Please wait a minute...
Frontiers of Environmental Science & Engineering

ISSN 2095-2201

ISSN 2095-221X(Online)

CN 10-1013/X

Postal Subscription Code 80-973

2018 Impact Factor: 3.883

Front. Environ. Sci. Eng.    2022, Vol. 16 Issue (4) : 47    https://doi.org/10.1007/s11783-021-1481-8
RESEARCH ARTICLE
PICRUSt2 functionally predicts organic compounds degradation and sulfate reduction pathways in an acidogenic bioreactor
Jun Li1, Aimin Li1(), Yan Li2, Minhui Cai1, Gan Luo1, Yaping Wu1, Yechao Tian1, Liqun Xing1, Quanxing Zhang1
1. State Key Laboratory of Pollution Control and Resources Reuse, School of the Environment, Nanjing University, Nanjing 210023, China
2. Jiangsu Key Laboratory of Chemical Pollution Control and Resources Reuse, School of Environmental and Biological Engineering, Nanjing University of Science and Technology, Nanjing 210094, China
 Download: PDF(4147 KB)   HTML
 Export: BibTeX | EndNote | Reference Manager | ProCite | RefWorks
Abstract

• Over 70% reduction of sulfate was achieved for sulfate less than 12000 mg/L.

• The decrease of genes encoding (EC: 1.3.8.1) induced the accumulation of VFAs.

• The sulfate reduction genes were primary carried by genus Desulfovibrio.

• Sulfate favored assimilatory, but inhibited dissimilatory sulfate reduction process.

For comprehensive insights into the influences of sulfate on performance, microbial community and metabolic pathways in the acidification phase of a two-phase anaerobic system, a laboratory-scale acidogenic bioreactor was continuously operated to treat wastewater with elevated sulfate concentrations from 2000 to 14000 mg/L. The results showed that the acidogenic bioreactor could achieve sulfate reduction efficiency of greater than 70% for influent sulfate content less than 12000 mg/L. Increased sulfate induced the accumulation of volatile fatty acids (VFAs), especially propionate and butyrate, which was the primary negative effects to system performance under the high-sulfate environment. High-throughput sequencing coupled with PICRUSt2 uncovered that the accumulation of VFAs was triggered by the decreasing of genes encoding short-chain acyl-CoA dehydrogenase (EC: 1.3.8.1), regulating the transformation of propanoyl-CoA to propenoyl-CoA and butanoyl-CoA to crotonyl-CoA of propionate and butyrate oxidation pathways, which made these two process hardly proceed. Besides, genes encoding (EC: 1.3.8.1) were mainly carried by order Clostridiales. Desulfovibrio was the most abundant sulfate-reducing bacteria and identified as the primary host of dissimilatory sulfate reduction functional genes. Functional analysis indicated the dissimilatory sulfate reduction process predominated under a low sulfate environment, but was not favored under the circumstance of high-sulfate. With the increase of sulfate, the assimilatory sulfate reduction process finally overwhelmed dissimilatory as the dominant sulfate reduction pathway in acidogenic bioreactor.

Keywords Acidogenic phase reactor      High-sulfate wastewater      Sulfate reduction      Acidogenic fermentation      PICRUSt2     
Corresponding Author(s): Aimin Li   
Issue Date: 25 August 2021
 Cite this article:   
Jun Li,Aimin Li,Yan Li, et al. PICRUSt2 functionally predicts organic compounds degradation and sulfate reduction pathways in an acidogenic bioreactor[J]. Front. Environ. Sci. Eng., 2022, 16(4): 47.
 URL:  
https://academic.hep.com.cn/fese/EN/10.1007/s11783-021-1481-8
https://academic.hep.com.cn/fese/EN/Y2022/V16/I4/47
Period Stage Duration
(d)
Influent COD
(mg/L)
Influent SO42-
(mg/L)
HRT COD/SO42-
Start-up period I 1–23 1000 0 20 3
II 24–43 2000 500 20
III 44–57 3000 1000 15
IV 57–72 4000 1500 12
V 73–88 5000 2000 8
Sulfate effect period I 1–36 6000 2000 20 3
II 37–46 9000 3000
III 47–62 12000 4000
IV 63–83 15000 5000
V 84–93 18000 6000
VI 94–102 21000 7000
VII 103–136 24000 8000
VIII 137–147 27000 9000
IX 148–168 30000 10000
X 169–195 33000 11000
XI 196–213 36000 12000
XII 214–231 39000 13000
XIII 232–245 42000 14000
Tab.1  Operational parameters of the EGSB reactor
Fig.1  Performance of the acidogenic reactor. (a) Sulfate reduction. (b) COD removal efficiency. (c) Dissolved and free sulfide concentration. (d) Total VFA and each individual composition.
Fig.2  Microbial community composition. (a) The phylum level and (b) genus level for bacteria. S1, S2 and S3 corresponded to the samples with sulfate contents of 4000, 9000, and 12000 mg/L, respectively.
Fig.3  The phylogenetic tree was made by Neighbor-Joining method. Bootstrap replications of 1,000 were applied, and only bootstrap values greater than 50% are shown. The inner circle was constructed using the top 100 OTUs and colored by the phylum level. The middle of the figure includes six circles that display the species, family, order, class, phylum, and kingdom of each OTU. The outer circle shows the relative abundance of the OTUs.
Fig.4  The acidogenic fermentation pathways and associated gene abundances. (a) Hydrolysis and pyruvate metabolism. (b) The propionate and butyrate oxidation pathways and the homoacetogenesis pathway.
Fig.5  The sulfate reduction pathways and associated gene abundances. (a) The dissimilatory and assimilatory sulfate reduction pathways. (b) The absolute abundance of dsrA identified using qPCR.
Fig.6  The hosts of each metabolism pathway identified by PICRUSt2. (a) Acidogenic fermentation and (b) sulfate reduction.
1 Q An, J R Cheng, Y T Wang, M J Zhu (2020). Performance and energy recovery of single and two stage biogas production from paper sludge: Clostridium thermocellum augmentation and microbial community analysis. Renewable Energy, 148: 214–222
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.renene.2019.11.142
2 J I P Baquiran, M A L Nada, N Posadas, D P Manogan, P C Cabaitan, C Conaco (2020). Population structure and microbial community diversity of two common tetillid sponges in a tropical reef lagoon. PeerJ, 8: e9017
https://doi.org/10.7717/peerj.9017 pmid: 32351788
3 H H Caicedo, D A Hashimoto, J C Caicedo, A Pentland, G P Pisano (2020). Overcoming barriers to early disease intervention. Nature Biotechnology, 38(6): 669–673
https://doi.org/10.1038/s41587-020-0550-z pmid: 32444852
4 B R Dhar, J H Park, H D Park, H S Lee (2019). Hydrogen-based syntrophy in an electrically conductive biofilm anode. Chemical Engineering Journal, 359: 208–216
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cej.2018.11.138
5 S Esquivel-Elizondo, P Parameswaran, A G Delgado, J Maldonado, B E Rittmann, R Krajmalnik-Brown (2016). Archaea and bacteria acclimate to high total ammonia in a methanogenic reactor treating swine waste. Archaea (Vancouver, B.C.), 2016: 4089684
https://doi.org/10.1155/2016/4089684 pmid: 27725793
6 C Gil-Garcia, L A G de Godoi, L T Fuess, M H R Z Damianovic (2018). Performance improvement of a thermophilic sulfate-reducing bioreactor under acidogenic conditions: Effects of diversified operating strategies. Journal of Environmental Management, 207: 303–312
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jenvman.2017.11.043 pmid: 29179118
7 G Han, S G Shin, K Cho, J Lee, W Kim, S Hwang (2019). Temporal variation in bacterial and methanogenic communities of three full-scale anaerobic digesters treating swine wastewater. Environmental Science and Pollution Research International, 26(2): 1217–1226
