Comparison of the efficiency of duckweed in heavy metal removal from aqueous solutions in combined and separate forms

Document Type: Original Article

Authors

1 Research Center for Environmental Health Technology, Iran University of Medical Sciences

2 Department of Environmental Health Engineering, School of Public Health, Iran University of Medical Sciences, Tehran, Iran

3 School of Health, Rasht University of medical sciences, Rasht, Iran

4 School of Health, Guilan University of Medical Science

Abstract

Today, heavy metal contamination is a major environmental concern across the world. Some of the common heavy metal pollutants in industrial wastewater include lead, copper, cadmium, and nickel. This study aimed to compare the efficiency of duckweed in the removal of heavy metals from aqueous solutions in combined and separate forms. This applied, fundamental research was conducted based on empirical studies. Heavy metal solutions were prepared at the concentrations of 5, 10, and 25 mg/l, and duckweed (weight: 0.2, 0.4, 0.8, and 1.2 g) was added to the prepared solutions (100 ml). Plant weight in the combined solution was four times higher than the separate solution. After the contact time of five, 10, and 15 days, heavy metal residues in the solutions was measured using ICP-OES. According to the results, heavy metal removal from the separate solutions differed with the combined solutions. Both systems were compared in terms of the contact time, initial heavy metal concentration, and removal order. The obtained results indicated that the removal efficiency of heavy metals was higher in the combined solutions compared to the separate solutions. Increased initial concentration also reduced removal efficiency in the separate solutions, while the removal rate remained constant in the combined solutions. Moreover, the heavy metals in the combined solutions were removed within a shorter time. The removal sequence of the heavy metals from separate solutions was lead>cadmium>nickel>chromium at the maximum removal time. In the combined heavy metal solutions, such removal rate sequence was not observed.

Keywords


  1. Miretzky P, Saralegui A, Cirelli AF. Aquatic macrophytes potential for the simultaneous removal of heavy metals (Buenos Aires, Argentina). J Chemosphere 2004; 57(8): 997-1005.
  2. Gardea Torresdey J. Phytofiltration of hazardous metal ions by alfalfa: a study of calcium and magnesium interferences. J Hazard Mater 1997; 56(1-2): 169-179.
  3. Srivastava R, Tiwari R, Ramudu PB. Electrokinetic remediation study for cadmium contaminated soil. J Environ Health Sci & Eng 2007; 4(4): 207-214.
  4. Malkoc E, Nuhoglu Y. Investigations of nickel (II) removal from aqueous solutions using tea factory waste. J Hazard Mater 2005; 127(1): 120-128.
  5. Ying X, Fang Z. Experimental research on heavy metal wastewater treatment with dipropyl dithiophosphate. J Hazard Mater 2006; 137(3): 1636-1642.
  6. Kurniawan TA. Physico–chemical treatment techniques for wastewater laden with heavy metals. J Chem eng 2006; 118(1): 83-98.
  7. Fu F, Wang Q. Removal of heavy metal ions from wastewaters: a review. J environ manage 2011; 92(3): 407-418.
  8. Lawrence K. Handbook of environmental engineering, environmental bioengineering, 2010, Springer, New York.
  9. Hou W. Effects of copper and cadmium on heavy metal polluted waterbody restoration by duckweed (Lemna minor). J Plant physiol biochem 2007; 45(1): 62-69.
  10. Diyanati Ra, Yazdani Cherati J, Belarak D. Effect of sorbitol on phenol removal rate by lemna minor. J Mazand Univ Med Sci 2013; 22(2): 58-65.
  11. Singh D, Tiwari A, Gupta R. Phytoremediation of lead from wastewater using aquatic plants. J Agric Technol 2012; 8(1): 1-11.
  12. Mishra VK, Tripathi B D. Concurrent removal and accumulation of heavy metals by the three aquatic macrophytes. J Bioresour technol 2008; 99(15): 7091-7097.
  13. Reinhold D. Assessment of plant-driven removal of emerging organic pollutants by duckweed. J Chemosphere 2010; 80(7): 687-692.
  14. Kilic NK, Duygu E, Donmez G. Triacontanol hormone stimulates population, growth and Brilliant Blue R dye removal by common duckweed from culture media. J Hazard Mater 2010; 182(1-3): 525-530.
  15. Li SX. Thorough removal of inorganic and organic mercury from aqueous solutions by adsorption on Lemna minor powder. J Hazard Mater 2011; 186(1): 423-429.
  16. Axtell NR, Sternberg SP, Claussen K. Lead and nickel removal using Microspora and Lemna minor. J Bioresour technol 2003; 89(1): 41-48.
  17. Kaur L, Gadgil K, Sharma S. Role of pH in the accumulation of lead and nickel by common Duckweed (Lemna minor). Int J Bioassays 2012; 1(12): 191-195.
  18. Jain S, Vasudevan P, Jha N. Removal of some heavy metals from polluted water by aquatic plants: Studies on duckweed and water velvet. J Biol Wastes 1989; 28(2): 115-126.
  19. Tangahu BV. A review on heavy metals (As, Pb, and Hg) uptake by plants through phytoremediation. Int J Chem Eng 2011; 2011.
  20. Rew A. Phytoremediation: an environmentally sound technology for pollution prevention, control and remediation in developing countries. J Educational Research and Reviews 2007; 2(7): 151-156.
  21. Erdei L. Phytoremediation as a program for decontamination of heavy-metal polluted environment. J Acta biologica szegediensis 2005; 49(1-2): 75-76.
  22. Ensley BD. Phytoremediation of toxic metals: using plants to clean up the environment. 2000; John Wiley & s Sons, Incorporated.
  23. Pais I, Jones Jr JB. The handbook of trace elements. 1997: CRC Press.
  24. Vardanyan LG, Ingole BS. Studies on heavy metal accumulation in aquatic macrophytes from Sevan (Armenia) and Carambolim (India) lake systems. J Environ int 2006; 32(2): 208-218.
  25. Bhattacharyya MH, Wilson AK, Rajan SS, Jonah M. Biochemical pathways in cadmium toxicity. ln: Zalup RK, Koropatnick J, editors. Molecular biology and toxicology of metals. London:taylor& francis; 2000. P.1-74.
  26. Salt DE, Smith R, Raskin I. Phytoremediation. Annual review of plant biology1998; 49(1): 643-668.
  27. Baycu G. Ecophysiological and seasonal variations in Cd, Pb, Zn, and Ni concentrations in the leaves of urban deciduous trees in Istanbul. J Environ pollut 2006; 143(3): 545-554.
  28. Brown PH, Welch RM, Cary EE. Nickel: A micronutrient essential for higher plants. J Plant physiol 1987; 85(3): 801-803.
  29. Wallace A. Some effects of chromium toxicity on bush bean plants grown in soil. J Plant soil 1976; 44(2): 471-473.
  30. Shanker AK. Differential antioxidative response of ascorbate glutathione pathway enzymes and metabolites to chromium speciation stress in green gram (Vigna radiata (L.) R. Wilczek. cv CO 4) roots. J Plant Sci 2004; 166(4): 1035-1043.
  31. Zaccheo P, Genevini PL, Cocucci SM. Chromium ions toxicity on the membrane transport mechanism in segments of maize seedling roots. J Plant Nutr 1982; 5(10): 1217-1227.