This research demonstrates enhanced nitrogen removal in municipal wastewater with HN-AD agents, suggesting cost-effective solutions.
Municipal wastewater with a low carbon-to-nitrogen (C/N) ratio presents challenges for conventional nitrogen removal processes, often requiring costly external carbon sources. This study investigated the enhancement of nitrogen removal in a simultaneous nitrification and denitrification (SND) system by incorporating heterotrophic nitrification and aerobic denitrification (HN-AD) bacterial agents (Klebsiella variicola L3, Acinetobacter beijerinckii W4, and Acinetobacter sp. Z1) with modified basalt fiber carriers. Three reactors were compared: mixed HN-AD strains (M), mixed strains with activated sludge (A+M), and activated sludge alone (A). Results demonstrated that the A+M reactor achieved superior performance, with median removal efficiencies of 82.2% for NH4+-N, 52.9% for total nitrogen (TN), and 51.6% for COD, outperforming the M reactor (75.2%, 43.6%, and 51.6%) and the A reactor (63.2%, 29.3%, and 44.8%). The A+M reactor also exhibited a 40% reduction in COD consumption per unit TN removed (2.55 ± 1.75) compared to the control reactor A (4.25 ± 3.99). Microbial analysis revealed Acinetobacter sp. Z1 (6.1%) and K. variicola L3 (1.1%) as dominant species, with the A+M reactor showing higher microbial diversity (56.4% Proteobacteria, 10.2% Bacteroidota) and biological viability (VSS/SS ratio of 0.70 ± 0.01). Extracellular polymeric substance (EPS) content in A+M reached 242.26 ± 15.52 mg/g-VSS, with a protein-to-polysaccharide ratio of 2.77 ± 0.00, indicating robust biofilm activity. These findings highlight the potential of HN-AD bacterial agents to enhance nitrogen removal in low C/N wastewater treatment, offering a cost-effective and sustainable alternative to traditional methods by reducing reliance on external carbon sources and improving system efficiency.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Diao et al. (2025) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: