Environmental Science and Pollution Research

, Volume 26, Issue 13, pp 13320–13333 | Cite as

Comparative assessment of using Miscanthus × giganteus for remediation of soils contaminated by heavy metals: a case of military and mining sites

  • Asil NurzhanovaEmail author
  • Valentina Pidlisnyuk
  • Kamila Abit
  • Chingiz Nurzhanov
  • Bulat Kenessov
  • Tatyana Stefanovska
  • Larry Erickson
Research Article


Contamination of soil by heavy metals is among the important environmental problems due to their toxicity and negative impact to human health and the environment. An effective method for cleaning the soil from heavy metals is phytoremediation using the second-generation bioenergy species Miscanthus × giganteus. The purpose of this research is to study the benefits of M. × giganteus cultivation at the soils taken from the mining and former military sites contaminated by As, Pb, Zn, Co, Ni, Cr, Cu, V, Mn, Sr, and U as well as at the soil artificially contaminated by Zn and Pb, to evaluate the physiological parameters of the plant, to establish peculiarities of the phytoremediation process, and to characterize the behavior of the plant in relation to the nature and concentrations of the metals in the soils. Results showed that M. × giganteus was resistant to heavy metals (tolerance index ≥ 1) and that the greatest portion of metals accumulated in the root system. The morphological parameters of the plant while grown on different soils are influenced by soil type and the content of contaminants. The stress effect while growing M. × giganteus on soil artificially contaminated by Zn and Pb was evaluated by measuring the content of pigments (chlorophylls a, b, and carotenoids) in the plant’s leaves. The decrease in the total content of chlorophylls, Сa + bcar and transpiration rate of water along with the increase in the water absorbing capacity were observed. The accumulation of heavy metals in different parts of the plant was determined; bioaccumulation coefficient and values of translocation factor were calculated. The obtained results showed that M. × giganteus was an excluder plant for nine highly toxic elements (As, Pb, Zn, Co, Ni, Cr, Cu, V, U) and an accumulator species for the moderately dangerous elements (Mn, Sr). Further research will be focused on the extraction of stable stimulated plant-growth–promoting rhizobacteria from the rhizosphere of M. × giganteus and formulation on that base the plant-bacterial associations as well as on the comparison of the plant physiological parameters, biochemical soil activity, and accumulation of heavy metals in the Miscanthus tissues between first and second vegetations.


Miscanthus × giganteus Bioenergy plant Soil phytoremediation Heavy metals Bioaccumulation Translocation factor 


Funding information

This research was supported by NATO (Science for Peace and Security Programmer, Multi-Year Project No. G4687) and the Ministry of Education and Science of Kazakhstan (Grant No. AP05131473).

Compliance with ethical standards

Conflict of interest

The authors declare that they have no conflict of interest.

Supplementary material

11356_2019_4707_MOESM1_ESM.docx (17 kb)
ESM 1 (DOCX 17 kb)


