Journal of Microbiology and Biotechnology

The Korean Society for Microbiology and Biotechnology (한국미생물·생명공학회)
권호 표지
DOI QR코드

DOI QR Code

Dynamics of Functional Genes and Bacterial Community during Bioremediation of Diesel-Contaminated Soil Amended with Compost

  • Hyoju Yang (Department of Environmental Science and Engineering, Ewha Womans University) ;
  • Jiho Lee (Department of Environmental Science and Engineering, Ewha Womans University) ;
  • Kyung-Suk Cho (Department of Environmental Science and Engineering, Ewha Womans University)
  • Received : 2022.10.24
  • Accepted : 2023.01.31
  • Published : 2023.04.28
Download PDF
⟨ Previous Next ⟩

Abstract

Compost is widely used as an organic additive to improve the bioremediation of diesel-contaminated soil. In this study, the effects of compost amendment on the remediation performance, functional genes, and bacterial community are evaluated during the bioremediation of diesel-contaminated soils with various ratios of compost (0-20%, w/w). The study reveals that the diesel removal efficiency, soil enzyme (dehydrogenase and urease) activity, soil CH4 oxidation potential, and soil N2O reduction potential have a positive correlation with the compost amendment (p < 0.05). The ratios of denitrifying genes (nosZI, cnorB and qnorB) to 16S rRNA genes each show a positive correlation with compost amendment, whereas the ratio of the CH4-oxidizing gene (pmoA) to the 16S rRNA genes shows a negative correlation. Interestingly, the genera Acidibacter, Blastochloris, Erythrobacter, Hyphomicrobium, Marinobacter, Parvibaculum, Pseudoxanthomonas, and Terrimonas are strongly associated with diesel degradation, and have a strong positive correlation with soil CH4 oxidation potential. Meanwhile, the genera Atopostipes, Bacillus, Halomonas, Oblitimonas, Pusillimonas, Truepera, and Wenahouziangella are found to be strongly associated with soil N2O reduction potential. These results provide useful data for developing technologies that improve diesel removal efficiency while minimizing greenhouse gas emissions in the bioremediation process of diesel-contaminated soil.

Keywords

Acknowledgement

This work was supported by the National Research Foundation of Korea (NRF) grant funded by the Korean Government through the Ministry of Science and ICT (MSIT) (2019R1A2C2006701 & 2022R1A2C2006615).

