2019 ; Vol.29-10: 1607~1623
|Author||Hai The Pham, Phuong Ha Vu, Thuy Thu Thi Nguyen, Ha Viet Thi Bui, Huyen Thanh Thi Tran, Hanh My Tran, Huy Quang Nguyen, Hong Byung Kim|
|Place of duty||Center for Life Science Research, Faculty of Biology, Vietnam National University – University of Science, Nguyen Trai 334, Thanh Xuan, Hanoi, Vietnam,Department of Microbiology, Faculty of Biology, Vietnam National University in Hanoi – University of Science, Nguyen Trai 334, Thanh Xuan, Hanoi, Vietnam|
|Title||A Laboratory-Scale Study of the Applicability of a Halophilic Sediment Bioelectrochemical System for in situ Reclamation of Water and Sediment in Brackish Aquaculture Ponds: Effects of Operational Conditions on Performance|
J. Microbiol. Biotechnol.2019 ;
|Abstract||Sediment bioelectrochemical systems (SBESs) can be integrated into brackish aquaculture ponds
for in-situ bioremediation of the pond water and sediment. Such an in-situ system offers
advantages including reduced treatment cost, reusability and simple handling. In order to realize
such an application potential of the SBES, in this laboratory-scale study we investigated the effect
of several controllable and uncontrollable operational factors on the in-situ bioremediation
performance of a tank model of a brackish aquaculture pond, into which a SBES was integrated, in
comparison with a natural degradation control model. The performance was evaluated in terms of
electricity generation by the SBES, Chemical oxygen demand (COD) removal and nitrogen
removal of both the tank water and the tank sediment. Real-life conditions of the operational
parameters were also experimented to understand the most close-to-practice responses of the
system to their changes. Predictable effects of controllable parameters including external resistance
and electrode spacing, similar to those reported previously for the BESs, were shown by the results
but exceptions were observed. Accordingly, while increasing the electrode spacing reduced the
current densities but generally improved COD and nitrogen removal, increasing the external
resistance could result in decreased COD removal but also increased nitrogen removal and
decreased current densities. However, maximum electricity generation and COD removal
efficiency difference of the SBES (versus the control) could be reached with an external resistance
of 100 Ω, not with the lowest one of 10 Ω. The effects of uncontrollable parameters such as ambient
temperature, salinity and pH of the pond (tank) water were rather unpredictable. Temperatures
higher than 35oC seemed to have more accelaration effect on natural degradation than on
bioelectrochemical processes. Changing salinity seriously changed the electricity generation but
did not clearly affect the bioremediation performance of the SBES, although at 2.5% salinity the
SBES displayed a significantly more efficient removal of nitrogen in the water, compared to the
control. Variation of pH to practically extreme levels (5.5 and 8.8) led to increased electricity
generations but poorer performances of the SBES (vs. the control) in removing COD and nitrogen.
Altogether, the results suggest some distinct responses of the SBES under brackish conditions and
imply that COD removal and nitrogen removal in the system are not completely linked to
bioelectrochemical processes but electrochemically enriched bacteria can still perform nonbioelectrochemical
COD and nitrogen removals more efficiently than natural ones. The results
confirm the application potential of the SBES in brackish aquaculture bioremediation and help
propose efficient practices to warrant the success of such application in real-life scenarios.|
|Key_word||Sediment bioelectrochemical systems, brackish aquaculture, in situ bioremediation, operational conditions|
Sajana TK, Ghangrekar MM, Mitra A. 2013. Application of sediment microbial fuel cell for in situ reclamation of aquaculture pond water quality. Aquacultural Eng. 57: 101-107.
Boyd CE. 1998. Pond water aeration systems. Aquacultural Eng. 18: 9-40.
Pham TH, Tran TH, Vu TL, Dang TH, Nguyen TTT, Dang THT, et al. 2019. A laboratory-scale study of the applicability of a halophilic sediment bioelectrochemical system for in situ reclamation of water and sediment in brackish aquaculture ponds: establishment, bacterial community and performance evaluation. J. Microbiol. Biotechnol. 29: 1104-1116.
Reimers CE, Tender LM, Fertig S, Wang W. 2001. Harvesting energy from the marine sediment-water interface. Environ. Sci. Technol. 35: 192-195.
