Advertisement

Effects of an aluminum-based chemical remediator on the cyanobacteria population: a study in the northeast of Brazil

  • José Osmar Andrade Guimarães NetoEmail author
  • Lafayette Dantas Luz
  • Terencio Rebello Aguiar Junior
Article
  • 56 Downloads

Abstract

Water sources destined to human supply are increasingly threatened worldwide due to various sources of pollution, either point or diffuse. In this sense, the objective of this work was to evaluate the efficiency of an aluminum-based chemical remediator in the Joanes River. An statistical analysis of physical, chemical, biological, and hydraulic monitoring data was performed relying on a 2013–2018 recording period, provided by the local sanitation service provider and the environmental agency. The results showed that even with the use of aluminum-based chemical remediators, the key parameters for controlling flowering events remained high with mean values of 0.18 mg P L−1, 176.155 cells mL−1 of cyanobacteria and peaks of 1.56 μg L−1 and 4.02 μg L−1 for microcystin and saxitoxin, respectively. At the end of this study, it was verified that the aluminum-based chemical remediator showed low effectiveness in the reduction of phosphorus and cyanobacteria, opposing to expectations of the sanitation provider.

Keywords

Water quality Human supply reservoir Cyanotoxins Microcystins Saxitoxins 

Notes

References

  1. Aguiar Jr., T. R., Bortolozo, F. R., & Hansel, F. A. (2015a). Riparian buffer zones as pesticide filters of no-till crops. Environmental Science and Pollution Research, 22, 10618–10626.  https://doi.org/10.1007/s11356-015-4281-5.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Aguiar Jr., T. R., Rasera, K., Parron, L. M., Brito, A. G., & Ferreira, M. T. (2015b). Nutrient removal effectiveness by riparian buffer zones in rural temperate watersheds: the impact of no-till crops practices. Agricultural Water Management, 149, 74–80.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.agwat.2014.10.031.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Aguiar Jr, T. R., Guimarães Neto, J. O. A, Şen H., & Pereira, H. (2018). Study of two cork species as natural biosorbents for five selected pesticides in water. Heliyon, 5, 1.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.heliyon.2019.e01189 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Andrade, L. C., Tiecher, T., de Oliveira, J. S., et al. (2018). Application of the index WQI-CCME with data aggregation per monitoring campaign and per section of the river: case study—Joanes River, Brazil. Environmental Monitoring and Assessment, 190, 3.  https://doi.org/10.1007/s10661-018-6542-5.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. APHA (American Public Health Association). (2012). Standard Methods for the Examination of Water and Wastewater, 22, 01–1546.Google Scholar
  6. Azevedo, S. M., Carmichael, W. W., Jochimsen, E. M., Rinehart, K. L., Lau, S., Shaw, G. R., & Eaglesham, G. K. (2002). Human intoxication by microcystins during renal dialysis treatment in Caruaru/Brazil. Toxicology, 181, 441–446.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Bahia (Empresa Baiana de Águas e Saneamento) (2015). Proposal for forest rehabilitation of Joanes and Jacuípe river APPs. Salvador-Ba Metropolitan Region, Notice No. 01.2015 - National Environment Foundation. Salvador (in Brazilian Portuguese).Google Scholar
  8. Bahia (Empresa Baiana de Águas e Saneamento). (2014). Basic project: application of Joanes I dam chemical remediator in emergency character. Salvador, 01–50 (in Brazilian Portuguese).Google Scholar
  9. Bahia (Superintendência de Estudos Econômicos e Sociais da Bahia). (1998). Analysis of climatic attributes of the State of Bahia. Salvador: Studies and Research Series, 1, 1–85 (in Brazilian Portuguese).Google Scholar
