4.7 Article

Recombinant luminescent bacterial sensors for the measurement of bioavailability of cadmium and lead in soils polluted by metal smelters

期刊

CHEMOSPHERE
卷 55, 期 2, 页码 147-156

出版社

PERGAMON-ELSEVIER SCIENCE LTD
DOI: 10.1016/j.chemosphere.2003.10.064

关键词

bacteria; bioavailability; polluted soils; bioluminescence; zinc; mobility

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Environmental hazard of heavy metals in soils depends to a large extent on their bioavailability. The approach used in this study enables the determination of bioavailable metals in solid-phase samples. Two recombinant bacterial sensors, one responding specifically to cadmium and the other to lead and cadmium by increase of luminescence (firefly luciferase was used as a reporter) were used to determine the bioavailability of these metals in soil-water suspensions (a contact assay) and respective particle-free extracts. Fifty agricultural soils sampled near zinc and lead smelters in the Northern France containing up to (mg/kg) 20.1 of Cd, 1050 of Pb and 1390 of Zn were analysed. As the soil matrix interferes with the assay, recombinant luminescent control bacteria lacking the metal recognizing protein and corresponding promoter (thus, being not metal-inducible) but otherwise comparable to the sensor bacteria (the same host bacterium and plasmid encoding luciferase) were used in parallel to take into account the possible quenching and/or stimulating effects of the sample on the luminescence of the sensor bacteria. Both, chemical and sensor analysis showed that only mug/l levels of metals were extracted from the soil into the water phase (0.1% of the total Cd, 0.07% of Pb and 0.5% of Zn). However, 115-fold more Cd and 40-fold more Pb proved bioavailable if the sensor bacteria were incubated in soil suspensions (i.e., in the contact assay). The bioavailability of metals in different soils varied (depending probably on soil type) ranging from 0.5% to 56% for cadmium and from 0.2% to 8.6% for lead. (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