Bond DR, Holmes DE, Tender LM, Lovley DR. 2002. Electrode-reducing microorganisms that harvest energy from marine sediments. Science 295: 483-485.
Jang JK, Pham TH, Chang IS, Kang KH, Moon H, Cho KS, et al. 2004. Construction and operation of a novel mediatorand membrane-less microbial fuel cell. Process Biochem. 39: 1007-1012.
Lovley DR. 2006. Bug juice: harvesting electricity with microorganisms. Nat. Rev. Microbiol. 4: 497-508.
Kim BH, Chang IS, Gadd GM. 2007. Challenges in microbial fuel cell development and operation. Appl. Microbiol. Biotechnol. 76: 485-494.
Venkata Mohan S, Velvizhi G, Annie Modestra J, Srikanth S. 2014. Microbial fuel cell: critical factors regulating biocatalyzed electrochemical process and recent advancements. Renewable Sustainable Energy Rev. 40: 779-797.
Gil G-C, In-Seop C, Byung Hong K, Mia K, Jae-Kyung J, Hyung Soo P, et al. 2003. Operational parameters affecting the performance of a mediator-less microbial fuel cell. Biosens. Bioelectron. 18: 327-334.
Pham TH, Aelterman P, Verstraete W. 2009. Bioanode performance in bioelectrochemical systems: recent improvements and prospects. Trends Biotechnol. 27: 168-178.
Scott K, Cotlarciuc I, Hall D, Lakeman JB, Browning D. 2008. Power from marine sediment fuel cells: the influence of anode material. J. Appl. Electrochem. 38: 1313-1319.
Scott K, Cotlarciuc I, Head I, Katuri KP, Hall D, Lakeman JB, et al. 2008. Fuel cell power generation from marine sediments:investigation of cathode materials. J. Chem. Technol. Biotechnol. 83: 1244-1254.
Liu H, Cheng SA, Logan BE. 2005. Power generation in fedbatch microbial fuel cells as a function of ionic strength, temperature, and reactor configuration. Environ. Sci. Technol. 39: 5488-5493.
Hong SW, Chang IS, Choi YS, Chung TH. 2009. Experimental evaluation of influential factors for electricity harvesting from sediment using microbial fuel cell. Bioresour. Technol. 100: 3029-3035.
He Z, Huang Y, Manohar AK, Mansfeld F. 2008. Effect of electrolyte pH on the rate of the anodic and cathodic reactions in an air-cathode microbial fuel cell. Bioelectrochemistry 74: 78-82.
Sajana TK, Ghangrekar MM, Mitra A. 2013. Effect of pH and distance between electrodes on the performance of a sediment microbial fuel cell. Water Sci. Technol. 68: 537-543.
Aelterman P, Rabaey K, Pham HT, Boon N, Verstraete W. 2006. Continuous electricity generation at high voltages and currents using stacked microbial fuel cells. Environ. Sci. Technol. 40: 3388-3394.
Logan BE, Hamelers B, Rozendal R, Schrorder U, Keller J, Freguia S, et al. 2006. Microbial fuel cells: Methodology and technology. Environ. Sci. Technol. 40: 5181-5192.
Logan BE. 2008. Microbial fuel cells, pp. 54-55. Ed. John Wiley & Sons.
Greenberg A, Clesceri LS, Eaton AD. 1992. Standard Methods for the Examination of Water and Wastewater, 18th Edn, pp. 5-16. Ed. American public health association, Washington.
Vyrides I, Stuckey D. 2009. A modified method for the determination of chemical oxygen demand (COD) for samples with high salinity and low organics. Bioresour. Technol. 100: 979-982.
Sajana TK, Ghangrekar MM, Mitra A. 2014. Effect of operating parameters on the performance of sediment microbial fuel cell treating aquaculture water. Aquac. Eng. 61: 17-26.
Menicucci J, Beyenal H, Marsili E, Veluchamy RA, Demir G, Lewandowski Z. 2006. Procedure for determining maximum sustainable power generated by microbial fuel cells. Environ. Sci. Technol. 40: 1062-1068.
