Login to MyKarger

New to MyKarger? Click here to sign up.



Login with Facebook

Forgot your password?

Authors, Editors, Reviewers

For Manuscript Submission, Check or Review Login please go to Submission Websites List.

Submission Websites List

Institutional Login
(Shibboleth or Open Athens)

For the academic login, please select your country in the dropdown list. You will be redirected to verify your credentials.

Research Article

Archaeal and Bacterial Community Structure in an Anaerobic Digestion Reactor (Lagoon Type) Used for Biogas Production at a Pig Farm

Pampillón-González L.a · Ortiz-Cornejo N.L.b · Luna-Guido M.b · Dendooven L.b · Navarro-Noya Y.E.c

Author affiliations

aDivisión Académica de Ciencias Biológicas, Universidad Juárez Autónoma de Tabasco, Tabasco, and bLaboratory of Soil Ecology, ABACUS, Cinvestav, Mexico City, and cCátedras CONACYT - Universidad Autónoma de Tlaxcala, Tlaxcala, Mexico

Related Articles for ""

J Mol Microbiol Biotechnol 2017;27:306-317

Do you have an account?

Login Information





Contact Information












By signing up for MyKarger you will automatically participate in our year-End raffle.
If you Then Do Not wish To participate, please uncheck the following box.

Yes, I wish To participate In the year-End raffle And Get the chance To win some Of our most interesting books, And other attractive prizes.


I have read the Karger Terms and Conditions and agree.



Login Information





Contact Information












By signing up for MyKarger you will automatically participate in our year-End raffle.
If you Then Do Not wish To participate, please uncheck the following box.

Yes, I wish To participate In the year-End raffle And Get the chance To win some Of our most interesting books, And other attractive prizes.


I have read the Karger Terms and Conditions and agree.



To view the fulltext, please log in

To view the pdf, please log in

Buy

  • FullText & PDF
  • Unlimited re-access via MyKarger
  • Unrestricted printing, no saving restrictions for personal use
read more

CHF 38.00 *
EUR 35.00 *
USD 39.00 *

Select

KAB

Buy a Karger Article Bundle (KAB) and profit from a discount!

If you would like to redeem your KAB credit, please log in.


Save over 20% compared to the individual article price.
Learn more

Rent/Cloud

  • Rent for 48h to view
  • Buy Cloud Access for unlimited viewing via different devices
  • Synchronizing in the ReadCube Cloud
  • Printing and saving restrictions apply

Rental: USD 8.50
Cloud: USD 20.00


Select

Subscribe

  • Access to all articles of the subscribed year(s) guaranteed for 5 years
  • Unlimited re-access via Subscriber Login or MyKarger
  • Unrestricted printing, no saving restrictions for personal use
read more

Subcription rates


Select

* The final prices may differ from the prices shown due to specifics of VAT rules.

Article / Publication Details

First-Page Preview
Abstract of Research Article

Received: December 01, 2016
Accepted: July 03, 2017
Published online: November 30, 2017
Issue release date: Published online first

Number of Print Pages: 12
Number of Figures: 5
Number of Tables: 1

ISSN: 1464-1801 (Print)
eISSN: 1660-2412 (Online)

