Professional Documents
Culture Documents
Discussion of Effect of Inoculation in Composting Processes: Modifications in Lignocellulosic Fraction'' Waste Management 27 (2007) 1099-1107
Discussion of Effect of Inoculation in Composting Processes: Modifications in Lignocellulosic Fraction'' Waste Management 27 (2007) 1099-1107
com
Discussion
As stated ‘the use of inoculants to improve the compo- sting. In fact the opposite is true since the highest ash con-
sting process has been a controversial subject.’ From a fun- tents (and thus lowest organic matter contents) were found
damental point of view, microbial ecologists can argue that in the control group (see Table 7). Therefore, it might be
bacterial diversity can be regarded as deterministic. Baas- more appropriate to report that inoculation by specific bac-
Becking’s 1934 formula, that ‘everything is everywhere terial types actually significantly inhibited the composting
and it is the environment that selects,’ has remained virtu- process. Inoculant effects were the least important factor
ally unchallenged. Tantalisingly, the opportunities pro- as compared with time and waste type effects. Therefore,
vided by the genomic era suggest that this is not strictly when time was removed from the analysis or when the
true (e.g., Whitaker et al., 2003). However, these studies ash contents were analysed by each time period, in general,
are regarded as exceptional as opposed to the norm. There- only the waste type effect remained significant. The rela-
fore, the suggestion that ‘the composting process can there- tively small differences between the different inoculant
fore be improved by means of inoculation if the types seen in Table 7 suggest that any inoculant strategy
microorganisms used for this purpose are appropriate for was not particularly important and that any statistical
the characteristics of the raw material,’ raises interesting significance is not indicative of biological significance.
theoretical as well as applied aspects of environmental Analysis of CEC resulted in similar conclusions to
microbiology. above, whereas analysis of C:N ratio failed to find any par-
Whilst essentially the experimental approach was ticularly significance of waste type or inoculation (data not
straightforward and sound, beyond this, however, the anal- shown).
ysis and the interpretations drawn are far from satisfactory. Results for the lignocellulose fraction were more difficult
Mean ash contents, obtained from Table 4, were re-ana- to re-analyse. However, the inconsistencies in the data are
lysed using ANOVA as an appropriate technique to inves- apparent. For example, whilst the OMW lignin data showed
tigate this dataset. Whilst there was a reduction in power of significant reductions at day180 for all inoculants, as com-
this analysis due to fewer replicates, it should be noted that pared with the control, this was not apparent in the previous
the original sampling design of taking replicates from com- sampling dates (see Fig. 1). Without a plausible biological
posite samples was itself flawed. Results of this analysis explanation and a more rigorous statistical assessment, this
showed significant effects of time, waste type, inoculant would appear to be a chance result. Furthermore, the OMW
and the interaction between inoculant and waste type (see data for ash content (Table 4) and cellulose degradation
Table 6). However, this does not mean that inoculation (Fig. 1) showed that the control outperformed all other
by appropriate organisms resulted in improved compo- inoculants. Whilst it was acknowledged that an increased
lignin reduction is generally associated with an increased
degradation of other components of the lignocellulosic frac-
q
tion, this is clearly not the case in this study. It appears from
27, 9. Vargas-Garcı́a, M.C., Suárez-Estrella, F., López, M.J., Moreno,
visual inspection that the lignin and cellulose concentrations
J. 1099–1107.
Tel.: +44 1482 466499; fax: +44 1482 466884. were to some extent negatively correlated. By reducing the
E-mail address: j.d.adams@hull.ac.uk recalcitrant lignin fraction, it would be expected that any
0956-053X/$ - see front matter Ó 2007 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
doi:10.1016/j.wasman.2007.09.008
J.D.W. Adams / Waste Management 28 (2008) 2428–2429 2429