References

  1. Hudson CR, Badiru AB. 2008. Operations research application. CRC Press, 30-31. 
  2. Mocek A, Owczarzak W. 2011. Parent material and soil physical properties. Encycl. Earth Sci. Ser. Part 4: 543-547.  https://doi.org/10.1007/978-90-481-3585-1_107
  3. Chen YA, Grace Liu PW, Whang LM, Wu YJ, Cheng SS. 2020. Effect of soil organic matter on petroleum hydrocarbon degradation in diesel/fuel oil-contaminated soil. J. Biosci. Bioeng. 129: 603-612.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jbiosc.2019.12.001
  4. Nwankwegu AS, Orji MU, Onwosi CO. 2016. Studies on organic and in-organic biostimulants in bioremediation of diesel-contaminated arable soil. Chemosphere 162: 148-156.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chemosphere.2016.07.074
  5. Wu M, Li W, Dick WA, Ye X, Chen K, Kost D, et al. 2017. Bioremediation of hydrocarbon degradation in a petroleum-contaminated soil and microbial population and activity determination. Chemosphere 169: 124-130.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chemosphere.2016.11.059
  6. Liu Q, Li Q, Wang N, Liu D, Zan L, Chang L, et al. 2018. Bioremediation of petroleum-contaminated soil using aged refuse from landfills. Waste Manag. 77: 576-585.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.wasman.2018.05.010
  7. Wongsa P, Tanaka M, Ueno A, Hasanuzzaman M, Yumoto I, Okuyama H. 2004. Isolation and characterization of novel strains of Pseudomonas aeruginosa and Serratia marcescens possessing high efficiency to degrade gasoline, kerosene, diesel oil, and lubricating oil. Curr. Microbiol. 49: 415-422.  https://doi.org/10.1007/s00284-004-4347-y
  8. Varjani SJ, Upasani VN. 2016. Biodegradation of petroleum hydrocarbons by oleophilic strain of Pseudomonas aeruginosa NCIM 5514. Bioresour. Technol. 222: 195-201.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.biortech.2016.10.006
  9. Syafrizal S. 2018. Kinetics of Batch microbial degradation of phenol by Pseudomonas aeruginosa and deep-sea sediment bacteria?: scale-up. Sci. Contrib. Oil Gas 41: 145-154.  https://doi.org/10.29017/SCOG.41.3.333
  10. Wu T, Xu J, Xie W, Yao Z, Yang H, Sun C, et al. 2018b. Pseudomonas aeruginosa L10: a hydrocarbon-degrading, biosurfactant-producing, and plant-growth-promoting endophytic bacterium isolated from a Reed (Phragmites australis). Front. Microbiol. 9: 1087. 
  11. Bosco F, Casale A, Mazzarino I, Godio A, Ruffino B, Mollea C, et al. 2020. Microcosm evaluation of bioaugmentation and biostimulation efficacy on diesel-contaminated soil. J. Chem. Technol. Biotechnol. 95: 904-912.  https://doi.org/10.1002/jctb.5966
  12. Deivakumari M, Sanjivkumar M, Suganya AM, Prabakaran JR, Palavesam A, Immanuel G. 2020. Studies on reclamation of crude oil polluted soil by biosurfactant producing Pseudomonas aeruginosa (DKB1). Biocatal. Agric. Biotechnol. 29: 101773. 
  13. Yang J, Li G, Qian Y, Zhang F. 2018. Increased soil methane emissions and methanogenesis in oil contaminated areas. L. Degrad. Dev. 29: 563-571.  https://doi.org/10.1002/ldr.2886
  14. Wu G, Kechavarzi C, Li X, Sui H, Pollard SJT, Coulon F. 2013. Influence of mature compost amendment on total and bioavailable polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons in contaminated soils. Chemosphere 90: 2240-2246.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chemosphere.2012.10.003
  15. Asemoloye MDD, Olowe OM, Zaffar H, Oshibanjo O, Jonathan SG. 2017. Organic compost as catalyst or mediator for speedy and cost effective bioremediation. SSRN Electron. J. 2: 1-14.  https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.3071988
  16. Chen CH, Liu PWG, Whang LM. 2019. Effects of natural organic matters on bioavailability of petroleum hydrocarbons in soil-water environments. Chemosphere 233: 843-851.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chemosphere.2019.05.202
  17. Liu H, Tan X, Guo J, Liang X, Xie Q, Chen S. 2020. Bioremediation of oil-contaminated soil by combination of soil conditioner and microorganism. J. Soils Sediments 20: 2121-2129.  https://doi.org/10.1007/s11368-020-02591-6
