Journal of Soils and Sediments

, Volume 14, Issue 10, pp 1753–1765 | Cite as

Application of a plant bioassay for the evaluation of ecotoxicological risks of heavy metals in sediments affected by mining activities

  • Mari Luz García-Lorenzo
  • María José Martínez-Sánchez
  • Carmen Pérez-Sirvent



The objective of this work was to evaluate the effectiveness of a plant bioassay (Phytotoxkit®) for screening ecotoxicological risks in sediments affected by mining activities.

Materials and methods

A total of 42 sediment samples affected by mining activities were studied, including 39 sediment samples from the Sierra Minera, Spain, an area affected by old extraction procedures, and three sediments from an area affected by opencast mining. These three samples were then mixed with limestone filler at 10, 20 and 30 %, providing nine stabilised samples. The total and soluble metal(loid) content (As, Cd, Cu, Fe, Pb and Zn) was determined in all samples, and the Phytotoxkit® bioassay was applied to determine the ecotoxicological effect of this procedure.

Results and discussion

The stabilised material had a neutral pH and low soluble metal(loid) concentration, similar to that of samples in which a natural attenuation process had taken place because of mixing with surrounding carbonate-rich materials. An ecotoxicological survey identified the low toxicity levels of the stabilised samples.


The applied bioassay is a good tool for screening metal(loid) contamination in areas affected by mining activities, since it provides information on both natural and simulated attenuation processes. The mixing of sediments with limestone filler could be applied to the remediation of zones affected by mining activities, because the toxicological effect on the tested organisms in the stabilised sediments was reduced significantly and the metal(loid) content was diminished.


Ecotoxicity Environmental risk Immobilisation Limestone filler Metal(loid)s Mining activity 

Supplementary material

11368_2014_942_MOESM1_ESM.doc (124 kb)
ESM 1 (DOC 124 kb)


