Cargando…
Comparison of two acidophilic sulfidogenic consortia for the treatment of acidic mine water
Sulfate-reducing bioreactors are a biotechnological alternative for the treatment of acid mine drainage (AMD). In this study, two separate bioreactors with pH and temperature-controlled (Bio I and II) were operated with two different acidophilic microbial consortia to determine their efficiencies in...
Autores principales: | , , , , , , , , , , |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
Frontiers Media S.A.
2022
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9746616/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/36524050 http://dx.doi.org/10.3389/fbioe.2022.1048412 |
_version_ | 1784849403345895424 |
---|---|
author | Frederico, Tayná Diniz Nancucheo, Ivan Santos, Werica Colaço Barros Oliveira, Renato Renison Moreira Buzzi, Daniella Cardoso Pires, Eder Soares Silva, Patricia Magalhães Pereira Lucheta, Adriano Reis Alves, Joner Oliveira de Oliveira, Guilherme Corrêa Bitencourt, José Augusto Pires |
author_facet | Frederico, Tayná Diniz Nancucheo, Ivan Santos, Werica Colaço Barros Oliveira, Renato Renison Moreira Buzzi, Daniella Cardoso Pires, Eder Soares Silva, Patricia Magalhães Pereira Lucheta, Adriano Reis Alves, Joner Oliveira de Oliveira, Guilherme Corrêa Bitencourt, José Augusto Pires |
author_sort | Frederico, Tayná Diniz |
collection | PubMed |
description | Sulfate-reducing bioreactors are a biotechnological alternative for the treatment of acid mine drainage (AMD). In this study, two separate bioreactors with pH and temperature-controlled (Bio I and II) were operated with two different acidophilic microbial consortia to determine their efficiencies in sulfate removal from a synthetic acidic mine water. The bioreactors were operated for 302 days in continuous flow mode under the same parameters: fed with a sulfate solution of ∼30 mM with a pH of 2.5, the temperature at 30°C, stirred gently at 40 rpm and using a continuous stream of nitrogen to help remove the H(2)S produced in the bioreactor. The glycerol consumption, acetate production, and sulfate removal were monitored throughout the course of the experiment. The community composition and potential metabolic functional groups were analyzed via 16S rRNA partial gene sequencing. Bio I consortium reduced the sulfate, achieving a range of sulfate concentration from 4.7 to 19 mM in the effluent liquor. The removal of sulfate in Bio II was between 5.6 and 18 mM. Both bioreactors’ communities showed the presence of the genus De sulfosporosinus as the main sulfate-reducing bacteria (SRB). Despite differences in microbial composition, both bioreactors have similar potential metabolism, with a higher percentage of microorganisms that can use sulfate in respiration. Overall, both bioreactors showed similar performance in treating acidic mine water containing mostly sulfate using two different acidophilic sulfidogenic consortia obtained from different global locations. |
format | Online Article Text |
id | pubmed-9746616 |
institution | National Center for Biotechnology Information |
language | English |
publishDate | 2022 |
publisher | Frontiers Media S.A. |
record_format | MEDLINE/PubMed |
spelling | pubmed-97466162022-12-14 Comparison of two acidophilic sulfidogenic consortia for the treatment of acidic mine water Frederico, Tayná Diniz Nancucheo, Ivan Santos, Werica Colaço Barros Oliveira, Renato Renison Moreira Buzzi, Daniella Cardoso Pires, Eder Soares Silva, Patricia Magalhães Pereira Lucheta, Adriano Reis Alves, Joner Oliveira de Oliveira, Guilherme Corrêa Bitencourt, José Augusto Pires Front Bioeng Biotechnol Bioengineering and Biotechnology Sulfate-reducing bioreactors are a biotechnological alternative for the treatment of acid mine drainage (AMD). In this study, two separate bioreactors with pH and temperature-controlled (Bio I and II) were operated with two different acidophilic microbial consortia to determine their efficiencies in sulfate removal from a synthetic acidic mine water. The bioreactors were operated for 302 days in continuous flow mode under the same parameters: fed with a sulfate solution of ∼30 mM with a pH of 2.5, the temperature at 30°C, stirred gently at 40 rpm and using a continuous stream of nitrogen to help remove the H(2)S produced in the bioreactor. The glycerol consumption, acetate production, and sulfate removal were monitored throughout the course of the experiment. The community composition and potential metabolic functional groups were analyzed via 16S rRNA partial gene sequencing. Bio I consortium reduced the sulfate, achieving a range of sulfate concentration from 4.7 to 19 mM in the effluent liquor. The removal of sulfate in Bio II was between 5.6 and 18 mM. Both bioreactors’ communities showed the presence of the genus De sulfosporosinus as the main sulfate-reducing bacteria (SRB). Despite differences in microbial composition, both bioreactors have similar potential metabolism, with a higher percentage of microorganisms that can use sulfate in respiration. Overall, both bioreactors showed similar performance in treating acidic mine water containing mostly sulfate using two different acidophilic sulfidogenic consortia obtained from different global locations. Frontiers Media S.A. 2022-11-29 /pmc/articles/PMC9746616/ /pubmed/36524050 http://dx.doi.org/10.3389/fbioe.2022.1048412 Text en Copyright © 2022 Frederico, Nancucheo, Santos, Oliveira, Buzzi, Pires, Silva, Lucheta, Alves, Oliveira and Bitencourt. https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (CC BY). The use, distribution or reproduction in other forums is permitted, provided the original author(s) and the copyright owner(s) are credited and that the original publication in this journal is cited, in accordance with accepted academic practice. No use, distribution or reproduction is permitted which does not comply with these terms. |
spellingShingle | Bioengineering and Biotechnology Frederico, Tayná Diniz Nancucheo, Ivan Santos, Werica Colaço Barros Oliveira, Renato Renison Moreira Buzzi, Daniella Cardoso Pires, Eder Soares Silva, Patricia Magalhães Pereira Lucheta, Adriano Reis Alves, Joner Oliveira de Oliveira, Guilherme Corrêa Bitencourt, José Augusto Pires Comparison of two acidophilic sulfidogenic consortia for the treatment of acidic mine water |
title | Comparison of two acidophilic sulfidogenic consortia for the treatment of acidic mine water |
title_full | Comparison of two acidophilic sulfidogenic consortia for the treatment of acidic mine water |
title_fullStr | Comparison of two acidophilic sulfidogenic consortia for the treatment of acidic mine water |
title_full_unstemmed | Comparison of two acidophilic sulfidogenic consortia for the treatment of acidic mine water |
title_short | Comparison of two acidophilic sulfidogenic consortia for the treatment of acidic mine water |
title_sort | comparison of two acidophilic sulfidogenic consortia for the treatment of acidic mine water |
topic | Bioengineering and Biotechnology |
url | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9746616/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/36524050 http://dx.doi.org/10.3389/fbioe.2022.1048412 |
work_keys_str_mv | AT fredericotaynadiniz comparisonoftwoacidophilicsulfidogenicconsortiaforthetreatmentofacidicminewater AT nancucheoivan comparisonoftwoacidophilicsulfidogenicconsortiaforthetreatmentofacidicminewater AT santoswericacolacobarros comparisonoftwoacidophilicsulfidogenicconsortiaforthetreatmentofacidicminewater AT oliveirarenatorenisonmoreira comparisonoftwoacidophilicsulfidogenicconsortiaforthetreatmentofacidicminewater AT buzzidaniellacardoso comparisonoftwoacidophilicsulfidogenicconsortiaforthetreatmentofacidicminewater AT piresedersoares comparisonoftwoacidophilicsulfidogenicconsortiaforthetreatmentofacidicminewater AT silvapatriciamagalhaespereira comparisonoftwoacidophilicsulfidogenicconsortiaforthetreatmentofacidicminewater AT luchetaadrianoreis comparisonoftwoacidophilicsulfidogenicconsortiaforthetreatmentofacidicminewater AT alvesjoneroliveira comparisonoftwoacidophilicsulfidogenicconsortiaforthetreatmentofacidicminewater AT deoliveiraguilhermecorrea comparisonoftwoacidophilicsulfidogenicconsortiaforthetreatmentofacidicminewater AT bitencourtjoseaugustopires comparisonoftwoacidophilicsulfidogenicconsortiaforthetreatmentofacidicminewater |