Supplementary information
Susceptibility of constructed wetland microbial communities to silver nanoparticles: a microcosm study
Mark Buttona, Hannele Auvinenb,c, Frederik Van Koetsemb, Baharak Hosseinkhanid,e, Diederik Rousseauc, Kela P. Webera*, Gijs Du Laingb
a Environmental Sciences Group, Department of Chemistry and Chemical Engineering, Royal Military College of Canada, Kingston, Ontario, PO Box 17000, Station Forces, K7K 7B4, Canada. Tel. (+1)613-541-6000-3363
b Laboratory of Analytical Chemistry and Applied Ecochemistry, Faculty of Bioscience Engineering, Ghent University, Coupure Links 653, 9000 Gent, Belgium. Tel. (+32)92645995
c Laboratory of Industrial Water and Ecotechnology, Faculty of Bioscience Engineering, Ghent University, Graaf Karel de Goedelaan 5, 8500 Kortrijk, Belgium
d Center for Microbial Ecology and Technology, Faculty of Bioscience Engineering, Ghent University, Coupure Links 653, 9000 Gent, Belgium
eBiomedical research institute, Hasselt University, Martelarenlaan 42, 3500 Hasselt, Belgium
*
SI Table 1: ICP-MS instrumental parameters and measuring conditions
Instrumental parameter / SettingNebulizer gas flow / 0.75 l/min
Auxiliary gas flow / 1.2 l/min
Plasma gas flow / 15 l/min
Lens voltage / 7.3 V
Plasma RF power / 1300 W
Method parameter / Setting
Sweeps/reading / 30
Dwell time/AMU / 75 ms
Integration time / 2250 ms
DRC mode / 0.4 mL CH4 min-1
RPq / 0.7
Calibration range / 0, 0.2, 0.5, 1, 2, 4, 8, 20 µg Ag/l
SI Table 2: Water quality measurements over the 28 day exposure period. A = control, B = citrate coated AgNPs, C = PVP coated AgNPs, D = ionic Ag. Errors (+/-) are expressed as 1 standard deviation of the mean (n=3)
Day 7 / Day 14 / Day 21 / Day 28A / B / C / D / A / B / C / D / A / B / C / D / A / B / C / D
pH / 7.5 / 7.4 / 7.3 / 7.4 / 8.2 / 7.9 / 7.8 / 8 / 7.7 / 7.8 / 7.8 / 7.8 / 7.7 / 7.7 / 7.7 / 7.7
+/- / 0.1 / 0 / 0.1 / 0.1 / 0.1 / 0.1 / 0 / 0 / 0.1 / 0.1 / 0 / 0.1 / 0.1 / 0 / 0 / 0.1
DO (mg/L) / 0.1 / 0.4 / 0.1 / 0.3 / 4.5 / 2.9 / 4 / 3.6 / 5.1 / 4.4 / 4.1 / 2.9 / 2.2 / 2.6 / 1.1 / 1.8
+/- / 0.1 / 0.4 / 0.2 / 0.1 / 0.6 / 0.5 / 1 / 0.6 / 0.3 / 0.4 / 0.9 / 1.1 / 1.4 / 1.1 / 0.7 / 2.6
TOC (mg/L) / 4.5 / 3.2 / 3.8 / 3.4 / 3.2 / 3.7 / 3.5 / 3.3 / 3 / 3.8 / 2.8 / 3 / 2.9 / 3.5 / 2.4 / 2.8
+/- / 1.9 / 0.2 / 0.6 / 0.3 / 0.1 / 0.4 / 0.2 / 0.3 / 0.3 / 0.7 / 0.2 / 0.2 / 0.6 / 1.9 / 0.1 / 0.6
SI Figure 1: EDS spectra corresponding to AgNPs in the S/TEM images shown in Figure 2. For (A) PVPcoated, and (B) Citrate coatedAg NPs in the simulated wastewater solution.
Lane / Sample / Lane / Sample / Lane / Sample1 / Ladder / 14 / Citrate W2 / 27 / Control biofilm W4
2 / Ladder / 15 / PVP W2 / 28 / Ag+ biofilm W4
3 / Ladder / 16 / Ag+ W2 / 29 / na
4 / Ladder / 17 / na / 30 / Control W3
5 / Biofilm W0 / 18 / na / 31 / Ag+ W3
6 / Control W0 / 19 / Control W4 / 32 / PVP W3
7 / Control W1 / 20 / na / 33 / na
8 / Citrate W1 / 21 / Citrate W4 / 34 / Citrate W3
9 / PVP W1 / 22 / Ag+ W4 / 35 / Ladder
10 / Ag+ W1 / 23 / PVP W4 / 36 / Ladder
11 / na / 24 / PVP biofilm W4 / 37 / Ladder
12 / Control W2 / 25 / Citrate biofilm W4
13 / Ladder / 26 / Ladder
SI Figure 2: DGGE gel image including all samples. Lane number with sample description shown in table below image, W indicates the week of sampling.Samples are interstitial waters unless stated as biofilm. na = sample was not used in this study.