The DOI matches its Crossref record; 67 of the 67 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Ammonia and temperature determine potential clustering in the anaerobic digestion microbiome
Abstract
Anaerobic digestion is regarded as a key environmental technology in the present and future bio-based economy. The microbial community completing the anaerobic digestion process is considered complex, and several attempts already have been carried out to determine the key microbial populations. However, the key differences in the anaerobic digestion microbiomes, and the environmental/process parameters that drive these differences, remain poorly understood. In this research, we hypothesized that differences in operational parameters lead to a particular composition and organization of microbial communities in full-scale installations. A total of 38 samples were collected from 29 different full-scale anaerobic digestion installations, showing constant biogas production in function of time. Microbial community analysis was carried out by means of amplicon sequencing and real-time PCR. The bacterial community in all samples was dominated by representatives of the Firmicutes, Bacteroidetes and Proteobacteria, covering 86.1 ± 10.7% of the total bacterial community. Acetoclastic methanogenesis was dominated by Methanosaetaceae, yet, only the hydrogenotrophic Methanobacteriales correlated with biogas production, confirming their importance in high-rate anaerobic digestion systems. In-depth analysis of operational and environmental parameters and bacterial community structure indicated the presence of three potential clusters in anaerobic digestion. These clusters were determined by total ammonia concentration, free ammonia concentration and temperature, and characterized by an increased relative abundance of Bacteroidales, Clostridiales and Lactobacillales, respectively. None of the methanogenic populations, however, could be significantly attributed to any of the three clusters. Nonetheless, further experimental research will be required to validate the existence of these different clusters, and to which extent the presence of these clusters relates to stable or sub-optimal anaerobic digestion.
Overview
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cites
Standard methods: For the examination of water and waste water
(1990) · Analytical Biochemistry · doi:10.1016/0003-2697(90)90598-4 · Cited by 72,091
QIIME allows analysis of high-throughput community sequencing data
Caporaso, J. G., Kuczynski, J., Stombaugh, J., Bittinger, K., Bushman, F. D., Costello, E. K., Fierer, N., Peña, A. G., Goodrich, J. K., Gordon, J. I., et al. (2010) · Nature Methods · doi:10.1038/nmeth.f.303 · Cited by 34,887
Standard Methods for the Examination of Water and Wastewater
Jenkins, S. H. (1982) · Water Research · doi:10.1016/0043-1354(82)90249-4 · Cited by 30,002
vegan: Community Ecology Package
Oksanen, J., Simpson, G. L., Blanchet, F. G., Kindt, R., Legendre, P., Minchin, P. R., O'Hara, R. B., Solymos, P., Stevens, M. H. H., Szoecs, E., et al. (2001) · CRAN: Contributed Packages · doi:10.32614/cran.package.vegan · Cited by 22,615
phyloseq: An R Package for Reproducible Interactive Analysis and Graphics of Microbiome Census Data
McMurdie, P. J., & Holmes, S. (2013) · PLoS ONE · doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0061217 · Cited by 21,322
Ultra-high-throughput microbial community analysis on the Illumina HiSeq and MiSeq platforms
Caporaso, J. G., Lauber, C. L., Walters, W. A., Berg-Lyons, D., Huntley, J., Fierer, N., Owens, S. M., Betley, J., Fraser, L., Bauer, M., et al. (2012) · The ISME Journal · doi:10.1038/ismej.2012.8 · Cited by 8,839
Enterotypes of the human gut microbiome
MetaHIT Consortium (additional members), Arumugam, M., Raes, J., Pelletier, E., Le Paslier, D., Yamada, T., Mende, D. R., Fernandes, G. R., Tap, J., Bruls, T., et al. (2011) · Nature · doi:10.1038/nature09944 · Cited by 7,548
Inhibition of anaerobic digestion process: A review
Chen, Y., Cheng, J. J., & Creamer, K. S. (2008) · Bioresource Technology · doi:10.1016/j.biortech.2007.01.057 · Cited by 4,830
Microbial Cellulose Utilization: Fundamentals and Biotechnology
Lynd, L. R., Weimer, P. J., van Zyl, W. H., & Pretorius, I. S. (2002) · Microbiology and Molecular Biology Reviews · doi:10.1128/mmbr.66.3.506-577.2002 · Cited by 4,726
Nonparametric estimation of the number of classes in a population
Chao, A. (1984) · Scandinavian Journal of Statistics · Cited by 4,265
Cited by
A comprehensive review on food waste anaerobic digestion: Research updates and tendencies
Ren, Y., Yu, M., Wu, C., Wang, Q., Gao, M., Huang, Q., & Liu, Y. (2018) · Bioresource Technology · doi:10.1016/j.biortech.2017.09.109 · Cited by 648
Thermal hydrolysis for sewage treatment: A critical review
Barber, W. P. F. (2016) · Water Research · doi:10.1016/j.watres.2016.07.069 · Cited by 484
Lü, F., Luo, C., Shao, L., & He, P. (2016) · Water Research · doi:10.1016/j.watres.2015.12.029 · Cited by 448
Westerholm, M., Moestedt, J., & Schnürer, A. (2016) · Applied Energy · doi:10.1016/j.apenergy.2016.06.061 · Cited by 339
Waste to Energy: A Focus on the Impact of Substrate Type in Biogas Production
Nwokolo, N., Mukumba, P., Obileke, K., & Enebe, M. (2020) · Processes · doi:10.3390/pr8101224 · Cited by 177
Metadata
- Authors
- De Vrieze, J., Saunders, A. M., He, Y., Fang, J., Nielsen, P. H., Verstraete, W., & Boon, N.
- Venue
- Water Research
- Publisher
- Elsevier BV
- Published
- 2015-05
- Volume
- 75
- Pages
- 312-323
- ISSN
- 0043-1354 (ISSN-L)
- OpenAlex
- W2053555532
- Cited by
- 347
- References
- 67
- FWCI
- 46.43
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
How to cite
Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.
- This page
- CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Ammonia and temperature determine potential clustering in the anaerobic digestion microbiome. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1016/j.watres.2015.02.025
- The paper
- De Vrieze, J., Saunders, A. M., He, Y., Fang, J., Nielsen, P. H., Verstraete, W., & Boon, N. (2015). Ammonia and temperature determine potential clustering in the anaerobic digestion microbiome. Water Research. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.watres.2015.02.025
Data sources
Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.
Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).
Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.