Abundance and diversity of nitrogen-removing microorganisms in the UASB-anammox reactor

Rui Chen; Junqin Yao; Nuerla Ailijiang; Ruisang Liu; Lei Fang; Yinguang Chen

doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0215615

Abstract

Anaerobic ammonium oxidation is considered to be the most economical and low-energy biological nitrogen removal process. So far, anammox bacteria have not yet been purified from cultures. Some nitrogen-removing microorganisms cooperate to perform the anammox process. The objective of this research was to analyze the abundance and diversity of nitrogen-removing microorganisms in an anammox reactor started up with bulking sludge at room temperature. In this study, the ammonia-oxidizing archaea phylum Crenarchaeota was enriched from 9.2 to 53.0%. Nitrosomonas, Nitrosococcus, and Nitrosospira, which are ammonia-oxidizing bacteria, increased from 3.2, 1.7, and 0.1% to 12.8, 20.4, and 3.3%, respectively. Ca. Brocadia, Ca. Kuenenia, and Ca. Scalindua, which are anammox bacteria, were detected in the seeding sludge, accounting for 77.1, 11.5, and 10.6%. After cultivation, the dominant genus changed to Ca. Kuenenia, accounting for 82.0%. Nitrospirae, nitrite oxidation bacteria, decreased from 2.2 to 0.1%, while denitrifying genera decreased from 12.9 to 2.1%. The results of this study contribute to the understanding of nitrogen-removing microorganisms in an anammox reactor, thereby facilitating the improvement of such reactors. However, the physiological and metabolic functions of the ammonia-oxidizing archaea community in the anammox reactor need to be investigated in further studies.

Citation: Chen R, Yao J, Ailijiang N, Liu R, Fang L, Chen Y (2019) Abundance and diversity of nitrogen-removing microorganisms in the UASB-anammox reactor. PLoS ONE 14(4): e0215615. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0215615

Editor: Sartaj Ahmad Bhat, Gifu University, JAPAN

Received: January 20, 2019; Accepted: April 4, 2019; Published: April 22, 2019

Copyright: © 2019 Chen et al. This is an open access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original author and source are credited.

Data Availability: The raw reads were deposited in the NCBI Sequence Read Archive (SRA) database (Accession Numbers: SRP128971 and SRP167287).

Funding: This work was supported by the National Natural Science Foundation of China (51568061).

Competing interests: The authors have declared that no competing interests exist.

Introduction

The discovery of the anaerobic ammonium oxidation (anammox) process, a chemolithoautotrophic microbial process, took place in a denitrifying fluidized bed reactor in the early 1990s [1]. Under anaerobic conditions, the anammox reaction can directly convert ammonium to nitrogen gas using nitrite as an electron acceptor [2]. Stoichiometric ratios are considered to be an indicator of anammox processes [3]. According to previous studies, the corresponding molar ratios of the anammox process for NH₄⁺ consumption, NO₂^- consumption and NO₃^- production are 1.00:1.32: 0.26, respectively [2]. Anammox is also an economical and effective method for nitrogen removal, since it was first discovered, compared to the traditional nitrification-denitrification method [1].

The anammox process is mediated by anammox bacteria and, according to data, six anammox bacterial genera, including Ca. Brocadia [4], Ca. Kuenenia [5], Ca. Scalindua [6], Ca. Anammoxoglobus [7], Ca. Jettenia [8], and Ca. Anammoximicrobium [9], have been enriched from samples collected from Wastewater Treatment Plants (WWTPs) and natural environments such as freshwater and marine areas [10]. All these genera belong to the same phylum, Planctomycetes [4]. The Candidatus Scalindua species are predominant in pristine freshwater ecosystems and marine environments, while the other five genera of anammox bacteria are mostly detected and enriched from the sludge of wastewater-impacted environments and WWTPs [11]. Anammox bacteria have not yet been purified from culture, indicating that they may coexist with other microorganisms [12]. Studies have found that anammox bacteria and ammonia-oxidizing bacteria (AOB) can coexist in a single reactor in which AOB oxidizes ammonium into nitrite, providing nitrite substance for anammox bacteria, while simultaneously consuming the dissolved oxygen (DO) and creating an anoxic environment for anammox bacteria [13]. Moreover, Nitrosomonas, which belongs to AOB, also exhibits anammox activity under anoxic conditions [14]. Studies have found that anammox bacteria and ammonia-oxidizing archaea (AOA) coexist in the Black Sea [15]. In low-oxygen environments, AOA can also provide nitrite to anammox bacteria [16].

Ammonia-oxidizing bacteria have commonly been reported in the anammox process, while the function of AOA has rarely been mentioned [17]. According to these reports, the growth of AOA can be encouraged by low DO values [18]. Ammonia-oxidizing archaea have an extremely high affinity towards ammonia, which makes them capable of achieving higher ammonia oxidation rates [19]. Therefore, AOA could be a better partner for anammox bacteria compared with AOB.

In this context, this research selected bulking sludge as seeding sludge to start up the anammox reaction at temperatures ranging from 20 to 31°C. The aim of this study was to investigate the abundance and diversity of AOA, AOB, anammox bacteria, nitrite oxidation bacteria (NOB), and denitrifying bacteria in the anammox reactor. The abundance and diversity of AOA in the UASB-anammox reactor started up with bulking sludge at room temperature were analysed for the first time.

Materials and methods

Anammox reactor

The effective volume of the Up-flow Anaerobic Sludge Bed (UASB) reactor used in this study was 3.2 L (Fig 1). The reactor contained a membrane device and the surface was covered with an insulating layer to protect against light. Hydraulic retention time (HRT) was 16.9–74.6 h, and the reactor was operated at room temperature, which was maintained at 20–31°C.

Download:

Fig 1. Schematic diagram of the UASB reactor.

https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0215615.g001

Seeding sludge and synthetic wastewater

The seeding sludge was obtained from the Changji WWTP (Xinjiang, China). The Sludge Volume Index (SVI) of the seeding sludge was 192 mL·g^-1. At an SVI greater than 150 mL·g^-1, the sludge is considered as bulking sludge [20].

Synthetic wastewater was used in this experiment and was composed of NH₄Cl and NaNO₂ as the main sources of ammonium and nitrite, without organic matter. The concentrations of NH₄⁺-N and NO₂^--N were 50 mg·L^-1 and 70 mg·L^-1. Other components included NaHCO₃ (500 mg·L^-1), MgSO₄ (300 mg·L^-1), CaCl₂ (126 mg·L^-1), KH₂PO₄ (30 mg·L^-1); 1 mL of mother liquor of trace elements was added to each liter of synthetic water. The mother liquor of trace elements contained FeSO₄ (5000 mg·L^-1), MnCl₂·H₂O (990 mg·L^-1), ZnSO₄·7H₂O (430 mg·L^-1), CuSO₄·H₂O (250 mg·L^-1), CoCl₂·6H₂O (240 mg·L^-1), NiCl₂·6H₂O (190 mg·L^-1), and H₃BO₄ (14 mg·L^-1).

Analysis

Two samples were collected from the UASB reactor. Sample A1 was collected from the seeding sludge on day 1, while sample A2 was collected on day 112 after successful anammox start-up. The samples for the microbial analysis were stored in the laboratory at -40°C and sent to Majorbio Bio-Pharm Technology Co. Ltd. (Shanghai, China) for DNA extraction, PCR amplification, and Illumina high-throughput sequencing.

Microbial DNA was extracted from two sludge samples that were collected from the UASB reactor using the FastDNA SPIN kit (Omega Bio-tek, Norcross, GA, U.S.) according to the manufacturer’s protocols. The final DNA concentration and purification were determined via a NanoDrop 2000 UV-vis spectrophotometer (Thermo Scientific, Wilmington, USA), whereas DNA quality was checked via 1% agarose gel electrophoresis. The target genes, primers, sequences, and PCR conditions are listed in Table 1. All PCR reactions were performed in triplicate in a 20 μL mixture containing 4 μL of 5x FastPfu Buffer, 2 μL of 2.5 mM dNTPs, 0.8 μL of each primer (5 μM), 0.4 μL of FastPfu Polymerase, and 10 ng of template DNA. The PCR products were extracted from a 2% agarose gel and further purified using the AxyPrep DNA Gel Extraction Kit (Axygen Biosciences, Union City, CA, USA). Subsequently, the products were quantified using QuantiFluor-ST (Promega, USA).

