4.7 Article

Crude oil bioremediation in sub-Antarctic intertidal sediments: chemistry and toxicity of oiled residues

期刊

MARINE ENVIRONMENTAL RESEARCH
卷 57, 期 4, 页码 311-327

出版社

ELSEVIER SCI LTD
DOI: 10.1016/j.marenvres.2003.07.001

关键词

crude oil; bioremediation; Antarctica; sediments; fertilizers; effectiveness; toxicity; hydrocarbon degrading bacteria; surfactants; dry fish compost

向作者/读者索取更多资源

The effectiveness of fertilizers for crude oil bioremediation in sub-Antarctic intertidal sediments was tested over a one-year period in a series of ten (10) experimental enclosures. Chemical, microbial and toxicological parameters demonstrated the effectiveness of various fertilizers in a pristine environment where hydrocarbon degrading bacteria (HDB) had not been stimulated by previous accidental spills or human activities. The low temperature of seawater (3-4 degreesC) had no obvious effects on the HDB community and the bioremediation process. Over 90% of n-alkanes were degraded in the first six months and most light aromatics (2-3 rings) disappeared during the first year of observation. The toxicity of oiled residues (Microtox(R) SP) was significantly reduced in the first 6 months of the process, but it increased again in the last months of the experiment. One of the fertilizers containing fishbone compost enriched with urea, inorganic phosphorus and a lipidic surfactant reduced significantly the toxicity of oil residues in the last 3 months of the experiment. Interstitial waters collected below the oil slicks during the remediation showed no toxicity, and even stimulated Vibrio fischeri. When comparing all fertilizers to the control plots, a good correlation (r(2) = 0.82) was found between the growth rate of HDB and the degradation rate of n-alkanes in the first 90 days of the experiment only indicating that fertilizers were efficient for at least 3 months but their beneficial effects were lost after 6 months. (C) 2003 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

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

4.7
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