Subscriber access provided by READING UNIV
Article
Detection of cyanobacteria in eutrophic water using a portable electrocoagulator and NanoGene assay Eun-Hee Lee, Beelee Chua, and Ahjeong Son Environ. Sci. Technol., Just Accepted Manuscript • DOI: 10.1021/acs.est.7b05055 • Publication Date (Web): 05 Jan 2018 Downloaded from http://pubs.acs.org on January 10, 2018
Just Accepted “Just Accepted” manuscripts have been peer-reviewed and accepted for publication. They are posted online prior to technical editing, formatting for publication and author proofing. The American Chemical Society provides “Just Accepted” as a free service to the research community to expedite the dissemination of scientific material as soon as possible after acceptance. “Just Accepted” manuscripts appear in full in PDF format accompanied by an HTML abstract. “Just Accepted” manuscripts have been fully peer reviewed, but should not be considered the official version of record. They are accessible to all readers and citable by the Digital Object Identifier (DOI®). “Just Accepted” is an optional service offered to authors. Therefore, the “Just Accepted” Web site may not include all articles that will be published in the journal. After a manuscript is technically edited and formatted, it will be removed from the “Just Accepted” Web site and published as an ASAP article. Note that technical editing may introduce minor changes to the manuscript text and/or graphics which could affect content, and all legal disclaimers and ethical guidelines that apply to the journal pertain. ACS cannot be held responsible for errors or consequences arising from the use of information contained in these “Just Accepted” manuscripts.
Environmental Science & Technology is published by the American Chemical Society. 1155 Sixteenth Street N.W., Washington, DC 20036 Published by American Chemical Society. Copyright © American Chemical Society. However, no copyright claim is made to original U.S. Government works, or works produced by employees of any Commonwealth realm Crown government in the course of their duties.
Page 1 of 31
Environmental Science & Technology
1
Detection of cyanobacteria in eutrophic water using a
2
portable electrocoagulator and NanoGene assay
3 1
4
Eun-Hee Lee, 2,* Beelee Chua, 1,*Ahjeong Son
5 6
1
Department of Environmental Science and Engineering, Ewha Womans University, Seoul, Republic of Korea
7
2
School of Electrical Engineering, Korea University, Seoul, Republic of Korea
8 9 10
*Corresponding Author, Beelee Chua: Present address. 145 Anam-ro, Seongbuk-gu, Korea University, Seoul,
11
02841, Republic of Korea; E-mail.
[email protected]; Phone. +82 (2) 3290-4639
12
*Corresponding Author, Ahjeong Son: Present address. 52 Ewhayeodae-gil, Seodaemun-gu, Ewha Womans
13
University, Seoul, 03760, Republic of Korea; E-mail.
[email protected]; Phone. +82 (2) 3277-3339; Fax.
14
+82 (2) 3277-3275
15
1
ACS Paragon Plus Environment
Environmental Science & Technology
Page 2 of 31
16
ABSTRACT
17
We have demonstrated the detection of cyanobacteria in eutrophic water samples using a portable
18
electrocoagulator and NanoGene assay. The electrocoagulator is designed to pre-concentrate cyanobacteria from
19
water samples prior to analysis via NanoGene assay. Using Microcystis aeruginosa laboratory culture and
20
environmental samples (cell densities ranging from 1.7 × 105 to 4.1 × 106 and 6.5 × 103 to 6.6 × 107 cells·mL-1,
21
respectively), the electrocoagulator was evaluated and compared with a conventional centrifuge. Varying the
22
operation duration from 0 to 300 s with different cell densities was first investigated. Pre-concentration
23
efficiencies (obtained via absorbance measurement) and dry cell weight of pre-concentrated cyanobacteria were
24
then obtained and compared. For laboratory samples at cell densities from 3.2 × 105 to 4.1 × 106 cells·mL-1, the
25
pre-concentration efficiencies of electrocoagulator appeared to be stable at ~60%. At lower cell densities (1.7
26
and 2.2 × 105 cells·mL-1), the pre-concentration efficiencies decreased to 33.9 ± 0.2 and 40.4 ± 5.4%,
27
respectively. For environmental samples at cell densities of 2.7 × 105 and 6.6 × 107 cells·mL-1, the
28
electrocoagulator maintained its pre-concentration efficiency at ~60%. On the other hand, the centrifuge’s pre-
29
concentration efficiencies decreased to non-detectable and below 40%, respectively. This shows that the
30
electrocoagulator outperformed the centrifuge when using eutrophic water samples. Finally, the compatibility of
31
the electrocoagulator with the NanoGene assay was verified via the successful detection of the microcystin
32
synthetase D (mcyD) gene in environmental samples. The viability of the electrocoagulator as an in situ
33
compatible alternative to the centrifuge is also discussed.
34 35
Keywords: electrocoagulator; centrifuge; pre-concentrate; cyanobacteria; NanoGene assay; Microcystis
36
aeruginosa
37 38
INTRODUCTION 2
ACS Paragon Plus Environment
Page 3 of 31
Environmental Science & Technology
39
In the summer of 2014, a three-day tap water ban was imposed in Toledo, Ohio (population ~ 300,000), due to a
40
massive harmful algal bloom on the surface of Lake Erie, USA.1-3 In the following summer, a harmful algal
41
bloom along the coast of Washington state resulted in a loss of over 9 million US dollars in razor clam fisheries
42
alone.4 According to the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration,5 harmful algal blooms have so far
43
occurred in every coastal state in the USA. This is because they tend to proliferate in anthropologically altered
44
environmental conditions such as eutrophic waters fed by sewage and agricultural runoff.6
45
It is well documented that harmful algal blooms can cause acute morbidity and mortality of invertebrate
46
and fish species via oxygen depletion (hypoxia and anoxia).7-10 Harmful algal blooms are also responsible for the
47
clogging of screens, fouling of weirs, and interference of floc settling in water treatment plants.11-13 They are
48
also a source of taste and odor compounds such as geosmin and 2-methylisoborneol and therefore cause
49
malodorous and unpalatable drinking water. Most importantly, harmful algal blooms that are primarily
50
composed of cyanobacteria and certain common strains of algae are known to produce toxic secondary
51
metabolites and endotoxins such as neurotoxins, cytotoxins, dermatotoxins, irritant toxins (lipopolysaccharides),
52
and hepatotoxins.14 For example, the genera Microcystis, Anabaena, and Plankthotrix can produce microcystins
53
(i.e., hepatotoxins).6 Therefore, chronic and acute exposure to microcystins can result in liver failure and cancer.
