Performance and microbial community dynamics of a sulfate-reducing bioreactor treating coal generated acid mine drainage

Burns, Andrew S.; Pugh, Charles W.; Segid, Yosief T.; Behum, Paul T.; Lefticariu, Liliana; Bender, Kelly S.

doi:10.1007/s10532-011-9520-y

Cited by 58 publications

(39 citation statements)

References 45 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…The pH has been regulated for optimum growth of algal species (Bhatnagar et al 2010), sulfate-reducing bacteria (Burns et al 2012), macrophytes (Kirby et al 2009), and Salvinia rotundifolia (Banerjee and Sarker 1997). For example, photosynthesis by algae increases pH through the presence of hydroxide ions that are formed by the use of carbon dioxide (USEPA 2011).…”

Section: Design Factorsmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Oxidation pond for municipal wastewater treatment

et al. 2015

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This literature review examines process, design, and cost issues related to using oxidation ponds for wastewater treatment. Many of the topics have applications at either full scale or in isolation for laboratory analysis. Oxidation ponds have many advantages. The oxidation pond treatment process is natural, because it uses microorganisms such as bacteria and algae. This makes the method of treatment cost-effective in terms of its construction, maintenance, and energy requirements. Oxidation ponds are also productive, because it generates effluent that can be used for other applications. Finally, oxidation ponds can be considered a sustainable method for treatment of wastewater.

show abstract

Section: Design Factorsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…For example, photosynthesis by algae increases pH through the presence of hydroxide ions that are formed by the use of carbon dioxide (USEPA 2011). Various authors set the pH range as low as 3-5 (Burns et al 2012), while the highest pH range is 4-11 (Bhatnagar et al 2010).…”

Section: Design Factorsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Oxidation pond for municipal wastewater treatment

et al. 2015

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…The prevailing presence of Gallionella species, a Fe-oxidizing chemolithotrophic bacteria, in the well B-1 ( Figure 3) suggest that active oxidation processes, sustained AMD production, and likely precipitation of Fe(III)-rich nNP were occurring in the coal mine waste [17].…”

Section: Examination Of Eh-ph Diagrammentioning

confidence: 99%

“…H 2 S [5,[16][17][18]. BSR activity (2CH 2 O + SO 4 2− → 2HCO 3¯+ H 2 S) is desirable for mitigating AMD because it removes SO 4 2− , raises the pH through bicarbonate alkalinity (HCO 3¯) production and yields H 2 S for precipitating sparingly soluble metal sulfides [17].…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…BSR activity (2CH 2 O + SO 4 2− → 2HCO 3¯+ H 2 S) is desirable for mitigating AMD because it removes SO 4 2− , raises the pH through bicarbonate alkalinity (HCO 3¯) production and yields H 2 S for precipitating sparingly soluble metal sulfides [17]. Due to their stability, sulfide minerals are seen as the preferred long-term remediation approach for SO 4 2− immobilization [5].…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Sulfur Isotope Fractionation as an Indicator of Biogeochemical Processes in an AMD Passive Bioremediation System

et al. 2017

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Sulfate, the main dissolved contaminant in acid mine drainage (AMD), is ubiquitous in watersheds affected by coal and metal mining operations worldwide. Engineered passive bioremediation systems (PBS) are low-cost technologies that remediate sulfate contamination by promoting (1) precipitation of sulfate-bearing compounds, such as schwertmannite and gypsum; and (2) microbially-mediated sulfate reduction (BSR) to sulfide with subsequent precipitation of sulfide minerals. In this study, chemical and sulfur isotopic data are used to infer multiple pathways for sulfate sequestration in the Tab-Simco PBS. By simultaneously monitoring sulfate concentrations and δ 34 S SO 4 values at four sampling points across the PBS, we (1) identified that the organic layer within the bioreactor was the primary site of BSR processes contributing to sulfate sequestration; (2) observed seasonal variations of BSR processes; (3) estimated that initially the BSR processes contributed up to 30% to sulfate sequestration in the Tab-Simco bioreactor; and (4) determined that BSR contribution to sulfate sequestration continuously declined over the PBS operational lifetime. Together, our results highlight the utility of combining geochemical and microbial fingerprinting techniques to decipher complementary processes involved in sulfur cycling in a PBS as well as the value of adding the sulfur isotope approach as an essential tool to help understand, predict, prevent and mitigate sulfate contamination in AMD-impacted systems.

show abstract

Microbial ecology in selenate‐reducing biofilm communities: Rare biosphere and their interactions with abundant phylotypes

Esquivel-Hernández

García‐Pérez

et al. 2021

Biotech & Bioengineering

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Selenate (SeO 4 2− ) reduction in hydrogen (H 2 )-fed membrane biofilm reactors (H 2 -MBfRs) was studied in combinations with other common electron acceptors. We employed H 2 -MBfRs with two distinctly different conditions: R1, with ample electron-donor availability and acceptors SeO 4 2− and sulfate (SO 4 2− ), and R2, with electron-donor limitation and the presence of electron acceptors SeO 4 2− , nitrate (NO 3 − ), and SO 4 2− . Even though H 2 was available to reduce all input SeO 4 2− and SO 4 2− in R1, SeO 4 2− reduction was preferred over SO 4 2− reduction. In R2, co-reduction of NO 3 − and SeO 4 2− occurred, and SO 4 2− reduction was mostly suppressed. Biofilms in all MBfRs had high microbial diversity that was influenced by the "rare biosphere" (RB), phylotypes with relative abundance less than 1%. While all MBfR biofilms had abundant members, such as Dechloromonas and Methyloversatilis, the bacterial communities were significantly different between R1 and R2. For R1, abundant genera were Methyloversatilis, Melioribacter, and Propionivibrio; for R2, abundant genera were Dechloromonas, Hydrogenophaga, Cystobacter, Methyloversatilis, and Thauera. Although changes in electron-acceptor or -donor loading altered the phylogenetic structure of the microbial communities, the biofilm communities were resilient in terms of SeO 4 2− and NO 3 − reductions, because interacting members of the RB had the capacity of respiring these electron acceptors.

show abstract

Performance and microbial community dynamics of a sulfate-reducing bioreactor treating coal generated acid mine drainage

Cited by 58 publications

References 45 publications

Oxidation pond for municipal wastewater treatment

Oxidation pond for municipal wastewater treatment

Sulfur Isotope Fractionation as an Indicator of Biogeochemical Processes in an AMD Passive Bioremediation System

Microbial ecology in selenate‐reducing biofilm communities: Rare biosphere and their interactions with abundant phylotypes

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About