Diversity of Bacterial Structure Community in the Compacted Sewage Sludge as a Barrier for Tailings

  • Qing ZhangEmail author
  • Huyuan Zhang
  • Jinfang Wang
Conference paper
Part of the Environmental Science and Engineering book series (ESE)


Compacted sewage sludge (CSS), also known as reducing barrier, can be used as barrier for tailings of mines. CSS is an effective means to isolate and eliminate acid mine drainage (AMD) produced by tailings. We studied the dynamics of bacterial community structure diversity over 75 days in the CSS. Samples were taken from two seepage conditions: pH 2.1 sulfuric acid water (SA) and the synthetic AMD. Deionized water (DW) was used as control. We used PCR-DGGE technique, which is denaturing gradient gel electrophoresis. The results indicated that Clostridiales, Bacillaceae, and Carnobacteriaceae dominated in the CSS samples with different relative abundance ranged from 46.26% to 10.25% at the start point (SP) of seepage, the 41st day (T1) of seepage or at the 75th day (T2) of seepage, under different seepage conditions (DW, SA and AMD). By redundancy analysis on the influences between environmental factors and microbial-community, microbial- mechanisms differed.


Compacted sewage sludge Microbial community structure diversity PCR- Denaturing Gradient Gel Electrophoresis (PCR-DGGE) Acid mine drainage (AMD) Heavy metals potential mobility 



The research was supported by the Doctoral Program of Higher Education of China (No. 20110211110025) and the Natural Science Foundation of Gansu Provincial Science & Technology Planning Project, China (No.18JR3RA222).


  1. 1.
    Wang B, Zhang H, Fan Z et al (2010) Compacted sewage sludge as a barrier for tailing impoundment. Envir Earth Sci 61:931–937CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Zhang H, Zhang Q, Yang B, et al (2014) Compacted sewage sludge as a barrier for tailings: the heavy metal speciation and total organic carbon content in the compacted sludge specimen. Plos One 9(6):e100932CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Lottermoser B (2007) Mine wastes-characterization, treatment, environmental impacts, 2nd Edition, Springer Heidelberg, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Vera M, Schippers A, Sand W (2013) Progress in bioleaching: fundamentals and mechanisms of bacterial metal sulfide oxidation-part A. Appl Microb Biotech 97:7529–7541CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Paul D, Pandey G, Pandey J et al (2005) Accessing microbial diversity for bioremediation and environmental restoration. Trends Biotech 23:135–142CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Rodrigues V, Torres T, Ottoboni L (2014) Bacterial diversity assessment in soil of an active Brazilian copper mine using high-throughput sequencing of 16S rDNA amplicons. Antonie Van Leeuwenhoek Inter. J Gen Mole Microb 106:879–890Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    Sauvain L (2014) Bacterial communities in trace metal contaminated lake sediments are dominated by endospore-forming bacteria. Aquatic Sci 76:S33–S46CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Seiler C, Berendonk T (2012). Heavy metal driven co-selection of antibiotic resistance in soil and water bodies impacted by agriculture and aquaculture. Frontiers Microb 3(69):399Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    Remenar M (2014) Actinobacteria occurrence and their metabolic characteristics in the nickel-contaminated soil sample. Biologia 69:1453–1463CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Luo J, Bai Y, Liang J, et al (2014) Metagenomic approach reveals variation of microbes with arsenic and antimony metabolism genes from highly contaminated soil. Plos One 9(10):e108185CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Islam E, Paul D, Sar P (2014) Microbial diversity in uranium deposits from Jaduguda and Bagjata uranium mines, India as revealed by Clone Library and Denaturing Gradient Gel Electrophoresis analyses. Geomicrob J 31: 862–874CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Zhan J, Sun Q (2011) Diversity of free-living nitrogen-fixing microorganisms in wastelands of copper mine tailings during the process of natural ecological restoration. J Environ. Sci.-China 23: 476–487CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Ferrari B, Winsley T, Ji M, et al (2014) Insights into the distribution and abundance of the ubiquitous candidatus saccharibacteria phylum following tag pyrosequencing. Sci. Rep. 4(2):3957Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    Chen Y (2014) Biogeochemical processes governing natural pyrite oxidation and release of acid metalliferous drainage. Environ Sci Tech 48: 5537–5545CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Liu J (2014) Correlating microbial diversity patterns with geochemistry in an extreme and heterogeneous environment of mine tailings. App Environ Microbiol 80: 3677–3686CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Kuang J (2013) Contemporary environmental variation determines microbial diversity patterns in acid mine drainage. ISME J 7:1038–1050CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Chen L (2013) Shifts in microbial community composition and function in the acidification of a lead/zinc mine tailings. Environ Microbiol 15: 2431–2444CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Nature Singapore Pte Ltd. 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.School of Geography and Environmental EngineeringLanzhou City UniversityLanzhouChina
  2. 2.Key Laboratory of Mechanics on Disaster and Environment in Western ChinaLanzhou University, Ministry of EducationLanzhouChina

Personalised recommendations