4.7 Article

Co-plantation of aquatic macrophytes Typha angustifolia and Paspalum scrobiculatum for effective treatment of textile industry effluent

期刊

JOURNAL OF HAZARDOUS MATERIALS
卷 338, 期 -, 页码 47-56

出版社

ELSEVIER SCIENCE BV
DOI: 10.1016/j.jhazmat.2017.05.021

关键词

Phytoremediation; Consortium; Drench; Typha angustifolia; Paspalum scrobiculatum

资金

  1. University Grants Commission, New Delhi [SR/PURSE/2010]
  2. DBT [BT/PR7498/BCE/8/942/2012]
  3. Council of Scientific and Industrial Research, New Delhi
  4. Department of Biotechnology, New Delhi under Interdisciplinary programs on Life Sciences for advanced Research and Education [BT/PR4572/INF/22/147/2012]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Field treatment of textile industry effluent was carried out in constructed drenches (91.4 m x 1.2 m x 0.6 m; 65.8 m(3)) planted independently with Typha angustifolia, Paspalum scrobiculatum and their co-plantation (consortium-TP). The in situ treatment of effluent by T. angustifolia, P. scrobiculatum and consortium-TP was found to decrease ADMI color value by 62, 59 and 76%, COD by 65, 63 and 70%, BOD by 68, 63 and 75%, TDS by 45, 39 and 57%, and TSS by 35,31 and 47%, respectively within 96 h. Heavy metals such as arsenic, cadmium, chromium and lead were also removed up to 28-77% after phytoremediation. T. angustifolia and P. scrobiculatum showed removal of Congo Red (100 mg/L) up to 80 and 73%, respectively within 48 h while consortium-TP achieved 94% decolorization. Root tissues of T. angustifolia and P. scrobiculatum revealed inductions in the activities of oxido-reductive enzymes such as lignin peroxidase (193 and 32%), veratryl alcohol oxidase (823 and 460%), laccase (492 and 182%) and azo reductase (248 and 83%), respectively during decolorization of Congo Red. Anatomical studies of roots, FTIR, HPLC, UV-vis Spectroscopy and GC-MS analysis verified the phytotransformation. Phytotoxicity studies confirmed reduced toxicity of the metabolites of Congo Red. (C) 2017 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.7
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据