Open access peer-reviewed chapter

Bioremediation of Petroleum-Contaminated Soil

Written By

Raman Kumar Ravi, Shalini Gupta and Reeta Verma

Submitted: 20 June 2021 Reviewed: 31 August 2021 Published: 28 June 2022

DOI: 10.5772/intechopen.100220

From the Edited Volume

Crude Oil - New Technologies and Recent Approaches

Edited by Manar Elsayed Abdel-Raouf and Mohamed Hasan El-Keshawy

Chapter metrics overview

262 Chapter Downloads

View Full Metrics

Abstract

Petroleum is not only an important energy resource to boost economic development but also a major pollutant source of soil. Petroleum toxicity can cause an adverse impact on the environment, as well as has negative effects for both animals and humans due to its carcinogenic nature. Therefore, its removal from the environment becomes a matter of concern. Although a lot of techniques are in use for remediation of petroleum-contaminated soil, exploitation of fungal ability provides a sustainable solution for this due to their ability to survive in harsh environmental conditions. Mycoremediation is the bioremediation technique employed for the removal of toxic compounds using fungal biomass. The fungi have been proved as a potential biomass degrader for complex organic compounds, resulting in the production of versatile extracellular enzymes. In this chapter, we have highlighted the basic concept of mycoremediation, the enzymatic system involved in the degradation process, the mechanism of fungal degradation, and factors affecting the degradation process. The chapter also provides useful insight for greater future understanding and improvement of the technique towards solving the problem of petroleum-contaminated soils.

Keywords

  • bioremediation
  • mycoremediation
  • petroleum contaminated soil
  • enzymes
  • toxicity
  • degradation

1. Introduction

Petroleum is a vital resource that is dominating the world economy [1]. The petroleum is composed of a complex mixture of aromatic, aliphatic, heterocyclic hydrocarbons, asphaltenes, and non-hydrocarbon compounds, of which 60–90% are biodegradable [2]. In the past few decades, with the development of the petroleum industries, related activities like exploration, transportation, management, or storage and refining of hydrocarbons have caused contamination of soil environment and posed a serious global problem [3]. In view of the high toxicity, carcinogenicity, mutagenicity, and teratogenicity nature of petroleum compounds, their bioaccumulation in the food chain will interfere with the biochemical and physiological processes that directly or indirectly lead to human health [4, 5]. The petroleum contamination may induce oxidative stress. They may cause alteration in the soil’s chemical composition, its properties, and low nutrient availability, which leads to inhibition of seed germination. The petroleum compounds may cause various harmful effects on plants such as reduction of photosynthetic pigments, slowdown of nutrient assimilation, inhibition of root growth, foliar deformation and tissue necrosis, as well as destroy biological membranes, disturb the signaling of metabolic pathways, and disrupting plant roots architecture [6, 7, 8, 9]. The hydrocarbons with low-molecular weight can penetrate the plant cells causing plant death. Besides this, many petroleum compounds and their derivatives are carcinogens. It is also reported that petroleum contamination can cause the depression of the nervous system, narcosis, and irritation of the mucous membranes of the eyes in humans [10, 11, 12, 13]. Therefore, nowadays, petroleum contamination becomes a global environmental issue. The petroleum compounds have not only adverse impact on plant growth and development but also on human and ecological health. Therefore, their removal becomes a necessity in the current scenario for a healthy environment. Bioremediation is one of the most reliable, environmentally friendly techniques for the removal of hazardous compounds using biological sources like plants and microbes or the metabolites obtained from them. The microbial communities … play great role in the degradation of petroleum contaminants from the environment effectively. In this chapter, we have highlighted the microbial remediation of petroleum-contaminated soil for environmental clean-up. The chapter also discussed the different enzymes involved in bioremediation, mechanisms of petroleum compounds degradation, and factors influencing the bioremediation processes. This chapter may provide different clues for new research approaches for microbial-assisted methods of remediation.

Advertisement

2. Different sources of petroleum contamination

Petroleum comprises a number of aliphatic, branched, and aromatic hydrocarbons [14, 15] and several other organic compounds including some organometallic constituents [16]. The contamination of soil by petroleum hydrocarbons includes various sources such as the activities like industrial and municipal runoffs, effluent release, offshore and onshore petroleum industry activities as well as accidental petroleum spills (Figure 1). Most of them are toxic to human beings, animals, and vegetation [17, 18, 19, 20]. The anthropogenic activities also lead to the release of petroleum hydrocarbons from oil and gas exploration and production units, tank leakages and overflow, petrochemical industry effluent discharge, accidental spills during loading and discharging, bunkering, oil tanker incident, transportation and storage, fugitive emissions, ballasting, and de-ballasting, burst in old underground pipelines, war and political crisis, sabotage, and natural disasters. Such type of incidents has posed adverse impacts on terrestrial and marine biodiversity. The petroleum contamination directly or indirectly affects the wellbeings of all kinds of life inhabiting in the affected environment by altering population dynamics thereby interrupting the natural interaction among organisms at various trophic levels consequently misbalancing the natural community structure within the ecosystem ([17, 18, 19, 20]; Belousova et al. 2001; Bejarano and Michel, 2010). In long term, this pollution affects the environment. Due to the adverse impact of these chemicals on human health and the environment, they are classified as priority environmental pollutants by the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency [21]. Wood fires or volcano eruptions account for the natural sources of petroleum contamination whereas major anthropogenic sources include industrial combustion processes, refining processes: coking (coal), cracking (petroleum products e.g., tar, waxes, oils) and fireplaces, tobacco smoke is categorized under indoor sources. Releasing hydrocarbon pollutants through spillages and leakage from underground tanks, steamers, unplugging of oil wells, or abandoned oil refinery sites causes contamination of surface soil, groundwater and ocean as well [20, 22, 23, 24].

