Improved methane production from sugarcane vinasse with filter cake in thermophilic UASB reactors, with predominance of Methanothermobacter and Methanosarcina archaea and Thermotogae bacteria

Abstract

Biogas production from sugarcane vinasse has enormous economic, energy, and environmental management potential. However, methane production stability and biodigested vinasse quality remain key issues, requiring better nutrient and alkalinity availability, operational strategies, and knowledge of reactor microbiota. This study demonstrates increased methane production from vinasse through the use of sugarcane filter cake and improved effluent recirculation, with elevated organic loading rates (OLR) and good reactor stability. We used UASB reactors in a two-stage configuration, with OLRs up to 45gCODLd, and obtained methane production as high as 3LLd. Quantitative PCR indicated balanced amounts of bacteria and archaea in the sludge (10-10copiesgVS), and of the predominant archaea orders, Methanobacteriales and Methanosarcinales (10-10copiesgVS). 16S rDNA sequencing also indicated the thermophilic Thermotogae as the most abundant class of bacteria in the sludge.

Effect of Clinoptilolite and Halloysite Addition on Biogas Production and Microbial Community Structure during Anaerobic Digestion

“…In this study was demonstrated that halloysite only slightly promote the immobilization of classes: Deltaproteobacteria , Thermotogae and Clostridia. Thermotogae is mainly responsible for the degradation of complex organic compounds [ 60 ] and Deltaproteobacteria class includes fermenting bacteria species [ 58 ] ( Figure 2 a). Both classes could increase biogas production process.…”

Molecular identification of microbial communities in the methane production from vinasse: A review

“…1, the microorganisms that participate in each stage of methane production are classified at the class level. Microbial consortia composition has been studied for the production of methane from sugarcane vinasse (dos Reis et al 2015; Dias et al 2016;de Barros et al 2017;Iltchenco et al 2019), brewery vinasse (Enitan et al 2014), and synthetic vinasse (Rodríguez et al 2012). These studies just focused on microbial composition identification at initial and/or final times.…”

“…Molecular techniques for the microbial identification in reactors for the production of methane from vinasse have been studied in samples of sugarcane vinasse (Martínez et al 2014;dos Reis et al 2015;Dias et al 2016;de Barros et al 2017;Jiménez et al 2018), synthetic vinasse (Rodríguez et al 2012), and tequila vinasse (Jáuregui-Jáuregui et al 2014;Toledo-Cervantes et al 2018). Few studies have been conducted with a metagenomic analysis in methane production from vinasses (Rodríguez et al 2012;Enitan et al 2014;dos Reis et al 2015;Dias et al 2016;de Barros et al 2017;Iltchenco et al 2019). In general such approaches are not able to identify microorganisms at the species level, so the specific function in the process is uncertain.…”

A spatially explicit assessment of sugarcane vinasse as a sustainable by-product

“…UASB can also work with high organic load and smaller sludge production than conventional aerobic biological treatments ( Forster-Carneiro et al, 2012 ). New reactors arrangements aiming at better technical performance are, however, in constant evolution ( Barros et al, 2017 ; Del Nery et al, 2018 ), as is the case of the Anaerobic Packed-Bed Reactors (APBR) ( Fuess et al, 2017a ; Fuess and Zaiat, 2018 ).…”