YaBeSH Engineering and Technology Library

    • Journals
    • PaperQuest
    • YSE Standards
    • YaBeSH
    • Login
    View Item 
    •   YE&T Library
    • ASCE
    • Journal of Environmental Engineering
    • View Item
    •   YE&T Library
    • ASCE
    • Journal of Environmental Engineering
    • View Item
    • All Fields
    • Source Title
    • Year
    • Publisher
    • Title
    • Subject
    • Author
    • DOI
    • ISBN
    Advanced Search
    JavaScript is disabled for your browser. Some features of this site may not work without it.

    Archive

    Harvesting Microalgal Biomass from a Cultured Algae-Based Wastewater Pond System

    Source: Journal of Environmental Engineering:;2020:;Volume ( 146 ):;issue: 012
    Author:
    M. F. van den Berg
    ,
    A.-M. Botha
    ,
    A. Bierman
    ,
    P. J. Oberholster
    DOI: 10.1061/(ASCE)EE.1943-7870.0001810
    Publisher: ASCE
    Abstract: Wastewater stabilization ponds (WSPs) are a popular and economical method to treat wastewater. In the current study, algae-treated effluent from WSPs was used to compare microalgal biomass harvesting methods (aluminum sulfate coagulation and chitosan flocculation) and microalgal biomass drying methods (sun drying, oven drying, and freeze drying). The physicochemical characteristics of the supernatants resulting from microalgal biomass harvesting were determined and the microbial composition of the harvested microalgal biomass was investigated using next-generation sequencing. The optimal chitosan and alum concentrations to harvest microalgal biomass were 0.368 and 9.96  g/L, respectively. The calculated optimal exposure period was 2 h. The harvest microalgal biomass with alum caused a decrease in the sulfate concentration (68.44  mg/L) and nitrogen (below detection limit), while the orthophosphate (14.93  mg/L), iron (0.12  mg/L), and total carbon concentration (327.78  mg/L) increased in comparison to the positive control. Furthermore, harvesting the microalgal biomass with chitosan resulted in a decreased sodium (155.17  mg/L) and magnesium concentration (12.40  mg/L), while an increase in ammonia (27.57  mg/L), total carbon (182.04  mg/L), and iron concentration (0.16  mg/L) was observed. The dominant microbial phyla in the positive control were Bacteroidetes (0.242) and Proteobacteria (0.340). Cyanobacteria (0.725) was dominant in the alum-harvested microalgal biomass and Proteobacteria (0.504) was dominant in the chitosan-harvested microalgal biomass. Drying the microalgal biomass to 0.1 NTU using the sun- and oven-drying methods would require 9 days and 25 h, respectively. The freeze-drying method was not able to dehydrate the microalgal biomass to 0.1 NTU. Depending on the application of the dried microalgal biomass, in this case as potential animal feed or soil fertilizer, the sun-drying method may be the superior method because higher-quality nutrients of the microalgal biomass would be retained, while the oven-drying method would require less time but could potentially destroy most of the nutrients.
    • Download: (720.9Kb)
    • Show Full MetaData Hide Full MetaData
    • Get RIS
    • Item Order
    • Go To Publisher
    • Statistics

      Harvesting Microalgal Biomass from a Cultured Algae-Based Wastewater Pond System

    URI
    https://yetl.yabesh.ir/yetl1/handle/yetl/4268503
    Collections
    • Journal of Environmental Engineering

    Show full item record

    contributor authorM. F. van den Berg
    contributor authorA.-M. Botha
    contributor authorA. Bierman
    contributor authorP. J. Oberholster
    date accessioned2022-01-30T21:36:02Z
    date available2022-01-30T21:36:02Z
    date issued12/1/2020 12:00:00 AM
    identifier other%28ASCE%29EE.1943-7870.0001810.pdf
    identifier urihttp://yetl.yabesh.ir/yetl1/handle/yetl/4268503
    description abstractWastewater stabilization ponds (WSPs) are a popular and economical method to treat wastewater. In the current study, algae-treated effluent from WSPs was used to compare microalgal biomass harvesting methods (aluminum sulfate coagulation and chitosan flocculation) and microalgal biomass drying methods (sun drying, oven drying, and freeze drying). The physicochemical characteristics of the supernatants resulting from microalgal biomass harvesting were determined and the microbial composition of the harvested microalgal biomass was investigated using next-generation sequencing. The optimal chitosan and alum concentrations to harvest microalgal biomass were 0.368 and 9.96  g/L, respectively. The calculated optimal exposure period was 2 h. The harvest microalgal biomass with alum caused a decrease in the sulfate concentration (68.44  mg/L) and nitrogen (below detection limit), while the orthophosphate (14.93  mg/L), iron (0.12  mg/L), and total carbon concentration (327.78  mg/L) increased in comparison to the positive control. Furthermore, harvesting the microalgal biomass with chitosan resulted in a decreased sodium (155.17  mg/L) and magnesium concentration (12.40  mg/L), while an increase in ammonia (27.57  mg/L), total carbon (182.04  mg/L), and iron concentration (0.16  mg/L) was observed. The dominant microbial phyla in the positive control were Bacteroidetes (0.242) and Proteobacteria (0.340). Cyanobacteria (0.725) was dominant in the alum-harvested microalgal biomass and Proteobacteria (0.504) was dominant in the chitosan-harvested microalgal biomass. Drying the microalgal biomass to 0.1 NTU using the sun- and oven-drying methods would require 9 days and 25 h, respectively. The freeze-drying method was not able to dehydrate the microalgal biomass to 0.1 NTU. Depending on the application of the dried microalgal biomass, in this case as potential animal feed or soil fertilizer, the sun-drying method may be the superior method because higher-quality nutrients of the microalgal biomass would be retained, while the oven-drying method would require less time but could potentially destroy most of the nutrients.
    publisherASCE
    titleHarvesting Microalgal Biomass from a Cultured Algae-Based Wastewater Pond System
    typeJournal Paper
    journal volume146
    journal issue12
    journal titleJournal of Environmental Engineering
    identifier doi10.1061/(ASCE)EE.1943-7870.0001810
    page11
    treeJournal of Environmental Engineering:;2020:;Volume ( 146 ):;issue: 012
    contenttypeFulltext
    DSpace software copyright © 2002-2015  DuraSpace
    نرم افزار کتابخانه دیجیتال "دی اسپیس" فارسی شده توسط یابش برای کتابخانه های ایرانی | تماس با یابش
    yabeshDSpacePersian
     
    DSpace software copyright © 2002-2015  DuraSpace
    نرم افزار کتابخانه دیجیتال "دی اسپیس" فارسی شده توسط یابش برای کتابخانه های ایرانی | تماس با یابش
    yabeshDSpacePersian