Figure 1.

Different sources of petroleum contamination.

Advertisement

3. Effect of petroleum contamination on the environment and human health

Contamination of soil by petroleum hydrocarbons can affect physicochemical properties of soil such as texture, compaction, structural status, penetration resistance, saturated hydraulic conductivity, mineral and heavy metal concentration (Hreniuc et al., 2015). The toxicity of petroleum compounds is of worldwide environmental concern and has an adverse effect on the environment and human health. The polyaromatic hydrocarbons (PAHs) are natural constituents of fossil fuels, coal, and petroleum comprising 0.2% and 7% PAHs [25]. The PAHs adsorb to dust or soot particles and enter into the atmosphere and are transported to far distances. Naturally, in a cyclic process, PAHs undergo a cycle of entry, deposition, and percolation. PAHs enter the environment via rain/fog thereafter get deposited on soil and plants and ultimately percolate in surface waters [26]. Dust produced by anthropogenic activities namely coal mining, automobile exhaust, transportation, and drilling of oil, stockpiles, and tailings is the major unnatural sources of PAHs that contaminate the various spheres of the atmosphere [27].

PAHs are present in all the spheres of the environment mainly evaporated into the atmosphere. Primarily when adsorbed on dust particles, PAHs undergo photolysis in the existence of sunlight. Upon oxidation, the complex structure of the compound can be broken in days or weeks [28]. The PAH compounds are hydrophobic in nature, immiscible in water; however miscible in other hydrophobic matter. PAHs can get easily adsorbed on dust particles as well as a precipitate on sediments of aquatic bodies. Therefore, these pollutants can easily mix with other hydrophobic matter and pollute the aquatic systems. Terrestrial and water system microbes possess the adaptability to degrade and mineralize PAHs over a longer or shorter time duration [29].

Under the influence of UV light, PAH metabolites produced are usually more toxic. PAHs in soil is unlikely to employ toxicity influence on terrestrial invertebrates [30]. In plants absorption of PAHs by roots from soils and thereafter translocated to other parts. Mobility of the absorbed contaminants is usually influenced by the dose, solubility, along other physicochemical properties of soil. The plant response against PAHs differs; certain plant species consist of components that may wear off a toxic consequence of PAHs; whereas, some plants have the ability to synthesize PAHs and perform as growth hormones [29, 31]. PAHs are persistent organic compounds and have a longer half-life which accounts for the PAH bioaccumulation in terrestrial invertebrates (shellfish expected to consist much higher concentration of PAH than in the environment) observed. Nonetheless, the metabolism of PAHs is effective to preclude biomagnifications [32, 33, 34, 35]. Organisms are adversely affected because of tumors, reproduction, growth development, and immunity. In mammals route to PAH absorption is by inhalation, dermal contact, and ingestion [31, 36, 37].

Advertisement

4. Strategies used for removal petroleum contamination from soil

The soil contamination by petroleum has drawn increasing attention to develop and implement innovative techniques to remove petroleum compounds from the soil in the past decades. Different strategies are being used for the removal of petroleum contamination from the soil that includes traditional physical and chemical remediation, which are less efficient. Bioremediation is one of the most reliable and efficient techniques used for the restoration of petroleum-contaminated soil in an eco-friendly way.

4.1 Bioremediation of petroleum-contaminated soil

Bioremediation is a process that naturally or artificially takes advantage of living organisms or their products to remove the pollutants of the contaminated environment [38]. Although it is time-consuming, due to their eco-friendly approach and very low cost, efficient and sustainable for restoring the contaminated soil in the context of sustainability, are extensively noticeable at present [39]. For this purpose, living organisms having the potential to grow under contaminated soil are usually used. The number of studies have revealed that selecting petroleum-tolerant plants for bioremediation in cases of soil petroleum pollution is a feasible and sustainable technology. Many plants like ryegrass, alfalfa, Mirabilis jalapa are capable to grow in petroleum stress conditions [40, 41, 42].

The microorganisms that are utilized in petroleum pollutants removal can be bacteria, fungi, or yeasts. These microbes are the essential component in soil that play a crucial role in the remediation of petroleum contamination [43, 44]. Some of them have a high capacity to degrade contaminants and are widely used for environmental clean-up [45]. In the bioremediation of petroleum-contaminated soils, the most widely used organisms are bacteria which have high frequency, rapid growth, and a broad spectrum of degradation of petroleum products [46]. The development of microbial biotechnology is beneficial for screening and identifying microorganisms from petroleum-contaminated soils [47]. Many microorganisms have been isolated and exploited for the bioremediation of petroleum hydrocarbons. A number of bacteria having the capacity to degrade petroleum hydrocarbons have been identified [48]. Furthermore, some microorganisms were crucial for petroleum hydrocarbons since the abundance of these microorganisms was dominant increased after petroleum contamination [49]. Different indigenous bacteria have different degrading enzymes, the blend of several efficient bacteria was employed to remediate the contaminated soils. The combined activity of indigenous bacterial consortium and exogenous bacteria can efficiently enhance the degradation of petroleum [50].

