfur and the acid environment caused by sulfur oxidation. The NO reductase (NOR) and N2O reductase (N2OR) were inhibited distinctively at relatively low NO levels, leading to efficient N2O accumulation, but were suppressed irreversibly at NO level beyond 15 mM in continuous experiments. Such results indicated that the regulation of NO at a relatively low level would benefit the system stability and NO removal capacity during long‐term system operation. The continuous operation of the sulfur‐driven Fe(II)EDTA‐NO‐based denitrification reduced the overall microbial diversity but enriched several key microbial community. Thauera, Thermomonas, and Arenimonas that are able to carry out sulfur‐driven autotrophic denitrification became the dominant organisms with their relative abundance increased from 25.8% to 68.3%, collectively.

show abstract

Denitrification of groundwater using a sulfur-oxidizing autotrophic denitrifying anaerobic fluidized-bed MBR: performance and bacterial community structure

Cited by 109 publications

References 51 publications

Sulfur-based mixotrophic denitrification corresponding to different electron donors and microbial profiling in anoxic fluidized-bed membrane bioreactors

Sulfur-based mixotrophic denitrification corresponding to different electron donors and microbial profiling in anoxic fluidized-bed membrane bioreactors

Using kinetics and modeling to predict denitrification fluxes in elemental‐sulfur‐based biofilms

Sulfur‐driven autotrophic denitrification of nitric oxide for efficient nitrous oxide recovery

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About