54
In this regard, in situ cyanobacterial detection, particularly detection of the above-mentioned toxigenic
55
genera, would have an obvious benefit. The rapid identification and quantification of specific toxin-producing
56
strains during a bloom would be invaluable. It would allow authorities to restrict recreational activities in parks
57
and fisheries to protect their stocks and water treatment plants to accommodate a higher than usual toxin load in
58
a timely manner. However, existing cyanobacterial detection techniques are not particularly amendable for in
59
situ deployment. So far, they have been largely limited to the analysis of field samples using laboratory-based
60
equipment (e.g., microscopic inspection, chromatographic and spectroscopic analysis, and molecular biology
61
assays).14-18 3
ACS Paragon Plus Environment
Environmental Science & Technology
62
Page 4 of 31
Furthermore, prior to analysis, the field samples require pre-concentration followed by lysis and
63
purification. Currently, pre-concentration can be achieved using a centrifuge or by filtration via a fine membrane.
64
Portable centrifuges (such as the Portable Centrifuge Kit by Healthrow Scientific) are electrical power intensive
65
(requiring a power adaptor) as well as costly (> 300 USD). Given the small size of cyanobacteria, the use of
66
filtration via a fine membrane requires a pump with high operating head and hence is also power intensive and
67
costly. Therefore, neither approach is amenable for in situ operation.
68
Inspired by the use of electrocoagulation in water treatment and algae harvesting,19-23 we have
69
developed a pocket-size portable electrocoagulator suitable for in situ cyanobacterial detection with the
70
NanoGene assay. Electrocoagulation is a well-known process that uses electricity to dissolve metal in order to
71
supply the ions required for coagulation of colloids including microorganism.24-25 In this study, aluminium was
72
used as both anode and cathode in the electrocoagulation process. At the anode surface where oxidation occurs,
73
the major products are H+, Al3+, and O2 gas. The corresponding oxidative half reactions are as follows.
74
Al → Al3+ + 3e-
(1a)
75
2H2O → O2 + 4H+ + 4e-
(1b)
76
2OH- → O2 + 2H+ + 4e-
(1c)
77
At the cathode surface where the reduction occurs, the major products are OH-, and H2 gas. The corresponding
78
reductive half reactions are as follows.
79
2H2O + 2e- → H2 + 2OH-
(2a)
80
2H+ + 2e- → H2
(2b)
81
Aluminium ions (Al3+) are generated at the anode and they form aluminium hydroxide (Al(OH)3). The
82
subsequent hydration of Al(OH)3 will further produce a variety of macro ions or gelatinous precipitates, which
4
ACS Paragon Plus Environment
Page 5 of 31
Environmental Science & Technology
83
will facilitate the coagulation of colloids such as microorganisms. In addition, gases trapped in coagulated
84
microorganisms will cause them to float to the surface.
85
The NanoGene assay is a bio-assay based on magnetic beads, dual quantum dots as well as DNA hybridization.
86
It is well known for its inhibitor resistance, sensitivity, selectivity, and in-situ compatibility for detecting
87
microorganisms.26-29 It also has an accompanying ozone-based in situ compatible lysis technique.30, 31 More
88
importantly, we have recently demonstrated that the NanoGene assay is as a viable method for detection of
89
Microcystis aeruginosa (M. aeruginosa).32
90
Using M. aeruginosa as the target cyanobacterium, we evaluated the performance of the
91
electrocoagulator with both laboratory and environmental samples (i.e., river water with a range of
92
eutrophication). Cell densities ranged from 1.7 × 105 to 4.1 × 106 and 6.5 × 103 to 6.6 × 107 cells·mL-1,
93
respectively. M. aeruginosa was chosen because the genus Microcystis is abundant and widespread in freshwater
94
bodies.33,
95
measurement were employed to evaluate the pre-concentration efficiency for both varying cell densities and
96
operation duration. The NanoGene assay was used to quantify the microcystin synthetase D, or mcyD gene, in
97
both laboratory and environmental samples that were pre-concentrated by the electrocoagulator. The results were
98
compared to those pre-concentrated by a centrifuge. Zeta potential measurements were also performed to further
99
elucidate the degree of pre-concentration in the environmental samples. In this way, we could establish the
100
suitability of the electrocoagulator as an in situ compatible alternative to the centrifuge for cyanobacterial
101
detection.
34
The absorbance ratio (before and after pre-concentration), as well as the dry cell weight
102 103
EXPERIMENTAL SECTION
104
Design and operation of the electrocoagulator. The electrocoagulator consisted of a pair of electrolysis
105
electrodes, a modified vial, trapping gauze and aspiration outlet (Figure 1a and 1b). The electrodes were 5
ACS Paragon Plus Environment
Environmental Science & Technology
Page 6 of 31
106
commercial off-the-shelf aluminum tubing (KS Aluminum Tubing #8100, Chicago, Illinois, USA) cut into
107
lengths of 60 mm. They were suspended (3.5 mm apart with a silicone spacer) inside a 4-mL modified vial with
108
an aspiration outlet at its base. The overall size of the electrocoagulator is ~2 × 3 × 10 cm with a weight of ~16 g
109
(without battery), and the materials cost less than 3 US dollars.
110
Prior to operation, the trapping gauze (a loosely woven cloth with average pore size > 0.2 mm as shown
111
in the insert of Figure 1b) was secured over the aspiration outlet. During operation, 4.5 VDC (~70 mA, 300 mW)
112
was applied between the electrolysis electrodes to enable electrocoagulation of cyanobacteria in the sample.