Biostimulation is a leading strategy of bioremediation to decontaminate petroleum polluted soil. It includes regulating various environmental conditions such as temperature, moisture, pH, redox potential, aeration, mineral nutrition, etc. to increase the growth and the metabolic activity of microorganisms. Consequently, various hydrocarbons can be tolerated and utilized as a carbon source to fulfill its growth requirements [51]. Bioaugmentation is another strategy of bioremediation, which refers to the inoculation of exogenous microorganisms into the contaminated soils to degrade the target contaminants [52]. The inoculated microorganism can be one strain or a consortium of microbial strains with diverse functional degradation capacities [53]. Bioaugmentation was considered to be more effective for the degradation of the light fraction of petroleum hydrocarbons [54]. Besides this, the microbial electrochemical system was considered as an emerging technique for bioremediation, which integrates microbial and electrochemical processes to convert the pollutants to less-toxic or value-added products [55]. With numerous integral benefits, the microbial electrochemical system was frequently applied in the remediation of petroleum contaminants in soil. The microbial electrochemical system can be utilized for different contaminants owing to the oxidation and reduction transformation involved in remediation processes [56].

In the last decay, the role of fungi in bioremediation has been increasingly recognized [57, 58], in which mainly saprotrophic and basidiomycetes, groups of fungi are highlighted to degrade or to transform toxic compounds [59, 60]. Mycoremediation is the bioremediation technique that employs fungi in the removal of toxic compounds; it could be carried out in the presence of both filamentous fungi [61] and macrofungi such as mushrooms [62, 63]. Both classes possess enzymes for the degradation of a large variety of pollutants [64, 65]. Fungi are noted for their colonizing abilities. They can colonize and adapt in diversified heterogeneous environments including complex soil matrices at extreme environmental conditions. Furthermore, they can decompose the organic matter and easily colonize both biotic and abiotic surfaces [66, 67]. Filamentous fungi have shown some different characteristics that make them more preferable for soil bioremediation than yeasts and bacteria [66, 68]. The most important is the type of growth i.e., multicellular mycelial growth, suitable to soil colonization and translocation of nutrients and water, the production of many bioactive compounds and extracellular enzymes, and the unique capability to co-metabolize many environmental chemicals [69].

4.1.1 Mycoremediation of petroleum-contaminated soils

Mycoremediation offers an alternative environmentally friendly technique for remediation of contamination in environmental matrices [70, 71, 72, 73]. Different species of fungi have been used for the remediation of petroleum-contaminated soils. These include microfungi such as Arbuscular mycorrhiza and yeast [74, 75, 76] as well as Penicillium and Aspergillus species [77, 78]. Mycoremediation with macrofungi (mushrooms) is also identified [79, 80]. Abioye et al. [76] reported crude oil degradation by yeast Saccharomyces cerevisiae. It was inoculated in a sterile mineral salt media containing 1 g of crude oil under control conditions at 30°C for 28 days. Obire et al. [81] recognized micro-fungal communities were actively involved in the remediation potentials of cow & poultry compost on petroleum polluted soil sites. Isolated yeasts and molds from cow dung comprised of Alternaria sp., Aspergillus sp., Cephalosporium sp., Cladosporium sp., Geotrichum sp., Moniliasp., Mucor sp., Penicillium sp., Rhizopus sp., Sporotrichum sp., Thamnidum sp., Candida sp., Rhodotorula sp., and Torulopsis sp., Saccharomyces spp (Yeast) has also been revealed to transform polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons (PAHs) into eco-friendly products [82].

One significant class of fungi, which demonstrate mycoremediation of petroleum-contaminated soils are the ligninolytic mushrooms such as white rot fungi [83, 84, 85]. Lebo et al. [86] and Fetzer [87], identified that white rot fungi are able to degrade recalcitrant organic pollutants, the fact is mushroomed naturally feed on and degrade lignin, a substance with the similar monomeric unit to organic contaminants. Stamets [73], validated up to 99% degradation of naturally diesel-contaminated soils at 20,000 parts per million concentration of PAHs after 8 weeks using the white rot mushroom i.e., P. ostreatus. Kristanti et al. [88], reported that up to 93% degradation of crude oil in the soil can be obtained using the white rot mushroom Polyporus sp. S133 pre-grown on the wood meal. It has been established that the litter decomposing mushroom i.e., Stropharia coronilla, can metabolize PAHs such as benzo[a]pyrene at 200 μM and this activity could be increased up to 12 times in presence of supplementary Mn2+ as electron acceptor. Mohammadi-Sichani et al. [89], reported that the litter decomposing mushroom A. bisporus can yield a higher ability to degrade total petroleum hydrocarbons in soils than white rot mushroom such as Pleurotus ostreatus and Ganoderma lucidum.

The most suitable fungal genera used for remediation of hydrocarbon contaminated soil are the basidiomycetes group [90]. The saprotrophic basidiomycetes, utilize dead organic substances as a carbon source, consist of the wood-degrading fungal groups. Overall, white-rot fungi are reflected for a prominent role in the biodegradation of petrochemicals [91]. These fungi can degrade efficiently both lignin and cellulose biopolymers till the complete mineralization [92], by producing an extracellular enzymatic complex, which comprehends lignin peroxidases (LiPs), manganese-dependent peroxidases (MnPs), versatile peroxidases (VPs), laccases, H2O2-generating oxidases and dehydrogenases, produced during the idiophase, usually under nitrogen depletion. The most common example of white rot fungi, that are capable to degrade pollutants, include Phanerochaete chrysosporium, Pleurotus ostreatus, Trametes versicolor, Bjerkandera adusta, Lentinula edodes, Irpex lacteus, Agaricus bisporus, Pleurotus tuber-regium and Pleurotus pulmonarius [93, 94]. Among these fungi, Phanerochaete chrysosporium has been the most investigated for its ability to degrade toxic or insoluble compounds to CO2 and H2O, more efficiently than other fungi.

Mostly the biodegradation studies at the laboratory & pilot scale are covered micro-fungi, but in last year, much attention has been given to mushrooms which are frequently present in soil and also easily cultivated [95]. Bioremediation by macro-fungi basidiomycetes is advantageous because, simultaneous remediation process, and soil enrichment with organic matter, nutrients and result in enhanced plant growth. Macro-fungi are potent degraders due to secretion of the similar intracellular enzymes (LiP, MnP, and laccase) labeled for the lignin-degrading fungi thus are attention-grabbing in the field of bioremediation. Altogether, they grow to a great extent and produce high biomass, when cultivated on carbon sources, like stubble or sawdust [79]. The mushroom biomass can be a protein source or can contain biologically active compounds such as phenols with antioxidant activity [64, 96]. Furthermore, mushroom biomass can be applied in biosorption treatment thanks to its ability to accumulate ions and xenobiotics from contaminated soils [97].

Different types of petroleum compounds such as phenanthrene, naphthalene, anthracene, pyrene, benzo[a]pyrene, fluoranthene, acenaphthene, etc. are earlier reported to be degraded by fungal biomass (Table 1). Phenanthrene can be degraded by Pleurotus ostreatus [98], Phanerochaete chrysosporium [99, 100, 101], Phanerochaete sordida [100, 102], Ganoderma lucidum [103], Trametes versicolor [104]. Naphthalene is degraded by Penicillium oxalicum [105], Penicillium sp. [106], Penicillium fastigiata, and Penicillium digitatum [107]. Govarthanana et al. [106] also reported degradation of acenaphthene and benzo[a]pyrene by Penicillium sp. Similarly, fungus Phanerochaete sordida is reported to degrade fluoranthene [100, 102]. The petroleum compound like anthracene is reported to be degraded by various fungal species such as Aspergillus fumigatus [108], Stropharia coronilla [109], Pleurotus ostreatus [100]. The earlier study revealed the Fusarium solani and Mucor sp. can degrade benzo[a] pyrene [110, 111], while pyrene is degraded by Trichoderma harzianum [112], Penicillium janthinellum [113] and Penicillium sp. M 1 [114].

Petroleum compoundsDegrading fungiReferences
PhenanthrenePleurotus ostreatusBezalel et al. [98]
Phanerochaete chrysosporiumJohn and Bumpus [99], Sutherland et al. [101], Pozdnyakova [100]
Phanerochaete sordidaLee et al. [102], Pozdnyakova [100]
Ganoderma lucidumTing et al. [103]
Trametes versicolorPozdnyakova et al. [104]
NaphthalenePenicillium oxalicumKannangara et al. [105]
Penicillium sp.Govarthanan et al. [106]
Penicillium fastigiata and Penicillium digitatumSimanjorang and Subowo [107]
AnthraceneAspergillus fumigatusYe et al. [108]
Stropharia coronillaSteffen et al. [109]
Pleurotus ostreatusPozdnyakova [100]
PyreneTrichoderma harzianumSaraswathy and Hallberg [112]
Penicillium janthinellumLaunen et al. [113]
Penicillium sp. M 1Sack and Günther [114]
Benzo[a]pyreneMucor sp.Su et al. [111]
Fusarium solaniRafin et al. [110]
Penicillium sp. CHY-2Govarthanan et al. [106]
FluoranthenePhanerochaete sordidaLee et al. [102], Pozdnyakova [100]
AcenaphthenePenicillium sp.Govarthanan et al. [106]

Table 1.

Fungi involved in the degradation of different petroleum compounds.

Advertisement

5. Mechanism of petroleum hydrocarbon degradation

Fungal genera catabolize hydrocarbons to intermediates analogous to those formed by a mammalian enzymatic system via Cytochrome P450 [115]. Whereas, several mechanisms have been proposed includes both direct and indirect oxidation of the organic molecule by the fungal enzymes namely Lignin peroxidase, Manganese Peroxidase, versatile peroxidase, and Lacasses (Figure 2) [116, 117, 118]. The promising combination of multi enzymatic mechanisms could play a key role in the degradation process [119]. Radical mediated reaction initiated by manganese peroxidase involves indirect oxidation of benzene rings with hydroxyl group may be led to spontaneous ring opening. Produce derivatives like muconic acid and carbon dioxide by decarboxylation of carboxyl groups [120, 121].

Figure 2.

Fungal enzymatic degradation mechanism of PAH compounds.

