4.6 Article

Acclimating activated sludge with co-metabolic substrates for enhancing treatment of low-concentration polyether wastewater

期刊

BIOCHEMICAL ENGINEERING JOURNAL
卷 159, 期 -, 页码 -

出版社

ELSEVIER
DOI: 10.1016/j.bej.2020.107583

关键词

Polyether wastewater; co-metabolism; complex carbon source; microbial community; refractory pollutants

资金

  1. National Natural Science Foundation of China [51678280, 51708253]
  2. National Major Science and Technology Projects of China [2017ZX07203001]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Polyether wastewater from chemical industries is difficult to be degraded directly by microorganisms even at low concentration. The feasibilities and differences of using complex and single carbon sources as co-metabolic substrates to acclimate activated sludge for enhancing treatment of low-concentration polyether wastewater (LCPW) were comparatively analyzed. The complex carbon source was produced from citric acid production wastewater (CAPW), and the sodium acetate (NaAc) was selected as single carbon source. Results indicated that the LCPW could be effectively treated with acclimated activated sludge, and satisfying the wastewater discharge standard (COD <= 50 mg/L, TN <= 15 mg/L, TP <= 0.5 mg/L). Importantly, the activated sludge acclimated with CAPW (AS-CAPW) presented larger biomass, better treatment performance, and higher extracellular polymeric substance content, dehydrogenase activity and bacterial diversity than that acclimated with NaAc (AS-NaAc). Moreover, high-throughput sequencing revealed that the relative abundance of dominant families associated with nutrient removal in AS-CAPW or AS-NaAc (e.g., Nitrosomonadaceae and Rhodocyclaceae) was similar. In contrast, the dominant families involved in macromolecular pollutions degradation had significant differences. Phycisphaeraceae (10.3%) and Lentimicrobiaceae (14.3%) were mainly enriched in AS-CAPW and AS-NaAc, respectively. This comprehensive work provides a feasible biological process for enhancing treatment of LCPW.

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