Open access peer-reviewed chapter

Phyco-Remediation of Sewage Wastewater by Microalgae

Written By

Radhakrishnan Vandana and Suchitra Rakesh

Submitted: 29 November 2022 Reviewed: 30 November 2022 Published: 13 January 2023

DOI: 10.5772/intechopen.109257

From the Edited Volume

Sewage Management

Edited by Başak Kılıç Taşeli

Chapter metrics overview

154 Chapter Downloads

View Full Metrics

Abstract

Land and water resources are significant constraints in the present energy scenario. Phyco-remediation is crucial in attaining the UNDP’s sixth sustainable development goal. The wastewater treatment by microalgae is highly economical, and the biomass generated can be further utilized for biofuel production. The successful coupling of microalgae with wastewater can overcome the expensive cultivation of microalgae and pollutants with wastewater and scale-up production of high-value products. A microalgae-based wastewater treatment process reduces BOD, inhibits coliforms, removes nutrients and contaminants, and removes heavy metals. In wastewater, nutrients are abundant, making it an ideal medium for growing microalgae. Microalgal biomass can produce a wide range of high-value products, such as biomethane, compost, biofuels, and animal feed.

Keywords

  • microalgae
  • biomass
  • sewage
  • wastewater
  • high-value products

1. Introduction

Water plays a vital role in all aspects of life, and the demand for wastewater treatment is currently a worldwide priority. Traditional sewage treatment consists of pre-treatment, physical, and chemical treatment of sewage water with high overhead expenses. The exploitation of natural resources worldwide to meet the energy demand has created a vast concern over environmental issues. Hence, wastewater treatment coupled with energy production and other valuable product generation. This method produces biomass that can be used further to produce valuable products and has a very low operational cost [1]. Recently, the use of microalgae for wastewater treatment has attracted much attention worldwide owing to its multifaceted benefits. Integrated biorefinery is a promising approach to microalgae cultivation for wastewater treatment with simultaneous production of high-value products and biofuel production [2, 3].

Furthermore, phycoremediation utilizes microalgae’s ability to bio-sequester carbon dioxide, their high growth rates, high biomass production, high lipid productivities, and their ability to remove contaminants from wastewater and produce biofuels. Aside from bio-manure and biodiesel, algal biomass can also be used to produce bioethanol, hydrogen, and other valuable products [4]. Investigation into different microalgal species has established that they could bring down more than 98% of COD and BOD of sewage water. The impact of phycoremediation in treating sewage wastewater reduces greenhouse gas and sludge formation cost-effectively and energy-affluently.

Many studies have coded the usage of microalgae in various wastewater treatments like agricultural, municipal, dairy, piggery, and poultry wastewaters and industrial effluents [5]. Recently, some studies have reported on treating sewage wastewater and microalgae biomass generation for biofuel production [6]. Chlorella vulgaris is the most desired organism for simultaneous wastewater treatment and bioenergy production [7]. Pooja et al. [8] used C. vulgaris to simultaneously remove nutrients and pollutants from wastewater and recover biomass for biofertilizer application. The above study successfully proved the conversion of sewage to chemical fertilizer. Kumar et al. [9] used C. vulgaris for wastewater treatment and industrial flue gases for biomass production.

Advertisement

2. Conventional sewage treatment process

The main aim of sewage wastewater treatment is to remove the BOD, suspended solids, nutrients, pathogenic microbes, and toxicity. The typical sewage treatment process involves four to five steps, viz., preliminary, primary, secondary, tertiary, and disinfection. Preliminary sewage wastewater treatment removes large solid particles like rags, wood, heavy grit particles, and fecal matter. A well-designed sedimentation tank removes almost 70% of the settleable solids and 40% of BOD during the primary treatment of sewage [10]. A mixed population of heterotrophic bacteria further reduces the BOD in secondary sewage treatment. These bacteria facilitate the biological oxidation of BOD and can further remove almost 90% of pathogenic bacteria from sewage [11]. Tertiary sewage treatment removes all the organic ions, viz., ammonium, nitrate, and phosphate, either biologically or chemically [12].

