4.5 Article

Temporal microbial diversity changes in solvent-degrading anaerobic granular sludge from low-temperature (15 °C) wastewater treatment bioreactors

期刊

SYSTEMATIC AND APPLIED MICROBIOLOGY
卷 30, 期 6, 页码 471-482

出版社

ELSEVIER GMBH
DOI: 10.1016/j.syapm.2007.03.005

关键词

fluorescence in situ hybridizations; 16S rRNA gene sequencing; low-temperature anaerobic digestion; Methanosaeta; Methanosarcina

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Anaerobic sludge granules were obtained from laboratory-scale anaerobic bioreactors used to treat pharmaceutical-like (methanol-, acetone- and propanol-contaminated) wastewater under low-temperature conditions (15 degrees C). The microbial diversity and diversity changes of the sludge samples were ascertained by applying 16S rRNA gene cloning and terminal restriction fragment length polymorphism (TRFLP) analyses, respectively, and using sludge samples from the inoculum, throughout and at the conclusion of the bioreactor trial. Data from genetic fingerprinting correlated well with those from physiological activity assays of the reactor biomass. Specifically, for example, TRFLP profiles indicated the dominance of hydrogenotrophic methanogens within the archaeal community, thus supporting the findings of specific methanogenic activity measurements. TRFLP data supported the hypothesis that the deviation between the replicated reactors, in terms of treatment efficiency, was associated with succession within the microbial communities present, and indicated that community development was linked to both operating temperature and wastewater composition. Fluorescence in situ hybridization (FISH) was also applied, to quantitatively assess the abundance of selected microbial groups, and revealed the underestimation of the abundance Methanosarcina by gene cloning analysis and demonstrated the spatial arrangement of these organisms within the architecture of the lowtemperature solvent-degrading anaerobic biofilms. (c) 2007 Elsevier GmbH. 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

4.5
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