5.1 Enzymes involved in biodegradation of petroleum contamination

Most of the enzymes are extracellular and allow to attack and then degrade large molecules into smaller units which can enter the cells for further transformations [122]. Extracellular laccases start ring cleavage in the biodegradation of aromatic compounds [61]. Laccase are multicopper oxidases with low substrate specificity & could act on o- and p-phenols, phenylenediamines via four-electron transfer from the target organic substrate to molecular oxygen [123]. Fungal peroxidases generate oxidants that initiate substrate oxidation in the extracellular environment [61]. They belong to the class II peroxidases [124] & catalyze the oxidation of various organic substrates by utilizing peroxide (H2O2) as an electron acceptor. Lignin peroxidase (LiPs), Manganese peroxidase (MnPs), and Versatile or non-specific peroxidase (VPs) are the leading fungal high redox class II peroxidase enzymes as reported earlier. These intracellular enzymes are convoluted in the biodegradation process of the complex lignocellulosic structure and, subsequently, could biotransform various organic compounds into inorganic substrates [125]. Some reported fungal genera could also secrete the dye-decolorizing peroxidase (DyPs), which have the ability to oxidize and hydrolyze phenolic and non-phenolic compounds [126]. Heme-thiolate peroxidase (HTPs) allocates peroxide-oxygen, from H2O2/R-COOH to organic substrate; in this group chloroperoxidases (CPOs) and aromatic peroxygenase (APOs) are involved. APOs can mainly be active on heterogeneous substrates via aromatic preoxygenation, epoxidation, or hydroxylation of aliphatic organic compounds [124].

Biodegradation by intracellular enzymatic pathway includes a class of cytochrome P450 monooxygenase and glutathione transferase, mainly possessed by lignocellulosic and plant litter fungi [125]. These enzymes show a functional role in the primary and secondary metabolism of fungi. Cytochrome P450 monooxidase, heme-thiolate containing oxidoreductase, could act on numerous organic substrates in stereo- and region selective manner, requiring molecular oxygen for the reaction initiation. These enzymes are triggered via reduced heme iron and single molecular oxygen to a substrate. Hydroxylation, epoxidation, sulfoxidation, and dealkylation intermediate reactions can occur and entail NADPH as electron donor [127]. Glutathione transferase enzyme is positioned in different cellular partitions and catalyze the nucleophilic attack of carbon, nitrogen or sulphur atom in non-polar compounds by reducing glutathione. These enzymes consist a wide range of substrate specificity and involved in the detoxification of several endogenous or exogenous toxic metabolites [128]. Major enzymes involved in petroleum compounds degradation are summarized in Table 2.

Degrading enzymesPetroleum compoundsDegrading fungiReferences
Cytochrome P450 monooxygenasePyrenePenicillium janthinellumLaunen et al. [113]
Manganese peroxidaseNaphthalene, acenaphthene, and Benzo[a]pyrenePenicillium sp. CHY-2Govarthanan et al. [106]
AnthraceneStropharia coronillaSteffen et al. [109]
FluorantheneP. sordidaLee et al. [102], Pozdnyakova [100]
LaccaseNaphthalenePenicillium fastigiata and Penicillium digitatumSimanjorang and Subowo [107]
PhenanthreneGanoderma lucidumTing et al. [103]
Extracellular peroxidasesPhenanthrene, anthracene, pyrene, fluorene, and fluoranthenePenicillium sp. M 1Sack and Günther [114]
Monooxygenase; epoxide hydrolasePhenanthrenePhanerochaete chrysosporiumSutherland et al. [101], Pozdnyakova [100]

Table 2.

Major enzymes involved in petroleum compounds degradation.

Advertisement

6. Factors influencing bioremediation of petroleum contaminants

Bioremediation is a technique to remove the contamination in a cost-effective and environment-friendly way. The remediation of contaminants depends on various factors like availability of contaminants for microbes, temperature, pH, relative humidity etc.

6.1 Availability of contaminants

Solubility and bioavailability are important factors in the bioremediation of petroleum-contaminated soils. Boopathy and Manning [129], stated that the rate of contaminant conversion during bioremediation depends on their uptake and metabolism rate and the rate of contact with the cells of the organism. Mannig et al. [130] reported that activities that result in the homogenous spread of contaminants in soils can drastically stimulate their biodegradation. Singh and Agarwal [131], demonstrated that the bioavailability of organic contaminants decreases with time. According to Boopathy and Manning [129], some physicochemical progressions such as sorption, desorption, diffusion, & dissolution stimulate contaminants bioavailability. So, these elements must be measured during planning for bioremediation of petroleum-contaminated soil. The use of surface-active agents (surfactants) could aid to combat the contaminants bioavailability issue during the remediation process [129].

6.2 Temperature

Temperature plays a critical role in bioremediation processes [132]. It has been reported that the rate of degradation of organic contaminants is comparably higher at higher temperatures [133]. Higher rates of degradation of organic contaminants are also reported in tropical soils compared to soils from temperate regions [134, 135]. Dimond and Owen [136], stated that temperature affects the half-life of organic contaminants which increases with lowering temperatures. Hong et al. [137], demonstrated that a temperature range of 20–40°C was optimal for degradation of the contaminant fenitrothion. Siddique et al. [132] further demonstrated that the highest degradation of Hexachlorocyclohexane in water and a soil slurry was achieved at an incubation temperature of 30°C.

6.3 pH

The soil environment is contaminated with different types of organic compounds that are causing an adverse effect on the soil microbial diversity. The pH of the soil is highly mutable and ranges from 2.5 to 11 which may significantly affect the biodegradability of hydrocarbons. The aptness of a pH range in any bioremediation process is site-specific, & swayed by the complex relation among the organism, contaminant, and soil properties. The pH range may also affect the solubility and availability of contaminants in soil. The organic contaminant present in the soil is degraded at high pH because of the increased solubility [138]. The study carried out by Owen et al. [135], demonstrated faster degradation of organic contaminants in alkaline soil pH compared to in acidic soil. The report also suggested that at low soil pH of 4.5 to 4.8, degradation of organic contaminants is inhibited [139]. Nash et al. [140], reported the effects of pH on the stability of DDT and observed maximum degradation in both moist and dry soils were obtained at pH values above 7. In another study, Hong et al. [137] reported bioremediation of fenitrothion-contaminated soil using Burkholderia sp. FDS-1 with an optimal degradation at a slightly alkaline pH of 7.5. Thus, pH is one of the factors that should be considered in the bioremediation of petroleum-contaminated soils.

