| 1. |
- Andersson, Erika, et al.
(author)
-
AhR agonist and genotoxicant bioavailability in a PAH-contaminated soil undergoing biological treatment
- 2009
-
In: Environmental Science and Pollution Research. - : Springer Berlin/Heidelberg. - 0944-1344 .- 1614-7499. ; 16:5, s. 521-530
-
Journal article (peer-reviewed)abstract
- Degradation of the 16 US EPA priority PAHs in soil subjected to bioremediation is often achieved. However, the PAH loss is not always followed by a reduction in soil toxicity. For instance, bioanalytical testing of such soil using the chemical-activated luciferase gene expression (CALUX) assay, measuring the combined effect of all Ah receptor (AhR) activating compounds, occasionally indicates that the loss of PAHs does not correlate with the loss of Ah receptor-active compounds in the soil. In addition, standard PAH analysis does not address the issue of total toxicant bioavailability in bioremediated soil.To address these questions, we have used the CALUX AhR agonist bioassay and the Comet genotoxicity bioassay with RTL-W1 cells to evaluate the toxic potential of different extracts from a PAH-contaminated soil undergoing large-scale bioremediation. The extracts were also chemically analyzed for PAH16 and PCDD/PCDF. Soil sampled on five occasions between day 0 and day 274 of biological treatment was shaken with n-butanol with vortex mixing at room temperature to determine the bioavailable fraction of contaminants. To establish total concentrations, parts of the same samples were extracted using an accelerated solvent extractor (ASE) with toluene at 100A degrees C. The extracts were tested as inducers of AhR-dependent luciferase activity in the CALUX assay and for DNA breakage potential in the Comet bioassay.The chemical analysis of the toluene extracts indicated slow degradation rates and the CALUX assay indicated high levels of AhR agonists in the same extracts. Compared to day 0, the bioavailable fractions showed no decrease in AhR agonist activity during the treatment but rather an up-going trend, which was supported by increasing levels of PAHs and an increased effect in the Comet bioassay after 274 days. The bio-TEQs calculated using the CALUX assay were higher than the TEQs calculated from chemical analysis in both extracts, indicating that there are additional toxic PAHs in both extracts that are not included in the chemically derived TEQ.The response in the CALUX and the Comet bioassays as well as the chemical analysis indicate that the soil might be more toxic to organisms living in soil after 274 days of treatment than in the untreated soil, due to the release of previously sorbed PAHs and possibly also metabolic formation of novel toxicants.Our results put focus on the issue of slow degradation rates and bioavailability of PAHs during large-scale bioremediation treatments. The release of sorbed PAHs at the investigated PAH-contaminated site seemed to be faster than the degradation rate, which demonstrates the importance of considering the bioavailable fraction of contaminants during a bioremediation process.It has to be ensured that soft remediation methods like biodegradation or the natural remediation approach do not result in the mobilization of toxic compounds including more mobile degradation products. For PAH-contaminated sites this cannot be assured merely by monitoring the 16 target PAHs. The combined use of a battery of biotests for different types of PAH effects such as the CALUX and the Comet assay together with bioavailability extraction methods may be a useful screening tool of bioremediation processes of PAH-contaminated soil and contribute to a more accurate risk assessment. If the bioremediation causes a release of bound PAHs that are left undegraded in an easily extracted fraction, the soil may be more toxic to organisms living in the soil as a result of the treatment. A prolonged treatment time may be one way to reduce the risk of remaining mobile PAHs. In critical cases, the remediation concept might have to be changed to ex situ remediation methods.
|
|
| 2. |
- Elgh-Dalgren, Kristin, et al.
(author)
-
Anaerobic bioremediation of a soil with mixed contaminants : Explosives degradation and influence on heavy metal distribution, monitored as changes in concentration and toxicity
- 2009
-
In: Water, Air and Soil Pollution. - Dordrecht : Springer Netherlands. - 0049-6979 .- 1573-2932. ; 202:1-4, s. 301-313
-
Journal article (peer-reviewed)abstract
- Two soils with explosives and metals were evaluated for the degradation efficiency of explosives by native microorganisms under anaerobic conditions. The commercially available method Daramend®, amended with zero-valent iron (ZVI), was compared with a horse-manure amended compost and a treatment with ZVI alone. In a moderately contaminated soil, Daramend® and ZVI treatment gave significantly higher removal rates compared to compost and control treatments (Tukey’s test, P<0.05). The largest overall decrease in ecotoxicity, measured with bioluminescent bacteria (Vibrio fischeri), was achieved with ZVI-treatment. In a more contaminated soil no degradation of contaminants and no decline in soil toxicity could be distinguished after the same time period. Problems with establishment of anaerobic conditions during parts of the remediation process and low microbial activity due to acute toxicity of contaminants are plausible explanations. Redistribution that could potentially lead to mobilization of the co-contaminant Pb was not observed in either of the soils during the biological treatments.
|
|
| 3. |
- van Hees, Patrick A. W., et al.
(author)
-
Re-cycling of Remediated Soil in Sweden : An Environmental Advantage?
