4.3 Article

Biodegradation of malathion, α- and β-endosulfan by bacterial strains isolated from agricultural soil in Veracruz, Mexico

出版社

TAYLOR & FRANCIS INC
DOI: 10.1080/03601234.2016.1211906

关键词

Biodegradation; endosulfan; Enterobacter amnigenus XGL214; Enterobacter cloacae PMM16; malathion

资金

  1. National Council for Science and Technology (ConsejoNacional de Ciencia y Tecnologia, CONACYT) [343724]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

The objective of this study was to evaluate the capacity of two bacterial strains isolated, cultivated, and purified from agricultural soils of Veracruz, Mexico, for biodegradation and mineralisation of malathion (diethyl 2-(dimethoxyphosphorothioyl) succinate) and alpha-and beta-endosulfan (6,7,8,9,10,10-hexachloro1,5,5a, 6,9,9a-hexahydro-6-9-methano-2,4,3-benzodioxathiepine-3-oxide). The isolated bacterial strains were identified using biochemical and morphological characterization and the analysis of their 16S rDNA gene, as Enterobacter cloacae strain PMM16 (E1) and E. amnigenus strain XGL214 (M1). The E1 strain was able to degrade endosulfan, whereas the M1 strain was capable of degrading both pesticides. The E1 strain degraded 71.32% of alpha-endosulfan and 100% of beta-endosulfan within 24 days. The absence of metabolites, such as endosulfan sulfate, endosulfan lactone, or endosulfan diol, would suggest degradation of endosulfan isomers through non-oxidative pathways. Malathion was completely eliminated by the M1 strain. The major metabolite was butanedioic acid. There was a time-dependent increase in bacterial biomass, typical of bacterial growth, correlated with the decrease in pesticide concentration. The CO2 production also increased significantly with the addition of pesticides to the bacterial growth media, demonstrating that, under aerobic conditions, the bacteria utilized endosulfan and malathion as a carbon source. Here, two bacterial strains are shown to metabolize two toxic pesticides into non-toxic intermediates.

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

4.3
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