For additional information: https://www.karger.com/MMB

Abstract

Biogas production from animal waste is an economically viable way to reduce environmental pollution and produce valuable products, i.e., methane and a nutrient-rich organic waste product. An anaerobic digestion reactor for biogas production from pig waste was sampled at the entrance, middle (digestion chamber), and exit of a digester, while the bacterial and archaeal community structure was studied by 16S rRNA gene metagenomics. The number of bacterial operational taxonomic units (OTU)-97% was 3-7 times larger than that of archaeal ones. Bacteria and Archaea found in feces of animals (e.g., Clostridiaceae, Lachnospiraceae, Ruminococcaceae, Methanosarcina, Methanolobus, Methanosaeta, and Methanospirillum) dominated the entrance of the digester. The digestion chamber was dominated by anaerobic sugar-fermenting OP9 bacteria and the syntrophic bacteria Candidatus Cloacamonas (Waste Water of Evry 1; WWE1). The methanogens dominant in the digestion chamber were the acetoclastic Methanosaeta and the hydrogenothrophic Methanoculleus and Methanospirillum. Similar bacterial and archaeal groups that dominated in the middle of the digestion chamber were found in the waste that left the digester. Predicted functions associated with degradation of xenobiotic compounds were significantly different between the sampling locations. The microbial community found in an anaerobic digestion reactor loaded with pig manure contained microorganisms with biochemical capacities related to the 4 phases of methane production.

