The impact of pH on the anaerobic and aerobic metabolism of Tetrasphaera-enriched polyphosphate accumulating organisms.

Members of the genus Tetrasphaera are putative polyphosphate accumulating organisms (PAOs) that have been found in greater abundance than Accumulibacter in many full-scale enhanced biological phosphorus removal (EBPR) wastewater treatment plants worldwide. Nevertheless, previous studies on the effect of environmental conditions, such as pH, on the performance of EBPR have focused mainly on the response of Accumulibacter to pH changes. This study examines the impact of pH on a Tetrasphaera PAO enriched culture, over a pH range from 6.0 to 8.0 under both anaerobic and aerobic conditions, to assess its impact on the stoichiometry and kinetics of Tetrasphaera metabolism. It was discovered that the rates of phosphorus (P) uptake and P release increased with an increase of pH within the tested range, while PHA production, glycogen consumption and substrate uptake rate were less sensitive to pH changes. The results suggest that Tetrasphaera PAOs display kinetic advantages at high pH levels, which is consistent with what has been observed previously for Accumulibacter PAOs. The results of this study show that pH has a substantial impact on the P release and uptake kinetics of PAOs, where the P release rate was >3 times higher and the P uptake rate was >2 times higher at pH 8.0 vs pH 6.0, respectively. Process operational strategies promoting both Tetrasphaera and Accumulibacter activity at high pH do not conflict with each other, but lead to a potentially synergistic impact that can benefit EBPR performance.

A review of the biotransformations of priority pharmaceuticals in biological wastewater treatment processes.

Wastewater effluent discharges have been considered as one of the main sources of synthetic chemicals entering into the aquatic environment. Even though they occur at low concentrations, pharmaceutically active compounds (PhACs) can have an impact on ecological toxicity that affects aquatic organisms. Moreover, new regulations in development toward preserving water quality reinforces the increasing need to monitor and abate some PhACs in wastewater treatment plants (WWTPs), where they are typically only partially eliminated. Unlike most previous reviews, we have focussed on how the main biological and chemical molecular factors impact the biotransformations of key PhACs in biological WWTP processes. Biotransformations have been found to be an important contributor towards the removal of PhACs from WWTP effluents. This review paper critically assesses these aspects and the recent advances that have been achieved in wastewater treatment processes for biodegradation of 7 PhACs; namely the non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drug (NSAID) diclofenac (DCF); the macrolide antibiotics azithromycin (AZM), erythromycin (ERY) and clarithromycin (CLR); the two natural estrogens estrone (E1) and 17ß-estradiol (E2), and the synthetic estrogen 17α-ethinylesradiol (EE2). These represent the micropollutants of the EU Watch list in Decision 2015/495/EU that are most relevant to WWTPs due to their frequent detection. The metabolic pathways, transformation products and impact of relevant factors to biological WWTP processes is addressed in this review. The biokinetics of PhAC biodegradation in different engineered bioprocesses is also discussed. Promising technologies and operational strategies that are likely to have a high impact on controlling PhAC releases are highlighted and future research needs are also proposed.

Bioaugmentation of membrane bioreactor with Achromobacter denitrificans strain PR1 for enhanced sulfamethoxazole removal in wastewater.

Achromobacter denitrificans strain PR1, previously found to harbour specific degradation pathways with high sulfamethoxazole (SMX) degradation rates, was bioaugmented into laboratory-scale membrane bioreactors (MBRs) operated under aerobic conditions to treat SMX-containing real domestic wastewater. Different hydraulic retention times (HRTs), which is related to reaction time and loading rates, were considered and found to affect the SMX removal efficiency. The availability of primary substrates was important in both bioaugmented and non-bioaugmented activated sludge (AS) for cometabolism of SMX. High HRT (24 h) resulted in low food to microorganism ratio (F/M) and low SMX removal, due to substrate limitation. Decrease in HRT from 24 h to 12 h, 6 h and finally 4 h led to gradual increases in primary substrates availability, e.g. organic compounds and ammonia, resulted in increased SMX removal efficiency and degradation rate, and is more favorable for high-rate wastewater treatment processes. After inoculation into the MBRs, the bioaugmentation strain was sustained in the reactor for a maximum of 31 days even though a significant decrease in abundance was observed. The bioaugmented MBRs showed enhanced SMX removal, especially under SMX shock loads compared to the control MBRs. The results of this study indicate that re-inoculation is required regularly after a period of time to maintain the removal efficiency of the target compound.

Impact of biogenic substrates on sulfamethoxazole biodegradation kinetics by Achromobacter denitrificans strain PR1.

Pure cultures have been found to degrade pharmaceutical compounds. However, these cultures are rarely characterized kinetically at environmentally relevant concentrations. This study investigated the kinetics of sulfamethoxazole (SMX) degradation by Achromobacter denitrificans strain PR1 at a wide range of concentrations, from ng/L to mg/L, to assess the feasibility of using it for bioaugmentation purposes. Complete removal of SMX occurred for all concentrations tested, i.e., 150 mg/L, 500 µg/L, 20 µg/L, and 600 ng/L. The reaction rate coefficients (kbio) for the strain at the ng/L SMX range were: 63.4 ± 8.6, 570.1 ± 15.1 and 414.9 ± 124.2 L/g[Formula: see text]·day), for tests fed without a supplemental carbon source, with acetate, and with succinate, respectively. These results were significantly higher than the value reported for non-augmented activated sludge (0.41 L/(g [Formula: see text]·day) with hundreds of ng/L of SMX. The simultaneous consumption of an additional carbon source and SMX suggested that the energetic efficiency of the cells, boosted by the presence of biogenic substrates, was important in increasing the SMX degradation rate. The accumulation of 3-amino-5-methylisoxazole was observed as the only metabolite, which was found to be non-toxic. SMX inhibited the Vibrio fischeri luminescence after 5 min of contact, with EC50 values of about 53 mg/L. However, this study suggested that the strain PR1 still can degrade SMX up to 150 mg/L. The results of this work demonstrated that SMX degradation kinetics by A. denitrificans PR1 compares favorably with activated sludge and the strain is a potentially interesting organism for bioaugmentation for SMX removal from polluted waters.

Specialty bias in treatment recommendations and quality of life among radiation oncologists and urologists for localized prostate cancer.

BACKGROUND: Given the importance of physician attitudes about different treatments and the quality of life (QOL) in prostate cancer, we performed a national survey of specialists to assess treatment recommendations and perceptions of treatment-related survival and QOL. METHODS: We mailed a self-administered survey instrument to a random sample of 1366 specialists in the U.S. Respondents were asked for treatment recommendations and survival that varied by PSA levels and Gleason scores and estimate QOL outcomes. Pearson's chi-square and multivariable regression models were used to test for differences in each outcome. RESULTS: Response rates were similar for radiation oncologists (52.6%) and urologists (52.3%; P=0.92). Across all risk strata, urologists were more likely to recommend surgery than were radiation oncologists, for conditions ranging from PSA>20 and Gleason score 8-10 (35.2 vs. 0.2%; P<0.001) to PSA 4-10 and Gleason score 7 (87.5 vs. 20.9%; P<0.001). Radiation oncologists were also more likely to recommend radiation therapy relative to urologists (all P<0.001). From low- to high-risk prostate cancer, radiation oncologists and urologists perceived their treatment as being better for improving survival (all P<0.001). Each specialty also viewed their treatment as having less urinary incontinence (all P<0.001). CONCLUSIONS: Radiation oncologists and urologists both prefer the treatment modalities they offer, perceive them to be more effective and to lead to a better QOL. Patients may be receiving biased information, and a truly informed consent process with shared decision-making may be possible only if they are evaluated by both specialties before deciding upon a treatment course.