4.8 Article

Combined fungal and bacterial pretreatment of wheat and pearl millet straw for biogas production - A study from batch to continuous stirred tank reactors

期刊

BIORESOURCE TECHNOLOGY
卷 321, 期 -, 页码 -

出版社

ELSEVIER SCI LTD
DOI: 10.1016/j.biortech.2020.124523

关键词

Biogas; Anaerobic digestion; Chaetomium globosporum; Chitinolytic bacteria; Bioaugmentation

资金

  1. Malaviya National Institute of Technology Jaipur - Department of Biotechnology, Ministry of Science and Technology Government of India

向作者/读者索取更多资源

In this study, chitinolytic bacteria were used for bioaugmentation of fungal pretreated agricultural residues to enhance biogas production. Batch and continuous experiments showed that the addition of chitinolytic bacteria to wheat and pearl millet straw pretreated with Chaetomium globosporum resulted in increased biogas yield. Microbial community analysis revealed higher abundance of methanogens in reactors running with pretreated wheat straw, mainly consisting of Firmicutes, Bacteroidetes, Proteobacteria phyla.
In present study, chitinolytic bacteria were employed to bioaugment the biogas production from fungal pretreated agricultural residues. The fungal pretreatment of wheat and pearl millet straw was done by Chaetomium globosporum. Pretreated straw were digested anaerobically at batch scale with and without the presence of chitinolytic bacteria. Contrary to untreated samples, the addition of chitionolytic bacteria with pretreated wheat and pearl millet straw provided 41 and 57% higher biogas yield. The study was further upscaled to continuous stirred tank reactors. At continuous scale too, wheat straw pretreated with Chaetomium globosporum combined with chitinolytic bacteria resulted in 16% higher biogas yield in contrast to untreated straw. Higher abundance of methanogens was detected in reactors running with pretreated wheat straw during microbial community analysis. The identified bacteria belonged mostly to Firmicutes, Bacteroidetes, Proteobacteria phyla.

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

4.8
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