4.8 Article

Kitchen waste hydrolysate enhances sewage treatment efficiency with different biological process compared with glucose

Journal

BIORESOURCE TECHNOLOGY
Volume 341, Issue -, Pages -

Publisher

ELSEVIER SCI LTD
DOI: 10.1016/j.biortech.2021.125904

Keywords

Food waste; Short-term aerobic fermentation; External carbon sources; Microbial community; Nitrogen-cycle genes

Funding

  1. National Natural Science Fund of China [42077217]

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Insufficient carbon source is the primary factor limiting biological nitrogen and phosphorus removal during sewage treatment. This study found that using kitchen waste hydrolysate (KWH) as a carbon source in sewage treatment achieved better removal efficiency than glucose, with over 96% of TN, TP, and COD removed after 48 hours of acclimation. The KWH also promoted the accumulation of specific bacteria and improved the abundance of certain genes related to denitrification.
Insufficient carbon source is the primary factor that limits biological nitrogen and phosphorus removal during sewage treatment. This study investigates the feasibility and biological process of kitchen waste hydrolysate (KWH) replacing glucose to improve pollutant removal efficiency. It was found that using KWH as carbon source achieved better removal effect than glucose during sewage treatment. And more than 96% of total nitrogen (TN), total phosphorus (TP), and the chemical oxygen demand were removed after 48 h of acclimation. Nitrogen and phosphorus introduced by adding KHW had no negative effect on the effluent quality. Compared with glucose, KWH decreased the diversity of bacteria and significantly promoted the accumulation of acid-producing bacteria (Propionibacterium) and denitrifying bacteria (Rhodobacteraceae). Moreover, KWH significantly improved the relative abundance of the amo A, nap A, and nos Z genes. This result further indicated that KWH was beneficial for denitrification and was a favorable external carbon source.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.8
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available