Answers are grounded in this paper and cite their sources.
AIMS: To identify the bacterial and archaeal composition in a mesophilic biogas digester treating pig manure and to compare the consistency of two 16S rDNA-based methods to investigate the microbial structure. METHODS AND RESULTS: Sixty-nine bacterial operational taxonomic units (OTU) and 25 archaeal OTU were identified by sequencing two 16S rDNA clone libraries. Most bacterial OTU were identified as phyla of Firmicutes (47.2% of total clones), Bacteroides (35.4%) and Spirochaetes (13.2%). Methanoculleus bourgensis (29.0%), Methanosarcina barkeri (27.4%) and Methanospirillum hungatei (10.8%) were the dominant methanogens. Only 9% of bacterial and 20% of archaeal OTU matched cultured isolates at a similarity index of >or=97%. About 78% of the dominant bacterial (with abundance >3%) and 83% of archaeal OTU were recovered from the denaturing gradient gel electrophoresis (DGGE) bands of V3 regions in 16S rDNAs. CONCLUSIONS: In the digester, most bacterial and archaeal species were uncultured; bacteria belonging to Firmicutes, Bacteroides and Spirochaetes seem to take charge of cellulolysis, proteolysis, acidogenesis, sulfur-reducing and homoacetogenesis; the most methanogens were typical hydrogenotrophic or hydrogenotrophic/aceticlastic; DGGE profiles reflected the dominant microbiota. SIGNIFICANCE AND IMPACT OF THE STUDY: This study gave a first insight of the overall microbial structure in a rural biogas digester and also indicated DGGE was useful in displaying its dominant microbiota.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Liu et al. (2009) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: