Advertisement

Microbial responses to combined oxidation and catalysis treatment of 1,4-dioxane and co-contaminants in groundwater and soil

  • Yu Miao
  • Nicholas W. Johnson
  • Kimberly Heck
  • Sujin Guo
  • Camilah D. Powell
  • Thien Phan
  • Phillip B. Gedalanga
  • David T. Adamson
  • Charles J. Newell
  • Michael S. Wong
  • Shaily MahendraEmail author
Research Article
Part of the following topical collections:
  1. Special Issue—Application of Environmental Genomics in Bioremediation of Persistent Pollutants

Abstract

Post-treatment impacts of a novel combined hydrogen peroxide (H2O2) oxidation and WOx/ZrO2 catalysis used for the removal of 1,4-dioxane and chlorinated volatile organic compound (CVOC) contaminants were investigated in soil and groundwater microbial community. This treatment train removed ~90% 1,4-dioxane regardless of initial concentrations of 1,4-dioxane and CVOCs. The Illumina Miseq platform and bioinformatics were used to study the changes to microbial community structure. This approach determined that dynamic shifts of microbiomes were associated with conditions specific to treatments as well as 1,4-dioxane and CVOCs mixtures. The biodiversity was observed to decrease only after oxidation under conditions that included high levels of 1,4-dioxane and CVOCs, but increased when 1,4-dioxane was present without CVOCs. WOx/ZrO2 catalysis reduced biodiversity across all conditions. Taxonomic classification demonstrated oxidative tolerance for members of the genera Massilia and Rhodococcus, while catalyst tolerance was observed for members of the genera Sphingomonas and Devosia. Linear discriminant analysis effect size was a useful statistical tool to highlight representative microbes, while the multidimensional analysis elucidated the separation of microbiomes under the low 1,4-dioxane-only condition from all other conditions containing CVOCs, as well as the differences of microbial population among original, post-oxidation, and post-catalysis states. The results of this study enhance our understanding of microbial community responses to a promising chemical treatment train, and the metagenomic analysis will help practitioners predict the microbial community status during the post-treatment period, which may have consequences for long-term management strategies that include additional biodegradation treatment or natural attenuation.

Keywords

Coupled treatments Chlorinated solvents Diethylene ether Biological diversity Microbial populations Biomarkers 

Notes

Acknowledgements

This study was supported by the Strategic Environmental Research and Development Program (SERDP) award ER-2307 and by National Science Foundation Faculty Early Career Development (CAREER) award #1255021. This research was performed in a renovated collaboratory funded by the National Science Foundation Grant Number 0963183, which was awarded under the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009 (ARRA). The authors thank Michelle Myers for her assistance with 1,4- dioxane analyses and total nucleic acids extractions.

Supplementary material

11783_2018_1071_MOESM1_ESM.pdf (937 kb)
Supplementary material, approximately 937 KB.

References

  1. Adamson D, Newell C, Mahendra S, Bryant D, Wong M (2017). In situ treatment and management strategies for 1, 4-dioxane-contaminated groundwater. Houston: GSI Environmental Inc., Houston United States. SERDP Project ER-2307Google Scholar
  2. Adamson D T, Anderson R H, Mahendra S, Newell C J (2015). Evidence of 1,4-dioxane attenuation at groundwater sites contaminated with chlorinated solvents and 1,4-dioxane. Environmental Science & Technology, 49(11): 6510–6518Google Scholar
  3. Anderson R H, Anderson J K, Bower P A (2012). Co-occurrence of 1,4-dioxane with trichloroethylene in chlorinated solvent groundwater plumes at US Air Force installations: Fact or fiction. Integrated Environmental Assessment and Management, 8(4): 731–737Google Scholar
  4. Barndõk H, Hermosilla D, Han C, Dionysiou D D, Negro C, Blanco A (2016). Degradation of 1,4-dioxane from industrial wastewater by solar photocatalysis using immobilized NF-TiO2 composite with monodisperse TiO2 nanoparticles. Applied Catalysis B: Environmental, 180: 44–52Google Scholar
  5. Bidaud P, Hébert L, Barbey C, Appourchaux A C, Torelli R, Sanguinetti M, Laugier C, Petry S (2012). Rhodococcus equi’s extreme resistance to hydrogen peroxide is mainly conferred by one of its four catalase genes. PLoS One, 7(8): e42396Google Scholar
  6. Chao Y, Liu W, Chen Y, Chen W, Zhao L, Ding Q, Wang S, Tang Y T, Zhang T, Qiu R L (2016). Structure, variation, and co-occurrence of soil microbial communities in abandoned sites of a rare earth elements mine. Environmental Science & Technology, 50(21): 11481–11490Google Scholar
  7. Chen K F, Chang Y C, Chiou W T (2016). Remediation of dieselcontaminated soil using In situ chemical oxidation (ISCO) and the effects of common oxidants on the indigenous microbial community: a comparison study. Journal of Chemical Technology and Biotechnology (Oxford, Oxfordshire), 91(6): 1877–1888Google Scholar
  8. Chitra S, Paramasivan K, Cheralathan M, Sinha P K (2012). Degradation of 1,4-dioxane using advanced oxidation processes. Environmental Science and Pollution Research International, 19(3): 871–878Google Scholar
  9. Choi P G, Nunotani N, Imanaka N (2017). High catalytic efficiency in liquid-phase oxidation of 1,4-dioxane using a Pt/CeO2-ZrO2-SnO2/SBA-16 catalyst. International Journal of Applied Ceramic Technology, 14(1): 9–15Google Scholar
  10. Dingman D W (2011). Inactivation of Paenibacillus larvae endospores by a hydrogen peroxide/peroxyacetic acid biocide. Journal of Apicultural Research, 50(2): 173–175Google Scholar
  11. Eberle D, Ball R, Boving T B (2016). Peroxone activated persulfate treatment of 1,4-dioxane in the presence of chlorinated solvent cocontaminants. Chemosphere, 144: 728–735Google Scholar
  12. Feng Y, Lee P H, Wu D, Shih K (2017). Surface-bound sulfate radicaldominated degradation of 1,4-dioxane by alumina-supported palladium (Pd/Al2O3) catalyzed peroxymonosulfate. Water Research, 120: 12–21Google Scholar
  13. Fida T T, Moreno-Forero S K, Breugelmans P, Heipieper H J, Röling W F, Springael D (2017). Physiological and transcriptome response of the polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbon degrading Novosphingobium sp. LH128 after Inoculation in soil. Environmental Science & Technology, 51(3): 1570–1579Google Scholar
  14. Gedalanga P, Madison A, Miao Y, Richards T, Hatton J, DiGuiseppi W H, Wilson J, Mahendra S (2016). A multiple lines of evidence framework to evaluate intrinsic biodegradation of 1,4-dioxane. Remediation, 27(1): 93–114Google Scholar
  15. Gedalanga P B, Pornwongthong P, Mora R, Chiang S Y D, Baldwin B, Ogles D, Mahendra S (2014). Identification of biomarker genes to predict biodegradation of 1,4-dioxane. Applied and Environmental Microbiology, 80(10): 3209–3218Google Scholar
  16. Gururani M A, Upadhyaya C P, Baskar V, Venkatesh J, Nookaraju A, Park S W (2013). Plant growth-promoting Rhizobacteria enhance abiotic stress tolerance in Solanum tuberosum through inducing changes in the expression of ROS-scavenging enzymes and improved photosynthetic performance. Journal of Plant Growth Regulation, 32(2): 245–258Google Scholar
  17. Hall E A, Bell S G (2015). The efficient and selective biocatalytic oxidation of norisoprenoid and aromatic substrates by CYP101B1 from Novosphingobium aromaticivorans DSM12444. RSC Advances, 5(8): 5762–5773Google Scholar
  18. Handtke S, Schroeter R, Jürgen B, Methling K, Schlüter R, Albrecht D, van Hijum S A F T, Bongaerts J, Maurer K H, Lalk M, Schweder T, Hecker M, Voigt B (2014). Bacillus pumilus reveals a remarkably high resistance to hydrogen peroxide provoked oxidative stress. PLoS One, 9(1): e85625Google Scholar
  19. Ikehata K, Wang-Staley L, Qu X Y, Li Y (2016). Treatment of groundwater contaminated with 1,4-dioxane, tetrahydrofuran, and chlorinated volatile organic compounds using advanced oxidation processes. Ozone Science and Engineering, 38(6): 413–424Google Scholar
  20. Inoue D, Tsunoda T, Sawada K, Yamamoto N, Saito Y, Sei K, Ike M (2016). 1,4-Dioxane degradation potential of members of the genera Pseudonocardia and Rhodococcus. Biodegradation, 27(4-6): 277–286Google Scholar
  21. Jasmann J R, Gedalanga P B, Borch T, Mahendra S, Blotevogel J (2017). Synergistic treatment of mixed 1,4-dioxane and chlorinated solvent contaminations by coupling electrochemical oxidation with aerobic biodegradation. Environmental Science & Technology, 51(21): 12619–12629Google Scholar
  22. Klindworth A, Pruesse E, Schweer T, Peplies J, Quast C, Horn M, Glöckner F O (2013). Evaluation of general 16S ribosomal RNA gene PCR primers for classical and next-generation sequencingbased diversity studies. Nucleic Acids Research, 41(1): e1Google Scholar
  23. Lan R S, Smith C A, Hyman M R (2013). Oxidation of cyclic ethers by alkane-grown Mycobacterium vaccae JOB5. Remediation Journal, 23(4): 23–42Google Scholar
  24. Laurent F, Cébron A, Schwartz C, Leyval C (2012). Oxidation of a PAH polluted soil using modified Fenton reaction in unsaturated condition affects biological and physico-chemical properties. Chemosphere, 86 (6): 659–664Google Scholar
  25. Lefevre E, Bossa N, Wiesner M R, Gunsch C K (2016). A review of the environmental implications of In situ remediation by nanoscale zero valent iron (nZVI): Behavior, transport and impacts on microbial communities. Science of The Total Environment, 565: 889–901Google Scholar
  26. Li J, Lu Q, de Toledo R A, Lu Y, Shim H (2015b). Effect of toluene concentration and hydrogen peroxide on Pseudomonas plecoglossicida cometabolizing mixture of cis-DCE and TCE in soil slurry. Environmental Geochemistry and Health, 37(6): 985–995Google Scholar
  27. Li M, Fiorenza S, Chatham J R, Mahendra S, Alvarez P J J (2010). 1,4-Dioxane biodegradation at low temperatures in Arctic groundwater samples. Water Research, 44(9): 2894–2900Google Scholar
  28. Li M, Van Orden E T, DeVries D J, Xiong Z, Hinchee R, Alvarez P J (2015a). Bench-scale biodegradation tests to assess natural attenuation potential of 1,4-dioxane at three sites in California. Biodegradation, 26(1): 39–50Google Scholar
  29. Mahendra S, Alvarez-Cohen L (2005). Pseudonocardia dioxanivorans sp. nov., a novel actinomycete that grows on 1,4-dioxane. International Journal of Systematic and Evolutionary Microbiology, 55(2): 593–598Google Scholar
  30. Mahendra S, Alvarez-Cohen L (2006). Kinetics of 1,4-dioxane biodegradation by monooxygenase-expressing bacteria. Environmental Science & Technology, 40(17): 5435–5442Google Scholar
  31. Mahendra S, Grostern A, Alvarez-Cohen L (2013). The impact of chlorinated solvent co-contaminants on the biodegradation kinetics of 1,4-dioxane. Chemosphere, 91(1): 88–92Google Scholar
  32. Mahendra S, Petzold C J, Baidoo E E, Keasling J D, Alvarez-Cohen L (2007). Identification of the intermediates of in vivo oxidation of 1, 4- dioxane by monooxygenase-containing bacteria. Environmental Science & Technology, 41(21): 7330–7336Google Scholar