  10. Bortoli, S., & Pinto, E. (2015). Cyanotoxins: general characteristics, history, legislation and methods of analysis. In Pompêo et al. (Eds.), Ecology of reservoirs and interfaces (pp. 321–339). São Paulo: Institute of Biosciences, University of São Paulo (in Brazilian Portuguese).Google Scholar
  11. Callery, O., Healy., M.G., & Rognard, F. (2016). Evaluation the long-term performance of low-cost adsorbents using small-scale adsorption column experiments. Water Research, 101, 429–440.Google Scholar
  12. Carmichael, W. W. (1992). Cyanobacterial secondary matabolites - the cyanotoxins. Journal of Aplied Bacteriology, 72, 445–459.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Carmichael, W.W. (2000). Assessment of blue-green algal toxins in raw and finished drinking water. AWWA Research Foundation, 01–179.Google Scholar
  14. CETESB (Environmental Society of São Paulo). (2013). Cyanobacteria Handbook Planktonics: Legislation, Guidelines for Monitoring and Aspects Environmental, 1, 01-47 (in Brazilian Portuguese).Google Scholar
  15. Chorus, I., & Bartram, J. (1999). Toxic cyanobacteria in water: a guide to their public health consequences, monitoring and management (pp. 01–400). London: E&FN Spon.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Chow, C. W. K., Drikas, M., House, J., Burch, M. D., & Velzeboer, R. M. A. (1999). The impact of conventional water treatment processes on cells of the cyanobacterium Microcystis aeruginosa. Water Research, 33, 3253–3262.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Coelho, H. D., Topazio, E. F., Oliveira, G. X. F., & Santos, J. J. (2015). Joanes I dam water monitoring prior to application of HCM ID 80. RESAG 2nd International Congress Review. Aracaju/SE, 1, 01–23 (in Brazilian Portuguese).Google Scholar
  18. CONAMA (Conselho Nacional de Meio Ambiente). (2005). Resolution N°. 357, of March 17, 2005. Official Gazette N°. Brasília, 053, 58–63 (in Brazilian Portuguese).Google Scholar
  19. Crossman, J. (2016). Bridging gaps across macronutrient cycles. Science of the Total Environment, 572, 1447–1448.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. CUE (Conselho da União Europeia) (1998). Directiva 98/83/CE Concerning the quality of water intended for human consumption. Official Journal of the European Communities, 01–23.Google Scholar
  21. Dupas, R., Musolff, A., Jawitz, J. W., Rao, P. S. C., Jäger, C. G., Fleckenstein, J. H., et al. (2017). Carbon and nutrient export regimes from headwatr catchments to downstream reaches. Biogeosciences Discussions, 2017, 1–30.Google Scholar
  22. EPA (United States Environmental Protection Agency). (2012). Edition of the Drinking Water Standards and Health Advisories (pp. 01–643). DC: Washington.Google Scholar
  23. Googerdchian, F., Moheb, A., & Emadi, R. (2018). Optimization of Pb (II) ions adsorption on nanohydroxyapatite adsorbents by applying Taguchi method. Journal of Hazardous Materials 349, 186–194.Google Scholar
  24. Hart, J., Fawel, J. K., & Croll, B. (1998). Algal toxins in surface waters: origins and removal during drinking water treatment processes. Water Supply, 16, 611–623.Google Scholar
  25. He, X., Liu, Y. L., Conklin, A., Westrick, J., Weavers, L. K., Dionysiou, D. D., Lenhart, J. J., Mouser, P. J., Szlag, D., & Walker, H. W. (2016). Toxic cyanobacteria and drinking water: Impacts, detention, and treatment. Harmful Algae, 54, 174–193.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. James, H., & Fawell, J. (1991). Detection and removal of cyanobacterial toxins from freshwaters. Research report (Water Research Centre (Great Britain), Foundation for Water Research, 01–31.Google Scholar
  27. Lürling, M., Waajena, G., & Oosterhouta, F. V. (2014). Humic substances interfere with phosphate removal by lanthanum modified clay in controlling eutrophication. Water Research, 54, 78–88.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Magalhães, A. J., Luz, L. D., & Aguiar Jr., T. R. (2019). Environmental factors driving the dominance of the harmful bloom-forming cyanobacteria Microcystis and Aphanocapsa in a tropical water supply reservoir. Water Environment Research, 1–13.Google Scholar