  18. Seo Y, Cho KS. 2021. Effects of plant and soil amendment on remediation performance and methane mitigation in petroleum-contaminated soil. J. Microbiol. Biotechnol. 31: 104-114.  https://doi.org/10.4014/jmb.2006.06023
  19. Bastida F, Jehmlich N, Lima K, Morris BEL, Richnow HH, Hernandez T, et al. 2016. The ecological and physiological responses of the microbial community from a semiarid soil to hydrocarbon contamination and its bioremediation using compost amendment. J. Proteomics 135: 162-169.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jprot.2015.07.023
  20. Lee YY, Seo Y, Ha M, Lee J, Yang H, Cho KS. 2021. Dynamics of bacterial functional genes and community structures during rhizoremediation of diesel-contaminated compost-amended soil. J. Environ. Sci. Heal. - Part A Toxic/Hazardous Subst. Environ. Eng. 56: 1107-1120.  https://doi.org/10.1080/10934529.2021.1965817
  21. Hu JY, Li YI, Yeung KW. 2006. Clothing Biosensory Engineering. Whoodhead Pubishing, pp. 252-260. 
  22. US. Environmental protection agency laboratory services and applied science division. 2020. Operating Procedure of Soil Sampling Effective 
  23. Vengadaramana A, Jashothan PT. 2012. Effect of organic fertilizers on the water holding capacity of soil in different terrains of Jaffna peninsula in Sri Lanka. J. Nat. Prod. Plant Resour. 2: 500-503. 
  24. Lee YY, Seo Y, Ha M, Lee J, Yang H, Cho KS. 2021. Evaluation of rhizoremediation and methane emission in diesel-contaminated soil cultivated with tall fescue (Festuca arundinacea). Environ. Res. 194: 110606. 
  25. Kandeler E, Gerber H. 1988. Short-term assay of soil urease activity using colorimetric determination of ammonium. Biol. Fertil. Soils 6: 68-72.  https://doi.org/10.1007/BF00257924
  26. Park HJ, Kwon JH, Yun J, Cho KS. 2020. Characterization of nitrous oxide reduction by Azospira sp. HJ23 isolated from advanced wastewater treatment sludge. J. Environ. Sci. Heal. - Part A Toxic/Hazardous Subst. Environ. Eng. 55: 1459-1467.  https://doi.org/10.1080/10934529.2020.1812321
  27. Yang H, Jung H, Oh K, Jeon JM, Cho KS. 2021. Characterization of the bacterial community associated with methane and odor in a pilot-scale landfill biocover under moderately thermophilic conditions. J. Microbiol. Biotechnol. 31: 803-814.  https://doi.org/10.4014/jmb.2103.03005
  28. Kim TG, Yi T, Lee EH, Ryu HW, Cho KS. 2012. Characterization of a methane-oxidizing biofilm using microarray, and confocal microscopy with image and geostatic analyses. Appl. Microbiol. Biotechnol. 95: 1051-1059.  https://doi.org/10.1007/s00253-011-3728-y
  29. Wasmund K, Burns KA, Kurtboke DI, Bourne DG. 2009. Novel alkane hydroxylase gene (alkB) diversity in sediments associated with hydrocarbon seeps in the Timor Sea, Australia. Appl. Environ. Microbiol. 75: 7391-7398.  https://doi.org/10.1128/AEM.01370-09
  30. Alonso-Gutierrez J, Teramoto M, Yamazoe A, Harayama S, Figueras A, Novoa B. 2011. Alkane-degrading properties of Dietzia sp. H0B, a key player in the Prestige oil spill biodegradation (NW Spain). J. Appl. Microbiol. 111: 800-810.  https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-2672.2011.05104.x
  31. Kolb S, Knief C, Stubner S, Conrad R. 2003. Quantitative detection of methanotrophs in soil by novel pmoA-targeted real-time PCR Assays. Appl. Environ. Microbiol. 69: 2423-2429.  https://doi.org/10.1128/AEM.69.5.2423-2429.2003
  32. Luton PE, Wayne JM, Sharp RJ, Riley PW. 2002. The mcrA gene as an alternative to 16S rRNA in the phylogenetic analysis of methanogen populations in landfill. Microbiology 148: 3521-3530.  https://doi.org/10.1099/00221287-148-11-3521
  33. Braker G, Tiedje JM. 2003. Nitric oxide reductase (norB) genes from pure cultures and environmental samples. Appl. Environ. Microbiol. 69: 3476-3483.  https://doi.org/10.1128/AEM.69.6.3476-3483.2003