113
Note that the electrical power may be supplied by three AA size batteries. Gases generated from the resulting
114
electrolysis were allowed to vent freely. After operation, a syringe was used to manually aspirate the culture
115
broth from the electrocoagulator via the aspiration outlet. In this way, the electrocoagulated cyanobacteria were
116
collected on the trapping gauze and this completed the pre-concentration of the samples. The pre-concentrated
117
cyanobacteria from the gauze were subjected to genomic DNA (gDNA) extraction for the NanoGene assay. The
118
pre-concentrated cyanobacteria from the gauze were subjected to genomic DNA (gDNA) extraction for the
119
NanoGene assay. The captured cyanobacteria were first extracted from the gauze by a tweezer. The remaining
120
cyanobacteria on the gauze was further extracted by soaking it in the lysis buffer (DNA extraction kit). It is
121
important to note that unlike conventional filtration using a fine membrane, a pump with high operating head is
122
not required. In this case, manual aspiration of the culture broth via a syringe sufficed and this was only possible
123
due to the large pore size of the trapping gauze.
124 125
Laboratory sample preparation. The target cyanobacterium M. aeruginosa strain UTEX 2388 was obtained
126
from the Culture Collection of Algae at the University of Texas, Austin, USA. It was inoculated into a 250-mL
127
Erlenmeyer flask containing 100 mL modified Bold 3N medium in which soil water was eliminated. The flask
128
was subsequently incubated at ambient temperature with shaking at 100 rpm to facilitate aeration. Continuous 6
ACS Paragon Plus Environment
Page 7 of 31
Environmental Science & Technology
129
illumination at 20,000 lux (30 W, SL230D, City E.L.G., Incheon, Korea) was also employed. M. aeruginosa
130
culture broth in early exponential phase was used for the laboratory samples in subsequent experiments.
131
The calibration curve (Figure S1) of laboratory sample cell density (cells·mL-1) versus absorbance (as
132
optical density or OD) at 680 nm was obtained via a counting chamber under a light microscope and
133
spectrofluorometer (SpectraMax M2, Molecular Devices, Sunnyvale, USA), respectively.
134 135
Environmental sample sites and sample preparation. Environmental samples were obtained from 2 negative
136
control sites (NC1 and NC2) and 4 study sites (S1, S2, S3 and S4) from the Han River, Korea, in August 2016
137
(Figure 2). Han River is a major river of South Korea that has a river basin of 26,018 km2 of basin and 514.8 km
138
of stems, respectively. Together they supply water to more than 10 million people in the Seoul metropolitan area.
139
The area is also prone to recurring harmful algal blooms.35, 36
140
As shown in Figure 2b and c, the waters in the NC1 and NC2 negative control sites were clear and
141
sedimentary bottom was visible. On the other hand as shown in Figure 2d, e, f and g, the waters of the S1, S2,
142
S3, and S4 study sites were increasingly turbid and a harmful algal bloom was visible in both study sites S3 and
143
S4.
144
Sampling was performed during hot weather with an average water temperature of ~29ºC. No rainfalls
145
was reported during the sampling period. At each sampling site, 2 L of water was drawn from a depth of 30 cm.
146
The water quality data for the environmental negative control and test samples are given in the Supplementary
147
Information (Table S1). The dominant algal species in the samples were identified via microscopic examination
148
(Table 1). The genus Microcystis was predominant in samples S3 and S4.
149
Environmental positive control samples (PC1 and PC2) were prepared by spiking M. aeruginosa culture
150
broth into the NC1 and NC2 samples to achieve final cell densities of 7.4 × 105 cells·mL-1 (equivalent to OD680
151
nm =
0.41) and 6.8 × 105 cells·mL-1 (equivalent to OD680 nm = 0.39), respectively. 7
ACS Paragon Plus Environment
Environmental Science & Technology
Page 8 of 31
152
Cell densities of environmental samples were determined by counting cells with a counting chamber
153
under a light microscope (Figure S2a). The corresponding chlorophyll-a concentration for environmental
154
samples is shown in Figure S2b.
155 156
Comparison of electrocoagulator and centrifuge. The samples (laboratory and environmental) in aliquots of 3
157
mL were first transferred to the modified 4-mL vial of the electrocoagulator. After electrocoagulation and
158
aspiration of the culture broth, the trapping gauze was removed from the electrocoagulator. Subsequently, the
159
electrocoagulated sample on the trapping gauze was dried at 80ºC overnight for dry cell weight measurement. In
160
order to visualize the samples before and after electrocoagulation, additional aliquots of 3 mL were also
161
electrocoagulated in cuvettes separately.
162
Similarly, 3-mL test samples were transferred to the 15-mL centrifuge tubes. The centrifuge (Model
163
1248, LaboGene, Seoul, Korea) was operated at 2,500 rpm (1,224 relative centrifugal force or RCF) for a given
164
duration. The supernatant was then discarded, and the centrifuged pellet in the tubes was also dried at 80ºC
165
overnight.
166
Afterwards, the gram-dry cell weight per liter (g-DCW·L-1) of the sample was determined by weighing
167
the pellet. The pre-concentration efficiency was estimated via the culture broth’s absorbance at 680 nm before
168
(ODt0) and after (ODt1) pre-concentration as follows:
169 170
Pre-concentration Efficiency (%) =
× 100
The background absorbance (culture broth only) was subtracted from both ODt0 and ODt1.
171
The experiments were performed at 4.5 V for varying operation durations from 0 to 300 s at a cell
172
density of 4.1 × 105 cells·mL-1, where OD680 nm = ~0.27. They were also performed for varying cell densities
173
from 1.7 × 105 to 4.1 × 106 cells·mL-1, where OD680 nm ranged from 0.08 to 1.1, with an operation duration of
174
180 s. All experiments were performed in biological triplicates unless otherwise stated. Note that uncoagulated 8
ACS Paragon Plus Environment
Page 9 of 31
Environmental Science & Technology
175
laboratory samples were also subjected to culture broth aspiration in the electrocoagulator. This was to establish
176
the inability of the trapping gauze to capture cyanobacteria without electrocoagulation.
