Soil Bioremediation. Группа авторов

P.J. et al. (2009). Biodegradation of the low concentration of polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons in soil by microbial consortium during incubation. Journal of Hazardous Materials 172: 601–605.

      59 59 Gentry, T.J., Rensing, C., and Pepper, I.L. (2004). New approaches for bioaugmentation as a remediation technology. Critical Reviews in Environmental Science and Technology 34: 447–494.

      60 60 Goldstein, R.M., Mallory, L.M., and Alexander, M. (1985). Reasons for possible failure of inoculation to enhance biodegradation. Applied Environmental Microbiology 50: 977–983.

      61 61 Leahy, J.G. and Colwell, R.R. (1990). Microbial‐degradation of hydrocarbons in the environment. Microbiologial Reviews 54: 305–315.

      62 62 Mishra, S., Jyot, J., Kuhad, R.C. et al. (2001). In situ bioremediation potential of an oily sludge‐degrading bacterial consortium. Current Microbiology 43: 328–335.

      63 63 Moslemy, P., Neufeld, R.J., and Guiot, S.R. (2002). Biodegradation of gasoline by gellan gum‐encapsulated bacterial cells. Biotechnology and Bioengineering 80: 175–184.

      64 64 Obuekwe, C.O. and Al‐Muttawa, E.M. (2001). Self‐immobilized bacterial cultures with potential for application as ready‐to‐use seeds for petroleum bioremediation. Biotechnology Letters 23: 1025–1032.

      65 65 McLoughlin, A.J. (1994). Controlled release of immobilized cells as a strategy to regulate ecological competence of inocula. In: Biotechnics/Wastewater (ed. T. Scheper), 1–45. Berlin: Springer.

      66 66 Cassidy, M.B., Lee, H., and Trevors, J.T. (1996). Environmental applications of immobilized microbial cells: a review. Journal of Industrial Microbiology and Biotechnology 16: 79–101.

      67 67 vanVeen, J.A., vanOverbeek, L.S., and vanElsas, J.D. (1997). Fate and activity of microorganisms introduced into soil. Microbiology and Molecular Biology Reviews 61: 121–135.

      68 68 Bouchez, T., Patureau, D., Dabert, P. et al. (2000). Ecological study of a bioaugmentation failure. Environmental Microbiology 2: 179–190.

      69 69 Dibble, J.T. and Bartha, R. (1979). Effect of environmental parameters on the biodegradation of oil sludge. Applied Environmental Microbiology 37: 729–739.

      70 70 Atlas, R.M. (1995). Bioremediation of petroleum pollutants. International Biodeterioration and Biodegradation 35: 317–327.

      71 71 Delille, D., Delille, B., and Pelletier, E. (2002). Effectiveness of bioremediation of crude oil contaminated subantarctic intertidal sediment: the microbial response. Microbial Ecology 44: 118–126.

      72 72 Nikolopoulou, M. and Kalogerakis, N. (2009). Biostimulation strategies for fresh and chronically polluted marine environments with petroleum hydrocarbons. Journal of Chemical Technology and Biotechnology 84: 802–807.

      73 73 Sarkar, D., Ferguson, M., Datta, R. et al. (2005). Bioremediation of petroleum hydrocarbons in contaminated soils: comparison of biosolids addition, carbon supplementation, and monitored natural attenuation. Environmental Pollution 136: 187–195.

      74 74 Sugai, S.F., Lindstrom, J.E., and Braddock, J.F. (1997). Environmental influences on the microbial degradation of Exxon Valdez oil on the shorelines of Prince William Sound, Alaska. Environmental Science and Technology 31: 1564–1572.

      75 75 Mulkins‐Phillips, G.J. and Stewart, J.E. (1974). Effect of environmental parameters on bacterial‐degradation of bunker‐C oil, crude oils, and hydrocarbons. Applied Microbiology 28: 915–922.

      76 76 Horel, A. and Schiewer, S. (2009). Investigation of the physical and chemical parameters affecting biodegradation of diesel and synthetic diesel fuel contaminating Alaskan soils. Cold Regions Science and Technology 58: 113–119.

      77 77 Bordoloi, N.K. and Konwar, B.K. (2009). Bacterial biosurfactant in enhancing solubility and metabolism of petroleum hydrocarbons. Journal of Hazardous Materials 170: 495–505.

