A study of the suitability of three commercial bioaugmentation products for use in grease traps

  • Markella TziritaEmail author
  • Seraphim Papanikolaou
  • Bríd Quilty
Original Article


Three bioaugmentation products, coded as BFL, FF and Gnz, were investigated for their ability to degrade waste-cooking fats and their suitability in relation to their microbial composition. The remaining fat was determined gravimetrically and bacteria present were identified using biochemical and molecular approaches. Screening of hydrolytic enzymes was also performed. Bacillus spp. dominated; however, FF product also contained 2 Pseudomonas spp. and 1 fungus. 16S rRNA sequencing confirmed most of the results obtained by the API system. Closely related Bacillus subtilis and Bacillus amyloliquefaciens were distinguished using SDS-PAGE and FAME profiles. The highly saturated fat was a challenge for the bacteria, while the FF, containing the fungus, performed 94% degradation. On the other hand, the soft fat was up to 94% degraded by FF and BFL, while Gnz did not perform any degradation. The enzymatic activity of the bacterial isolates varied even among the same bacterial species and corresponded with the overall degradative ability of each product, which increased with increasing diversity of the microbial population. Lipase activity indicated substrate specificity and preference for short-chain fatty acids. The BFL product having the greatest number of Bacillus species showed good potential and the highest lipolytic activity, although the FF product was eliminated when safety and regulatory issues were considered. The study demonstrated that careful consideration must be given to the microbiological composition of bioaugmentation products and the methods used to ensure robust identification of the microbes present.

Graphical Abstract


Bacillus Bioaugmentation Biodegradation Enzymes FOG Identification 



This was a collaborative project between Dublin City University, Ireland and Mr. Ciaran Gillen from BioFuture Ltd, Dublin, Ireland, who provided us the products and important information on FOGs and regulations.

Funding information

The project was funded by the Irish EPA (Environmental Protection Agency) under the Science, Technology, Research & Innovation for the Environment (STRIVE) Programme 2007–2013.

Compliance with ethical standards

Conflict of interests

The authors declare that they have no competing interests.