Download:

Table 1. Target genes, primers, and sequences used in the DNA amplification.

https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0215615.t001

Purified amplicons were pooled in equimolar and paired-end sequenced (2 × 300) on an Illumina MiSeq platform (Illumina, San Diego, USA) according to the standard protocols of Majorbio Bio-Pharm Technology Co. Ltd. (Shanghai, China). The raw reads were deposited in the NCBI Sequence Read Archive (SRA) database (Accession Numbers: SRP128971 and SRP167287).

Data analysis

Data analysis was conducted using the i-Sanger platform (http://www.i-sanger.com/), provided by Majorbio Bio-Pharm Technology Co. Ltd. (Shanghai, China). The microbial phylotype richness levels were calculated using the Ace estimator and the Shannon diversity index. The Ace estimator, the Shannon diversity index, the Heip evenness index, and the coverage percentage were also calculated via the Mothur program version v.1.30.1. These analyses were performed using the R Programming Language software.

Results and discussion

Reactor performance

The concentrations of influent NH₄⁺-N and NO₂^--N were about 50.0 and 70.0 mg·L^-1, respectively (Fig 2A). During days 1–9, the NH₄⁺-N concentration of the effluent exceeded that of the influent, with the peak value of effluent NH₄⁺-N in the reactor reaching 66.4 mg·L^-1. This phenomenon was consistent with numerous previous studies and was named the “cell lysis phase” [25]. Denitrification was the dominant process, and the NO₂^--N removal rate was 54.5–76.1%. The activity of anammox was not obvious.

Download:

Fig 2.

(a) Concentrations and removal efficiencies of NH₄⁺-N and NO₂^--N, (b) Stoichiometric ratios of the reactor during 96–112 d.

https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0215615.g002

During days 10–26, the NH₄⁺-N removal rate was measured as 3.1–21.6%. Furthermore, the NO₂^--N removal rate showed a downward trend and decreased from 60.1 to 29.3%, indicating that the activity of denitrifying bacteria had begun to decrease, as organic matter continued to be consumed [26]. Further, Ammonia and nitrite nitrogen were removed simultaneously with nitrate nitrogen production, indicating the occurrence of anammox activity. This stage was therefore termed the “anammox activity appearance period”.

During days 27–95, the removal rates of NH₄⁺-N and NO₂^--N gradually increased from 9.8 and 32.0% to 98.3 and 98.9%, respectively, while the NO₃^--N production stabilized, with an average of 5.3 mg·L^-1. This stage was named the “anammox activity elevation period”.

During days 96–112, the removal rates of NH₄⁺-N and NO₂^--N stabilized at 95.1 and 99.2%, respectively. The corresponding molar ratios of NH₄⁺ consumption, NO₂^- consumption, and NO₃^- production were 1.00:1.41:0.21 (Fig 2B). The corresponding molar ratio of the last stage was close to the reported value (1:1.32:0.26) [2], indicating that this stage was the anammox activity stable period.

Analysis of microbial community diversity

The total effective reads of the two sludge samples were 10,387–42,278 (Table 2). The coverage of each sample was more than 99%, indicating that the produced data was sufficient to cover all species. The Ace estimator represents the richness estimator, and larger values represent higher microbial community richness. The Shannon index is also a frequently used diversity index, and larger values represent higher microbial community diversity. The Heip index represents community evenness; higher values indicate a higher microbial community evenness. After cultivation, richness, diversity, and evenness of the AOA community were increased; AOA can actually be enriched under low-oxygen conditions. The diversity and evenness of the AOB community were also increased. In contrast, the diversity and evenness of the anammox bacteria were decreased, along with the richness, diversity, and evenness of the bacterial community.

Download:

Table 2. Summary of sequencing data for the two samples.

https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0215615.t002

Microbial community analysis

Based on previous studies, nitrogen-removing microorganisms are mainly AOA, AOB, NOB, denitrifying bacteria, and anammox bacteria (Table 3) [27–35]. Studies on AOA and anammox bacteria were mainly performed in natural environments such as freshwater lakes, rivers, or the Great Barrier Reef [27–30], while only a few studies on AOA were performed in lab-scale anammox reactors; AOB have mainly been studied in PN-A (partial nitritation/anammox) systems [31]. In contrast, anammox bacteria are relatively well studied [32–33]. According to previous studies, the phylum Planctomycetes contains all anammox bacterial genera [4], and NOB can compete with anammox bacteria for nitrite. In oxygen-poor environments, the metabolism of NOB is significantly suppressed [34]. The interaction between denitrifying bacteria and anammox bacteria has extensively been studied in lab-scale reactors [35], while studies on nitrogen-removing microorganisms in anammox reactors are rare (Table 3), especially in terms of richness and diversity.

Download:

Table 3. Studies of microbial communities involved in anammox.

https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0215615.t003

AOA community analysis at phylum and genus levels.

Ammonium-oxidizing archaea can grow chemolithoautotrophically by aerobically oxidizing ammonia to nitrite [36], thereby contributing to ammoxidation. They are widely distributed in marine environments [37], soil [38], lakes [39], hot springs, and mining areas [40–41] and play an important role in the global nitrogen cycle. The AOA domain contains the phyla Euryarchaeota, Crenarchaeota, and Thaumarchaeota phyla [42], and AOA comprise an evolutionary group completely independent of AOB; however, AOB have traditionally been considered the main driver of ammonia oxidation [43], and researchers have overlooked the significant contributions of AOA to ammonia oxidation in a large range of environments [38]. It has been investigated that AOA are more active under certain extreme environmental habitats, such as low-oxygen environments [44].

A total of 4 AOA phyla were detected from the two samples (Fig 3), including Crenarchaeota and Thaumarchaeota. The other two phyla were unclassified AOA phyla. The relative abundance of Crenarchaeota increased from 9.2% in the seeding sludge to 53.0% in the anammox sludge, while the relative abundance of Thaumarchaeota phylum decreased from 23.5 to 14.8%. The relative abundance of unclassified AOA genus Crenarchaeota increased from 9.2 to 53.0% (Table 4). The genera Nitrosopumilus and Nitrososphaera belong to the phylum Thaumarchaeota and significantly increased over time, accounting for 11.4 and 3.2% of the bacteria in the anammox sludge, respectively.

Download:

Fig 3. AOA community structure at the phylum level.

https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0215615.g003

Download:

Table 4. Relative abundances of AOA genera in sludge samples.

https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0215615.t004

The phylum Crenarchaeota appeared to adapt well to the low-oxygen environment. A previous study has observed Thaumarchaeota and anammox bacteria in coexistence in different environments, particularly in anoxic water [45]. However, the relative abundance of the phylum Thaumarchaeota decreased in the reactor. The physiological and metabolic functions of the phylum Crenarchaeota need to be investigated in further studies.

AOB community analysis at phylum and genus levels.

At the phylum level, the relative abundance of Proteobacteria increased from 26.4% in the seeding sludge to 90.7% in the anammox sludge, while the relative abundances of the genera Nitrosomonas, Nitrosococcus, Nitrosospira, and Betaproteobacteria increased from 3.2, 1.7, 0.1, and 0.3% to 12.8, 20.4, 3.3, and 38.2%, respectively (Table 5).

