Abstract

  The current study was aimed at design of substrate specific synthetic consortium for improved biogas production. Pure cultures specific to their roles were isolated from biogas digesters and used to design the synthetic consortium. The designed consortium was compared with natural consortium for biogas production efficiency in batch mode fermentation. The biogas yields obtained with designed consortium and natural consortium were 66% and 60% of theoretical maximum, respectively. The complete conversion of substrate to biogas was observed in 7 days with designed consortium in comparison to 35 days in case of natural consortium. The performance of designed consortium with respect to enhanced rate of digestion was attributed to presence of substrate specific microbes and their initial abundance. The higher abundance of bacteria and archaebacteria in the designed consortium as estimated using qPCR quantification was evident of the fact that initial abundance of specific microbes increases the rate of biogas production. This report is first of its kind in constructing substrate specific synthetic consortium and demonstrating its effectiveness in improvement of anaerobic digestion process. Overall, the presented work shall pave ways to implement substrate specific consortium design strategy for development of economically sustainable biogas production from diverse substrates.

Keywords: Anaerobic Digestion; Consortium Design; Isolation and Screening; Batch Mode Fermentation; QPCR Quantification

References

1. Wirth Roland., et al. “Characterization of a biogas-producing microbial community by short-read next generation DNA sequencing”. Biotechnology for Biofuels 5.1 (2012): 41.
2. Weiland Peter. "Production and energetic use of biogas from energy crops and wastes in Germany”. Applied Biochemistry and Biotechnology 109.1-3 (2003): 263-274.
3. Angelidaki Irini and L Ellegaard. "Codigestion of manure and organic wastes in centralized biogas plants”. Applied Biochemistry and Biotechnology 109.1-3 (2003): 95-105.
4. Sreekrishnan TR., et al. “Enhancement of biogas production from solid substrates using different techniques––a review”. Bioresource Technology 95.1 (2004): 1-10.
5. Amani T., et al. “Anaerobic digestion from the viewpoint of microbiological, chemical, and operational aspects—a review”. Environmental Reviews 18.NA (2010): 255-278.
6. Howard I., et al. “Evaluation of microbiological and physicochemical indicators for wastewater treatment”. Environmental Toxicology: An International Journal 19.3 (2004): 241-249.
7. Doloman Anna., et al. “Qualitative analysis of microbial dynamics during anaerobic digestion of microalgal biomass in a UASB reactor”. International Journal of Microbiology (2017).
8. De Vrieze Jo., et al. “Inoculum selection influences the biochemical methane potential of agro‐industrial substrates”. Microbial Biotechnology 8.5 (2015): 776-786.
9. Martin-Ryals Ana., et al. “Improving anaerobic digestion of a cellulosic waste via routine bioaugmentation with cellulolytic microorganisms”. Bioresource Technology 189 (2015): 62-70.
10. Čater, Maša., et al. “Biogas production from brewery spent grain enhanced by bioaugmentation with hydrolytic anaerobic bacteria”. Bioresource Technology 186 (2015): 261-269.
11. Nielsen., et al. “Bioaugmentation of a two‐stage thermophilic (68° C/55° C) anaerobic digestion concept for improvement of the methane yield from cattle manure”. Biotechnology and Bioengineering 97.6 (2007): 1638-1643.
12. Westerholm., et al. “Bioaugmentation of syntrophic acetate-oxidizing culture in biogas reactors exposed to increasing levels of ammonia”. Applied and Environmental Microbiology 78.21 (2012): 7619-7625.
13. Kovács Kornél Lajos., et al. “Improvement of biogas production by bioaugmentation”. Bio Med Research International (2013).
14. Sun Li., et al. “Characterization of microbial community structure during continuous anaerobic digestion of straw and cow manure”. Microbial Biotechnology 8.5 (2015): 815-827.