177 178
Analysis of pre-concentrated samples via NanoGene assay. Briefly, the NanoGene assay consisted of
179
magnetic beads (MB) and dual quantum dot nanoparticles (QD).26-28, 32 The aminated MB (2 × 107 beads·mL-1,
180
Dynabead M270, Invitrogen, Carlsbad, USA) were coupled with carboxyl QD565 (2 µmole·L-1, Invitrogen,
181
Carlsbad, USA) through an amide bond formation to form the MB-QD565 conjugate. It was further conjugated
182
with the probe DNA (100 µmole·L-1, Bioneer, Daejeon, Korea) to form the MB-QD565-probe DNA complex. The
183
signaling DNA (100 µmole·L-1, Bioneer) was separately immobilized on the surface of QD655 (2 µmole·L-1,
184
Invitrogen, Carlsbad, USA) nanoparticles to form the signaling DNA-QD655 complex. During DNA
185
hybridization, the MB-QD565 complex was tethered to the signaling DNA-QD655 complex via the target mcyD
186
gene through complementary base pairing. After rinsing to remove untethered complexes, the target mcyD gene
187
could be quantified by the normalized fluorescence of QD655 with respect to that of QD565.
188
The pre-concentrated samples (laboratory and environmental) from both the electrocoagulator and
189
centrifuge were first subjected to gDNA extraction. This was performed in duplicate using the NucleoSpin Plant
190
II DNA extraction kit (Macherey-Nagel, Düren, Germany) in accordance with the manufacturer’s instructions.
191
The extracted gDNA was eluted in 100 µL of elution buffer, and duplicate gDNA samples were pooled together.
192
The concentration of the pooled gDNA extracts was spectrophotometrically measured at OD260
193
NanoDropTM 2000 (Thermo Fisher, Wilmington, USA). The gDNA extracts were then denatured at 95ºC for 20
194
min prior to DNA hybridization.
nm
using a
195
DNA hybridization was initiated by adding 5 µL of denatured gDNA extracts to 300 µL of DIG Easy
196
Hybridization buffer (Roche, Basel, Switzerland). The mixture also contained MB-QD565-probe DNA and
197
QD655-signaling DNA complexes. This was followed by the incubation at 37ºC for 15 h with a gentle tilt rotation. 9
ACS Paragon Plus Environment
Environmental Science & Technology
Page 10 of 31
198
After incubation, the sample was rinsed 3 times with 0.1 mole·L-1 phosphate buffer (pH 7.4). The fluorescence
199
intensities of QD565 and QD655 were measured on black 96-microplates (Thermo Fisher Scientific) using a
200
SpectraMax M2 spectrofluorometer with emission wavelengths at 570 and 660 nm, respectively, and an
201
excitation wavelength of 360 nm. Normalized fluorescence was calculated as the ratio of measured fluorescence
202
QD655/QD565.
203
The negative control for the NanoGene assay was in the form of ultrapure deionized water
204
(DNase/RNase/Protease free, Intron Biotechnology, Gyeonggi, Korea) added to the DNA hybridization reaction
205
instead of denatured gDNA.
206
A standard curve for the NanoGene assay (Figure S3) was established using the amplified mcyD gene
207
fragment (297 bp) of M. aeruginosa (mcyD gene copy numbers ranging from 6.5 × 100 to 6.5 × 1010). It was
208
prepared by PCR using the gDNA of M. aeruginosa and the primer set of mcyDF2 and mcyDR2.37 The PCR
209
mixture and thermocycling conditions were described previously in detail.31 The mcyD gene copy numbers were
210
calculated using Avogadro’s number (i.e., 6.022 × 1023 molecules·mole-1) and the DNA weight in Daltons, with
211
the assumption that the average weight of a base pair (bp) is 650 Daltons. The limit of quantification for the
212
NanoGene assay was 7 mcyD gene copy number·mL-1 (Figure S3).
213 214
Zeta potential measurement. Zeta potential measurement was performed by laser Doppler velocimetry using
215
the zeta potential and particle size analyzer ELSZ-2000 (Otsuka Electronics, Osaka, Japan). The zeta potential (ζ)
216
of the environmental samples was measured before and after pre-concentration (by electrocoagulator and
217
centrifuge). Three milliliters of the environmental sample was transferred to the zeta flow cells (Otsuka
218
Electronics) and measured. Electrophoretic analysis was carried out in technical triplicates.
219 220
RESULTS AND DISCUSSION 10
ACS Paragon Plus Environment
Page 11 of 31
Environmental Science & Technology
221
Pre-concentration and NanoGene assay analysis of laboratory samples. Using the electrocoagulator in the
222
absence of applied voltage at the electrolysis electrodes, there was no electrocoagulation of cyanobacteria. As
223
expected, no cyanobacteria were observed on the trapping gauze after aspiration (Figure 3a). This means that in
224
the absence of electrocoagulation, the cyanobacteria in the laboratory samples were sufficiently small to simply
225
pass through the trapping gauze with near zero percent pre-concentration efficiencies for cell densities ranging
226
from 1.4 × 105 to 4.1 × 106 cells·mL-1 (Figure 3b). This is because the size of individual M. aeruginosa cells was
227
too small (~10 to 40 µm) to be captured by the trapping gauze (average pore size > 0.2 mm). However, with
228
operation durations of 60 s and higher, initial visual observations suggested that it was possible to pre-
229
concentrate the laboratory samples for the given range of cell densities (Figure 3c and 3d). A visible increase in
230
the amount of cyanobacterial cells captured by the trapping gauze could be seen with an increase in operation
231
duration (60 – 300 s).
