Advertisement

Journal of Soils and Sediments

, Volume 19, Issue 1, pp 106–115 | Cite as

The change in biotic and abiotic soil components influenced by paddy soil microbial fuel cells loaded with various resistances

  • Williamson Gustave
  • Zhao-Feng Yuan
  • Raju Sekar
  • Yu-Xiang Ren
  • Hu-Cheng Chang
  • Jinjing-Yuan Liu
  • Zheng ChenEmail author
Soils, Sec 2 • Global Change, Environ Risk Assess, Sustainable Land Use • Research Article
  • 77 Downloads

Abstract

Purpose

Soil microbial fuel cells (sMFC) are novel technique that uses organic matters in soils as an alternative energy source. External resistance (ER) is a key factor that influences sMFC performance and also alters the soil biological and chemical reactions. However, little information is available on how the microbial community and soil component changes in sMFC with different ER. Thus, the purpose of this study is to collectively examine the effects of different ER on paddy soil biotic and abiotic components.

Materials and methods

Eighteen paddy sMFC were constructed and operated at five different ER (2000, 1000, 200, 80, and 50 Ω) in triplicates for 90 days. The effects of the sMFC anodes at different ER were examined by measuring organic matter (OM) removal efficiency, trace elements in porewater, and bacterial community structure in contaminated paddy soil.

Results and discussion

The results indicate that ER has significant effects on sMFC power production, OM removal efficiency, and bacterial beta diversity. Moreover, ER influences iron, arsenic, and nickel concentration as well in soil porewater. In particular, greater current densities were observed at lower ER (2.6 mA, 50 Ω) as compared to a higher ER (0.3 mA, 2000 Ω). The removal efficiency of OM increased with decreasing ER, whereas it decreased with soil distance away from the anode. Furthermore, principal coordinate analysis (PCoA) revealed that ER may shape the bacterial community that develop in the anode vicinity but have minimal effect on that of the bulk soil.

Conclusions

The current study illustrates that lower ER can be used to selectively enhance the relative abundance of electrogenic bacteria and lead to high OM removal.

Keywords

Arsenic External resistances Geobacter Organic matter Paddy soil Soil microbial fuel cell 

Notes

Acknowledgements

This work was supported by the National Science Foundation of China (41571305) and the Jiangsu Science and Technology Program (BK20161251). The authors acknowledge the kind help of Zhou Xiao and Yi-Li Cheng for their technical support in the sample analysis. The authors are grateful to Markus Klingelfuss and Jacquelin St. Jean for proofreading the manuscript. Lastly, the authors are grateful for the kind help of Elmer Villanueva for his help in the statistical analysis.

Compliance with ethical standards

Conflict of interest

The authors declare no conflict of interest.

Supplementary material

11368_2018_2024_MOESM1_ESM.docx (1.1 mb)
ESM 1 (DOCX 1105 kb)

