Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Evaluation of two bacterial delivery systems for in-situ remediation of PAH contaminated sediments

  • Research Article
  • Published:
Journal of Soils and Sediments Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Intention, Goal and Background

Contaminated sediments represent a significant, worldwide environmental problem since they contain a mixture of different xenobiotics and heavy metals. The presence of mixed contamination presents a unique set of obstacles for remediation efforts. Often sediment remediation occurs as an ex-situ application (i.e., after dredging) in an attempt to minimize some of the problems. However, dredging poses it’s own issues. It does not address contaminated water and often material is not completely removed thereby leaving a long-term residual contamination source in the waterway.

Objective

The potential of bio remediation to treat sediments contaminated with polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons (PAHs), polychlorinated biphenyls, and heavy metals was addressed. The primary objective was to assess two delivery mechanisms for microbial inoculation to facilitate in-situ remediation of PAH contaminated sediments.

Methods

Simulated river beds were constructed to mimic the Mahoning River. Contaminated sediment from the river was added to each reactor at a uniform depth, followed by the addition of river water. Fifteen inoculation points were used in each simulated river bed to ensure adequate microbial populations. One tank was inoculated with an acclimated bacteria solution as a free suspension. The other tank was inoculated with an attached growth biofilm system. Sediment samples were taken throughout the experiment and the percent PAH degradation determined. Water characteristics (DO, pH, bacterial activity, etc.) were also tracked as corroborating evidence.

Results and Discussion

The monitoring sites indicated that an attached growth system was more effective, and achieved a 99% PAH degradation efficiency at some of the sampling sites. Tracking individual PAH compounds also indicated a higher overall microbial activity with the attached growth system. This activity was evident by the formation and subsequent biodegradation of lower molecular weight degradation byproducts. However, more of the sediment area was treated by the free suspension inoculum due to the ease of microbial migration.

Conclusions

The applicability of using an aerobic microbial consortium composed ofMycobacterium sp., Pseudomonas aeruginosa, andPseudomonas flourescens to treat contaminated sediment was demonstrated. In addition, it was found that introducing the consortium as an attached growth was more effective than when delivered as a free suspension.

Recommendation and Outlook

The results demonstrated that the consortium was effective at treating the PAHs present in the contaminated soil. An additional study to evaluate the consortium’s effectiveness at remediating the PCB present in the sediment is warranted. Optimization of the consortium-nutrient combination could enable a treatment approach to effective for all the organic contaminants present. Although this would not address the heavy metals present in the sediment, it would afford a great opportunity at remediating a severely contaminated sediment system.

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

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Christensen ER, Rachdawong P, Karls JE, Van Camp RP (1999): PAHs in sediments: Unmixing and CMB modeling of sources. J Environ Eng125, 1022–1032

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  2. CornetlisenG, Van NoortP, Parsons J, GoversH (1997): Temperature dependence of slow adsorption and desorption kinetics of organic compounds in sediments. Environ Sci Technol 31,454–460

    Article  Google Scholar 

  3. Murphy TP, Lawson A, Kumagai M, BabinJ (1999): Review of emerging issues in sediment treatment. Aquatic Ecosystem Health Management 2, 419–434

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  4. Poeton TS, Stensel HD, Strand SE (1999): Biodegradation of PAHs by marine bacteria: Effect of solid phase on degradation kinetics. Water Res 33, 868–880

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  5. Speight JG (1996): Environmental Technology Handbook. Taylor & Francis: Washington, DC

    Google Scholar 

  6. McGlynn SE, Livingston RJ (1997): The distribution of poly-nuclear aromatic hydrocarbons between aquatic plants and sediments. International J Quantum Chern 64, 271–283

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  7. Cookson JT Jr. (1995): Bioremediation Engineering: Design and Application. McGraw-Hill: New York

    Google Scholar 

  8. Deane G, Chroneer Z, LickW (1999): Diffusion and sorption of hexachlorobenzene in sediments and saturated soils. J Environ Eng 125, 689–696

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  9. Peyton BM, Skeen RS, Hooke, BS, Lundman RW, Cunningham AB (1995): Evaluation of bacterial detachment rates in porous-media. Appl Biochem Biotechnol 51-52, 785–797

