4.7 Article

Performance of Chlorella sorokiniana-activated sludge consortium treating wastewater under light-limited heterotrophic condition

期刊

CHEMICAL ENGINEERING JOURNAL
卷 382, 期 -, 页码 -

出版社

ELSEVIER SCIENCE SA
DOI: 10.1016/j.cej.2019.122799

关键词

Chlorell sorokiniana-activated sludge consortium; Dark heterotrophic condition; Nutrients removal; Oxygen consumption; Interaction

资金

  1. China Scholarship Council [201808420103]
  2. National Natural Science Foundation of China [51808416]
  3. National College Students Innovation and Entrepreneurship Training Program [201810488032]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Light limitation often occurs in algae-bacteria consortium. Chlorella sorokiniana is special for heterotrophic growth in the dark, autotrophic or mixotrophic growth in the light. Wastewater treatment by Chlorella sorokiniana-activated sludge consortium under dark heterotrophic conditions (24 h dark, dark period of 12 h/12 h light/dark) was systematically evaluated for the first time. The performance closely depended on sludge/algae ratio with best initial ratio of 1:2 (R-2). Compared to activated sludge (R-0), R-2 showed enhanced NH4+-N and P removal (by 6% and 10%, respectively), similar COD removal, and better settleability. Notably, less O-2 consumption of R-2 than activated sludge made energy-saving possible. Further analysis found that interaction made sludge/algae ratio reversal to be 3:1. The promoting interaction between algae and bacteria was associated with up-regulated cofactors and vitamins, while defensive interaction came from secondary metabolites of terpenoids and polyketides. Despite oxidative stress in the dark consortium, photosynthesis of algae reactivated when switched into light. The performance order was light consortium > dark consortium > activated sludge. Nitrosomonas and Dechloromonas were enriched for nutrients removal. The results reveal the superiority of algae-bacteria consortium over activated sludge whether with or without light.

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