Environmental Science and Pollution Research

, Volume 26, Issue 14, pp 14400–14413 | Cite as

Heavy metal uptake by water lettuce (Pistia stratiotes L.) from paper mill effluent (PME): experimental and prediction modeling studies

  • Vinod Kumar
  • Jogendra SinghEmail author
  • Pankaj Kumar
Research Article


The present paper reports the heavy metal uptake by water lettuce (Pistia stratiotes L.) from paper mill effluent (PME) with its prediction modeling studies. Lab scale phytoremediation experiments were performed in glass aquariums to grow P. stratiotes in 0% (bore well water as a control), 25%, 50%, 75%, and 100% concentrations of PME. The influence of pH and heavy metal concentration in PME for the effective uptake and accumulation of heavy metal contents (∆Y: mg/kg) in plant tissues was modeled using two-factor multiple linear regression. The results showed that the selected input variables were supportive to develop prediction models with higher linear regression (R2 > 0.72), high model efficiency (ME: 0.92–0.99), low mean average normalizing error (MANE < 0.02), and statistically significant F > Prob values. Kruskal-Wallis one-way post hoc test indicated that the contents of Cd, Cu, Fe, Pb, and Zn in the roots, leaves, and whole plant were affected by PME concentration while the contents of Mn did not. The correlation studies showed that the bioaccumulation of heavy metals was found both element and PME concentration specific. This work represents an effective method to model heavy metal uptake by P. stratiotes from PME. Furthermore, this methodology can also be adopted for predicting effective metal uptake by plant species being used for the phytoremediation of heavy metals from industrial effluents.


Bioaccumulation Heavy metals Paper mill effluent Phytoremediation Pistia stratiotes Prediction models 



The authors are thankful to one anonymous reviewer for their precious suggestions before submitting this manuscript.

Funding information

This research work was financially supported by the University Grants Commission, New Delhi, India [(RGNF) F1-17.1/ 2015-16/ RGNF-2015-17-SC-UTT-5597/ (SA-III/ Website)].

Compliance with ethical standards

Conflict of interest

The authors declare that there is no conflict of interest.


