INDIGENOUS AND EFFECTIVE MICROORGANISMS (EMOs) IN WASTEWATER TREATMENT

The waste management either solid or liquid is of paramount necessity. Due to increased urbanization and migration of people to cities in search for job has resulted in increased consumption of natural resources and accumulation of enormous waste. In addition, intensive agriculture practices to fulfill food requirement has enabled forced usage of synthetic compounds without understanding its adverse impact on the environment. Several industries among developing nations dispose waste into water bodies and this has raised concerns among large population. In recent years, biochemical or biological degradation of pollutants has received a great attention because of the sole reason that it has a potential to degrade wide arrays of recalcitrant pollutants including xenobiotics (Mueller et al., 1991; Barbeau et al., 1997; Cameron et al., 2000; Tripathi and Garg, 2013). Further, it is considered to be more safe and economic process when compared to other bioremediation processes.

Nevertheless, extensive studies on the biodegradation have now enabled to use a group of particular microorganisms or microbial consortia in removal of complex recalcitrant in the environment. Earlier findings suggest that indigenous microorganism own a potential to degrade wide range of pollutants (Cai et al., 2013; Kumar and Gopal, 2015). However, time involved is essentially more as these develop a mechanism of degradation naturally, under the favorable conditions which are termed as natural attenuation. Further, one of the key constraints is fluctuating environmental factors as these microorganisms are veiy sensitive to environmental conditions (pH, temperature, and type of pollutant). Nevertheless, approaches such as cell-free enzymes front such sensitive organisms have been found to address this issue. Several microorganisms have been isolated from the wide array of contaminated sites that are known to effectively degrade the pollutants under laboratory conditions. In situ bioremediation techniques especially bioaugmentation and biostimulation are more interesting than that of those ex-situ processes (Tyagi et al., 1993). The bioaugmentation approach is receiving a great deal of attention as it involves the usage of exogenous microorganisms for bioremediation of pollutants. Additionally, it can involve either the use of an individual group or consortia of microorganisms. However, recent studies suggest that consortia of microorganisms are comparatively more efficient on contrary to individual group of microorganisms.

In 1970s, for the first time, Teruo Higa at the University of Ryukyus, Okinawa, Japan, proposed the concept of effective microorganism for bioremediation of a wide range of pollutants (Higa, 1989, 1991, 1994; Higa and Chinen, 1998). The EMOs involve consortia of microorganisms such as lactic acid bacteria (.Lactobacillus plantarum, Lactobacillus casei, and Streptococcus lactis), photosynthetic bacteria (Rhodopseudo- monaspalustrus and Rhodobacter spaeroides) and yeasts (Saccharomyces cerevisiae and Candida utilis), actinomycetes (Streptomyces albus and Streptomyces griseus). Teruo and James (1994) identified more than 80 beneficial species of microorganisms. The selected potential microorganisms for efficient degradation allow degrading a wide array of pollutants. The approach of EMOs has now gained much appreciation and is been followed across globe for removal of pollutants among different environments. These microorganisms have a tendency to glow under both aerobic as well as anaerobic conditions. Additionally, the combination of microorganisms used in developing this mixture is in such a maimer that they are symbiotic against each other and work efficiently under different substrates. Further, the medium used for cultivation of these EMO is very economic and has shown to be efficient after storing for long duration. EMOs are widely used as insect repellent, foliar spray and as compost (PSDC, 2009; Zakaria et al., 2010).

On contrary, IMOs are mixture of naturally occurring group of microorganisms present over the contaminated sites. The efficiency of IMO technology was proven to be reliable and ecofriendly when compared to intensive or chemical fanning. The IMO technology improves soil and plant health, and benefits other soil-inhabiting organisms. This approach has been largely followed by fanners of many Southeast Asian countries and has been employed for home gardening as well as commercial fanning. IMO has also been reported to facilitate the removal of unpleasant odor among the poultry andpiggeiy (Kumar and Gopal, 2015) (Tables 11.1 and 11.2).