15. Chachkhiani M., et al. “16S rDNA characterisation of bacterial and archaeal communities during start-up of anaerobic thermophilic digestion of cattle manure”. Bioresource Technology 93.3 (2004): 227-232.
16. Raskin Lutgarde., et al. “Characterization of microbial communities in anaerobic bioreactors using molecular probes”. Antonie van Leeuwenhoek 68.4 (1995): 297-308.
17. Regueiro, Leticia., et al. “Relationship between microbial activity and microbial community structure in six full-scale anaerobic digesters”. Microbiological Research 167.10 (2012): 581-589.
18. Großkopf Tobias and Orkun S Soyer. "Synthetic microbial communities”. Current Opinion in Microbiology 18 (2014): 72-77.
19. Wolfe and Ralph S. "Techniques for cultivating methanogens”. Methods in Enzymology 494. (2011): 1-22.
20. Hungate RE. "Chapter IV A roll tube method for cultivation of strict anaerobes”. Methods in Microbiology 3 (1969): 117-132.
21. Tuan., et al. “Design of PCR primers for the mcrA genes detection of methanogen communities”. Applied Mechanics and Materials 135 (2012).
22. Gerardi and Michael H. “The microbiology of anaerobic digesters”. John Wiley and Sons (2003).
23. Angelidaki., et al. “A mathematical model for dynamic simulation of anaerobic digestion of complex substrates: focusing on ammonia inhibition”. Biotechnology and Bioengineering 42.2 (1993): 159-166.
24. Li Tianlun., et al. “Insights into networks of functional microbes catalysing methanization of cellulose under mesophilic conditions”. Environmental Microbiology 11.4 (2009): 889-904.
25. Werner Jeffrey J., et al. “Bacterial community structures are unique and resilient in full-scale bioenergy systems”. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences 108.10 (2011): 4158-4163.
26. Jiang, Li-Li., et al. “Advances in industrial microbiome based on microbial consortium for biorefinery”. Bioresources and Bioprocessing 4.1 (2017): 11.
27. Onda T., et al. “Widespread distribution of the bacteriocin‐producing lactic acid cocci in Miso‐paste products”. Journal of Applied Microbiology 92.4 (2002): 695-705.
28. Hwanhlem Noraphat., et al. “Isolation and screening of lactic acid bacteria from Thai traditional fermented fish (Plasom) and production of Plasom from selected strains”. Food Control 22.3-4 (2011): 401-407.
29. Doddema Hans J and Godfried D Vogels. "Improved identification of methanogenic bacteria by fluorescence microscopy”. Applied and Environmental Microbiology36.5 (1978): 752-754.
30. Sirohi Sunil Kumar., et al. “The 16S rRNA and mcrA gene based comparative diversity of methanogens in cattle fed on high fibrebased diet”. Gene 523.2 (2013): 161-166.
31. Luton Philip E., et al. “The mcrA gene as an alternative to 16S rRNA in the phylogenetic analysis of methanogen populations in landfillb”. Microbiology 148.11 (2002): 3521-3530.
32. Westermann., et al. “Threshold acetate concentrations for acetate catabolism by aceticlastic methanogenic bacteria”. Applied and Environmental Microbiology 55.2 (1989): 514-515.
33. Buswell Arthur M and Sidney Lionel Neave. "Laboratory studies of sludge digestion”. Bulletin (Illinois State Water Survey) 30 (1930).
34. Fountoulakis MS and T Manios. "Enhanced methane and hydrogen production from municipal solid waste and agro-industrial by-products co-digested with crude glycerol”. Bioresource Technology 100.12 (2009): 3043-3047.
35. Ali Shah Fayyaz., et al. “Microbial ecology of anaerobic digesters: the key players of anaerobiosis”. The Scientific World Journal 2014 (2014).
36. Brenner Katie., et al. “Engineering microbial consortia: a new frontier in synthetic biology”. Trends in Biotechnology 26.9 (2008): 483-489.

Citation

Citation: Priyanka Dargode.,et al. “Design of Substrate Specific Consortium for Improved Biogas Production". Acta Scientific Microbiology 3.2 (2020): 118-128.

Copyright

Copyright: © 2020 Priyanka Dargode.,et al. This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original author and source are credited.