In contrast, quaternary treatment aims to remove heavy metals, organic compounds, and soluble minerals [13]. Following tertiary treatment, disinfection kills all pathogenic microbes in the effluent. Disinfection can be achieved using a variety of physical and chemical methods. Ozone and UV light are the most preferred physical disinfection methods, while chlorine has been used extensively for disinfection [14].

Advertisement

3. Microalgae for sewage wastewater treatment

The use of microalgae for sewage wastewater treatment is cost-efficient, renewable source for biomass production and helps in carbon sequestration [15]. The microalgae can utilize the organic and inorganic carbon and inorganic nitrogen and phosphorus present in wastewater for their growth. Photosynthesis in microalgae helps heterotrophic bacteria degrade carbonaceous materials in wastewater treatment. Many studies have reported microalgae biomass production using nutrients removed from wastewater [16]. In addition, microalgae are efficient for carbon dioxide capture and nutrient removal from wastewater and are reported as a potential candidate for future energy production [17]. The microalgae can directly assimilate ammonia and phosphate from wastewater for their growth and metabolic functions [18]. Furthermore, the microalgae wastewater treatment process emits fewer greenhouse gases, as most of the nitrogen is being assimilated instead of converted to nitrogen oxide [19].

Microalgae have recently been extensively studied for their ability to treat wastewater effluents. The performance of various microalgal species for wastewater treatment varies with the range of wastewater types [20]. Prandini et al. [21] successfully demonstrated nutrient removal from piggery wastewater by Scenedesmus obliquus. Kothari et al. [22] have used Chlorella pyrenoidosa for dairy effluent treatment. Many studies have reported C. vulgaris as an ideal candidate for municipal wastewater effluent treatment [23]. Other microalgae used for wastewater treatment are Chlamydomonas sp., Nanochloropsis sp., Dunaliella sp., Botryococcus sp., etc. [24]. Microalgae at the secondary treatment phase or primary sewage wastewater to effluent standards are economical and eco-friendly approaches. The nutrient composition of primary sewage waste and secondary treatment effluent is almost the same but has different concentrations [25]. The concentration of nutrients, viz., nitrogen and phosphorus, in primary sewage waste is higher than in secondary treatment effluent (Table 1).

Sl. no.MicroalgaeType of wastewaterNutrient removal efficiency in %References
PhosphorousCODNitrogen
1Parachlorella kessleriDomestic sewage659570[26]
2Chlorella fuscaUrban sewage45.4824.6[27]
3Chlorella pyrenoidosaSewage treatment plant94.28799.5[28]
4Chlamydomonas reinhardtiiSwine farm sewage13–14.542–83[29]
5Scenedesmus obliquusMunicipal sewage47–9879–100[30]
6Tetraselmis indicaDomestic sewage60–9372–9478.46[31]
7Nannochloropsis sp.Tannery effluent998482[32]
8Chlorella vulgarisIndustrial sewage7086[33]
9C. pyrenoidosaSynthetic sewage70.16199.2[28]
10Scenedesmus quadricaudaIndustrial sewage75.3377.50[26]
11Chlorella sorokiniana (WB1DG)Biogas effluent91.6863.4270.66[34]
12C. sorokiniana (P21)Biogas effluent92.1173.7867.33[34]

Table 1.

Nutrient removal efficiency of microalgae from various wastewater.

Advertisement

4. Mechanism of nutrient removal by microalgae

4.1 Carbon

As a primary carbon source, microalgae use CO2, whereas in aqueous conditions, CO2 splits into bicarbonate and carbonate ions depending on pH, temperature, and salinity [35]. Due to the low concentration of CO2 in the aquatic environment, microalgae use a carbon concentration mechanism to minimize the loss of photosynthetic activity [36]. Microalgae convert inorganic carbon to organic carbon via the Calvin cycle, as it provides metabolic reactions to produce amino acids and lipids.

The carbon dioxide concentration in the wastewater is one of the essential factors that decide the growth of microalgae, i.e., low availability of inorganic carbon in wastewater limits microalgal growth. Hence, to improve microalgae growth, the wastewater is usually supplemented with carbon dioxide or bicarbonate salts [37].

Shen et al. [38] reported that S. obliquus at 5% CO2 concentration removes total nitrogen from the wastewater within 2 days. In contrast, the total nitrogen recovery is less even on the third day under ambient and higher concentrations. Many studies have reported that at elevated CO2 levels, biomass production and nutrient removal from wastewater via microalgae have improved [39, 40]. The microalgae tolerance to CO2 is strain specific and has few species acclimatized with CO2 concentrations up to 100% [41]. Microalgae metabolize organic carbon compounds from wastewater through photo-mixotrophy or strict heterotrophy [42]. Municipal wastewater is highly heterogeneous, with complex carbonaceous materials that limit its availability as an ideal carbon source for microalgae. Since municipal wastewater comprises majorly complex organic carbon compounds, their decomposition by heterotrophic microorganisms must be converted to viable carbon sources for microalgae [43]. It has been reported that supplementing inorganic carbon to wastewater enhances nutrient removal efficiency [42]. However, enriching the wastewater with organic carbon increases production costs.

4.2 Nitrogen

Microalgae can utilize nitrogen from various organic and inorganic sources. Ammonia is preferred among the various nitrogen sources as its assimilation and incorporation are more efficient. Ruiz-Marin et al. [30] reported that microalgae, viz., S. obliquus and C. vulgaris showed a preference for NH3 in wastewater compared to other nitrogen sources. Membrane transporter proteins easily assimilate ammonium, and once translocated, the ammonium is directly incorporated into amino acids required for growth and other functions. Whereas transport of NO3 and NO2 is an energy-dependent process, they must first be reduced to ammonium via enzymatic reaction, requiring reductant NADH and ferredoxin [44]. In the microalgae wastewater treatment process, nitrification decreases the ammonium, and nitrate production is not desired as microalgae do not eliminate it if ammonium is present. Many studies have reported in steady-state wastewater treatment, almost 80% of the NH3 is oxidized to NO3, with a maximum of 40% assimilated by microalgae [45].

In photoautotrophic microalgae, inorganic carbon is fixed by the Calvin cycle and enters the glycolytic pathway as glucose-3-phosphate. Once converted to acetyl CoA, pyruvate is transported to mitochondria and enters the TCA cycle. Acetyl Co-A is further metabolized to CO2, and ATP, reducing equivalents and carbon skeletons [46].

Organic carbon substrates are transported in the cytosol through the glycolytic or pentose phosphate pathways in heterotrophic mode. Glycerol can be used as an alternative carbon substrate, translocated across the membrane via passive diffusion into the cytosol of microalgae [42, 47].

4.3 Phosphorus

Phosphorus is an important element involved in many metabolic processes as well as structural component of microalgae [18]. In wastewater, inorganic P exists in many ionic forms and is mostly bioavailable than soluble organic P compounds for microalgae. Phosphorus is incorporated into organic compounds by phosphorylation of Adenosine diphosphate (ADP). It is an endergonic reaction that obtains energy either by oxidation of respiratory substrates or by photosynthetic electron transport chain [24]. If a wastewater in enriched with P, microalgae have the capacity to accumulate P beyond their metabolic needs and store as acid-insoluble polyphosphate granules via luxury uptake mechanism [48].

Advertisement

5. Factors affecting the microalgae wastewater treatment

5.1 Bacteria

The use of microalgae in wastewater treatment has been extensively studied. It is impossible to avoid other organisms like bacteria and fungi in wastewater, and wastewater sterilization is not feasible due to the huge volumes to be processed. The common bacterial species dominated in sewage wastewater are from the classes Bacteroidia, Flavobacteria, Betaproteobacteria, and Gamma proteobacteria. In primary sewage wastewater, variations in bacterial community composition are noticed at different inoculation ratios of microalgae to sludge [49].

Bacteria help the microalgae in wastewater treatment by providing CO2 via heterotrophic metabolism of organic matter and later mineralizing it to inorganic compounds that can be consumed directly by microalgae [50]. In return, microalgae produce oxygen via photosynthesis, which is required for heterotrophic bacterial growth during organic matter degradation [44]. The activated sludge treatment microalgae facilitate nitrification by generating a sufficient quantity of dissolved O2 [51]. The integration of a bacterial-microalgal approach for wastewater treatment is a promising approach as heterotrophic bacteria degrade the organic matter in the absence of aerated oxygen, as the microalgae provide O2, and similarly, the need for CO2 sparging is eliminated as bacterial respiration produces it [52].