  1. Almaganbetov N, Grigoruk V (2008) Degradation of soil in Kazakhstan: problems and challenges. In: Simeonov, Sargsyan V (eds) Soil chemical pollution, risk assessment, remediation and security. Springer, pp 309–320.
  2. Amanullah M, Ping W, Amjad A, Mukesh KA, Altaf HL, Quan W, Zengqiang Z (2016) Challenges and opportunities in the phytoremediation of heavy metals contaminated soils: a review. Ecotox Environ Safe 126:111–121. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Amina Н, Araina BA, Abbasi MS, Jahangir TM, Amind F (2018) Comparative study of Zn-phytoextraction potential in guar ( L.) and sesame ( L.): tolerance and accumulation. Geology, Ecology, and Landscapes 2(1):29–38.
  4. Antonkiewicz J, Kołodziej B, Bielińska E, Witkowicz R, Tabor S (2018) Using Jerusalem artichoke to extract heavy metals from municipal sewage sludge amended soil. Pol J Environ Stud 27:513–527. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Audet P, Chares C (2007) Heavy metal phytoremediation from a meta-analytical perspective. Environ Pollut 147:231–237. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Аtabayeva S, Nurmahanova A, Asrandina S, Alybayeva RA, Meldebekova A, Lee T (2017) Effect of copper on physiological and biochemical peculiarities of wheat (Triticum aestivum L.) varieties. Pak J Bot 49(6):2189–2196Google Scholar
  7. Baker AJM (1981) Accumulators and excluders-strategies in the response of plants to heavy metals. J Plant Nutr 3(1-4):1–4. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Baker AJM, McGrath SP, Reeve RD (2000) Metal hyperaccumulator plants: a review of the ecology and physiology of a biochemical resource for phytoremediation of metal polluted soils Contaminated soil and water. Lewis Publishers, Boca-Raton, FL, USA, pp 85–107Google Scholar
  9. Balsamo RA, Kelly WJ, Satrio JA, Ruiz-Felix MN, Fetterman M, Wynn R, Hagel K (2015) Utilization of grasses for potential biofuel production and phytoremediation of heavy metal contaminated soils. Int J Phytoremediation 17(5):448–455. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Bilandzija N, Jurisic V, Vica N, Leto J, Matin A, Sito S, Kricka T (2017) Combustion properties of Miscanthus x giganteus Biomass-Optimization of harvest time. J Energy Inst 90:528–533. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Biyasheva ZM (2010) Prolonged pollution by heavy metals and radionuclides of the territory adjacent to mining enriched complex in town Tekeli. Bul Kazakh Natl U Ecol Ser 3(29):60–65 (In Russian)Google Scholar
  12. Boersma N (2013) The influence of propagation method and stand age on Miscanthus x giganteus performance in Iowa, USA. PhD Dissertation.
  13. Chirkova ТV (2002) Physiological basis of plant resistance. Publishing House of St. Petersburg University, St. Petersburg, p 244 (In Russian)Google Scholar
  14. Dauber J, Brown C, Fernando AL, Finnan J, Krasuska E, Ponitka J, Styles D, Thran D, Van Groenigen KJ, Weih M, Zah R (2012) Bioenergy from “surplus” land: environmental and socio-economic implications. BioRisk 7:5–50. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Diwan H, Ahmad A, Iqbal M (2010) Uptake related parameters as indices of phytoremediation potential. Biologia 65(6):1004–1011. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Gavrilenko VF, Ladygina ME, Khandobina LM (1975) A large practical workshop on plant physiology. High School, Moscow, Russia: 392 рp. (In Russian)Google Scholar
  17. Ginneken LV, Meers Е, Guisson R, Ruttens A, Elst K, Tack FMG, Vangronsveld J, Diels L, Dejonghe W (2007) Phytoremediation for heavy metal-contaminated soils combined with bioenergy production. Environ Eng Landsc 15(4):227–236. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. GOST (1983) Protection of nature. Soil. Classification of chemicals for the pollution control. (In Russian)Google Scholar
  19. GOST (1984a) 26213-84. Soil. Determination of humus by the Tyurin method, modified by CINAO. (In Russian)Google Scholar
  20. GOST (1984b) Protection of nature. Soil. Methods for sampling and preparation of soil for chemical, bacteriological, helminthological analysis. (In Russian)Google Scholar
  21. GOST (1985) 26423-85. Measurement of the actual acidity of the soil was carried out by applying the instrument pH-meter AP50. (In Russian)Google Scholar
  22. GOST (1991) 26207-91. Soils. Determination of the mobile compounds of phosphorus and potassium by Kirsanov method, modified by CINAO. (In Russian)Google Scholar
  23. Gupta DK, Nicoloso FT, Schetinger MRC, Rossato LV, Pereira LB, Castro GY, Srivastava S, Tripathi RD (2009) Antioxidant defense mechanism in hydroponically grown Zea mays seedlings under moderate lead stress. J Hazard Mater 172(1):479–484. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Heaton EA, Dohleman FG, Miguez AF, Juvik JA, Lozovaya V, Widholm J, Zabotina OA, Mcisaac GF, David MB, Voigt TB, Boersma NN, Long SP (2010) Miscanthus: a promising biomass crop. Adv Bot Res 56:76–137. Google Scholar
