Advertisement

Environmental Science and Pollution Research

, Volume 22, Issue 12, pp 8866–8875 | Cite as

Bioavailability and ecotoxicity of arsenic species in solution culture and soil system: implications to remediation

  • Nanthi BolanEmail author
  • Santiago Mahimairaja
  • Anitha Kunhikrishnan
  • Balaji Seshadri
  • Ramya Thangarajan
Bioavailability - the underlying basis for Risk Based Land Management

Abstract

In this work, bioavailability and ecotoxicity of arsenite (As(III)) and arsenate (As(V)) species were compared between solution culture and soil system. Firstly, the adsorption of As(III) and As(V) was compared using a number of non-allophanic and allophanic soils. Secondly, the bioavailability and ecotoxicity were examined using germination, phytoavailability, earthworm, and soil microbial activity tests. Both As-spiked soils and As-contaminated sheep dip soils were used to test bioavailability and ecotoxicity. The sheep dip soil which contained predominantly As(V) species was subject to flooding to reduce As(V) to As(III) and then used along with the control treatment soil to compare the bioavailability between As species. Adsorption of As(V) was much higher than that of As(III), and the difference in adsorption between these two species was more pronounced in the allophanic than non-allophanic soils. In the solution culture, there was no significant difference in bioavailability and ecotoxicity, as measured by germination and phytoavailability tests, between these two As species. Whereas in the As-spiked soils, the bioavailability and ecotoxicity were higher for As(III) than As(V), and the difference was more pronounced in the allophanic than non-allophanic soils. Bioavailability of As increased with the flooding of the sheep dip soils which may be attributed to the reduction of As(V) to As(III) species. The results in this study have demonstrated that while in solution, the bioavailability and ecotoxicity do not vary between As(III) and As(V), in soils, the latter species is less bioavailable than the former species because As(V) is more strongly retained than As(III). Since the bioavailability and ecotoxicity of As depend on the nature of As species present in the environment, risk-based remediation approach should aim at controlling the dynamics of As transformation.

Keywords

Arsenic species Germination Plant uptake Adsorption Ecotoxicity 

Notes

Acknowledgments

We would like to thank Massey University Research Foundation for the award of the Postdoctoral Fellowship. We would also like to thank Dr. Chris Anderson for his help in analyzing the soil and plant samples for As using the graphite furnace AAS. The Postdoctoral fellowship program (PJ008650042012) at National Academy of Agricultural Science, Rural Development Administration, Republic of Korea, supported Dr. Kunhikrishnan’s contribution.