5.2 Industrial contaminants

Microalgae can remove most industrial contaminants like heavy metals. Heavy metal contamination in wastewater is primarily due to industrial processing. The use of microalgae for wastewater treatment is termed phycoremediation, where algae uptake the nutrients, accumulate heavy metals, and degrade organic matter via symbiotic interaction with heterotrophic bacteria [53]. Microalgae has the potential to utilize waste as a nutritional source and reduce pollutants via enzymatic and metabolic processes. The microalgal metabolic pathways make them detoxify, transform and volatilize the heavy metal and xenobiotic pollution in wastewater [54]. Biosorption is the most commonly used mechanism by microalgae for either active or passive heavy metal uptake. Hence, biosorption is regarded as a cost-efficient way to eliminate heavy metals from industrial effluent [55]. The active algal biomass has a metal efflux metabolism-driven system for maintaining heavy metal concentration in intracellular space to avoid heavy metal toxicity. In microalgae, the heavy metal ions are distributed in cell vacuoles and organelles. In microalgae, the oxidation number of heavy metals is altered by various enzymatic reactions and makes them into less toxic forms. The microprecipitation of heavy metal removal in the form of phosphates and sulfates by active algal biomass is a practical approach to removing heavy metals from wastewater [56]. The microalgal cell wall has an overall negative charge due to the presence of various functional groups; this makes the algal cell an entire binding site for heavy metal cations and involved in metal exchange via an ion-exchange mechanism [57].

5.3 pH

pH is an important abiotic parameter that decides the efficiency of wastewater treatment. The increased pH of wastewater leads to an adverse effect on bacterial activity. If the assimilation of inorganic carbon by microalgae is increased, the medium leads to an alkaline environment. Under the alkaline situation, the beneficial activity of aerobic and facultative bacteria in wastewater is impaired. Many studies have reported the inactivation of bacterial activity at higher pH [58]. At the pH of 8.5–9.5, wastewater bacterial community like coliforms and other pathogenic microbes has been drastically reduced [59]. Many mechanisms lead to the elimination of bacterial community in wastewater, i.e., conformational changes in bacterial membrane structure, respiratory chain damage, and increased susceptibility to exogenous factors like light, temperature, etc. [60]. Sutherland et al. [61] reported a reduction in nutrient removal efficiency at higher pH from primary sewage wastewater treatment via a microalgae consortium. Martinez et al. [62] reported the disruption of the cell wall of S. obliquus while treated with municipal sewage effluent at pH > 11.

5.4 Temperature and light

The indigenous microbial community in the wastewater will also compete for nutrients and microalgae. Hence, to promote microalgal growth, the factors like temperature and light intensity has to be considered [63]. The rate of photosynthesis by microalgae is directly proportional to the optimum light intensity, as, beyond optimum, photoinhibition will take place [64]. The illumination saturation point for microalgae varies between 200 and 400 μE m−2 s−1 [65]. The illumination period and amount of light intensity to microalgae-bacterial culture affect the nutrient removal efficiency from wastewater. The prolonged dark conditions during wastewater treatment via microalgae-bacteria consortium lower biomass recovery and chlorophyll. Gonzalez-Camejo et al. [66] reported in a bacterial-microalgal consortium for wastewater treatment, the lower light intensity of 40 μE m−2 s−1 favors the activity of nitrifying bacteria. Whereas, higher light intensities of 85–125 μE m−2 s−1 favor more microalgal growth over nitrifying bacteria.

The environmental temperature also plays a major role in nutrient removal efficiency from wastewater by microalgae. Ruiz-Martinez et al. [67] evaluated the ammonium removal efficiency of Scenedesmus sp. at different temperatures and found that the removal rate increases from 15 to 34°C. Similarly, Sforza et al. [68] assessed at a lower temperature of 15°C Chlorella protothecoides remove more NH4+ N from effluent. The optimum temperature range of microalgae for wastewater treatment is between 10 and 30°C [65]. Usually, under normal conditions, higher temperature leads to a high growth rate and increased nutrient uptake by microalgae due to higher metabolic activity; these conditions are not always desired with wastewater treatment. Cultivating microalgae in wastewater at a lower temperature may also require less light intensity to minimize light saturation and photo-inhibition.

