Environmental Microbiology / Microbial Diversity | Environmental Biotechnology
Microbiol. Biotechnol. Lett. 2020; 48(2): 223-229
https://doi.org/10.4014/mbl.1912.12011
Jing He 1, 2, Qiuzhuo Zhang 2 and Varenyam Achal 1, 2*
1East China Normal University, Shanghai, China, 2Guangdong Technion - Israel Institute of Technology, Shantou, China
The application of plant-growth-promoting rhizobacteria (PGPR) supports the growth of plants in contaminated soil while ureolytic bacteria can immobilise heavy metals by carbonate precipitation. Thus, dual treatment with such bacteria may be beneficial for plant growth and bioremediation in contaminated soil. This study aimed to determine whether the PGPR Pseudomonas fluorescens could work in synergy with ureolytic bacteria to assist with the remediation of cadmium (Cd)- and lead (Pb)-contaminated soils. Pot experiments were conducted to grow radish plants in Cd- and Pb-contaminated soils treated with PGPR P. fluorescens and the results were compared with dual inoculation of P. fluorescens combined with ureolytic Staphylococcus epidermidis HJ2. The removal rate of the metals from the soil was more than 83% for Cd and Pb by the combined treatment compared to 17% by PGPR alone. Further, the dual treatment reduced the metal accumulation in the roots by more than 80%. The translocation factors for Cd and Pb in plant tissues in both treatments remained the same, suggesting that PGPR combined with the carbonate precipitation process does not hamper the transfer of essential metal ions into plant tissues from the soil.
Keywords: Heavy metals, PGPR, carbonate, urease, bioremediation
With the increasing use of legumes as part of a balanced diet, their safety has become an important concern. Soil not only supports plant growth but also determines the composition of food and feed at the bottom of the food chain [1]. However, cadmium (Cd), lead (Pb) and other heavy metal pollutants are frequently reported worldwide in agricultural soil due to the longterm use of phosphoric fertilisers, sewage sludge application, dust from smelters, industrial waste and unsuitable watering practices in agricultural lands [2]. As heavy metal-polluted soil is closely associated with plant growth and agricultural productivity, heavy metals can easily enter the food chain and pose a significant risk to human health and the environment [3].
Metal pollutants in contaminated soils are hard to degrade or transform into safer products and cannot be effectively separated from the environment [4]. In addition, trace amounts of heavy metals in agricultural crops, such as Pb, copper and Cd, can cause iron-deficiency symptoms in microorganisms and have a negative effect on plant photosynthesis, as well as binding to mercapto groups in proteins and inhibiting enzyme activity [5, 6]. Therefore, there is great interest in the remediation of heavy metals in soil by immobilising heavy metals through physical, chemical and biological means to improve the physical and chemical properties of soil so that the land can be rehabilitated in contaminated sites [7].
Bioremediation, an environmentally friendly and costeffective technique, has begun to replace the physical and chemical strategies commonly used in the past [8]. The use of microbial bioremediation of heavy metals in soil can effectively reduce the transfer of metals to the soil ecosystem and ensure the safety of vegetable production. Microbially induced carbonate precipitation (MICP), which is mainly performed by ureolytic bacteria, can effectively immobilise heavy metals from the soil [9−11]. However, MICP alone may not be enough to meet the requirements of practical application in contaminated agriculture fields and we speculate that plant-growthpromoting rhizobacteria (PGPR) may increase the effectiveness of bioremediation.
Plant-promoted rhizosphere microbes can cause chemical conversion and helpful in chelating metal in the soil, while at the same time can also induce precipitation or biosorption to reduce the availability of heavy metals. Rhizosphere-related bacteria can produce hormones that stimulate plant growth and provide nutrients to plants, thus increasing metal bioaccumulation [12]. The PGPR, including
Considering the advantages of MICP and PGPR, we hypothesised that, together, they would be highly efficient for heavy metal remediation in soil. Therefore, we tested whether combining MICP by
Field pot experiments were performed in September to November 2018 in an agricultural soil contaminated by the artificial addition of heavy metals (25 mg kg-1 PbCl2 and 25 mg kg-1 CdCl2) in Minhang district (China), for 50 days. The outdoor experiment was used to study the effect of combined bacterial strains on plant growth and Cd(II) and Pb(II) uptake. Two strains were selected to remediate soil contaminated with Cd and Pb.
Each plastic pot was filled with 6 kg of soil that had been spiked with 25 mg kg-1 CdCl2 and 25 mg kg-1 PbCl2. The seeds were separated into two groups: the first group was dipped in sterile water (uninoculated control) and the other in bacterial suspensions for 2 h in Petri plates before being placed in separate pots. For inoculation treatments, approximately 2 ml of
Table 1 . Experimental treatment pots of the present study.
Code | Treatments | Combination type |
---|---|---|
S1 | Pb + Cd + | Pb + Cd contaminated soil, mono inoculation |
S2 | Pb + Cd + | Pb + Cd contaminated soil, dual inoculation |
C0 | The original soil | None |
C1 | Original soil spiked with Pb + Cd | Pb + Cd contaminated soil, non-inoculation |
After harvesting, the pots were divided into three layers (top, middle and bottom) of 10 cm each to explore the changes in nutrients in the different soil levels. The soil samples were air-dried and ground using a ceramic mill and then sieved (2 mm). Physicochemical properties of soil, including organic matter (OM), pH, total nitrogen (TN), total phosphate (TP) and available phosphate (available P), were measured according to standard protocols [15]. Heavy metal contents (Pb and Cd) were analysed by Inductively coupled plasma mass spectrometry, ICP-MS (Shimadzu, Japan).
