International Water Technology Journal, IWTJ

Vol. 3 - Issue 2, June 2013

POTENTIAL OF EFFECTIVE MICROORGANISMS (EM) FOR

CONVENTIONAL ACTIVATED SLUDGE UPGRADE
El Karamany H.M. 1, El Shatoury S.A.2, Ahmed D.S. 1, and Saleh I.S. 1
1

Environmental Engineering department, Faculty of Engineering, Zagazig University, Egypt

2
Botany department, Faculty of Science, Suez Canal University, Egypt

ABSTRACT
Activated sludge process is widely used for wastewater treatment throughout the world with various
modifications. The aim of this research was to study the effect of using effective microorganisms (EM)
to enhance the activated sludge process. A model has been constructed to simulate activated sludge
process. It consisted of two reactors (EM-dosed and control) operated simultaneously. The results of
the present study showed that the reactor induced with EM achieved removal ratios of 84.5%, 91.5%
and 96.0% in TSS, COD and BOD respectively compared to 63.5%, 66.0% and 74.0% in the control
reactor. Increasing EM dose from (1/7500) to (1/1000), increasing COD and BOD removal ratios
from 71.0%, 75.5% to 91.5%, 96.0% respectively compared to 68.0%, 74.0% in the control reactor .
Also results indicated that the pulse dose addition method achieved higher efficiency in early days (7
days), 90.0% and 94.5% for COD and BOD respectively compared to 78.0%, 82.5% in daily dose
method. However, the daily EM dose method showed higher removal efficiency at the long run
application (one month) 92.0%, 85.7% for COD and BOD respectively compared to 82.5%, 76.0% in
pulse dose method. EM dose (1/1000) showed significant higher removal ratios at lower hydraulic
retention time (HRT=4 hours), where the EM reactor achieved removal efficiency for COD and BOD
were 84.5% and 91.5% respectively compared to 92.0%, 96.5% at the control reactor. Enzymes
evaluation showed that the enzymatic activity of EM have more ability in the oxidation of organic
materials than of bacteria found in the control reactor.

Keywords: Effective microorganisms (EM), Activated sludge upgrade, COD removal, bacterial
count, HRT.

1. INTRODUCTION
More than 80% of biological wastewater treatment plants (WWTPs) are based on the principle of
activated sludge process, in which suspended bacteria oxidize the carbonaceous and nitrogenous
compounds to produce an effluent in accordance with legal standards, and that corresponds to a
minimal environmental impact. [Metcalf & Eddy, 2003].
Most large cities in Egypt had already built their wastewater treatment plants as activated sludge
process plants. Some of these plants are suffering from over loading problems. These problems due to
increase in population and standard of living that Led to increase in wastewater discharges. The
increase of organic and hydraulic loads, related to the improvement of wastewater collection, and the
implementation of new national regulations and directives, often leads to discharges which do not
comply with the standards.
The concept of EM was developed by Japanese horticulturist Teuro Higa from the University of
Ryukyus in Japan. He reported in the 1970s that a combination of approximately 80 different
microorganisms is capable of positively influencing decomposing organic matter such that it reverts
into a life promoting process. This selection was done from over two thousand species of microbes
found in all environments. EM is developed using three principal organisms, namely phototrophic

87

International Water Technology Journal, IWTJ

Vol. 3 - Issue 2, June 2013

bacteria, Lactic acid bacteria and Yeasts. Thus, EM consists of these three principal types, which is
subsequently enriched naturally by other species such as filamentous fungi and Actinomycetes [Higa,
1996].
In the current wastewater treatment process, microorganisms play a significant role in the treatment
of domestic sewage. Many different organisms live within the wastewater itself, assisting in the
breakdown of certain organic pollutants [Taylor, et al 1997]. The basis for using these EM species of
microorganisms is that they contain various organic acids due to the presence of lactic acid bacteria,
which secrete organic acids, enzymes, antioxidants and metallic chelates. The creation of an
antioxidant environment by EM assists in the enhancement of the solid-liquid separation, which is the
foundation for cleaning water. [Higa and Chinen 1998].
Concerning the research in hand, various parameters have been examined to test the effect of EM on
enhancing the quality of the existing conventional activated sludge WWTPs. Those parameters
included the change in EM dosing, method of dose addition, and hydraulic retention times. In addition,
biological tests have been conducted on the enzymes of EM and compared to the enzymes of the
bacteria present in the control reactor

2. MATERIALS AND METHODS

2.1 Wastewater Characteristics
In this study the used wastewater was collected from the effluent channel of primary sedimentation
tanks in "El Aslogy wastewater treatment plant", Zagazig, Egypt. The measured parameters were
COD, BOD, TSS, temperature, DO and pH. All these parameters were measured in Environmental
Engineering Laboratory, Engineering Faculty, Zagazig, Egypt according to the American Standard
Methods for the Examination of Water and Wastewater [APHA, 2005]. The wastewater characteristics
in this study as shown in Table (1).
2.2 Effective Microorganisms (EM)
Effective microorganisms (EM) used in this study was obtained from Egyptian environmental affairs
agency (EEAA). EM solution is a yellowish liquid with a pleasant odor and sweet sour taste with a pH
of 2.8 and stored in area with minimal temperature fluctuations due to don't affect on the survival of
microorganisms. EM culture contained a mixture of lactic acid bacteria, phototrophic bacteria, yeast,
actinomycetes and fermenting fungi.
Table 1: The physical-chemical characteristics of inlet wastewater

Parameter
Chemical oxygen demand (COD)
Biochemical oxygen demand (BOD)
Total suspended solids (TSS)
Dissolved oxygen (DO)
PH value
Temperature

Average value
56550
37035
37545
2.680.92
7.70.25
268

Unit
mg/l
mg/l
mg/l
mg/l
-----Celsius

2.3 Experimental Model

The used experimental model consisted of a feeding tank ahead of two reactors; one of the two
reactors represented the reference and the other was used for the addition of EM as shown in Figure
(1). Each reactor consisted of an aeration tank and final sedimentation tank with dimensions as
illustrated in table (2).

87

International Water Technology Journal, IWTJ

Vol. 3 - Issue 2, June 2013

Table 2: Model's dimensions.

Units

length
(m)

width (m)

height (m)

Diameter
(mm)

Capacity(Liter)

Head tank
Aeration tank
Final Sedimentation tank
All pipes

0.40
0.40
0.25
-----

0.40
0.25
0.25
-----

0.60
0.31
0.40
-----

------------12.7

96
31
25
-----

EM solution
FST

Final Sedimentation Tank

AT

Aeration Tank

RSL

Return Sludge Line

ESL

Excess Sludge Line

Pump

Adding

R.S.L

Air supply
Effluent
E.S.L

Manhole

E.S.L

Air supply

Effluent

control
reactor
Supply pump
Effluent channel
of primary sedimentation tank

R.S.L
Pump

Head tank

* One reactor for control and another for EM study

Fig. 1: Schematic diagram for the bench scale model.