Advertisement

6. Future perspective and conclusion

In developing countries, almost 80% of the wastewater is discharged untreated to land or waterbodies, which may lead to serious health risks and environmental issues like eutrophication. Due to rapid industrialization and the global population, the requirement for fresh water and wastewater discharge is increasing daily. Conventional sewage treatment processes are not much desired due to their inability to reduce the nutrient concentration to acceptable levels in wastewater.

Microalgae-bacteria-based consortium to recover nutrients from wastewater is an alternative to conventional processes as both organisms establish a symbiotic relationship. Bacteria utilize the organic matter from sewage wastewater and produce CO2 as a by-product. The microalgae, in turn, utilize the bacteria discharges CO2 and produce carbohydrates and O2, required for biomass production, and the latter serves as a terminal electron acceptor for bacterial respiration.

Integrating microalgae-based biorefinery is a promising approach with dual benefits, i.e., wastewater treatment and high-value biomass generation for biofuel production to make the wastewater treatment sustainable, eco-friendly, and economically viable. The microalgae in sewage wastewater treatment have a tri purpose of bioenergy production from generated microalgal biomass, phycoremediation, and organic farming with much less damage to soils and human health than chemical fertilizers.

Advertisement

Acknowledgments

The corresponding author would like to acknowledge the IntechOpen for providing the opportunity and accepting the chapter for the same.

