Evidence map›Paper›PMID 27193869›Full record

ArticleScientific reports2016

Integrative microbial community analysis reveals full-scale enhanced biological phosphorus removal under tropical conditions.

Yingyu Law, Rasmus Hansen Kirkegaard, Angel Anisa Cokro, Xianghui Liu, Krithika Arumugam, Chao Xie, Mikkel Stokholm-Bjerregaard, Daniela I Drautz-Moses, Per Halkjær Nielsen, Stefan Wuertz and 1 more

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Scientific reports, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 15 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
15citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

15 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Unlocking the potential of sidestream EBPR: exploring the coexistence of PAO, GAO and DGAO for effective phosphorus and nitrogen removal.Water science and technology : a journal of the International Association on Water Pollution Research · 2025
    Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Comparative Genomics of Members of the GenusFrontiers in microbiology · 2022
    Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Review
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

11 authors.

Yingyu LawSingapore Centre for Environmental Life Sciences Engineering, Nanyang Technological University, Singapore 637551, Singapore.
Rasmus Hansen KirkegaardCentre for Microbial Communities, Department of Chemistry and Bioscience, Aalborg University, 9220 Aalborg, Denmark.
Angel Anisa CokroSingapore Centre for Environmental Life Sciences Engineering, Nanyang Technological University, Singapore 637551, Singapore.
Xianghui LiuSingapore Centre for Environmental Life Sciences Engineering, Nanyang Technological University, Singapore 637551, Singapore.
Krithika ArumugamSingapore Centre for Environmental Life Sciences Engineering, Nanyang Technological University, Singapore 637551, Singapore.
Chao XieSingapore Centre for Environmental Life Sciences Engineering, National University of Singapore, Singapore 119077, Singapore.
Mikkel Stokholm-BjerregaardCentre for Microbial Communities, Department of Chemistry and Bioscience, Aalborg University, 9220 Aalborg, Denmark.
Daniela I Drautz-MosesSingapore Centre for Environmental Life Sciences Engineering, Nanyang Technological University, Singapore 637551, Singapore.
Per Halkjær NielsenSingapore Centre for Environmental Life Sciences Engineering, Nanyang Technological University, Singapore 637551, Singapore.
Stefan WuertzSingapore Centre for Environmental Life Sciences Engineering, Nanyang Technological University, Singapore 637551, Singapore.
Rohan B H WilliamsSingapore Centre for Environmental Life Sciences Engineering, National University of Singapore, Singapore 119077, Singapore.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Management of phosphorus discharge from human waste is essential for the control of eutrophication in surface waters. Enhanced biological phosphorus removal (EBPR) is a sustainable, efficient way of removing phosphorus from waste water without employing chemical precipitation, but is assumed unachievable in tropical temperatures due to conditions that favour glycogen accumulating organisms (GAOs) over polyphosphate accumulating organisms (PAOs). Here, we show these assumptions are unfounded by studying comparative community dynamics in a full-scale plant following systematic perturbation of operational conditions, which modified community abundance, function and physicochemical state. A statistically significant increase in the relative abundance of the PAO Accumulibacter was associated with improved EBPR activity. GAO relative abundance also increased, challenging the assumption of competition. An Accumulibacter bin-genome was identified from a whole community metagenomic survey, and comparative analysis against extant Accumulibacter genomes suggests a close relationship to Type II. Analysis of the associated metatranscriptome data revealed that genes encoding proteins involved in the tricarboxylic acid cycle and glycolysis pathways were highly expressed, consistent with metabolic modelling results. Our findings show that tropical EBPR is indeed possible, highlight the translational potential of studying competition dynamics in full-scale waste water communities and carry implications for plant design in tropical regions.

Indexed as

Tropical ClimateWater MicrobiologyBacteriaBiodegradation, EnvironmentalBioreactorsGlycogenIn Situ Hybridization, FluorescenceMetagenomeMicrobial ConsortiaPhosphorusSequence Analysis, DNASewageTemperatureWaste Disposal, FluidWastewaterWater PurificationGlycogenPhosphorusSewageWastewater

Identifiers

PMID27193869
PMCPMC4872125

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.