Evaluation of the Potential of Burningbush (Kochia scoparia (L.) Schard) and Maize (Zea mays L.) and the Role of Soil Organic Amendment in Phytoremediation of Gasoline-Contaminated Soils

Research paper
  • 7 Downloads

Abstract

A greenhouse study was conducted to investigate the performance of burningbush (Kochia scoparia (L.) Schard) and maize (Zea mays L.) in removal of hydrocarbons from soils contaminated with different levels of gasoline. Plants’ capability to grow in gasoline-spiked soils was also evaluated. Additionally, peat fertilizer applied to selected treatments to identify the role of organic amendment of soil on plant growth and remediation potential in contaminated soil. Both studied plant species were found to tolerate gasoline contamination up to the highest applied concentration, i.e., 10,000 mg/kg; however, seedling emergence and subsequent growth were affected in the presence of various levels gasoline in soil. Germination, biomass and root length of burningbush and maize significantly decreased in the presence of higher levels of gasoline (P < 0.05). Positive influence of soil amendment with peat on plant growth and phytoremediation performance was achieved. Remediation ability of both plant species was altered by variation in gasoline content of soil. For instance, increase in gasoline content of unamended soils from 1000 to 10,000 mg/kg reduced hydrocarbon dissipation in the rhizosphere of burningbush from 92.48 to 79.44%. Burningbush and maize demonstrated considerable remediation ability over the course of experiment, with slightly higher effectiveness for burningbush both in amended and in unamended soils. Results indicated that high tolerance and biomass establishment of a given plant species in gasoline-contaminated soil, as observed for burningbush and maize, may imply promising phytoremediation performance.

Keywords

Gasoline Phytoremediation Burningbush Maize Spiked soil 

References

  1. Abhilash PC, Jamil S, Singh N (2009) Transgenic plants for enhanced biodegradation and phytoremediation of organic xenobiotics. Biotechnol Adv 7:474–488CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Adam G, Duncan HJ (2002) Influence of diesel fuel on seed germination. Environ Pollut 120:363–370CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Ansari AA, Gill SS, Gill R, Lanza GR, Newman L (2015) Phytoremediation: management of environmental contaminants. Springer, BerlinCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Cheema SA, Khan MI, Shen C, Tang X, Farooq M, Chen L, Zhang C, Chen Y (2010) Degradation of phenanthrene and pyrene in spiked soils by single and combined plants cultivation. J Hazard Mater 177(1–3):384–389CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Daryabeigi Zand A, Hoveidi H (2017) Feasibility of sunflower (Helianthus annus L.) plantation in low to moderately contaminated brownfields to achieve remediation objectives. J Appl Biotechnol Rep 3(3):457–463Google Scholar
  6. Daryabeigi Zand A, Nabi Bidhendi GR, Mehrdadi N, Shirdam R, Mikaeili A (2009) Screening tolerant plant species to grow in Total Petroleum Hydrocarbon (TPHs) polluted soil for remediation purposes. Environ Sci Technol 12(4):41–57Google Scholar
  7. De Sousa CA (2003) Turning brownfields into green space in the City of Toronto. Landsc Urban Plan 62(4):181–198CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Elrahman ASA (2016) Redevelopment aspects for brownfields sites in Egypt. Procedia Environ Sci 34:25–35CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Kulakow PA, Schwab AP, Banks MK (2000) Screening plant species for growth on weathered, petroleum hydrocarbon-contaminated sediments. Int J Phytoremediation 2:297–317CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Kurtovic S, Siljkovic B, Nikola Pavlovic N (2014) Methods of identification and evaluation of brownfield sites. Int J Res Bus Soc Sci 3(2):105–120Google Scholar
  11. Li X, Yang H, Li W, Che Z (2016) Public-private partnership in residential brownfield redevelopment: case studies of Pittsburgh. Procedia Eng 145:1534–1540CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Liao C, Xu W, Lu G, Deng F, Liang X, Guo C, Dang Z (2016) Biosurfactant-enhanced phytoremediation of soils contaminated by crude oil using maize (Zea mays. L). Ecol Eng 92:10–17CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Lin J (2013) The effect of voluntary brownfields programs on nearby property values: evidence from Illinois. J Urban Econ 78:1–18CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Liu H, Meng F, Tong Y, Chi J (2014) Effect of plant density on phytoremediation of polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons contaminated sediments with Vallisneria spiralis. Ecol Eng 73:380–385CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Merkl N, Schultze-Kraft R, Infante C (2005) Assessment of tropical grasses and legumes for phytoremediation of petroleum-contaminated soils. Water Air Soil Pollut 165:195–209CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Panagos P, Liedekerke MV, Yigini Y, Montanarella L (2013) Contaminated sites in Europe: review of the current situation based on data collected through a European network. J Environ Public Health.  https://doi.org/10.1155/2013/158764 Google Scholar
  17. Patrascioiu C, Doicin B (2015) Property estimation of commercial ecological gasoline. Chem Eng Trans 43:247–253Google Scholar
  18. Paull E (2008) The Environmental and economic impacts of brownfields redevelopment. Northeast-Midwest Institute, Washington, DCGoogle Scholar
  19. Pilon-Smits E (2005) Phytoremediation. Annu Rev Plant Biol 56:15–39CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Scow KM, Hicks KA (2005) Natural attenuation and enhanced bioremediation of organic contaminants in groundwater. Curr Opin Biotech 16:246–253CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. US EPA (1998) Test methods for evaluating solid waste, physical chemical methods. Environmental Protection Agency, Washington, DCGoogle Scholar
  22. Vigliotta G, Matrella S, Cicatelli A, Guarino F, Castiglione S (2016) Effects of heavy metals and chelants on phytoremediation capacity and on rhizobacterial communities of maize. J Environ Manage 179(1):93–102CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Wang J, Feng X, Anderson CW, Xing Y, Shang L (2012) Remediation of mercury contaminated sites—a review. J Hazard Mater 221–222:1–18Google Scholar
  24. Ward O, Singh A, Hamme JV (2003) Accelerated biodegradation of petroleum hydrocarbon waste. J Int Microbiol Biotechnol 30:260–270CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Wei S, Pan S (2010) Phytoremediation for soils contaminated by phenanthrene and pyrene with multiple plant species. J Soil Sediment 10(5):886–894CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Xiao N, Liu R, Jin C, Dai Y (2015) Efficiency of five ornamental plant species in the phytoremediation of polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbon (PAH)-contaminated soil. Ecol Eng 75:384–391CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© University of Tehran 2018

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Faculty of EnvironmentUniversity of TehranTehranIran

Personalised recommendations