Download:

Table 5. Relative abundances of AOB genera in sludge samples.

https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0215615.t005

According to previous results, AOB can oxidize ammonia to nitrite, thereby providing nitrite for anammox and denitrification reactions [13]. In wastewater treatment processes, Nitrosomonas is frequently detected and shows anammox activity under anoxic conditions [14]. Previous studies have suggested that Betaproteobacteria, coexisting in anammox reactors, may consume organic compounds and trace amounts of O₂, thus establishing suitable microenvironments for anammox bacteria [46].

Anammox bacterial community analysis at genus levels.

The genera Ca. Kuenenia, Ca. Brocadia, and Ca. Scalindua were detected in the reactor (Fig 4), accounting for 11.5, 77.1, and 10.6% of the bacteria in the seeding sludge. After successful anammox start-up, Ca. Kuenenia became the dominant genus, accounting for 82.0%. The relative abundance of Ca. Brocadia decreased to 18.0%, while Ca. Scalindua disappeared. According to previous research, Ca. Brocadia and Ca. Kuenenia are common anammox bacterial genera in anammox reactors [47], and Ca. Kuenenia was the main species of anammox bacteria in a laboratory reactor fed with synthetic wastewater [48]. In another study, Ca. Scalindua is predominant in freshwater ecosystems and in marine environments [11].

Download:

Fig 4.

Anammox bacterial community structure at the genus level in A1 (a) and A2 (b).

https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0215615.g004

Bacterial community analysis at phylum and genus levels.

A total of 28 bacterial phyla were obtained in the two samples. The relative abundance of 10 bacterial phyla was greater than 1% in at least one sample (Fig 5). Bacteria were most abundant in the reactor. In the seeding sludge, the relative abundances of Bacteroidetes, Proteobacteria, Chloroflexi, Actinobacteria, Nitrospirae, Planctomycetes, Acidobacteria, Firmicutes, and Chlorobi were 43.5, 37.0, 4.6, 3.4, 2.2, 1.9, 1.5, 1.4, and 1.4%, respectively. In the anammox sludge, the relative abundances of Chloroflexi, Proteobacteria, Chlorobi, Bacteroidetes, Actinobacteria, Planctomycetes, Ignavibacteriae, Acidobacteria, Firmicutes, and Nitrospirae were 41.7, 19.0, 13.3, 9.6, 3.9, 3.0, 2.7, 2.2, 0.8, and 0.1%, respectively.

Download:

Fig 5. Bacterial community structure at the phylum level.

https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0215615.g005

According to previous research, all anammox bacterial genera belong to the phylum Planctomycetes [4]. After the successful anammox start-up, the relative abundance of the phylum Planctomycetes increased from 1.9% in the seeding sludge to 3.0% in the anammox sludge. The phylum Chloroflexi is heterotrophic in microbial communities and prefers organic matter from dead anammox biomass as substrate [35]. Thus, anammox bacteria and the phylum Chloroflexi may interact within the anammox reactor [49]. The relative abundance of the phylum Chloroflexi increased from 4.6 to 41.7% overtime. Studies have reported that Chlorobi is an autotrophic bacterium and can thus be enriched through adaptation to the inorganic environment within the anammox reactor [50]. The relative abundance of the phylum Chlorobi increased from 1.4 to 13.3%. Nitrospirae was the only phylum of nitrite oxidation bacteria (NOB) in this study. The relative abundance of the phylum Nitrospirae decreased from 2.2 to 0.1%, which was consistent with the results of the anammox activity tests and confirmed the effective suppression of NOB in the anoxic environment [34].

A total of 294 bacterial genera were obtained in the two samples. The relative abundance of 54 bacterial genera was greater than 0.5% in at least one sample (Fig 6). The 54 bacterial genera accounted for 79.3–87.2% of the total bacterial effective sequences in each sample. The genera Norank Ardenticatenia, norank Anaerolineaceae, and norank Caldilineaceae belong to the bacterial phylum Chloroflexi, which increased from 0.5, 0.1, and 0.7% to 18.4, 12.9, and 6.9%. Research has shown that Saprospiraceae are aerobic bacteria and commonly cause bulking sludge [51]. After successful anammox start-up, the relative abundance of norank Saprospiraceae decreased from 21.4 to 2.9%, while that of the NOB genus Nitrospira decreased from 2.2 to 0.1%.

Download:

Fig 6. Bacterial community structure at the genus level.

https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0215615.g006

Research has shown that most denitrifying bacteria belong to the phyla Proteobacteria and Bacteroidetes [52–54]. The relative abundances of Proteobacteria and Bacteroidetes decreased from 37.0 and 43.5% to 19.0 and 9.6%, respectively. At the genus level, a total of 13 denitrifying genera of Proteobacteria and two denitrifying genera of Bacteroidetes were detected [53]. The relative abundance of denitrifying genera decreased from 12.9 to 2.1% (Table 6). According to a previous study, anammox activity inhibited the growth of denitrifying bacteria [55].

Download:

Table 6. Relative abundances of denitrifying bacterial genera in sludge samples.

https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0215615.t006

Practical implications

Anammox bacteria have not yet been purified from cultures. Therefore, nitrogen-removing microorganisms cooperate to perform the anammox process. The abundances and diversities of AOA, AOB, anammox bacteria, NOB, and denitrifying bacteria greatly impact the nitrogen-removal efficiency of anammox systems. The results presented here offer new perspectives for the microbially mediated nitrogen removal in the practical application of anammox. This study demonstrated that the unclassified AOA genus Crenarchaeota, Nitrosomonas, Nitrosococcus, and Nitrosospira of AOB, and Ca. Kuenenia of the anammox bacteria are dominant nitrogen-removing microorganisms in this anammox reactor. In practical wastewater treatment systems, the role of AOA in the anammox process should be considered. In addition, the challenges in the current research and future work are to create suitable conditions for the balance among AOA, AOB, and anammox bacteria and the efficient inhibition of NOB.

Conclusions

In this study, the diversity, richness, and evenness of AOA were significantly increased, while the unclassified AOA genus Crenarchaeota was enriched and increased from 9.2 to 53.0%, most likely because it adapted to the oxygen-poor environment. The AOB genera Nitrosomonas, Nitrosococcus, and Nitrosospira were enriched and increased from 3.2, 1.7, and 0.1% to 12.8, 20.4, and 3.3%, respectively. Three anammox bacterial genera, Ca. Brocadia, Ca. Kuenenia, and Ca. Scalindua, were detected. After cultivation, Ca. Kuenenia was enriched from 11.5 to 82.0% and became the dominant anammox bacterial genus, while Ca. Brocadia decreased from 77.1 to 18.0% and Ca. Scalindua disappeared completely. The NOB genus Nitrospira decreased from 2.2 to 0.1%, while denitrifying bacteria decreased from 12.9 to 2.1%.

Acknowledgments

This work was supported by the National Natural Science Foundation of China (51568061).