The model was set at the effluent channel of primary sedimentation tanks in "El Aslogy wastewater
treatment plant", Zagazig, Egypt as shown in figure (1). One horse power pump was used to raise the
wastewater from the channel to the head tank. The head tank was provided with two valves and two
pipes 0.5 inch in diameter to distribute the wastewater on the aeration tanks. The wastewater moved
from the aeration tanks to final sedimentation tanks through pipes 12.7 mm in diameter. The return
sludge is recycled to the aeration tanks by two pumps. Sludge was withdrawn from the sedimentation
tank once a day to keep the SRT at the designated values. This arrangement was adjusted by using an
electronic control system using a timer (24 hr). The supplied air quantity was sufficient to maintain
dissolved oxygen concentration in the range of 2mg/l - 4 mg/l.
2.4 Model Start Up
The conventional way of start-up of wastewater treatment plant is to inoculate a large amount of
fresh activated sludge to the aeration tank and acclimatize the sludge for the high removal of organic
materials. In this the model, approximately 10 liters of activated sludge (based on Q r = 0.5Q) were
added to each aeration tank in the start of each run. The start up period ranged between (10 15) days
based on characteristics of both return activated sludge and influent wastewater into model.
2.5 Experimental Procedure
In the present study the two reactors worked together in the same atmospheric conditions, flow rates,
raw wastewater and retention time. The experimental program was established on three stages.
In the first stage the effect of different EM doses was studied. This stage included four runs. Each
run carried out using different dose of EM added daily to the reactor in the same time of each day.
These doses based on the ratio of volume of EM to the volume of aeration tank, were (1/1000),
(1/2500), (1/5000) and (1/7500). The selected major enzyme activities of the EM and the conventional
activated sludge were evaluated in this stage to show the differences in their abilities to degrade
organic matter. These tests were amylase, lipase, protease and cellulose. Enzymatic screening was

78

International Water Technology Journal, IWTJ

Vol. 3 - Issue 2, June 2013

performed for the whole microbial population by transferring 0.1 ml from the sample directly to a well
in the corresponding medium plate. In parallel, activities of individual cells were investigated by serial
dilution of the samples in phosphate buffer and cultivation, as described above. Enzymatic activities
were measured as activity index (diameter of clear zone / diameter of growth) after incubation at 28C
for 7days (21 days for carboxymethyl cellulase CMCase). Enzymatic activities were investigated as
follows:
Amylase activity: Samples were inoculated in Starch Agar medium plates, incubated for 14 days at
28C, then covered by Gram's iodine solution, which allowed the visualization of clear halos around
the colonies that produced amylase (Williams and Wellington, 1982).
Lipase activity: Samples were grown on Tributyrin agar plates. The clear zone around the growth
indicated the lipase production (Janda, 2005).
Protease activity: Samples were grown on Skim milk agar (Williams and Wellington, 1982).
Enzyme production was indicated by clear zones around the growth.
CMCase activity: Samples were grown on cellulose agar medium, supplemented with
carboxymethyl cellulose as a sole carbon source (Wollum, 1982). Enzymes production was indicated
by clear zones around the growth.
In the second stage, two methods of addition of EM dose (1/1000), daily EM dose method and pulse
method. The two methods were compared to achieve long steady state period with high removal
efficiency over one month. (Note; pulse addition method was the total amount of EM over month
added only once at the start of the run).
In the third stage, the effect of hydraulic retention time (2, 4, 6 and 8 hour) at EM dose (1/1000) was
studied and compared the results with control reactor. The boundary operating conditions of three
stages are displayed in Table (3). Working conditions and procedures were rigorously followed during
all experiments.
Table 3: The operational conditions applied through the whole study

Runs

EM addition method

EM dose

Qa (L/d)

Qrb (L/d)

HRTc(hr)

st

1st run
2nd run
3rd run
4th run

daily
daily
daily
daily

1/5000
1/7500
1/2500
1/1000

124
124
124
124

62
62
62
62

6
6
6
6

2nd

5th run
6th run

daily
Pulse

1/1000
1/1000

3rd

7th run

daily

1/1000

124
124
93,
186
372

stage

62
6
62
6
124, 46.5, 62,
8, 6, 4
and 93 and
and 2
186

a = inlet wastewater flow rate (liter/day),

b = return activated sludge flow rate (liter/day)
c = hydraulic retention time (hours)

3. RESULTS AND DISCUSSION

3.1. Effect of using EM
The results showed that using EM increased TSS, COD and BOD removal ratios differed
significantly compared to the control (p< 0.05), particularly with higher EM dose. For example figure
(4) illustrated that using EM dose (1/1000) achieved BOD removal ratio 96.0% compared to 74.0% in
control reactor.