  34. Henry S, Bru D, Stres B, Hallet S, Philippot L. 2006. Quantitative detection of the nosZ gene, encoding nitrous oxide reductase, and comparison of the abundances of 16S rRNA, narG, nirK, and nosZ genes in soils. Appl. Environ. Microbiol. 72: 5181-5189.  https://doi.org/10.1128/AEM.00231-06
  35. Caporaso JG, Kuczynski J, Stombaugh J, Bittinger K, Bushman FD, Costello EK, et al. 2010. QIIME allows analysis of high-throughput community sequencing data. Nat. Publ. Gr. 7: 335-336.  https://doi.org/10.1038/nmeth.f.303
  36. Magoc T, Salzberg SL. 2011. FLASH: Fast length adjustment of short reads to improve genome assemblies. Bioinformatics27: 2957-2963. 
  37. Li W, Fu L, Niu B, Wu S, Wooley J. 2012. Ultrafast clustering algorithms for metagenomic sequence analysis. Brief. Bioinform. 13: 656-668.  https://doi.org/10.1093/bib/bbs035
  38. Lozupone C, Hamady M, Knight R. 2006. UniFrac - An online tool for comparing microbial community diversity in a phylogenetic context. BMC Bioinform. 7: 371. 
  39. Bolton H, Elliott LF, Papendick RI, Bezdicek DF. 1985. Soil microbial biomass and selected soil enzyme activities: effect of fertilization and cropping practices. Soil Biol. Biochem. 17: 297-302.  https://doi.org/10.1016/0038-0717(85)90064-1
  40. Lloyd AB, Sheaffe MJ. 1973. Urease activity in soils. Plant Soil 39: 71-80.  https://doi.org/10.1007/BF00018046
  41. Ceccanti B, Nannipieri P, Cervelli S, Sequi P. 1978. Fractionation of humus-urease complexes. Soil. Bio. Biochem. 10: 39-45.  https://doi.org/10.1016/0038-0717(78)90008-1
  42. Li H, Zhang Y, Kravchenko I, Xu H, Zhang CG. 2007. Dynamic changes in microbial activity and community structure during biodegradation of petroleum compounds: a laboratory experiment. J. Environ. Sci. 19: 1003-1013.  https://doi.org/10.1016/S1001-0742(07)60163-6
  43. Guo H, Yao J, Cai M, Qian Y, Guo Y, Richnow HH, et al. 2012. Effects of petroleum contamination on soil microbial numbers, metabolic activity and urease activity. Chemosphere 87: 1273-1280.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chemosphere.2012.01.034
  44. Abraham W, Nogales B, Golyshin PN, Pieper DH, Timmis KN. 2002. Polychlorinated biphenyl-degrading microbial communities in soils and sediments. Curr. Opin. Microbiol. 5: 246-253.  https://doi.org/10.1016/S1369-5274(02)00323-5
  45. Freilich S, Zarecki R, Eilam O, Segal ES, Henry CS, Kupiec M, et al. 2011. Competitive and cooperative metabolic interactions in bacterial communities. Nat. Commun. 2: 589. 
  46. Kastner M, Miltner A. 2016. Application of compost for effective bioremediation of organic contaminants and pollutants in soil. Appl. Microbiol. Biotechnol. 100: 3433-3449.  https://doi.org/10.1007/s00253-016-7378-y
  47. Semple KT, Reid BJ, Fermor TR. 2001. Impact of composting strategies on the treatment of soils contaminated with organic pollutants. Environ. Pollut. 112: 269-283.  https://doi.org/10.1016/S0269-7491(00)00099-3
  48. Ren X, Zeng G, Tang L, Wang Jingjing, Wan J, Wang Jiajia, et al. 2018. The potential impact on the biodegradation of organic pollutants from composting technology for soil remediation. Waste Manag. 72: 138-149.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.wasman.2017.11.032
  49. Quagliotto P, Montoneri E, Tambone F, Adani F, Gobetto R, Viscardi G. 2006. Chemicals from wastes: compost-derived humic acid-like matter as surfactant. Environ. Sci. Technol. 40: 1686-1692.  https://doi.org/10.1021/es051637r
  50. Lin C. 2008. A negative-pressure aeration system for composting food wastes. Bioresour. Technol. 99: 7651-7656.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.biortech.2008.01.078
  51. Tran HT, Lin C, Bui XT, Ngo HH, Cheruiyot NK, Hoang HG, et al. 2021. Aerobic composting remediation of petroleum hydrocarbon-contaminated soil. Current and future perspectives. Sci. Total Environ. 753: 142250. 
  52. Namkoong W, Hwang EY, Park JS, Choi JY. 2002. Bioremediation of diesel-contaminated soil with composting. Environ. Pollut. 119: 23-31.  https://doi.org/10.1016/S0269-7491(01)00328-1