© 2017 S. Karger AG, Basel


References

  1. Ali Shah F, Mahmood Q, Maroof Shah M, Pervez A, Ahmad Asad S: Microbial ecology of anaerobic digesters: the key players of anaerobiosis. Sci World J 2014, DOI: 10.1155/2014/ 183752.
  2. American Public Health Association: Standard methods for the examination of water and wastewater. Washington, APHA/AWWA/WEF, 1998.
  3. Baker GC, Smith JJ, Cowan DA: Review and re-analysis of domain-specific 16S primers. J Microbiol Meth 2003;55:541-555.
  4. Bearson SMD, Allen HK, Bearson BL, Looft T, Brunelle BW, Kich JD, Tuggle CK, Bayles DO, Alt D, Levine UY, Stanton TB: Profiling the gastrointestinal microbiota in response to Salmonella: low versus high Salmonella shedding in the natural porcine host. Infect Genet Evol 2013;16:330-340.
  5. Caporaso JG, Bittinger K, Bushman FD, DeSantis TZ, Andersen GL, Knight R: PyNAST: a flexible tool for aligning sequences to a template alignment. Bioinformatics 2010a;26:266-267.
  6. Caporaso JG, Kuczynski J, Stomabaugh J, Bittinger K, Bushman FD, Costello EK, Fierer N, Pena AG, Goodrich JK, Gordon JI, Huttley GA, Kelley ST, Knights D, Koening JE, Ley RE, Lozupone CA, McDonald D, Muegge BD, Pirrung M, Reeder J, Sevinsky JR, Turbaugh PJ, Walters WA, Widmann J, Yatsunenko T, Zaneveld J, Knight R: QIIME allows analysis of high-throughput community sequencing data. Nat Methods 2010b;7:335-336.
  7. Chouari R, Le Paslier D, Daegelen P, Ginestet P, Weissenbach J, Sghir A: Novel predominant archaeal and bacterial groups revealed by molecular analysis of an anaerobic sludge digester. Environ Microbiol 2005;7:1104-1115.
  8. Conrad R: Contribution of hydrogen to methane production and control of hydrogen concentrations in methanogenic soils and sediments. FEMS Microbiol Ecol 1999;28:193-202.
  9. Dodsworth JA, Blainey PC, Murugapiran SK, Swingley WD, Ross CA, Tringe SG, Chain PSG, Scholz MB, Lo CC, Raymond J, Quake SR, Hedlund BP: Single-cell and metagenomic analyses indicate a fermentative and saccharolytic lifestyle for members of the OP9 lineage. Nat Comm 2013;4:1854.
  10. Dojka MA, Hugenholtz P, Haack SK, Pace NR: Microbial diversity in a hydrocarbon- and chlorinated-solvent-contaminated aquifer undergoing intrinsic bioremediation. Appl Environ Microbiol 1998;64:3869-3877.
    External Resources
  11. El-Mashad HM, Zeeman G, van Loon WK, Bot GP, Lettinga G: Effect of temperature and temperature fluctuation on thermophilic anaerobic digestion of cattle manure. Bioresour Technol 2004;95:191-201.
  12. Gevers D, Kugathasan S, Denson LA, Vazquez-Baeza Y, Van Treuren W, Ren BY, Schwager E, Knights D, Song SJ, Yassour M, Morgan XC, Kostic AD, Luo CW, Gonzalez A, McDonald D, Haberman Y, Walters T, Baker S, Rosh J, Stephens M, Heyman M, Markowitz J, Baldassano R, Griffiths A, Sylvester F, Mack D, Kim S, Crandall W, Hyams J, Huttenhower C, Knight R, Xavier RJ: The treatment-naive microbiome in new-onset Crohn's disease. Cell Host Microbe 2014;15:382-392.
  13. Grbic-Galic D: Anaerobic production and transformation of aromatic hydrocarbons and substitutes phenols by ferulic acid-degradin BESA-inhibited methanogenic consortia. FEMS Microbiol Ecol 1986;38:161-169.
  14. Hattori S, Kamagata Y, Hanada S, Shoun H: Thermacetogenium phaeum gen. nov., sp. nov., a strictly anaerobic, thermophilic, syntrophic acetate-oxidizing bacterium. Int J Syst Evol Microbiol 2000;50:1601-1609.
  15. Haugland RA, Varma M, Sivaganesan M, Kelty C, Peed L, Shanks OC: Evaluation of genetic markers from the 16S rRNA gene V2 region for use in quantitative detection of selected Bacteroidales species and human fecal waste by qPCR. Syst Appl Microbiol 2010;33:348-357.
  16. Hong PY, Yannarell AC, Dai QH, Ekizoglu M, Mackie RI: Monitoring the perturbation of soil and groundwater microbial communities due to pig production activities. Appl Environ Microbiol 2013;79:2620-2629.
  17. Karakashev D, Batstone DJ, Trably E, Angelidaki I: Acetate oxidation is the dominant methanogenic pathway from acetate in the absence of Methanosaetaceae. Appl Environ Microbiol 2006;72:5138-5141.
  18. Kim YM, Jang HM, Lee K, Chantrasakdakul P, Kim D, Park KY: Changes in bacterial and archaeal communities in anaerobic digesters treating different organic wastes. Chemosphere 2015;141:134-137.
  19. Kotsyurbenko OR, Chin KJ, Glagolev MV, Stubner S, Simankova MV, Nozhevnikova AN, Conrad R: Acetoclastic and hydrogenotrophic methane production and methanogenic populations in an acidic West-Siberian peat bog. Environ Microbiol 2004;6:1159-1173.
  20. Langille MG, Zaneveld J, Caporaso JG, McDonald D, Knights D, Reyes JA, Clemente JC, Burkepile DE, Vega Thurber RL, Knight R, Beiko RG, Huttenhower C: Predictive functional profiling of microbial communities using 16S rRNA marker gene sequences. Nat Biotechnol 2013;31:814-821.
  21. Lee J, Han G, Shin SG, Koo T, Cho K, Kim W, Hwang S: Seasonal monitoring of bacteria and archaea in a full-scale thermophilic anaerobic digester treating food waste-recycling wastewater: correlations between microbial community characteristics and process variables. Chem Eng J 2016;300:291-299.
  22. Limam RD, Chouari R, Mazéas L, Wu TD, Li T, Grossin-Debattista J, Guerquin-Kern JL, Saidi M, Landoulsi A, Sghir A, Bouchez T: Members of the uncultured bacterial candidate division WWE1 are implicated in anaerobic digestion of cellulose. Microbiol Open 2014;3:157-167.
  23. Lorenz H, Fischer P, Schumacher B, Adler P: Current EU-27 technical potential of organic waste streams for biogas and energy production. Waste Manag 2013;33:2434-2448.