  1. Ali H, Khan E, Sajad MA (2013) Phytoremediation of heavy metals-concepts and applications. Chemosphere 91(7):869–881. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Ali M, Sreekrishnan TR (2001) Aquatic toxicity from pulp and paper mill effluents: a review. Adv Environ Res 5(2):175–196. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. AOAC (2005) In: Official methods of analysis of the association of official analytical chemists. 13th edition, pp. 545–567Google Scholar
  4. APHA, AWWA, WEF (2012) Standard methods for the examination of water and wastewater, 21st ed. American Public Health Association. pp. 2462Google Scholar
  5. Awuah E, Lubberding HJ, Asante K, Gijzen HJ (2002) The effect of pH on enterococci removal in Pistia-, duckweed-and algae-based stabilization ponds for domestic wastewater treatment. Water Sci Technol 45(1):67–74. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Baltrėnaitė E, Baltrėnas P, Lietuvninkas A (2017) Modelling phytoremediation: concepts, models, and approaches. In: Phytoremediation. Springer, Cham, pp 327–341. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Bell TH, Joly S, Pitre FE, Yergeau E (2014) Increasing phytoremediation efficiency and reliability using novel omics approaches. Trends Biotechnol 32(5):271–280. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Bonanno G, Vymazal J, Cirelli GL (2018) Translocation, accumulation and bioindication of trace elements in wetland plants. Sci Total Environ 631:252–261. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Cherian S, Oliveira MM (2005) Transgenic plants in phytoremediation: recent advances and new possibilities. Environ Sci Technol 39(24):9377–9390. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Chojnacka K (2010) Biosorption and bioaccumulation–the prospects for practical applications. Environ Int 36(3):299–307. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Deeba F, Pruthi V, Negi YS (2018) Effect of emerging contaminants from paper mill industry into the environment and their control. In: Environmental Contaminants. Springer, Singapore, pp 391–408. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. DeForest DK, Brix KV, Tear LM, Adams WJ (2018) Multiple linear regression models for predicting chronic aluminum toxicity to freshwater aquatic organisms and developing water quality guidelines. Environ Toxicol Chem 37(1):80–90. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. dos Santos-Araujo SN, Swartjes FA, Versluijs KW, Moreno FN, Alleoni LRF (2017) Soil-plant transfer models for metals to improve soil screening value guidelines valid for São Paulo, Brazil. Environ Monit Assess 189:615CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Duruibe JO, Ogwuegbu MOC, Egwurugwu JN (2007) Heavy metal pollution and human biotoxic effects. Int J Phys Sci 2(5):112–118Google Scholar
  15. Dushenkov S (2003) Trends in phytoremediation of radionuclides. Plant Soil 249(1):167–175. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Eid EM, Alrumman SA, Farahat EA, El-Bebany AF (2018) Prediction models for evaluating the uptake of heavy metals by cucumbers (Cucumis sativus L.) grown in agricultural soils amended with sewage sludge. Environ Monit Assess 190(9):501. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Eid EM, Shaltout KH, Al-Sodany YM, Jensen K (2010) Effects of abiotic conditions on Phragmites australis along geographic gradients in Lake Burullus, Egypt. Aquat Bot 92(2):86–92. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Galal TM, Eid EM, Dakhil MA, Hassan LM (2018) Bioaccumulation and rhizofiltration potential of Pistia stratiotes L. for mitigating water pollution in the Egyptian wetlands. Int J Phytoremediation 20(5):440–447. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Glick BR, Stearns JC (2011) Making phytoremediation work better: maximizing a plant’s growth potential in the midst of adversity. Int J Phytoremediation 13(S1):4–16CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Goheen DW (2018) Chemicals from lignin. In: Organic chemicals from biomass. CRC Press, pp 143–161Google Scholar
  21. Griffin PW, Hammond GP, Norman JB (2018) Industrial decarbonisation of the pulp and paper sector: a UK perspective. Appl Therm Eng 134:152–162. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Houben D, Evrard L, Sonnet P (2013) Mobility, bioavailability and pH-dependent leaching of cadmium, zinc and lead in a contaminated soil amended with biochar. Chemosphere 92(11):1450–1457. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Ijaz A, Imran A, ul Haq MA, Khan QM, Afzal M (2016) Phytoremediation: recent advances in plant-endophytic synergistic interactions. Plant Soil 405(1–2):179–195. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Kamali M, Khodaparast Z (2015) Review on recent developments on pulp and paper mill wastewater treatment. Ecotoxicol Environ Saf 114:326–342. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Khandare RV, Govindwar SP (2015) Phytoremediation of textile dyes and effluents: current scenario and future prospects. Biotechnol Adv 33(8):1697–1714. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Khodaverdilou H, Homaei M (2008) Modeling phytoremediation of Cd and Pb from contaminated soils using plant transpiration reduction functions. Iran J Irrig Drain 2(1):7–16Google Scholar
  27. Kooh MRR, Lim LB, Lim LH, Malik OA (2018) Phytoextraction potential of water fern (Azolla pinnata) in the removal of a hazardous dye, methyl violet 2B: artificial neural network modelling. Int J Phytoremediation 20(5):424–431. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Kumar SS, Kadier A, Malyan SK, Ahmad A, Bishnoi NR (2017) Phytoremediation and Rhizoremediation: uptake, mobilization and sequestration of heavy metals by plants. In: Plant-microbe interactions in agro-ecological perspectives. Springer, Singapore, pp 367–394. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Kumar V, Singh J, Chopra AK (2018a) Assessment of phytokinetic removal of pollutants of paper mill effluent using water hyacinth (Eichhornia crassipes [Mart.] Solms). Environ Technol 39(21):2781–2791. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Kumar V, Singh J, Chopra AK (2018b) Assessment of plant growth attributes, bioaccumulation, enrichment, and translocation of heavy metals in water lettuce (Pistia stratiotes L.) grown in sugar mill effluent. Int J Phytoremediation 20(5):507–521. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Li J, Yu H, Luan Y (2015a) Meta-analysis of the copper, zinc, and cadmium absorption capacities of aquatic plants in heavy metal-polluted water. Int J Environ Res Public Health 12(12):14958–14973. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Li X, Xi H, Sun X, Yang Y, Yang S, Zhou Y, Yang Y (2015b) Comparative proteomics exploring the molecular mechanism of eutrophic water purification using water hyacinth (Eichhornia crassipes). Environ Sci Pollut Res 22(11):8643–8658. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. Li Y, Zhang S, Jiang W, Liu D (2013) Cadmium accumulation, activities of antioxidant enzymes, and malondialdehyde (MDA) content in Pistia stratiotes L. Environ Sci Pollut Res 20(2):1117–1123. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. Lu Q, He ZL, Graetz DA, Stoffella PJ, Yang X (2011) Uptake and distribution of metals by water lettuce (Pistia stratiotes L.). Environ Sci Pollut Res 18(6):978–986. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. Mackay D (1982) Correlation of bioconcentration factors. Environ Sci Technol 16:274–278. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. Malik ZH, Ravindran KC (2018) Biochemical tolerance of Suaeda maritima L.(Dumort) as a potential species for phytoextracting heavy metal and salt in paper mill effluent contaminated soil. J Drug Deliv Sci Technol 8(6-s):241–245. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. Mani D, Kumar C (2014) Biotechnological advances in bioremediation of heavy metals contaminated ecosystems: an overview with special reference to phytoremediation. Int J Environ Sci Technol 11(3):843–872. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. Mazumdar K, Das S (2015) Phytoremediation of Pb, Zn, Fe, and Mg with 25 wetland plant species from a paper mill contaminated site in North East India. Environ Sci Pollut Res 22:701.
  39. Mishra S, Mohanty M, Pradhan C, Patra HK, Das R, Sahoo S (2013) Physico-chemical assessment of paper mill effluent and its heavy metal remediation using aquatic macrophytes—a case study at JK paper mill, Rayagada, India. Environ Monit Assess 185(5):4347–4359. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. Muthusaravanan S, Sivarajasekar N, Vivek JS, Paramasivan T, Naushad M, Prakashmaran J, Al-Duaij OK (2018) Phytoremediation of heavy metals: mechanisms, methods and enhancements. Environ Chem Lett 16:1–21. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. Ouyang Y (2002) Phytoremediation: modeling plant uptake and contaminant transport in the soil–plant–atmosphere continuum. J Hydrol 266(1–2):66–82. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. Qureshi AS, Hussain MI, Ismail S, Khan QM (2016) Evaluating heavy metal accumulation and potential health risks in vegetables irrigated with treated wastewater. Chemosphere 163:54–61. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  43. Qureshi MI, D’Amici GM, Fagioni M, Rinalducci S, Zolla L (2010) Iron stabilizes thylakoid protein–pigment complexes in Indian mustard during Cd-phytoremediation as revealed by BN-SDS-PAGE and ESI-MS/MS. J Plant Physiol 167:761–770. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  44. Rajaram T, Das A (2008) Water pollution by industrial effluents in India: discharge scenarios and case for participatory ecosystem specific local regulation. Futures 40(1):56–69. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  45. Rajasulochana P, Preethy V (2016) Comparison on efficiency of various techniques in treatment of waste and sewage water—a comprehensive review. Resource-Efficient Technol 2(4):175–184. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  46. Römkens PFAM, Guo HY, Chu CL, Liu TS, Chiang CF, Koopmans GF (2009) Prediction of cadmium uptake by brown rice and derivation of soil–plant transfer models to improve soil protection guidelines. Environ Pollut 157(8–9):2435–2444. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  47. Sakakibara M, Ohmori Y, Ha NTH (2011) Phytoremediation of heavy metal-contaminated water and sediment by Eleocharis acicularis. Clean Soil Air Water 39:735–741. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  48. Sarkar M, Majumdar P (2011) Application of response surface methodology for optimization of heavy metal biosorption using surfactant modified chitosan bead. Chem Eng J 175:376–387. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  49. Sarma H (2011) Metal hyperaccumulation in plants: a review focusing on phytoremediation technology. J Environ Sci Technol 4(2):118–138. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  50. Selvarathi P, Ramasubramanian VJ (2010) Phytoremedial effect of Datura metel L. on paper mill effluent and its impact on physicochemical characteristics of Lycopersicon esculentum Mill. Biosci Res 1(2):94–100Google Scholar
  51. Sharma S, Singh B, Manchanda VK (2015) Phytoremediation: role of terrestrial plants and aquatic macrophytes in the remediation of radionuclides and heavy metal contaminated soil and water. Environ Sci Pollut Res 22(2):946–962. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  52. Sridhar R, Sivakumar V, Immanuel VP, Maran JP (2011) Treatment of pulp and paper industry bleaching effluent by electrocoagulant process. J Hazard Mater 186(2–3):1495–1502. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  53. Steyerberg EW, Harrell FE Jr, Borsboom GJ, Eijkemans MJC, Vergouwe Y, Habbema JDF (2001) Internal validation of predictive models: efficiency of some procedures for logistic regression analysis. J Clin Epidemiol 54(8):774–781. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  54. Tangahu BV, Abdullah S, Rozaimah S, Basri H, Idris M, Anuar N, Mukhlisin M (2011) A review on heavy metals (As, Pb, and Hg) uptake by plants through phytoremediation. Int J Chem Eng 2011:1–30. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  55. Tchounwou PB, Yedjou CG, Patlolla AK, Sutton DJ (2012) Heavy metal toxicity and the environment. In: Molecular, clinical and environmental toxicology. Springer, Basel, pp 133–164CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  56. Thompson G, Swain J, Kay M, Forster CF (2001) The treatment of pulp and paper mill effluent: a review. Bioresour Technol 77(3):275–286. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  57. Wang C, Zhang S, Wang P, Hou J, Qian J, Ao Y, Li L (2011) Salicylic acid involved in the regulation of nutrient elements uptake and oxidative stress in Vallisneria natans (Lour.) Hara under Pb stress. Chemosphere 84(1):136–142. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  58. Wang S, Wu Z, Luo J (2018) Transfer mechanism, uptake kinetic process, and bioavailability of P, Cu, Cd, Pb, and Zn in macrophyte rhizosphere using diffusive gradients in thin films. Environ Sci Technol 52(3):1096–1108Google Scholar
  59. Wuana RA, Okieimen FE (2011) Heavy metals in contaminated soils: a review of sources, chemistry, risks and best available strategies for remediation. Isrn Ecol 2011:1–20. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  60. Zainith S, Chowdhary P, Bharagava RN (2019) Recent advances in physico-chemical and biological techniques for the management of pulp and paper mill waste. In: Emerging and eco-friendly approaches for waste management. Springer, Singapore, pp 271–297. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  61. Zeng F, Ali S, Zhang H, Ouyang Y, Qiu B, Wu F, Zhang G (2011) The influence of Ph and organic matter content in paddy soil on heavy metal availability and their uptake by rice plants. Environ Pollut 159:84–91. CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

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

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Agro-ecology and Pollution Research Laboratory, Department of Zoology and Environmental ScienceGurukula Kangri VishwavidyalayaHaridwarIndia

Personalised recommendations