References

1. Mulder A., Graaf A. A. v. d., Robertson L. A. and Kuenen J. G.. Anaerobic ammonium oxidation discovered in a denitrifying fluidized bed reactor. Fems Microbiology Ecology.1995; 16: 177–184.
- View Article
- Google Scholar
2. Strous M., Heijnen J. J., Kuenen J. G., and Jetten M. S. M. The sequencing batch reactor as a powerful tool for the study of slowly growing anaerobic ammonium-oxidizing microorganisms. Applied Microbiology and Biotechnology. 1998; 50(5): 589–596.
- View Article
- Google Scholar
3. Chen H., Hu H. Y., Chen Q. Q., Shi M. L., and Jin R. C. Successful start-up of the anammox process: influence of the seeding strategy on performance and granule properties. Bioresource Technology. 2016; 211, 594–602. pmid:27043054
- View Article
- PubMed/NCBI
- Google Scholar
4. Strous M., Fuerst J A, Kramer E H M. Missing lithotroph identified as new planctomycete. Nature. 1999; 400: 446. pmid:10440372
- View Article
- PubMed/NCBI
- Google Scholar
5. Schmid M., Twachtmann U., Klein M., Strous M., Juretschko S., Jetten M., Metzger J. W., Schleifer K. H. and Wagner M.. Molecular evidence for genus level diversity of bacteria capable of catalyzing anaerobic ammonium oxidation. Systematic and Applied Microbiology. 2000; 23: 93–106. pmid:10879983
- View Article
- PubMed/NCBI
- Google Scholar
6. Kuypers M. M., Sliekers A. O., Lavik G., Schmid M., Jørgensen B. B., Kuenen J. G., Sinninghe Damsté J. S., Strous M. and Jetten M. S.. Anaerobic ammonium oxidation by anammox bacteria in the Black Sea. Nature. 2003; 422: 608. pmid:12686999
- View Article
- PubMed/NCBI
- Google Scholar
7. Kartal B., Rattray J., van Niftrik L. A., Van d. V. J., Schmid M. C., Webb R. I., Schouten S., Fuerst J. A., Damste J. S. and Jetten M. S.. Candidatus "Anammoxoglobus propionicus" a new propionate oxidizing species of anaerobic ammonium oxidizing bacteria. Systematic and Applied Microbiology. 2007, 30: 39–49. pmid:16644170
- View Article
- PubMed/NCBI
- Google Scholar
8. Zhe-Xue Q., Sung-Keun R., Jian-E Z., Yang Y., Jin-Woo B., Ja Ryeong P., Sung-Taik L. and Yong-Ha P.. Diversity of ammonium-oxidizing bacteria in a granular sludge anaerobic ammonium-oxidizing (anammox) reactor. Environmental Microbiology. 2010; 10: 3130–3139.
- View Article
- Google Scholar
9. Khramenkov S. V., Kozlov M. N., Kevbrina M. V., Dorofeev A. G., Kazakova E. A., Grachev V. A., Kuznetsov B. B., Polyakov D. Y. and Nikolaev Y. A.. A novel bacterium carrying out anaerobic ammonium oxidation in a reactor for biological treatment of the filtrate of wastewater fermented sludge. Microbiology. 2013, 82: 628–636.
- View Article
- Google Scholar
10. Romain Connan, Patrick Dabert, Sophie R. Le, Olivier, Chapleur, Gilbert and Bridoux. Characterization of a combined batch-continuous procedure for the culture of anammox biomass. Ecological Engineering. 2017; 106: 231–241.
- View Article
- Google Scholar
11. Han P., Huang Y. T., Lin J. G. and Gu J. D.. A comparison of two 16S rRNA gene-based PCR primer sets in unraveling anammox bacteria from different environmental samples. Applied Microbiology and Biotechnology. 2013; 97: 10521–10529. pmid:24177731
- View Article
- PubMed/NCBI
- Google Scholar
12. Lotti T., Kleerebezem R., Abelleira-Pereira J. M., Abbas B. and Loosdrecht M. C. M. v. Faster through training: The anammox case. Water Research. 2015; 81: 261–268. pmid:26074189
- View Article
- PubMed/NCBI
- Google Scholar
13. Chu Z. R., Wang K., Li X. K., Zhu M. T., Yang L. and Zhang J.. Microbial characterization of aggregates within a one-stage nitritation-anammox system using high-throughput amplicon sequencing. Chemical Engineering Journal. 2015; 262: 41–48.
- View Article
- Google Scholar
14. Shalini S. S. and Joseph K.. Nitrogen management in landfill leachate: Application of SHARON, ANAMMOX and combined SHARON–ANAMMOX process. Waste Management. 2012; 32: 2385–2400. pmid:22766438
- View Article
- PubMed/NCBI
- Google Scholar
15. Coolen M. J. L., Ben A., Judith V. B., Hopmans E. C., Kuypers M. M. M., Wakeham S. G. and Damsté J. S., Sinninghe. Putative ammonia-oxidizing Crenarchaeota in suboxic waters of the Black Sea: a basin-wide ecological study using 16S ribosomal and functional genes and membrane lipids. Environmental Microbiology. 2010; 9: 1001–1016.
- View Article
- Google Scholar
16. Lam P., Jensen M. M., Lavik G., Mcginnis D. F., Müller B., Schubert C. J., Amann R., Bo T. and Kuypers M. M. M.. Linking crenarchaeal and bacterial nitrification to anammox in the Black Sea. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America. 2007; 104: 7104–7109. pmid:17420469
- View Article
- PubMed/NCBI
- Google Scholar
17. Fitzgerald C M, Camejo P, Oshlag J Z, et al. Ammonia-oxidizing microbial communities in reactors with efficient nitrification at low-dissolved oxygen. Water Research. 2015; 70: 38–51. pmid:25506762
- View Article
- PubMed/NCBI
- Google Scholar
18. Yan J, Haaijer S C M, Op d C H J M, et al. Mimicking the oxygen minimum zones: stimulating interaction of aerobic archaeal and anaerobic bacterial ammonia oxidizers in a laboratory-scale model system. Environmental Microbiology. 2012; 14(12): 3146–3158. pmid:23057688
- View Article
- PubMed/NCBI
- Google Scholar
19. Stahl D A, José R. de la Torre . Physiology and Diversity of Ammonia-Oxidizing Archaea. Annual Review of Microbiology. 2012; 66: 83–101. pmid:22994489
- View Article
- PubMed/NCBI
- Google Scholar
20. Still D. A., Ekama G. A., Wentzel M. C. and Casey T. G.. Filamentous organism bulking in nutrient removal activated sludge systems. Paper 2: Stimulation of the selector effect under aerobic conditions. Water Sa. 1996; 22: 97–114.
- View Article
- Google Scholar
21. Bollmann A., Bullerjahn G. S. and Mckay R. M.. Abundance and Diversity of Ammonia-Oxidizing Archaea and Bacteria in Sediments of Trophic End Members of the Laurentian Great Lakes, Erie and Superior. Plos One. 2014; 9: e97068. pmid:24819357
- View Article
- PubMed/NCBI
- Google Scholar
22. Mao Y., Yannarell A. C. and Mackie R. I.. Changes in N-transforming archaea and bacteria in soil during the establishment of bioenergy crops. Plos One. 2011; 6: e24750. pmid:21935454
- View Article
- PubMed/NCBI
- Google Scholar
23. Zhu G., Wang S., Wang W., Wang Y., Zhou L., Jiang B., Op D. C., Risgaardpetersen H, N., Schwark L.and Peng Y.. Hotspots of anaerobic ammonium oxidation at land-freshwater interfaces. Nature Geoscience. 2013; 6: 103–107.
- View Article
- Google Scholar
24. Jinbo X., Yongqin L., Xiangui L., Huayong Z., Jun Z., Juzhi H., Yongping Y., Tandong Y., Rob K. and Haiyan C.. Geographic distance and pH drive bacterial distribution in alkaline lake sediments across Tibetan Plateau. Environmental Microbiology. 2012;14: 2457–2466. pmid:22676420
- View Article
- PubMed/NCBI
- Google Scholar
25. Yin X., Qiao S., Zhou J. and Tang X.. Fast start-up of the anammox process with addition of reduced graphene oxides. Chemical Engineering Journal. 2016; 283: 160–166.
- View Article
- Google Scholar
26. Lv L., Ren L. F., Ni S. Q., Gao B. Y. and Wang Y. N.. The effect of magnetite on the start-up and N₂O emission reduction of the anammox process. Rsc Advances. 2016; 6: 99989–99996.
- View Article
- Google Scholar
27. Weidong W, Weiyue L, Di W, et al. Differentiation of nitrogen and microbial community in the littoral and limnetic sediments of a large shallow eutrophic lake (Chaohu Lake, China). Journal of Soils and Sediments. 2019; 19: 1005–1016.
- View Article
- Google Scholar
28. Lee K H, Wang Y F, Wang Y, et al. Abundance and Diversity of Aerobic/Anaerobic Ammonia/Ammonium-Oxidizing Microorganisms in an Ammonium-Rich Aquitard in the Pearl River Delta of South China. Microbial Ecology. 2018; 76: 81–91. pmid:27448106