  24. Manyi-Loh CE, Mamphweli SN, Meyer EL, Okoh AI, 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 Health 2013;10:4390-4417.
  25. McDonald D, Price MN, Goodrich J, Nawrocki EP, DeSantis TZ, Probst A, Andersen GL, Knight R, Hugenholtz P: An improved Greengenes taxonomy with explicit ranks for ecological and evolutionary analyses of bacteria and archaea. ISME J 2012;6:610-618.
  26. Moset V, Cerisuelo A, Ferrer P, Jimenez A, Bertolini E, Cambra-Lopez M: Microbial examination of anaerobic sludge adaptation to animal slurry. Environ Technol 2014;35:749-758.
  27. Navarro-Noya YE, Gómez-Acata S, Montoya-Ciriaco N, Rojas-Valdez A, Suárez-Arriaga MC, Valenzuela-Encinas C, Jiménez-Bueno N, Verhulst N, Govaerts B, Dendooven L: Relative impacts of tillage, residue management and crop-rotation on soil bacterial communities in a semi-arid agroecosystem. Soil Biol Biochem 2013a;65:86−95.
    External Resources
  28. Navarro-Noya YE, Suárez-Arriaga MC, Rojas-Valdes A, Montoya-Ciriaco NM, Gómez-Acata S, Fernández-Luqueño F, Dendooven L: Pyrosequencing analysis of the bacterial community in drinking water wells. Microb Ecol 2013b;66:19-29.
  29. Nkoa R: Agricultural benefits and environmental risks of soil fertilization with anaerobic digestates: a review. Agron Sustain Dev 2014;34:473-492.
  30. Parks DH, Tyson GW, Hugenholtz P, Beiko RG: STAMP: Statistical analysis of taxonomic and functional profiles. Bioinformatics 2014;30:3123-3124.
  31. Pelletier E, Kreimeyer A, Bocs S, Rouy Z, Gyapay G, Chouari R, Riviere D, Ganesan A, Daegelen P, Sghir A, Cohen GN, Medigue C, Weissenbach J, Le Paslier D: “Candidatus Cloacamonas acidaminovorans”: genome sequence reconstruction provides a first glimpse of a new bacterial division. J Bacteriol 2008;190:2572-2579.
  32. Pettersson B, Kodjo A, Ronaghi M, Uhlen M, Tonjum T: Phylogeny of the family Moraxellaceae by 16S rDNA sequence analysis, with special emphasis on differentiation of Moraxella species. Int J Syst Bacteriol 1998;48:75-89.
  33. Poulsen M, Schwab C, Jensen BB, Engberg RM, Spang A, Canibe N, Højberg O, Milinovich G, Fragner L, Schleper C, Weckwerth W, Lund P, Schramm A, Urich T: Methylotrophic methanogenic Thermoplasmata implicated in reduced methane emissions from bovine rumen. Nat Commun 2013;4:1428.
  34. SAS Institute: Statistic Guide for Personal Computers, Version 6.04. Cary, SAS Institute, 1989.
  35. Schlüter A, Bekel T, Diaz NN, Dondrup M, Eichenlaub R, Gartemann KH, Krahn I, Krause L, Krömeke H, Kruse O, Mussgnug JH, Neuweger H, Niehaus K, Pühler A, Runte KJ, Szczepanowski R, Tauch A, Tilker A, Viehöver P, Goesmann A: The metagenome of a biogas-producing microbial community of a production-scale biogas plant fermenter analysed by the 454-pyrosequencing technology. J Biotechnol 2008;136:77-90.
  36. Stolze Y, Zakrzewski M, Maus I, Eikmeyer F, Jaenicke S, Rottmann N, Siebner C, Pühler A, Schlüter A: Comparative metagenomics of biogas-producing microbial communities from production-scale biogas plants operating under wet or dry fermentation conditions. Biotechnol Biofuels 2015;8:14.
  37. Strik DPBTB, Domnanovich AM, Holubar P: A pH-based control of ammonia in biogas during anaerobic digestion of artificial pig manure and maize silage. Process Biochem 2006;41:1235-1238.
    External Resources
  38. Sun H, Wu S, Dong R: Monitoring volatile fatty acids and carbonate alkalinity in anaerobic digestion: titration methodologies. Chem Eng Technol 2016;39:599-610.
    External Resources
  39. Sundberg C, Al-Soud WA, Larsson M, Alm E, Yekta SS, Svensson BH, Sørensen SJ, Karlsson A: 454 pyrosequencing analyses of bacterial and archaeal richness in 21 full-scale biogas digesters. FEMS Microbiol Ecol 2013;85:612-626.
  40. Thygesen O, Sommer SG, Shin SG, Triolo JM: Residual biochemical methane potential (BMP) of concentrated digestate from full-scale biogas plants. Fuel 2014;132:44-46.
  41. Ufnar JA, Ufnar DF, Wang SY, Ellender RD: Development of a swine-specific fecal pollution marker based on host differences in methanogen mcrA genes. Appl Environ Microbiol 2007;73:5209-5217.
  42. United States Environmental Protection Agency: Environmental regulations and technology: control of pathogens and vector attraction in sewage biosolids (including domestic septage) - under 40 CFR part 503. Cincinnati, EPA, 1999.
  43. Walker M, Iyer K, Heaven S, Banks CJ: Ammonia removal in anaerobic digestion by biogas stripping: an evaluation of process alternatives using a first order rate model based on experimental findings. Chem Eng J 2011;178:138-145.
    External Resources
  44. Werner JJ, Knights D, Garcia ML, Scalfone NB, Smith S, Yarasheski K, Cummings TA, Beers AR, Knight R, Angenent LT: Bacterial community structures are unique and resilient in full-scale bioenergy systems. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA 2011;108:4158-4163.
  45. Xia Y, Masse DI, McAllister TA, Kong YH, Seviour R, Beaulieu C: Identity and diversity of archaeal communities during anaerobic co-digestion of chicken feathers and other animal wastes. Bioresource Technol 2014;110:111-119.
  46. Ziemer CJ: Broad diversity and newly cultured bacterial isolates from enrichment of pig feces on complex polysaccharides. Microb Ecol 2013;66:448-461.
  47. Zinder SH, Koch M: Non-aceticlastic methanogenesis from acetate: acetate oxidation by a thermophilic syntrophic coculture. Arch Microbiol 1984;138:263-272.
    External Resources

Article / Publication Details

First-Page Preview
Abstract of Research Article

Received: December 01, 2016
Accepted: July 03, 2017
Published online: November 30, 2017
Issue release date: Published online first

Number of Print Pages: 12
Number of Figures: 5
Number of Tables: 1

ISSN: 1464-1801 (Print)
eISSN: 1660-2412 (Online)

For additional information: https://www.karger.com/MMB


Copyright / Drug Dosage / Disclaimer

Copyright: All rights reserved. No part of this publication may be translated into other languages, reproduced or utilized in any form or by any means, electronic or mechanical, including photocopying, recording, microcopying, or by any information storage and retrieval system, without permission in writing from the publisher.
Drug Dosage: The authors and the publisher have exerted every effort to ensure that drug selection and dosage set forth in this text are in accord with current recommendations and practice at the time of publication. However, in view of ongoing research, changes in government regulations, and the constant flow of information relating to drug therapy and drug reactions, the reader is urged to check the package insert for each drug for any changes in indications and dosage and for added warnings and precautions. This is particularly important when the recommended agent is a new and/or infrequently employed drug.
Disclaimer: The statements, opinions and data contained in this publication are solely those of the individual authors and contributors and not of the publishers and the editor(s). The appearance of advertisements or/and product references in the publication is not a warranty, endorsement, or approval of the products or services advertised or of their effectiveness, quality or safety. The publisher and the editor(s) disclaim responsibility for any injury to persons or property resulting from any ideas, methods, instructions or products referred to in the content or advertisements.