  53. Unbehaun H, Dittler B, Kuhne G, Wagenfuhr A. 2000. The impact of hydrocarbon remediation (diesel oil and polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons) on enzyme activities and microbial properties of soil. Acta Biotechnol. 20: 313-333.  https://doi.org/10.1002/abio.370200312
  54. Riffaldi R, Levi-Minzi R, Cardelli R, Palumbo S, Saviozzi A. 2006. Soil biological activities in monitoring the bioremediation of diesel oil-contaminated soil. Water. Air. Soil Pollut. 170: 3-15.  https://doi.org/10.1007/s11270-006-6328-1
  55. Myers MG, Mcgarity JW. 1968. The urease activity in profiles of five great soil groups from northern New South Wales. Palnt Soil. 25: 25-37.  https://doi.org/10.1007/BF01349175
  56. Speir TW, Lee R, Pansier EA, Cairns A. 1980. A comparison of sulphatase, urease and protease activities in planted and in fallow soils. Soil Biol. Biochem. 12: 281-291.  https://doi.org/10.1016/0038-0717(80)90075-9
  57. Dharmakeerthi RS, Thenabadu MW. 1996. Urease activity in soils: a review. J. Natl. Sci. Counc. Sri Lanka 24: 159-195.  https://doi.org/10.4038/jnsfsr.v24i3.5548
  58. Bhardwaj Y, Dubey SK. 2020. Changes in pmoA gene containing methanotrophic population and methane oxidation potential of dry deciduous tropical forest soils. Curr. Sci. 118: 750-758.  https://doi.org/10.18520/cs/v118/i5/750-758
  59. Qin H, Tang Y, Shen J, Wang C, Chen C, Yang J, et al. 2018. Abundance of transcripts of functional gene reflects the inverse relationship between CH4 and N2O emissions during mid-season drainage in acidic paddy soil. Biol. Fertil. Soils. 54: 885-895.  https://doi.org/10.1007/s00374-018-1312-7
  60. Medina R, David Gara PM, Rosso JA, Del Panno MT. 2021. Effects of organic matter addition on chronically hydrocarbon-contaminated soil. Biodegradation 32:145-163.  https://doi.org/10.1007/s10532-021-09929-y
  61. Bernat K, Wojnowska-Baryla I. 2007. Carbon source in aerobic denitrification. Biochem. Eng. J. 36: 116-122.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.bej.2007.02.007
  62. Feng X, Liu Z, Jia X, Lu W. 2020. Distribution of bacterial communities in petroleum-contaminated soils from the Dagang oilfield, China. Trans. Tianjin Univ. 26: 22-32.  https://doi.org/10.1007/s12209-019-00226-7
  63. Zengler K, Heider J, Rossello-Mora R, Widdel F. 1999. Phototrophic utilization of toluene under anoxic conditions by a new strain of Blastochloris sulfoviridis. Arch. Microbiol. 172: 204-212.  https://doi.org/10.1007/s002030050761
  64. Shi K, Zhang Q, Xue J, Chen X, Chen Y, Qiao Y, et al. 2020. Study on the degradation performance and bacterial community of bioaugmentation in petroleum-pollution seawater. J. Environ. Chem. Eng. 8: 103900. 
  65. Jeong SY, Kim TG. 2019. Development of a novel methanotrophic process with the helper micro-organism Hyphomicrobium sp. NM3. J. Appl. Microbiol. 126: 534-544.  https://doi.org/10.1111/jam.14140
  66. Grimaud R, Ghiglione JF, Cagnon C, Lauga B, Vaysse PJ, Rodriguez-Blanco A, et al. 2012. Genome sequence of the marine bacterium Marinobacter hydrocarbonoclasticus SP17, which forms biofilms on hydrophobic organic compounds. J. Bacteriol. 194: 3539-3540.  https://doi.org/10.1128/JB.00500-12
  67. Gao W, Cui Z, Li Q, Xu G, Jia X, Zheng L. 2013. Marinobacter nanhaiticus sp. nov., polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbon- degrading bacterium isolated from the sediment of the South China Sea. Antonie Van Leeuwenhoek 103: 485-491.  https://doi.org/10.1007/s10482-012-9830-z
  68. Said O Ben, Cravo-Laureau C, Armougom F, Cipullo S, Khelil M Ben, Yahiya MBH, et al. 2021. Enhanced pilot bioremediation of oily sludge from petroleum refinery disposal under hot-summer Mediterranean climate. Environ. Technol. Innov. 24: 102037. 
  69. Xia W, Li J, Han L, Liu L, Yang X, Hao S, et al. 2022. Influence of dispersant / oil ratio on the bacterial community structure and petroleum hydrocarbon biodegradation in seawater. J. Coast. Res. 84: 77-81.  https://doi.org/10.2112/SI84-011.1
  70. Hou J, Liu W, Wang B, Wang Q, Luo Y, Franks AE. 2015. PGPR enhanced phytoremediation of petroleum contaminated soil and rhizosphere microbial community response. Chemosphere 138: 592-598.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chemosphere.2015.07.025
