| Literature DB >> 26839546 |
Suki Roy1, Lubbnaz Nagarchi1, Ishita Das1, Jayasri Mangalam Achuthananthan1, Suthindhiran Krishnamurthy1.
Abstract
Ambur, a town located on the banks of Palar River, is considered one of the most polluted areas in India and occupied by hundreds of tanneries and leather product units. The present study was designed to evaluate the toxic effect of discharged tannery effluent (TE) on model agricultural crops, ecofriendly microorganisms, and human blood cells. The phytotoxic effects of TE tested on Allium cepa and Lemna minor revealed inhibition of root growth and significant reduction in number of fronds, protein, and chlorophyll content. Moreover, TE induced chlorosis and tissue necrosis in Nostoc muscorum at low concentration (10%). TE has also negative impact on ecofriendly microorganisms, Bacillus thuringiensis, Rhizobium etli, and Aspergillus terreus which play an important role in the nutrition of plant growth. The genotoxicity of TE was investigated in human leukocytes which showed interference with normal mitotic division with subsequent cell lysis. It also intervened with the normal replication process and induced micronucleus formation in the healthy leukocyte. 5% concentration of TE has been revealed to be toxic to erythrocytes. From this study TE found in the Palar River of Ambur has adverse effects on all the three levels of organisms in ecosystem even at lower concentrations.Entities:
Year: 2015 PMID: 26839546 PMCID: PMC4709700 DOI: 10.1155/2015/504360
Source DB: PubMed Journal: J Toxicol ISSN: 1687-8191
Physicochemical characteristics of the tannery effluent collected from Palar River (all values are mean range for three observations each).
| Sr. number | Parameter | Tannery effluent (values) |
|---|---|---|
| 1 | Colour | Dark brown |
| 2 | pH | 7.6 |
| 3 | BOD | 526 mg/L |
| 4 | COD | 2985 mg/L |
| 5 | DO | 36.21 mg/L |
| 6 | TDS | 6395 mg/L |
Average concentration of metals and anions in the tannery effluent collected from Palar River (all values are mean range for three observations each).
| Sr. number | Metals | Concentration in tannery effluent (mg/L) | USEPA guidelines (mg/L) |
|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | Lead | 2.98 | 0.2 |
| 2 | Iron | 5.21 | 0.3 |
| 3 | Cobalt | 3.83 | 0.03 |
| 4 | Copper | 3.12 | 1.0 |
| 5 | Zinc | 5.73 | 1.0 |
| 6 | Manganese | 4.11 | 1.0 |
| 7 | Chromium | 9.21 | 0.1 |
| 8 | Nickel | 11.79 | 0.1 |
| 9 | Arsenic | 1.46 | 0.05 |
| 10 | Magnesium | 3.87 | 1.0 |
| 11 | Cadmium | 2.26 | 0.1 |
| 12 | Nitrate | 78 | 50 |
| 13 | Nitrite | 129 | 12 |
| 14 | Phosphate | 16.9 | 5 |
| 15 | Sulphate | 776 | 250 |
| 16 | Chloride | 187 | 200 |
Figure 3Effect of tannery effluent on ecofriendly microorganisms. (a) Zone of inhibition in Bacillus thuringiensis (mm). (b) Zone of inhibition in Rhizobium etli (mm). (c) Zone of inhibition in Aspergillus terreus (mm).
Effect of tannery effluent on protein content and photosynthetic pigments of Lemna minor (all values are mean ± SD range for three observations each).
| Concentration of tannery effluent (%) | Protein concentration ( | Chlorophyll a concentration ( | Chlorophyll b concentration ( | Carotenoids concentration ( |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 0 | 60 ± 0.30 | 6.687 ± 0.14 | 1.00 ± 0.40 | 3.474 ± 0.22 |
| 5 | 52 ± 0.26 | 5.79 ± 0.17 | 0.916 ± 0.30 | 2.95 ± 0.27 |
| 10 | 50 ± 0.28 | 0.907 ± 0.15 | 0.811 ± 0.10 | 1.946 ± 0.24 |
| 15 | 38 ± 0.29 | 0.738 ± 0.16 | 0.800 ± 0.22 | 1.044 ± 0.26 |
| 20 | 12 ± 0.27 | 0.636 ± 0.18 | 0.640 ± 0.20 | 0.360 ± 0.25 |
Effect of tannery effluent on root growth in Allium cepa (all values are mean ± SD range for three observations each). The EC50 was found to be 7.79%.
| Concentration of tannery effluent (%) | Root length (cm) | Root growth (%) |
|---|---|---|
| 0 | 5.5 ± 0.33 | 100 |
| 5 | 2.9 ± 0.27 | 52.7 |
| 10 | 2.6 ± 0.21 | 47.2 |
| 15 | 2.4 ± 0.29 | 43.6 |
| 20 | 2.1 ± 0.27 | 38.1 |
| 25 | 1.5 ± 0.21 | 27.2 |
| 30 | 0.9 ± 0.28 | 16.3 |
| 35 | 0.5 ± 0.31 | 9.1 |
| 40 | 0.2 ± 0.27 | 3.6 |
| 45 | 0 | 0 |
| 50 | 0 | 0 |
| 55 | 0 | 0 |
Effect of tannery effluent on number of fronds in Lemna minor (all values are mean range for three observations each).
| Concentration of tannery effluent (%) | Number of fronds | |
|---|---|---|
| 0 hour | 96 hour | |
| 0 | 42 | 56 |
| 5 | 42 | 38 |
| 10 | 42 | 33 |
| 15 | 42 | 22 |
| 20 | 42 | 18 |
Effect of tannery effluent on leukocytecell viability.
| Volume of tannery effluent in culture (%) | Number of cells viable after treatment (cells/mL) |
|---|---|
| Control | 1.25 ± 0.01 × 106 |
| 5 | 1.1 ± 0.05 × 106 |
| 10 | 8 ± 1.15 × 105 |
| 15 | 7.7 ± 0.67 × 104 |
| 20 | 3.7 ± 0.29 × 104 |
Figure 1Chromosomal aberrations in human blood cells due to tannery effluent exposure: (a) Control; (b) human blood cells treated with 20% TE; arrow indicates chromatid breaks (CB); (c) human blood cells treated with 20% TE; arrow indicates chromatid gaps (ChG); (d) human blood cells treated with 20% TE; arrow indicates chromosomal gaps (CG).
Figure 2Percentage of hemolysis in In vitro Hemolytic Assay indicating the concentration of tannery effluent that can cause 50% of hemolysis.