Monitoring Respiration Changes in a Light Naphtha-Contaminated Sandy Loam Soil under Different Bioremediation Treatments

Document Type : Research Paper

Authors

1 MSc Student, Department of Soil Science, Faculty of Agriculture, University of Tabriz

2 Associate Professor, Department of Soil Science, Faculty of Agriculture, University of Tabriz

3 Professor, Department of Soil Science, Faculty of Agriculture, University of Tabriz

10.22092/ijsr.2024.362389.707

Abstract

Petroleum hydrocarbons are one of the most common groups of organic pollutants in the environment. Bioremediation of soils contaminated with petroleum compounds is an effective process for cleaning petroleum pollutants in the environment. In the present research, to reduce  light naphtha (1%) pollutant in in a sandy loam soil, different bioremediation methods including biostimulation, bioaugmentation, and integrated treatment (including both bioaugmentation and biostimulation) were used. This experiment was done as a split-plot design with three factors (pollution, bioremediation, and time) with 3 repetitions in 3 kg pots. After running the experiment at time intervals of 0, 5, 10, 15, 20, 30, 45, 60, 90 and 120 days, samples were taken from the test pots and parameters including basal respiration (BR) and substrarte-induced respiration (SIR) were measured. The results showed that application of bioremediation treatments had reduced light naphta pollution. Also, petroleum pollution had affected the activity of soil microorganisms, such that the maximum amount of BR and SIR was obtained in the early days; but with the passing of time, BR had a sharper drop compared to SIR. Seemingly, the microbial community responded to added glucose as a simple and available carbon source, and SIR was less reduced, but, probably, basal respiration encountered lack of carbon sources and decreased more. The results showed that, among the bioremediation treatments, integrated treatment had a greater effect on the reduction of petroleum hydrocarbons than other bioremediation treatments at the probability level of (P<0.01). The use of integrated treatment, in addition to increasing the active microbial population involved in the decomposition of petroleum compounds and providing optimal conditions for their activity, stimulates the indigenous soil microbial population and is a suitable method for removing petroleum compounds.