- View Article
- PubMed/NCBI
- Google Scholar
29. Juan L, Xiancheng L, Yanying Z, et al. Community Composition and Transcriptional Activity of Ammonia-Oxidizing Prokaryotes of Seagrass Thalassia hemprichii in Coral Reef Ecosystems. Frontiers in Microbiology. 2018; 9: 7. pmid:29422885
- View Article
- PubMed/NCBI
- Google Scholar
30. Zhou X, Liu X, Huang S, et al. Total inorganic nitrogen removal during the partial/complete nitrification for treating domestic wastewater: Removal pathways and Main influencing factors. Bioresource Technology. 2018; 256: 285–294 pmid:29455096
- View Article
- PubMed/NCBI
- Google Scholar
31. Cheng Hao Ge Ying Dong, Li Hongmin, Li Qianxia, Ni Shou-Qing, Gao Baoyu, et al. Nitritation-anammox process—A realizable and satisfactory way to remove nitrogen from high saline wastewater. Bioresource Technology. 2019; 275: 86–93. pmid:30579105
- View Article
- PubMed/NCBI
- Google Scholar
32. He S, Chen Y, Qin M, et al. Effects of temperature on anammox performance and community structure. Bioresource Technology. 2018; 260: 186–195. pmid:29625291
- View Article
- PubMed/NCBI
- Google Scholar
33. Wang Q, Ding C, Tao G, et al. Analysis of enhanced nitrogen removal mechanisms in a validation wastewater treatment plant containing anammox bacteria. Applied Microbiology and Biotechnology. 2019; 103: 1255–1265. pmid:30539255
- View Article
- PubMed/NCBI
- Google Scholar
34. Hoekstra M., Geilvoet S. P., Hendrickx T., Van C. E. T. K., Kleerebezem R. and Van M. L.. Towards mainstream Anammox; lessons learned from pilot-scale research at WWTP Dokhaven. Environmental Technology. 2018; 1.
- View Article
- Google Scholar
35. Qin Y., Han B., Cao Y. and Wang T.. Impact of substrate concentration on anammox-UBF reactors start-up. Bioresource Technology. 2017; 239: 422–429. pmid:28535492
- View Article
- PubMed/NCBI
- Google Scholar
36. Könneke M., Bernhard A. E., Torre J. R. D. L., Walker C. B., Waterbury J. B. and Stahl D. A.. Isolation of an autotrophic ammonia-oxidizing marine archaeon. Nature. 2005 437: 543–546. pmid:16177789
- View Article
- PubMed/NCBI
- Google Scholar
37. Christopher A F., Kathryn J R., J Michael B., Alyson E S. and Brian B O.. Ubiquity and diversity of ammonia-oxidizing archaea in water columns and sediments of the ocean. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America. 2005; 102: 14683–14688. pmid:16186488
- View Article
- PubMed/NCBI
- Google Scholar
38. Leininger S., Urich T., Schloter M., Schwark L., Qi J., Nicol G. W., Prosser J. I., Schuster S. C. and Schleper C.. Archaea predominate among ammonia-oxidizing prokaryotes in soils. Nature. 2006 442: 806. pmid:16915287
- View Article
- PubMed/NCBI
- Google Scholar
39. Herrmann M., Saunders A. and Schramm A.. Effect of Lake Trophic Status and Rooted Macrophytes on Community Composition and Abundance of Ammonia-Oxidizing Prokaryotes in Freshwater Sediments. Applied and Environmental Microbiology. 2009; 75: 3127–3136. pmid:19304820
- View Article
- PubMed/NCBI
- Google Scholar
40. Ann P., Yundan P., Weidong Z., Wenjun L., Yiliang L., William I., Anna P., Christopher R., Shuguang L. and Zhang C. L.. Factors controlling the distribution of archaeal tetraethers in terrestrial hot springs. Applied and Environmental Microbiology. 2008; 74: 3523–3532. pmid:18390673
- View Article
- PubMed/NCBI
- Google Scholar
41. Spear J., Barton H., Robertson C., Francis C. and Pace N.. Microbial community biofabrics in a geothermal mine adit. Appl Environ Microbiol. 2007; 73: 6172–6180. pmid:17693567
- View Article
- PubMed/NCBI
- Google Scholar
42. Brochierarmanet C., Boussau B., Gribaldo S. and Forterre P.. Mesophilic crenarchaeota: proposal for a third archaeal phylum, the Thaumarchaeota. Nature Reviews Microbiology. 2008; 6: 245–252. pmid:18274537
- View Article
- PubMed/NCBI
- Google Scholar
43. Purkhold U., PommereningRöser A, Juretschko S., Schmid M. C., Koops H. P., and Wagner M. Phylogeny of all recognized species of ammonia oxidizers based on comparative 16S rRNA and amoA sequence analysis: implications for molecular diversity surveys. Applied and Environmental Microbiology. 2000; 66: 5368–5382. pmid:11097916
- View Article
- PubMed/NCBI
- Google Scholar
44. Sauder L. A., Albertsen M., Engel K., Schwarz J., Nielsen P. H., Wagner M. and Neufeld J. D.. Cultivation and characterization of Candidatus Nitrosocosmicus exaquare, an ammonia-oxidizing archaeon from a municipal wastewater treatment system. Isme Journal. 2017; 11: 1142–1157. pmid:28195581
- View Article
- PubMed/NCBI
- Google Scholar
45. Pitcher A., Villanueva L., Hopmans E. C., Schouten S., Reichart G. J. and Damsté J. S. S.. Niche segregation of ammonia-oxidizing archaea and anammox bacteria in the Arabian Sea oxygen minimum zone. Isme Journal. 2011; 5: 1896. pmid:21593795
- View Article
- PubMed/NCBI
- Google Scholar
46. Kindaichi T., Tsushima I., Ogasawara Y., Shimokawa M., Ozaki N., Satoh H. and Okabe S.. In situ activity and spatial organization of anaerobic ammonium-oxidizing (anammox) bacteria in biofilms. Applied and Environmental Microbiology. 2007; 73: 4931. pmid:17526785
- View Article
- PubMed/NCBI
- Google Scholar
47. Star W R L V D, Miclea A I, Dongen U G J M V, et al. The membrane bioreactor: A novel tool to grow anammox bacteria as free cells. Biotechnology and bioengineering. 2008; 101(2):286–294. pmid:18421799
- View Article
- PubMed/NCBI
- Google Scholar
48. Wang X., Xu X., Liu S., Zhang Y., Zhao C. and Yang F.. Combination of complex adsorption and anammox for nitric oxide removal. Journal of Hazardous Materials. 2016; 312: 175–183. pmid:27037471
- View Article
- PubMed/NCBI
- Google Scholar
49. Ailijiang N., Chang J., Peng L., Peng L., Wu Q., Zhang X. and Xia H.. Electrical stimulation on biodegradation of phenol and responses of microbial communities in conductive carriers supported biofilms of the bioelectrochemical reactor. Bioresource Technology. 2016; 201: 1–7. pmid:26615496
- View Article
- PubMed/NCBI
- Google Scholar
50. Xin W., Jian Z., Li Y., Qing X. and Qiang H.. A novel process combining simultaneous partial nitrification, anammox and denitrification (SNAD) with denitrifying phosphorus removal (DPR) to treat sewage. Bioresource Technology. 2016; 222: 309–316. pmid:27728833
- View Article
- PubMed/NCBI
- Google Scholar
51. Duan Z. H., Pan L. M., Chen X. O., Wang X. D., Zhao L. J. and Tian L. Q.. Changes of Microbial Community Structure in Activated Sludge Bulking at Low Temperature. Environmental Science. 2016; 37: 1070.
- View Article
- Google Scholar
52. Xiong Z., Yinglong S., Xiang L., Naidong X., Dongbo W. and Yinguang C.. Pyrosequencing reveals the key microorganisms involved in sludge alkaline fermentation for efficient short-chain fatty acids production. Environmental Science & Technology. 2013; 47: 4262–4268.
- View Article
- Google Scholar
53. Lu H., Chandran K. and Stensel D.. Microbial ecology of denitrification in biological wastewater treatment." Water Research. 2014; 64: 237–254. pmid:25078442
- View Article
- PubMed/NCBI
- Google Scholar
54. Luo J., Liang H., Yan L., Ma J., Yang Y. and Li G.. Microbial community structures in a closed raw water distribution system biofilm as revealed by 454-pyrosequencing analysis and the effect of microbial biofilm communities on raw water quality. Bioresource Technology. 2013; 148: 189–195. pmid:24055963
- View Article
- PubMed/NCBI
- Google Scholar
55. Kirkpatrick J. B., Fuchsman C. A., Yakushev E., Staley J. T. and Murray J. W.. Concurrent activity of anammox and denitrifying bacteria in the Black Sea. Frontiers in Microbiology. 2012; 3: 256. pmid:22833740
- View Article
- PubMed/NCBI
- Google Scholar