References

  1. Abbas SZ, Rafatullah M, Ismail N, Syakir MI (2017) A review on sediment microbial fuel cells as a new source of sustainable energy and heavy metal remediation: mechanisms and future prospective. Int J Energy Res 41:1242–1264CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Aelterman P, Freguia S, Keller J, Verstraete W, Rabaey K (2008) The anode potential regulates bacterial activity in microbial fuel cells. Appl Microbiol Biotechnol 78:409–418CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Del Campo AG, Cañizares P, Lobato J, Rodrigo M, Morales FF (2014) Effects of external resistance on microbial fuel cell’s performance, environment, energy and climate change II. Springer, pp 175–197Google Scholar
  4. Cao X, Song HL, Yu CY, Li XN (2015) Simultaneous degradation of toxic refractory organic pesticide and bioelectricity generation using a soil microbial fuel cell. Bioresour Technol 189:87–93CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Caporaso JG, Kuczynski J, Stombaugh J, Bittinger K, Bushman FD, Costello EK, Fierer N, Pena AG, Goodrich JK, Gordon JI (2010) Qiime allows analysis of high-throughput community sequencing data. Nat Methods 7:335–336CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Chen Z, Huang YC, Liang JH, Zhao F, Zhu YG (2012) A novel sediment microbial fuel cell with a biocathode in the rice rhizosphere. Bioresour Technol 108:55–59CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Chen Z, Zhu BK, Jia WF, Liang JH, Sun GX (2015) Can electrokinetic removal of metals from contaminated paddy soils be powered by microbial fuel cells? Environ Technol Innovation 3:63–67CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. De Schamphelaire L, Rabaey K, Boeckx P, Boon N, Verstraete W (2008) Outlook for benefits of sediment microbial fuel cells with two bio-electrodes. Microb Biotechnol 1:446–462CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Desantis TZ, Hugenholtz P, Larsen N, Rojas M, Brodie EL, Keller K, Huber T, Dalevi D, Hu P, Andersen GL (2006) Greengenes, a chimera-checked 16S rRNA gene database and workbench compatible with arb. Appl Environ Microbiol 72:5069–5072CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Edgar RC, Haas BJ, Clemente JC, Quince C, Knight R (2011) Uchime improves sensitivity and speed of chimera detection. Bioinformatics 27:2194–2200CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Giannis A, Pentari D, Wang JY, Gidarakos E (2010) Application of sequential extraction analysis to electrokinetic remediation of cadmium, nickel and zinc from contaminated soils. J Hazard Mater 184:547–554CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Gil GC, Chang IS, Kim BH, Kim M, Jang JK, Park HS, Kim HJ (2003) Operational parameters affecting the performance of a mediator-less microbial fuel cell. Biosens Bioelectron 18:327–334CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Gustave W, Yuan ZF, Sekar R, Chang HC, Zhang J, Wells M, Ren YX, Chen Z (2018) Arsenic mitigation in paddy soils by using microbial fuel cells. Environ Pollut 238:647–655CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Holmes DE, Bond DR, O'Neil RA, Reimers CE, Tender LR, Lovley DR (2004) Microbial communities associated with electrodes harvesting electricity from a variety of aquatic sediments. Microb Ecol 48:178–190CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Hong SW, Chang IS, Choi YS, Kim BH, Chung TH (2009a) Responses from freshwater sediment during electricity generation using microbial fuel cells. Bioprocess Biosyst Eng 32:389–395CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Hong SW, Chang IS, Choi YS, Chung TH (2009b) Experimental evaluation of influential factors for electricity harvesting from sediment using microbial fuel cell. Bioresour Technol 100:3029–3035CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Hong SW, Kim HS, Chung TH (2010) Alteration of sediment organic matter in sediment microbial fuel cells. E. Environ Pollut 158:185–191Google Scholar
  18. Huaidong HE, Waichin LI, Riqing YU, Zhihong YE (2017) Illumina-based analysis of bulk and rhizosphere soil bacterial communities in paddy fields under mixed heavy metal contamination. Pedosphere 27:569–578CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Huan D, Yi CW, Zhang F, Huang ZC, Zheng C, Hui JX, Feng Z (2014) Factors affecting the performance of single-chamber soil microbial fuel cells for power generation. Pedosphere 24:330–338CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Huang DY, Zhou SG, Chen Q, Zhao B, Yuan Y, Zhuang L (2011) Enhanced anaerobic degradation of organic pollutants in a soil microbial fuel cell. Chem Eng J 172:647–653CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Huijuan LI, Jingjing P, Hongbo LI (2012) Diversity and characterization