4.5 Article

Trace methane oxidation and the methane dependency of sulfate reduction in anaerobic granular sludge

Journal

FEMS MICROBIOLOGY ECOLOGY
Volume 72, Issue 2, Pages 261-271

Publisher

OXFORD UNIV PRESS
DOI: 10.1111/j.1574-6941.2010.00849.x

Keywords

trace methane oxidation; sulfate reduction; anaerobic granular sludge; reversed methanogenesis

Categories

Funding

  1. Dutch ministries of Economical affairs, Education, culture and science and Environment [EETK03044]
  2. EET (Economie, Ecologie, Technologie) program
  3. King Abdullah University of Science and Technology

Ask authors/readers for more resources

This study investigates the oxidation of labeled methane (CH4) and the CH4 dependence of sulfate reduction in three types of anaerobic granular sludge. In all samples, 13C-labeled CH4 was anaerobically oxidized to 13C-labeled CO2, while net endogenous CH4 production was observed. Labeled-CH4 oxidation rates followed CH4 production rates, and the presence of sulfate hampered both labeled-CH4 oxidation and methanogenesis. Labeled-CH4 oxidation was therefore linked to methanogenesis. This process is referred to as trace CH4 oxidation and has been demonstrated in methanogenic pure cultures. This study shows that the ratio between labeled-CH4 oxidation and methanogenesis is positively affected by the CH4 partial pressure and that this ratio is in methanogenic granular sludge more than 40 times higher than that in pure cultures of methanogens. The CH4 partial pressure also positively affected sulfate reduction and negatively affected methanogenesis: a repression of methanogenesis at elevated CH4 partial pressures confers an advantage to sulfate reducers that compete with methanogens for common substrates, formed from endogenous material. The oxidation of labeled CH4 and the CH4 dependence of sulfate reduction are thus not necessarily evidence of anaerobic oxidation of CH4 coupled to sulfate reduction.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.5
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available