232
With varying operation durations (Figure 4a and 4b), both the pre-concentration efficiency and dry cell
233
weight resulting from the electrocoagulator were slightly lower if not comparable to that of the centrifuge (cell
234
density at 4.1 × 105 cells·mL-1). At an operation duration of 180 s, the electrocoagulator and centrifuge achieved
235
similar pre-concentration efficiencies of 59.1 ± 3.7% and 61.9 ± 2.6% (p-value = 0.342, as determined by a t-test,
236
Table S2), respectively. Their corresponding dry cell weights were also near identical at 0.14 ± 0.02 and 0.14 ±
237
0.05 g-DCW·L-1 (p-value = 1.000, Table S2), respectively. Increasing the operation duration of the
238
electrocoagulator from 180 to 300 s of the electrocoagulator resulted in a marginal increase in pre-concentration
239
efficiency to 62.8 ± 9.9% (~3% increase). Therefore, the nominal operation duration of the electrocoagulator for
240
subsequent experiments was set at 180 s.
241
With varying cell densities (Figure 4c and 4d), both the pre-concentration efficiency and dry cell weight
242
from the electrocoagulator were also slightly lower if not comparable to that of the centrifuge (nominal
243
operation duration of 180 s). For cell densities from 3.2 × 105 to 4.1 × 106 cells·mL-1, the pre-concentration 11
ACS Paragon Plus Environment
Environmental Science & Technology
Page 12 of 31
244
efficiencies of electrocoagulator appeared to be stable at ~60% which was consistent with the earlier experiment.
245
They were slightly lower than that of the centrifuge (~70%).
246
At lower cell densities (2.2 × 105 and 1.7 × 105 cells·mL-1), the pre-concentration efficiencies decreased
247
to 40.4 ± 5.4 and 33.9 ± 0.2%, respectively. This trend was also observed with the centrifuged samples where the
248
pre-concentration efficiencies also decreased to 53.1 ± 0.9 and 37.5 ± 1.8% for these cell densities, respectively.
249
As shown in Figure 4e and 4f, the pre-concentrated samples from the electrocoagulator were analyzed
250
successfully with the NanoGene assay. As expected, the normalized fluorescence and mcyD gene copy number
251
increased with cell density for both the electrocoagulator and centrifuge. At 2.5 × 106 cells·mL-1, pre-
252
concentration via electrocoagulator and centrifuge yielded comparable normalized fluorescence of 4.49 ± 0.46
253
and 5.04 ± 0.51, respectively. The mcyD gene copy numbers from the electrocoagulator and centrifuge were not
254
significantly different (p-value > 0.05, as determined by a t-test, Figure 4f and Table S2).
255 256
Pre-concentration of environmental samples. As expected, using the electrocoagulator and centrifuge (Figure
257
5a and 5b) both yielded pre-concentrated cyanobacteria in PC1 and PC2 (positive control) but not in NC1 and
258
NC2 (negative control). There were also no visible pre-concentrated cyanobacteria obtained from S1 and S2.
259
However, the electrocoagulator appeared to be able to pre-concentrate S3 and S4 as well as, if not more
260
effectively, than the centrifuge. As shown in the dotted boxes in Figure 5a and 5b, S3 formed a well-defined
261
layer after electrocoagulation while remained dispersed after centrifugation. Similarly, the electrocoagulator was
262
able to form a well-defined layer of cyanobacteria in S4. More specifically, the electrocoagulator was able to
263
pre-concentrate S3 (at 57.8 ± 5.1%) with corresponding dry cell weight of 0.33 ± 0.06 g-DCW·L-1 while the
264
centrifuge was unable to do so (Figure 6, p-value ± 30 mV indicate well dispersed particles with no
285
aggregation.42 After pre-concentration by the electrocoagulator and centrifuge, their zeta potentials were reduced
286
as expected. Similarly, the zeta potential for S4 was reduced after pre-concentration, but by a lesser amount than
287
expected. This could be due to the 10-fold dilution that was necessary for zeta potential measurement. With the
288
electrocoagulator, the zeta potential of S3 was reduced significantly from -16.51 ± 1.02 to -5.05 ± 1.05 mV (p13
ACS Paragon Plus Environment
Environmental Science & Technology
Page 14 of 31
289
value = 0.008, Table S4). However, with the centrifuge, it was marginally reduced to -14.32 ± 0.86 mV (p-value
290
= 0.333, Table S4). Therefore the electrocoagulator was able to pre-concentrate S3 more effectively than the
291
centrifuge.
292 293
NanoGene assay analysis of pre-concentrated environmental samples. With reference to Figure 7, M.
294
aeruginosa in the environmental samples pre-concentrated by the electrocoagulator were successfully quantified
295
via the NanoGene assay. The normalized fluorescence for S3, S4, PC1 and PC2 was 3.0 ± 0.7, 4.8 ± 0.6, 4.2 ±
296
0.3 and 4.3 ± 0.3 (Figure 7a), and these corresponded to 3.5 × 103, 5.6 × 106, 1.2 × 105, and 2.0 × 105 mcyD gene
297
copy number (Figure S3 and 7c). More importantly, it demonstrates that the electrocoagulator is also compatible
298
with the NanoGene assay for environmental samples, as it was for the laboratory samples shown earlier.
299
However, with the centrifuge, the normalized fluorescence for S4, PC1 and PC2 was 4.4 ± 0.3, 4.8 ± 0.2 and 4.3
300
± 0.6 (Figure 7b) and these corresponded to 2.6 × 105, 1.2 × 106, and 5.1 × 105 mcyD gene copy number (Figure
301
7d).
302
The viability of the electrocoagulator as an alternative to the centrifuge could be further highlighted by
303
comparing its NanoGene analysis results to the environmental samples’ cell density (Figure S2a) and
304
chlorophyll a concentrations (Figure S2b). The environmental samples’ cell density for S1, S2, S3 and S4 were
305
8.6 × 103, 6.5 × 103, 2.7 × 105 and 6.6 × 107 cells·mL-1. Both the electrocoagulator and centrifuge were not able
306
to pre-concentrate S1 and S2 (cell density less than 104 cells·mL-1). However the electrocoagulator was able to
307
pre-concentrate both S3 and S4. On the other hand, the centrifuge was only able to pre-concentrate S4.
308
The successful NanoGene assay analysis of the environmental samples pre-concentrated by the
309
electrocoagulator verified the compatibility of these technologies. The electrocoagulator has been shown to be
310
an in situ compatible alternative to the centrifuge. More importantly, the electrocoagulator is also small, light
311
weight and low cost. In accordance with the World Health Organization 2003 guidelines for safe recreational 14
ACS Paragon Plus Environment
Page 15 of 31
Environmental Science & Technology
312
water environments, the operational cell density limit of the electrocoagulator at ~105 cells·mL-1 also
313
corresponded to the moderate probability of adverse health effects.43 This means the electrocoagulator can be
314
used on environmentally relevant concentration of cyanobacteria. In other words, the electrocoagulator has
315
advanced the possibility of in situ cyanobacterial detection in eutrophic waters by reducing the size, weight and
316
cost associated with pre-concentration of cyanobacteria.
317 318
ASSOCIATED CONTENT
319
Supporting Information
320
The supporting information is available free of charge on the ACS Publication website. This includes cell
321
density of laboratory cultures (Microcystis aeruginosa), chlorophyll-a concentrations of environmental samples,
322
the calibration curve of the NanoGene assay, and water quality data of environmental test samples.
323 324
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
325
This work was supported by the National Research Foundation of Korea (NRF-2017R1A2B4005133 and NRF-
326
2015R1D1A1A01060317).
327
15
ACS Paragon Plus Environment
Environmental Science & Technology
Page 16 of 31
328
REFERENCES
329
(1) Ho, J. C.; Michalak, A. M. Challenges in tracking harmful algal blooms: A synthesis of evidence from Lake
330
Erie. J. Great Lakes Res. 2015, 41, (2), 317-325.
331
(2) Michalak, A. M.; Anderson, E. J.; Beletsky, D.; Boland, S.; Bosch, N. S.; Bridgeman, T. B.; Chaffin, J. D.;
332
Cho, K.; Confesor, R.; Daloglu, I.; DePinto, J. V.; Evans, M. A.; Fahnenstiel, G. L.; He, L. L.; Ho, J. C.; Jenkins,
333
L.; Johengen, T. H.; Kuo, K. C.; LaPorte, E.; Liu, X. J.; McWilliams, M. R.; Moore, M. R.; Posselt, D. J.;
334
Richards, R. P.; Scavia, D.; Steiner, A. L.; Verhamme, E.; Wright, D. M.; Zagorski, M. A. Record-setting algal
335
bloom in Lake Erie caused by agricultural and meteorological trends consistent with expected future conditions.
336
P. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA 2013, 110, (16), 6448-6452.
337
(3) Wilson, E. K. Danger from microcystins in Toledo water unclear. Chem. Eng. News 2014, 92, (32), 9.
338
(4) NOAA, West coast harmful algal bloom, May 2016. https://oceanservice.noaa.gov/news/sep15/westcoast-
339
habs.html
340
(5) NOAA, U. Harmful algal blooms. https://oceanservice.noaa.gov/hazards/hab/
341
(6) Wiegand, C.; Pflugmacher, S. Ecotoxicological effects of selected cyanobacterial secondary metabolites a
342
short review. Toxicol. Appl. Pharm. 2005, 203, (3), 201-218.
343
(7) Paerl, H. W.; Otten, T. G. Harmful cyanobacterial blooms: Causes, consequences, and controls. Microb. Ecol.
344
2013, 65, (4), 995-1010.
345
(8) Landsberg, J. H. The effects of harmful algal blooms on aquatic organisms. Rev. Fish. Sci. 2002, 10, (2), 113-
346
390.
347
(9) Van Dolah, F. M. Effects of harmful algal blooms. Marine mammal research: conservation beyond crisis.
348
Reynolds III J. E., Perrin, W. F., Reeves, R. R., Montgomery, S., Ragen, T. J., Eds.; Johns Hopkins University
349
Press, Baltimore, Maryland 2005, 85-99.
350
(10) Pretty, J. N.; Mason, C. F.; Nedwell, D. B.; Hine, R. E.; Leaf, S.; Dils, R. Environmental costs of freshwater 16
ACS Paragon Plus Environment
Page 17 of 31
Environmental Science & Technology
351
eutrophication in England and Wales. Environ. Sci. Technol. 2003, 37, (2), 201-208.
352
(11) Babel, S.; Takizawa, S. Microfiltration membrane fouling and cake behavior during algal filtration.
353
Desalination 2010, 261, (1-2), 46-51.
354
(12) Babel, S.; Takizawa, S. Chemical pretreatment for reduction of membrane fouling caused by algae.
355
Desalination 2011, 274, (1-3), 171-176.
356
(13) Weinrich, L.; Haas, C. N.; LeChevallier, M. W. Recent advances in measuring and modeling reverse
357
osmosis membrane fouling in seawater desalination: a review. J. Water Reuse Desal. 2013, 3, (2), 85-101.
358
(14) Chorus, I.; Bartram, J. Toxic cyanobacteria in water: A guide to their public health consequences,
359
monitoring and management. Spon Press: 1999.
360
(15) Ouellette, A. J. A.; Handy, S. M.; Wilhelm, S. W. Toxic Microcystis is widespread in Lake Erie: PCR
361
detection of toxin genes and molecular characterization of associated cyanobacterial communities. Microb. Ecol.
362
2006, 51, (2), 154-165.
363
(16) Kaushik, R.; Balasubramanian, R. Methods and approaches used for detection of cyanotoxins in
364
environmental samples: A review. Crit. Rev. Env. Sci. Tec. 2013, 43, (13), 1349-1383.
365
(17) Nübel, U.; Garcia-Pichel, F.; Muyzer, G. PCR primers to amplify 16S rRNA genes from cyanobacteria.
366
Appl. Environ. Microb. 1997, 63, (8), 3327-3332.
367
(18) Spoof, L.; Vesterkvist, P.; Lindholm, T.; Meriluoto, J. Screening for cyanobacterial hepatotoxins,
368
microcystins and nodularin in environmental water samples by reversed-phase liquid chromatography–
369
electrospray ionisation mass spectrometry. J. Chromatogr. A 2003, 1020, (1), 105-119.