of potential H2-dependent Fe(iii)-reducing bacteria in paddy soils. Pedosphere 22:673–680CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Ishii SI, Hotta Y, Watanabe K (2008) Methanogenesis versus electrogenesis: morphological and phylogenetic comparisons of microbial communities. Biosci Biotechnol Biochem 72:286–294CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Jadhav GS, Ghangrekar MM (2009) Performance of microbial fuel cell subjected to variation in pH, temperature, external load and substrate concentration. Bioresour Technol 100:717–723CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Jang JK, Chang IS, Kang KH, Moon H, Cho KS, Kim BH (2004) Construction and operation of a novel mediator- and membrane-less microbial fuel cell. Process Biochem 39:1007–1012CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Jia PW, Xiu JW, Zhang J (2013) Evaluating loss-on-ignition method for determinations of soil organic and inorganic carbon in arid soils of northwestern China. Pedosphere 23:593–599CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Jung S, Regan JM (2011) Influence of external resistance on electrogenesis, methanogenesis, and anode prokaryotic communities in microbial fuel cells. Appl Environ Microbiol 77:564–571CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Kaku N, Yonezawa N, Kodama Y, Watanabe K (2008) Plant/microbe cooperation for electricity generation in a rice paddy field. Appl Microbiol Biotechnol 79:43–49CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Kouzuma A, Kaku N, Watanabe K (2014) Microbial electricity generation in rice paddy fields: recent advances and perspectives in rhizosphere microbial fuel cells. Appl Microbiol Biotechnol 98:9521–9526CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Logan BE (2008) Microbial fuel cells. A John Wiley & Sons, Inc.Google Scholar
  30. Logan B, Cheng S, Watson V, Estadt G (2007) Graphite fiber brush anodes for increased power production in air-cathode microbial fuel cells. Environ Sci Technol 4:3341–3346CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Lu L, Huggins T, Jin S, Zuo Y, Ren ZJ (2014) Microbial metabolism and community structure in response to bioelectrochemically enhanced remediation of petroleum hydrocarbon-contaminated soil. Environ Sci Technol 48:4021–4029CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. 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 40:1062–1068CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. Min B, Román ÓB, Angelidaki I (2008) Importance of temperature and anodic medium composition on microbial fuel cell (MFC) performance. Biotechnol Lett 30:1213–1218CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. Mohan SV, Mohanakrishna G, Reddy BP, Saravanan R, Sarma P (2008) Bioelectricity generation from chemical wastewater treatment in mediatorless (anode) microbial fuel cell (MFC) using selectively enriched hydrogen producing mixed culture under acidophilic microenvironment. Biochem Eng J 39:121–130CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. Nicol GW, Leininger S, Schleper C, Prosser JI (2008) The influence of soil pH on the diversity, abundance and transcriptional activity of ammonia oxidizing archaea and bacteria. Environ Microbiol 10:2966–2978CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. Pettridge J, Firestone MK (2005) Redox fluctuation structures microbial communities in a wet tropical soil. Appl Environ Microbiol 71:6998–7007CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. Pitts K, Dobbin PS, Reyesramirez F, Thomson AJ, Richardson DJ, Seward HE (2003) Characterization of the Shewanella oneidensis mr-1 decaheme cytochrome mtra expression in Escherichia coli confers the ability to reduce soluble Fe(iii) chelates. J Biol Chem 278:27758–27765CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. Quan XC, Quan YP, Tao K, Jiang XM (2013) Comparative investigation on microbial community and electricity generation in aerobic and anaerobic enriched MFCs. Bioresour Technol 128:259–265CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. Reimers CE, Tender LM, Fertig S, Wang W (2001) Harvesting energy from the marine sediment−water interface. Environ Sci Technol 35:192–5Google Scholar
  40. Rismani-Yazdi H, Christy AD, Carver SM, Yu Z, Dehority BA, Tuovinen OH (2011) Effect of external resistance on bacterial diversity and metabolism in cellulose-fed microbial fuel cells. Bioresour Technol 102:278–283CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. Song TS, Yan ZS, Zhao ZW, Jiang HL (2010) Removal of organic matter in freshwater sediment by microbial fuel cells at various external resistances. J Chem Technol Biotechnol 85:1489–1493Google Scholar
