A comparative study of eubacterial communities by PCR-DGGE fingerprints in anoxic and aerobic biotrickling filters used for biogas desulfurization
Biological desulfurization has proven to be a process that is technically and economically feasible on using biotrickling filters that can be performed under aerobic and anoxic conditions. However, microbial communities are different mainly due to the use of different final electron acceptors. The analysis of microbial communities in these systems has not been addressed with regard to the anoxic process. The aim of the work reported here was to analyse the eubacterial community in the two types of bioreactor along the packed bed and during the operation time. The analysis was carried out using the 16S PCR-DGGE molecular fingerprint technique. The microbial profile analysis in the aerobic bioreactor revealed that the community was more diverse and stratified compared to those obtained in the two anoxic bioreactors, influenced by environmental factors. The main OTU involved in this process is genus Thiobacillus, although different species were detected depending on each operational condition.
KeywordsPCR-DGGE Biotrickling filters (BTF) Anoxic hydrogen sulfide removal Biogas Bacterial community
The authors wish to express sincere gratitude to the Spanish Ministry of Science and Innovation and the European FEDER funds for providing financial support through the projects CTM2009-14338-C03-02 and UNCA08-1E-003. Gratitude is also due to the Iberoamerican Ph.D. Program in Sciences of the University of Cádiz.
- 1.Syed M, Soreanu G, Falletta P, Beland M (2006) Removal of hydrogen sulfide from gas streams using biological processes—a review. Can Biosyst Eng 48:2.1–2.14Google Scholar
- 24.Zakrzewski M, Goesmann A, Jaenicke S, Junemann S, Eikmeyer F, Szczepanowski R, Al-Soud WA, Sorensen S, Puhler A, Schluter A (2012) Profiling of the metabolically active community from a production-scale biogas plant by means of high-throughput metatranscriptome sequencing. J Biotechnol 158:248–258CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 37.Vardanyan NS, Vardanyan AK, Sequences G, Albertensis A (2014) New sulphur oxidizing bacteria isolated from bioleaching pulp of zinc and copper concentrates. Univers J Microbiol Res 2:27–31Google Scholar
- 41.Green PN (2005) Bergey’s Manual of systematic bacteriology, 2nd edn, vol 2. The Proteobacteria, Part C: The Alpha-, Beta-, Delta-Google Scholar
- 47.Kelly D, Wood A, Stackebrandt E (2005) Thiobacillus Beijerinck 1904b, 597AL. In: Brenner DJ, Krieg NR, Garrity GM, Staley JT, Boone DR, Vos P, Goodfellow M, Rainey FA, Schleifer K-H (eds) Springer USGoogle Scholar
- 49.Krieg N, Ludwig W, Euzéby J, Whitman W (2010) Phylum XIV. Bacteroidetes phyl. nov. In: Krieg N, Staley J, Brown D, Hedlund B, Paster B, Ward N, Ludwig W, Whitman W (eds) Springer, New YorkGoogle Scholar
- 50.Sorokin DY, Tourova TP, Bezsoudnova EY, Pol A, Muyzer G (2007) Denitrification in a binary culture and thiocyanate metabolism in Thiohalophilus thiocyanoxidans gen. nov. sp. nov.—a moderately halophilic chemolithoautotrophic sulfur-oxidizing Gammaproteobacterium from hypersaline lakes. Arch Microbiol 187:441–450CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar