Advertisement

Modelling Biogas Production Kinetics of Various Heavy Metals Exposed Anaerobic Fermentation Process Using Sigmoidal Growth Functions

  • Yonglan TianEmail author
  • Kun Yang
  • Lei Zheng
  • Xiaoxi Han
  • Yanli Xu
  • Ying Li
  • Shusen Li
  • Xiang Xu
  • Huayong Zhang
  • Lei Zhao
Original Paper
  • 6 Downloads

Abstract

The kinetic evaluation of the biogas potential from heavy metal stressed anaerobic fermentation process was performed using modified sigmoidal bacterial growth curve equations (modified Gompertz and Logistic) in order to investigate their suitability to describe the degradation patterns associated with varied heavy metal species and concentration. The anaerobic co-fermentation experiments were performed at mesophilic conditions with mixed cow dung and Phragmites straw as feedstocks. The results show that appropriate concentration of heavy metals brought forward the biogas peaks, shorten the lag-phase (λ) and promoted the efficiency of co-fermentation. In this way, the cumulative biogas yields expressed the one-phase process and fitted the sigmoidal bacterial growth curve equations better. Both the modified Gompertz model and Logistic model were able to represent the experimental data in the presence of heavy metals as shown by the no significant different correlation coefficients (R2). However, the discrepancies between the experimental and fitting results of the modified Gompertz model were smaller than the Logistic model which suggested that the earlier was more suitable for describing the degradation patterns under heavy metal stress. The results of this research are expected to provide theoretical guidance for studying the impact of heavy metals and modelling research of anaerobic fermentation process.

Graphic abstract

Keywords

Anaerobic fermentation Kinetic study Modified gompertz model Logistic model Heavy metal Lag-phase 

Abbreviations

A

Maximum cumulative biogas yields

Rmax

Maximum methane production rate

λ

Lag phase time

R2

Correlation coefficients

TS

Total solids

Notes

Acknowledgements

This work was funded by the Major Science and Technology Program for Water Pollution Control and Treatment [2017ZX07101003]; and the Fundamental Research Funds for the Central Universities [2018MS051].

Compliance with Ethical Standards

Conflict of interest

On behalf of all authors, the corresponding author states that there is no conflict of interest.

Supplementary material

12649_2019_810_MOESM1_ESM.docx (150 kb)
Supplementary file1 (DOCX 149 kb)

References

  1. 1.
    Verma, V.K., Singh, Y.P., Rai, J.P.N.: Biogas production from plant biomass used for phytoremediation of industrial wastes. Bioresour. Technol. 98, 1664–1669 (2007)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Yue, Z.-B., Yu, H.-Q., Wang, Z.-L.: Anaerobic digestion of cattail with rumen culture in the presence of heavy metals. Bioresour. Technol. 98, 781–786 (2007)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Manyiloh, C.E., Mamphweli, S.N., Meyer, E.L., Okoh, A.I., Makaka, G., Simon, M.: Microbial anaerobic digestion (bio-digesters) as an approach to the decontamination of animal wastes in pollution control and the generation of renewable energy. Int. J. Environ. Res. Public Heal. 10, 4390–4417 (2013)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Whitman, W.B., Wolfe, R.S.: Presence of nickel in Factor F 430 from methanobacteriumbryantii. Biochem. Biophys. Res. Commun. 92, 1196–1201 (1980)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Zandvoort, B.M.H., Van Hullebusch, E.D., Fermoso, F.G., Lens, P.N.L.: Trace metals in anaerobic granular sludge reactors: bioavailability and dosing strategies. Eng. Life Sci. 6, 293–301 (2006)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Ware, A., Power, N.: Modelling methane production kinetics of complex poultry slaughterhouse wastes using sigmoidal growth functions. Renew. Energy. 104, 50–59 (2017)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Zwietering, M.H., Jongenburger, I., Rombouts, F.M., Riet, K.V.: ’T: modeling of the bacterial growth curve. Appl. Environ. Microbiol. 56, 1875–1881 (1990)Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    Nyoman, W., Seno, J.: The kinetic of biogas production rate from cattle manure in batch mode. Int. J. Chem. Biomol. Eng. 3, 39–44 (2010)Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    Altaş, L.: Inhibitory effect of heavy metals on methane-producing anaerobic granular sludge. J. Hazard. Mater. 162, 1551–1556 (2009)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Zhu, M.R.: Fitting gompertz model and logistic model. Math. Pract. Theory. 32, 705–709 (2002)Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    Fan, Y., Wang, Y., Qian, P.Y., Gu, J.D.: Optimization of phthalic acid batch biodegradation and the use of modified Richards model for modelling degradation. Int. Biodeterior. Biodegrad. 53, 57–63 (2004)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Beuvink, J.M., Kogut, J.: Modeling gas production kinetics of grass silages incubated with buffered ruminal fluid. J. Anim. Sci. 71, 1041 (1993)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Veluchamy, C., Kalamdhad, A.S.: Enhanced methane production and its kinetics model of thermally pretreated lignocellulose waste material. Bioresour. Technol. 241, 1–9 (2017)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Zhang, H., Tian, Y., Wang, L., Mi, X., Chai, Y.: Effect of ferrous chloride on biogas production and enzymatic activities during anaerobic fermentation of cow dung and Phragmites straw. Biodegradation 27, 69–82 (2016)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Tian, Y., Zhang, H., Chai, Y., Wang, L., Mi, X., Zhang, L., Ware, M.A.: Biogas properties and enzymatic analysis during anaerobic fermentation of Phragmites australis straw and cow dung: influence of nickel chloride supplement. Biodegradation 28, 15–25 (2017)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Zhang, H., Han, X., Tian, Y., Li, Y., Yang, K., Hao, H., Chai, Y., Xu, X.: Process analysis of anaerobic fermentation of Phragmites australis straw and cow dung exposing to elevated chromium (VI) concentrations. J. Environ. Manag. 224, 414–424 (2018)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Hao, H., Tian, Y., Zhang, H., Chai, Y.: Copper stressed anaerobic fermentation: biogas properties, process stability, biodegradation and enzyme responses. Biodegradation 28, 369–381 (2017)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Dhamodharan, K., Kumar, V., Kalamdhad, A.S.: Effect of different livestock dungs as inoculum on food waste anaerobic digestion and its kinetics. Bioresour. Technol. 180, 237–241 (2015)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Zhang, H., Tian, Y., Wang, L., Zhang, L., Dai, L.: Ecophysiological characteristics and biogas production of cadmium-contaminated crops. Bioresour. Technol. 146, 628–636 (2013)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Tian, Y., Zhang, H., Mi, X., Wang, L., Zhang, L., Ai, Y.: Research on anaerobic digestion of corn stover enhanced by dilute acid pretreatment: mechanism study and potential utilization in practical application. J. Renew. Sustain. Energy. 8, 023103 (2016)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Gaur, R.Z., Suthar, S.: Anaerobic digestion of activated sludge, anaerobic granular sludge and cow dung with food waste for enhanced methane production. J. Clean. Prod. 164, 557–566 (2017)CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Nature B.V. 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Research Center for Engineering Ecology and Nonlinear ScienceNorth China Electric Power UniversityBeijingChina
  2. 2.College of Resources and Environmental SciencesChina Agricultural UniversityBeijingChina

Personalised recommendations