4.7 Article

Impact of applied current on sulfate-rich wastewater treatment and microbial biodiversity in the cathode chamber of microbial electrolysis cell (MEC) reactor

期刊

CHEMICAL ENGINEERING JOURNAL
卷 307, 期 -, 页码 150-158

出版社

ELSEVIER SCIENCE SA
DOI: 10.1016/j.cej.2016.07.106

关键词

Microbial electrolysis cells (MECs); Sulfate-reducing bacteria (SRB); Optimal current applied; Microbial activity; Charge transfer resistance; Microbial community

资金

  1. National Natural Science Foundation of China [20877075]
  2. National Key Laboratory of Biochemical Engineering
  3. National Key Technologies RD Program [2006BAC02A05]
  4. National Basic Research Program of China (973 Program) [2007CB613501]
  5. Brook Byers Institute at George Tech

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Microbial electrolysis cell (MEC) coupled with sulfate-reducing bacteria (SRB) was used to degrade sulfate-rich wastewater which was deficient in electron donors. Results confirmed that SRB could trigger vigorous synergy with an applied current. An applied electrical field of 1.5 mA (R1) resulted in the highest sulfate removal, which was 14.9% higher than that of the control reactor (R0). In addition, organic substance consumption decreased with the increase of applied current. The concentration of lactic dehydrogenase (LDH), an indicator of cell rupture, increased by 3.59 times at 2.5 mA; that of ATP, an indicator of cell metabolism, sharply decreased under 2.5 and 3.5 mA. This finding indicated that high current led to plasmatorrhexis, low growth rate, and metabolic activity, subsequently reduced sulfate-reduction efficiency. Conversely, a proper current resulted in the enhancement of extracellular secretion, which was conducive to biofilm formation as further confirmed by detection through SEM. Electrochemical impedance spectroscopy (EIS) illustrated the SRB in the biofilm could accelerate the rate of direct electron transfer to cathode. Genus-level results further revealed that the dominant bacterium Desulfovibrio, an SRB, was richer in the cathode biofilm and RI, compared with RO. (C) 2016 Elsevier B.V. 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