Keywords

Main Subjects

References

  1. Anderson, T., and K.H. Domsch. 1985. Maintenance carbon requirements of actively-metabolizing microbial populations under in situ conditions. Soil Biology and Biochemistry 17:197-203.
  2. ARamsay, M., P.J. Swannell., W.A.Sh. Duke., and T.R. Hill. 2000. Effect of bioremediation on the microbial community in oiled mangrove sediments. Marine Pollution Bulletin vol. 7(41):413-419.
  3. , K., S. Goya., and K. Kapoor. 2006. Microbial biomass dynamics during the decomposition of leaf litter of Poplar and eucalyptus in a sandy loam. Appl. Soil Ecol. J. 35: 10-23.
  4. , N., N. Ali1., M. Eliyas., M. Khanafer., N.A. Sorkhoh., and S. Samir., Radwan. 2015. Most Hydrocarbonoclastic Bacteria in the Total Environment are Diazotrophic, which Highlights Their Value in the Bioremediation of Hydrocarbon Contaminants. Microbes Environ. Vol. 30, No. 1: 70-75.
  5. Ebrahimi, M., Sarikhani, M.R., Safari Sinegani, A.A., Ahmadi, A., and S., Keesstra. 2019. Estimating the soil respiration under different land uses using artificial neural network and linear regression models. Catena. 174: 371–382
  6. Gogoi, B.K., N.N Dutta., P. Goswami., and T.R. Krishna Mohan. 2003. A case study of bioremediation of petroleumhydrocarbon contaminated soil at a crude oil spill site. Advances in Environmental Research, 7: 767-782.
  7. Gomez, F., and M. Sartaj. 2014. Optimization of field scale biopiles for bioremediation of petroleum hydrocarbon contaminated soil at low temperature conditions by response surface methodology (RSM). Int. Biodeterior. Biodegrad. 89, 103–109.
  8. Haritash, A.K., and C.P. Kaushik. 2009. Biodegradation aspects of polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons (PAHs): a review. Journal of hazardous materials, 169(3):1-15.
  9. , S., A. Sinkkonen., and M. Romantschuk. 2011. Enhancing bioremediation diesel fuel contaminated soil in a boreal climate: comparison of biostimulation and bioaugmentation. Int. Biodeterior. Biodegrad. 65:359-368.
  10. , S.J., D.H. Choi., D.S. Sim., and Y.S. Oh. 2005. Evaluation of bioremediation effetiveness on crude oilcontaminated sand. Chemosphere, 59:845-852.
  11. , C.C., Y.C. Huang., Y.H. Wei., and J.S. Chang. 2009. Biosurfactant-enhanced removal of total petroleum hydrocarbons from contaminated soil, J. Hazard Mater. Vol. 167, No. 1, pp. 607-614.
  12. , M.P., and T.E. Cloete. 2005. The use of biological activities to monitor the removal of fuel contaminants perspectives to monitoring hydrocarbon contamination: a review. Int. Biodeterior. Biodegrad, 55: 1–8.
  13. , R. 2000. Potentiol of cold-adapted microorganisms for bioremediation of oil-polluted Alpine soils. International Biodeterioration & Biodegradation. 46:3-10.
  14. , G., C. Macci., E. Peruzzi., B. Ceccanti., and S. Doni. 2013. Organic matter–microorganism–plant in soil bioremediation: a synergic approach Rev Environ Sci Biotechnol, 12:399–419.
  15. Miao- dong., W., L. Wei., S. Yao., W. Da- hui. 2006. Effects of surfactant on biodesulfurization by Corynebacterium Zd-1 in the presence of organic phase. Zheijang University Science.7: 371- 75.
  16. , I., S. Mnif., R. Sahnoun., S. Maktouf., Y. Ayedi., S. Ellouze-Chaabouni., and D. Ghribi. 2015. Biodegradation of disel oil by a novel microbial consortium: comparison between co-inoculation with biosurfactant-producing strain and exogenously added biosurfactants, Sci. Pollut. Res. 22(19): 14852-14861.
  17. , B., A. Horel., M.J. Beazleya., and P.A. Sobecky. 2013. Intrinsic rates of petroleum hydrocarbon biodegradation in Gulf of Mexico intertidal sandy sediments and its enhancement by organic substrates. Journal of Hazardous Materials. 244–245: 537–544.
  18. , RH., A.S. Xiong., Y. Xeo., X.Y. Fu., F. Gao., W. Zhao., Y.S. Tian., and Q.H. Yao. 2008. Microbial biodegradation of polyaromatic hydrocarbons: a review. FEMS Microbiol. Rev, 32: 927–955.
  19. , K., M. Megharaj., K. Venkateswarlu., R. Naidu. 2015. Ecological implications of motor oil pollution: earthworm survival and soil health. Soil Biol.Biochem. 85: 72-81.
  20. Souza EC, Vessoni-Penna TC and de Souza Oliveira RP, 2014. Biosurfactant-enhanced hydrocarbon bioremediation:An overview,” Int. Biodeter Biodegr. 89(1):88-94.
  21. , J.L., and C.M. Reynolds. 1995. Bioremediation of a petroleum-contaminated cryic soil: effects of phosphorous, nitrogen, and temperature. Journal of Soil Contam, 4:299-310.
  22. , M.A., W. Dick., W.Li., X. Wang., Q.Yang., T. Wang., L. Xu., M. Zhang., and L. Chen. 2016. Bioaugmentation and biostimulation of hydrocarbon degradation and the microbial community in a petroleum-contaminated soil, China, Biodegradation, 107: 158-164.
  23. , M.L., L.M. Chen., Y.Q. Tian., D. Yi., andW.A. Dick. 2013. Degradation of polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons by microbial consortia enriched from three soils using two different culture media. Environ. Pollut, 178: 152-158.
  24. , D., C. Liu., L. Liu., Y. Zhang., Q. Liu., W. Wu. 2011. Selection of functional consortium for crude oil-contaminated soil remediation, China, Biodegradation. 65:1244-1248.

 

 

Iranian Journal of Soil Research
Volume 37, Issue 4
March 2024
Pages 377-393

Files

Share

How to cite

Statistics