Song S-H, Yeom S-H, Choi S-S, Yoo Y-J. 2003. Effect of oxidation-reduction potential on denitrification by Ochrobactrum anthropi SY509. J. Microbiol. Biotechnol. 13: 473-476.
Viet TN, Behera SK, Kim JW, Park H-S. 2008. Effects of oxidation reduction potential and organic compounds on anammox reaction in batch cultures. Environ. Eng. Res. 13: 210-215.
Zhang X, Zhu F, Chen L, Zhao Q, Tao G. 2013. Removal of ammonia nitrogen from wastewater using an aerobic cathode microbial fuel cell. Bioresour. Technol. 146: 161-168.
González del Campo A, Cañizares P, Lobato J, Rodrigo M, Fernandez Morales FJ. 2016. Effects of External Resistance on Microbial Fuel Cell’s Performance, pp. 175-197. In Lefebvre G, Jiménez E, Cabañas B (eds.), Environment, Energy and Climate Change II: Energies from New Resources and the Climate Change, Ed. Springer International Publishing, Cham
Doronina NV, Gogleva AA, Trotsenko YA. 2012. Methylophilus glucosoxydans sp. nov., a restricted facultative methylotroph from rice rhizosphere. Int. J. Syst. Evol. Microbiol. 62: 196-201.
Aruga S, Kamagata Y, Kohno T, Hanada S, Nakamura K, Kanagawa T. 2002. Characterization of filamentous Eikelboom type 021N bacteria and description of Thiothrix disciformis sp. nov. and Thiothrix flexilis sp. nov. Int. J. Syst. Evol. Microbiol. 52: 1309-1316.
Mohan Y, Das D. 2009. Effect of ionic strength, cation exchanger and inoculum age on the performance of Microbial Fuel Cells. Int. J. Hydrogen Energy 34: 7542-7546.
Chen Y, Cheng JJ, Creamer KS. 2008. Inhibition of anaerobic digestion process: a review. Bioresour. Technol. 99: 4044-4064.
Yan N, Marschner P, Cao W, Zuo C, Qin W. 2015. Influence of salinity and water content on soil microorganisms. Int. Soil Water Conservation Res. 3: 316-323.
Bower CE, Bidwell JP. 1978. Ionization of ammonia in seawater: effects of temperature, pH, and salinity. J. Fisheries Res. Board Canada 35: 1012-1016.
Isnansetyo A, Getsu SAI, Seguchi M, Koriyama M. 2014. Independent effects of temperature, salinity, ammonium concentration and pH on nitrification rate of the ariake seawater above mud sediment. HAYATI J. Biosci. 21: 21-30.
Zhang L, Li C, Ding L, Xu K, Ren H. 2011. Influences of initial pH on performance and anodic microbes of fed-batch microbial fuel cells. J Chem. Technol. Biotechnol. 86: 1226-1232.
Madigan MT, Bender KS, Buckley DH, Sattley WM, Stahl DA. 2019. Brock Biology of Microorganisms, 15th Ed., pp. 188-189. Ed. Pearson Education Inc., NJ.
Boyd CE, Schmittou HR. 1999. Achievement of sustainable aquaculture through environmental management. Aquac. Economics Manag. 3: 59-69.
Fuller RJ. 2007. Solar heating systems for recirculation aquaculture. Aquac. Eng. 36: 250-260.
Rossi R, Jones D, Myung J, Zikmund E, Yang W, Gallego YA, et al. 2019. Evaluating a multi-panel air cathode through electrochemical and biotic tests. Water Res. 148: 51-59.
Yang W, Rossi R, Tian Y, Kim K-Y, Logan BE. 2018. Mitigating external and internal cathode fouling using a polymer bonded separator in microbial fuel cells. Bioresour. Technol. 249: 1080-1084.
Zhang F, Pant D, Logan BE. 2011. Long-term performance of activated carbon air cathodes with different diffusion layer porosities in microbial fuel cells. Biosens. Bioelectron. 30: 49-55.
Rossi R, Yang W, Zikmund E, Pant D, Logan BE. 2018. In situ biofilm removal from air cathodes in microbial fuel cells treating domestic wastewater. Bioresour. Technol. 265: 200-206.