78

International Water Technology Journal, IWTJ

Vol. 3 - Issue 2, June 2013

Increasing the performance of an existing activated sludge system would be necessary by increasing
the amount of biomass inside the reactor. In theory, the higher the MLSS concentration in the aeration
tanks the greater efficiency of the process because the higher biomass can utilize the more available
organic matter. According to figure (5), the bacterial count for EM reactor achieved (1.3*10^8 cfu/ml)
compared to (1.6*10^6 cfu/ml) in the control reactor. This means that EM reactor contain the higher
amount of biomass inside the reactor. In addition to the species contained in EM produce various
organic acids due mainly to the presence of lactic acid bacteria. The EM secretes organic acids and
enzymes which acts on sewage and degrades complex organic matter into simpler ones. The
antioxidant substances produced by EM enhances the breakdown of Solids and reduces the sludge
volume [Higa & Chinen, 1998].
These results comply with Namsivayam, et al (2011), whose experimental model consists of 2l
Erlenmeyer flask with 1 liter of domestic sewage.100 ml of activated EM culture was added into the
sewage sample. The setup was operated continuously for 20 days. EM was added each day at the
dilution rate of 1:10,000 for five days. Their results refer to BOD was reduced from 2.8 to 0.9 mg/l.
3.2. Effect of EM dose
It was found that when the EM dose was (1/7500), the results were 65.0%, 71.0% and 75.5% in
removal efficiency of TSS, COD and BOD respectively compared to 64.0%, 68.5% and 74.0% in
control reactor as shown in figures (2, 3 and 4). While when the EM dose was (1/5000), the removal
efficiency of TSS, COD and BOD were 68.0%, 75.0% and 81.0% respectively compared to 63.0%,
66.0% and 74.0% in control reactor. The EM dose (1/2500) achieved removal efficiency 75.0%,
83.5% and 91.0% of TSS, COD and BOD respectively compared to 62.0%, 67.5% and 75.0% in
control reactor. But the final EM dose (1/1000) achieved removal efficiency 83.5%, 91.5% and 96.0%
of TSS, COD and BOD respectively compared to 63.0%, 66.0% and 74.0% in control reactor.

EM Reactor

90%
80%

Ref. Reactor

TSS removal ratio

TSS removal ratio

Results indicated that EM dose higher than (1/1000) would offset small increasing in removal
efficiency for TSS, COD and BOD. Consequently the dose (1/1000) was selected as the highest dose
for the following experiments.

EM dose = 1/5000

70%
60%
50%
40%

EM Reactor

90%

Ref. Reactor

80%
70%
60%
50%
40%

12

15

18

21

24

12

15

18

Em reactor

Ref. reactor

TSS removal ratio

TSS removal ratio

Em reactor

90%
80%
70%
60%

EM dose = 1/2500

50%
40%
0

12

15

18

21

21

24

Time(days)

Time(days)

24

Ref. reactor

90%
80%
70%
60%

EM dose = 1/1000

50%
40%
0

12

15

Time(days)

18

21

24

Time(days)

Fig. 2: TSS removal ratio for different EM doses compared to control (Ref.) reactor