References

  1. Abedin MJ, Meharg AA (2002) Relative toxicity of arsenite and arsenate on germination and early seedling growth of rice (Oryza sativa L.). Plant Soil 243:57–66CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Abedin MJ, Feldman J, Meharg AA (2002) Uptake kinetics of arsenic species in rice plants. Plant Physiol 128:1120–1128CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Adriano DC (2001) Trace elements in terrestrial environments: biogeochemistry, bioavailability and risks of metals, 2nd edn. Springer, New YorkCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Adriano DC, Wenzel WW, Vangronsveld J, Bolan NS (2004) Role of assisted natural remediation in environmental cleanup. Geoderma 122:121–142CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Al-Abed SR, Jegadeesan G, Purandare J, Allen D (2007) Arsenic release from iron rich mineral processing waste: influence of pH and redox potential. Chemosphere 66:775–782CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Álvarez-Benedí J, Bolado S, Cancillo I, Calvo C, García-Sinovas D (2005) Adsorption–desorption of arsenate in three Spanish soils. Vadose Zone J 4:282–290CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Anderson C, Deram A, Petit D, Brooks RR, Stewart RB, Simcock R (2001) Induced hyperaccumulation: metal movement and problems. In: Iskandar IK, Kirkham MB (eds) Trace elements in soils: bioavailability, flux and transfer. Lewis Publishers, Washington DC, pp 63–76Google Scholar
  8. Asta MP, Nordstrom DK, McCleskey RB (2012) Simultaneous oxidation of arsenic and antimony at low and circumneutral pH, with and without microbial catalysis. Appl Geochem 27:281–291CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Bhattacharya S, Gupta K, Debnath S, Ghosh UC, Chattopadhyay D, Mukhopadhyay A (2012) Arsenic bioaccumulation in rice and edible plants and subsequent transmission through food chain in Bengal basin: a review of the perspectives for environmental health. Toxicol Environ Chem 94:429–441CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Bloem J, Hopkins DW, Benedetti A (2006) Microbiological methods for assessing soil quality. CABI Publishing, OxfordshireGoogle Scholar
  11. Bolan NS, Mahimairaja S, Kunhikrishnan A, Naidu R (2012a) Sorption-bioavailability nexus of arsenic and cadmium in variable charge soils. J Hazard Mater. doi: 10.1016/j.jhazmat.2012.09.074 Google Scholar
  12. Bolan NS, Kunhikrishnan A, Gibbs J (2012b) Rhizoreduction of arsenate and chromate in Australian native grass, shrub and tree vegetation. Plant Soil. doi: 10.1007/s11104-012-1506-y Google Scholar
  13. Brammer H (2009) Mitigation of arsenic contamination in irrigated paddy soils in South and South-East Asia. Environ Int 35:856–863CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Caussy D (2003) Case studies of the impact of understanding bioavailability: arsenic. Ecotoxicol Environ Saf 56:164–173CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Chatterjee A, Das D, Mandal BK, Chowdhury TR, Samanta G, Chakraborti D (1995) Arsenic in ground-water in 6 districts of West-Bengal, India—the biggest arsenic calamity in the world. 1. Arsenic species in drinking-water and urine of the affected people. Analyst 120:643–650CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Cheng H, Hu Y, Luo J, Zhao J (2009) Geochemical processes controlling fate and transport of arsenic in acid mine drainage (AMD) and natural systems. J Hazard Mater 165:13–26CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Duan GL, Zhou Y, Tong YP, Mukhopadhyay R, Rosen BP, Zhu YG (2007) A CDC25 homologue from rice functions as an arsenate reductase. New Phytol 174:311–321CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Eisler R (2004) Arsenic hazards to humans, plants, and animals from gold mining. Rev Environ Contam Toxicol 180:133–165Google Scholar
  19. ETC/S-European Topic Centre on Soil (1998) Topic report: contaminated sites. European Environment Agency, Copenhagen, DenmarkGoogle Scholar
  20. Fitz WJ, Wenzel WW (2002) Arsenic transformations in the soil–rhizosphere–plant system: fundamentals and potential application to phytoremediation. J Biotechnol 99:259–278CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Flanagan SV, Johnston RB, Zheng Y (2012) Arsenic in tube well water in Bangladesh: health and economic impacts and implications for arsenic mitigation. Publication: Bulletin of the World Health Organization; Type: Policy & practice Article ID: BLT.11.101253Google Scholar
  22. Flynn HC, McMahon V, Diaz GC, Demergasso CS, Corbisier O, Meharg AA, Paton GI (2002) Assessment of bioavailable arsenic and copper in soils and sediments from the Antofagasta region of northern Chile. Sci Total Environ 286:51–59CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Geng CN, Zhu YG, Tong YP, Smith SE, Smith FA (2006) Arsenate (As) uptake by and distribution in two cultivars of winter wheat (Triticum aestivum L.). Chemosphere 62:608–615CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Goldberg S (2002) Competitive adsorption of arsenate and arsenite on oxides and clay minerals. Soil Sci Soc Am J 66:413–421CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Kuppardt A, Vetterlein D, Harms H, Chatzinotas A (2010) Visualisation of gradients in arsenic concentration around individual roots of Zea mays L. using agar-immobilized bioreporter bacteria. Plant Soil 329:295–306CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Lafferty BJ, Loeppert RH (2005) Methyl arsenic adsorption and desorption behavior on iron oxides. Environ Sci Technol 39:2120–2127CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Liu X, Zhang S, Shan X, Zhu YG (2005) Toxicity of arsenate and arsenite on germination, seedling growth and amylolytic activity of wheat. Chemosphere 61:293–301CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Mahimairaja S, Bolan NS, Adriano DC, Robinson B (2005) Arsenic contamination and its risk management in complex environmental settings. Adv Agron 86:1–82Google Scholar