POTENTIALITY OF IMOs AND EMOs

Wastewater generated from different sources shows wide variations. Generally, industrial wastewaters comprise suspended, colloidal, and dissolved particles, including complex organic matter. The chemical composition may significantly contribute for increase in the acidity or alkalinity (Cheryan and Rajagopalan, 1998; Verma et al., 2012). These

Microorganism

Compound Treated

Sources

References

Bacteria

Haliscomenobacter hydrossis

Sludge bulking

Domestic and municipal

Mielczarek et al., 2012; Kowalska et al., 2015

Acidithiobacillus feirooxidans, Acidithiobacillus thiooxidans

Metals

Sewage

Tyagi et al., 1993; Chan et al., 2003

Burkholderia pickettii

Quinoline

Coke effluent

Jianlong et al., 2002

Nitrospira oligobopha, Nitrosomonas oligob opha

Organic matter

Municipal

Haims et al.. 2003; Siripong andRittmann. 2007

Rhodopseudomonas blastica

Reduction of COD and BOD

Rubber sheet

Kautachote et al.. 2005

Ion oxidizing bacteria

Heavy metals

Sewage

Xiang et al., 2000

Nitrosomonas sp., Nitrobacter sp.

Nutrients, ammonia

Sewage

Wagner. 1996

Pseudomonas sp.

Nutrients

Sewage

Salla et al., 1989

Achromobacter sp.

Pyridine

Industry

Deng et al., 2011

Alcaligens sp.

Phenol

Municipal

Wang et al.. 2016

Zooglea ramigera

Lower BOD

Municipal

Rossello-Mora et al., 1995

Acinetobacter sp.

Phenol

Municipal

Wang et al.. 2016

Candidatus sp., Nibotoga arctica

Nutrient, ammonia

Municipal

Liicker et al., 2015; Saunders et al., 2016

Microthiix parvicella

Sludge bulking, phosphorus removal

Municipal

Wang et al., 2014

Dechloromonas sp.

Nutrients

Activated sludge

Zhang et al., 2012

Prosthecobacter sp.

Nutrients

Activated sludge

Zhang et al.. 2012

Caldilinea sp.

Nutrients

Activated sludge

Zhang et al., 2012

Tricoccus sp.

Nutrients

Activated sludge

Zhang et al., 2012

Microorganism

Compound Treated

Sources

References

Thiobacillus sp.

Nutrients

Municipal

Maetal., 2015

Comamonas sp.

Nutrients

Municipal

Maetal., 2015

Thauera sp.

Nutrients

Municipal

Jiang et al., 2008

Azoarcus sp.

Nutrients

Municipal

Maetal., 2015

Rhodoplanes sp.

Sludge bulking

Municipal

Maetal., 2015

Nostocola limicola

Sludge bulking

Municipal

Guo and Zhang. 2012

Mycobacterium fortmtum

Sludge bulking

Activated sludge

Guo and Zhang. 2012

Accumuttbacter sp.

Phosphorus

Domestic and municipal

Oehmen et al., 2007; He et al., 2008

Tetrasphaera sp.

Phosphorus

Domestic and municipal

Nielsen et al., 2010; Nguyen et al., 2011

Pseudomonas paucim obi lis

Bisphenol A

Municipal

Ike et al., 1995

Sph ingomonas bisphenolicum

Bisphenol A

Municipal

Oshiman et al., 2007

Sinorhizobium meliloti

Bisphenol A

Sewage sludge

Mohapatra et al., 2010

Microbacterium oxydans

Phenol

Effluent

Wang et al., 2016

Pseudomonas aeruginosa

Heavy metal

Effluent

Olawale, 2014

Fungi

Penecillium corylophilum, P. waksmanii, P. citrinum

Organic matter

Domestic and municipal wastewater

Fakhrul-Razi et al., 2002

Aspeigilltts terrius, A. Jlavus

Organic matter

Domestic and municipal wastewater

Fakhrul-Razi et al., 2002

Ttichodenna harzianum

Organic matter

Domestic and Municipal wastewater

Fakhrul-Razi et al., 2002

Microorganism

Compound treated

Sources

References

Algae

Chlorella vulgaris

Nutrient, ammonium, and phosphorus ions, metal recovery

Municipal, synthetic wastewater, effluent

Lau et al., 1995; Gomes et al., 1998; De-Bashan et al., 2002

Bacteria

Aquabacterium sp.

Nutrients

Municipal

Zhang et al., 2016

Thauera sp.

Nitrogen

Domestic

Peng et al., 2014

Kuenenia stuttgariiensis, Brocadia anammoxidans

Ammonia

Domestic, municipal

Van Der Star et al., 2007

Arihmbacter sp.