  1. 1.
    Brooksbank AM, Latchford JW, Mudge SM (2007) Degradation and modification of fats, oils and grease by commercial microbial supplements. World J Microbiol Biotechnol 23:977–985CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Frank RR, Cipullo S, Garcia J, Davies S, Wagland ST, Villa R, Trois C, Coulon F (2017) Compositional and physicochemical changes in waste materials and biogas production across 7 landfill sites in UK. Waste Manag 63:11–17CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    He X, de los Reyes FL, Leming ML et al (2013) Mechanisms of fat, oil and grease (FOG) deposit formation in sewer lines. Water Res 47:4451–4459CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    He X, So MJ, De Los Reyes FL (2016) Shifts in microbial communities in bioaugmented grease interceptors removing fat, oil, and grease (FOG). Appl Microbiol Biotechnol 100:7025–7035CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Tang HL, Xie YF, Chen Y (2012) Use of Bio-Amp, a commercial bio-additive for the treatment of grease trap wastewater containing fat, oil and grease. Bioresour Technol 124:52–58CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Rashid N, Imanaka T (2008) Efficient degradation of grease using microorganisms. J Chem Soc Pak 30(4):612–617Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    Fritze D (2008) In: Berkeley R, Heyndrickx M, Logan N, De Vos P (eds) Bacillus identification—traditional approaches, in applications and systematics of Bacillus and relatives. Blackwell Science Ltd, Oxford, UK. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Sugimori D, Watanabe M, Utsue T (2013) Isolation and lipid degradation profile of Raoultella planticola strain 232-2 capable of efficiently catabolising edible oils under acidic conditions. Appl Microbiol Biotechnol 97:871–880CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Tzirita M, Papanikolaou S, Quilty B (2018) Degradation of fat by a bioaugmentation product comprising of Bacillus spp. before and after the addition of a Pseudomonas sp. Eur J Lipid Sci Technol 120(2). CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Tzirita M, Papanikolaou S, Quilty B (2018) Enhanced fat degradation following the addition of a Pseudomonas species to a bioaugmentation product used in grease traps. J Environ Sci. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    De Paolis MR, Lippi D (2008) Use of metabolic and molecular methods for the identification of a Bacillus strain isolated from paper affected by foxing. Microbiol Res 163:121–131CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Loperena L, Ferrari MD, Diaz AL et al (2009) Isolation and selection of native microorganisms for the aerobic treatment of simulated dairy wastewaters. Bioresour Technol 100:1762–1766CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Jeyaram K, Romia W, Singha TA et al (2011) Distinct differentiation of closely related species of Bacillus subtilis group with industrial importance. J Microbiol Methods 87:161–164CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Clarridge JE III (2004) Impact of 16S rRNA gene sequence analysis for identification of bacteria on clinical microbiology and infectious diseases. Clin Microbiol Rev 17:840–862CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Gomaa OM, Momtaz OA (2007) 16S rRNA characterization of a bacillus isolate and its tolerance profile after subsequent subculturing. Arab J Biotech 10(107):116Google Scholar
  16. 16.
    Mohamed EA, Abe M, Ghanem KM et al (2013) Diversity of Bacillus genotypes in soil samples from El-Omayed biosphere reserve in Egypt. J Cult Collect 5:78–84Google Scholar
  17. 17.
    Kaynar P, Beyatli Y (2008) Protein profiles and biochemical characterizations of Bacillus spp. strains isolated from fishes. Fresenius Environ Bull 17(9 A):1316–1321Google Scholar
  18. 18.
    Slabbinck B, Waegeman W, Dawyndt P, de Vos P, de Baets B (2010) From learning taxonomies to phylogenetic learning: integration of 16S rRNA gene data into FAME-based bacterial classification. BMC Bioinformatics 11:69. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Kämpfer P (1994) Limits and possibilities of total fatty acid analysis for classification and identification of Bacillus species. Syst Appl Microbiol 17:86–98CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Papanikolaou S, Dimou A, Fakas S, Diamantopoulou P, Philippoussis A, Galiotou-Panayotou M, Aggelis G (2011) Biotechnological conversion of waste cooking olive oil into lipid-rich biomass using Aspergillus and Penicillium strains. J Appl Microbiol 110:1138–1150CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Metcalfe L, Schmitz A (1961) The rapid preparation of fatty acid esters for gas chromatographic analysis. Anal Chem 33(3):363–364CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Harley JP, Prescott LM (1990) Laboratory exercises in microbiology. Wm. C. Brown Publishers, Dubuque, IAGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    Logan N, Berkeley R (1984) Identification of bacillus strains using the API system. J Gen Microbiol 130:1871–1882Google Scholar
