IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jeners/v16y2023i8p3300-d1117845.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Anaerobic Digestion of Agricultural Waste Using Microbial Inocula: Performance and Characterization of Bacterial Communities Using 16S rRNA Sequencing Approach

Author

Listed:
  • Btissam Niya

    (Plant and Microbial Biotechnology Center, Moroccan Foundation of Advanced Science Innovation and Research MAScIR, Rue Mohamed Al Jazouli Madinat Al Irfane, Rabat 10100, Morocco
    Engineering, Industrial Management & Innovation Laboratory IMII, Faculty of Science and Technics (FST), Hassan 1st University of Settat, Settat 26002, Morocco)

  • Kaoutar Yaakoubi

    (Plant and Microbial Biotechnology Center, Moroccan Foundation of Advanced Science Innovation and Research MAScIR, Rue Mohamed Al Jazouli Madinat Al Irfane, Rabat 10100, Morocco)

  • Salah Eddine Azaroual

    (Plant and Microbial Biotechnology Center, Moroccan Foundation of Advanced Science Innovation and Research MAScIR, Rue Mohamed Al Jazouli Madinat Al Irfane, Rabat 10100, Morocco)

  • Fatima Zahra Beraich

    (Biodome.sarl, Research and Development Design Office of Biogas Technology, Casablanca 20500, Morocco)

  • Moha Arouch

    (Engineering, Industrial Management & Innovation Laboratory IMII, Faculty of Science and Technics (FST), Hassan 1st University of Settat, Settat 26002, Morocco)

  • Issam Meftah Kadmiri

    (Plant and Microbial Biotechnology Center, Moroccan Foundation of Advanced Science Innovation and Research MAScIR, Rue Mohamed Al Jazouli Madinat Al Irfane, Rabat 10100, Morocco
    Plant and Soil Microbiome Sub-Program, AgroBioSciences, Mohammed VI Polytechnic University (UM6P), Ben Guerir 43150, Morocco)

Abstract

Anaerobic digestion is considered a beneficial treatment for biogas production (BP). To improve the performance of this bioprocess, the addition of well-selected inocula could be an interesting approach that affects the overall efficiency of the BP. In this study, the reactor performance and energy analysis of liquid-state anaerobic digestion of cattle manure (CM) at high solids concentration (TS%) (94.87%) with six different inocula—two cellulosic (C.I1, C.I2), one lipidic (Li.I), two lactic (La.I1, La.I2), and one saccharidic (Sacc.I)—were investigated. The results showed that inocula improved the biogas production and yield during anaerobic digestion of CM by 109%, 86%, and 52.4%, respectively, when the cellulosic (C.I1), lipidic (Li.I), and lactic (La.I1) inocula were added, compared with the substrate production alone at a substrate/inoculum (S/I) ratio of 5:3 ( v / v ). The addition of inocula in an appropriate range is useful for the performance of the anaerobic digestion process. In our study, the 16S rRNA sequencing approach was followed to investigate microbial community structure and diversity in the substrate CM and the three inocula that showed a significant improvement in biogas production (C.I1, Li.I, and La.I). The most abundant bacterial populations were found to be Firmicutes , Bacteroidetes , Proteobacteria , and Actinobacteria , with different abundance percentages. Interestingly, C.I1, which resulted in the highest biogas production, showed the dominance of Cyanobacteria (53.44%) belonging mainly to the class Nostocophycidae . This study highlighted the role of inocula in improving biogas production from cattle manure (CM) thanks to their microbial diversity.

