• Blog
  • Wastewater Testing
  • Bioaugmentation Applications
  • Useful Information
  • About Us
BIOLOGICAL WASTE TREATMENT EXPERT
Contact Us

Nitrosomonas (AOB) can also engage in heterotrophic metabolism under anoxic conditions

9/26/2018

 
Nitrosomonas species also known as Ammonia Oxidizing Bacteria (AOB) have always been discussed as obligate aerobic chemoautotrophs. Under aerobic conditions, the Nitrosomonas convert ammonia  to nitrite while using carbon dioxide  and carbonate as a carbon source. 

I have recently read multiple peer reviewed papers that document the ability of Nitrosomonas to utilize various organic compounds as an energy source with nitrite as an alternative electron acceptor - producing N2 gas as a final product. This ability to use their waste product from aerobic reactions as an electron acceptor reveals how Nitrosomonas can survive in systems with substantial anoxic periods.

Here is a link to a 2009 paper with more details:
 https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/19452213

Filamentous bacteria and floc forming bacteria

9/21/2018

 
Picture
Photo by Sandy Bernard.
Easily seen using a phase contrast microscope, filamentous bacteria provide the structural support on which floc forming organisms grow.  Without filaments, floc tends to shrink in size and be more susceptible to sheer.   Problems arise when filaments become overabundant and extend from the floc.  Once extended from floc and reducing floc density, filaments begin inhibiting settling rates.  So like many things, filaments are good in moderation but bad when overabundant.  What conditions promote filamentous growth?
  • Low Dissolved Oxygen (D.O.)
  • High influent soluble BOD & organic acids (causing a zone of highly depressed DO near the influent)
  • Sulfides - several filamentous forms can also obtain energy from sulfide oxidation
  • Low nitrogen or phosphorus - unbalanced C:N:P ratio
  • Grease & Long chain fatty acids - this encourages Nocardia type foaming 

Some of the above problems can be fixed which reduces growth conditions favorable for filaments.  Consider corrective measures such as:
  • Moving more aeration to the inlet area to avoid the DO depression often seen near the influent
  • A long term solution is to step-feed influent which prevents DO drop and high concentrations of organic acids (also known as septicity in influent)
  • Add nutrients if C:N:P ratio is triggering filaments (they have more surface area to uptake scarce nutrients)
  • Adjust F/M or MCRT 
  • Using hypochlorite, peroxide, or other oxidant to disrupt the filaments.  This is only for severe problems.  With more surface area, filaments are more susceptible to disinfection than floc forming bacteria.  Dosing can be determined by jar testing and looking for filament disruption prior to disinfection of the main system.

Chronic toxicity - troubleshooting with Microbial Community Analysis

9/14/2018

 
I am posting an article from Paul Campbell that was published on Aster Bio's Environmental Genomics Blog - www.environmentalgenomics.com.

One of the fun things about wastewater microbial community analysis (MCA) is that we can often tell what type of influent the plant is seeing without any prior knowledge. We can even identify some operational challenges facing operators. As an example, we recently received a sample from a refinery located on the Texas Gulf Coast, no information about the current operating conditions, just a request for MCA. The results were really quite interesting (see graph, below).
Picture
While the chart generally presents microorganisms present at greater than 0.1% of the sequencing reads, I’ve intentionally removed some genera. Three microorganisms (Thiobacillus, Thauera and Methyloversatilis) each accounted for more than 3% of the sequencing reads. Thiobacillus accounted for almost 5%!
But, the interesting organism in the chart is Marichromatium. This is a genus of purple sulfur bacteria. While these microorganisms can photosynthesize when necessary, in the MLSS they can live off of organic acids. But, the really interesting part is that Marichromatiumrequires a reduced sulfur compound (sulfides) for growth.
​

So, the MCA strongly suggests that the facility is refining a high-sulfur crude. Furthermore, the sulfides are getting into the influent water, where they impact operations. The ammonia-oxidizing and nitrite-oxidizing bacteria (Nitrosomonas and Nitrospira, respectively) barely make up 0.5% of the sequencing reads – a typical refinery would have 1.5 to 3%. Sulfides are known to inhibit the growth of these two fragile organisms.

This is a great example of how the microbial community analysis both identifies a problem with the biomass (a low nitrifier population) and the cause (chronic toxicity due to sulfide exposure).

Ammonia treatment - a review of biological processes & terms

9/10/2018

 
Picture
A mixture of AOB & NOB cultures grown in Aster Bio's batch reactor.
We sure love to use acronyms in environmental science and wastewater treatment. I have had full discussions with people mistaking "the nitrifiers" for "denitrifiers" when speaking - think about how close the words sound in normal speech. So, I thought a list of terms would help get everyone on the same page.
  • Ammonia Oxidizing Bacteria (AOB) - these organisms convert ammonia (NH3) into nitrite (NO2)
  • Nitrite Oxidizing Bacteria (NOB) - organisms converting nitrite (NO2) into nitrate (NO3)
  • Denitrifying Organisms - many species can use nitrate (fewer nitrite) under anoxic conditions
  • Anammox - or Anaerobic Ammonia Oxidation is biochemical pathway that has NO2 + NH4 --> N2 (gas) + H2O. This is an anaerobic process that requires a long MCRT & low F/M conditions. Often a fixed film with anammox cultures is required for significant development.
  • Comammox - abbreviation for Complete Ammonia Oxidation - some organisms such as Nitrospira have the ability to completely convert ammonia into nitrate. Instead of two distinct microbial populations, Comammox have a single population completely removing problem nitrogen forms.
  • Feammox - (the latest identified reactions) - iron reducing organisms work at lower pH without oxygen. Ammonia oxidation with concurrent Iron III reduction produces energy for this class of organisms. Research is still in the early phase regarding these organisms and their potential in waste treatment.

