A review on energy and cost effective phase separated pretreatment of biosolids

Extracellular Polymeric Substances (EPS) existent in anaerobic sludge proves to be a barrier for sludge liquefaction and biomass lysis efficiency. Hence EPS deaggregation heightens the surface area for the subsequent pretreatment thereby uplifting the sludge disintegration and biomethanation rate. This review documents the role of EPS and its components which inhibits sludge hydrolysis and also the various phase separated pretreatment methods available with its disintegration mechanism to enhance the biomass lysis and methane production rate. It also illustrates the effects of phase separated pretreatment on the sludge disintegration rate which embodies two phases-floc disruption and cell lysis accompanied by their computation through biomethane potential assay and fermentation analysis comprehensively. Additionally, energy balance study and cost analysis requisite for successful implementation of a proposed phase separated pretreatment on a pilot scale level and their challenges are also reviewed. Overall this paper documents the potency of phase separated pretreatment for full scale approach.publishedVersio

A review on energy and cost effective phase separated pretreatment of biosolids

Extracellular Polymeric Substances (EPS) existent in anaerobic sludge proves to be a barrier for sludge liquefaction and biomass lysis efficiency. Hence EPS deaggregation heightens the surface area for the subsequent pretreatment thereby uplifting the sludge disintegration and biomethanation rate. This review documents the role of EPS and its components which inhibits sludge hydrolysis and also the various phase separated pretreatment methods available with its disintegration mechanism to enhance the biomass lysis and methane production rate. It also illustrates the effects of phase separated pretreatment on the sludge disintegration rate which embodies two phases-floc disruption and cell lysis accompanied by their computation through biomethane potential assay and fermentation analysis comprehensively. Additionally, energy balance study and cost analysis requisite for successful implementation of a proposed phase separated pretreatment on a pilot scale level and their challenges are also reviewed. Overall this paper documents the potency of phase separated pretreatment for full scale approach

Guidelines for the use and interpretation of assays for monitoring autophagy (4th edition)

In 2008, we published the first set of guidelines for standardizing research in autophagy. Since then, this topic has received increasing attention, and many scientists have entered the field. Our knowledge base and relevant new technologies have also been expanding. Thus, it is important to formulate on a regular basis updated guidelines for monitoring autophagy in different organisms. Despite numerous reviews, there continues to be confusion regarding acceptable methods to evaluate autophagy, especially in multicellular eukaryotes. Here, we present a set of guidelines for investigators to select and interpret methods to examine autophagy and related processes, and for reviewers to provide realistic and reasonable critiques of reports that are focused on these processes. These guidelines are not meant to be a dogmatic set of rules, because the appropriateness of any assay largely depends on the question being asked and the system being used. Moreover, no individual assay is perfect for every situation, calling for the use of multiple techniques to properly monitor autophagy in each experimental setting. Finally, several core components of the autophagy machinery have been implicated in distinct autophagic processes (canonical and noncanonical autophagy), implying that genetic approaches to block autophagy should rely on targeting two or more autophagy-related genes that ideally participate in distinct steps of the pathway. Along similar lines, because multiple proteins involved in autophagy also regulate other cellular pathways including apoptosis, not all of them can be used as a specific marker for bona fide autophagic responses. Here, we critically discuss current methods of assessing autophagy and the information they can, or cannot, provide. Our ultimate goal is to encourage intellectual and technical innovation in the field