4.5 Article Proceedings Paper

Multiple metal tolerance and biosorption of cadmium by Candida tropicalis isolated from industrial effluents: glutathione as detoxifying agent

期刊

ENVIRONMENTAL MONITORING AND ASSESSMENT
卷 174, 期 1-4, 页码 585-595

出版社

SPRINGER
DOI: 10.1007/s10661-010-1480-x

关键词

Cadmium; Heavy metal; Glutathione; Metabolic inhibitors; Candida tropicalis; Bioremediation

向作者/读者索取更多资源

The ability of cadmium uptake by metal-resistant yeast, Candida tropicalis, from the liquid medium and wastewater was evaluated. The minimum inhibitory concentration of Cd2 + against C. tropicalis was 2,500 mg L (-aEuro parts per thousand 1). The yeast also showed tolerance toward Zn2 + (1,400 mg L (-aEuro parts per thousand 1)), Ni2 + (1,000 mg L (-aEuro parts per thousand 1)), Hg2 + (1,400 mg L (-aEuro parts per thousand 1)), Cu2 + (1,000 mg L (-aEuro parts per thousand 1)), Cr6 + (1,200 mg L (-aEuro parts per thousand 1)), and Pb2 + (1,000 mg L (-aEuro parts per thousand 1)). The yeast isolate showed typical growth curves, but lag and log phases extended in the presence of cadmium. The yeast isolate showed optimum growth at 30A degrees C and pH 8. The metal processing ability of the isolate was determined in a medium containing 100 mg L (-aEuro parts per thousand 1) of Cd2 + . C. tropicalis could decline Cd2 + 70%, 85%, and 92% from the medium after 48, 96, and 144 h, respectively. C. tropicalis was also able to remove Cd2 + 40% and 78% from the wastewater after 6 and 12 days, respectively. Cd produced an increase in glutathione (GSH) and nonprotein thiol levels by 135% and 134% at 100-mg L (-aEuro parts per thousand 1) concentration, respectively. An increase in the synthesis of GSH is involved in metal tolerance, and the presence of increasing GSH concentrations may be a marker for high metal stress in C. tropicalis. C. tropicalis, which is resistant to heavy metal ions and is adaptable to the local environmental conditions, may be employed for metal detoxification operations.

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