Radish samples were collected in sampling bags prior to rinsing twice with deionised water. The white radish was divided into three parts (root, stem and leaves) that were dried at 65℃, ground and sieved with 40-mesh. The accumulation of Pb and Cd was analysed by ICPMS after nitric acid and H2O2 (5:2,
The bioconcentration factor (BCF) and translocation factor (TF) were calculated to estimate the metal uptake in different parts of the plant [17, 18]. The factors were calculated as follows:
BCF = Concentration of heavy metals in the aerial parts of plant/concentration of heavy metals in the soil
TF = Concentration of heavy metals in the stem (leaves)/concentration of heavy metals in the root (stem)
All data are presented as the mean values of three replicates. The data were analysed using the statistical package OriginPro (Version 8.6) and Excel. For pot experiments, data are represented as the mean ± standard deviation of three replicates. On the point of testing for the assumptions, the outcomes of the tests and the application of transformations were not required and not tested. Wherever applied, in order to mention the significant differences in particular data, the different letters associated with bar indicated significant differences at
In this study, plant-growth-promoting and ureolytic bacteria were evaluated for their role in the immobilisation of Cd and Pb in contaminated soil while growing radish plants, the effect of the treatment on plant growth and metal accumulation in radish tissues, as well as the mechanism involved in growth promotion and metal remediation.
After the pot experiment and bacterial treatment, the soil pH in each pot was measured. There were no obvious pH changes compared to the control when the soil was inoculated with
To determine the distribution of nutrients in the soil, vertical soil samples were collected from the pots. With the dual inoculum of
The soil properties after remediation were compared with those of the original soil. PGPR had a positive effect on solubilising phosphate, especially, for the wide distribution of rhizosphere. However, the addition of
Growing plants under soluble Pb and Cd stress can indirectly affect biomass production. As Fig. 3 depicts, there was a significant reduction in the fresh weight and dry weight of radish in C1 (soil spiked with metals) compared to soil without metals (C0). The fresh plant weight (~81 g) in the original soil reduced to 34 g fresh weight when grown in metal-contaminated soil. However, the addition of PGPR resulted in a reduction in this negative effect and the radish fresh weight in S1 was 66 g.
The results in Fig. 3 indicate that inoculation with PGPR enhances radish fresh weight and dry weight during metal contamination, which agrees with previous studies [12]. The reason that PGPR inoculation supports plant growth is attributed to indole acetic acid production and excretion [20]. In addition, the PGPR may reduce the negative phytotoxic effect of metals by sharing the metal load due to its biosorption and bioaccumulation [21].
The significant improvement (
The metal concentrations in the root, stem and leaf tissues of radish grown in artificially metal-contaminated soil (C0 = 25 mg kg-1 Pb2+ and 25 mg kg-1 Cd2+) with and without treatment are given in Fig. 4. With dual
Compared to S1, when combined with carbonate precipitation induced by
The translocation factor is an important parameter to measure while studying metal accumulation in plants [27]. Although there were differences in the value of the TF between all treatments and the control, the TF showed a similar pattern, suggesting that PGPR combined with MICP does not hamper the transfer of essential metal ions into plant tissues from soil (Fig. 5). The TF in Root to Stem (RS) and Stem to Leaves (SL) in S1 was 0.55 and 1.15 for Cd compared to 0.57 and 1.07 for Pb, respectively. In S2, the TF values in RS and SL were 0.52 and 1.17 for Cd and 0.45 and 1.24 for Pb, respectively.
After soil remediation with PGPR combined with MICP, the soil metal removal rate reached 83% for Cd and 85% for Pb, compared to 17% for Cd and Pb by PGPR alone (Fig. 6). Conversely, natural attenuation or external factors did not alleviate metal-contaminated soil that contained more than 23 mg kg-1 of both metals. High metal concentrations led to limited radish growth. The addition of PGPR is generally not associated with the bioremediation of heavily metal-contaminated soil while there are many reports on the role of carbonate precipitation induced by bacteria in the immobilisation of heavy metals including Cd and Pb [11, 22, 28]. Moreover, the results of the present study revealed that PGPR combined with the MICP process could be a sustainable approach for plant growth under soil metal stress.
Microbially induced carbonate precipitation is proved as an efficient process in the immobilization of heavy metals from the soil. However, as PGPR are common bacteria in rhizosphere helping plant growth, the process of MICP together could bring sustainability in agriculture. The present study revealed that the combined treatment of soil with plant-growth-promoting bacteria and ureolytic bacteria, which are capable of immobilising metals via carbonate precipitation, are capable of treating metal-contaminated soils, thus leading to significant increases in plant growth. Such bacteria and MICP could be complementary to each other in bioremediation studies.
This research is supported by National Natural Science Foundation of China under grant number 41950410576.
The authors have no financial conflicts of interest to declare.
HeeJoo Hwang, Min-Ji Kim, and Jae-Ho Shin
Microbiol. Biotechnol. Lett. 2024; 52(4): 487-489 https://doi.org/10.48022/mbl.2409.09016Taslin Jahan Mou, Rahat Ara Mun, Farhana Haque, Nadim Sharif, Abdul Kadir Ibne Kamal, Md. Fokhrul Islam, Md. Shahedur Rahman, Shuvra kanti Dey, and Anowar Khasru Parvez
Microbiol. Biotechnol. Lett. 2024; 52(4): 416-427 https://doi.org/10.48022/mbl.2407.07006Diyorbek Kosimov, Lyudmila Zaynitdinova, Aziza Mavjudova, Muzaffar Muminov, and Oybek Shukurov
Microbiol. Biotechnol. Lett. 2024; 52(1): 44-54 https://doi.org/10.48022/mbl.2312.12004