Phytoremediation of Heavy Metal-Contaminated Soils Using the Perennial Energy Crops Miscanthus spp. and Arundo donax L.
- 1.7k Downloads
Giant reed (Arundo donax) and Miscanthus spp. were tested to evaluate their tolerance and phytoremediation capacity in soils contaminated with heavy metals. Giant reed was tested under 450 and 900 mg Zn kg−1, 300 and 600 mg Cr kg−1, and 450 and 900 mg Pb kg−1 contaminated soils, while the Miscanthus genotypes M. × giganteus, M. sinensis, and M. floridulus were tested on 450 and 900 mg Zn kg−1 contaminated soils, along 2 years. Giant reed biomass production was negatively affected by the contamination; however, yield reduction was only significant under 600 mg Cr kg−1 soil. Zn contamination reduced significantly M. × giganteus production but not M. sinensis or M. floridulus yields. Yet, M. × giganteus was also the most productive. Both grasses can be considered as indicators, once metal concentration in the biomass reflected soil metal concentration. Regarding giant reed experiments, higher modified bioconcentration factors (mBCFs, 0.3–0.6) and translocation factors (TFs, 1.0–1.1) were obtained for Zn, in the contaminated soils, followed by Cr (mBCFs, 0.2–0.4, belowground organs; TFs, 0.2–0.4) and Pb (mBCFs, 0.06–0.07, belowground organs; TFs, 0.2–0.4). Metal accumulation also followed the same pattern Zn > Cr > Pb. Miscanthus genotypes showed different phytoremediation potential facing similar soil conditions. mBCFs (0.3–0.9) and TFs (0.7–1.5) were similar among species, but highest zinc accumulation was observed with M. × giganteus due to the higher biomass production. Giant reed and M. × giganteus can be considered as interesting candidates for Zn phytoextraction, favored by the metal accumulation observed and the high biomass produced. A. donax and Miscanthus genotypes showed to be well suited for phytostabilization of heavy metal contamination as these grasses prevented the leaching of heavy metal and groundwater contamination.
KeywordsArundo donax Miscanthus genotypes Heavy metals Contaminated soils Phytoremediation
The authors would like to acknowledge the European Union for financially supporting this work through the Optimization of Perennial Grasses for Biomass Production (OPTIMA) project, Grant Agreement No. 289642, Collaborative project, FP7-KBBE-2011.3.1-02.
- 3.Kabata-Pendias A (2011) Trace elements in soils and plants, 4th edn. CRC, Boca RatonGoogle Scholar
- 4.Fergusson J (1991) The heavy elements: chemistry, environmental impact and health effects. Pergamon Press, OxfordGoogle Scholar
- 5.Garbisu C, Alkorta I (2003) Basic concepts on heavy metal soil bioremediation. Eur J Miner Process Environ Prot 3:58–66Google Scholar
- 8.Wuana RA, Okieimen FE (2011) Heavy metals in contaminated soils: a review of sources, chemistry, risks and best available strategies for remediation. ISRN Ecol. Article ID 402647, doi: 10.5402/2011/402647
- 14.Fernando A, Oliveira J (2004) Fitorremediação de solos contaminados com metais pesados—mecanismos, vantagens e limitações. Biologia Vegetal e Agro-Industrial 1:103–114Google Scholar
- 18.Fernando AL, Godovikova V, Oliveira JFS (2004) Miscanthus × giganteus: contribution to a sustainable agriculture of a future/present-oriented biomaterial. Materials Science Forum, Advanced Materials Forum II 455–456: 437–441Google Scholar
- 19.Lasat MM (2000) Phytoextraction of metals from contaminated soil: a review of plant/soil/metal interaction and assessment of pertinent agronomic issues. JHSR 2:1–25Google Scholar
- 23.El Bassam N (2010) Handbook of bioenergy crops. A complete reference to species, development and applications. Earthscan, LondonGoogle Scholar
- 25.ALAC F (2005) Fitorremediação por Miscanthus × giganteus de solos contaminados com metais pesados, Ph.D. thesis. Faculdade de Ciências e Tecnologia, Universidade Nova de Lisboa, Portugal (in Portuguese) Google Scholar
