4.7 Article

The influences of illite/smectite clay on lignocellulose decomposition and maturation process revealed by metagenomics analysis during cattle manure composting

期刊

WASTE MANAGEMENT
卷 127, 期 -, 页码 1-9

出版社

PERGAMON-ELSEVIER SCIENCE LTD
DOI: 10.1016/j.wasman.2021.04.033

关键词

Composting; Illite; smectite clay; Lignocellulose breakdown; Humification process; Metagenomics analysis

资金

  1. National Natural Science Foundation of China [21878057]
  2. Natural Science Foundation of Guangxi Province [2017GXNSFAA198345]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

The addition of illite/smectite clay (I/S) was found to enhance the degradation rate of cellulose, hemicellulose and lignin during cattle manure composting, as well as stimulate microbial activity and promote humification process.
The purpose of this study was to analyze the effects of illite/smectite clay (I/S) on lignocellulosic degradation and humification process via metagenomics analysis during cattle manure composting. The test group (TG) with 10% I/S and the reference group (RG) were established. The results indicated that the addition of I/S made the degradation rate of cellulose, hemicellulose and lignin in TG (1.56%, 29.01%, 19.95%) was higher than that in RG (1.16%, 17.24%, 13.14%). Compared with RG, the abundance values of AA2, AA10, GH1 and GH10 in TG increased by 15.18%, 29.28%, 31.08%, 21.65%, respectively. Meanwhile, humic substance (HS) content was increased by 3.49% and 7.16% during RG and TG composting. Furthermore, the microbial community in TG changed, in which the relative abundance of Actinobacteria increased and Proteobacteria decreased. Redundancy analysis (RDA) showed that the temperature was positively correlated with the abundance of AA2, AA10, GH1 and GH10, whereas the organic matter content was negatively correlated. Overall, adding I/S to the composting could stimulate microbial activity, promote the degradation of lignocellulose and humification process. (c) 2021 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

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

4.7
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