  24. 24.
    Aruwa CE, Olatope SOA (2015) Characterization of Bacillus species from convenience foods with conventional and API kit method: a comparative analysis. J Appl Life Sci Int 3(1):42–48CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. 25.
    Gevers D, Huys G, Swings J (2001) Applicability of rep-PCR fingerprinting for identification of Lactobacillus species. FEMS Microbiol Lett 205:31–36CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. 26.
    Chen W, Kuo T (1993) A simple and rapid method for the preparation of Gram-negative bacterial genomic DNA. Nucleic Acids Res 21:2260CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. 27.
    Heipieper H, De Bont J (1994) Adaptation of Pseudomonas putida S12 to ethanol and toluene at the level of fatty acid composition of membranes. Appl Environ Microbiol 60(4440):4444Google Scholar
  28. 28.
    Papaparaskevas D, Christakopoulos P, Kekos D et al (1992) Optimizing production of extracellular lipase from Rhodotorula glutinis. Biotechnol Lett 14(5):397–402CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. 29.
    Latorre JD, Hernandez-Velasco X, Wolfenden RE, Vicente JL, Wolfenden AD, Menconi A, Bielke LR, Hargis BM, Tellez G (2016) Evaluation and selection of Bacillus species based on enzyme production, antimicrobial activity, and biofilm synthesis as direct-fed microbial candidates for poultry. Front Vet Sci 3:95CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. 30.
    Nisola GM, Cho ES, Shon HK et al (2009) Cell immobilized FOG trap system for fat, oil, and grease removal from restaurant wastewater. J Environ Eng 135(9):876–884CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. 31.
    Montefrio MJ, Xinwen T, Obbard JP (2010) Recovery and pre-treatment of fats, oil and grease interceptors for biodiesel production. Appl Energy 87:3155–3161CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. 32.
    Williams JB, Clarkson C, Mant C, Drinkwater A, May E (2012) Fat, oil and grease deposits in sewers: characterisation of deposits and formation mechanisms. Water Res 46(19):6319–6328CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. 33.
    Tano-Debrah K, Fukuyama S, Otonari N, Taniguchi F, Ogura M (1999) An inoculum for the aerobic treatment of wastewaters with high concentrations of fats and oils. Bioresour Technol 69(2):133–139CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. 34.
    Tzirita M, Papanikolaou S, Chatzifragkou A, Quilty B (2018) Waste fat biodegradation and biomodification by Yarrowia lipolytica and a bacterial consortium composed of Bacillus spp. and Pseudomonas putida. Eng Life Sci 18:932–942. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. 35.
    Whitton R, Ometto F, Pidou M, Jarvis P, Villa R, Jefferson B (2015) Microalgae for municipal wastewater nutrient remediation: mechanisms, reactors and outlook for tertiary treatment. Environ Technol Rev 4(1):133–148CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. 36.
    Salome C, Bonvallot J (1994) Fat degradation with bioadditive. Possibilities for use in sewerage system. Tech Sci Methods 85(9):421–429Google Scholar
  37. 37.
    Saravia V, Murro D, Ferrari MD, Lareo C, Loperena L (2004) Butter oil as model substrate to evaluate milk fat degrading microorganisms used in bioaugmentation strategies. Fresenius Environ Bull 13(4):353–355Google Scholar
  38. 38.
    Thompson IP, van der Gast CJ, Ciric L, Singer AC (2005) Bioaugmentation for bioremediation: the challenge of strain selection. Environ Microbiol 7(7):909–915CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. 39.
    El Fantroussi S, Agathos SN (2005) Is bioaugmentation a feasible strategy for pollutant removal and site remediation? Curr Opin Microbiol 8(3):268–275CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. 40.
    Huban CM, Plowman RD (1997) Bioaugmentation: put microbes to work. Chem Eng 104:74–82Google Scholar
  41. 41.
    Prasad MP, Manjunath K (2011) Comparative study on biodegradation of lipid-rich wastewater using lipase producing bacterial species. Indian J Biotechnol 10:121–124Google Scholar
  42. 42.
    Gordon RE, Haynes WC, Pang CHN, Smith NR (1973) The genus Bacillus. U.S. Dep. Agric. Agric. Handb no. 427Google Scholar
  43. 43.
    Liu BR, Jia GM, Chen J, Wang G (2006) A review of methods for studying microbial diversity in soils. Pedosphere 16(1):18–24CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  44. 44.
    Berber I (2004) Characterization of Bacillus species by numerical analysis of their SDS-PAGE protein profiles. J Cell Mol Biol 3:33–37Google Scholar
  45. 45.
