Skip to main content

Comparative Mesocosm Study of Biostimulation Efficiency in Two Different Oil-Amended Sub-Antarctic Soils

Microbial Ecology volume 56, pages 243–252 (2008)Cite this article

Abstract

Biological treatment has become increasingly popular as a remediation method for soils and groundwater contaminated with petroleum hydrocarbon, chlorinated solvents, and pesticides. Bioremediation has been considered for application in cold regions such as Arctic and sub-Arctic climates and Antarctica. Studies to date suggest that indigenous microbes suitable for bioremediation exist in soils in these regions. This paper reports on two case studies at the sub-Antarctic Kerguelen Island in which indigenous bacteria were found that were capable of mineralizing petroleum hydrocarbons in soil contaminated with crude oil and diesel fuel. All results demonstrate a serious influence of the soil properties on the biostimulation efficiency. Both temperature elevation and fertilizer addition have a more significant impact on the microbial assemblages in the mineral soil than in the organic one. Analysis of the hydrocarbons remaining at the end of the experiments confirmed the bacterial observations. Optimum temperature seems to be around 10°C in organic soil, whereas it was higher in mineral soil. The benefit of adding nutrients was much stronger in mineral than in the organic soil. Overall, this study suggests that biostimulation treatments were driven by soil properties and that ex situ bioremediation for treatment of cold contaminated soils will allow greater control over soil temperature, a limiting factor in cold climates.

This is a preview of subscription content, access via your institution.

Access options

Buy single article

Instant access to the full article PDF.

43,34 €

Price includes VAT (Finland)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Figure 1
Figure 2
Figure 3
Figure 4
Figure 5

References

  1. Aislabie J, McLeod M, Fraser R (1998) Potential for biodegradation of hydrocarbons in soil from the Ross dependency, Antarctica. Appl Microbiol Biotechnol 49:210–214

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  2. Aislabie J, Fraser R, Duncan S, Farrell RL (2001) Effects of oil spills on microbial heterotrophs in Antarctic soils. Potential for biodegradation of hydrocarbons in soil from the Ross dependency, Antarctica. Polar Biol 24:308–313

    Article  Google Scholar 

  3. Aislabie J, Balks JM, Foght JM, Waterhouse EJ (2004) Hydrocarbon spills on Antarctic soil: effect and management. Env Sci Technol 38:1265–1274

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  4. Aislabie J, Saul DJ, Foght JM (2006) Bioremediation of hydrocarbon-contaminated polar soils. Extremophiles 10:171–179

    PubMed  Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  5. Alexander M (1999) Biodegradation and Bioremediation, 2nd edn. Academic, London

    Google Scholar 

  6. Bossert I, Bartha R (1984) The fate of petroleum in soil ecosystems. In: Atlas RM (ed) Petroleum microbiology. MacMillan, New York, NY, USA, pp 434–476

    Google Scholar 

  7. Braddock JF, Ruth ML, Catterall PH, Walworth JL, Mc Carthy KA (1997) Enhancement and inhibition of microbial activity in hydrocarbon-contaminated Artic soils: implications for nutrient-amended bioremediation. Environ Sci Technol 31:2078–2084

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  8. Coulon F, Delille D (2006) Influence of substratum on the degradation processes in diesel polluted sub-Antarctic soils (Crozet Archipelago). Polar Biol 29:806–812

    Article  Google Scholar 

  9. Coulon F, Pelletier E, St Louis R, Gourhant L, Delille D (2004) Degradation of petroleum hydrocarbons in two sub-Antarctic soils: influence of an oleophilic fertilizer. Environ Toxicol Chem 23:1893–1901

    PubMed  Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  10. Cripps GC, Shears J (1997) The fate in the marine environment of a minor diesel fuel spill from an Antarctic station. Environ Monitor Assess 46:221–232

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  11. Delille D (2000) Response of Antarctic soil assemblages to contamination by diesel fuel and crude oil. Microb Ecol 40:159–168

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  12. Delille D, Coulon F, Pelletier E (2004a) Biostimulation of natural microbial assemblages in oil-amended vegetated and desert sub-Antarctic soils. Microb Ecol 47:407–415

    PubMed  Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  13. Delille D, Coulon F, Pelletier E (2004b) Effects of temperature warming during a bioremediation study of natural and nutrient amended hydrocarbon contaminated sub-Antarctic soils. Cold Reg Sci Technol 40:61–70

    Article  Google Scholar 

  14. Delille D, Coulon F, Pelletier E (2007) Biostimulation of natural microbial assemblages in oil-amended vegetated and desert sub-Antarctic soils. Polar Biol 30:925–933

    Article  Google Scholar 

  15. Delille D, Pelletier E (2002) Natural attenuation of diesel-oil contamination in a subantarctic soil (Crozet Island). Polar Biol 25:682–687

    Google Scholar 

  16. Enell A, Reichenberg F, Ewald G, Warfvinge P (2005) Chemosphere 61:1529–1538

    PubMed  Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  17. Ferguson SH, Franzmann PD, Revill AT, Snape I, Rayner JL (2003) The effects of nitrogen and water on mineralisation of hydrocarbons in diesel-contaminated terrestrial Antarctic soils. Cold Reg Sci Technol 37:197–212

    Article  Google Scholar 

  18. Gerdes B, Brinkmeyer R, Dieckmann G, Helmke E (2005) Influence of crude oil on changes of bacterial communities in Arctic sea-ice. FEMS Microbiol Ecol 53:129–139

    PubMed  Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  19. Hobbie JE, Daley RJ, Jasper S (1977) Use of nucleopore filters for counting bacteria by fluorescence microscopy. Appl Environ Microbiol 33:1225–1228