6.4 Relative humidity

Relative humidity is an important parameter in the removal of contaminants from the soil. In bioremediation of contaminated soils, generally more than 60% relative humidity is maintained [141, 142]. Several studies have been reported a different range of relative humidity. The utilized relative humidity for bioremediation of contaminated soil was 70% [142] and 60% [141], while it was between 60 and 70% [143]. The relative humidity values up to 85–95% have also been reported for remediation of contaminated soil [116]. The growth of mushrooms and their fruiting is also reported at a relative humidity of 70–80% [144].

Advertisement

7. Conclusion

Bioremediation could serve as a sustainable alternative for complex pollutant clean-up. Though this technique has been explored and studied for years. But still, it is not been maximized for practical solutions and field-scale application for the treatment of petroleum-contaminated soil. Hence, it is necessary to carry out an assessment of microbes for bioremediation of petroleum-contaminated soil site and its evolvement, limitations, and perspectives in the field. Present literature provides an understanding of bioremediation for petroleum-contaminated soils, in which different types of fungi, mechanisms of the technique are highlighted. The findings offer mycoremediation is capable of providing reliable options for the treatment of petroleum-contaminated soils. This is because fungi can provide cheaper and safer means for the simultaneous degradation of organic contaminants for environmental clean-up.

References

  1. 1. Sun Y. On-site management of international petroleum cooperation projects. Natural Gas Exploration and Development. 2009;32(2):69-73. DOI: 10.3969/j.issn.1673-3177.2009.02.019
  2. 2. Falkova M, Vakh C, Shishov A, Zubakina E, Moskvin A, Moskvin L, et al. Automated IR determination of petroleum products in water based on sequential injection analysis. Talanta. 2016;148:661-665. DOI: 10.1016/j.talanta.2015.05.043
  3. 3. Smith E, Thavamani P, Ramadass K, Naidu R, Srivastava P, Megharaj M. Remediation trials for hydrocarboncontaminated soils in arid environments: Evaluation of bioslurry and biopiling techniques. International Biodeterioration and Biodegradation. 2015;101:56-65. DOI: 10.1016/j. ibiod.2015.03.029
  4. 4. Chen M, Xu P, Zeng G, Yang C, Huang D, Zhang J. Bioremediation of soils contaminated with polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons, petroleum, pesticides, chlorophenols and heavy metals by composting: Applications, microbes and future research needs. Biotechnology Advances. 2015;33:745-755. DOI: 10.1016/j.biotechadv.2015.05.003
  5. 5. Rein A, Adam IKU, Miltner A, Brumme K, Kästner M, Trapp S. Impact of bacterial activity on turnover of insoluble hydrophobic substrates (phenanthrene and pyrene)-model simulations for prediction of bioremediation success. Journal of Hazardous Materials. 2016;306:105-114. DOI: 10.1016/j.jhazmat.2015.12.005
  6. 6. Nardeli SM, Saad CF, de Barros Rossetto P, Caetano VS, Ribeiro-Alves M, Paes JES, et al. Transcriptional responses of Arabidopsis thaliana to oil contamination. Environmental and Experimental Botany. 2016;127:63-72. DOI: 10.1016/j.envexpbot.2016.03.007
  7. 7. Rahbar FG, Kiarostami K, Shirdam R. Effects of petroleum hydrocarbons on growth, photosynthetic pigments and carbohydrate levels of sunflower. Journal of Food, Agriculture and Environment. 2012;10:773-776
  8. 8. Redondo-Gómez S, Petenello MC, Feldman SR. Growth, nutrient status, and photosynthetic response to diesel contaminated soil of a cordgrass, Spartina argentinensis. Marine Pollution Bulletin. 2014;79:34-38. DOI: 10.1016/j.marpolbul.2014.01.009
  9. 9. Zhang J, Fan S, Yang J, Du X, Li F, Hou H. Petroleum contamination of soil and water, and their effects on vegetables by statistically analysing entire data set. Science of the Total Environment. 2014;476-477:258-265. DOI: 10.1016/j.scitotenv.2014.01.023
  10. 10. Al Shami A, Harik G, Alameddine I, Bruschi D, Garcia DA, El-Fadel M. Risk assessment of oil spills along the Mediterranean coast: A sensitivity analysis of the choice of hazard quantification. Science of the Total Environment. 2017;574:234-245. DOI: 10.1016/j.scitotenv.2016.09.064
  11. 11. Ameen F, Moslem M, Hadi S, Al-Sabri AE. Biodegradation of diesel fuel hydrocarbons by mangrove fungi from Red Sea Coast of Saudi Arabia. Saudi Journal of Biological Sciences. 2016;23:211-218. DOI: 10.1016/j.sjbs.2015.04.005
  12. 12. Bastida F, Jehmlich N, Lima K, Morris BEL, Richnow HH, Hernández T, et al. The ecological and physiological responses of the microbial community from a semiarid soil to hydrocarbon contamination and its bioremediation using compost amendment. Journal of Proteomics. 2016;135:162-169. DOI: 10.1016/j.jprot.2015.07.023