Suggested Citation

  • Btissam Niya & Kaoutar Yaakoubi & Salah Eddine Azaroual & Fatima Zahra Beraich & Moha Arouch & Issam Meftah Kadmiri, 2023. "Anaerobic Digestion of Agricultural Waste Using Microbial Inocula: Performance and Characterization of Bacterial Communities Using 16S rRNA Sequencing Approach," Energies, MDPI, vol. 16(8), pages 1-15, April.
    • Handle: RePEc:gam:jeners:v:16:y:2023:i:8:p:3300-:d:1117845
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/1996-1073/16/8/3300/pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/1996-1073/16/8/3300/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Abbas, Yasir & Yun, Sining & Wang, Ziqi & Zhang, Yongwei & Zhang, Xianmei & Wang, Kaijun, 2021. "Recent advances in bio-based carbon materials for anaerobic digestion: A review," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 135(C).
    2. Kumar, Abhishek & Sah, Bikash & Singh, Arvind R. & Deng, Yan & He, Xiangning & Kumar, Praveen & Bansal, R.C., 2017. "A review of multi criteria decision making (MCDM) towards sustainable renewable energy development," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 69(C), pages 596-609.
    3. Jiang, Y. & Heaven, S. & Banks, C.J., 2012. "Strategies for stable anaerobic digestion of vegetable waste," Renewable Energy, Elsevier, vol. 44(C), pages 206-214.
    4. Aiban Abdulhakim Saeed Ghaleb & Shamsul Rahman Mohamed Kutty & Yeek-Chia Ho & Ahmad Hussaini Jagaba & Azmatullah Noor & Abdulnaser Mohammed Al-Sabaeei & Najib Mohammed Yahya Almahbashi, 2020. "Response Surface Methodology to Optimize Methane Production from Mesophilic Anaerobic Co-Digestion of Oily-Biological Sludge and Sugarcane Bagasse," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(5), pages 1-11, March.
    5. Wu, Di & Li, Lei & Zhao, Xiaofei & Peng, Yun & Yang, Pingjin & Peng, Xuya, 2019. "Anaerobic digestion: A review on process monitoring," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 103(C), pages 1-12.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Niya, Btissam & Azaroual, Salah Eddine & Kaichouh, Salma & Sendide, Khalid & Yaakoubi, Kaoutar & Fal, Soufiane & Rabia, Reda & Beraich, Fatima Zahra & Arouch, Moha & Meftah Kadmiri, Issam, 2024. "Influence of inoculum on process parameters and microbial communities during anaerobic digestion of cattle manure: Insights from metabarcoding analysis," Renewable Energy, Elsevier, vol. 231(C).
    2. Meng, Xingyao & Wang, Qingping & Zhao, Xixi & Cai, Yafan & Ma, Xuguang & Fu, Jingyi & Wang, Pan & Wang, Yongjing & Liu, Wei & Ren, Lianhai, 2023. "A review of the technologies used for preserving anaerobic digestion inoculum," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 188(C).