- 31.Fernando A, Oliveira JS (2004) Effects on growth, productivity and biomass quality of Miscanthus × giganteus of soils contaminated with heavy metals. In: Van Swaaij, WPM, Fjällström T, Helm P, Grassi A (eds) Biomass for Energy, Industry and Climate Protection: Proceedings of the 2nd World Biomass Conference, ETA-Florence e WIP-Munich, pp 387–390Google Scholar
- 33.Pilu R, Bucci A, Badone FC, Landoni M (2012) Giant reed (Arundo donax L.): a weed plant or a promising energy crop? Afr J Biotechnol 11:9163–9174Google Scholar
- 34.Decreto-Lei n.°276-2009 (2009) Anexo I, Valores limite de concentração relativos a metais pesados, compostos orgânicos e dioxinas e microrganismos. Diário da República 192:7154–7165 (in Portuguese)Google Scholar
- 35.Dyckhoff C, Halliwell L, Haynes R, Watts S (1996) Sampling. In: Watts S, Halliwell L (eds) Essential environmental science, methods and techniques. Routledge, London, pp 31–66Google Scholar
- 36.Baize D (2000) Guide des analyses en pedologie, 2nd edn. INRA editions, ParisGoogle Scholar
- 37.Ross DS, Ketterings Q (2011) Recommended methods for determining soil cation exchange capacity—Chapter 9. Recommended Soil Testing Procedures for the Northeastern United States. Cooperative Bulletin No. 493. Available at http://extension.udel.edu/lawngarden/files/2012/10/CHAP9.pdf.
- 39.Watts S, Halliwell L (1996) Appendix 3—detailed field and chemical methods for soil. In: Watts S, Halliwell L (eds) Essential environmental science, methods and techniques. Routledge, London, pp 475–505Google Scholar
- 40.Haigh M, Dyckhoff C (1996) Soils. In: Watts S, Halliwell L (eds) Essential environmental science, methods & techniques. Routledge, London, pp 261–303Google Scholar
- 41.Olsen SR, Cole CV, Watanabe FS, Dean LA (1954) Estimation of available phosphorus in soils by extraction with sodium bicarbonate. United States Department of Agriculture (USDA) Circular 939. U.S. Government Printing Office, WashingtonGoogle Scholar
- 43.ISO 11466 (1995) Soil quality—extraction of trace metals soluble in aqua regia Google Scholar
- 45.Vandecasteele C, Block CB (1993) Modern methods for trace element determination. Wiley, ChichesterGoogle Scholar
- 54.Kacprzak MJ, Rosikon K, Fijalkowski K, Grobelak A (2014) The effect of Trichoderma on heavy metal mobility and uptake by Miscanthus giganteus, Salix sp., Phalaris arundinacea, and Panicum virgatum. Appl Environ Soil Sci, Article ID 506142, doi: 10.1155/2014/506142
- 55.Jin X, You S (2015) Soil pollution of abandoned tailings in one zinc antimony mine and heavy metal accumulation characteristics of dominant plants. International Conference on Materials, Environmental and Biological Engineering, Guilin, pp 500–504, March 28–30, MEBE (2015)Google Scholar
- 56.Barbosa B, Costa J, Boléo S, Duarte MP, Fernando AL (2016) Phytoremediation of inorganic compounds. In: Ribeiro AB, Mateus EP, Couto N (eds) Electrokinetics across disciplines and continents—new strategies for sustainable development. Springer International Publishing, Switzerland, pp 373–400CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 57.Fiorentino N, Fagnano M, Adamo P, Impagliazzo A, Mori M, Pepe O, Ventorino V, Zoina A (2013) Assisted phytoextraction of heavy metals: compost and Trichoderma effects on giant reed (Arundo donax L.) uptake and soil N-cycle microflora. Ital J Agron 8:244–254Google Scholar
- 58.Sabeen M, Mahmood Q, Irshad M, Fareed I, Khan A, Ullah F, Hussain J, Hayat Y, Tabassum S (2013) Cadmium phytoremediation by Arundo donax L. from contaminated soil and water. Int J Biomed Res. Article ID 324830, doi: 10.1155/2013/324830
- 60.Decreto Lei n° 236/98 (1998) Normas, critérios e objectivos de qualidade com a finalidade de proteger o meio aquático e melhorar a qualidade das águas em função dos seus principais usos, Diário da República 176: 3676–3722 (in Portuguese).Google Scholar