4.6 Article

Microalgal consortia for municipal wastewater treatment - Lipid augmentation and fatty acid profiling for biodiesel production

出版社

ELSEVIER SCIENCE SA
DOI: 10.1016/j.jphotobiol.2019.111638

关键词

Microalgal consortia; Lipid enhancement; Wastewater; Phycoremediation; Fatty acids; Biodiesel

资金

  1. UGC-JRF
  2. Science and Engineering Research Board (SERB) [PDF/2017/002783]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

The present study investigates the phycoremediation potentials of two microalgal consortia (MAC1 and MAC2) for treating sewage water and producing biomass with high lipid, protein and chlorophyll contents. During the study, the microalgal strains were tested for lipid enhancement, biomass production and contaminant removal from wastewater. The microalgal consortia showed prolific growth in wastewater with 75% dilution and accumulated higher lipid content of 31.33% dry cell weight in MAC1. The maximum biomass (50% diluted wastewater) for both the consortia was 1.53 and 1.04 gL(-I). Total chlorophyll (19.17-25.17 mu g mL(-1)) and protein contents (0.12-0.16 mg mL(-1)) for both the consortia were found to be maximum in 75 WW. MAC1 was capable of removing 86.27% of total organic carbon and 87.6% of chemical oxygen demand. Approximately, 94% of nitrate and phosphate contents were removed from the initial contents of wastewater. Heavy metal removal efficiency was also found to be better and showed 85.06% Cu, 75.2% Cr, 98.2% Pb, and 99.6% Cd removal by the algal consortia. Pyrolytic decomposition of algal consortia was observed using thermogravimetric analysis. The stepwise decomposition of algae indicated distinct losses of functional groups. The gas chromatography-mass spectrometric analysis revealed the majority of saturated fatty acids followed by monounsaturated and polyunsaturated fatty acids. Thus, the present study proved that both the consortia show tremendous potential for the treatment of domestic wastewaters with successive lipid enhancement for biodiesel production.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.6
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据