370
(19) Bleeke, F.; Quante, G.; Winckelmann, D.; Klöck, G. Effect of voltage and electrode material on
371
electroflocculation of Scenedesmus acuminatus. Bioresour. Bioprocess. 2015, 2, (1), 36.
372
(20) Mollah, M. Y.; Schennach, R.; Parga, J. R.; Cocke, D. L. Electrocoagulation (EC)-science and applications.
373
J. Hazard. Mater. 2001, 84, (1), 29-41. 17
ACS Paragon Plus Environment
Environmental Science & Technology
Page 18 of 31
374
(21) Vandamme, D.; Pontes, S. C.; Goiris, K.; Foubert, I.; Pinoy, L. J.; Muylaert, K. Evaluation of electro-
375
coagulation-flocculation for harvesting marine and freshwater microalgae. Biotechnol. Bioeng. 2011, 108, (10),
376
2320-9.
377
(22) Valero, E.; Alvarez, X.; Cancela, A.; Sanchez, A. Harvesting green algae from eutrophic reservoir by
378
electroflocculation and post-use for biodiesel production. Bioresour. Technol. 2015, 187, 255-62.
379
(23) Alfafara, C. G.; Nakano, K.; Nomura, N.; Igarashi, T.; Matsumura, M. Operating and scale-up factors for
380
the electrolytic removal of algae from eutrophied lakewater. J. Chem. Technol. Biot. 2002, 77, (8), 871-876.
381
(24) Lee, A.K., Lewis, D.M., Ashman, P.J. Harvesting of marine microalgae by electroflocculation: The
382
energetics, plant design, and economics. Applied Energy 2013, 108, 45-53.
383
(25) Vandamme, D.,
384
Coagulation-Flocculation for harvesting marine and freshwater microalgae. Biotechnol. Bioeng. 2011, 108,
385
2320-2329.
386
(26) Kim, G. Y.; Son, A. Development and characterization of a magnetic bead-quantum dot nanoparticles based
387
assay capable of Escherichia coli O157:H7 quantification. Anal. Chim. Acta. 2010, 677, (1), 90-96.
388
(27) Kim, G. Y.; Wang, X. F.; Ahn, H.; Son, A. Gene quantification by the NanoGene assay is resistant to
389
inhibition by humic acids. Environ. Sci. Technol. 2011, 45, (20), 8873-8880.
390
(28) Kim, G. Y.; Wang, X. F.; Son, A. Inhibitor resistance and in situ capability of nanoparticle based gene
391
quantification. J. Environ. Monitor. 2011, 13, (5), 1344-1350.
392
(29) Mitchell, K. A.; Chua, B.; Son, A. Development of first generation in-situ pathogen detection system
393
(Gen1-IPDS) based on NanoGene assay for near real time E. coli O157:H7 detection. Biosens. Bioelectron. 2014,
394
54, 229-236.
395
(30) Lee, E. H.; Chua, B.; Son, A. Micro corona discharge based cell lysis method suitable for inhibitor resistant
396
bacterial sensing systems. Sensor. Actuat. B-Chem. 2015, 216, 17-23.
Pontes, S.C.V., Goiris, K., Foubert, I., Pinoy, L.J.J., Muylaert, K. Evaluation of Electro-
18
ACS Paragon Plus Environment
Page 19 of 31
Environmental Science & Technology
397
(31) Lee, E.-H.; Lim, H. J.; Son, A.; Chua, B. A disposable bacterial lysis cartridge (BLC) suitable for an in situ
398
water-borne pathogen detection system. Analyst 2015, 140, (22), 7776-7783.
399
(32) Lee, E. H.; Cho, K. S.; Son, A. Detection and quantification of toxin-producing Microcystis aeruginosa
400
strain in water by NanoGene assay. J. Microbiol. Biotechnol. 2017, 27, (4), 808-815.
401
(33) Kardinaal, W. E. A.; Janse, I.; Kamst-van Agterveld, M.; Meima, M.; Snoek, J.; Mur, L. R.; Huisman, J.;
402
Zwart, G.; Visser, P. M. Microcystis genotype succession in relation to microcystin concentrations in freshwater
403
lakes. Aquat. Microb. Ecol. 2007, 48, (1), 1-12.
404
(34) Znachor, P.; Jurczak, T.; Komarkova, J.; Jezberova, J.; Mankiewicz, J.; Kastovska, K.; Zapomelova, E.
405
Summer changes in cyanobacterial bloom composition and microcystin concentration in eutrophic Czech
406
reservoirs. Environ. Toxicol. 2006, 21, (3), 236-243.
407
(35) Kim, B. H.; Hwang, S. J.; Park, M. H.; Kim, Y. J. Relationship between cyanobacterial biomass and total
408
microcystin-LR levels in drinking and recreational water. B. Environ. Contam. Tox. 2010, 85, (5), 457-462.
409
(36) Srivastava, A.; Ahn, C. Y.; Asthana, R. K.; Lee, H. G.; Oh, H. M. Status, alert system, and prediction of
410
cyanobacterial bloom in South Korea. BioMed Res. Int. 2015, 2015, 584696.
411
(37) Kaebernick, M.; Neilan, B. A.; Borner, T.; Dittmann, E. Light and the transcriptional response of the
412
microcystin biosynthesis gene cluster. Appl. Environ. Microb. 2000, 66, (8), 3387-92.
413
(38) Dervaux, J.; Mejean, A.; Brunet, P. Irreversible collective migration of cyanobacteria in eutrophic
414
conditions. PloS One 2015, 10, (3), e0120906.
415
(39) Aparicio Medrano, E.; Uittenbogaard, R. E.; van de Wiel, B. J. H.; Dionisio Pires, L. M.; Clercx, H. J. H.
416
An alternative explanation for cyanobacterial scum formation and persistence by oxygenic photosynthesis.
417
Harmful Algae 2016, 60, 27-35.