  33. McMurdie P J, Holmes S (2013). phyloseq: an R package for reproducible interactive analysis and graphics of microbiome census data. PLoS One, 8(4): e61217Google Scholar
  34. Medina R, David Gara P M, Fernández-González A J, Rosso J A, Del Panno M T (2018). Remediation of a soil chronically contaminated with hydrocarbons through persulfate oxidation and bioremediation. Science of The Total Environment, 618: 518–530Google Scholar
  35. Miao Y, Liao R, Zhang X X, Wang Y, Wang Z, Shi P, Liu B, Li A (2015). Metagenomic insights into Cr(VI) effect on microbial communities and functional genes of an expanded granular sludge bed reactor treating high-nitrate wastewater. Water Research, 76: 43–52Google Scholar
  36. Miao Y, Wang Z, Liao R H, Shi P, Li A M (2017). Assessment of phenol effect on microbial community structure and function in an anaerobic denitrifying process treating high concentration nitrate wastewater. Chemical Engineering Journal, 330: 757–763Google Scholar
  37. Mohr T K G, Stickney J A, DiGuiseppi W H (2010). Environmental Investigation and Remediation: 1,4-Dioxane and Other Solvent Stabilizers. Boca Raton, FL: CRC Press, Taylor & Francis GroupGoogle Scholar
  38. Munakata-Marr J, Sorenson K S, Petri B G, Cummings J B (2011). Principles of combining ISCO with other in situ remedial approaches. In: Siegrist R, Crimi M, Simpkin T, eds. In situ Chemical Oxidation for Groundwater Remediation. New York, NY: Springer, SERDP/ESTCP Environmental Remediation Technology, vol 3, 285–317Google Scholar
  39. Myers M A, Johnson NW, Zerecero-Marin E, Pornwongthong P, Liu Y, Gedalanga P B, Mahendra S (2018). Abiotic and bioaugmented granular activated carbon for the treatment of 1,4-dioxane-contaminated water. Environmental Pollution, 240: 916–924Google Scholar
  40. Nemecek J, Pokorný P, Lhotský O, Knytl V, Najmanová P, Steinová J, Cerník M, Filipová A, Filip J, Cajthaml T (2016). Combined nanobiotechnology for in-situ remediation of mixed contamination of groundwater by hexavalent chromium and chlorinated solvents. Science of The Total Environment, 563–564: 822–834Google Scholar
  41. Padhy R N, Nayak N, Rath S (2014). Antagonism at combined effects of chemical fertilizers and carbamate insecticides on the rice-field N2- fixing cyanobacterium Cylindrospermum sp. in vitro. Interdisciplinary Toxicology, 7(1): 5–11Google Scholar
  42. Pornwongthong P, Mulchandani A, Gedalanga P B, Mahendra S (2014). Transition metals and organic ligands influence biodegradation of 1,4-dioxane. Applied Biochemistry and Biotechnology, 173(1): 291–306Google Scholar
  43. Richardson S D, Lebron B L, Miller C T, Aitken M D (2011). Recovery of phenanthrene-degrading bacteria after simulated in situ persulfate oxidation in contaminated soil. Environmental Science & Technology, 45(2): 719–725Google Scholar
  44. San Miguel A, Roy J, Gury J, Monier A, Coissac E, Ravanel P, Geremia R A, Raveton M (2014). Effects of organochlorines on microbial diversity and community structure in Phragmites australis rhizosphere. Applied Microbiology and Biotechnology, 98(9): 4257–4266Google Scholar
  45. Santiago A J, Ahmed M N A, Wang S L, Damera K, Wang B, Tai P C, Gilbert E S, Derby C D (2016). Inhibition and dispersal of Pseudomonas aeruginosa biofilms by combination treatment with escapin intermediate products and hydrogen peroxide. Antimicrobial Agents and Chemotherapy, 60(9): 5554–5562Google Scholar
  46. Schloss P D, Westcott S L, Ryabin T, Hall J R, Hartmann M, Hollister E B, Lesniewski R A, Oakley B B, Parks D H, Robinson C J, Sahl JW, Stres B, Thallinger G G, Van Horn D J, Weber C F (2009). Introducing mothur: open-source, platform-independent, community-supported software for describing and comparing microbial communities. Applied and Environmental Microbiology, 75(23): 7537–7541Google Scholar
  47. Segata N, Izard J, Waldron L, Gevers D, Miropolsky L, Garrett W S, Huttenhower C (2011). Metagenomic biomarker discovery and explanation. Genome Biology, 12(6): R60Google Scholar