78

International Water Technology Journal, IWTJ

Vol. 3 - Issue 2, June 2013

This results obtained from this study indicate that suspended solids will be reduced. Higa (1993)
supported this statement through the example of the Gushikawa City Library, which when treated with
EM has reduced the need for solids handling and increasing the removal ratios in BOD and COD. Also
these results comply with the results of Monica, et al. (2011), where their results showed that
treatment of sewage using EM with addition of dose (1/300) under aerobic conditions reduced the
BOD from 374.5 to 55.9 mg/l with mean reduction of 85% while the control showed the decrease in
BOD from 374.5 to 248.6 mg/l with mean reduction of 34%. The EM reduced the COD of sewage
from 570.4 to 99.8 mg/l with mean reduction of 82% while the control showed the decrease in COD
from 570.4 to 409.3 mg/l with mean reduction of 28%.
3.3. Effect of EM on bacterial count
Microbiological analysis showed that, the bacterial counts changed significantly from the control
when using the doses (1/1000) and (1/2500) with significant values were (1.3*10^8 cfu/ml) and
(4.7*10^7 cfu/ml) respectively compared to (1.6*10^6 cfu/ml) and (2.2*10^6 cfu/ml) for control
reactor as shown in figure (5). Comparable results were reported by Namsivayam, et al (2011), where
application of dose (1/10000) resulted in a significant increase in bacterial population from 11.2X10 4
cfu/ml in control reactor to 23.1X105 cfu/ml in EM reactor.

EM Reactor

100%

Ref. Reactor

COD removal ratio

COD removal ratio

According to figure (3, 4, 5) It is suggested that, the increase in bacterial count in EM dose (1/1000)
compared to (1/7500) was responsible for the recognized difference in removal efficiency. The bigger
population of EM bacteria cells adding to its high ability for degrading organic matter in the
wastewater would increasing the microbiological activity in the environment and the efficiency
treatment. Also, enzymatic investigation of the EM illustrates their Superiority compared to normal
bacteria found in wastewater as shown in Table (4). However, the use of EM does not only enhance
the microbes found in EM in that environment. It acts as a catalyst with a synergistic effect to promote
all the beneficial microbes of that environment. When this happens, the microbes that develop harmful
effects are excluded from that ecosystem, in a manner akin to human activity, where good people
weed out the bad ones (Higa 1998).

90%
80%
70%

EM dose = 1/7500
EM dose = 1/2500

60%
50%
40%
0

12

15

18

21

80%
70%

COD removal ratio

Ref. Reactor

80%
70%
60%
50%
40%
0

12

15

18

21

24

EM dose = 1/5000
EM dose = 1/1000

60%
50%
40%

24

12

Em reactor

100%

18

21

24

Ref. reactor

90%
80%
70%
60%
50%
40%
0

12

times(day)
Fig. 3: COD removal ratio for different EM doses compared to control (Ref.) reactor

78

15

times(day)

COD removal ratio

EM Reactor

Ref. Reactor

90%

times(day)

100%
90%

EM Reactor

100%

15

18

21

24

times(day)

Em Reactor

100%
90%
80%
70%
60%
50%
40%
30%

Vol. 3 - Issue 2, June 2013

Em Reactor

Ref. Reactor

BOD removal ratio

BOD removal ratio

International Water Technology Journal, IWTJ

EM dose = 1/7500

12

15

18

21

100%
90%
80%
70%
60%
50%
40%
30%

Ref. Reactor

EM dose = 1/5000

24

12

15

18

Em Reactorl

100%
90%
80%
70%
60%
50%
40%
30%

Em Reactor

Ref. Reactor

EM dose = 1/2500

12

15

18

21

21

24

times(day)

BOD removal ratio

BOD removal ratio

times(day)
100%
90%
80%
70%
60%
50%
40%
30%

Ref. Reactor

EM dose = 1/1000

24

12

15

18

21

24

times(day)

times(day)
Fig. 4: BOD removal ratio for different EM doses compared to control (Ref.) reactor
Em Reactor

6.0
5.0
3

12

15

18

21

24

Time(days)
Em Reactor

6.0
5.0

7.0
6.0
5.0
0

12

15

18

21

12

15

24

Time(days)

18

21

Ref. Reactor

9.0

EM dose = 1/1000

8.0
7.0
6.0
5.0
0

12

15

18

21

24

Time(days)

Fig. 5: Bacterial count for different EM doses compared to control (Ref.) reactor

3.4. Evaluation of EM Enzymes

The selected enzymes for this part of the study were the common enzymes which may be
found in wastewater, e.g. amylase, protease, lipase and carboxymethyl cellulose (CMCase).

