| Literature DB >> 21350672 |
Nilanjana Das1, Preethy Chandran.
Abstract
One of the major environmental problems today is hydrocarbon contamination resulting from the activities related to the petrochemical industry. Accidental releases of petroleum products are of particular concern in the environment. Hydrocarbon components have been known to belong to the family of carcinogens and neurotoxic organic pollutants. Currently accepted disposal methods of incineration or burial insecure landfills can become prohibitively expensive when amounts of contaminants are large. Mechanical and chemical methods generally used to remove hydrocarbons from contaminated sites have limited effectiveness and can be expensive. Bioremediation is the promising technology for the treatment of these contaminated sites since it is cost-effective and will lead to complete mineralization. Bioremediation functions basically on biodegradation, which may refer to complete mineralization of organic contaminants into carbon dioxide, water, inorganic compounds, and cell protein or transformation of complex organic contaminants to other simpler organic compounds by biological agents like microorganisms. Many indigenous microorganisms in water and soil are capable of degrading hydrocarbon contaminants. This paper presents an updated overview of petroleum hydrocarbon degradation by microorganisms under different ecosystems.Entities:
Year: 2010 PMID: 21350672 PMCID: PMC3042690 DOI: 10.4061/2011/941810
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Biotechnol Res Int ISSN: 2090-3146
Figure 1Hydrocarbon degradation rates in soil, fresh water, and marine environments.
Figure 2Main principle of aerobic degradation of hydrocarbons by microorganisms.
Figure 3Enzymatic reactions involved in the processes of hydrocarbons degradation.
Enzymes involved in biodegradation of petroleum hydrocarbons.
| Enzymes | Substrates | Microorganisms | References |
|---|---|---|---|
| Soluble Methane | C1–C8 alkanes alkenes and cycloalkanes | ||
| McDonald et al. [ | |||
| Particulate Methane | C1–C5 (halogenated) alkanes and cycloalkanes | ||
| McDonald et al. [ | |||
| AlkB related | C5–C16 alkanes, fatty acids, alkyl benzenes, cycloalkanes and so forth | ||
| Jan et al. [ | |||
| Eukaryotic P450 | C10–C16 alkanes, fatty acids | ||
|
Iida et al. [ | |||
| Bacterial P450 | C5–C16 alkanes, cycloalkanes | ||
|
Van Beilen et al. [ | |||
| Dioxygenases | C10–C30 alkanes | Maeng et al. [ | |
Biosurfactants produced by microorganisms.
| Biosurfactants | Microorganisms |
|---|---|
| Sophorolipids | |
| Rhamnolipids | |
| Lipomannan | |
| Rhamnolipids | |
| Surfactin | |
| Glycolipid | |
| Glycolipid |
Figure 4Involvement of biosurfactant (rhamnolipid) produced by Pseudomonas sp in the uptake of hydrocarbons.
Bioremediation agents in NCP product schedule (Adapted from USEPA, 2002).
| Name or Trademark | Product Type | Manufacture |
|---|---|---|
| BET BIOPETRO | MC | BioEnviro Tech, Tomball, TX |
| BILGEPRO | NA | International Environmental Products, LLC, Conshohocken, PA. |
| INIPOL EAP 22 | NA | Societe, CECA S.A., France |
| LAND AND SEA | NA | Land and Sea Restoration LLC, San Antonio, TX |
| RESTORATION MICRO-BLAZE | MC | Verde Environmental, Inc., Houston, TX |
| OIL SPILL EATER II | NA/EA | Oil Spill Eater International, Corporation, Dallas, TX |
| OPPENHEIMER FORMULA | MC | Oppenheimer Biotechnology, Inc., Austin, TX |
| PRISTINE SEA II | MC | Marine Systems, Baton Rouge, LA |
| STEP ONE | MC | B & S Research, Inc., Embarrass, MN |
| SYSTEM E.T. 20. | MC | Quantum Environmental Technologies, Inc(QET), La Jolla, CA |
| VB591TMWATER, VB997TMSOIL, AND BINUTRIX | NA | BioNutraTech, Inc., Houston,TX |
| WMI-2000 | MC | WMI International, Inc |
Abbreviations of product type:
MC: Microbial Culture
EA: Enzyme Additive
NA: Nutrient Additive.
Advantages and disadvantages of phytoremediation over traditional technologies.
| Advantages | Disadvantages |
|---|---|
| Relatively low cost | Longer remediation times |
| Easily implemented and maintained | Climate dependent |
| Several mechanisms for removal | Effects to food web might be unknown |
| Environmentally friendly | Ultimate contaminant fates might be unknown |
| Aesthetically pleasing | Results are variable |
| Reduces landfilled wastes | |
| Harvestable plant material |
Genetic engineering for biodegradation of contaminants.
| Microorganisms | Modification | Contaminants | Reference |
|---|---|---|---|
| pathway | 4-ethylbenzoate | Ramos et al. [ | |
| pathway | toluene/benzoate | Panke and Sanchezromero [ | |
| pathway | chloro-, methylbenzoates | Rojo et al. [ | |
| substrate specificity | Hrywna et al. [ | ||
| substrate specificity | PCB | Erickson and Mondello [ | |
| substrate specificity | TCE, toluene, benzene | Suyama et al. [ |
Application of genetically modified bacteria for assessing the biodegradation process efficiency.
| Microorganisms | Application | Contaminants | Reference |
|---|---|---|---|
| process monitoring | PCB | Van Dyke et al. [ | |
| process monitoring | TCE, BTEX | Applegate et al. [ | |
| process monitoring | naphthalene, anthracene | Sayler and Ripp [ | |
| strain monitoring | 2,4-D | Masson et al. [ | |
| stress response | BTEX | Sousa et al. [ | |
| toxicity assessment | 2, 4-dinitrophenol hydroquinone | Kelly et al. [ | |
| end point analysis | non polar narcotics | Layton et al. [ |