[ref1] 1. Mulder A., Graaf A. A. v. d., Robertson L. A. and Kuenen J. G.. Anaerobic ammonium oxidation discovered in a denitrifying fluidized bed reactor. Fems Microbiology Ecology.1995; 16: 177–184.
View Article
Google Scholar

[2] View Article

[3] Google Scholar

[ref2] 2. Strous M., Heijnen J. J., Kuenen J. G., and Jetten M. S. M. The sequencing batch reactor as a powerful tool for the study of slowly growing anaerobic ammonium-oxidizing microorganisms. Applied Microbiology and Biotechnology. 1998; 50(5): 589–596.
View Article
Google Scholar

[5] View Article

[6] Google Scholar

[ref3] 3. Chen H., Hu H. Y., Chen Q. Q., Shi M. L., and Jin R. C. Successful start-up of the anammox process: influence of the seeding strategy on performance and granule properties. Bioresource Technology. 2016; 211, 594–602. pmid:27043054
View Article
PubMed/NCBI
Google Scholar

[8] View Article

[9] PubMed/NCBI

[10] Google Scholar

[ref4] 4. Strous M., Fuerst J A, Kramer E H M. Missing lithotroph identified as new planctomycete. Nature. 1999; 400: 446. pmid:10440372
View Article
PubMed/NCBI
Google Scholar

[12] View Article

[13] PubMed/NCBI

[14] Google Scholar

[ref5] 5. Schmid M., Twachtmann U., Klein M., Strous M., Juretschko S., Jetten M., Metzger J. W., Schleifer K. H. and Wagner M.. Molecular evidence for genus level diversity of bacteria capable of catalyzing anaerobic ammonium oxidation. Systematic and Applied Microbiology. 2000; 23: 93–106. pmid:10879983
View Article
PubMed/NCBI
Google Scholar

[16] View Article

[17] PubMed/NCBI

[18] Google Scholar

[ref6] 6. Kuypers M. M., Sliekers A. O., Lavik G., Schmid M., Jørgensen B. B., Kuenen J. G., Sinninghe Damsté J. S., Strous M. and Jetten M. S.. Anaerobic ammonium oxidation by anammox bacteria in the Black Sea. Nature. 2003; 422: 608. pmid:12686999
View Article
PubMed/NCBI
Google Scholar

[20] View Article

[21] PubMed/NCBI

[22] Google Scholar

[ref7] 7. Kartal B., Rattray J., van Niftrik L. A., Van d. V. J., Schmid M. C., Webb R. I., Schouten S., Fuerst J. A., Damste J. S. and Jetten M. S.. Candidatus "Anammoxoglobus propionicus" a new propionate oxidizing species of anaerobic ammonium oxidizing bacteria. Systematic and Applied Microbiology. 2007, 30: 39–49. pmid:16644170
View Article
PubMed/NCBI
Google Scholar

[24] View Article

[25] PubMed/NCBI

[26] Google Scholar

[ref8] 8. Zhe-Xue Q., Sung-Keun R., Jian-E Z., Yang Y., Jin-Woo B., Ja Ryeong P., Sung-Taik L. and Yong-Ha P.. Diversity of ammonium-oxidizing bacteria in a granular sludge anaerobic ammonium-oxidizing (anammox) reactor. Environmental Microbiology. 2010; 10: 3130–3139.
View Article
Google Scholar

[28] View Article

[29] Google Scholar

[ref9] 9. Khramenkov S. V., Kozlov M. N., Kevbrina M. V., Dorofeev A. G., Kazakova E. A., Grachev V. A., Kuznetsov B. B., Polyakov D. Y. and Nikolaev Y. A.. A novel bacterium carrying out anaerobic ammonium oxidation in a reactor for biological treatment of the filtrate of wastewater fermented sludge. Microbiology. 2013, 82: 628–636.
View Article
Google Scholar

[31] View Article

[32] Google Scholar

[ref10] 10. Romain Connan, Patrick Dabert, Sophie R. Le, Olivier, Chapleur, Gilbert and Bridoux. Characterization of a combined batch-continuous procedure for the culture of anammox biomass. Ecological Engineering. 2017; 106: 231–241.
View Article
Google Scholar

[34] View Article

[35] Google Scholar

[ref11] 11. Han P., Huang Y. T., Lin J. G. and Gu J. D.. A comparison of two 16S rRNA gene-based PCR primer sets in unraveling anammox bacteria from different environmental samples. Applied Microbiology and Biotechnology. 2013; 97: 10521–10529. pmid:24177731
View Article
PubMed/NCBI
Google Scholar

[37] View Article

[38] PubMed/NCBI

[39] Google Scholar

[ref12] 12. Lotti T., Kleerebezem R., Abelleira-Pereira J. M., Abbas B. and Loosdrecht M. C. M. v. Faster through training: The anammox case. Water Research. 2015; 81: 261–268. pmid:26074189
View Article
PubMed/NCBI
Google Scholar

[41] View Article

[42] PubMed/NCBI

[43] Google Scholar

[ref13] 13. Chu Z. R., Wang K., Li X. K., Zhu M. T., Yang L. and Zhang J.. Microbial characterization of aggregates within a one-stage nitritation-anammox system using high-throughput amplicon sequencing. Chemical Engineering Journal. 2015; 262: 41–48.
View Article
Google Scholar

[45] View Article

[46] Google Scholar

[ref14] 14. Shalini S. S. and Joseph K.. Nitrogen management in landfill leachate: Application of SHARON, ANAMMOX and combined SHARON–ANAMMOX process. Waste Management. 2012; 32: 2385–2400. pmid:22766438
View Article
PubMed/NCBI
Google Scholar

[48] View Article

[49] PubMed/NCBI

[50] Google Scholar

[ref15] 15. Coolen M. J. L., Ben A., Judith V. B., Hopmans E. C., Kuypers M. M. M., Wakeham S. G. and Damsté J. S., Sinninghe. Putative ammonia-oxidizing Crenarchaeota in suboxic waters of the Black Sea: a basin-wide ecological study using 16S ribosomal and functional genes and membrane lipids. Environmental Microbiology. 2010; 9: 1001–1016.
View Article
Google Scholar

[52] View Article

[53] Google Scholar

[ref16] 16. Lam P., Jensen M. M., Lavik G., Mcginnis D. F., Müller B., Schubert C. J., Amann R., Bo T. and Kuypers M. M. M.. Linking crenarchaeal and bacterial nitrification to anammox in the Black Sea. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America. 2007; 104: 7104–7109. pmid:17420469
View Article
PubMed/NCBI
Google Scholar

[55] View Article

[56] PubMed/NCBI

[57] Google Scholar

[ref17] 17. Fitzgerald C M, Camejo P, Oshlag J Z, et al. Ammonia-oxidizing microbial communities in reactors with efficient nitrification at low-dissolved oxygen. Water Research. 2015; 70: 38–51. pmid:25506762
View Article
PubMed/NCBI
Google Scholar

