Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Applications of Biological Surface Active Compounds in Remediation Technologies

  • Chapter
Biosurfactants

Part of the book series: Advances in Experimental Medicine and Biology ((AEMB,volume 672))

Abstract

Many microorganisms synthesize a wide range of surface active compounds (SACs), classified according to their molecular weights, properties and localizations. The low molecular weight SACs or biosurfactants lower the surface tension at the air/water interfaces and the interfacial tension at oil/water interfaces, whereas the high molecular weight SACs, also known as bioemulsifiers, are more effective in stabilizing oil-in-water emulsions. The ability to biosynthesize SACs is, often, coupled with the ability of these microorganisms to grow on immiscible carbon sources, such as hydrocarbons. Different mechanisms are involved in the SACs interactions between microbial cells and immiscible hydrocarbons including: (i) emulsification, (ii) micellarization, (iii) adhesion-deadhesion of microorganisms to and from hydrocarbons and (iv) desorption of contaminants. These naturally occurring phenomena can be exploited by adding bioemulsifiers and biosurfactants into environments where bioremediation/biodegradation rates of organic pollutants is to be enhanced. However, analysis of the current literature show some cases where the complex interactions among SACs, microbial cells, organic substrates and environmental media led to an inhibition of the biodegradation. The understanding of the different physiological roles of SACs in microbial communities is fundamental in order to develop more effective remediation technologies exploiting both synthetic surfactants and microbial SACs. The physio-chemical properties of some microbial SACs have been exploited in hydrocarbon-contaminated soils washing and in mobilisation of soil-bound metal in metal-contaminated soils. Our ability to analyse the microbial diversity in the natural environments will expand our knowledge on microbial SACs with respect to their exploitation for commercial applications and their roles in the physiology of the producing microorganisms.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Log in via an institution
Chapter
USD 29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD 169.00
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD 219.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info
Hardcover Book
USD 219.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Durable hardcover edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. Neu T. Significance of bacterial surface-active compounds in interaction of bacteria with interfaces. Microbiol Rev 1996; 60:151–166.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  2. Rosenberg E, Ron EZ. High-and low-molecular-mass microbial surfactants. Appl Microbial Biotechnol 1999; 52:154–162.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  3. Desai JD, Banat IM. Microbial production of surfactants and their commercial potential. Microbiol Mol Biol Rev 1997; 61:47–64.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  4. Cooper DG, Goldenberg BG. Surface-active agents from two bacillus species. App Environ Microbiol 1987; 53:224–229.

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  5. Rosenberg E, Zuckerberg A, Rubinovitz C et al. Emulsifier of arthrobacter RAG-1: isolation and emulsifying properties. Appl Environ Microbiol 1979; 37:402–408.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  6. Ito S, Inoue S. Sophorolipids from torulopsis bombicola: possible relation to alkane uptake. Appl Environ Microbiol 1982; 43:1278–1283.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  7. Kretschmer A, Bock H, Wagner F. Chemical and physical characterization of interfacial-active lipids from rhodococcus erythropolis grown on n-alkanes. Appl Environ Microbiol 1982; 44:864–870.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  8. Lang S, Philp JC. Surface-active lipids in rhodococci. Anton Leeuw Int J G 1998; 74:59–70.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  9. Ron EZ, Rosenberg E. Natural roles of biosurfactants. Environ Microbiol 2001; 3:229–236.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  10. Bodour AA, Drees KP, Maier RM. Distribution of biosurfactant-producing bacteria in undisturbed and contaminated arid southwestern soils. Appl Environ Microbiol 2003; 6:3280–3287.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  11. Bento FM, Camargo FA, Okeke BC et al. Diversity of biosurfactant producing microorganisms isolated from soils contaminated with diesel oil. Microbiol Res 2005; 160:249–255.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  12. Batista SB, Mounteer AH, Amorim FR et al. Isolation and characterization of biosurfactant/bioemulsifierproducing bacteria from petroleum contaminated sites. Bioresour Technol 2006; 97:868–875.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  13. Ruggeri C, Franzetti A, Bestetti G et al. Isolation and screening of surface active compound-producing bacteria on renewable substrates. Proceedings of second international conference on environmental, industrial and applied microbiology. Seville, Spain. In press.

    Google Scholar 

  14. Bodour AA, Guerrero-Barajas C, Jiorle BV et al. Structure and characterization of flavolipids, a novel class of biosurfactants produced by flavobacterium sp. Strain MTN11. Appl Environ Microbiol 2004; 70:114–120.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  15. Pepi M, Cesàro A, Liut G et al. An antarctic psychrotrophic bacterium halomonas sp. ANT-3b, growing on n-hexadecane, produces a new emulsyfying glycolipid. FEMS Microbiol Ecol 2005; 53:157–166.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  16. Bonilla M, Olivaro C, Corona M et al. Production and characterization of a new bioemulsifier from pseudomonas putida ML2. J Appl Microbiol 2005; 98:456–463.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  17. Makkar RS, Cameotra SS. An update on the use of unconventional substrates for biosurfactant production and their new application. Appl Microbiol Biotechnol 2002; 58:428–434.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  18. Van Hamme JD, Singh A, Ward OP. Physiological aspects. Part 1 in a series of papers devoted to surfactants in microbiology and biotechnology. Biotechnol Adv 2006; 24:604–620.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  19. Van Hamme JD, Singh A, Ward OP. Recent advances in petroleum microbiology. Microbiol Mol Biol R 2003; 6:503–549.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  20. Bouchez-Naitali M, Rakatozafy H, Marchal R et al. Diversity of bacterial strains degrading hexadecane in relation to the mode of substrate uptake. J Appl Microbiol 1999; 8:421–428.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  21. Urum K, Pekdemir T. Evaluation of biosurfactants for crude oil contaminated soil washing. Chemosphere 2004; 57:1139–1150.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  22. Sutcliff IC. Cell envelope composition and organisation in the genus rhodococcus. Anton Leeuw Int J G 1998; 74:49–58.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  23. Van Hamme JD, Ward OP. Physical and metabolic interactions of pseudomonas sp. Strain JA5-B45 and rhodococcus sp. Strain F9-D79 during growth on crude oil and effect of a chemical surfactant on them. Appl Environ Microbiol 2001; 67:4874–4879.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  24. Franzetti A, Bestetti G, Caredda P et al. Surface-active compounds and their role in bacterial access to hydrocarbons in Gordonia strains. FEMS Microbiol Ecol 2008; 63:238–248.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  25. Rosenberg E, Gottlieb A, Rosenberg M. Inhibition of bacterial adherence to hydrocarbons and epithelial cells by emulsan. Infect Immun 1983; 39:1024–1028.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  26. Mulligan CN, Yong RN, Gibbs BF. An evaluation of technologies for the heavy metal remediation of dredged sediments. J Hazard Mater 2001; 85:145–163.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  27. Christofi N, Ivshina IB. Microbial surfactants and their use in field studies of soil remediation. J Appl Microbiol 2002; 93:915–929.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  28. Mulligan CN. Environmental applications for biosurfactants. Environ Pollut 2005; 133:183–198.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  29. Banat IM, Makkar RS, Cameotra SS. Potential commercial applications of microbial surfactants. Appl Microbiol Biotechnol 2000; 53:495–508.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  30. Kourkoutas Y, Banat IM. Biosurfactant production and application. In: Pandey AP, ed. The Concise Encyclopedia of Bioresource Technology. Philadelphia: Haworth Reference Press, 2004:505–515.

    Google Scholar 

  31. Singh A, Van Hamme JD, Ward OP. Surfactants in microbiology and biotechnology: Part 2. Application aspects. Biotechnol Adv 2007; 25:99–121.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  32. Barkay T, Navon-Venezia S, Ron EZ et al. Enhancement of solubilization and biodegradation of polyaromatic hydrocarbons by the bioemulsifier Alasan. Appl Environ Microbiol 1999; 65:2697–2702.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  33. Beal R, Betts WB. Role of rhamnolipid biosurfactants in the uptake and mineralization of hexadecane in pseudomonas aeruginosa. J Appl Microbiol 2000; 89:158–68.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  34. Maier RM, Soberón-Chávez G. Pseudomonas aeruginosa rhamnolipids: biosynthesis and potential applications. Appl Microbiol Biotechnol 2000; 54:625–633.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  35. Noordman WH, Janssen DB. Rhamnolipid stimulates uptake of hydrophobic compounds by pseudomonas aeruginosa. Appl Environ Microbiol 2002; 68:4502–4508.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  36. Rahman KSM, Rahman TJ, Kourkoutoas Y et al. Enhanced bioremediation of n-alkane in petroleum sludge using bacterial consortium amended with rhamnolipid and micronutrients. Bioresour Technol 2003; 90:159–168.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  37. Mata-Sandoval JC, Karns J, Torrents A. Influence of rhamnolipids and triton X-100 on the biodegradation of three pesticides in aqueous phase and soil slurries. J Agric Food Chem 2001; 49:3296–3303.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  38. Awasthi N, Kumar A, Makkar R et al. Enhanced biodegradation of endosulfan, a chlorinated pesticide in presence of a biosurfactant. J Environ Sci Health 1999; B34:793–803.