  71. Nopcharoenkul W, Netsakulnee P, Pinyakong O. 2013. Diesel oil removal by immobilized Pseudoxanthomonas sp. RN402. Biodegradation 24: 387-397.  https://doi.org/10.1007/s10532-012-9596-z
  72. Koshlaf E, Shahsavari E, Aburto-Medina A, Taha M, Haleyur N, Makadia TH, et al. 2016. Bioremediation potential of diesel-contaminated Libyan soil. Ecotoxicol. Environ. Saf. 133: 297-305.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecoenv.2016.07.027
  73. Fu L, Bai YN, Lu YZ, Ding J, Zhou D, Zeng R.J. 2019. Degradation of organic pollutants by anaerobic methane-oxidizing microorganisms using methyl orange as example. J. Hazard. Mater. 364: 264-271.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jhazmat.2018.10.036
  74. Kong S, She Y, Jia C, Wang C, Roxaua Vauesa CC. 2013. Physiological characteristics and primary identification of a methane-fed bacterium from a natural gasfield in China. Int. Biodeterior. Biodegrad. 76: 67-70.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ibiod.2012.06.006
  75. Bacosa H, Suto K, Inoue C. 2010. Preferential degradation of aromatic hydrocarbons in kerosene by a microbial consortium. Int. Biodeterior. Biodegrad. 64: 702-710.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ibiod.2010.03.008
  76. Lee B Il, Kang H, Kim H, Joung Y, Joh K. 2014. Ferruginibacter yonginensis sp. nov., isolated from a mesotrophic artificial lake. Int. J. Syst. Evol. Microbiol. 64: 846-850.  https://doi.org/10.1099/ijs.0.057083-0
  77. Ryan MP, Pembroke JT. 2018. Brevundimonas spp: emerging global opportunistic pathogens. Virulence 9: 480-493.  https://doi.org/10.1080/21505594.2017.1419116
  78. Bello A, Han Y, Zhu H, Deng L, Yang W, Meng Q, et al. 2020. Microbial community composition, co-occurrence network pattern and nitrogen transformation genera response to biochar addition in cattle manure-maize straw composting. Sci. Total Environ. 721: 137759.
  79. Yang T, Xin Y, Zhang L, Gu Z, Li Y, Ding Z, Shi G. 2020. Characterization on the aerobic denitrification process of Bacillus strains. Biomass Bioenergy 140: 105677. 
  80. Elkarrach K, Merzouki M, Atia F, Laidi O, Benlemlih M. 2021. Aerobic denitrification using Bacillus pumilus, Arthrobacter sp., and Streptomyces lusitanus: novel aerobic denitrifying bacteria. Bioresour. Technol. Rep. 14: 100663. 
  81. Wu S, Zhuang G, Bai Z, Cen Y, Xu S, Sun H, et al. 2018a. Mitigation of nitrous oxide emissions from acidic soils by Bacillus amyloliquefaciens, a plant growth-promoting bacterium. Glob. Chang. Biol. 24: 2352-2365.  https://doi.org/10.1111/gcb.14025
  82. Guo Y, Zhou X, Li Y, Li K, Wang C, Liu J, et al. 2013. Heterotrophic nitrification and aerobic denitrification by a novel Halomonas campisalis. Biotechnol. Lett. 35: 2045-2049.  https://doi.org/10.1007/s10529-013-1294-3
  83. Miao Y, Zhang XX, Jia S, Liao R, Li A. 2018. Comprehensive analyses of functional bacteria and genes in a denitrifying EGSB reactor under Cd(II) stress. Appl. Microbiol. Biotechnol. 102: 8551-8560.  https://doi.org/10.1007/s00253-018-9228-6
  84. Grouzdev DS, Tourova TP, Babich TL, Shevchenko MA, Sokolova DS, Abdullin RR, et al. 2018. Whole-genome sequence data and analysis of type strains 'Pusillimonas nitritireducens' and 'Pusillimonas subterraneus' isolated from nitrate- and radionuclide-contaminated groundwater in Russia. Data Br. 21: 882-887.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.dib.2018.10.060
  85. Yin W, Wang K, Xu J, Wu D, Zhao C. 2018. The performance and associated mechanisms of carbon transformation (PHAs, polyhydroxyalkanoates) and nitrogen removal for landfill leachate treatment in a sequencing batch biofilm reactor (SBBR). RSC Adv. 8: 42329-42336.  https://doi.org/10.1039/C8RA07839D
  86. Shi S, Lin Z, Zhou Jiong, Fan X, Huang Y, Zhou Jian. 2022. Enhanced thermophilic denitrification performance and potential microbial mechanism in denitrifying granular sludge system. Bioresour. Technol. 344: 126190.