Are SV30 & SVI important in MBR (membrane) wastewater treatment systems?

9/4/2018

 
Picture
Image from www.ovivo.com - installed MBR unit.
MBR systems use membrane separation instead of a DAF or clarifier to remove biological solids from effluent wastewater. MBR systems are becoming more common as membrane technology has improved and overall costs are lower when compared with larger foot print activated sludge systems. When compared with extended aeration activated sludge units, MBR systems typically have the following differences:
  • Higher MLSS/MLVSS 
  • Smaller aeration basin & overall foot print
  • Better control of F/M & MCRT
  • Fewer problems with solids in effluent
The MBR is technologically superior to older clarifier systems, but they still have issues that require operator attention. First since a membrane separates solids from discharged water, settling rates and floc formation would not seem as critical - however biological polymers are just as important for good MBR function as they are in systems with conventional clarification. Why do I say that floc formation is just as important in an MBR with advanced membrane technology?

Pores in the membrane allow for water to pass with solids being retained. As pores become clogged with solids - both biological & particulate - the system goes into a backwash cycle to clear the pores and restore membrane function. The problem is that backwashing is not perfect, overtime pores deteriorate with accumulated solids. Even with cleaning technologies that include oxidants, acids, or enzymes - the pores will eventually become plugged. 

A leading cause of plugged pores in biological waste treatment units is the accumulation of high molecular weight and "sticky" biological polymers. Organisms that thrive in the low F/M conditions found in MBR systems also tend to excrete copious amounts of extracellular polymeric substances (EPS). While some EPS is good and improves separation potential, the wrong EPS and overabundance of EPS can both create blinding conditions in membrane pores. 

The easiest ways to monitor EPS in a biological treatment unit is to run SV30, SVI, and microscopic exam on at least a daily basis. Additional monitoring with molecular testing is equally important - including both Microbial Community Analysis (MCA) and qPCR for specific problem or good organisms which gives earlier warnings for EPS blinding potential. When you have a buildup of problematic EPS, do not just assume that it cannot be corrected. Multiple control methods exist, it is just best to address the EPS problem before membrane issues start to compromise unit performance.


    Author

    Erik Rumbaugh has been involved in biological waste treatment for over 20 years. He has worked with industrial and municipal wastewater  facilities to ensure optimal performance of their treatment systems. He is a founder of Aster Bio (www.asterbio.com) specializing in biological waste treatment.

    View my profile on LinkedIn

    RSS Feed

    Click to set custom HTML

    Archives

    December 2022
    November 2022
    October 2022
    September 2022
    August 2022
    June 2022
    May 2022
    March 2022
    February 2022
    January 2022
    November 2021
    October 2021
    September 2021
    August 2021
    June 2021
    April 2021
    March 2021
    February 2021
    December 2020
    November 2020
    October 2020
    September 2020
    August 2020
    July 2020
    June 2020
    May 2020
    April 2020
    March 2020
    February 2020
    January 2020
    December 2019
    November 2019
    October 2019
    September 2019
    August 2019
    July 2019
    June 2019
    May 2019
    April 2019
    March 2019
    February 2019
    January 2019
    December 2018
    November 2018
    October 2018
    September 2018
    August 2018
    July 2018
    June 2018
    May 2018
    April 2018
    March 2018
    February 2018
    January 2018
    December 2017
    November 2017
    October 2017
    September 2017
    August 2017
    July 2017
    June 2017
    May 2017
    April 2017
    March 2017
    February 2017
    January 2017
    December 2016
    November 2016
    October 2016
    September 2016
    August 2016
    July 2016
    June 2016
    May 2016
    April 2016
    March 2016
    February 2016
    January 2016
    December 2015
    November 2015
    October 2015
    September 2015
    August 2015
    July 2015
    June 2015
    May 2015
    April 2015
    March 2015
    February 2015
    January 2015
    December 2014
    November 2014
    October 2014
    September 2014
    August 2014
    July 2014
    June 2014
    May 2014
    April 2014
    March 2014
    February 2014

Proudly powered by Weebly
Photos used under Creative Commons from Picturepest, marcoverch, perzonseowebbyra, Picturepest, Picturepest, dsearls, dungodung, Massachusetts Office of Travel & Tourism, aqua.mech, vastateparksstaff, hile, Aaron Volkening, amishsteve, Neil DeMaster, mklwong88, KOMUnews, Picturepest, kaibara87