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  39. Colores GM, Macur RE, Ward DM et al. Molecular analysis of surfactant-driven microbial population shifts in hydrocarbon-contaminated soil. Appl Environ Microbiol 2000; 66:2959–2964.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  40. Bramwell DP, Laha S. Effects of surfactant addition on the biomineralization and microbial toxicity of phenanthrene. Biodegradation 2000; 11:263–277.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  41. Billingsley KA, Backus SM, Ward OP. Effect of surfactant solubilization on biodegradation of polychlorinated biphenyl congeners by pseudomonas LB400. Appl Microbiol Biotechnol 1999; 52:255–260.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  42. Goudar C, Strevett K, Grego J. Competitive substrate biodegradation during surfactant-enhanced remediation. J Environ Eng 1999; 125:1142–1148.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  43. Franzetti A, Di Gennaro P, Bestetti G et al. Selection of surfactants for enhancing diesel-hydrocarbons contaminated media bioremediation. J Hazard Mater 2008; 252:1309–1319.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  44. Shreve GS, Inguva S, Gunnan S. Rhamnolipid biosurfactant enhancement of hexadecane biodegradation by pseudomonas aeruginosa. Mol Mar Biol Biotechnol 1995; 4:331–337.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  45. Zhang Y, Miller RM. Enhanced octadecane dispersion and biodegradation by a pseudomonas rhamnolipid surfactant (biosurfactant). Appl Environ Microbiol 1992; 58:3276–3282.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  46. Al-Tahhan RA, Sandrin TR, Bodour AA et al. Rhamnolipid-induced removal of lipopolysaccharide from pseudomonas aeruginosa: Effect on cell surface properties and interaction with hydrophobic substrates. Appl Environ Microbiol 2000; 66:3262–3268.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  47. Zhong H, Zeng GM, Yuan XZ et al. Adsorption of dirhamnolipid on four microorganisms and the effect on cell surface hydrophobicity. Appl Microbiol Biotechnol 2007; 77:447–455.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  48. Chen P, Pickard MA, Gray MR. Surfactant inhibition of bacterial growth on solid anthracene. Biodegradation 2000; 11:341–347.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  49. Weber WJ Jr, Huang W, Le Boeuf EJ. Geosorbent organic matter and its relationship to the binding and sequestration of organic contaminants. Colloids Surf A 1999; 151:167–179.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  50. Fortin J, Jury WA, Anderson MA. Enhanced removal of trapped non-aqueous phase liquids from saturated soil using surfactant solutions. J Contam Hydrol 1997; 24:247–267.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  51. Mulder H, Wassink GR, Breure AM et al. Effect of non-ionic surfactants on naphthalene dissolution and biodegradation. Biotechnol Bioeng 1998; 60:397–407.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  52. Bai GY, Brusseau ML, Miller RM. Biosurfactant-enhanced removal of residual hydrocarbon from soil. J Contam Hydrol 1997; 25:157–170.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  53. Edwards DA, Adeel Z, Luthy RG. Distribution of non-ionic surfactant and phenanthrene in a sediment/aqueous system. Environ Sci Technol 1994; 28:1550–1560.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  54. Noordman WH, Wachter JH, de Boer GJ et al. The enhancement by surfactants of hexadecane degradation by pseudomonas aeruginosa varies with substrate availability. J Biotechnol 2002; 94:195–212.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  55. Ron EZ, Rosenberg E. Biosurfactants and oil bioremediation. Curr Opin Biotechnol 2002; 13:249–252

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  56. Lee M, Kang H, Do W. Application of non-ionic surfactant-enhanced in situ flushing to a diesel contaminated site. Water Res 2005; 39:139–46.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  57. Urum K, Pekdemir T, Gopur M. Optimum conditions for washing of crude oil-contaminated soil with biosurfactant solutions. T I Chem Eng-Lond 2003; 81B:203–209.

