Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Seasonal Variation on Microbial Community and Methane Production during Anaerobic Digestion of Cattle Manure in Brazil

  • Physiology and Biotechnology
  • Published:
Microbial Ecology Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Anaerobic digestion is an alternative method for the treatment of animal manure and wastewater. The anaerobic bioconversion of biomass requires a multi-step biological process, including microorganisms with distinct roles. The diversity and composition of microbial structure in pilot-scale anaerobic digestion operating at ambient temperature in Brazil were studied. Influence of the seasonal and temporal patterns on bacterial and archaeal communities were assessed by studying the variations in density, dynamic and diversity and structure. The average daily biogas produced in the summer and winter months was 18.7 and 16 L day−1, respectively, and there was no difference in the average methane yield. Quantitative PCR analysis revealed that no differences in abundances and dynamics were found for bacterial communities and the total number of Archaea in different seasons. Analysis of bacterial clone libraries revealed a predominance of Firmicutes (54.5 %/summer and 46.7 %/winter) and Bacteroidetes (31.4 %/summer and 44.4 %/winter). Within the Archaea, the phylum Euryarchaeota was predominant in both digesters. Phylogenetic distribution showed changes in percentage between the phyla identified, but no alterations were recorded in the quality and amount of produced methane or community dynamics. The results may suggest that redundancy of microbial groups may have occurred, pointing to a more complex microbial community in the ecosystem related to this ambient temperature system.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3
Fig. 4
Fig. 5

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Guerci M, Knudsen MT, Bava L, Zucali M, Schönbach P, Kristensen T (2013) Parameters affecting the environmental impact of a range of dairy farming systems in Denmark, Germany and Italy. J Clean Prod 54:133–141

    Article  Google Scholar 

  2. Abubaker J, Risberg K, Pell M (2012) Biogas residues as fertilisers—effects on wheat growth and soil microbial activities. Appl Energy 99:126–134

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  3. Holm-Nielsen JB, Seadi TA, Oleskowicz-Popiel P (2009) The future of anaerobic digestion and biogas utilization. Bioresour Technol 100:5478–5484

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  4. Kumar KV, Sridevi V, Rani K, Sakunthala M, Kumar CS (2013) A review on production of biogas, fundamentals, applications & its recent enhancing techniques. Elixir Chem Engg 57:14073–14079

    Google Scholar 

  5. Sundberg C, Al-Soud WA, Larsson M, Alm E, Yekta SS, Svensson BH, Sørensen SJ, Karlsson A (2013) 454 pyrosequencing analyses of bacterial and archaeal richness in 21 full-scale biogas digesters. FEMS Microbiol Ecol 85:612–626

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  6. Kunz A, Steinmetz RLR, Rammeb MA, Coldebella A (2009) Effect of storage time on swine manure solid separation efficiency by screening. Bioresour Technol 100:1815–1818

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  7. Levén L, Eriksson ARB, Schnurer A (2007) Effect of process temperature on bacterial and archaeal communities in two methanogenic bioreactors treating organic house holdwaste. FEMS Microbiol Ecol 59:683–693

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  8. Lee SH, Kang HJ, Lee YH, Lee TJ, Han K, Choic Y, Park HD (2012) Monitoring bacterial community structure and variability in time scale in full-scale anaerobic digesters. J Environ Monit 14:1893–1905

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  9. Ferrer I, Gamiz M, Almeida M, Ruiz A (2009) Pilot project of biogas production from pig manure and urine mixture at ambient temperature in Ventanilla (Lima, Peru). Waste Manag 29:168–173

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  10. Yusuf MOL, Debora A, Ogheneruona DE (2011) Ambient temperature kinetic assessment of biogas production from co-digestion of horse and cow dung. Res Agr Eng 57:97–104

    Google Scholar 

  11. Nikolaeva S, Sánchez E, Borja R (2013) Dairy wastewater treatment by anaerobic fixed bed reactors from laboratory to pilot-scale plant: a case study in Costa Rica operating at ambient temperature. Int J Environ Res 7:759–766

    Google Scholar 

  12. American Public Health Association (APHA) (2005) Standard methods for examination of water and wastewater, 21st edn. American Water Works Association, Washington, DC