  25. Il’in VB, Syso AI. (2001) Microelements and heavy metals in soils and plants of Novosibirsk region. SB RAS Press, Novosibirsk, Russia. 229 рр. (In Russian)Google Scholar
  26. ISO 10381-6 (2017) Soil Quality-Sampling-Part 6: Guidance on the collection, handling and storage of soil under aerobic conditions for the assessment of microbiological processes, biomass and diversity in the laboratory. Available at: Accessed 03 Sep 2018
  27. Issanova G, Saparov A, Ustemirova A (2014) Soil degradation and desertification processes within Kazakhstan. Proceedings of IV International Conference “Ecology of urban areas 2014”, 9-10th October 2014, Zrenjanin, Serbia, pp 429-434Google Scholar
  28. Jones MB, Walsh M (2001) Miscanthus for energy and fibre. – Origins and Taxonomy of Miscanthus. James & James Publishers, London, pp 2–9Google Scholar
  29. Kabata-Pendias A (2010) Trace elements in soils and plants, 4th edn. CRC Press, Boca Raton, FL, USA, p 548CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Kharytonov M, Pidlisnyuk V, Stefanovska T, Babinko M, Martynova N, Rula I (2018) The estimation of Miscanthus×giganteus’ adaptive potential for cultivation on the mining and post-mining lands in Ukraine. Environ Sci Pollut Res 26(3):2974–2986. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Khudsar T, Mahmooduzzafar, Iqbal M (2001) Cadmium-induced changes in leaf epidermis, photosynthetic rate and pigment concentrations in Cajanus cajan. Biol Plant 44:59–64.
  32. Kidin VV, Deriugin IP, Kobzarenko VI (2008) Workshop on agrochemistry. Colos, Moscow, Russia. 599 рр. (In Russian)Google Scholar
  33. Kilpatrick LА (2012) Sustainable growth of Miscanthus on marginal lands amended with flue gas desulfurization gypsum and sewage biosolids. Paper. 12-133766124 ASABE, p 37Google Scholar
  34. Kocon A, Jurga B (2017) The evaluation of growth and phytoextraction potential of Miscanthus x giganteus and Sida hermaphrodita on soil contaminated simultaneously with Cd, Cu, Ni, Pb, and Zn. Environ Sci Pollut Res 24(5):4990–5000. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. Kocon A, Matyka M (2012) Phytoextractive potential of Miscanthus x giganteus and Sida hermaphrodita growing under moderate pollution of soil with Zn and Pb. J Food Agric Environ 10(2):1253–1256Google Scholar
  36. Kovalchuk VP, Vasiliev VG, Boyko VD, Zosimov LV (2010) Collection of methods for studying soils and plants. XXI century, Кolos, p 252 (In Russian)Google Scholar
  37. Kuehl RO (2000) Design of experiments: statistical principles of research design and analysis. 2nd edn. Duxbury press at Brooks /Cole publishing company, CA, USA. 688 ppGoogle Scholar
  38. Kvak V, Stefanovska T, Pidlisnyuk V, Alasmary Z, Kharytonov M (2018) The long-term assessment of Miscanthus x giganteus cultivation in the forest-steppe zone of Ukraine. INMATEH J Agricult Engineer 54(1):113–121Google Scholar
  39. Lord R, Atkinson J, Lane A, Scurlock J, Street G (2008) Biomass, remediation, re generation (BioReGen Life Project): reusing brownfield sites for renewable energy crops. ASCE Geotechnical Special Publication 177:527–534. Accessed 20 Jan 2019
  40. Maximyuk GP (1948) Application of the Heusler calcimeter for the determination of carbon dioxide. Pochvovedenie AN SSSR, Moscow, Russia, p 126 (In Russian)Google Scholar
  41. Meysurova AF, Notov AA, Pungin AV (2018) Photosynthetic pigments in hypogymnia physodes with different metal contents. J Appl Spectrosс 84(6):1037–1043.
  42. Nsanganwimana F, Pourrut B, Mench M, Douay F (2014) Suitability of Miscanthus species for managing inorganic and organic contaminated land and restoring ecosystem services A review. J Environ Manag 143:123–134. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  43. Nsanganwimana F, Waterlot C, Louvel B, Pourrut B, Douay F (2016) Metal, nutrient and biomass accumulation during the growing cycle of Miscanthus established on metal-contaminated soils. J Soil Sci Plant Nutr 179(2):257–269. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  44. Nurzhanova A, Kalugin S, Zhambakin K (2013) Obsolete pesticides and application of colonizing plant species for remediation of contaminated soils in Kazakhstan. Environ Sci Pollut Res 20:2054–2063. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  45. Panin MS (2002) Chemical ecology. Semipalatinsk, Kazakhstan. 852 рр. (In Russian)Google Scholar