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Wu, Di & Li, Lei & Peng, Yun & Yang, Pingjin & Peng, Xuya & Sun, Yongming & Wang, Xiaoming, 2021. "State indicators of anaerobic digestion: A critical review on process monitoring and diagnosis," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 148(C).
    2. Sohail Khan & Fuzhi Lu & Muhammad Kashif & Peihong Shen, 2021. "Multiple Effects of Different Nickel Concentrations on the Stability of Anaerobic Digestion of Molasses," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(9), pages 1-11, April.
    3. Tan, R.R. & Aviso, K.B. & Ng, D.K.S., 2019. "Optimization models for financing innovations in green energy technologies," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 113(C), pages 1-1.
    4. Behroozeh, Samira & Hayati, Dariush & Karami, Ezatollah, 2022. "Determining and validating criteria to measure energy consumption sustainability in agricultural greenhouses," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 185(C).
    5. Dorokhov, V.V. & Kuznetsov, G.V. & Vershinina, K.Yu. & Strizhak, P.A., 2021. "Relative energy efficiency indicators calculated for high-moisture waste-based fuel blends using multiple-criteria decision-making," Energy, Elsevier, vol. 234(C).
    6. Leanda C. Garvie & David J. Lee & Biljana Kulišić, 2024. "Towards a Bioeconomy: Supplying Forest Residues for the Australian Market," Energies, MDPI, vol. 17(2), pages 1-19, January.
    7. Yao, Yiqing & Sheng, Hongmei & Luo, Yang & He, Mulan & Li, Xiangkai & Zhang, Hua & He, Wenliang & An, Lizhe, 2014. "Optimization of anaerobic co-digestion of Solidago canadensis L. biomass and cattle slurry," Energy, Elsevier, vol. 78(C), pages 122-127.
    8. Rafael Lizarralde & Jaione Ganzarain & Mikel Zubizarreta, 2020. "Assessment and Selection of Technologies for the Sustainable Development of an R&D Center," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(23), pages 1-23, December.
    9. Huibing Cheng & Shanshui Zheng & Jianghong Feng, 2022. "A Fuzzy Multi-Criteria Method for Sustainable Ferry Operator Selection: A Case Study," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(10), pages 1-22, May.
    10. Lo, Huai-Wei & Liou, James J.H. & Huang, Chun-Nen & Chuang, Yen-Ching & Tzeng, Gwo-Hshiung, 2020. "A new soft computing approach for analyzing the influential relationships of critical infrastructures," International Journal of Critical Infrastructure Protection, Elsevier, vol. 28(C).
    11. Alaa Khadra & Mårten Hugosson & Jan Akander & Jonn Are Myhren, 2020. "Development of a Weight Factor Method for Sustainability Decisions in Building Renovation. Case Study Using Renobuild," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(17), pages 1-15, September.
    12. Osseweijer, Floor J.W. & van den Hurk, Linda B.P. & Teunissen, Erik J.H.M. & van Sark, Wilfried G.J.H.M., 2018. "A comparative review of building integrated photovoltaics ecosystems in selected European countries," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 90(C), pages 1027-1040.
    13. Paweł Ziemba, 2022. "Application Framework of Multi-Criteria Methods in Sustainability Assessment," Energies, MDPI, vol. 15(23), pages 1-18, December.
    14. Ifaei, Pouya & Tayerani Charmchi, Amir Saman & Loy-Benitez, Jorge & Yang, Rebecca Jing & Yoo, ChangKyoo, 2022. "A data-driven analytical roadmap to a sustainable 2030 in South Korea based on optimal renewable microgrids," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 167(C).
    15. Fang, Hong & Wang, Xu & Song, Wenyan, 2020. "Technology selection for photovoltaic cell from sustainability perspective: An integrated approach," Renewable Energy, Elsevier, vol. 153(C), pages 1029-1041.
    16. Tim H¨ofer & Rüdiger von Nitzsch & Reinhard Madlener, 2020. "Using Value-Focused Thinking and Multicriteria Decision Making to Evaluate Energy Transition Alternatives," Decision Analysis, INFORMS, vol. 17(4), pages 330-355, December.
    17. Gulhane, Madhuri & Pandit, Prabhakar & Khardenavis, Anshuman & Singh, Dharmesh & Purohit, Hemant, 2017. "Study of microbial community plasticity for anaerobic digestion of vegetable waste in Anaerobic Baffled Reactor," Renewable Energy, Elsevier, vol. 101(C), pages 59-66.
    18. José Carlos Romero & Pedro Linares, 2021. "Multiple Criteria Decision-Making as an Operational Conceptualization of Energy Sustainability," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(21), pages 1-14, October.
    19. Seker, Sukran & Kahraman, Cengiz, 2021. "Socio-economic evaluation model for sustainable solar PV panels using a novel integrated MCDM methodology: A case in Turkey," Socio-Economic Planning Sciences, Elsevier, vol. 77(C).
    20. Ali Mostafaeipour & Seyyed Jalaladdin Hosseini Dehshiri & Seyyed Shahabaddin Hosseini Dehshiri & Mehdi Jahangiri & Kuaanan Techato, 2020. "A Thorough Analysis of Potential Geothermal Project Locations in Afghanistan," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(20), pages 1-17, October.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:gam:jeners:v:16:y:2023:i:8:p:3300-:d:1117845. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: MDPI Indexing Manager (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.mdpi.com .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.