    Google Scholar 

  13. Braun F, Hamelin J, Gévaudan G, Patureau D (2011) Development and application of an enzymatic and cell flotation treatment for the recovery of viable microbial cells from environmental matrices such as anaerobic sludge. Appl Environ Microbiol 77:8487–8493

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  14. Michelland RJ, Dejean S, Combes S, Fortun-Lamothe L, Cauquil L (2009) StatFingerprints: a friendly graphical interface program for processing and analysis of microbial fingerprint profiles. Mol Ecol Resour 9:1359–1363

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  15. Yu Y, Lee C, Kim J, Hwang S (2005) Group-specific primer and probe sets to detect methanogenic communities using quantitative real-time polymerase chain reaction. Biotechnol Bioeng 89:670–679

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  16. Tamaki H, Wright CL, Li X, Lin Q, Hwang C, Wang S, Thimmapuram J, Kamagata Y, Liu W (2011) Analysis of 16S rRNA amplicon sequencing options on the Roche/454 next-generation titanium sequencing platform. PLoS ONE 6:e25263

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  17. Alexander TW, Yanke JL, Reuter T, Topp E, Read RR, Selinger BL, McAllister TA (2011) Longitudinal characterization of antimicrobial resistance genes in feces shed from cattle fed different subtherapeutic antibiotics. BMC Microbiol 11:19

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  18. Klocke M, Mähnert P, Mundt K, Souidi K, Linke B (2007) Microbial community analysis of a biogas-producing completely stirred tank reactor fed continuously with fodder beet silage as mono-substrate. Syst Appl Microbiol 30:139–151

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  19. Moletta-Denat M, Bru-Adan V, Delgenès JP, Hamelin J, Wéry N, Godon JJ (2010) Selective microbial aerosolization in biogas demonstrated by quantitative PCR. Bioresour Technol 101:7252–7257

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  20. Hori T, Haruta S, Ueno Y, Ishii M, Igarashi Y (2006) Dynamic transition of a methanogenic population in response to the concentration of volatile fatty acids in a thermophilic anaerobic digester. Appl Environ Microbiol 72:1623–1630

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  21. Liu FH, Wang SB, Zhang JS, Zhang J, Yan X, Zhou HK, Zhao GP, Zhou ZH (2009) The structure of the bacterial and archaeal community in a biogas digester as revealed by denaturing gradient gel electrophoresis and 16S rDNA sequencing analysis. J Appl Microbiol 106:952–966

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  22. Peu P, Brugère H, Pourcher AM, Kérourédan M, Godon JJ, Delgenès JP, Dabert P (2006) Dynamics of a pig slurry microbial community during anaerobic storage and management. Appl Environ Microbiol 72:3578–3585

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  23. Bengelsdorf FR, Gerischer U, Langer S, Zak M, Kazda M (2013) Stability of a biogas-producing bacterial, archaeal and fungal community degrading food residues. FEMS Microbiol Ecol 84:201–212

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  24. Alvarez R, Villca S, Lidén G (2006) Biogas production from llama and cow manure at high altitude. Biomass Bioenerg 30:66–75

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  25. Hill DT, Taylor SE, Grift TE (2001) Simulation of low temperature anaerobic digestion of dairy and swine manure. Bioresour Technol 78:127–131

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  26. Rico JL, García H, Rico C, Tejero I (2007) Characterization of solid and liquid fractions of dairy manure with regard to their component distribution and methane production. Bioresour Technol 98:971–979

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  27. Chae KJ, Jang A, Yim SK, Kim IS (2008) The effects of digestion temperature and temperature shock on the biogas yields from the mesophilic anaerobic digestion of swine manure. Bioresour Technol 99:1–6

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  28. McGarvey JA, Miller WG, Zhang R, Ma Y, Mitloehner F (2007) Bacterial population dynamics in dairy waste during aerobic and anaerobic treatment and subsequent storage. Appl Environ Microbiol 73:193–202

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  29. Kampmann K, Ratering S, Kramer I, Schmidt M, Zerr W, Schnella S (2012) Unexpected stability of Bacteroidetes and Firmicutes communities in laboratory biogas reactors fed with different defined substrates. Appl Environ Microbiol 78:2106–2119