  29. Manning BA, Goldberg S (1997) Arsenic(III) and arsenic(V) absorption on three California soils. Soil Sci 162:886–895CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Martin M, Violante A, Barberis E (2007) Fate of arsenite and arsenate in flooded and not flooded soils of southwest Bangladesh irrigated with arsenic contaminated water. J Environ Sci Health A 42:1775–1783CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. McCarty KM, Hanh HT, Kim KW (2011) Arsenic geochemistry and human health in South East Asia. Rev Environ Health 26:71–78CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Meharg AA, Jardine L (2003) Arsenite transport into paddy rice (Oryza sativa) roots. New Phytol 157:39–44CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. Mench M, Vangronsveld J, Beckx C, Ruttens A (2006) Progress in assisted natural remediation of an arsenic contaminated agricultural soil. Environ Pollut 144:51–61CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. Nath B, Maity JP, Jean JS, Birch G, Kar S, Yang HJ, Lee MK, Hazra R, Chatterjee D (2011) Geochemical characterization of arsenic-affected alluvial aquifers of the Bengal Delta (West Bengal and Bangladesh) and China plains (SW Taiwan): implications for human health. Appl Geochem 26:705–713CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. Ohe K, Tagai Y, Nakamura S, Oshima T, Baba Y (2005) Adsorption behavior of arsenic(III) and arsenic(V) using magnetite. J Chem Eng Jpn 38:671–676CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. Osborne TH, Jamieson HE, Hudson-Edwards KA, Nordstrom DK, Walker SR, Ward SA, Santini JM (2010) Microbial oxidation of arsenite in a subarctic environment: diversity of arsenite oxidase genes and identification of a psychrotolerant arsenite oxidiser. BMC Microbiol 10:205CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. Pickering IJ, Prince RC, George MJ, Smith RD, George GN, Salt DE (2000) Reduction and coordination of arsenic in Indian mustard. Plant Physiol 122:1171–1177CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. Robinson B, Duwig C, Bolan NS, Kannathasan M, Saravanan A (2003) Uptake of arsenic by New Zealand watercress (Lepidium sativum). Sci Total Environ 301:67–73CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. Sahu SJ, Nath B, Roy S, Mandal B, Chatterjee D (2011) A laboratory batch study on arsenic sorption and desorption on guava orchard soils of Baruipur, West Bengal, India. J Geochem Explor 108:157–162CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. Saunders WMH (1965) Phosphate retention in New Zealand soils and its relationship to free sesquioxides, organic matter and other soil properties. N Z J Agric Res 8:30–57CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. Smith E, Naidu R, Alston AM (1998) Arsenic in the soil environment: a review. Adv Agron 64:149–195Google Scholar
  42. Smith E, Naidu R, Alston AM (1999) Sorption of arsenate and arsenite by four Australian soils. J Environ Qual 28:1719–1726CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  43. Smith PG, Koch I, Gordon RA, Mandoli DF, Chapman BD, Reimer KJ (2005) X-ray absorption near-edge structure analysis of arsenic species for application to biological environmental samples. Environ Sci Technol 39:248–254CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  44. Smith E, Juhasz AL, Weber J (2009) Arsenic uptake and speciation in vegetables grown under greenhouse conditions. Environ Geochem Health 31:125–132CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  45. Song J, Zhao FJ, McGrath SP, Luo YM (2006) Influence of soil properties and aging on arsenic phytotoxicity. Environ Toxicol Chem 25:1663–1670CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  46. SPSS Inc. (2009) PASW Statistics for Windows, Version 18.0. Chicago, IllinoisGoogle Scholar
  47. Stroud JL, Norton GJ, Islam MR, Dasgupta T, White RP, Price AH, Meharg AA, McGrath SP, Zhao FJ (2011) The dynamics of arsenic in four paddy fields in the Bengal delta. Environ Pollut 159:947–953CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  48. Takahashi Y, Minamikawa R, Hattori KH, Kurishima K, Kihou N, Yuita K (2004) Arsenic behaviour in paddy fields during the cycle of flooded and non-flooded periods. Environ Sci Technol 38:1038–1044CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  49. Turpeinen R, Pantsar-Kallio M, Häggblom M, Kairaselo T (1999) Influence of microbes on the mobilization, toxicity and biomethylation of arsenic in soil. Sci Total Environ 236:173–180CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  50. USEPA United States Environmental Protection Agency (1997) Recent development for in-situ treatment of metal contaminated soils. Office of Solid Waste and Emergency Response, EPA-542-R-97-004, p8Google Scholar
  51. USEPA United States Environmental Protection Agency (2006) Arsenic in your drinking water. http://www.epa.gov/ogwdw/arsenic/pdfs/fs_arsenic_justthefactsfor onsumers.pdf. Accessed 16 Sept 2012
  52. Wang JR, Zhao FJ, Meharg AA, Raab A, Feldmann J, McGrath SP (2002) Mechanisms of arsenic hyperaccumulation in Pteris vittata: uptake kinetics, interactions with phosphate, and arsenic speciation. Plant Physiol 130:1552–1561CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  53. WHO (1981) Environmental health criteria. 18: Arsenic. World Health Organisation, GenevaGoogle Scholar
  54. Wolterbeek HT, van der Meer AJGM (2002) Transport rate of arsenic, cadmium, copper and zinc in Potamogeton pectinatus L.: radiotracer experiments with 76As, 109,115Cd, 64Cu and 65,69mZn. Sci Total Environ 287:13–30CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  55. Xu XY, McGrath SP, Zhao FJ (2007) Rapid reduction of arsenate in the medium mediated by plant roots. New Phytol 176:590–599CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  56. Xu XY, McGrath SP, Meharg AA, Zhao FJ (2008) Growing rice aerobically markedly decreases arsenic accumulation. Environ Sci Technol 42:5574–5579CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2013

Authors and Affiliations

  • Nanthi Bolan
    • 1
    • 2
    Email author
  • Santiago Mahimairaja
    • 3
  • Anitha Kunhikrishnan
    • 4
  • Balaji Seshadri
    • 1
    • 2
  • Ramya Thangarajan
    • 1
    • 2
  1. 1.Centre for Environmental Risk Assessment and Remediation, Building–XUniversity of South AustraliaMawson LakesAustralia
  2. 2.Cooperative Research Centre for Contamination Assessment and Remediation of the EnvironmentSalisburyAustralia
  3. 3.Department of Environmental ScienceTamil Nadu Agricultural UniversityCoimbatoreIndia
  4. 4.Chemical Safety Division, Department of Agro-Food SafetyNational Academy of Agricultural ScienceSuwon-siRepublic of Korea

Personalised recommendations