phytoremediation of pesticide affected soils

1. 1

2. 2

3. 3

4. Soil pollutants
• Pesticides
• Fertilizers and other agrochemicals
• Industrial effluents etc,
4

5. What is a pesticide?
• Pesticide is a substance, which is used to
control pests of crops.
• "-cide" -Latin word "to kill."
5

6. Types of pesticides
• Insecticides : DDT, Aldrin, Dieldrin, Heptachlor
• Herbicides : Paraquat, 2,4-D, 2,4,5-T, Alachlor
• Rodenticides : Zinc phosphide, Warfarin
• Fungicides : Ziram, Maneb, Triazines, Quinones
• Bactericides : Chlorine containing chemicals
• Repellants : Camphor, Clove oil
6

7. Impact of pesticides on human health
Cancer
1. Brain cancer
2. Kidney cancer
3. Blood cancer
4. Lung cancer
5. Breast cancer etc,
 Neurological diseases
 Birth defects and fetal defects
 Impaired fertility of males: 2,4-D and
Dibromochlorophane
7

8. Pesticide tragedies

9. • Aerial spraying of Endosulfan since 1976 in cashew
plantations spread over 4500 hectares three times in a
year around 15 villages in Kasaragod district
• The cashew plantations belong to the state owned
public sector company – Plantation Corporation of
Kerala (PCK)
• Aerial spray of Endosulfan using helicopters was
recommended by Government scientific bodies to cut
cost of manual labour
Kasargodu Endosulfon tragedy

10. • Endosulfan has been banned by the Supreme
Court of India w.e.f. 13-05-2011 for production
use & sale, all over India

11. Bhopal Gas Tragedy
• Bhopal’s pesticide plant was built in 1969 to manufacture Sevin, a pesticide
used throughout Asia to kill beetles, weevils and worms
• The plant was operated by Union Carbide India, Limited, but an American
company, Union Carbide Corporation, held more than half the stock
• The leak began on December 2, 1984, when water entered a tank that was
used to store methyl isocyanate, a toxic gas and a key ingredient in Sevin
• The water reacted with the gas, causing extreme pressure and heat that
possibly caused the tank to explode.
• The tank spewed 40 tons of poisonous gas into the air. The toxic cloud was
mostly methyl isocyanate, a compound that can irritate the throat and eyes,
cause chest pain and shortness of breath, and, in large doses trigger
convulsions, lung failure and cardiac arrest

12. Dissolved in soil
solution
Occupying the
exchange sites
on soil inorganic
constistuents
Specifically
adsorbed on
inorganic soil
constistuents
Precipitated as
pure or mixed
solids
Associated with
insoluble
organic matter
12

13. Critical limit values of metal
contaminants in soil
Critical limit values (mg/Kg of soil)
Contaminants PH <7.00 PH >7.00
Cd 1 3
Cu 50 210
Cr 30 150
Ni 30 112
Pb 50 300
Zn 150 450
13

14. 14

15. Phytoremediation - What is it?
Definition: Use of green plants and their microorganisms to
reduce environmental problems without the need to excavate
the contaminant material and dispose of it elsewhere.
● Natural process - can be an effective remediation method
at a variety of sites and on numerous contaminants.
● Selected plant species possess the genetic potential to
remove, degrade, metabolize, or immobilize a wide range
of contaminants (~350 species).
15

16. History of Phytoremediation
16
• 1994: phytoremediation term coined by
ILYA RASKIN
• First Phytoremediation company - PHYTOTECH
• 1995: First Phytoremediation conference,
Columbia
phytoremediation takes off

17. Phytoremediation mechanisms
Phytoextraction
Phytostabilization
Phytoremediation Phytotransformation
Phytostimulation
Phytovolatilization
Rhizofiltration
17

18. Harvest and disposal
Metal accumulation in shoots
Transfer from roots to shoots
Rhizosphere amendments or soil exudates increase the mobility and uptake
1
2
3
4
Phytoextraction
 Works well on metals
such as lead, cadmium,
copper, nickel etc.
18

19. Advantages:
● Cost is fairly inexpensive
compared to conventional
methods.
● Contaminant permanently
removed from soil.
● Amount of waste material
that must be disposed of
is decreased up to 95%
● In some cases,
contaminant can be
recycled.
Limitations:
• Metal bioavailability within
the rhizosphere.
• Rate of metal uptake by
roots.
• Proportion of metal “fixed”
within the roots.
• Cellular tolerance to toxic
metals.
19

20. The potential of water hyacinth (Eichhornia crassipes) to remove a
phosphorus pesticide Ethion
Phytodegradation
20

21. Advantage:
● Both economically and
environmentally friendly
Disadvantages:
● Requires more than one
growing season to be
efficient
● Soil must be less than 3 ft
in depth and groundwater
within 10 ft of the surface
● Contaminants may still re-
enter the food chain
through animals or insects
that eat plant material
21

22. 3. Rhizofiltration
22

23. Rhizofilteration
23

24. Advantages:
● Ability to use both
terrestrial and aquatic
plants for either in situ
and ex situ applications.
● Contaminants do not
have to be translocated
into shoots.
Disadvantages:
● Constant need to adjust
pH.
● Plants may first need to
be grown in greenhouse
/ nursery.
● There is periodic
harvesting and plant
disposal.
● Tank design should be
well engineered.
24

25. • The use of plants to reduce
the bio availability of
pollutants in the environment
through reduction of
leaching, run off and soil
erosion.
• Prevent migration to the
ground water or air
4. Phytostabilisation
Phytostabilization of “Hg” by
WILLOW ROOTS
25

26. Advantages:
● No disposal of
hazardous material /
biomass is required
● Very effective when
rapid immobilization is
needed to preserve
ground and surface
waters
Disadvantages:
● Contaminant remain in
soil
● Application of extensive
fertilisation / soil
amendments
● Mandatory monitoring
required
26

27. • Used only for those contaminants that are highly
volatile
• Limited to certain special metals capable of forming
volatile compounds eg: Hg, Se, As
• Indian mustard (Brassica juncea) and canola (Brassica
napus) have been used in the phytovolatilization of Se
5. Phytovolatilisation
27

28. Advantage:
•The contaminant, mercuric
ion, may be transformed
into a less toxic substance
(i.e., elemental Hg).
Disadvantage:
•The mercury released into
the atmosphere is likely to
be recycled by precipitation
and then re-deposited back
into lakes and oceans,
repeating the production of
methyl-mercury by
anaerobic bacteria.
28

29. 29

30. How long will it take ???
•Depends on amount of metals present
•Type of the plant used
•Size and depth of polluted area
•Type of soil and conditions present
30

31. Types of plants used

32. Types of plant used
● Plant species are selected for use based on factors
such as:
- ability to extract or degrade the contaminants of
concern
- adaptation to local climates
- high biomass
- depth root structure
- compatibility with soils
- growth rate
- ease of planting and maintenance
- ability to take up large quantities of water through the
roots.

33. Types of plants used

34. Hydrangeas are popular
ornamental plants grown
for their large clumps of
flowers. Their other
speciality is that they are
responsible for drawing
aluminium out of the soil.
Water Hyssop (Bacopa monnieri)
removes lead, mercury, cadmium
and chromium from bogs and
wetland.
Willow trees
absorb
cadmium,
zinc and
copper

35. 35

36. Properties of Hyperaccumulators
• Ability to accumulate the metal intended to be
extracted, preferably in the aboveground
parts.
• Tolerance to high-metal concentrations in soils.
• Fast growth and high accumulating biomass.
• Easily grown as an agricultural crop and fully
harvestable.
36

37. Hyper accumulators V/S Common
plants
Maximum accumulating capacity of contaminants (mg/kg of dry matter)
Contaminants Common plants Hyper accumulators
Cd 3 1800
Cu 50 12300
Cr 2 7700
Pb 10 7900
Ni 50 47000
Zn 300 51000
37

38. Elements Plant species Maximum conc.
(mg/kg)
Cadmium Thlaspi caerulescens 500
Chromium Brassica juncea, Helianthus annus 1400
Nickel Alyssum lesbiacum, Sebertia
accumulata
47000
Lead Thlaspi rotundifolium, Brassica
juncea, Zea mays
8200
Cobalt Haumaniuastrum robertii 10000
Zinc Thlaspi caerulescens, Brassica
juncea, B. oleracea, B.campestris
51000
Selenium Brassica juncea, B.napus 900
Copper Ipomoea alpina 12000
38

39. 39
T. goesingense
Alyssum bertoloniiT. caeruluscens
Thlaspi rotundifolium

40. Alyssum lesbiacum
Sebertia acuminata Ipomoea alpina
Haumaniuastrum robertii
40

41. What to do with plant containing
contaminants ?
The shoot is harvested to recover the metal.

42. How the metals extracted be used again?

43. Cost effective when compared to other conventional
methods
 “Natural” method, more aesthetically pleasing
 Minimal land disturbance
 Reduces potential for transport of contaminants by
wind, reduces soil erosion
 Multiple contaminants can be removed with the
same plant.
43

44.  Slow rate and difficult to achieve acceptable
levels of decontamination
 Possibility of contaminated plants entering the
food chain
 Contaminant might kill the plant
 Possible spread of contaminant through falling
leaves
44

45. Review of literature
• Julia Foght , Trevor April , Kevin Biggar & Jackie
Aislabie (2001) ,Bioremediation of DDT-
Contaminated Soils: A Review, Biorernediation
Journal, Newzealand.
• Hyperaccumulators and phytoremediation of
heavy metal contaminated soil:a review of studies
in China and abroad,WEI Chao Yang,CHEN Tong
Bin (Institute of Geographical Sciences and
Natural Resources Research,Chinese Academy of
Sciences,Beijing 100101,China)
45

46. • Research Progress in Phytoextraction Technique of
Cadmium Contaminated Soil,WEN Hua,WEI Shi-qiang
(College of Resourees and Environment,Southwest
Agricultural University,Chongqing,400716,China).
• PHYTOREMEDIATION AND PHYTOTECHNOLOGIES: A
REVIEW FOR THE PRESENT AND THE FUTURE, Nelson
Marmiroli, Marta Marmiroli and Elena Maestri
University of Parma, Department of Environmental
Sciences, Parco Area delle Scienze 11/A43100 Parma,
Italy
46

47. Material & methods
A metal control (raw effluent without any plants) and a plant control
(plants grown in deionized water) were maintained
 Effluent used for experiments was analyzed for metals after every
24 h for the entire period of seven days.
100g of each addedAzolla pinnata Lemna minor
10L effluent added
220C ± 2
Collected from the agrofarm pond, BHU
The plants were rinsed gently with tap
water followed by deionized water
16 hours light
47

48. Table 1: Heavy metal conc. (mg/L) in raw
effluent and treated effluent
48

49. Table 2: Concentration (mg/L) of residual heavy metals in the test
solution at different stages of bioremediation using Azolla pinnata
Mn Cu Zn Fe Pb Cr Cd
Raw
efflu.
4.957 1.432 0.816 0.762 0.655 0.070 0.018
Day 1 4.582 0.619 0.204 0.578 0.310 0.066 0.012
Day 2 4.132 0.474 0.134 0.568 0.280 0.061 0.009
Day 3 2.106 0.359 0.123 0.551 0.170 0.052 0.007
Day 4 1.068 0.202 0.100 0.512 0.140 0.029 0.006
Day 5 1.020 0.130 0.036 0.260 0.050 0.020 0.004
Day 6 0.200 0.091 0.028 0.231 0.032 0.008 0.002
Day 7 0.190 0.039 0.019 0.228 0.026 0.005 0.001
96% 70%98%97% 78%93%93%
49

50. Table 3: Concentration (mg/L) of residual heavy metals in the test
solution at different stages of bioremediation using Lemna minor
Mn Cu Zn Fe Pb Cr Cd
Raw
efflu.
4.957 1.432 0.816 0.762 0.655 0.070 0.018
Day 1 2.819 0.814 0.765 0.667 0.370 0.065 0.009
Day 2 2.285 0.597 0.692 0.650 0.360 0.051 0.008
Day 3 2.106 0.233 0.468 0.646 0.340 0.045 0.004
Day 4 2.006 0.214 0.420 0.291 0.270 0.031 0.004
Day 5 1.189 0.210 0.368 0.286 0.230 0.029 0.004
Day 6 0.372 0.202 0.354 0.210 0.150 0.026 0.004
Day 7 0.301 0.204 0.306 0.200 0.100 0.026 0.003
86%94% 74% 84% 63% 78%62% 50

