4.6 Article

Effective and robust partial nitrification to nitrite by real-time aeration duration control in an SBR treating domestic wastewater

期刊

PROCESS BIOCHEMISTRY
卷 44, 期 9, 页码 979-985

出版社

ELSEVIER SCI LTD
DOI: 10.1016/j.procbio.2009.04.022

关键词

Partial nitrification to nitrite; Aeration duration control; Nitrite accumulation; Ammonia oxidizing bacteria (AOB); Nitrite oxidizing bacteria (NOB); Sequencing batch reactor (SBR)

资金

  1. National High Technology Research Development Program (863 Program) of China [2006AA06Z319]
  2. National Natural Science Foundation of China (NSFC) [50778005]
  3. Environment and Water Industry (EWI) Development Scheme of Singapore [EDB S07/1-53974092]
  4. State Key Laboratory of Urban Water Resource and environment (HIT) [QAK200802]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Achieving sustainable partial nitrification to nitrite has been proven difficult in treating low strength nitrogenous wastewater. Real-time aeration duration control was used to achieve efficient partial nitrification to nitrite in a sequencing batch reactor (SBR) to treat low strength domestic wastewater. Above 90% nitrite accumulation ratio was maintained for long-term operation at normal condition, or even lower water temperature in winter. Partial nitrification established by controlling aeration duration showed good performance and robustness even though encountering long-term extended aeration and starvation period. Process control enhanced the successful accumulation of ammonia oxidizing bacteria (AOB) and washout of nitrite oxidizing bacteria (NOB). Scanning electron microscope observations indicated that the microbial morphology showed a shift towards small rod-shaped clusters. Fluorescence in situ hybridization (FISH) results demonstrated AOB were the dominant nitrifying bacteria, up to 8.3 +/- 1.1% of the total bacteria; on the contrary, the density of NOB decreased to be negligible after 135 days operation since adopting process control. (C) 2009 Published by Elsevier Ltd.

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

4.6
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