Näytä suppeat kuvailutiedot

dc.contributor.authorAalto, Sanni L.
dc.contributor.authorSyropoulou, Elisavet
dc.contributor.authorde Jesus Gregersen, Kim João
dc.contributor.authorTiirola, Marja
dc.contributor.authorBovbjerg Pedersen, Per
dc.contributor.authorPedersen, Lars-Flemming
dc.date.accessioned2022-02-07T06:22:12Z
dc.date.available2022-02-07T06:22:12Z
dc.date.issued2022
dc.identifier.citationAalto, S. L., Syropoulou, E., de Jesus Gregersen, K. J., Tiirola, M., Bovbjerg Pedersen, P., & Pedersen, L.-F. (2022). Microbiome response to foam fractionation and ozonation in RAS. <i>Aquaculture</i>, <i>550</i>, Article 737846. <a href="https://doi.org/10.1016/j.aquaculture.2021.737846" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1016/j.aquaculture.2021.737846</a>
dc.identifier.otherCONVID_104128013
dc.identifier.urihttps://jyx.jyu.fi/handle/123456789/79640
dc.description.abstractEfficient water treatment is required to maintain high water quality and control microbial growth in recirculating aquaculture systems (RAS). Here, we examined the effects of two treatment methods, ozonation and foam fractionation, separately and combined, on the microbiology in twelve identical experimental RAS with rainbow trout (Oncorhyncus mykiss) during 8 weeks. Microbes suspended in water and growing in biofilter biofilms were examined using flow cytometry analysis and high throughput sequencing of the 16S rRNA gene. The results showed that foam fractionation did not cause large changes in abundance or overall community composition of free-living microbes. Instead, through decreasing the organic matter availability in water, it targeted specific microbial taxa, leading to e.g. decreased potential for off-flavor production. In contrast, ozonation was found to have a profound impact on the system microbiology, by reducing the overall cell abundance, increasing microbial dead/live ratio, and changing the community composition of both free-living and biofilm microbes. Ozonation increased the abundance of certain key microbial taxa adapted to low carbon conditions, which might form a stable and more abundant community under a prolonged ozone dosing. Combining the two treatment methods did not provide any additional benefits as compared to ozonation solely, corroborating the high disinfection potential of ozone. However, ozone had only a minor impact on biofilter microbial communities, which were, in general, more resistant to water treatment than water communities. Water treatment had no effect on the overall genetic nitrification potential in the biofilter biofilms. However, foam fractionation led to changes in the nitrifying microbial community in biofilter, increasing the abundance of Nitrospira conducting complete ammonia oxidation to nitrate (comammox). Altogether, the results obtained indicate that although these two water treatment methods have similar outcomes on physico-chemical water quality and microbial activity, their underlying mechanisms are different, potentially leading to different outcomes under the long-term application.en
dc.format.mimetypeapplication/pdf
dc.language.isoeng
dc.publisherElsevier BV
dc.relation.ispartofseriesAquaculture
dc.rightsCC BY 4.0
dc.subject.otherbiofilter
dc.subject.othermicrobial abundance
dc.subject.otherRAS microbiome
dc.subject.otherwater treatment
dc.titleMicrobiome response to foam fractionation and ozonation in RAS
dc.typearticle
dc.identifier.urnURN:NBN:fi:jyu-202202071398
dc.contributor.laitosBio- ja ympäristötieteiden laitosfi
dc.contributor.laitosDepartment of Biological and Environmental Scienceen
dc.contributor.oppiaineYmpäristötiedefi
dc.contributor.oppiaineResurssiviisausyhteisöfi
dc.contributor.oppiaineNanoscience Centerfi
dc.contributor.oppiaineEnvironmental Scienceen
dc.contributor.oppiaineSchool of Resource Wisdomen
dc.contributor.oppiaineNanoscience Centeren
dc.type.urihttp://purl.org/eprint/type/JournalArticle
dc.type.coarhttp://purl.org/coar/resource_type/c_2df8fbb1
dc.description.reviewstatuspeerReviewed
dc.relation.issn0044-8486
dc.relation.volume550
dc.type.versionpublishedVersion
dc.rights.copyright© 2021 the Authors
dc.rights.accesslevelopenAccessfi
dc.subject.ysosuodatus
dc.subject.ysomikrobisto
dc.subject.ysobiofilmit
dc.subject.ysootsonointi
dc.subject.ysovesiviljely (kalatalous)
dc.subject.ysokirjolohi
dc.subject.ysovedenkäsittely
dc.format.contentfulltext
jyx.subject.urihttp://www.yso.fi/onto/yso/p7323
jyx.subject.urihttp://www.yso.fi/onto/yso/p27039
jyx.subject.urihttp://www.yso.fi/onto/yso/p25266
jyx.subject.urihttp://www.yso.fi/onto/yso/p18115
jyx.subject.urihttp://www.yso.fi/onto/yso/p5099
jyx.subject.urihttp://www.yso.fi/onto/yso/p12317
jyx.subject.urihttp://www.yso.fi/onto/yso/p10858
dc.rights.urlhttps://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/
dc.relation.doi10.1016/j.aquaculture.2021.737846
jyx.fundinginformationThis study was funded by the European Maritime and Fisheries Fund (EMFF) and the Danish Fisheries Agency project.”Lanozo” (J. No. 33111-I-17-060).
dc.type.okmA1


Aineistoon kuuluvat tiedostot

Thumbnail

Aineisto kuuluu seuraaviin kokoelmiin

Näytä suppeat kuvailutiedot

CC BY 4.0
Ellei muuten mainita, aineiston lisenssi on CC BY 4.0