  1. Asta MP (2011) Procesos geoquímicos en aguas ácidas por meteorización de sulfuros. Bol Geol Min 122:259–272Google Scholar
  2. Asta MP, Ayora C, Acero P, Cama J (2010) Field rates for natural attenuation of arsenic in Tinto Santa Rosa acid mine drainage (SW Spain). J Hazard Mater 177:1102–1111CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Bagur-González MG, Estepa-Molina C, Martín-Peinado F, Morales-Ruano S (2011) Toxicity assessment using Lactuca sativa L. bioassay of the metal(loid)s As, Cu, Mn, Pb and Zn in soluble-in-water saturated soil extracts from an abandoned mining site. J Soils Sediments 11:281–289CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Bakopoulou S, Emmanouil C, Kungolos A (2011) Assessment of wastewater effluent quality in Thessaly region, Greece, for determining its irrigation reuse potential. Ecotoxicol Environ Saf 74:188–194CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Baran A, Tarnawski M (2013) Phytotoxkit/Phytotestkit and Microtox as tools for toxicity assessment of sediments. Ecotoxicol Environ Saf 98:19–27CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Berger AC, Bethke CM, Krumhansl JL (2000) A process model of natural attenuation in drainage from a historic mining district. Appl Geochem 15:655–666CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Chapman BM, Jones DR, Jung RF (1983) Processes controlling metal ion attenuation in acid mine drainage streams. Geochim Cosmochim Acta 47:1957–1973CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Czerniawska-Kusza I, Kusza G (2011) The potential of the Phytotoxkit microbiotest for hazard evaluation of sediments in eutrophic freshwater ecosystems. Environ Monit Assess 179:113–121CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Garau G, Castaldi P, Santona L, Deiana P, Melis P (2007) Influence of red mud, zeolite and lime on heavy metal immobilization, culturable heterotrophic microbial populations and enzyme activities in a contaminated soil. Geoderma 142:47–57CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. García-Lorenzo ML, Martínez-Sánchez MJ, Pérez-Sirvent C, Molina J (2009) Ecotoxicological evaluation for the screening of areas polluted by mining activities. Ecotoxicology 18:1077–1086CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. García-Lorenzo ML, Pérez-Sirvent C, Martínez-Sánchez MJ, Molina-Ruiz J (2012) Trace elements contamination in an abandoned mining site in a semiarid zone. J Geochem Explor 113:23–35CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Gómez-Ros JM, García G, Peñas JM (2013) Assessment of restoration success of former metal mining areas after 30 years in a highly polluted Mediterranean mining area: Cartagena-La Unión. Ecol Eng 57:393–402CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Kopec M, Gondek K, Baran A (2013) Assessment of respiration activity and ecotoxicity of compost containing biopolymers. Ecotoxicol Environ Saf 89:137–142CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Kosobucki P, Kruk M, Buszewski B (2008) Immobilization of selected heavy metals in sewage sludge by natural zeolites. Bioresour Technol 99:5972–5976CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Leitgib L, Kálmán J, Gruiz K (2007) Comparison of bioassays by testing whole soil and their water extract from contaminated sites. Chemosphere 66:428–434CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Liu Y, Naidu R, Ming H (2011) Red mud as an amendment for pollutants in solid and liquid phases. Geoderma 163:1–12CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. López-Roldán R, Kazlauskaite L, Ribo J, Riva MC, González S, Cortina JL (2012) Evaluation of an automated luminescent bacteria assay for in situ aquatic toxicity determination. Sci Total Environ 440:307–313CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Lottermoser BG (2007) Mine wastes: characterization, treatment and environmental impacts. Springer, BerlinGoogle Scholar
  19. Madrid F, Florido MC (2010) Effects of the presence of a composted biosolid on the metal immobilizing action of an urban soil. J Hazard Mater 176:792–798CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Martin JD (2004) Using XPowder: a software package for powder X-ray diffraction analysis. D.L. GR 1001/04. ISBN 84-609-1497-6. 105 p
  21. Martínez-Sánchez MJ, Navarro MC, Pérez-Sirvent C, Marimón J, Vidal J, García-Lorenzo ML, Bech J (2008) Assessment of the mobility of metals in a mining-impacted coastal area (Spain, Western Mediterranean). J Geochem Explor 86:171–182CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Mignardi S, Corami A, Ferrini V (2012) Evaluation of the effectiveness of phosphate treatment for the remediation of mine waste soils contaminated with Cd, Cu, Pb and Zn. Chemosphere 86:354–360. doi: 10.1016/j.chemosphere.2011.09.050 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Nordstrom DK (1982) The effect of sulfate on aluminium concentrations in natural waters: some stability relations in the system Al2O3-SO3-H2O at 298K. Geochim Cosmochim Acta 46:681–692CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. OECD (1984) Guideline of the OECD for testing chemical products—terrestrial plants. Growth Test Method 208, Paris, FranceGoogle Scholar
  25. Oen IS, Fernandez JC, Manteca JI (1975) The lead-zinc and associated ores of La Union, Sierra de Cartagena, Spain. Econ Geol 70:1259–1278CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Oleszczuk P, Malara A, Jósko I, Lesiuk A (2012) The phytotoxicity changes of sewage sludge-amended soils. Water Air Soil Pollut 223:4937–4948CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Ovejero G, Jacquin JP, Servajean G (1976) Les minéralisations et leur contexte géologique dans la Sierra de Cartagena (sud-est de léspagne). Bull Soc Geol Fr 7(t. XVIII, no. 3):619–633Google Scholar
  28. Pérez-Sirvent C, García-Lorenzo ML, Martínez-Sánchez MJ, Navarro MC, Marimón J, Bech J (2007) Metal-contaminated soil remediation by using sludges of the marble industry: toxicological evaluation. Environ Int 33:502–504CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Pérez-Sirvent C, García-Lorenzo ML, Martínez-Sánchez MJ, Molina-Ruiz J, Marimón J, Navarro MC (2011) Use of marble cutting sludges for remediating soils and sediments contaminated by heavy metals. Environ Progr Sustain Energ 30:533–539CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Phytotoxkit (2004) Seed germination and early growth microbiotest with higher plants. Standard operation procedure. Microbiotest, NazarethGoogle Scholar
  31. Plaza G, Nalecz-Jawexki G, Ulfig K, Brigmon RL (2005) The application of bioassays as indicators of petroleum-contaminated soil remediation. Chemosphere 59:289–296CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Sarmiento AM, Olías M, Nieto JM, Canóvas CR, Delgado J (2009) Natural attenuation processes in two water reservoirs receiving acid mine drainage. Sci Total Environ 407:2051–2062CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. Scanferla P, Ferrari G, Pellay R, Volpi Ghirardini A, Zanetto G, Libralato G (2009) An innovative stabilisation/solidification treatment for contaminated soil remediation: demonstration project results. J Soils Sediments 9:229–236CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. Shi W, Shao H, Li H, Shao M, Du S (2009) Progress in the remediation of hazardous heavy metal-polluted soils by natural zeolite. J Hazard Mater 170:1–6CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. Wadhia K, Thompson KC (2007) Low-cost ecotoxicity testing of environmental samples using microbiotests for potential implementation of water framework directive. Trends Anal Chem 26:307–322CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2014

Authors and Affiliations

  • Mari Luz García-Lorenzo
    • 1
  • María José Martínez-Sánchez
    • 2
  • Carmen Pérez-Sirvent
    • 2
  1. 1.Department of Petrology and Geochemistry, Faculty of GeologyUniversity Complutense of MadridMadridSpain
  2. 2.Department of Agricultural Chemistry, Geology and Pedology, Faculty of ChemistryUniversity of MurciaMurciaSpain

Personalised recommendations