https://doi.org/10.1007/s11356-017-1103-y pmid: 29327188
8 H M Jang, J H Ha, J M Park, M S Kim, S G Sommer (2015). Comprehensive microbial analysis of combined mesophilic anaerobic-thermophilic aerobic process treating high-strength food wastewater. Water Research, 73: 291–303
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.watres.2015.01.038 pmid: 25689817
9 S K Khanal, J C Huang (2005). Effect of high influent sulfate on anaerobic wastewater treatment. Water Environment Research: A Research Publication of the Water Environment Federation, 77(7): 3037–3046
https://doi.org/10.2175/106143005X73929 pmid: 16381151
10 M G I Langille, J Zaneveld, J G Caporaso, D McDonald, D Knights, J A Reyes, J C Clemente, D E Burkepile, R L Vega Thurber, R Knight, R G Beiko, C Huttenhower (2013). Predictive functional profiling of microbial communities using 16S rRNA marker gene sequences. Nature Biotechnology, 31: 814–821
https://doi.org/10.1038/nbt.2676 pmid: 23975157
11 S H Lee, J H Park, H J Kang, Y H Lee, T J Lee, H D Park (2013). Distribution and abundance of Spirochaetes in full-scale anaerobic digesters. Bioresource Technology, 145: 25–32
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.biortech.2013.02.070 pmid: 23562175
12 B Li, Y Yang, L Ma, F Ju, F Guo, J M Tiedje, T Zhang (2015). Metagenomic and network analysis reveal wide distribution and co-occurrence of environmental antibiotic resistance genes. The ISME Journal, 9(11): 2490–2502
https://doi.org/10.1038/ismej.2015.59 pmid: 25918831
13 J Li, M H Cai, Y Miao, G Luo, W T Li, Y Li, A M Li (2019a). Bacterial community structure and predicted function in an acidogenic sulfate-reducing reactor: Effect of organic carbon to sulfate ratios. Bioresource Technology, 293: 122020
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.biortech.2019.122020 pmid: 31470231
14 J Li, W T Li, G Luo, Y Li, A M Li (2019b). Effect of nitrobenzene on the performance and bacterial community in an expanded granular sludge bed reactor treating high-sulfate organic wastewater. Frontiers of Environmental Science & Engineering, 13(1): 6
https://doi.org/10.1007/s11783-019-1090-y
15 J Li, Y Liang, Y Miao, D Wang, S Jia, C H Liu (2020). Metagenomic insights into aniline effects on microbial community and biological sulfate reduction pathways during anaerobic treatment of high-sulfate wastewater. Science of the Total Environment, 742: 140537
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.scitotenv.2020.140537 pmid: 32623173
16 R Li, M Zhou, S He, T Pan, J Liu, J Zhu (2021). Deciphering the effect of sodium dodecylbenzene sulfonate on up-flow anaerobic sludge blanket treatment of synthetic sulfate-containing wastewater. Frontiers of Environmental Science & Engineering, 15: 91
17 A M Linz, S He, S L R Stevens, K Anantharaman, R R Rohwer, R R Malmstrom, S Bertilsson, K D McMahon (2018). Freshwater carbon and nutrient cycles revealed through reconstructed population genomes. PeerJ, 6: e6075
https://doi.org/10.7717/peerj.6075 pmid: 30581671
18 G Luo, D Karakashev, L Xie, Q Zhou, I Angelidaki (2011). Long-term effect of inoculum pretreatment on fermentative hydrogen production by repeated batch cultivations: Homoacetogenesis and methanogenesis as competitors to hydrogen production. Biotechnology and Bioengineering, 108(8): 1816–1827
https://doi.org/10.1002/bit.23122 pmid: 21381001
19 L Luo, G Kaur, J W C Wong (2019). A mini-review on the metabolic pathways of food waste two-phase anaerobic digestion system. Waste management & research : the journal of the International Solid Wastes and Public Cleansing Association, ISWA, 37(4): 333–346
https://doi.org/10.1177/0734242X18819954 pmid: 30696377
20 L Ma, Y Xia, B Li, Y Yang, L G Li, J M Tiedje, T Zhang (2016). Metagenomic assembly reveals hosts of antibiotic resistance genes and the shared resistome in pig, chicken, and human feces. Environmental Science & Technology, 50(1): 420–427
https://doi.org/10.1021/acs.est.5b03522 pmid: 26650334
21 N Müller, P Worm, B Schink, A J M Stams, C M Plugge (2010). Syntrophic butyrate and propionate oxidation processes: from genomes to reaction mechanisms. Environmental Microbiology Reports, 2(4): 489–499
