4.5 Article

Field testing phytoremediation of organic and inorganic pollutants of sewage drain by bacteria assisted water hyacinth

Journal

INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF PHYTOREMEDIATION
Volume 23, Issue 2, Pages 139-150

Publisher

TAYLOR & FRANCIS INC
DOI: 10.1080/15226514.2020.1802574

Keywords

Bacillus cereus; Bacillus safensis; phytoremediation

Ask authors/readers for more resources

The study successfully reduced the pollutants in industrial effluent through a combination of plants and bacteria, especially heavy metals and organic compounds. This method provides a practical reference for bacterial-assisted phytoremediation of urban drainage systems.
The study was carried out to identify the potential of phytoremediation within a flowing drain throughEichhornia crassipesin combination with two bacillus species to treat the inorganic and polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons (PAHs) from industrial effluent at Kala Shah Kaku (KSK), Lahore, Pakistan. Results showed that the highest metals removal efficiency was found in Cr, Pb, Ni, and Cu as 72.4, 83.3, 82.35, and 63.63%, respectively. However, biochemical oxygen demand (BOD) and chemical oxygen demand (COD) removal efficiencies were also considerably higher (66.66 and 66.67%). The BOD, COD, sulfates, phosphate, and total dissolved solids (TDS) showed a higher reduction rate as 1442.7, 1967.3, 1148.2, 7225.4, and 911.5 g m(-2)d(-1), respectively. Chlorophyll a + b and carotenoid contents were decreased from 7.92 to 5.78 mg kg(-1), 3.03 to 3.01 mg kg(-1), respectively and total nitrogen was increased from 22 to 27 mg kg(-1)inE. crassipes. Bio-concentration factor was higher for all metals and the maximum was found in Cr (<1). The reduction efficiency of & x1a9;PAHs was found up to 60% with different rings structure. The use ofBacillus safensisstrain showed the higher percentage reduction for BOD, nitrates, sulfates, and phosphates. The Study provide practical reference for bacterial assisted phytoremediation of urban drain.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.5
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available