  46. Pidlisnyuk V, Erickson L, Kharchenko S, Stefanovska T (2014) Sustainable land management: growing miscanthus in soils contaminated with heavy metals. J Environ Prot 5:723–730. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  47. Pidlisnyuk V, Trogl J, Stefanovska T, Shapoval P, Erickson L (2016) Preliminary results on growing second generation biofuel crop Miscanthus x giganteus at the polluted military site in Ukraine. Nova Biotechnol et Chim 15(1):77–84. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  48. Pidlisnyuk V, Erickson L, Trögl J, Shapoval P, Davis L, Popelka J, Stefanovska T, Hettiarachchi G (2018) Metals uptake behaviour in Miscanthus x giganteus plant during growth at the contaminated soil from the military site in Sliač, Slovakia. Pol J Chem Technol 20(2):1–7. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  49. Podrzeba M, Rusinowski S, Krzyzak J (2018) Macroelements and heavy metals content in energy crops cultivated on contaminated soil under different fertilization- case studies on autumn harvest. Environ Sci Pollut Res 25:12096–12106. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  50. Pogrzeba M, Krzyzak J, Sas-Nowosielska A (2013) Environmental hazards related to Miscanthus x giganteus cultivation on heavy metal contaminated soil. E3S Web of Conferences 1:29006.м29006Google Scholar
  51. Pogrzeba M, Krzyżak J, Rusinowski S, Hebner A, Kopielski K, Werle S, Ratman-Kłosińska I (2017) Possibility of using energy crops for phytoremediation of heavy metals contaminated land - a three-year experience. In: Renewable energy sources: engineering, technology, innovation, (eds) Krzysztof Mudryk, Sebastian Werle, ICORES, Springer Proceeding in Wnergy. Cham. pp.33-45.,371-6_4
  52. Prasad MN (2003) Practical use of plants for restoration soil polluted by metals. Russ J Plant Physiol 50(1):764–777Google Scholar
  53. Rodríguez-Eugenio N, McLaughlin M, Pennock D (2018) Soil Pollution: a hidden reality. Rome, FAO. 142 pp. (Accessed 20 Jan 2019)
  54. Rohan D, Mayank V, João P, Paul MS (2013) Spatial distribution of heavy metals in soil and flora associated with the glass industry in North Central India: implications for phytoremediation. Soil Sediment Contam 22(1):1–20. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  55. Sandalio LM, Dalurzo HC, Gomez M, Romero-Puertas MC, del Rio LA (2001) Cadmium-induced changes in the growth and oxidative metabolism of pea plants. J Exp Bot 52(364):2115–2126CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  56. Shaw JA (1989) Heavy metals tolerance in plants. In: Evolutionary aspects. CRC Press, Florida, USA, p 268Google Scholar
  57. Strilchuk YG (2001) Environmental impact assessment of activities at the military polygons and determination the measures for revitalization. In: Radioecology. Protection of the Environment, vol 3, pp 26–33 (In Russian)Google Scholar
  58. Tsao DT (2003) Overview of phytotechnologies. In: Scheper T, Tsao D (eds) Advances in biochemical engineering/biotechnology, phytoremediation. Springer-Verlag, Berlin, Germany, pp 1–50.,991-X_1 Google Scholar
  59. Turner JR, Thayer JF (2001) Introduction to analysis of variance: design, analysis, and interpretation. Sage Publications, Inc, Thousand Oaks, CA, USA, p 192CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  60. Wagner M, Kiesel A, Hastings A, Iqbal Y, Lewandowski I (2017) Novel miscanthus germplasm-based value chains: a life cycle assessment. Front Plant Sci 8:990. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  61. Wagner M, Mangold A, Lask J, Kiesel A, Lewandowski I (2018) Economic and environmental performance of miscanthus cultivated on marginal land for biogas production. GCB Bioenergy 11:34–49. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  62. World Reference Base for Soil Resources (2015) IUSS Working Group WRB. International soil classification system for naming soils and creating legends for soil maps. In: World Soil Resources Reports No. 106. FAO, Rome, Italy, p 203Google Scholar
  63. Yakovleva NA, Semenyuk AH, Shajgabaev FS (2009) Ecological –hygienic aspects of health state in city Tekeli. Hygiene, epidemiology. Immunobiology 3:41–49 (In Russian)Google Scholar
  64. Yoon J, Cao X, Zhou Q, Ma LQ (2006) Accumulation of Pb, Cu, and Zn in native plants growing on a contaminated Florida site. Sci Total Environ 368(2–3):456–464.
  65. Zaier H, Ghnaya T, Lakhdar A, Baioui R, Ghabriche R, Mnasri M, Sghair S, Lutts S, Abdelly C, Hanen Z, Taha G, Abelbasset L, Rawdha B, Rim G, Majda M, Hedly A (2010) Comparative study of Pb-phytoextraction potential in Sesuvium portulacastrum and Brassica juncea: Tolerance and accumulation. Hazard Mater 183(1-3):609–615. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  66. Zu YQ, Li Y, Chen JJ, Chen HY, Qin L, Schvartz C (2005) Hyper accumulation of Pb, Zn, and Cd in herbaceous grown on lead–zinc mining area in Yunnan, China. Environ Int 31(5):755–762. CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag GmbH Germany, part of Springer Nature 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Institute of Plant Biology and BiotechnologyAlmatyKazakhstan
  2. 2.Department of Technical SciencesJan Evangelista Purkyně University in Ústí nad LabemÚstí nad LabemCzech Republic
  3. 3.Center of Physical Chemical Methods of Research and AnalysisAl-Farabi Kazakh National UniversityAlmatyKazakhstan
  4. 4.Al-Farabi Kazakh National UniversityAlmatyKazakhstan
  5. 5.Department of Plant ProtectionNational University of Life and the Environmental SciencesKyivUkraine
  6. 6.Department of Chemical EngineeringКansas State UniversityManhattanUSA

Personalised recommendations