https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1758-2229.2010.00147.x pmid: 23766220
22 J Ozkan, M Willcox, B Wemheuer, G Wilcsek, M Coroneo, T Thomas (2019). Biogeography of the human ocular microbiota. The Ocular Surface, 17(1): 111–118
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jtos.2018.11.005 pmid: 30445178
23 N Q Ren, H Chua, S Y Chan, Y F Tsang, N Sin (2007). Effects of COD/SO42‒ ratios on an acidogenic sulfate-reducing reactor. Industrial & Engineering Chemistry Research, 46(6): 1661–1666
https://doi.org/10.1021/ie060589w
24 L Shan, Z Zhang, Y Yu, J J Ambuchi, Y Feng (2017). Performance of CSTR-EGSB-SBR system for treating sulfate-rich cellulosic ethanol wastewater and microbial community analysis. Environmental Science and Pollution Research International, 24(16): 14387–14395
https://doi.org/10.1007/s11356-017-9022-5 pmid: 28432623
25 A J M Stams, C M Plugge, F A M de Bok, B H G W van Houten, P Lens, H Dijkman, J Weijma (2005). Metabolic interactions in methanogenic and sulfate-reducing bioreactors. Water science and technology: A journal of the International Association on Water Pollution Research, 52(1–2): 13–20
https://doi.org/10.2166/wst.2005.0493 pmid: 16187442
26 P Wang, Z Qiao, X Li, Y Su, B Xie (2020). Functional characteristic of microbial communities in large-scale biotreatment systems of food waste. Science of the Total Environment, 746: 141086
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.scitotenv.2020.141086 pmid: 32750579
27 C H Wei, W X Wang, Z Y Deng, C F Wu (2007). Characteristics of high-sulfate wastewater treatment by two-phase anaerobic digestion process with Jet-loop anaerobic fluidized bed. Journal of Environmental Sciences (China), 19(3): 264–270
https://doi.org/10.1016/S1001-0742(07)60043-6 pmid: 17918585
28 Y Xu, H Gong, X Dai (2021). High-solid anaerobic digestion of sewage sludge: Achievements and perspectives. Frontiers of Environmental Science & Engineering, 15(4):71
29 S Yang, J Li, Z Zheng, Z Meng (2009). Characterization of Spartina alterniflora as feedstock for anaerobic digestion. Biomass and Bioenergy, 33(4): 597–602
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.biombioe.2008.09.007
30 Y Yuan, C Chen, B Liang, C Huang, Y Zhao, X Xu, W Tan, X Zhou, S Gao, D Sun, D Lee, J Zhou, A Wang (2014). Fine-tuning key parameters of an integrated reactor system for the simultaneous removal of COD, sulfate and ammonium and elemental sulfur reclamation. Journal of Hazardous Materials, 269: 56–67
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jhazmat.2013.12.014 pmid: 24373982
31 X Zhang, L Zhang, L Zhang, Z Ji, Y Shao, H Zhou, Y Bao, Y Qu, L Liu (2019). Comparison of rhizosphere bacterial communities of reed and Suaeda in Shuangtaizi River Estuary, Northeast China. Marine Pollution Bulletin, 140: 171–178
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.marpolbul.2019.01.041 pmid: 30803632
32 Z Y Zhang, M W Ali, H S A Saqib, S X Liu, X Yang, Q Li, H Zhang (2020). A shift pattern of bacterial communities across the life stages of the citrus red mite, Panonychus citri. Frontiers in Microbiology, 11
https://doi.org/10.3389/fmicb.2020.01620 pmid: 32754145
[1] FSE-21069-OF-LJ_suppl_1 Download
[1] Bin Liang, Deyong Kong, Mengyuan Qi, Hui Yun, Zhiling Li, Ke Shi, E Chen, Alisa S. Vangnai, Aijie Wang. Anaerobic biodegradation of trimethoprim with sulfate as an electron acceptor[J]. Front. Environ. Sci. Eng., 2019, 13(6): 84-.
[2] Jun Li, Wentao Li, Gan Luo, Yan Li, Aimin Li. Effect of nitrobenzene on the performance and bacterial community in an expanded granular sludge bed reactor treating high-sulfate organic wastewater[J]. Front. Environ. Sci. Eng., 2019, 13(1): 6-.
[3] Yi Chen, Shilong He, Mengmeng Zhou, Tingting Pan, Yujia Xu, Yingxin Gao, Hengkang Wang. Feasibility assessment of up-flow anaerobic sludge blanket treatment of sulfamethoxazole pharmaceutical wastewater[J]. Front. Environ. Sci. Eng., 2018, 12(5): 13-.
[4] Lin Lin, Ying-yu Li, Xiao-yan Li. Acidogenic sludge fermentation to recover soluble organics as the carbon source for denitrification in wastewater treatment: Comparison of sludge types[J]. Front. Environ. Sci. Eng., 2018, 12(4): 3-.
Viewed
Full text


Abstract

Cited

  Shared   
  Discussed