418
(40) Mendoza-Lera, C.; Federlein, L. L.; Knie, M.; Mutz, M. The algal lift: Buoyancy-mediated sediment
419
transport. Water Resour. Res. 2016, 52, (1), 108-118. 19
ACS Paragon Plus Environment
Environmental Science & Technology
Page 20 of 31
420
(41) Komárek, J. Coccoid and colonial cyanobacteria A2 - WEHR, JOHN D. In Freshwater Algae of North
421
America, Sheath, R. G., Ed. Academic Press: Burlington, 2003; pp 59-116.
422
(42) 4187-82, A. S. D. Zeta potential of colloids in water and wastewater; American Society for Testing and
423
Materials: Conshohocken, PA, 1985.
424
(43) Guidelines for safe recreational water environments; Volume 1 Coastal and fresh waters; World Health
425
Organization: Geneva, Switzerland, 2003; pp. 150, Table 8.3, ISBN 9241545801
426 427
20
ACS Paragon Plus Environment
Page 21 of 31
Environmental Science & Technology
428
FIGURE CAPTIONS
429
Figure 1. (a) Schematic of the portable electrocoagulator for in situ cyanobacterial detection with the NanoGene
430
assay. (b) Photo of the electrocoagulator with insert showing the trapping gauze.
431
Figure 2. (a) Sampling site map. Negative control sites (b) NC1 (c) NC2. Study sites (d) S1 (e) S2 (f) S3 (g) S4.
432
Figure 3. (a) Photo of the trapping gauze when used with the uncoagulated laboratory samples. (b)
433
Experimental plot of the pre-concentration efficiency (%) versus cell density (cells·mL-1) for uncoagulated
434
laboratory samples for varying cell densities (1.4 × 105 to 4.0 × 106 cells·mL-1). (c) Laboratory samples (4.1 ×
435
105 cells·mL-1) pre-concentrated via the electrocoagulator with varying duration 0 – 300 s at 4.5 VDC. (d)
436
Laboratory samples of varying cell densities (1.7 × 105 to 4.1 × 106 cells·mL-1) pre-concentrated via the
437
electrocoagulator at 4.5 VDC for duration of 180 s.
438
Figure 4. Pre-concentration and dry cell weight of laboratory samples via electrocoagulator and centrifuge for
439
(a)(b) varying operation durations at a cell density of 4.1 × 105 cells·mL-1 and (c)(d) varying cell densities with
440
an operation duration of 180 s. (e)(f) NanoGene assay analysis of laboratory samples pre-concentrated using
441
electrocoagulator and centrifuge.
442
Figure 5. Photos of environmental samples before and after pre-concentration using (a) electrocoagulator and (b)
443
centrifuge. Pre-concentration of S3 and S4 (eutrophic water samples) was more effective using the
444
electrocoagulator as compared to the centrifuge (dotted box).
445
Figure 6. (a)(b) Pre-concentration efficiency and (c)(d) dry cell weight of environmental samples via
446
electrocoagulator and centrifuge. ND stands for non-detectable.
447
Figure 7. NanoGene assay analysis of pre-concentrated environmental samples via electrocoagulator and
448
centrifuge. (a)(b) Normalized fluorescence (QD655/QD565) and (c)(d) mcyD gene copy numbers. ND stands for
449
non-detectable.
450 21
ACS Paragon Plus Environment
Environmental Science & Technology
(a)
(b)
Figure 1
22
ACS Paragon Plus Environment
Page 22 of 31
Page 23 of 31
Environmental Science & Technology
(a) Sampling Site Map
(b) NC1
(c) NC2
(d) S1
(e) S2
(f) S3
(g) S4
Figure 2 23
ACS Paragon Plus Environment
Environmental Science & Technology
(a)
(b)
(d)
(c)
Figure 3
24
ACS Paragon Plus Environment
Page 24 of 31
Page 25 of 31
Environmental Science & Technology
(a)
(b)
(c)
(d)
(e)
(f)
Figure 4
25
ACS Paragon Plus Environment
Environmental Science & Technology
(a)
(b)
Figure 5
26
ACS Paragon Plus Environment
Page 26 of 31
Page 27 of 31
Environmental Science & Technology
(a)
(b)
(c)
(d)
Figure 6
27
ACS Paragon Plus Environment
Environmental Science & Technology
(a)
(b)
(c)
(d)
Figure 7
28
ACS Paragon Plus Environment
Page 28 of 31
Page 29 of 31
Environmental Science & Technology
Table 1. Dominant species of cyanobacteria in environmental test samples.
Environmental samples
Dominant algal species
NC1
ND
NC2
ND
S1
Euglena
S2
Scenedesmus, Euglena
S3
Microcystis, Chlamydomonas, Eudonina, Euglena, Spirulina, Anabaena, Closterium, Cosmarium
S4
Microcystis, Chlamydomonas, Euglena, Cosmarium
ND denotes non-detectable
29
ACS Paragon Plus Environment
Environmental Science & Technology
Page 30 of 31
Table 2. Zeta potential measurements of environmental samples before and after pre-concentration (via electrocoagulator and centrifuge).
Environmental samples
Raw water sample (mV)
Electrocoagulator (mV)
Centrifuge (mV)
NC1
6.63 ± 1.45
NA
NA
NC2
6.58 ± 0.21
NA
NA
S1
6.46 ± 0.73
NA
NA
S2
4.94 ± 1.31
NA
NA
S3
-16.51 ± 1.02
-5.05 ± 1.05
-14.32 ± 0.86
S4a
-21.48 ± 1.20
-16.97 ± 2.47
-17.65 ± 1.64
PC1
-32.18 ± 0.03
-19.99 ± 0.29
-20.55 ± 1.38
PC2
-35.09 ± 0.54
-27.83 ± 0.42
-23.54 ± 0.31
Values represent the mean ± SD (n = 3). NA denotes not applicable. S4a sample was ten-fold diluted with distilled water.
30
ACS Paragon Plus Environment
Page 31 of 31
Environmental Science & Technology
Electrocoagulation as pre-concentration technique for cyanobacterial detection by NanoGene assay.
ACS Paragon Plus Environment