| Literature DB >> 30524836 |
Faridah H Were1, Godfrey A Wafula1, Simon Wairungu2.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: This study examines an intervention strategy to reduce the risk of chromium (Cr) exposure. It follows a previous Cr exposure investigation, which revealed that large volumes of Cr-contaminated waste were burnt on site. The study site had a long history of land-based waste disposal since 1994.Entities:
Keywords: bamboo species; chromium exposure; land-based disposal; phytoremediation; tannery waste
Year: 2017 PMID: 30524836 PMCID: PMC6221446 DOI: 10.5696/2156-9614-7.16.12
Source DB: PubMed Journal: J Health Pollut ISSN: 2156-9614
Description of Major Activities in the Tannery Associated with Chromium Contamination of the Tannery Site
| Loading and storing of chrome sulphate | Spillage of chrome within the storage area | Chrome spillage in powder form was swept and dumped in the open field |
| Weighing chrome | Spillage of chrome during weighing Residual amount of chrome in empty packaging materials | Chrome spillage in powder form was swept together with empty chrome packaging materials and dumped in the open field, and thereafter burned to reduce volume |
| Tanning process involved transferring, dosing and mixing chrome | Spillage of chrome in production areas Unutilized chrome (about 40%) is discharged as effluent during the tanning process The effluent treatment plant was poorly managed and resulted in sludge containing Cr | Cr-containing sludge was scooped from the treatment plant and dumped in the open field |
| Mechanical processes such as sammying, splitting, and trimming of tanned leather | Both solid waste and liquid containing Cr effluents were generated | Cr-containing sludge and tanned leather waste was dumped in the open |
| Shaving of leather | Shavings of the wet-blue pelt containing Cr were generated | The shavings were dumped and burned in the open field |
| Buffing of leather | Leather dust bearing Cr was generated | The fine leather dust was dumped in the open field |
Preliminary Total Chromium Levels and Physico-chemical Properties of Tannery and Control Soils
| Tannery (Mean ±SE) | 2326.7±34.7 | 2300.3±119.6 | 2107.4±118.7 | 2332.4±127.5 | 2324.8±122.7 | 2187.3±122.1 | 0.627 | |
| Range | 2138.0 – 2542.0 | 1539.0 – 3234.0 | 1351.0 - 2439.0 | 1337.0 – 3398.0 | 1348.0 – 3308.0 | 1449.0 - 2981 | ||
| Control (Mean ±SE) | 1.69±0.46b | 0.38±0.23a | 0.44±0.11a | 0.28±0.16a | 0.50±0.05a | 0.67±0.22b | 0.043 | |
| Range | 1.23 – 2.15 | 0.15 – 0.61 | 0.33 - 0.54 | 0.12 – 0.43 | 0.45 – 0.54 | 0.45 - 0.89 | ||
| <0.001 | <0.001 | <0.001 | <0.001 | <0.001 | <0.001 | |||
| Tannery (Mean ± SE) | 7.84±0.13 | 7.73±0.19 | 7.99±0.18 | 7.81±0.14 | 7.68±0.09 | 7.60±0.13 | 0.510 | |
| Range | 7.30 – 8.60 | 6.70 – 8.60 | 7.00 – 8.60 | 6.90 – 8.30 | 7.00 – 8.10 | 6.80 – 8.20 | ||
| Control (Mean ± SE) | 6.55±0.01ab | 6.70±0.10ab | 6.15±0.05a | 6.95±0.05ab | 7.00±0.00b | 6.50±0.30a | 0.027 | |
| Range | 6.50 - 6.60 | 6.60 – 6.80 | 6.10 – 6.20 | 6.90 – 7.00 | 7.00 – 7.00 | 6.20 - 6.80 | ||
| <0.001 | 0.552 | 0.002 | 0.032 | 0.014 | 0.125 | |||
| Tannery (Mean ± SE) | 173.3±5.2ab | 177.8±4.2b | 171.9±5.2ab | 153.5±7.3a | 150.8±6.3a | 167.4±6.6ab | 0.006 | |
| Range | 134.0 – 190.0 | 159.0 – 199.0 | 139.0 – 198.0 | 114.0 – 191.0 | 118.0 – 189.0 | 127.0 – 198.0 | ||
| Control (Mean ± SE) | 109.0±11.0 | 104.0±17.0 | 108.0±0.5 | 114.5±8.5 | 108.0±1.0 | 91.5±0.1 | 0.056 | |
| Range | 98.0 – 120.0 | 87.0 – 121.0 | 107.0 – 109.0 | 106.0 – 123.0 | 107 – 109.0 | 91.0 – 92.0 | ||
| <0.001 | <0.001 | <0.001 | 0.059 | 0.019 | 0.306 | |||
| Tannery (Mean ± SE) | 31.4±3.1 | 34.5±3.1 | 35.6±2.5 | 32.3±1.6 | 33.1±2.0 | 33.1±2.4 | 0.861 | |
| Range | 20.1 – 52.9 | 20.9 - 50.2 | 18.9 – 48.7 | 22.8 – 38.4 | 22.9 – 45.3 | 22.6 – 50.2 | ||
| Control (Mean ± SE) | 31.8±0.9 | 29.7±4.1 | 30.8±0.4 | 24.5±1.1 | 27.8±1.0 | 22.7±0.3 | 0.059 | |
| Range | 30.9 – 32.6 | 25.6 – 33.7 | 30.5 – 31.0 | 23.4 – 25.6 | 26.8 – 28.8 | 22.4 22.9 | ||
| 0.961 | 0.552 | 0.470 | 0.071 | 0.306 | 0.111 | |||
| Tannery (Mean ± SE) | 3.36±0.09 | 3.18±0.06 | 3.43±0.05 | 3.34±0.08 | 3.49±0.11 | 3.40±0.09 | 0.148 | |
| Range | 2.9 – 4.0 | 2.8 – 3.4 | 3.1 – 3.7 | 2.8 – 3.6 | 2.6 – 4.1 | 2.5 - 3.9 | ||
| Control (Mean ± SE) | 2.00±0.10 | 2.45±0.05 | 2.05±0.05 | 2.05±0.25 | 2.05±0.15 | 2.05±0.25 | 0.468 | |
| Range | 1.9 – 2.1 | 2.4 – 2.5 | 2.0 – 2.1 | 1.8 – 2.3 | 1.9 – 2.2 | 1.8 - 2.3 | ||
| <0.001 | <0.001 | <0.001 | <0.001 | <0.001 | <0.001 | |||
Independent Student's t-test compares different parameters of the tannery and control soils; P-value <0.001 indicates a significant difference between the control and tannery parameters, and mean values followed by the same small letter within the same row do not differ significantly (One –Way ANOVA, SNK-test, α = 0.05)
Abbreviations: SE, standard error
Influence of Treatment on Bamboo Species and Treatment Type on the Dependent Variables
| Bamboo Species | 0.761 | 0.738 | 0.990 | 0.180 | 0.860 |
| Treatment | <0.001 | < 0.001 | <0.001 | 0.037 | 0.002 |
| Bamboo Species X Treatment Interaction | 0.315 | 0.381 | 0.990 | 0.893 | 0.415 |
Two-Way ANOVA, P < 0.05 indicates a significant interaction between bamboo species and treatment type
Summary of Growth Performance and Chromium Levels in Rhizosphere Soils, Roots and Shoots of Bamboo Species—Two Years of Growth
Effects of Bamboo Species and Treatment Type on the Dependent Variable—Two Years of Growth
| < 0.001 | < 0.001 | 0.003 | 0.012 | < 0.001 | |
| 0.022 | < 0.001 | < 0.001 | < 0.001 | < 0.001 | |
| 0.613 | 0.650 | 0.003 | 0.012 | < 0.001 |
Two-Way ANOVA, (P < 0.05) indicates significant interaction between bamboo species and treatment type.
Accumulation and Translocation of Chromium in Six Different Bamboo Species in the Tannery and Control Site
| 0.24±0.05 | 1.13±0.02 | 0.27±0.05 | ||
| 1.10±0.05 | 0.49±0.07 | 0.53±0.07 | ||
| 0.02±0.01 | 1.53±0.11 | 0.03±0.01 | ||
| 0.09±0.01 | 1.64±0.10 | 0.14±0.02 | ||
| 0.21±0.03 | 0.79±0.05 | 0.16±0.02 | ||
| 0.07±0.01 | 1.34±0.09 | 0.10±0.02 | ||
| 3.19±1.16 | 0.84±0.68 | 1.90±1.19 | ||
| 2.54±1.72 | 0.31±0.19 | 0.48±0.07 | ||
| 0.22±0.03 | 0.83±0.24 | 0.18±0.03 | ||
| 0.80±0.13 | 2.57±0.43 | 1.47±0.07 | ||
| 0.16±0.08 | 2.21±0.03 | 1.83±0.79 | ||
| 3.07±0.24 | 0.78±0.04 | 2.41±0.31 |
Abbreviations: SE, standard error
Figure 1 —Evaluating growth of B. blumeana by determining the height using clinometer. This is after two years of growth during phytoremediation of a chromium contaminated site (Source: F. Were & Cutesy of KEFRI)