4.6 Article

Phycoremediation potential, physiological, and biochemical response of Amphora subtropica and Dunaliella sp to nickel pollution

Journal

JOURNAL OF APPLIED PHYCOLOGY
Volume 30, Issue 2, Pages 931-941

Publisher

SPRINGER
DOI: 10.1007/s10811-017-1315-z

Keywords

Amphora subtropica; Dunaliella sp.; Nickel removal; Biochemical composition; Stress biomarkers

Funding

  1. Ministry of Higher Education and Scientific Research of Tunisia under Contract Program of the Environmental Bioprocesses Laboratory

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Metal pollution can produce many biological effects on aquatic environments. The marine diatom Amphora subtropica and the green alga Dunaliella sp. possess a high metal absorption capacity. Nickel (Ni) removal by living cells of A. subtropica and Dunaliella sp. was tested in cultures exposed to different Ni concentrations (100, 200, 300, and 500 mg L-1). The amount of Ni removed by the microalgac increased with the time of exposure and the initial Ni concentration in the medium. The metal, which was mainly removed by bioadsorption to Dunaliella sp. cell surfaces (93.63% of total Ni (for 500 mg Ni L-1) and by bioaccumulation (80.82% of total Ni (for 300 mg Ni L-1) into Amphora subtropica cells, also inhibited growth. Exposure to Ni drastically reduced the carbohydrate and protein concentrations and increased total lipids from 6.3 to 43.1 pg cell(-1), phenolics 0.092 to 0.257 mg GAE gW(-1) (Fw), and carotenoid content, from 0.08 to 0.59 mg g(-1) (Fw), in A. subtropica. In Dunaliella sp., total lipids increased from 26.1 to 65.3 pg cell(-)(1), phenolics from lipids increased from 26.1 to 65.3 pg cell(-1), phenolics from 0.41 to 0.97 mg g(-1) (Fw). These compounds had an important role in protecting the algae against ROS generated by Ni. In order to cope with Ni stress shown by the increase of TBARS level, enzymatic (SOD, CAT, and GPx) ROS scavenging mechanisms were induced.

Authors

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

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.6
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available