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  20. Kerry E (1993) Bioremediation of experimental petroleum spills on mineral soils in the Vesfold Hills, Antarctica. Polar Biol 13:163–170

    Article  Google Scholar 

  21. Leahy JG, Colwell RR (1990) Microbial degradation of hydrocarbons in the environment. Microbiol Rev 54:305–315

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  22. Maliszewska-Kordybach B (2005) Dissipation of polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons in freshly contaminated soils-The effect of soil physicochemical properties and aging. Water Air Soil Pollut 168:113–128

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  23. Margesin R, Hämmerle M, Tscherko D (2007) Microbial activity and community composition during bioremediation of diesel-oil-contaminated soil: effects of hydrocarbon concentration, fertilizers and incubation time. Microb Ecol 53:259–269

    PubMed  Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  24. Margesin R, Schinner F (1997a) Efficiency of indigenous and inoculated cold-adapted soil microorganisms for biodegradation of diesel oil in alpine soils. Appl Environ Microbiol 63:2660–2664

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  25. Margesin R, Schinner F (1997b) Bioremediation of diesel-oil-contaminated alpine soils at low temperatures. Appl Microbiol Biotechnol 47:462–468

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  26. Margesin R, Schinner F (2001) Biodegradation and bioremediation of hydrocarbons in extreme environments. Appl Environ Microbiol 56:650–663

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  27. Mills AL, Breuil C, Colwell RR (1978) Enumeration of petroleum-degrading marine and estuarine microorganisms by the most probable number method. Can J Microbiol 24:552–557

    Article  Google Scholar 

  28. Mohn W, Radziminski C, Fortin M-C, Reimer K (2001) On site bioremediation of hydrocarbon-contaminated Arctic tundra soils in inoculated biopiles. Appl Microbiol Biotechnol 57:242–247

    PubMed  Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  29. Nedwell DB (1999) Effect of low temperature on microbial growth: lowered affinity for substrates limits growth at low temperature. FEMS Microbiol Ecol 30:101–111

    PubMed  Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  30. Oppenheimer CH, ZoBell CE (1952) The growth and viability of sixty-three species of marine bacteria as influenced by hydrostatic pressure. J Mar Res 11:10–18

    Google Scholar 

  31. Powell SM, Ferguson SH, Snape I, Siciliano SD (2006) Fertilization stimulates anaerobic fuel degradation of Antarctic soils by denitrifying microorganisms. Environ Sci Technol 40:2011–2017

    PubMed  Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  32. Rayner JL, Snape I, Walworth JL, Harvey PM, Ferguson SH (2007) Petroleum-hydrocarbon contamination and remediation by microbioventing at sub-Antarctic Macquarie Island. Cold Regions Sci Technol 48:139

    Article  Google Scholar 

  33. Rivet L, Mille G, Bassères A, Ladousse A, Gerin C, Acquaviva M, Bertrand JC (1993) n-Alkanes biodegradation by a marine bacterium in the presence of an oleophilic nutrient. Biotechnol Lett 15:637–640

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  34. Ruberto L, Vazquez SC, Mac Cormarck WP (2003) Effectiveness of the natural bacteria flora, biostimulation and bioaugmentation on the bioremediation of a hydrocarbon contaminated Antarctic soil. Inter Biodeter Biodegrad 52:115–125

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  35. Snape I, Riddle MJ, Stark JS, Cole CM, King CK, Duquesne S, Gore DB (2001) Management and remediation of contaminated sites at Casey Station, Antarctica. Polar Record 37:199–214

    Article  Google Scholar 

  36. Stallwood B, Shears J, Williams PA, Hugues KA (2005) Low temperature bioremediation of oil-contaminated soil using biostimulation and bioaugmentation with a Pseudomonas sp. from maritime Antarctica. J Appl Microb 99:794–802

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  37. Van Hamme JD, Singh A, Ward OP (2003) Recent advances in petroleum microbiology. Microbiol Mol Biol Rev 67:503–554

    PubMed  Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  38. Walworth JL, Reynolds CM (1995) Bioremediation of a petroleum-contaminated cryic soil: Effects of phosphorous, nitrogen, and temperature. J Soil Contam 4:299–310

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  39. Wardell LJ (1995) Potential for bioremediation of fuel-contaminated soil in Antarctica. J Soil Contam 4:111–121

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  40. Whyte LG, Hawari J, Zhou E, Bourbonniere L, Inniss WE, Greer CW (1998) Biodegradation of variable-chain-length alkanes at low temperature by a psychrotrophic Rhodococcus sp. Appl Environ Microbiol 64:2578–2584

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgements

This research was supported by the French Polar Institute (IPEV) and the European Project FACEIT (Fast Advanced Cellular and Ecosystems Information Technologies).

Author information

Author notes

  1. Frédéric Coulon

    Present address: Center for Resource Management and Efficiency, Sustainable Systems Department, School of Applied Sciences, Cranfield University, Bedfordshire, MK43 0AL, UK

Affiliations

  1. Laboratoire Arago, Observatoire Océanologique de Banyuls, Université P. et M. Curie UMR-CNRS 7621, 66650, Banyuls sur mer cedex, France

    Daniel Delille

  2. Department of Biological Sciences, University of Essex, Wivenhoe Park, Colchester, CO4 3SQ, UK

    Frédéric Coulon

Authors
  1. Daniel Delille
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Frédéric Coulon
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Daniel Delille.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and Permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Delille, D., Coulon, F. Comparative Mesocosm Study of Biostimulation Efficiency in Two Different Oil-Amended Sub-Antarctic Soils. Microb Ecol 56, 243–252 (2008). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00248-007-9341-z

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00248-007-9341-z

Keywords

  • Mineral Soil
  • Organic Soil
  • Petroleum Hydrocarbon
  • Much Probable Number
  • Soil Mesocosms