  29. Marques, A.E.O. (2009). Evaluation of the influence of iron and aluminum on cyanobacterial growth and toxin production in mixed culture. Faculty of Science and Technology/New University of Lisbon. Lisboa/PT, 01-76 (in Portuguese from Portugal).Google Scholar
  30. Menezes, L. A. (2006). Geoenvironmental Characterization of the Joanes River Basin, Bahia. Universidade Federal de Sergipe, São Cristovão/SE, 01–171 (in Brazilian Portuguese).Google Scholar
  31. MS (Ministério da Saúde do Brasil). (2015). Cyanobacteria/cyanotoxins: collection, preservation and analysis procedures. Brasília, 1–106 (in Brazilian Portuguese).Google Scholar
  32. MS (Ministério da Saúde do Brasil) (2018). Consolidation Ordinance N°. 5 of September 28, 2017, Annex XX - Water Potability Standard. Official Gazette N° 053, Brasília, 58-63 (in Brazilian Portuguese).Google Scholar
  33. Oguz, E. (2004). Removal of phosphate from aqueous solution with blast furnace slag. Journal of Hazardous Materials, 114, 131–137.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. Paerl, H. W., & Otten, T. G. (2013). Harmful cyanobacterial blooms: causes, consequences, and controls. Microbial Ecology, 65, 995–1010.  https://doi.org/10.1007/s00248-012-0159-y.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. Rasões, M. A. A. (2008). Study on Chemical Phosphorus Precipitation as a Remediation of the Furnas Lagoon Trophic State, S. Miguel - Azores. Masters dissertation. 01-50 (in Portuguese from Portugal).Google Scholar
  36. Silva, G. C. D. V. (2010). Critical Assessment of Water Quality of the Joanes River Basin (pp. 01–170). Salvador/BA: Universidade Federal da Bahia (in Brazilian Portuguese).Google Scholar
  37. Silva, S.C.F. (2012). Cytobacterial ecotoxicology in the main channel of the Lower Tapajós River, Santarém, Pará, Amazon, Brazil, 93 (in Brazilian Portuguese).Google Scholar
  38. Sousa, G.B. (2016). Conselho gestor da APA Joanes/Ipitanga e suas contribuições para o fortalecimento da gestão ambiental de municípios da região metropolitana de salvador. Anais do IV Congresso Baiano de Engenharia Sanitária e Ambiental. Cruz das Almas/BA, 01-06 (in Brazilian Portuguese).Google Scholar
  39. Teixeira, M. G. L. C., Costa, M. C. N., Carvalho, V. L. P., Pereira, M. S. P., & Hage, E. (1993). Gastroenteriris epidemic in the area of the Itaparica Dam, Bahia, Brazil. Bulletin of the Pan American Health Organization, 27, 01–09.Google Scholar
  40. Westrick, J. A., Szlag, D. C., Southwell, B. J., & Sinclair, J. (2010). A review of cyanobacteria and cyanotoxins removal/inactivation in drinking water treatment. Analytical and Bioanalytical Chemistry, 397, 1705–1714.  https://doi.org/10.1007/s00216-010-3709-5.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. WHO (World Health Organization). (2017). Guidelines for drinking-water quality: fourth edition incorporating the first addendum (pp. 01–631). Geneva: World Health Organization.Google Scholar
  42. Xiaoguang, Y., Jingling, L., & Zhang, L. (2015). Ecological modeling of riparian vegetation under disturbances: a review. Ecological Modelling, 318, 293–300.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecolmodel.2015.07.002.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  43. Zhang, Y., Kou, X., Lu, H. (2014). The feasibility of adopting zeolite in phosphorus removal from aqueous solutions. Desalination and Water Treatment 52, 4298–4304.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Nature Switzerland AG 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Department of Environmental Engineering, Polytechnic SchoolFederal University of Bahia (UFBA)SalvadorBrazil

Personalised recommendations