4.7 Article

Ecotoxicity monitoring and bioindicator screening of oil-contaminated soil during bioremediation

Journal

ECOTOXICOLOGY AND ENVIRONMENTAL SAFETY
Volume 124, Issue -, Pages 120-128

Publisher

ACADEMIC PRESS INC ELSEVIER SCIENCE
DOI: 10.1016/j.ecoenv.2015.10.005

Keywords

Oil-contaminated soil; Bioremediation; Ecotoxicity; Bioindicator

Funding

  1. Program for New Century Excellent Talents in University [NCET-11-0166]
  2. Guangdong Provincial Natural Science Foundation [9351064101000001]

Ask authors/readers for more resources

A series of toxicity bioassays was conducted to monitor the ecotoxicity of soils in the different phases of bioremediation. Artificially oil-contaminated soil was inoculated with a petroleum hydrocarbon-degrading bacterial consortium containing Burkholderia cepacia GS3C, Sphingomonas GY2B and Pandoraea pnomenusa GP3B strains adapted to crude oil. Soil ecotoxicity in different phases of bioremediation was examined by monitoring total petroleum hydrocarbons, soil enzyme activities, phytotoxicity (inhibition of seed germination and plant growth), malonaldehyde content, superoxide dismutase activity and bacterial luminescence. Although the total petroleum hydrocarbon (TPH) concentration in soil was reduced by 64.4%, forty days after bioremediation, the phytotoxicity and Photobacterium phosphoreum ecotoxicity test results indicated an initial increase in ecotoxicity, suggesting the formation of intermediate metabolites characterized by high toxicity and low bioavailability during bioremediation. The ecotoxicity values are a more valid indicator for evaluating the effectiveness of bioremediation techniques compared with only using the total petroleum hydrocarbon concentrations. Among all of the potential indicators that could be used to evaluate the effectiveness of bioremediation techniques, soil enzyme activities, phytotoxicity (inhibition of plant height, shoot weight and root fresh weight), malonaldehyde content, superoxide dismutase activity and luminescence of P. phosphoreum were the most sensitive. (C) 2015 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.

Authors

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

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.7
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available