  48. Sei K, Kakinoki T, Inoue D, Soda S, Fujita M, Ike M (2010). Evaluation of the biodegradation potential of 1,4-dioxane in river, soil and activated sludge samples. Biodegradation, 21(4): 585–591Google Scholar
  49. Sekar R, Taillefert M, DiChristina T J (2016). Simultaneous transformation of commingled trichloroethylene, tetrachloroethylene, and 1,4-dioxane by a microbially driven fenton reaction in batch liquid cultures. Applied and Environmental Microbiology, 82(21): 6335–6343Google Scholar
  50. Simonin M, Richaume A (2015). Impact of engineered nanoparticles on the activity, abundance, and diversity of soil microbial communities: a review. Environmental Science and Pollution Research International, 22(18): 13710–13723Google Scholar
  51. Soultanidis N, Zhou W, Psarras A C, Gonzalez A J, Iliopoulou E F, Kiely C J, Wachs I E, Wong M S (2010). Relating n-pentane isomerization activity to the tungsten surface density of WO(x)/ZrO2. Journal of the American Chemical Society, 132(38): 13462–13471Google Scholar
  52. Suthersan S, Quinnan J, Horst J, Ross I, Kalve E, Bell C, Pancras T (2016). Making strides in the management of “Emerging Contaminants”. Ground Water Monitoring and Remediation, 36(1): 15–25Google Scholar
  53. Sutton N B, Langenhoff A A, Lasso D H, van der Zaan B, van Gaans P, Maphosa F, Smidt H, Grotenhuis T, Rijnaarts H H (2014). Recovery of microbial diversity and activity during bioremediation following chemical oxidation of diesel contaminated soils. Applied Microbiology and Biotechnology, 98(6): 2751–2764Google Scholar
  54. Vainberg S, McClay K, Masuda H, Root D, Condee C, Zylstra G J, Steffan R J (2006). Biodegradation of ether pollutants by Pseudonocardia sp. strain ENV478. Applied and Environmental Microbiology, 72(8): 5218–5224Google Scholar
  55. Wilson M M, Metcalf W W (2005). Genetic diversity and horizontal transfer of genes involved in oxidation of reduced phosphorus compounds by Alcaligenes faecalis WM2072. Applied and Environmental Microbiology, 71(1): 290–296Google Scholar
  56. Xu X H, Liu X M, Zhang L, Mu Y, Zhu X Y, Fang J Y, Li S P, Jiang J D (2018). Bioaugmentation of chlorothalonil-contaminated soil with hydrolytically or reductively dehalogenating strain and its effect on soil microbial community. Journal of Hazardous Materials, 351: 240–249Google Scholar
  57. Yang Y, Cheng D, Li Y, Yu L, Gin K Y H, Chen J P, Reinhard M (2017). Effects of monochloramine and hydrogen peroxide on the bacterial community shifts in biologically treated wastewater. Chemosphere, 189: 399–406Google Scholar
  58. Zhang S, Gedalanga P B, Mahendra S (2016). Biodegradation kinetics of 1,4-dioxane in chlorinated solvent mixtures. Environmental Science & Technology, 50(17): 9599–9607Google Scholar
  59. Zhang S, Gedalanga P B, Mahendra S (2017). Advances in bioremediation of 1,4-dioxane-contaminated waters. Journal of Environmental Management, 204(Pt 2): 765–774Google Scholar
  60. Zheng Y G, Yin H H, Yu D F, Chen X, Tang X L, Zhang X J, Xue Y P, Wang Y J, Liu Z Q (2017). Recent advances in biotechnological applications of alcohol dehydrogenases. Applied Microbiology and Biotechnology, 101(3): 987–1001Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Higher Education Press and Springer-Verlag GmbH Germany, part of Springer Nature 2018

Authors and Affiliations

  • Yu Miao
    • 1
  • Nicholas W. Johnson
    • 1
  • Kimberly Heck
    • 2
  • Sujin Guo
    • 2
  • Camilah D. Powell
    • 2
  • Thien Phan
    • 1
  • Phillip B. Gedalanga
    • 1
    • 3
  • David T. Adamson
    • 4
  • Charles J. Newell
    • 4
  • Michael S. Wong
    • 2
  • Shaily Mahendra
    • 1
    Email author
  1. 1.Department of Civil and Environmental EngineeringUniversity of CaliforniaLos AngelesUSA
  2. 2.Department of Chemical and Biomolecular EngineeringRice UniversityHoustonUSA
  3. 3.Department of Health ScienceCalifornia State UniversityFullertonUSA
  4. 4.GSI Environmental Inc.HoustonUSA

Personalised recommendations