4.5 Article Proceedings Paper

Heavy Metal Pollution in Lentic Ecosystem of Sub-Tropical Industrial Region and its Phytoremediation

期刊

INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF PHYTOREMEDIATION
卷 12, 期 3, 页码 226-242

出版社

TAYLOR & FRANCIS INC
DOI: 10.1080/15226510903563843

关键词

heavy metals; water pollution; phytoremediation; eichhornia; coal mines

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Metals and several physicochemical parameters, from four sampling sites in a tropical lake receiving the discharges from a thermal power plant, a coal mine and a chlor-alkali industry, were studied from 2004-2005. Pertaining to metal pollution, the site most polluted with heavy metals was Belwadah, i.e., waters and sediments had the highest concentration of all the metals examined. The reference site was characterized by the presence of low concentrations of metals in waters and in sediments. Further, several wetland plants were harvested from different sites, and simultaneously, these were assessed for their metal concentration efficiency. Following the water quality monitoring and metal concentration efficiency, two-month field phytoremediation experiments were conducted using large enclosures at the discharge point of different polluted sites of the lake. Eichhornia crassipes, Lemna minor, and Azolla pinnata were frontier metal accumulators hence selected for previously mentioned field phytoremediation experiments. During field phytoremediation experiments using aquatic macrophytes, marked percentage reduction in metals concentrations were recorded. The percentage decrease for different metals was in the range of 25-67.90% at Belwadah (with Eichhornia crassipes and Lemna minor), 25-77.14% at Dongia nala (with Eichhornia crassipes, Lemna minor, and Azolla pinnata) and 25-71.42% at Ash pond site of G.B. Pant Sagar (with Lemna minor and Azolla pinnata). Preliminary studies of polluted sites are therefore useful for improved microcosm design and for the systematic extrapolation of information from experimental ecosystems to natural ecosystems.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.5
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据