4.8 Article

Impact of electrical stimulation modes on the degradation of refractory phenolics and the analysis of microbial communities in an anaerobic-aerobic-coupled upflow bioelectrochemical reactor

期刊

BIORESOURCE TECHNOLOGY
卷 320, 期 -, 页码 -

出版社

ELSEVIER SCI LTD
DOI: 10.1016/j.biortech.2020.124371

关键词

Electrical stimulation; Biodegradation; Microbial community; Refractory phenolics

资金

  1. National Natural Science Foundation of China [51968067]
  2. Natural Science Foundation of Xinjiang Uygur Autonomous Region of China [2018D01C044]
  3. Doctoral Program Foundation of Xinjiang University [BS180237]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

An electrically stimulated anaerobic-aerobic coupled system has been developed to improve the biodegradation of refractory phenolics, showing that intermittent electrical stimulation could be a potential alternative for the efficient degradation of refractory phenolics.
An electrically stimulated anaerobic-aerobic coupled system was developed to improve the biodegradation of refractory phenolics. Expected 4-nitrophenol, 2, 4-dinitrophenol, and COD removals in the system with aerobic cathodic and anaerobic anodic chambers were approximately 53.7%, 45.4%, 22.3% (intermittent mode) and 37.9%, 19.8%, 17.3% (continuous mode) higher than that in the control system (26.0 +/- 6.4%, 30.7 +/- 7.1%, 49.8 +/- 3.0%). 2, 4-dichlorophenol removal in the system with aerobic anodic and anaerobic cathodic chambers was approximately 28.5% higher than that in the control system (71.4 +/- 5.7%). The contribution of the aerobic cathodic/anodic chambers to the removal of phenolic compounds was higher than that of the anaerobic cathodic/anodic chambers. The species related to phenolic biodegradation (Rhodococcus, Achromobacter, PSB -M3, and Sphingobium) were enriched in the cathodic and anodic chambers of the system. These results showed that intermittent electrical stimulation could be a potential alternative for the efficient degradation of refractory phenolics.

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

4.8
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