- 2008
-
In: Resources, Conservation and Recycling. - Amsterdam : Elsevier. - 0921-3449 .- 1879-0658. ; 52:12, s. 1349-1361
-
Research review (peer-reviewed)abstract
- The disposal of soil material after ex-situ treatment of contaminated soil is an issue of growing concern. The handling and use of this material are surrounded by numerous regulatory, economic, technical and societal aspects that complicate or hinder recycling. As a consequence, the lack of means of recovery can in the long term bias the whole remedial process. In addition, it can affect the competition between various treatment options such as ex-situ, and in-situ techniques and landfilling. At the same time the materials must not have any negative environmental impacts, and their usage must be compatible with existing risk assessment and management frameworks regarding contaminated land. Other concerns such as a possible distinction against “lightly” contaminated materials, waste status and public acceptance add to the complexity. This paper focuses on Swedish conditions, but does also provide an outlook concerning EU regulation. A summary of leaching and batch tests employed for re-use of soil and waste is presented as well as an overview of the eco-toxicological aspects of treated materials. The main conclusion is that re-cycling of treated soil is desirable from numerous aspects, but has to go along an adequate risk assessment.
|
|
| 4. |
- Arwidsson, Zandra, et al.
(author)
-
Remediation of Metal Contaminated Soil by Organic Metabolites from Fungi I—Production of Organic Acids
- 2008
-
In: Water, Air and Soil Pollution. - Berlin, Germany : Springer. - 0049-6979 .- 1573-2932. ; 205:1-4, s. 215-226
-
Journal article (peer-reviewed)abstract
- Investigations were made on living strains offungi in a bioremediation process of three metal (lead)contaminated soils. Three saprotrophic fungi (Aspergillusniger, Penicillium bilaiae, and a Penicillium sp.) wereexposed to poor and rich nutrient conditions (no carbonavailability or 0.11 M D-glucose, respectively) andmetal stress (25 μM lead or contaminated soils) for5 days. Exudation of low molecular weight organicacids was investigated as a response to the metal andnutrient conditions. Main organic acids identified wereoxalic acid (A. niger) and citric acid (P. bilaiae).Exudation rates of oxalate decreased in response tolead exposure, while exudation rates of citrate were lessaffected. Total production under poor nutrient conditionswas low, except for A. niger, for which nosignificant difference was found between the poor andrich control. Maximum exudation rates were 20 μmoloxalic acid g^−1 biomass h^−1 (A. niger) and 20 μmolcitric acid g^−1 biomass h^−1 (P. bilaiae), in the presenceof the contaminated soil, but only 5 μmol organic acidsg^−1 biomass h^−1, in total, for the Penicillium sp. Therewas a significant mobilization of metals from the soilsin the carbon rich treatments and maximum release ofPb was 12% from the soils after 5 days. This was notsufficient to bring down the remaining concentration tothe target level 300 mg kg^−1 from initial levels of 3,800,1,600, and 370 mg kg^−1in the three soils. Target levelsfor Ni, Zn, and Cu, were 120, 500, and 200 mg kg^−1,respectively, and were prior to the bioremediationalready below these concentrations (except for Cu Soil1). However, maximum release of Ni, Zn, and Cu was28%, 35%, and 90%, respectively. The release of metalswas related to the production of chelating acids, but alsoto the pH-decrease. This illustrates the potential to usefungi exudates in bioremediation of contaminated soil.Nonetheless, the extent of the generation of organicacids is depending on several processes and mechanismsthat need to be further investigated.
|
|
| 5. |
- Elgh-Dalgren, Kristin, 1980-, et al.
(author)
-
Laboratory and pilot scale soil washing of PAH and arsenic from a wood preservation site : Changes in concentration and toxicity
- 2009
-
In: Journal of Hazardous Materials. - Amsterdam : Elsevier. - 0304-3894 .- 1873-3336. ; 172:2-3, s. 1033-1040
-
Journal article (peer-reviewed)abstract
- Soil washing of a soil with a mixture of both polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons (PAH) and As was evaluated in laboratory and pilot scale, utilizing both single and mixtures of different additives. The highest level of decontamination was achieved with a combination of 0.213 M of the chelating agent MGDA and 3.2xCMC* of a nonionic, alkyl glucoside surfactant at pH 12 (Ca(OH)2). This combination managed to reach Swedish threshold values within 10 min of treatment when performed at elevated temperature (50°C), with initial contaminant concentrations of As = 105±4 mg/kg and US-EPA PAH16 = 46.0±2.3 mg/kg. The main mechanisms behind the removal were the pH-effect for As and a combination of SOM-ionization as a result of high pH and micellar solubilization for PAHs. Implementation of the laboratory results utilizing a pilot scale equipment did not improve the performance, which may be due to the shorter contact time between the washing solution and the particles, or changes in physical characteristics of the leaching solution due to the elevated pressure utilized. The ecotoxicological evaluation, Microtox®, demonstrated that all soil washing treatments increased the toxicity of soil leachates, possibly due to increased availability of contaminants and toxicity of soil washing solutions to the test organism.
|
|