    Article  Google Scholar 

  10. JohnsonW (2000): Sediment control of facilitated transport and enhanced desorption. J Environ Eng 126, 47–57

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  11. Renholds J (1998): In situ Treatment of Contaminated Sediments. Office of Solid Waste and Emergency Technology Innovations. US Environmental Protection Agency, Washington DC

  12. Haddox DC (2000): Investigation of Two Microbial Delivery Systems for the In-Situ Bioremediation of Contaminated Sediments. MS. Thesis, University of Akron

  13. US Environmental Protection Agency (1993): Selecting Remediation Techniques for Contaminated Sediments. EPA Office of Water, EPA-823-B93-001

  14. Kravitz M (1990): Managing Contaminated Sediments: EPA Decision-Making Processes. US Environmental Protection Agency, EPA 506/6–90/002

  15. Davis ML, Cornwell DA (1998): Introduction to Environmental Engineering, McGraw-Hill: New York, pp 87–98

    Google Scholar 

  16. Lau YL, LiuD (1993): Effect of flow rate on biofilm accumula- tion in open channels. Water Res. 27, 355–360

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  17. Karimi-LotfabadS (1996). Reactions of PAHs on soil. Environ Sci Technol, 30(4)145–1151

    Article  Google Scholar 

  18. Ramirez NE (1999): Elucidation of Sorption, Desorption, and Biodegradation Phenomena of Pyrene Spiked Soils. MS Thesis, University of Akron

  19. Muellar JG, Resnick SM, Shelton ME, Pritchard PH (1992): Effect of inoculation on the biodegradation of weathered Prud- hoe Bay crude-oil. J Industrial Microbiol10, 95–102

    Article  Google Scholar 

  20. Tang WC, White JC, AlexanderM (1998): Utilization of sorbed compounds by microorganisms specifically isolated for that purpose. Appl Microbial Biotechnol49, 117–121

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  21. Tittle PC, Liu YT, Strand SE (1995). Use of alternative growth substrates to enhance PAH degradation. In: HincheeR (Ed), Bioremediation of Recalcitrant Organics, ACS Publishing: New York, p 1–7

    Google Scholar 

  22. Cutright TJ, LeeS (1994): Microorgansisms and metabolic pathways for the remediation of PAH contaminated soil. Fresenius Environ Bull 3, 413–421

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  23. Vargas MC, Rodrigues R, Sanches F, RamirezN (2001). Biological transformation of anthracene in soil byPleurotus ostreatus under solid-state fermentation conditions using wheat bran compost. Ciencia, Tecnologia y Futuro 2 (2) 43–50

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  24. Btanch HW, Clark DS (1996): Biochemical Engineering. Marcel Dekker: New York, pp 82

    Google Scholar 

  25. Clement TP, Hooker BS, Skeen RS (1996): Numerical modeling of biologically reactive transport near nutrient injection well. J Environ Eng 122, 833–839

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  26. Holrn PE, NMson PH, Albrechtsen HJ, Christensen TH (1992): Importance of unattached bacteria and bacteria attached to sediment in determining potentials for degradation of xenobiotic organic contaminants in an aerobic aquifer. Appl Environ Microbiol 58, 3020–3026

    Google Scholar 

  27. Peyton BM, Characklis WG (1993): A statistical analysis of the effect of substrate utilization and shear stress on the kinetics of biofilm detachment. Biotechnol Bioeng 41, 728–735

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  28. Characklis WG (1990): BiofitmProcesses. In: Biofilms, Wiley: New York, pp 195–231

    Google Scholar 

  29. White GF (1995): Multiple interactions in riverine biofilms-Surfactant adsorption, bacterial attachment and biodegradadon. Water Sci Technol31, 61–70

    CAS  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Civil Engineering, The University of Akron, 44325-3905, Akron, OH, USA

    Don C. Haddox & Teresa J. Cutright

Authors
  1. Don C. Haddox
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Teresa J. Cutright
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Teresa J. Cutright.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Haddox, D.C., Cutright, T.J. Evaluation of two bacterial delivery systems for in-situ remediation of PAH contaminated sediments. J Soils & Sediments 3, 41–48 (2003). https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02989468

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02989468

Keywords

Search

Navigation