78

24

Time(days)
Em Reactor

7.0

Ref. Reactor

EM dose = 1/5000

8.0

Ref.Reactor

EM dose = 1/2500

8.0

Log10 [Cell No.] (cfu/ml)

7.0

Em Reactor

9.0

EM dose = 1/7500

8.0

9.0

Log10 [Cell No.] (cfu/ml)

Ref. Reactor

Log10 [Cell No.] (cfu/ml)

Log10 [Cell No.] (cfu/ml)

9.0

International Water Technology Journal, IWTJ

Vol. 3 - Issue 2, June 2013

Results of individual cells activities showed better representation of enzymatic activities,

compared to evaluation of the whole microbial population. Results indicated that EM
enzymes (amylase, protease and carboxymethyl cellulose) have more abilities than enzymes
of bacteria which found in control reactor and have the same ability almost in lipase enzyme
as shown in Table (4). This because the species contained in EM produce various organic
acids due mainly to the presence of lactic acid bacteria. The EM secretes organic acids and
enzymes which acts on sewage and degrades complex organic matter into simpler ones. The
antioxidant substances produced by EM enhances the breakdown of Solids and reduces the
sludge volume [Higa & Chinen, 1998].
Previous results showed that EM reproduces many survival cells of the EM within the
wastewater at the same hydraulic retention time rather than normal bacteria. Also EM
enzymes have greater abilities in the oxidation of various organic materials found in
wastewater.
Table 4: Average enzymatic activity indices of amylase, protease, lipase and carboxymethyl 85ellulose
(CMCase) for the two reactors.
EM reactor
Enzyme

Control reactor

Amylase
Protease

individual microbial
cells
7.12
3.66

microbial
population
6.6
3.53

individual microbial
cells
3.11
No activity

microbial
population
3.22
2.40

Lipase

3.50

No activity

4.3

No activity

CMCase

5.56

No activity

3.0

No activity

3.5. Method of EM Addition

It was deduced that the pulse dose achieved higher efficiency in early days (7 days), were
90.0%, 94.5% for COD and BOD respectively compared to daily dose 78.0% and 82.5% as
shown in figure (6). This could be reasoned to the large amount of EM bacteria which
consumed most organic matter in the reactor. However, the daily EM dose showed higher
removal efficiency at the long run application (30 days), were 90.5%, 95.0% for COD and
BOD respectively compared to pulse dose 76.0 % and 82.5%. This indicates the possible
wash-out of EM cells from the reactor and the importance of continuous fed of the inoculants
to guarantee stable treatment efficiency. Therefore, the application regime could possibly
follow pulse addition method in case of needing rapidly high removal efficiency in short
time. While the daily addition could be followed in cases when achieving high removal
efficiency on long term is required.
Em(Pulse) Reactor

Em(daily) Reactor

EM(Pulse) Reactor

100%

BOD removal ratio

COD removal ratio

100%
90%
80%
70%
60%
50%
40%

EM(daily) Reactor

90%
80%
70%
60%
50%
40%

12

15

18

21

24

27

30

12

15

18

21

times(day)

24

27

30

times(day)

Fig. 6: the effect of daily and pulse EM dose (1/1000) on removal ratio with time.

78

International Water Technology Journal, IWTJ

Vol. 3 - Issue 2, June 2013

3.6. Effect of HRT on removal ratio with daily EM dose (1/1000)

EM Reactor

EM Reactor

Ref. Reactor

Ref. Reactor

100.0%

COD removal ratio

100.0%
90.0%
80.0%
70.0%
60.0%
50.0%

90.0%
80.0%
70.0%
60.0%
50.0%
40.0%

40.0%
2

HRT(hr)

HRT(hr)
EM Reactor

BOD removal ratio

TSS removal ratio

At HRT equal to 4 hours, the EM reactor gave removal efficiency for TSS, COD, BOD
were 77.5%, 84.5%, and 91.5% respectively compared to 60.5%, 63.0% and 68.5% for the
control reactor as shown in figure (7). So, discharges of wastewater coming to treatment
plants may be doubled while maintaining high removal ratios.