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  30. Krause L, Diaz NN, Edwards RA, Gartemann KH, Krömeke H, Neuweger H, Pühler A, Runte KJ, Schlüter A, Stoye J, Szczepanowski R, Tauch A, Goesmann A (2008) Taxonomic composition and gene content of a methane-producing microbial community isolated from a biogas reactor. J Biotechnol 136:91–101

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  31. Jaenicke S, Ander C, Bekel T, Bisdorf R, Dröge M (2011) Comparative and joint analysis of two metagenomic datasets from a biogas fermenter obtained by 454-pyrosequencing. PLoS ONE 6:e14519

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  32. Ritari J, Koskinen K, Hultman J, Kurola JM, Kymäläinen M, Romantschuk M, Paulin L, Auvinen P (2012) Molecular analysis of meso- and thermophilic microbiota associated with anaerobic biowaste degradation. BMC Microbiol 12:121

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  33. Simankova MV, Kotsyurbenko OR, Luedersb T, Nozhevnikova AN, Wagner B, Conrad R, Friedrich MW (2003) Isolation and characterization of new strains of methanogens from cold terrestrial habitats. Syst Appl Microbiol 26:312–318

  34. Ma J, Zhao B, Frear C, Zhao Q, Yu L, Li X, Chen S (2013) Methanosarcina domination in anaerobic sequencing batch reactor at short hydraulic retention time. Bioresource Technol 137:41–50

  35. Wang Y, Qian PY (2009) Conservative fragments in bacterial 16S rRNA genes and primer design for 16S ribosomal DNA amplicons in metagenomic studies. PloS ONE 4:e7401

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  36. Brosius J, Dull TJ, Sleeter DD, Noller HF (1981) Gene organization and primary structure of a ribosomal RNA operon from Escherichia coli. J Mol Biol 148:107–127

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgments

The authors are grateful to Kim Milferstedt, for support to the program database analysis. This study was supported by grants from EMBRAPA’s virtual Laboratory abroad (Labex Program) in Europe, Brazilian National Council for Scientific and Technological Development (CNPq), Research Support Foundation of Minas Gerais (FAPEMIG). The authors gratefully acknowledge Embrapa Dairy Cattle, Institut National de la Recherche Agronomique (INRA) and Federal University of Juiz de Fora (UFJF). We also thank Coordination of Improvement of the Personnel of Higher Education (CAPES) by the scholarship (Process 11853-12-3).

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Laboratory of Bacterial Physiology and Molecular Genetics, Department of Parasitology, Microbiology and Immunology, Institute of Biological Sciences, Federal University of Juiz de Fora, 36.036-900, Juiz de Fora, Minais Gerais, Brazil

    Juliana Alves Resende, Vânia Lúcia Silva & Cláudio Galuppo Diniz

  2. INRA, UR50, Laboratoire de Biotechnologie de l’Environnement, Narbonne, France

    Juliana Alves Resende, Jean-Jacques Godon & Anaïs Bonnafous

  3. EMBRAPA Brazilian Agricultural Research Corporation, Secretariat for International Relations, Headquarters, Brasilia, Brazil

    Pedro Braga Arcuri

  4. EMBRAPA Dairy Cattle - Brazilian Agricultural Research Corporation, Juiz de Fora, Brazil

    Marcelo Henrique Otenio

Authors
  1. Juliana Alves Resende
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Jean-Jacques Godon
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Anaïs Bonnafous
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Pedro Braga Arcuri
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  5. Vânia Lúcia Silva
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  6. Marcelo Henrique Otenio
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  7. Cláudio Galuppo Diniz
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Cláudio Galuppo Diniz.

Electronic supplementary material

Below is the link to the electronic supplementary material.

ESM 1

(DOCX 15 kb)

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Resende, J.A., Godon, JJ., Bonnafous, A. et al. Seasonal Variation on Microbial Community and Methane Production during Anaerobic Digestion of Cattle Manure in Brazil. Microb Ecol 71, 735–746 (2016). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00248-015-0647-y

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00248-015-0647-y

Keywords

Search

Navigation