References

  1. 1. Ray B, Rakesh S. Phycoremediation of aquaculture wastewater and algal lipid extraction for fuel conversion. Highlights in BioScience. 2022;5:1
  2. 2. Jothibasu K, Muniraj I, Jayakumar T, Ray B, Dhar DW, Karthikeyan S, et al. Impact of microalgal cell wall biology on downstream processing and nutrient removal for fuels and value-added products. Biochemical Engineering Journal. 2022;187:108642
  3. 3. Ray B, Rakesh S. Advances on harvesting and extraction systems in microalgal biorefinery. In: Micro-algae: Next-generation Feedstock for Biorefineries. 2022. p. 239
  4. 4. Khan SA, Hussain MZ, Prasad S, Banerjee UC. Prospects of biodiesel production from microalgae in India. Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews. 2009;13(9):2361-2372
  5. 5. Plöhn M, Spain O, Sirin S, Silva M, Escudero-Oñate C, Ferrando-Climent L, et al. Wastewater treatment by microalgae. Physiologia Plantarum. 2021;173(2):568-578
  6. 6. Ho L, Goethals PL. Municipal wastewater treatment with pond technology: Historical review and future outlook. Ecological Engineering. 2020;148:105791
  7. 7. Mahdy A, Mendez L, Ballesteros M, González-Fernández C. Algaculture integration in conventional wastewater treatment plants: Anaerobic digestion comparison of primary and secondary sludge with microalgae biomass. Bioresource Technology. 2015;184:236-244
  8. 8. Pooja K, Priyanka V, Rao BCS, Raghavender V. Cost-effective treatment of sewage wastewater using microalgae Chlorella vulgaris and its application as bio-fertilizer. Energy Nexus. 2022;7:100122
  9. 9. Kumar PK, Krishna SV, Verma K, Pooja K, Bhagawan D, Himabindu V. Phycoremediation of sewage wastewater and industrial flue gases for biomass generation from microalgae. South African Journal of Chemical Engineering. 2018;25:133-146
  10. 10. Horan NJ. Biological Wastewater Treatment Systems: Theory and Operation. Chichester: John Wiley & Sons; 1990
  11. 11. Gray NF. Biology of Wastewater Treatment. Vol. 4. World Scientific. Covent Garden, London: Imperial College Press; 2004
  12. 12. de la Noüe J, Laliberté G, Proulx D. Algae and waste water. Journal of Applied Phycology. 1992;4(3):247-254
  13. 13. Oswald WJ. Microalgae and wastewater treatment. In: Borowitzka MA, Borowitzka LJ, editors. Microalgal Biotechnology. New York: Cambridge University Press; 1988b. pp. 357-394
  14. 14. Abdel-Raouf N, Al-Homaidan AA, Ibraheem I. Microalgae and wastewater treatment. Saudi Journal of Biological Sciences. 2012;19(3):257-275
  15. 15. Almomani F, Judd S, Bhosale RR, Shurair M, Aljaml K, Khraisheh M. Intergraded wastewater treatment and carbon bio-fixation from flue gases using Spirulina platensis and mixed algal culture. Process Safety and Environmental Protection. 2019;124:240-250
  16. 16. Chawla P, Malik A, Sreekrishnan TR, Dalvi V, Gola D. Selection of optimum combination via comprehensive comparison of multiple algal cultures for treatment of diverse wastewaters. Environmental Technology & Innovation. 2020;18:100758
  17. 17. Arun S, Sinharoy A, Pakshirajan K, Lens PN. Algae based microbial fuel cells for wastewater treatment and recovery of value-added products. Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews. 2020;132:110041
  18. 18. Borowitzka MA. Systematics, taxonomy and species names: Do they matter? In: The Physiology of Microalgae. Cham: Springer; 2016. pp. 655-681
  19. 19. Alcántara C, Domínguez JM, García D, Blanco S, Pérez R, García-Encina PA, et al. Evaluation of wastewater treatment in a novel anoxic–aerobic algal–bacterial photobioreactor with biomass recycling through carbon and nitrogen mass balances. Bioresource Technology. 2015;191:173-186
  20. 20. Chiu SY, Kao CY, Chen TY, Chang YB, Kuo CM, Lin CS. Cultivation of microalgal Chlorella for biomass and lipid production using wastewater as nutrient resource. Bioresource Technology. 2015;184:179-189
  21. 21. Prandini JM, Da Silva MLB, Mezzari MP, Pirolli M, Michelon W, Soares HM. Enhancement of nutrient removal from swine wastewater digestate coupled to biogas purification by microalgae Scenedesmus spp. Bioresource Technology. 2016;202:67-75
  22. 22. Kothari R, Pathak VV, Kumar V, Singh DP. Experimental study for growth potential of unicellular alga Chlorella pyrenoidosa on dairy waste water: An integrated approach for treatment and biofuel production. Bioresource Technology. 2012;116:466-470
  23. 23. Gouveia L, Graça S, Sousa C, Ambrosano L, Ribeiro B, Botrel EP, et al. Microalgae biomass production using wastewater: Treatment and costs: Scale-up considerations. Algal Research. 2016;16:167-176