Ref. Reactor

100.0%
90.0%
80.0%
70.0%
60.0%
50.0%
40.0%
2

HRT(hr)
Fig. 7: the effect of HRT on removal ratio with daily EM dose (1/1000).

4. CONCLUSIONS
Based on the experimental program executed in this research, and limited to both the tested materials
and the testing procedures employed, the following conclusions have been reached:

Increase EM dose, increase TSS, BOD and COD removal ratios.

The highest EM dose (1/1000) added to aeration tank by volume has been achieved the
highest removal ratios 91.5% and 96.0%for COD and BOD respectively compared to 66.0%
and 74.0% in the control reactor.
The addition of EM dose as daily dose gave high removal ratios on long term compared to
pulse addition.
Using EM bacteria in activated sludge system would reproduce many numbers of effective,
beneficial activated cells in aeration tank that achieving high removal ratio of organic
materials.
EM enzymes have been appeared a great ability in oxidize of organic materials compared to
the bacteria in control reactor.
The application of EM bacteria may be increased the aeration tank capacity by lowering the
HRT with maintaining stringent water quality criteria.
The obtained results indicated that old and over loaded plants can be improved by using EM.
EM has the potential to improve the overall effectiveness of the activated sludge process for
treatment of domestic sewage.

78

International Water Technology Journal, IWTJ

Vol. 3 - Issue 2, June 2013

REFERENCES
[1]. American Public Health Association; American Water Works Association; And Water
Pollution Federation. (2005). Standard Methods for the Examination of Water and
Wastewater. 21th Edition.
[2]. Higa, T. (1993). "An Earth Saving Revolution", Sunmark Publishing Tokyo, Japan.
[3]. Higa, T. (1996). "Effective Microorganisms -Their role in Kyusei Nature Farming and
sustainable agriculture". In Proceedings of the Third International Conference on Kyusei
Nature Farming. Ed. J.F. Parr et al., USDA, Washington, USA: 20-24.
[4]. Higa, T. and Chinen, N. (1998). "EM Treatments of Odor Waste Water and Environmental
Problems", College of Agriculture, University of Ryukyus, Okinawa, Japan.
[5]. Janda, K. (2005). The lipolytic activity of Thermomyces lanuginosus strains isolated from
different natural sources. International Biodeterioration and Biodegradation, 55: 149-152.
[6]. Metcalf and Eddy Inc, (2003). "Wastewater Engineering, Treatment and Reuse" McGrawHill, New York.
[7]. Monica, S., Karthik, L., Mythili, S. and Sathiavelu, A. (2011). "Formulation of Effective
Microbial Consortia and its Application for Sewage Treatment". Microbial Biochem Technol
volume (3): 051-055. doi:10.4172/1948-5948.1000051.
[8]. Namsivayam, S., Narendrakumar, G. and Arvind, K. (2011). " Evaluation of Effective
Microorganism (EM) for treatment of domestic sewage" Journal of Experimental Sciences,
ISSN: 2218-1768, Vol. 2, Issue 7, Pages 30-32.
[9]. Taylor, C., Yahner, J., Jones, D. and Dunn, A. (1997)."Wastewater in Pipeline", Ch (8), P4.
[10]. Williams, S.T. and Wellington, E.M.H. (1982). Actinomycetes. In: Page, A. L. (ed),
methods of soil analysis. Part 2. Chemical and microbiological properties-Agronomy
monograph no. 9, ASA-SSSA, Madison, USA, pp. 969-987.
[11]. Wollum, A.G. (1982). Cultural methods for soil microorganisms. In: A.L. Page, R.H. Miller
and D.R. Keenet, Editors, Methods of Soil Analysis, Part 2, Soil Science Society of America,
Madison, WI, pp. 781801.

78