  13. 13. Bezza FA, Nkhalambayausi Chirwa EM. Biosurfactant from Paenibacillus dendritiformis and its application in assisting polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbon (PAH) and motor oil sludge removal from contaminated soil and sand media. Process Safety and Environmental Protection. 2015;98:354-364. DOI: 10.1016/j.psep.2015.09.004
  14. 14. Prince R. Petroleum spill bioremediation in marine environment. Critical Reviews in Microbiology. 1993;19(4):217-242
  15. 15. Wang Z, Fingas S, Blenkinsopp S, Sergy G, Landriault M, Sigouin L, et al. Comparison of oil composition changes due to biodegradation and physical weathering in different oils. Journal of Chromatography A. 1998;809:89-107
  16. 16. Butler CS, Mason JR. Structure-function analysis of the bacterial aromatic ring hydroxylating dioxygenases. Advances in Microbial Physiology. 1997;38:47-84
  17. 17. Deppe U, Richnow HH, Michaelis W, Antranikian G. Degradation of crude oil by an arctic microbial consortium. Extremophiles. 2005;9(6):461-470
  18. 18. Margesin R, Schinner F. Biodegradation and bioremediation of hydrocarbons in extreme environments. Applied Microbiology and Biotechnology. 2001;56(5-6):650-663
  19. 19. Sajna KV, Sukumaran RK, Gottumukkala LD, Pandey A. Crude oil biodegradation aided by biosurfactants from Pseudozyma sp. NII 08165 or its culture broth. Bioresource Technology. 2015;191:133-139
  20. 20. Souza EC, Vessoni-Penna TC, Oliveira RPDS. Biosurfactant-enhanced hydrocarbon bioremediation: An overview. International Biodeterioration and Biodegradation. 2014;89:88-94
  21. 21. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. Test Method for Evaluating Solid Waste, SW-846. 3rd ed. Vol. 1A. Washington, DC: U.S. EPA; 1986
  22. 22. Janbandhu A, Fulekar MH. Biodegradation of phenanthrene using adapted microbial consortium isolated from petrochemical contaminated environment. Journal of Hazardous Materials. 2011;187(1-3):333-340
  23. 23. Prince RC, McFarlin KM, Butler JD, Febbo EJ, Wang FCY, Nedwed TJ. The primary biodegradation of dispelled crude oil in the sea. Chemosphere. 2013;90(2):521-526
  24. 24. Saeki H, Sasaki M, Komatsu K, Miura A, Matsuda H. Oil spill remediation by using the remediation agent JE1058BS that contains a biosurfactant produced by Gordonia sp. strain JE-1-58. Bioresource Technology. 2009;100:572-577
  25. 25. National Research Council. Oil in the Sea III: Inputs, Fates, and Effects. Washington, DC: National Research Council; 2003
  26. 26. Quiroz R, Grimalt JO, Fernandez P. Toxicity assessment of polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons in sediments from European high mountain lakes. Ecotoxicology and Environmental Safety. 2010;73:559-564
  27. 27. Nikitha T, Satyaprakash M, Vani SS, Sadhana B, Padal SB. A review on polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons: Their transport, fate and biodegradation in the environment. International Journal of Current Microbiology and Applied Sciences. 2017;6(4):1627-1639
  28. 28. Santodonato J. Polycyclic organic matter. Journal of Environmental Pathology and Toxicology. 1981;5:1
  29. 29. Agency for Toxic Substance and Disease Registry (ATSDR). Public Health Statement. Atlanta, GA: Agency for Toxic Substance and Disease Registry; 2010
  30. 30. Peter HA. Petroleum and individual polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbon. In: Hoffman DJ, Rattner BA, Buston GA, Cairns J, editors. Handbook of Ecotoxicology. Boca Raton, FL: Lewis Publisher; 2003. pp. 342-359
  31. 31. Beyer J, Jonsson G, Porte C, Krahn MM, Ariese F. Analytical methods for determining metabolites of polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbon (PAH) pollutants in fish bile: A review. Environmental Toxicology and Pharmacology. 2010;30:224-244
  32. 32. Abdel-Shafy Hussein I, Mansour Mona SM. A review on polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons: Source, environmental impact, effect on human health and remediation. Egyptian Journal of Petroleum. 2016;25:107-123. DOI: 10.1016/j.ejpe.2015.03.011
  33. 33. Borosky GL. Theoretical study related to the carcinogenic activity of polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbon derivatives. Journal of Organic Chemistry. 1999;64:7738-7744
  34. 34. Inomata Y, Kajino M, Sato K, Ohara T, Kurokawa JI. Emission and atmospheric transport of particulate PAHs in Northeast Asia. Environmental Science and Technology. 2012;46:4941-4949
  35. 35. Tudoran MA, Putz MV. Polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons: From in cerebro to in silico eco-toxicity fate. Chemical Bulletin of Politehnica University of Timisoara. 2012;57(71):50-53
  36. 36. Dong C, Chen C, Chen C. Determination of polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons in industrial harbor sediments by GC-MS. International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health. 2012;9(6):2175-2188
  37. 37. Veltman K, Huijbregts MAJ, Rye H, Hertwich EG. Including impacts of particulate emissions on marine ecosystems in life cycle assessment: The case of offshore oil and gas production. Integrated Environmental Assessment and Management. 2012;7(4):678-686