  24. 24. Gonçalves AL, Pires JC, Simões M. A review on the use of microalgal consortia for wastewater treatment. Algal Research. 2017;24:403-415
  25. 25. Mehrabadi A, Farid MM, Craggs R. Potential of five different isolated colonial algal species for wastewater treatment and biomass energy production. Algal Research. 2017;21:1-8
  26. 26. Ji L et al. A comparative study of the growth and nutrient removal effects of five green microalgae in simulated domestic sewage. Water (Switzerland). 2021;13(24):3
  27. 27. Arrojo MÁ et al. Potential of the microalgae Chlorella fusca (Trebouxiophyceae, Chlorophyta) for biomass production and urban wastewater phycoremediation. AMB Express. 2022;12(1):3
  28. 28. Kumari P et al. Phycoremediation of wastewater by Chlorella pyrenoidosa and utilization of its biomass for biogas production. Journal of Environmental Chemical Engineering. Feb. 2021;9(1):104974
  29. 29. Kong QX, Li L, Martinez B, Chen P, Ruan R. Culture of microalgae Chlamydomonas reinhardtii in wastewater for biomass feedstock production. Applied Biochemistry and Biotechnology. 2010;160(1):9-18
  30. 30. Ruiz-Marin A, Mendoza-Espinosa LG, Stephenson T. Growth and nutrient removal in free and immobilized green algae in batch and semi-continuous cultures treating real wastewater. Bioresource Technology. 2010;101:58-64
  31. 31. Amit CR, Ghosh UK, Nayak JK. Phycoremediation Potential of Marine Microalga Tetraselmis indica on Secondary Treated Domestic Sewage for Nutrient Removal and Biodiesel Production. Elsevier; 2019. pp. 405-436
  32. 32. Saranya D, Shanthakumar S. An Integrated Approach for Tannery Effluent Treatment with Ozonation and Phycoremediation: A Feasibility Study. 2020
  33. 33. Pandey BC, Sangita G. Effectiveness of Algae in Wastewater Treatment. No. August, 2022
  34. 34. Padri M. Application of two indigenous strains of microalgal Chlorella sorokiniana in cassava biogas effluent focusing on growth rate, removal kinetics, and harvestability. Water (Switzerland). 2021;13(17):3
  35. 35. Hill PS, Tripati AK, Schauble EA. Theoretical constraints on the effects of pH, salinity, and temperature on clumped isotope signatures of dissolved inorganic carbon species and precipitating carbonate minerals. Geochimica et Cosmochimica Acta. 2014;125:610-652
  36. 36. Raven JA, Cockell CS, De La Rocha CL. The evolution of inorganic carbon concentrating mechanisms in photosynthesis. Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society B: Biological Sciences. 2008;363(1504):2641-2650
  37. 37. Kesaano M. Characterization and Performance of Algal Biofilms for Wastewater Treatment and Industrial Applications. Utah State University; 2015. Available from: https://digitalcommons.usu.edu/etd/4445
  38. 38. Shen QH, Jiang JW, Chen LP, Cheng LH, Xu XH, Chen HL. Effect of carbon source on biomass growth and nutrients removal of Scenedesmus obliquus for wastewater advanced treatment and lipid production. Bioresource Technology. 2015;190:257-263
  39. 39. Yao L, Shi J, Miao X. Mixed wastewater coupled with CO2 for microalgae culturing and nutrient removal. PLoS One. 2015;10(9):e0139117
  40. 40. Qi F, Xu Y, Yu Y, Liang X, Zhang L, Zhao H, et al. Enhancing growth of Chlamydomonas reinhardtii and nutrient removal in diluted primary piggery wastewater by elevated CO2 supply. Water Science and Technology. 2017;75(10):2281-2290
  41. 41. Zhao B, Su Y. Process effect of microalgal-carbon dioxide fixation and biomass production: A review. Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews. 2014;31:121-132
  42. 42. Perez-Garcia O, Escalante F, De-Bashan L, Bashan Y. Heterotrophic cultures of microalgae: Metabolism and potential products. Water Research. 2011b;45:11-36
  43. 43. Lowrey J, Brooks MS, McGinn PJ. Heterotrophic and mixotrophic cultivation of microalgae for biodiesel production in agricultural wastewaters and associated challenges—A critical review. Journal of Applied Phycology. 2015;27(4):1485-1498
  44. 44. Falkowski PG, Raven JA. Aquatic Photosynthesis. Princeton University Press; 2013
  45. 45. Vargas G, Donoso-Bravo A, Vergara C, Ruiz-Filippi G. Assessment of microalgae and nitrifiers activity in a consortium in a continuous operation and the effect of oxygen depletion. Electronic Journal of Biotechnology. 2016;23:63-68
  46. 46. Voet D, Voet J. Biochemistry. 4th ed. New Jersey, USA: John Wiley & Sons; 2011
  47. 47. Yang C, Hua Q , Shimizu K. Energetics and carbon metabolism during growth of microalgal cells under photoautotrophic, mixotrophic and cyclic light-autotrophic/dark-heterotrophic conditions. Biochemical Engineering Journal. 2000;6(2):87-102