    Ercolini D, Moschetti G, Blaiotta G, Coppola S (2001) The potential of a polyphasic PCR-DGGE approach in evaluating microbial diversity of natural whey cultures for water-buffalo mozzarella cheese production: bias of culture-dependent and culture-independent analyses. Syst Appl Microbiol 24(4):610–617CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  46. 46.
    Coeuret V, Dubernet S, Bernardeau M, Gueguen M, Vernoux JP (2003) Isolation, characterisation and identification of lactobacilli focusing mainly on cheeses and other dairy products. Lait 83(4):269–306CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  47. 47.
    Reva O, Sorokulova I, Smirnov V (2001) Simplified technique for identification of the aerobic spore-forming bacteria by phenotype. Int J Syst Evol Microbiol 51(4):1361CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  48. 48.
    Goto K, Omura T, Hara Y, Sadaie Y (2000) Application of the partial 16S rDNA sequence as an index for rapid identification of species in the genus Bacillus. J Gen Appl Microbiol 46(1):1–8CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  49. 49.
    Boyd MA, Antonio MAD, Hillier SL (2005) Comparison of API 50 CH strips to whole-chromosomal DNA probes for identification of Lactobacillus species. J Clin Microbiol 43(10):5309–5311CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  50. 50.
    Safronova LA, Zelena LB, Klochko VV, Reva ON (2012) Does the applicability of Bacillus strains in probiotics rely upon their taxonomy? Can J Microbiol 58:212–219CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  51. 51.
    Tzirita M, Quilty B (2012) An investigation of mixed microbial populations for use in the treatment of waste fats, oils and greases (FOGs). In: Microbes in applied research: current advances and challenges; Edited by Mendez-Vilas. World Scientific Publishing Co, Pte. Ltd., pp 18–22. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  52. 52.
    Larsen N, Thorsen L, Kpikpi E, Stuer-Lauridsen B, Cantor MD, Nielsen B, Brockmann E, Derkx P, Jespersen L (2014) Characterization of Bacillus spp. strains for use as probiotic additives in pig feed. Appl Microbiol Biotechnol 98:1105–1118CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  53. 53.
    Deb P, Talukdar SA, Mohsina K, Sarker PK, Sayem SA (2013) Production and partial characterization of extracellular amylase enzyme from Bacillus amyloliquefaciens P-001. SpringerPlus 2(1):1CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  54. 54.
    Sharma R, Soni S, Vohra R (2002) Production of extracellular alkaline lipase from a Bacillus sp. RSJ 1 and its application in ester hydrolysis. Indian J Microbiol 42(1):49–54Google Scholar
  55. 55.
    Snellman EA, Colwell RR (2004) Acinetobacter lipases: molecular biology, biochemical properties and biotechnological potential. J Ind Microbiol Biotechnol 31(9):391–400CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  56. 56.
    Lee LP, Karbul HM, Citartan M, Gopinath SC, Lakshmipriya T, Tang TH (2015) Lipase-secreting Bacillus species in an oil-contaminated habitat: promising strains to alleviate oil pollution. Biomed Res Int:9, 820575. Google Scholar
  57. 57.
    Gupta R, Gupta N, Rathi P (2004) Bacterial lipases: an overview of production, purification and biochemical properties. Appl Microbiol Biotechnol 64(6):763–781CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  58. 58.
    Hasanuzzaman M, Umadhay-Briones KM, Zsiros SM (2004) Isolation, identification, and characterization of a novel, oil-degrading bacterium, Pseudomonas aeruginosa T1. Curr Microbiol 49(2):108–114CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  59. 59.
    Sztajer H, Zboińska E (1988) Microbial lipases in biotechnology. Acta Biotechnol 8(2):169–175CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  60. 60.
    Thomson CA, Delaquis PJ, Mazza G (1999) Detection and measurement of microbial lipase activity: a review. Crit Rev Food Sci Nutr 39(2):165–187CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  61. 61.
    Metzger JO, Bornscheuer U (2006) Lipids as renewable resources: current state of chemical and biotechnological conversion and diversification. Appl Microbiol Biotechnol 71:13–22CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  62. 62.
    Vasiliadou IA, Bellou S, Daskalaki A, Tomaszewska-Hetman L, Chatzikotoula C, Kompoti B, Papanikolaou S, Vayenas D, Pavlou S, Aggelis G (2018) Biomodification of fats and oils and scenarios of adding value on renewable fatty materials through microbial fermentations: modelling and trials with Yarrowia lipolytica. J Clean Prod 200:1111–1129CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  63. 63.
    Papanikolaou S, Aggelis G (2019) Sources of microbial oils with emphasis to Mortierella (Umbelopsis) isabellina fungus. World J Microbiol Biotechnol 35(4):63CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  64. 64.