51. Table 4: Concentration (mg/kg) of heavy metals in Lemna
minor and Azolla pinnata before and after phytoremediation
Heavy metals
Lemna minor Azolla pinnata
Initial conc. Final conc. Initial conc. Final conc.
Mn 0.669 5.185* 0.568 4.903*
Cu 0.274 1.428* 0.015 0.817*
Zn 0.204 0.550* 0.030 0.628*
Fe 0.626 1.128* 0.816 1.225*
Pb 0.01 0.480* 0.10 0.382*
Cr 0.030 0.071* 0.031 0.092*
Cd 0.022 0.027* 0.016 0.030*
51

53. Conclusion
● Although much remains to be studied,
phytoremediation will clearly play some role in the
stabilisation and remediation of many contaminated
sites.
● The main factor driving the implementation of
phytoremediation projects are low costs with
significant improvements in site aesthetics and the
potential for ecosystem restoration.

54. References

55. 1. Donn, J. (2001). Fern will detoxify soil - Fern a possible toxic waste cure, pp 8A.
In newspaper: Rome News - Tribute.
http://news.google.com/newspapers?
nid=348&dat=20010201&id=XzgxAAAAIBAJ&sjid=szsDAAAAIBAJ&pg=6042,
44971 [Date accessed: 12/03/14]
2. Etim, E.E. (2012). Phytoremediation and its mechanisms: A review. International
Journal of Environmental and Bioenergy 2(3), 120 - 136.
http://modernscientificpress.com/Journals/ViewArticle.aspx?
gkN1Z6Pb60HNQPymfPQlZIsaO1oMajYkT5i8/SIthV/i1509l3XqlgX4XSDiXBec
[Date acccessed: 09/03/2014]
3. Flash demo on phytoremediation-https://illumin.usc.
edu/printer/80/phytoremediation/ [Date accessed: 12/03/2014]
4. Mishra, C.S,K. (2007). Rhizoremediation - An Emerging Technology for
Management of Environmental Pollutants. In: Environmental Biotechnology, pp
209-223. Balaji Offset.
http://books.google.mu/books?
id=YN0ZNmraDDMC&printsec=frontcover#v=onepage&q&f=false[Date
accessed: 12/03/14]

56. 5. Nordlander, H. (2012). Comparative assessment of rhizodegradation
approachment to PAHs pollution. International Summer Water Resources
Research School. Dept. of Water Resources Engineering, Lund University.
Published online.
http://www.tvrl.lth.
se/fileadmin/tvrl/files/vvrf05/HannaN_Comparative_assessment_of_rhizodegradati
on_approaches_to_PAHs_pollution.pdf [Date accessed: 12/03/2014]
6. Phytoremediation ppt on slidesharehttp://www.igece.
org/WRKY/BrachyWRKY/WRKY/IMG/Rhizofiltration.jpg[Date accessed: 12/03/14]
7. Poisoned River - Gold Mining Along the Biliu River, 20111117, Pacific
Environment http://www.habitatadvocate.com.au/?tag=china-water-pollution[Date
accessed: 09/03/2014]
8. Tann, N. (2012) 26 years later: Remembering the Chernobyl Nuclear Disaster.
Websire: The Batimore Sun http://darkroom.baltimoresun.
com/2012/04/remembering-chernobyl/#30[Date accessed: 09/03/2014]

57. 10. Text by Price, J. and Dare, S.
http://homeopathtyler.wordpress.com/2010/06/18/phyto-remediation-using-
plants-to-remove-toxins/ [Date accessed: 12/03/2014]
11. University of Hawaii - Department of Bioremediation Technologies
http://www.hawaii.edu/abrp/Technologies/phytran.html [Date accessed:
09/03/2014]
12. http://www.slideshare.net/nmanthreege/phytoremediation-11602480?
qid=4c84753a-f99a-4cd6-b9b4-32e743e03526&v=default&b=&from_search=2
[Date accessed: 12/03/14]
13. http://totallycoolpix.com/2013/02/water-pollution-in-china/[Date accessed:
09/03/2014]
14. http://deoracle.org/learning-objects/phytoremediation.html [Date accessed:
12/03/2014]

58. 58