  42. Srikanth S, Marsili E, Flickinger MC, Bond DR (2008) Electrochemical characterization of geobacter sulfurreducens cells immobilized on graphite paper electrodes. Biotechnol Bioeng 99:1065–1073CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  43. Srikanth S, Mohan SV, Sarma PN (2010) Positive anodic poised potential regulates microbial fuel cell performance with the function of open and closed circuitry. Bioresour Technol 101:5337–5344CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  44. Sun W, Xiao E, Dong Y, Tang S, Krumins V, Ning Z, Sun M, Zhao Y, Wu S, Xiao T (2016) Profiling microbial community in a watershed heavily contaminated by an active antimony (Sb) mine in Southwest China. Sci Total Environ 550:297–308CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  45. Torres CI, Krajmalnikbrown R, Parameswaran P, Marcus AK, Wanger G, Gorby YA, Rittmann BE (2009) Selecting anode-respiring bacteria based on anode potential: phylogenetic, electrochemical, and microscopic characterization. Environ Sci Technol 43:9519–9524CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  46. Touch N, Hibino T, Morimoto Y, Kinjo N (2017a) Relaxing the formation of hypoxic bottom water with sediment microbial fuel cells. Environ Technol 38:3016–3025CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  47. Touch N, Hibino T, Takata H, Yamaji S (2017b) Loss on ignition-based indices for evaluating organic matter characteristics of littoral sediments. Pedosphere 27:978–984CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  48. Wang Q, Garrity GM, Tiedje JM, Cole JR (2007) Naïve Bayesian classifier for rapid assignment of rRNA sequences into the new bacterial taxonomy. Appl Environ Microbiol 73:5261–5267CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  49. Wang A, Cheng H, Ren N, Cui D, Lin N, Wu W (2012) Sediment microbial fuel cell with floating biocathode for organic removal and energy recovery. Front Environ Sci Eng 6:569–574CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  50. Wang N, Chen Z, Li HB, Su JQ, Zhao F, Zhu YG (2015a) Bacterial community composition at anodes of microbial fuel cells for paddy soils: the effects of soil properties. J Soils Sediments 15:926–936CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  51. Wang C, Deng H, Zhao F (2015b) The remediation of chromium (VI)-contaminated soils using microbial fuel cells. Soil Sediment Contam 25:1–12CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  52. Wei J, Liang P, Cao X, Huang X (2010) A new insight into potential regulation on growth and power generation of geobacter sulfurreducens in microbial fuel cells based on energy viewpoint. Environ Sci Technol 44:3187–3191CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  53. Wu Y, Zeng J, Zhu Q, Zhang Z, Lin X (2017) Ph is the primary determinant of the bacterial community structure in agricultural soils impacted by polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbon pollution. Sci Rep 7:40093CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  54. Xiao E, Krumins V, Xiao T, Dong Y, Song T, Ning Z, Huang Z, Sun W (2016) Depth-resolved microbial community analyses in two contrasting soil cores contaminated by antimony and arsenic. Environ Pollut 221:244CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  55. Yu B, Tian J, Feng L (2017) Remediation of pah polluted soils using a soil microbial fuel cell: influence of electrode interval and role of microbial community. J Hazard Mater 336:110–118CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  56. Zhang C-P, Shan-Shan C, Guang-Li L, Zhang R-D, Jian X (2012) Characterization of strain pseudomonas sp. Q1 in microbial fuel cell for treatment of quinoline-contaminated water. Pedosphere 22:528–535CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  57. Zhou Y, Jiang H, Cai H (2015) To prevent the occurrence of black water agglomerate through delaying decomposition of cyanobacterial bloom biomass by sediment microbial fuel cell. J Hazard Mater 287:7–15CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  58. Zhu X, Yates MD, Hatzell MC, Rao HA, Saikaly PE, Logan BE (2014) Microbial community composition is unaffected by anode potential. Environ Sci Technol 48:1352–1358CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  59. Zhuang L, Zhou S, Li Y, Yuan Y (2010) Enhanced performance of air-cathode two-chamber microbial fuel cells with high-pH anode and low-pH cathode. Bioresour Technol 101:3514–3519CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag GmbH Germany, part of Springer Nature 2018

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Department of Environmental ScienceXi’an Jiaotong-Liverpool UniversitySuzhouChina
  2. 2.Department of Environmental ScienceUniversity of LiverpoolLiverpoolUK
  3. 3.Department of Biological SciencesXi’an Jiaotong-Liverpool UniversitySuzhouChina

Personalised recommendations