Catalytic response of microbial biofilms grown under fixed anode potentials depends on electrochemical cell configuration

Abstract In microbial electrochemical cells the anode potential can vary over a wide range, which alters the thermodynamic energy available for bacterial-electrode electron exchange (termed electroactive bacteria). We investigated how anode potential affected the microbial catalytic response of the electroactive biofilm. Microbial biofilms induced to grow on graphite electrodes by application of a fixed applied anode potential in membrane-separated and membrane-less electrochemical cells show differences in electrocatalytic response. Maximum current density is obtained using +0.2 V vs. Ag/AgCl to induce biofilm growth in membrane-less cells, in contrast to a maximum achieved at lower applied potentials in a membrane-separated electrochemical cell configuration. This insight into differences in optimal applied potentials based on cell configuration can play an important role in selection of parameters required for microbial fuel cells and bio-electrochemical systems.

[1]  Prathap Parameswaran,et al.  Kinetic experiments for evaluating the Nernst-Monod model for anode-respiring bacteria (ARB) in a biofilm anode. , 2008, Environmental science & technology.

[2]  D. Leech,et al.  Geobacter sulfurreducens biofilms developed under different growth conditions on glassy carbon electrodes: insights using cyclic voltammetry. , 2010, Chemical Communications.

[3]  P. Lens,et al.  Does bioelectrochemical cell configuration and anode potential affect biofilm response? , 2012, Biochemical Society transactions.

[4]  Bruce E. Logan,et al.  Comparison of microbial electrolysis cells operated with added voltage or by setting the anode poten , 2011 .

[5]  R. Hozalski,et al.  Microbial Biofilm Voltammetry: Direct Electrochemical Characterization of Catalytic Electrode-Attached Biofilms , 2008, Applied and Environmental Microbiology.

[6]  Matthieu Picot,et al.  Enzymatic versus microbial bio-catalyzed electrodes in bio-electrochemical systems. , 2012, ChemSusChem.

[7]  Willy Verstraete,et al.  The anode potential regulates bacterial activity in microbial fuel cells , 2008, Applied Microbiology and Biotechnology.

[8]  A. Uitterlinden,et al.  Profiling of complex microbial populations by denaturing gradient gel electrophoresis analysis of polymerase chain reaction-amplified genes coding for 16S rRNA , 1993, Applied and environmental microbiology.

[9]  A. Bergel,et al.  Forming electrochemically active biofilms from garden compost under chronoamperometry. , 2008, Bioresource technology.

[10]  D. R. Bond,et al.  Electricity Production by Geobacter sulfurreducens Attached to Electrodes , 2003, Applied and Environmental Microbiology.

[11]  Derek R Lovley,et al.  Microtoming coupled to microarray analysis to evaluate the spatial metabolic status of Geobacter sulfurreducens biofilms , 2010, The ISME Journal.

[12]  B. Logan,et al.  Optimal set anode potentials vary in bioelectrochemical systems. , 2010, Environmental science & technology.

[13]  Prathap Parameswaran,et al.  Selecting anode-respiring bacteria based on anode potential: phylogenetic, electrochemical, and microscopic characterization. , 2009, Environmental science & technology.

[14]  Sean F. Covalla,et al.  Power output and columbic efficiencies from biofilms of Geobacter sulfurreducens comparable to mixed community microbial fuel cells. , 2008, Environmental microbiology.

[15]  Kazuya Watanabe,et al.  Characterization of a filamentous biofilm community established in a cellulose-fed microbial fuel cell , 2008, BMC Microbiology.

[16]  Byoung-Chan Kim,et al.  Selection of a variant of Geobacter sulfurreducens with enhanced capacity for current production in microbial fuel cells. , 2009, Biosensors & bioelectronics.

[17]  Qingliang Zhao,et al.  Accelerated start-up of two-chambered microbial fuel cells: Effect of anodic positive poised potential , 2009 .

[18]  V. O’Flaherty,et al.  Low-temperature (7 °C) anaerobic treatment of a trichloroethylene-contaminated wastewater: microbial community development. , 2011, Water research.

[19]  M. Gutiérrez,et al.  Three-dimensional microchanelled electrodes in flow-through configuration for bioanode formation and current generation , 2011 .

[20]  Leonard M Tender,et al.  Effect of electrode potential on electrode-reducing microbiota. , 2006, Environmental science & technology.

[21]  Bruce E Rittmann,et al.  Conduction‐based modeling of the biofilm anode of a microbial fuel cell , 2007, Biotechnology and bioengineering.

[22]  Derek R. Lovley,et al.  Cyclic voltammetry of biofilms of wild type and mutant Geobacter sulfurreducens on fuel cell anodes indicates possible roles of OmcB, OmcZ, type IV pili, and protons in extracellular electron transfer , 2009 .

[23]  Vincent M Rotello,et al.  Electricity generation by Geobacter sulfurreducens attached to gold electrodes. , 2008, Langmuir : the ACS journal of surfaces and colloids.

[24]  V. O’Flaherty,et al.  Charge transport through Geobacter sulfurreducens biofilms grown on graphite rods. , 2012, Langmuir : the ACS journal of surfaces and colloids.

[25]  Derek R Lovley,et al.  Powering microbes with electricity: direct electron transfer from electrodes to microbes. , 2011, Environmental microbiology reports.

[26]  X. Quan,et al.  Effect of anode aeration on the performance and microbial community of an air–cathode microbial fuel cell , 2012 .