Literature DB >> 14681739

Biostimulation of natural microbial assemblages in oil-amended vegetated and desert sub-Antarctic soils.

D Delille1, F Coulon, E Pelletier.   

Abstract

A field study was initiated in December 2000 in two selected soils of The Grande Terre (Kerguelen Archipelago) with the objective of determining the long-term effects of fertilizer addition on the biodegradation rate and the toxicity of oil residues under severe sub-Antarctic conditions. Two soils were selected. The first site supports an abundant vegetal cover; the second one was desert soil, devoid of plant material. These two soils were located in the vicinity of the permanent station of Port-aux-Français (69 degrees 42'E; 49 degrees 19'S). A series of five experimental plots (0.75 x 0.75 m) were settled firmly into each of the studied soils. Each plot received 500 mL of diesel or Arabian light crude oil, and some of them were treated with a bioremediation agent: slow-release fertilizer Inipol EAP-22 (Elf Atochem). All the plots were sampled on a regular basis over a 1 year period. Heterotrophic and hydrocarbon-degrading microorganisms increased by two orders of magnitude during the first month of the experimentation in all treated enclosures, but differences appeared between the different plots. The microbial response was improved by bioremediation treatments. However, fertilizer addition had a greater impact on the desert soil when compared to the vegetated one. All chemical indices show a reduction of alkanes and light aromatics. Toxicity results show a high variability between treatments and environmental conditions. As a conclusion, it is clear that the microbial response was rapid and efficient in spite of the severe weather conditions, and the rate of degradation was improved by bioremediation treatments. However, after 1 year of treatment, the signal of a relatively high toxicity of oiled residues remained present in the two studied soils.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2003        PMID: 14681739     DOI: 10.1007/s00248-003-2024-5

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Microb Ecol        ISSN: 0095-3628            Impact factor:   4.552


  13 in total

1.  Response of Antarctic Soil Bacterial Assemblages to Contamination by Diesel Fuel and Crude Oil.

Authors: 
Journal:  Microb Ecol       Date:  2000-08       Impact factor: 4.552

2.  Efficiency of indigenous and inoculated cold-adapted soil microorganisms for biodegradation of diesel oil in alpine soils.

Authors:  R Margesin; F Schinner
Journal:  Appl Environ Microbiol       Date:  1997-07       Impact factor: 4.792

Review 3.  Bacterial life at low temperature: physiological aspects and biotechnological implications.

Authors:  A M Gounot
Journal:  J Appl Bacteriol       Date:  1991-11

4.  Effect of dispersed oil on heterotrophic bacterial communities in cold marine waters.

Authors:  D Delille; R Siron
Journal:  Microb Ecol       Date:  1993-05       Impact factor: 4.552

5.  Use of nuclepore filters for counting bacteria by fluorescence microscopy.

Authors:  J E Hobbie; R J Daley; S Jasper
Journal:  Appl Environ Microbiol       Date:  1977-05       Impact factor: 4.792

Review 6.  Microbial degradation of petroleum hydrocarbons: an environmental perspective.

Authors:  R M Atlas
Journal:  Microbiol Rev       Date:  1981-03

Review 7.  Microbial degradation of hydrocarbons in the environment.

Authors:  J G Leahy; R R Colwell
Journal:  Microbiol Rev       Date:  1990-09

8.  Field observations on the variability of crude oil impact on indigenous hydrocarbon-degrading bacteria from sub-Antarctic intertidal sediments.

Authors:  D Delille; B Delille
Journal:  Mar Environ Res       Date:  2000-06       Impact factor: 3.130

9.  Microcosm enrichment of biphenyl-degrading microbial communities from soils and sediments.

Authors:  I Wagner-Döbler; A Bennasar; M Vancanneyt; C Strömpl; I Brümmer; C Eichner; I Grammel; E R Moore
Journal:  Appl Environ Microbiol       Date:  1998-08       Impact factor: 4.792

10.  Effectiveness of bioremediation of crude oil contaminated subantarctic intertidal sediment: the microbial response.

Authors:  D Delille; B Delille; E Pelletier
Journal:  Microb Ecol       Date:  2002-06-13       Impact factor: 4.552

View more
  7 in total

Review 1.  Cold-loving microbes, plants, and animals--fundamental and applied aspects.

Authors:  R Margesin; G Neuner; K B Storey
Journal:  Naturwissenschaften       Date:  2006-10-13

2.  Isolation and characterization of different bacterial strains for bioremediation of n-alkanes and polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons.

Authors:  A Guermouche M'rassi; F Bensalah; J Gury; R Duran
Journal:  Environ Sci Pollut Res Int       Date:  2015-03-28       Impact factor: 4.223

3.  Suitability of oil bioremediation in an Artic soil using surplus heating from an incineration facility.

Authors:  Nazaré Couto; Janne Fritt-Rasmussen; Pernille E Jensen; Mads Højrup; Ana P Rodrigo; Alexandra B Ribeiro
Journal:  Environ Sci Pollut Res Int       Date:  2014-02-01       Impact factor: 4.223

4.  Microbial activity and community composition during bioremediation of diesel-oil-contaminated soil: effects of hydrocarbon concentration, fertilizers, and incubation time.

Authors:  Rosa Margesin; Marion Hämmerle; Dagmar Tscherko
Journal:  Microb Ecol       Date:  2007-02       Impact factor: 4.552

5.  Comparative mesocosm study of biostimulation efficiency in two different oil-amended sub-antarctic soils.

Authors:  Daniel Delille; Frédéric Coulon
Journal:  Microb Ecol       Date:  2007-12-12       Impact factor: 4.552

6.  Bacterial community dynamics during bioremediation of diesel oil-contaminated Antarctic soil.

Authors:  S Vázquez; B Nogales; L Ruberto; E Hernández; J Christie-Oleza; A Lo Balbo; R Bosch; J Lalucat; W Mac Cormack
Journal:  Microb Ecol       Date:  2008-08-07       Impact factor: 4.552

Review 7.  Bioremediation of hydrocarbon-contaminated polar soils.

Authors:  Jackie Aislabie; David J Saul; Julia M Foght
Journal:  Extremophiles       Date:  2006-03-03       Impact factor: 2.395

  7 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.