The addition of various amounts of biochar to anaerobic digestion of food wastes at different ratios of inoculum to substrate (ISR) was investigated to evaluate the effect of biochar as a functional additive and to optimize the additive dosage of biochar. The biochar treatments at ISR 2, 1, and 0.8 shortened the lag phase of digestion by −20.0%–10.9%, 43.3%–54.4%, and 36.3%–54.0%, and raised the maximum methane production rate by 100%–275%, 100%–133.3%, and 33.3%–100%, respectively, compared to control without biochar. Biochar also enhanced the degradation rate of dissolved organics and volatile fatty acids. Furthermore, the amount of biochar with best effectiveness at ISR = 2, 1, and 0.8 was 2.5, 0.625, and 0.5 g g−1-waste, respectively. Therefore, the effectiveness of biochar depended on the additive amount of biochar and at the same time the inoculum amount, implying a complementary role of abiotic biochar to biotic inoculum.
ChauhanAOgramA (2005) Evaluation of support matrices for immobilization of anaerobic consortia for efficient carbon cycling in waste regeneration. Biochemical and Biophysical Research Communications327: 884–893.
5.
ChenSRotaruAEShresthaPM. (2014) Promoting interspecies electron transfer with biochar. Scientific Reports4: 5019.
6.
ChenYChengJJCreamerKS (2008) Inhibition of anaerobic digestion process: A review. Bioresource Technology99: 4044–4064.
7.
Cruz ViggiCRossettiSFaziS. (2014) Magnetite particles triggering a faster and more robust syntrophic pathway of methanogenic propionate degradation. Environmental Science & Technology48: 7536–7543.
8.
GongW-JLiangHLiW-Z. (2011) Selection and evaluation of biofilm carrier in anaerobic digestion treatment of cattle manure. Energy36: 3572–3578.
9.
HabouzitFGevaudanGHamelinJ. (2011) Influence of support material properties on the potential selection of Archaea during initial adhesion of a methanogenic consortium. Bioresource Technology102: 4054–4060.
10.
KatoSHashimotoKWatanabeK (2012) Methanogenesis facilitated by electric syntrophy via (semi)conductive iron-oxide minerals. Environmental Microbiology14: 1646–1654.
11.
KayhanianM (1999) Ammonia inhibition in high-solids biogasification: An overview and practical solutions. Environmental Technology20: 355–365.
12.
LehmannJDJosephS (2015) Biochar for Environmental Management: Science, Technology and Implementation. London: Routledge.
13.
LinYLüFShaoL. (2013) Influence of bicarbonate buffer on the methanogenic pathway during thermophilic anaerobic digestion. Bioresource Technology137: 245–253.
14.
LopesWSLeiteVDPrasadS (2004) Influence of inoculum on performance of anaerobic reactors for treating municipal solid waste. Bioresource Technology94: 261–266.
15.
LüFHaoLGuanD. (2013) Synergetic stress of acids and ammonium on the shift in the methanogenic pathways during thermophilic anaerobic digestion of organics. Water Research47: 2297–2306.
16.
LüFHaoLZhuM. (2012) Initiating methanogenesis of vegetable waste at low inoculum-to-substrate ratio: Importance of spatial separation. Bioresource Technology105: 169–173.
17.
LüFLuoCShaoL. (2016) Biochar alleviates combined stress of ammonium and acids by firstly enriching Methanosaeta and thenMethanosarcina. Water Research90: 34–43.
18.
LuoCLüFShaoL. (2015) Application of eco-compatible biochar in anaerobic digestion to relieve acid stress and promote the selective colonization of functional microbes. Water Research68: 710–718.
19.
MoritaMSasakiK (2012) Factors influencing the degradation of garbage in methanogenic bioreactors and impacts on biogas formation. Applied Microbiology and Biotechnology94: 575–582.
20.
MummeJSrockeFHeegK. (2014) Use of biochars in anaerobic digestion. Bioresource Technology164: 189–197.
21.
NogueraDRArakiNRittmannBE (1994) Soluble microbial products (SMP) in anaerobic chemostats. Biotechnology and Bioengineering44: 1040–1047.
22.
PhamTPKaushikRParshettiGK. (2015) Food waste-to-energy conversion technologies: Current status and future directions. Waste Management38: 399–408.
23.
SasakiKSasakiDMoritaM. (2010) Efficient treatment of garbage slurry in methanogenic bioreactor packed by fibrous sponge with high porosity. Applied Microbiology and Biotechnology86: 1573–1583.
24.
ShowKYTayJH (1999) Influence of support media on biomass growth and retention in anaerobic filters. Water Research33: 1471–1481.
25.
UmanaONikolaevaSSanchezE. (2008) Treatment of screened dairy manure by upflow anaerobic fixed bed reactors packed with waste tyre rubber and a combination of waste tyre rubber and zeolite: Effect of the hydraulic retention time. Bioresource Technology99: 7412–7417.
26.
WangTShaoLLiT. (2014) Digestion and dewatering characteristics of waste activated sludge treated by an anaerobic biofilm system. Bioresource Technology153: 131–136.
27.
WilkieAColleranE (1984) Start-up of anaerobic filters containing different support materials using pig slurry supernatant. Biotechnology Letters6: 735–740.
28.
WoolfDAmonetteJEStreet-PerrottFA. (2010) Sustainable biochar to mitigate global climate change. Nature Communications1: 56.
29.
YamadaCKatoSUenoY. (2015) Conductive iron oxides accelerate thermophilic methanogenesis from acetate and propionate. Journal of Bioscience and Bioengineering119: 678–682.
30.
YangYZhangCHuZ (2013) Impact of metallic and metal oxide nanoparticles on wastewater treatment and anaerobic digestion. Environmental Science: Processes & Impacts15: 39–48.
31.
ZhangCSuHBaeyensJ. (2014a) Reviewing the anaerobic digestion of food waste for biogas production. Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews38: 383–392.
32.
ZhangJLüFLuoC. (2014b) Humification characterization of biochar and its potential as a composting amendment. Journal of Environmental Sciences26: 390–397.
33.
ZhaoZZhangYWoodardTL. (2015) Enhancing syntrophic metabolism in up-flow anaerobic sludge blanket reactors with conductive carbon materials. Bioresource Technology191: 140–145.