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  58. Harvey S, Elashi I, Val des JJ et al. Enhanced removal of exxon valdez spilled oil from alaskan gravel by a microbial surfactant. Biotechnology 1990; 8:228–230.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  59. Van Dyke MI, Couture P, Brauer et al. Pseudomonas aeruginosa UG2 rhamnolipid biosurfactants: structural characterization and their use in removing hydrophobic compounds from soil. Can J Microbiol 1993; 39:1071–1078.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  60. Vipulanandan C, Ren X. Enhanced solubility and biodegradation of naphthalene with biosurfactant. J Environ Eng 2000; 126:629–634.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  61. Cameotra SS, Bollag JM. Biosurfactant-enhanced bioremediation of polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons. Crit Rev Environ Sci Technol 2003; 30:111–126.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  62. Chu W. Remediation of contaminated soils by surfactant-aided soil washing. Pract Period Hazard Toxic Radioact Waste Manage 2003; 7:19–24.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  63. Saichek RE, Reddy KR. Effects of system variables on surfactant enhanced electrokinetic removal of polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons from clayey soils. Environ Technol 2003; 24:503–515.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  64. Miller RM. Biosurfactant-facilitated remediation of metal-contaminated soils. Environ Health Perspect 1995; 103 Suppl 1:59–62.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  65. Tan H, Champion JT, Artiola JF et al. Complexation of cadmium by a rhamnolipid biosurfactant. Environ Sci Technol 1994; 28:2402–2406.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  66. Ochoa-Loza FJ, Artiola JF, Maier RM. Stability constants for the complexation of various metals with a rhamnolipid biosurfactant. J Environ Qual 2001; 30:479–485.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  67. Mulligan CN, Yong RN. The use of biosurfactants in the removal of metals from oil-contaminated soil. In: Yong RN, ed. Contaminated Ground: Fate of Pollutants and Remediation. London: Thomas Telford Publishers, 1997:461–466.

    Google Scholar 

  68. Maslin P, Maier RM. Rhamnolipid-enhanced mineralization of phenanthrene in organic-metal cocontaminated soils. Biorem J 2000; 4:295–308.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  69. Gutnick DL, Bach H. Engineering bacterial biopolymers for the biosorption of heavy metals; new products and novel formulations. Appl Microbiol Biotechnol 2000; 54:451–460.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  70. Bodour AA, Maier RM. Application of a modified drop-collapse technique for surfactant quantification and screening of biosurfactant-producing microorganisms. J Microbiol Methods 1998; 32:273–280.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  71. Chen CY, Baker SC, Darton RC. The application of a high throughput analysis method for the screening of potential biosurfactants from natural sources. J Microbiol Methods 2007; 70:503–510.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  72. Torsvik V, Øvreås L, Thingstad TF. Prokaryotic diversity-magnitude, dynamics and controlling factors. Science 2002; 296:1064–1066.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  73. Keller M, Zengler K. Tapping into microbial diversity. Nat Rev Microbiol 2004; 2:141–50.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Environmental Sciences, University of Milano-Bicocca, Piazza della Scienza 1, 20126, Milano, Italy

    Andrea Franzetti

  2. Department of Biomedical Science and Technology, University of Cagliari, Monserrato, Italy

    Elena Tamburini

  3. School of Biomedical Sciences, University of Ulster, Coleraine, Northern Ireland, UK

    Ibrahim M. Banat

Authors
  1. Andrea Franzetti
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Elena Tamburini
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Ibrahim M. Banat
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Andrea Franzetti .

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

  1. Bioprocess and Bioproduct Development Laboratory, Department of Biotechnology, Indian Institute of Technology Kharagpur, West Bengal, India

    Ramkrishna Sen MTech, PhD

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2010 Landes Bioscience and Springer Science+Business Media

About this chapter

Cite this chapter

Franzetti, A., Tamburini, E., Banat, I.M. (2010). Applications of Biological Surface Active Compounds in Remediation Technologies. In: Sen, R. (eds) Biosurfactants. Advances in Experimental Medicine and Biology, vol 672. Springer, New York, NY. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4419-5979-9_9

Download citation

Publish with us

Policies and ethics

Search

Navigation