    Papanikolaou S, Chevalot I, Komaitis M, Aggelis G, Marc I (2001) Kinetic profile of the cellular lipid composition in an oleaginous Yarrowia lipolytica capable of producing a cocoa-butter substitute from industrial fats. Antonie Van Leeuwenhoek 80:215–224CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  65. 65.
    Papanikolaou S, Aggelis G (2011) Lipids of oleaginous yeasts. Part I: biochemistry of single cell oil production. Eur J Lipid Sci Technol 113:1031–1051CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  66. 66.
    Aggelis G, Papadiotis G, Komaitis M (1997) Microbial fatty acid specificity. Folia Microbiol 42:117–120CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  67. 67.
    Fickers P, Benetti PH, Waché Y, Marty A, Mauersberger S, Smit MS, Nicaud JM (2005) Hydrophobic substrate utilisation by the yeast Yarrowia lipolytica, and its potential applications. FEMS Yeast Res 5:527–543CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  68. 68.
    Smith J, Haas M (1992) Lipolytic microorganisms. In: Vanderzant C, Splittstoesser DF (eds) Compendium of methods for the microbiological examination of foods, 3rd edn. American Health Public Association, Washington, pp 183–191Google Scholar
  69. 69.
    Chen L, Coolbear T, Daniel RM (2004) Characteristics of proteinases and lipases produced by seven Bacillus sp. isolated from milk powder production lines. Int Dairy J 14(6):495–504CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  70. 70.
    Eggert T, van Pouderoyen G, Pencreac’h G, Douchet I, Verger R, Dijkstra BW et al (2002) Biochemical properties and three-dimensional structures of two extracellular lipolytic enzymes from Bacillus subtilis. Colloids Surf B: Biointerfaces 26(1-2):37–46CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  71. 71.
    Song X, Qi X, Hao B, Qu Y (2008) Studies of substrate specificities of lipases from different sources. Eur J Lipid Sci Technol 110(12):1095–1101CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  72. 72.
    Mohan TS, Palavesam A, Immanvel G (2008) Isolation and characterization of lipase-producing Bacillus strains from oil mill waste. Afr J Biotechnol 7(15):2728–2735Google Scholar
  73. 73.
    Affandi IE, Suratman NH, Abdullah S, Ahmad WA, Zakaria ZA (2014) Degradation of oil and grease from high-strength industrial effluents using locally isolated aerobic biosurfactant-producing bacteria. Int Biodeterior Biodegradation 95:33–40CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  74. 74.
    Schallmey M, Singh A, Ward OP (2004) Developments in the use of Bacillus species for industrial production. Can J Microbiol 50(1):1–7CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  75. 75.
    Mamo J, Assefa F (2018) The role of microbial aspartic protease enzyme in food and beverage industries. J Food Qual. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  76. 76.
    Si JB, Jang EJ, Charalampopoulos D, Wee YJ (2018) Purification and characterization of microbial protease produced extracellularly from Bacillus subtilis FBL-1. Biotechnol Bioprocess Eng 23(2):176–182CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  77. 77.
    Pant G, Prakash A, Pavani JV, Bera S, Deviram GV, Kumar A, Panchpuri M, Prasuna RG (2015) Production, optimization and partial purification of protease from Bacillus subtilis. J Taibah Univ Sci 9(1):50–55CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  78. 78.
    Gopinath SC, Anbu P, Arshad MK, Lakshmipriya T, Voon CH, Hashim U (2017) Chinni SV (2017) Biotechnological processes in microbial amylase production. Biomed Res Int. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  79. 79.
    Abd-Elhalem BT, El-Sawy M, Gamal RF, Abou-Taleb KA (2015) Production of amylases from Bacillus amyloliquefaciens under submerged fermentation using some agro-industrial by-products. Ann Agric Sci 60(2):193–202CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  80. 80.
    Ayansina AD, Adelaja AO, Mohammed SS (2017) Characterization of amylase from some Aspergillus and Bacillus species associated with cassava waste peels. Adv Microbiol 7(04):280CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  81. 81.
    Gupta R, Gigras P, Mohapatra H, Goswami VK, Chauhan B (2003) Microbial α-amylases: a biotechnological perspective. Process Biochem 38(11):1599–1616CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  82. 82.
    Tzirita M, Papanikolaou S, Quilty B (2018) Degradation of fat using bioaugmentation: optimization of a bioaugmentation product. LAP LAMPERT Academic Publishing, p 69. isbn:978-3-659-96479-9Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag GmbH Germany, part of Springer Nature 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Microbial Ecology Group, School of BiotechnologyDublin City UniversityDublinIreland
  2. 2.Department of Food Science and Human NutritionAgricultural University of AthensAthensGreece
  3. 3.National Institute for Cellular Biotechnology (NICB)Dublin City UniversityDublinIreland

Personalised recommendations