COD removal

Refinery effluent

Sahoo et al., 2014

Lactobacillus plantarum, Lactobacillus casei, Streptoccus lactis, Rhodopseudomonas palustrus, Rhodobacter spaeroides

Solid liquid separation, reducing sludge volume, decompose organic matter

Municipal

Higa and Chinen, 1998; Zhao et al., 2006; Ke et al., 2009; Shalaby, 2011

Pseudomonas sp.

Detoxifies the metals

Sewage

Monica et al., 2011

Cyanobacteria

Oscillatoria sp., Phonnidium tenue, Phormidium bokneri, Phonnidium tenue

Nitrogen, phosphorus

Domestic, agriculture

Chevalier et al., 2000

Fungi

Bjerkandera adust

Decolonization

Textiles

Spina et al., 2012

Aspergillus terreus, Rhizopus sexualis

COD. BOD. TDS. oil. and grease, heavy metals

Effluent

Dias et al., 2002; Jogdand et al., 2012

Microorganism

Compound treated

Sources

References

Penicillium chrysogenum, Rhizopus oiyzae

Metal recovery

Effluent

Gomes et al., 1998

Aspergillus oiyzae, Mucor hiemahs

Breakdown of organic matters

Municipal

Zakaria et al., 2010

Yeast

Rhodotorula mucilaginosa

COD, phenol

Municipal

Jarboui et al., 2012

Saccharomyces cerevisiae,

Candida utilis, Streptomyces albus, Stieptomyces grisetis

Metabolites used as substrate for lactic acid bacteria, heavy metals

Municipal, effluent

Gomes et al., 1998; Higa and Chinen, 1998; Zhao et al., 2006; Ke et al.. 2009; Shalaby. 2011

factors have profound effects on the growth and survivability of IMO. The potential of EM technology is that it can effectively degrade complex compounds such as xenobiotics and organic matter present in the waste- water. As aforementioned, EM has been also found to subsidize the growth of pathogenic microorganisms in wastewater, such as fecal coli- form bacteria. It reduces the BOD, COD, TSS, total, and fecal coliforms and significantly minimizes the usage of chemicals such as alum, lime, chlorine for treatment, and contributes in cost reduction. Sludge volume greatly reduces up to 20%. It may also aid in the maintenance of the right pH, which greatly influences the growth of wide bacteria and largely subsidizes the foul smell. No design alteration in the ETP is required, and it can be directly applied to natural streams. More interestingly, this technology is found to be simple, natural, economic, and environment friendly (El-Sherbiny et al., 2001; Shalaby, 2011).

A study by Okuda and Higa (1995) demonstrated that the application of EM to the sewage water significantly reduced the BOD and COD up to 93% and 20%, respectively. Further, a decrease in suspended solids up to 94% was also reported on contrary to untreated water. Additionally, the decrease in nitrogen and phosphorus content was observed. This treated water when evaluated for the cucumber cultivation they found some promising results; EM treated water showed increased plant survival, leaf size, and diy weight. In addition, they observed the increase in vitamin C, and chlorophyll content, and root activity was also found to be enhanced among EM treated water. The sewage sludge after wastewater treatment was also evaluated for use as fertilizer for tomato cultivation and then study indicated that EM treated sludge of 500 g and 1 Kg resulted in increased plant height, leaf number and fresh weight on contrary to untreated and bare soil. Thus then study indicated that application of EM for sewage treatment could offer multiple facets and can be exploited for recycling the water as well as the sludge.

Studies also show that the increased concentrations of heavy metals in the wastewater have a significant effect on the EM activity. A study of Sheng et al. (2008) reported the adverse effects of heavy metals on EM and then study highlighted that various heavy metals found across the wastewater severely affect the DNA of EM. Wherein then study mainly focused on the assessment of heavy metals (As3*, Cd2+, Cr3+, Cu:+, Hg2+, Pb2+, and Zn2+) on EM DNA using in vitro assay (Comet assay). Their study demonstrated that the damage of the DNA of EM were negatively correlated with their treatment capability and that EM bacteria can withstand up to maximum concentrations of 0.05 mg/L for As3+, 0.2 mg/L for Hg2+, 0.5 mg/L for Cd2+, Cr3+, and Cu2+, and 1 mg/L for Pb2+ and Zn2'. Further concluded that As3+ at 0.05 mg/L concentration and Hg2' at 0.20 mg/L concentration DNA damage was more and their ability of waste- water treatment reduced drastically.

 
Source
< Prev   CONTENTS   Source   Next >