[59] View Article

[60] PubMed/NCBI

[61] Google Scholar

[ref18] 18. Yan J, Haaijer S C M, Op d C H J M, et al. Mimicking the oxygen minimum zones: stimulating interaction of aerobic archaeal and anaerobic bacterial ammonia oxidizers in a laboratory-scale model system. Environmental Microbiology. 2012; 14(12): 3146–3158. pmid:23057688
View Article
PubMed/NCBI
Google Scholar

[63] View Article

[64] PubMed/NCBI

[65] Google Scholar

[ref19] 19. Stahl D A, José R. de la Torre . Physiology and Diversity of Ammonia-Oxidizing Archaea. Annual Review of Microbiology. 2012; 66: 83–101. pmid:22994489
View Article
PubMed/NCBI
Google Scholar

[67] View Article

[68] PubMed/NCBI

[69] Google Scholar

[ref20] 20. Still D. A., Ekama G. A., Wentzel M. C. and Casey T. G.. Filamentous organism bulking in nutrient removal activated sludge systems. Paper 2: Stimulation of the selector effect under aerobic conditions. Water Sa. 1996; 22: 97–114.
View Article
Google Scholar

[71] View Article

[72] Google Scholar

[ref21] 21. Bollmann A., Bullerjahn G. S. and Mckay R. M.. Abundance and Diversity of Ammonia-Oxidizing Archaea and Bacteria in Sediments of Trophic End Members of the Laurentian Great Lakes, Erie and Superior. Plos One. 2014; 9: e97068. pmid:24819357
View Article
PubMed/NCBI
Google Scholar

[74] View Article

[75] PubMed/NCBI

[76] Google Scholar

[ref22] 22. Mao Y., Yannarell A. C. and Mackie R. I.. Changes in N-transforming archaea and bacteria in soil during the establishment of bioenergy crops. Plos One. 2011; 6: e24750. pmid:21935454
View Article
PubMed/NCBI
Google Scholar

[78] View Article

[79] PubMed/NCBI

[80] Google Scholar

[ref23] 23. Zhu G., Wang S., Wang W., Wang Y., Zhou L., Jiang B., Op D. C., Risgaardpetersen H, N., Schwark L.and Peng Y.. Hotspots of anaerobic ammonium oxidation at land-freshwater interfaces. Nature Geoscience. 2013; 6: 103–107.
View Article
Google Scholar

[82] View Article

[83] Google Scholar

[ref24] 24. Jinbo X., Yongqin L., Xiangui L., Huayong Z., Jun Z., Juzhi H., Yongping Y., Tandong Y., Rob K. and Haiyan C.. Geographic distance and pH drive bacterial distribution in alkaline lake sediments across Tibetan Plateau. Environmental Microbiology. 2012;14: 2457–2466. pmid:22676420
View Article
PubMed/NCBI
Google Scholar

[85] View Article

[86] PubMed/NCBI

[87] Google Scholar

[ref25] 25. Yin X., Qiao S., Zhou J. and Tang X.. Fast start-up of the anammox process with addition of reduced graphene oxides. Chemical Engineering Journal. 2016; 283: 160–166.
View Article
Google Scholar

[89] View Article

[90] Google Scholar

[ref26] 26. Lv L., Ren L. F., Ni S. Q., Gao B. Y. and Wang Y. N.. The effect of magnetite on the start-up and N₂O emission reduction of the anammox process. Rsc Advances. 2016; 6: 99989–99996.
View Article
Google Scholar

[92] View Article

[93] Google Scholar

[ref27] 27. Weidong W, Weiyue L, Di W, et al. Differentiation of nitrogen and microbial community in the littoral and limnetic sediments of a large shallow eutrophic lake (Chaohu Lake, China). Journal of Soils and Sediments. 2019; 19: 1005–1016.
View Article
Google Scholar

[95] View Article

[96] Google Scholar

[ref28] 28. Lee K H, Wang Y F, Wang Y, et al. Abundance and Diversity of Aerobic/Anaerobic Ammonia/Ammonium-Oxidizing Microorganisms in an Ammonium-Rich Aquitard in the Pearl River Delta of South China. Microbial Ecology. 2018; 76: 81–91. pmid:27448106
View Article
PubMed/NCBI
Google Scholar

[98] View Article

[99] PubMed/NCBI

[100] Google Scholar

[ref29] 29. Juan L, Xiancheng L, Yanying Z, et al. Community Composition and Transcriptional Activity of Ammonia-Oxidizing Prokaryotes of Seagrass Thalassia hemprichii in Coral Reef Ecosystems. Frontiers in Microbiology. 2018; 9: 7. pmid:29422885
View Article
PubMed/NCBI
Google Scholar

[102] View Article

[103] PubMed/NCBI

[104] Google Scholar

[ref30] 30. Zhou X, Liu X, Huang S, et al. Total inorganic nitrogen removal during the partial/complete nitrification for treating domestic wastewater: Removal pathways and Main influencing factors. Bioresource Technology. 2018; 256: 285–294 pmid:29455096
View Article
PubMed/NCBI
Google Scholar

[106] View Article

[107] PubMed/NCBI

[108] Google Scholar

[ref31] 31. Cheng Hao Ge Ying Dong, Li Hongmin, Li Qianxia, Ni Shou-Qing, Gao Baoyu, et al. Nitritation-anammox process—A realizable and satisfactory way to remove nitrogen from high saline wastewater. Bioresource Technology. 2019; 275: 86–93. pmid:30579105
View Article
PubMed/NCBI
Google Scholar

[110] View Article

[111] PubMed/NCBI

[112] Google Scholar

[ref32] 32. He S, Chen Y, Qin M, et al. Effects of temperature on anammox performance and community structure. Bioresource Technology. 2018; 260: 186–195. pmid:29625291
View Article
PubMed/NCBI
Google Scholar

[114] View Article

[115] PubMed/NCBI

[116] Google Scholar

[ref33] 33. Wang Q, Ding C, Tao G, et al. Analysis of enhanced nitrogen removal mechanisms in a validation wastewater treatment plant containing anammox bacteria. Applied Microbiology and Biotechnology. 2019; 103: 1255–1265. pmid:30539255
View Article
PubMed/NCBI
Google Scholar

[118] View Article

[119] PubMed/NCBI

[120] Google Scholar

[ref34] 34. Hoekstra M., Geilvoet S. P., Hendrickx T., Van C. E. T. K., Kleerebezem R. and Van M. L.. Towards mainstream Anammox; lessons learned from pilot-scale research at WWTP Dokhaven. Environmental Technology. 2018; 1.
View Article
Google Scholar

[122] View Article

[123] Google Scholar

[ref35] 35. Qin Y., Han B., Cao Y. and Wang T.. Impact of substrate concentration on anammox-UBF reactors start-up. Bioresource Technology. 2017; 239: 422–429. pmid:28535492
View Article
PubMed/NCBI
Google Scholar

[125] View Article

[126] PubMed/NCBI

[127] Google Scholar

[ref36] 36. Könneke M., Bernhard A. E., Torre J. R. D. L., Walker C. B., Waterbury J. B. and Stahl D. A.. Isolation of an autotrophic ammonia-oxidizing marine archaeon. Nature. 2005 437: 543–546. pmid:16177789
View Article
PubMed/NCBI
Google Scholar

[129] View Article

[130] PubMed/NCBI

[131] Google Scholar

[ref37] 37. Christopher A F., Kathryn J R., J Michael B., Alyson E S. and Brian B O.. Ubiquity and diversity of ammonia-oxidizing archaea in water columns and sediments of the ocean. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America. 2005; 102: 14683–14688. pmid:16186488
View Article
PubMed/NCBI
Google Scholar