      78 78 Ron, E.Z. and Rosenberg, E. (2002). Biosurfactants and oil bioremediation. Current Opinion in Biotechnology 13: 249–252.

      79 79 Baek, K.H., Yoon, B.D., Kim, B.H. et al. (2007). Monitoring of microbial diversity and activity during bioremediation of crude OH‐contaminated soil with different treatments. Journal of Microbiology and Biotechnology 17: 67–73.

      80 80 Hamdi, H., Benzarti, S., Manusadzianas, L. et al. (2007). Bioaugmentation and biostimulation effects on PAH dissipation and soil ecotoxicity under controlled conditions. Soil Biology and Biochemistry 39: 1926–1935.

      81 81 Hankard, P.K., Svendsen, C., Wright, J. et al. (2004). Biological assessment of contaminated land using earthworm biomarkers in support of chemical analysis. Science of the Total Environment 330: 9–20.

      82 82 Bento, F.M., Camargo, F.A.O., Okeke, B.C. et al. (2005). Comparative bioremediation of soils contaminated with diesel oil by natural attenuation, biostimulation and bioaugmentation. Bioresoures Technology 96: 1049–1055.

      83 83 Thomassin‐Lacroix, E.J.M., Eriksson, M., Reimer, K.J. et al. (2002). Biostimulation and bioaugmentation for on‐site treatment of weathered diesel fuel in Arctic soil. Applied Microbiology and Biotechnology 59: 551–556.

      84 84 Simon, M.A., Bonner, J.S., McDonald, T.J. et al. (1999). Bioaugmentation for the enhanced bioremediation of petroleum in a wetland. Polycyclic Aromatic Compounds 14: 231–239.

      85 85 Lendvay, J.M., Loffler, F.E., Dollhopf, M. et al. (2003). Bioreactive barriers: a comparison of bioaugmentation and biostimulation for chlorinated solvent remediation. Environmental Science and Technology 37: 1422–1431.

2 Bioremediation: A Green Solution to avoid Pollution of the Environment

      Muhammad Mahroz Hussain¹, Zia Ur Rahman Farooqi¹, Junaid Latif ², Muhammad Umair Mubarak¹, and Fazila Younas¹

       1 Institute of Soil and Environmental Sciences, University of Agriculture Faisalabad, Faisalabad, Pakistan

       2 College of Natural Resources and Environment, Northwest Agriculture and Forestry University, Yangling, China

2.1 Introduction

Phytoremediation is a leading technology that helps to resolve the issues related to toxic metal removal with the help of a green revolutionary technique. In a green revolutionary technique the best genetically appropriate plants assist removal of toxic metals from contaminated soil. These plants can degrade, remove, immobilize, or metabolize toxic metal in a wide range of areas, e.g., wetland or a terrestrial land system. Phytoremediation is not a new technology. Almost 300 years ago different types of plants species were utilized to clean‐up wastewater [1]. At the end of the nineteenth century, Thlaspi caerulescens and Viola calaminaria were the first plant species that were documented to accumulate high levels of metals in their leaves [2]. In 1935, Byers reported that plants of the genus Astragalus could accumulate up to 0.6% selenium in dry shoot biomass. One decade later, it was identified that plants could accumulate up to 1% Ni in shoots [3]. In the last decade, extensive research has been conducted to investigate the biology of metal phytoextraction. Metal hyperaccumulation is a phenomenon generally associated with species endemic to metalliferous soils, and it is found in only a very small proportion of such metallophytes. Furthermost, but not all, hyperaccumulators are strictly endemic to metalliferous soils. More than 430 taxa are described to date in all continents in temperate and tropical environments. Notable centers of distribution are: Ni – New Caledonia, Cuba, South East Asia, Brazil, Southern Europe, and Asia Minor; Zn and Pb – Europe; Co and Cu – Southcentral Africa. Some families and genera are particularly well represented, i.e., for Ni: Brassicaceae (Alyssum and Thlaspi), Euphorbiaceae (Phyllanthus, Leucocroton), and Asteraceae (Senecio, Pentacalia); Zn: Brassicaceae (Thlaspi); Cu and Co: Lamiaceae and Scrophulariaceae. Phytoremediation can be practiced to scavenge both organic and inorganic pollutants present in solid substrates (soil), liquid substrates (water), and the air.

Phytoremediation