4.5 Article

Quorum quenching activity of indigenous quorum quenching bacteria and its potential application in mitigation of membrane biofouling

期刊

出版社

WILEY
DOI: 10.1002/jctb.5507

关键词

quorum quenching; antifouling; quorum sensing; MBR; biofilm

资金

  1. National Natural Science Foundation of China [51178172, 51578222, 51521006, 51308076, 51378190]
  2. Project of Chinese Ministry of Education [113049A]
  3. Research Fund for the Program for Changjiang Scholals and Innovative Research Team in University [IRT-13R17]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

BACKGROUNDQuorum sensing (QS) could regulate gene expression so as to mediate some bacterial behaviors such as the production of extracellular polymeric substances (EPS) and biofilm formation. In this study, a quorum quenching (QQ) bacterium was isolated from an indigenous lab-scale membrane bioreactor (MBR) and encapsulated in a dumpling-shaped microbial bag for biofouling control. RESULTSThis QQ bacteria has a higher genetic homology with Acinetobacter bereziniae strain. The effect of time and temperature on the QQ activity of the microbial bag was tested by degrading N-acyl homoserine lactone (AHL). The results showed the degradation of C8-HSL (N-Octanoyl-DL-homoserine lactone) and C6-HSL (N-Hexanoyl-L-homoserine lactone) could reach equilibrium within 2 h. In addition, a suitable temperature for AHL degradation was 20 degrees C, at which the rate of degradation of C6-HSL and C8-HSL by the microbial bag was 88% and 69%, respectively. The antifouling efficiency of the microbial bag was investigated by a constant pressure filtration system. With the microbial bag added, the decrease of permeability was obviously improved. After 14 days, the permeability with QQ decreased to 18% while the control experiment exhibited almost no permeability. CONCLUSIONThe excellent AHL degradation rate and the filtration test showed that this QQ bacteria has an excellent antifouling potential in membrane filtration systems. (c) 2017 Society of Chemical Industry

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

4.5
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