Membrane biofilm communities in full-scale membrane bioreactors are not randomly assembled and consist of a core microbiome
Item Type Article
Authors Matar, Gerald;Bagchi, Samik;Zhang, Kai;Oerther, Daniel B.;Saikaly, Pascal
Citation Matar GK, Bagchi S, Zhang K, Oerther DB, Saikaly PE (2017) Membrane biofilm communities in full-scale membrane bioreactors are not randomly assembled and consist of a core microbiome. Water Research 123: 124–133. Available: http://
dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.watres.2017.06.052.
Eprint version Post-print
DOI 10.1016/j.watres.2017.06.052
Publisher Elsevier BV
Journal Water Research
Rights NOTICE: this is the author’s version of a work that was accepted for publication in Water Research. Changes resulting from the publishing process, such as peer review, editing, corrections, structural formatting, and other quality control mechanisms may not be reflected in this document. Changes may have been made to this work since it was submitted for publication. A definitive version was subsequently published in Water Research, 20 June 2017. DOI: 10.1016/j.watres.2017.06.052. © 2017. This manuscript version is made available under the CC-BY-NC-ND 4.0 license http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/
1
Supporting Information
1 2
Membrane biofilm communities in full-scale membrane bioreactors are not 3
randomly assembled and consist of a core microbiome 4
5
Gerald K. Matara†, Samik Bagchia†, Kai Zhangb, Daniel B. Oertherc, Pascal E. Saikalya, * 6
7
aKing Abdullah University of Science and Technology, Biological and Environmental 8
Sciences and Engineering Division, Water Desalination and Reuse Research Center, 9
Thuwal 23955-6900, Saudi Arabia 10
bBaswood Corporation, Allen, Texas 75013, USA 11
cDepartment of Civil, Architectural, and Environmental Engineering, and Environmental 12
Research Center, Missouri University of Science and Technology, Rolla, Missouri 65409, 13
USA 14
15
*Corresponding author: Pascal E. Saikaly, [email protected]; Tel.: +966–2–
16
808-4903 17
†Contributed equally to this work 18
19 20 21
Table S1 22
Characteristics of the 5 full-scale MBR plants.
23
aBOD, biochemical oxygen demand; TKN, total kjeldahl nitrogen; TP, total phosphorous; SRT, solids retention time; HRT, hydraulic 24
retention time; scfm, standard cubic feet per minute.
25
bAir scouring intensity.
26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34
Environmental and operational variablesa MBR
plant
Date of sample collection (dd/mm/yyyy)
Influent BOD (mg/L)
Influent TKN (mg/L)
Influent TP (mg/L)
SRT (days)
HRT (hours)
Flow rate (m3/d)
Flux (liters/m2/h)
Airflow (scfm/ft2)b
MBR 1 6/12/2011 250 50 6 22 8.6 1800 19.7 0.04
MBR 2 7/12/2011 200 35.5 8 31 8.4 200 20.9 0.04
MBR 3 8/12/2011 400 120 15 49 27.9 400 19.7 0.04
MBR 4 12/12/2011 700 80 8 15 16.7 1400 22.2 0.04
MBR 5 11/12/2011 300 31 8 29 16.9 1300 18.9 0.03
3 Table S2
35
Number and percentages of shared genera between samples belonging to the same 36
category (i.e. AS, Early or Mature).
37
Sample (Combined)a
Total number of
classified generab
Number of shared genera
Percentage of shared
genera
Percentage in the total classified sequencesc
AS 214 83 38.79 64.47-83.87
Early 208 63 30.29 74.79-91.87
Mature 222 50 22.52 72.07-89.95
aCombined samples correspond to the five AS, five early biofilm, or five mature biofilm samples collected
38
from the 5 MBRs.
39
bTotal number of classified genera in each category (i.e. AS, Early or Mature).
40
cPercentage of sequences belonging to the shared genera in each sample in the total classified sequences.
41 42
43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60 61 62 63 64
Fig. S1. Geographic location of the five full-scale MBRs in the region of Seattle 65
(Washington, U.S.A.).
66 67
MBR 1 MBR 2
MBR 3
MBR 5
MBR 4
5 68
69
Fig. S2. Principal coordinate analysis (PCoA) of the 15 pooled samples based on Bray- 70
Curtis distance showing the relatedness of the bacterial community structure of AS and 71
biofilm (Early and Mature) samples.
72 73 74
-0.4 -0.2 0 0.2 0.4 0.6
PCO1 (20.9% of total variation) -0.6
-0.4 -0.2 0 0.2 0.4
PCO2 (19.5% of total variation)
Reactor
WWT1 WWT2 WWT3 WWT4 WWT5MBR5 MBR2 MBR3 MBR4 MBR1
75 76
Fig. S3. Heatmap distribution of bacterial phyla and proteobacterial classes derived from 77
the 15 pooled samples. The color intensity in each cell shows the percentage of phylum 78
and proteobacterial classes in the corresponding sample, referring to the color key at the 79
top left. The numbers from 1 to 5 correspond to the 5 full-scale MBRs.
80 81 82 83 84
7 87
Fig. S4. Relative abundance of bacteria retrieved from the five MBRs classified at the 88
class level. Bacterial classes that represent <0.1% of the total bacterial community 89
composition were classified as “others”. The numbers 1 to 5 correspond to the five 90
different full-scale MBRs.
91 92
0 20 40 60 80 100
Relative abundance (%)
Others
TM7_genera_incertae_sedis Planctomycetacia
OP10_genera_incertae_sedis OD1_genera_incertae_sedis Gemmatimonadetes Nitrospira
Acidobacteria_Gp6 Acidobacteria_Gp4 Acidobacteria_Gp3 Acidobacteria_Gp16 Actinobacteria Clostridia
Unclassified Chloroflexi Caldilineae
Anaerolineae
Unclassified Bacteroidetes Sphingobacteria Flavobacteria Bacteroidia
Unclassified Proteobacteria Deltaproteobacteria Gammaproteobacteria Betaproteobacteria Alphaproteobacteria
93
94 95
Fig. S5. Venn diagram showing core and unique OTUs within each biomass category (i.e.
96
AS, Early or Mature).
97
9 98
99 100 101 102 103 104 105 106 107 108 109 110 111 112 113 114 115 116 117 118
Fig. S6. Venn diagram showing the shared and unique OTUs in each MBR.
119 120