  48. 48. Eixler S, Karsten U, Selig U. Phosphorus storage in Chlorella vulgaris (Trebouxiophyceae, Chlorophyta) cells and its dependence on phosphate supply. Phycologia. 2006;45(1):53-60
  49. 49. Su Y, Mennerich A, Urban B. Synergistic cooperation between wastewater-born algae and activated sludge for wastewater treatment: Influence of algae and sludge inoculation ratios. Bioresource Technology. 2012;105:67-73
  50. 50. de Godos I, Vargas VA, Blanco S, González MCG, Soto R, García-Encina PA, et al. A comparative evaluation of microalgae for the degradation of piggery wastewater under photosynthetic oxygenation. Bioresource Technology. 2010;101(14):5150-5158
  51. 51. Wang M, Yang H, Ergas SJ, van der Steen P. A novel shortcut nitrogen removal process using an algal-bacterial consortium in a photo-sequencing batch reactor (PSBR). Water Research. 2015;87:38-48
  52. 52. Mathew MM, Khatana K, Vats V, Dhanker R, Kumar R, Dahms HU, et al. Biological approaches integrating algae and bacteria for the degradation of wastewater contaminants—A review. Frontiers in Microbiology. 2021;12:5
  53. 53. Majumder S, Gupta S, Raghuvanshi S, Gupta S, Majumder S. Removal of dissolved metals by bioremediation. In: Heavy Metals in Water: Presence, Removal and Safety. 2014. pp. 44-56
  54. 54. Gautam RK, Sharma SK, Mahiya S, Chattopadhyaya MC. Contamination of Heavy Metals in Aquatic Media: Transport, Toxicity and Technologies for Remediation. 2014
  55. 55. Ahmad S, Pandey A, Pathak VV, Tyagi VV, Kothari R. Phycoremediation: Algae as eco-friendly tools for the removal of heavy metals from wastewaters. In: Bioremediation of Industrial Waste for Environmental Safety. 2020. pp. 53-76
  56. 56. Ungureanu G, Santos S, Boaventura R, Botelho C. Biosorption of antimony by brown algae S. muticum and A. nodosum. Environmental Engineering & Management Journal (EEMJ). 2015;14(2):6
  57. 57. Monteiro CM, Castro PM, Malcata FX. Capacity of simultaneous removal of zinc and cadmium from contaminated media, by two microalgae isolated from a polluted site. Environmental Chemistry Letters. 2011;9(4):511-517
  58. 58. Ansa EDO, Lubberding HJ, Gijzen HJ. The effect of algal biomass on the removal of faecal coliform from domestic wastewater. Applied Water Science. 2012;2(2):87-94
  59. 59. Awuah E. Pathogen Removal Mechanisms in Macrophyte and Algal Waste Stabilization Ponds. Wageningen University and Research. Leiden, The Netherlands: Taylor & Francis/Balkema; 2006
  60. 60. Bosshard F, Bucheli M, Meur Y, Egli T. The respiratory chain is the cell's Achilles' heel during UVA inactivation in Escherichia coli. Microbiology. 2010;156(7):2006-2015
  61. 61. Sutherland DL, Howard-Williams C, Turnbull MH, Broady PA, Craggs RJ. The effects of CO2 addition along a pH gradient on wastewater microalgal photo-physiology, biomass production and nutrient removal. Water Research. 2015;70:9-26
  62. 62. Martınez ME, Sánchez S, Jimenez JM, El Yousfi F, Munoz L. Nitrogen and phosphorus removal from urban wastewater by the microalga Scenedesmus obliquus. Bioresource Technology. 2000;73(3):263-272
  63. 63. Lee J, Cho DH, Ramanan R, Kim BH, Oh HM, Kim HS. Microalgae-associated bacteria play a key role in the flocculation of Chlorella vulgaris. Bioresource Technology. 2013;131:195-201
  64. 64. Williams PJLB, Laurens LM. Microalgae as biodiesel & biomass feedstocks: Review & analysis of the biochemistry, energetics & economics. Energy & Environmental Science. 2010;3(5):554-590
  65. 65. Singh SP, Singh P. Effect of temperature and light on the growth of algae species: A review. Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews. 2015;50:431-444
  66. 66. Gonzalez-Camejo J, Barat R, Pachés M, Murgui M, Seco A, Ferrer J. Wastewater nutrient removal in a mixed microalga–bacteria culture: Effect of light and temperature on the microalgae–bacteria competition. Environmental Technology. 2017;39(4):503-515
  67. 67. Ruiz-Martínez A, Serralta J, Seco A, Ferrer J. Effect of temperature on ammonium removal in Scenedesmus sp. Bioresource Technology. 2015;191:346-349
  68. 68. Sforza E, Ramos-Tercero EA, Gris B, Bettin F, Milani A, Bertucco A. Integration of Chlorella protothecoides production in wastewater treatment plant: From lab measurements to process design. Algal Research. 2014;6:223-233

Written By

Radhakrishnan Vandana and Suchitra Rakesh

Submitted: 29 November 2022 Reviewed: 30 November 2022 Published: 13 January 2023