[133] View Article

[134] PubMed/NCBI

[135] Google Scholar

[ref38] 38. Leininger S., Urich T., Schloter M., Schwark L., Qi J., Nicol G. W., Prosser J. I., Schuster S. C. and Schleper C.. Archaea predominate among ammonia-oxidizing prokaryotes in soils. Nature. 2006 442: 806. pmid:16915287
View Article
PubMed/NCBI
Google Scholar

[137] View Article

[138] PubMed/NCBI

[139] Google Scholar

[ref39] 39. Herrmann M., Saunders A. and Schramm A.. Effect of Lake Trophic Status and Rooted Macrophytes on Community Composition and Abundance of Ammonia-Oxidizing Prokaryotes in Freshwater Sediments. Applied and Environmental Microbiology. 2009; 75: 3127–3136. pmid:19304820
View Article
PubMed/NCBI
Google Scholar

[141] View Article

[142] PubMed/NCBI

[143] Google Scholar

[ref40] 40. Ann P., Yundan P., Weidong Z., Wenjun L., Yiliang L., William I., Anna P., Christopher R., Shuguang L. and Zhang C. L.. Factors controlling the distribution of archaeal tetraethers in terrestrial hot springs. Applied and Environmental Microbiology. 2008; 74: 3523–3532. pmid:18390673
View Article
PubMed/NCBI
Google Scholar

[145] View Article

[146] PubMed/NCBI

[147] Google Scholar

[ref41] 41. Spear J., Barton H., Robertson C., Francis C. and Pace N.. Microbial community biofabrics in a geothermal mine adit. Appl Environ Microbiol. 2007; 73: 6172–6180. pmid:17693567
View Article
PubMed/NCBI
Google Scholar

[149] View Article

[150] PubMed/NCBI

[151] Google Scholar

[ref42] 42. Brochierarmanet C., Boussau B., Gribaldo S. and Forterre P.. Mesophilic crenarchaeota: proposal for a third archaeal phylum, the Thaumarchaeota. Nature Reviews Microbiology. 2008; 6: 245–252. pmid:18274537
View Article
PubMed/NCBI
Google Scholar

[153] View Article

[154] PubMed/NCBI

[155] Google Scholar

[ref43] 43. Purkhold U., PommereningRöser A, Juretschko S., Schmid M. C., Koops H. P., and Wagner M. Phylogeny of all recognized species of ammonia oxidizers based on comparative 16S rRNA and amoA sequence analysis: implications for molecular diversity surveys. Applied and Environmental Microbiology. 2000; 66: 5368–5382. pmid:11097916
View Article
PubMed/NCBI
Google Scholar

[157] View Article

[158] PubMed/NCBI

[159] Google Scholar

[ref44] 44. Sauder L. A., Albertsen M., Engel K., Schwarz J., Nielsen P. H., Wagner M. and Neufeld J. D.. Cultivation and characterization of Candidatus Nitrosocosmicus exaquare, an ammonia-oxidizing archaeon from a municipal wastewater treatment system. Isme Journal. 2017; 11: 1142–1157. pmid:28195581
View Article
PubMed/NCBI
Google Scholar

[161] View Article

[162] PubMed/NCBI

[163] Google Scholar

[ref45] 45. Pitcher A., Villanueva L., Hopmans E. C., Schouten S., Reichart G. J. and Damsté J. S. S.. Niche segregation of ammonia-oxidizing archaea and anammox bacteria in the Arabian Sea oxygen minimum zone. Isme Journal. 2011; 5: 1896. pmid:21593795
View Article
PubMed/NCBI
Google Scholar

[165] View Article

[166] PubMed/NCBI

[167] Google Scholar

[ref46] 46. Kindaichi T., Tsushima I., Ogasawara Y., Shimokawa M., Ozaki N., Satoh H. and Okabe S.. In situ activity and spatial organization of anaerobic ammonium-oxidizing (anammox) bacteria in biofilms. Applied and Environmental Microbiology. 2007; 73: 4931. pmid:17526785
View Article
PubMed/NCBI
Google Scholar

[169] View Article

[170] PubMed/NCBI

[171] Google Scholar

[ref47] 47. Star W R L V D, Miclea A I, Dongen U G J M V, et al. The membrane bioreactor: A novel tool to grow anammox bacteria as free cells. Biotechnology and bioengineering. 2008; 101(2):286–294. pmid:18421799
View Article
PubMed/NCBI
Google Scholar

[173] View Article

[174] PubMed/NCBI

[175] Google Scholar

[ref48] 48. Wang X., Xu X., Liu S., Zhang Y., Zhao C. and Yang F.. Combination of complex adsorption and anammox for nitric oxide removal. Journal of Hazardous Materials. 2016; 312: 175–183. pmid:27037471
View Article
PubMed/NCBI
Google Scholar

[177] View Article

[178] PubMed/NCBI

[179] Google Scholar

[ref49] 49. Ailijiang N., Chang J., Peng L., Peng L., Wu Q., Zhang X. and Xia H.. Electrical stimulation on biodegradation of phenol and responses of microbial communities in conductive carriers supported biofilms of the bioelectrochemical reactor. Bioresource Technology. 2016; 201: 1–7. pmid:26615496
View Article
PubMed/NCBI
Google Scholar

[181] View Article

[182] PubMed/NCBI

[183] Google Scholar

[ref50] 50. Xin W., Jian Z., Li Y., Qing X. and Qiang H.. A novel process combining simultaneous partial nitrification, anammox and denitrification (SNAD) with denitrifying phosphorus removal (DPR) to treat sewage. Bioresource Technology. 2016; 222: 309–316. pmid:27728833
View Article
PubMed/NCBI
Google Scholar

[185] View Article

[186] PubMed/NCBI

[187] Google Scholar

[ref51] 51. Duan Z. H., Pan L. M., Chen X. O., Wang X. D., Zhao L. J. and Tian L. Q.. Changes of Microbial Community Structure in Activated Sludge Bulking at Low Temperature. Environmental Science. 2016; 37: 1070.
View Article
Google Scholar

[189] View Article

[190] Google Scholar

[ref52] 52. Xiong Z., Yinglong S., Xiang L., Naidong X., Dongbo W. and Yinguang C.. Pyrosequencing reveals the key microorganisms involved in sludge alkaline fermentation for efficient short-chain fatty acids production. Environmental Science & Technology. 2013; 47: 4262–4268.
View Article
Google Scholar

[192] View Article

[193] Google Scholar

[ref53] 53. Lu H., Chandran K. and Stensel D.. Microbial ecology of denitrification in biological wastewater treatment." Water Research. 2014; 64: 237–254. pmid:25078442
View Article
PubMed/NCBI
Google Scholar

[195] View Article

[196] PubMed/NCBI

[197] Google Scholar

[ref54] 54. Luo J., Liang H., Yan L., Ma J., Yang Y. and Li G.. Microbial community structures in a closed raw water distribution system biofilm as revealed by 454-pyrosequencing analysis and the effect of microbial biofilm communities on raw water quality. Bioresource Technology. 2013; 148: 189–195. pmid:24055963
View Article
PubMed/NCBI
Google Scholar

[199] View Article

[200] PubMed/NCBI

[201] Google Scholar

[ref55] 55. Kirkpatrick J. B., Fuchsman C. A., Yakushev E., Staley J. T. and Murray J. W.. Concurrent activity of anammox and denitrifying bacteria in the Black Sea. Frontiers in Microbiology. 2012; 3: 256. pmid:22833740
View Article
PubMed/NCBI
Google Scholar

[203] View Article

[204] PubMed/NCBI

[205] Google Scholar

Figures

Abstract

Introduction

Materials and methods

Anammox reactor

Seeding sludge and synthetic wastewater

Analysis

Data analysis

Results and discussion

Reactor performance

Analysis of microbial community diversity

Microbial community analysis

AOA community analysis at phylum and genus levels.

AOB community analysis at phylum and genus levels.

Anammox bacterial community analysis at genus levels.

Bacterial community analysis at phylum and genus levels.

Practical implications

Conclusions

Acknowledgments

References