  38. 38. Gouda S, Kerry RG, Das G, Paramithiotis S, Shin H-S, Patra JK. Revitalization of plant growth promoting rhizobacteria for sustainable development in agriculture. Microbiological Research. 2018;206:131-140. DOI: 10.1016/j.micres.2017.08.016
  39. 39. Azubuike CC, Chikere CB, Okpokwasili GC. Bioremediation techniques-classification based on site of application: Principles, advantages, limitations and prospects. World Journal of Microbiology and Biotechnology. 2016;32:180. DOI: 10.1007/s11274-016-2137-x
  40. 40. Günther T, Dornberger U, Fritsche W. Effects of ryegrass on biodegradation of hydrocarbons in soil. Chemosphere. 1996;33:203-215
  41. 41. Peng S, Zhou Q, Cai Z. Zhang Z, Phytoremediation of petroleum-contaminated soils by Mirabilis jalapa L. in a greenhouse plot experiment. Journal of Hazardous Materials. 2009;168:1490-1496. DOI: 10.1016/j.jhazmat.2009.03.036
  42. 42. Shahsavari E, Adetutu EM, Anderson PA, Ball AS. Tolerance of selected plant species to petrogenic hydrocarbons and effect of plant rhizosphere on the microbial removal of hydrocarbons in contaminated soil. Water, Air, and Soil Pollution. 2013;224:1495. DOI: 10.1007/s11270-013-1495-3
  43. 43. Jia J, Zong S, Hu L, Shi S, Zhai X, Wang B, et al. The dynamic change of microbial communities in crude oil-contaminated soils from oil fields in China. Soil and Sediment Contamination: An International Journal. 2017;26:171-183. DOI: 10.1080/15320383.2017.1264923
  44. 44. Yan L, Sinkko H, Penttinen P, Lindström K. Characterization of successional changes in bacterial community composition during bioremediation of used motor oilcontaminated soil in a boreal climate. Science of the Total Environment. 2016;542:817-825. DOI: 10.1016/j.scitotenv.2015.10.144
  45. 45. Kuppusamy S, Thavamani P, Venkateswarlu K, Lee YB, Naidu R, Megharaj M. Remediation approaches for polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons (PAHs) contaminated soils: Technological constraints, emerging trends and future directions. Chemosphere. 2017;168:944-968. DOI: 10.1016/j.chemosphere.2016.10.115
  46. 46. Wolicka D, Suszek A, Borkowski A, Bielecka A. Application of aerobic microorganisms in bioremediation in situ of soil contaminated by petroleum products. Bioresource Technology. 2009;100:3221-3227. DOI: 10.1016/j.biortech.2009.02.020
  47. 47. Guerra AB, Oliveira JS, SilvaPortela RCB, Araújo W, Carlos AC, Vasconcelos ATR, et al. Metagenome enrichment approach used for selection of oil-degrading bacteria consortia for drill cutting residue bioremediation. Environmental Pollution. 2018;235:869-880. DOI: 10.1016/j.envpol.2018.01.014
  48. 48. Tremblay J, Yergeau E, Fortin N, Cobanli S, Elias M, King TL, et al. Chemical dispersants enhance the activity of oil- and gas condensate degrading marine bacteria. The ISME Journal. 2017;11:2793-2808. DOI: 10.1038/ismej.2017.129
  49. 49. Yakimov MM, Timmis KN, Golyshin PN. Obligate oil-degrading marine bacteria. Current Opinion in Biotechnology. 2007;18:257-266. DOI: 10.1016/j.copbio.2007.04.006
  50. 50. Tao K, Liu X, Chen X, Hu X, Cao L, Yuan X. Biodegradation of crude oil by a defined co-culture of indigenous bacterial consortium and exogenous Bacillus subtilis. Bioresource Technology. 2017;224:327-332. DOI: 10.1016/j.biortech.2016.10.073
  51. 51. Shahi A, Aydin S, Ince B, Ince O. Evaluation of microbial population and functional genes during the bioremediation of petroleum-contaminated soil as an effective monitoring approach. Ecotoxicology and Environmental Safety. 2016;125:153-160. DOI: 10.1016/j. ecoenv.2015.11.029
  52. 52. Ruffini Castiglione M, Giorgetti L, Becarelli S, Siracusa G, Lorenzi R, Di Gregorio S. Polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbon-contaminated soils: Bioaugmentation of autochthonous bacteria and toxicological assessment of the bioremediation process by means of Vicia faba L. Environmental Science and Pollution Research International. 2016;23:7930-7941. DOI: 10.1007/s11356-016-6049-y
  53. 53. Heinaru E, Merimaa M, Viggor S, Lehiste M, Leito I, Truu J, et al. Biodegradation efficiency of functionally important populations selected for bioaugmentation in phenol- and oil-polluted area. FEMS Microbiology Ecology. 2005;51:363-373. DOI: 10.1016/j.femsec.2004.09.009
  54. 54. Bento FM, Camargo FAO, Okeke BC, Frankenberger WT. Comparative bioremediation of soils contaminated with diesel oil by natural attenuation, biostimulation and bioaugmentation. Bioresource Technology. 2005;96:1049-1055. DOI: 10.1016/j. biortech.2004.09.008
  55. 55. Wang X, Cai Z, Zhou Q, Zhang Z, Chen C. Bioelectrochemical stimulation of petroleum hydrocarbon degradation in saline soil using U-tube microbial fuel cells. Biotechnology and Bioengineering. 2012;109:426-433. DOI: 10.1002/bit.23351
  56. 56. Wu Y, Jing X, Gao C, Huang Q, Cai P. Recent advances in microbial electrochemical system for soil bioremediation. Chemosphere. 2018;211:156-163. DOI: 10.1016/j.chemosphere.2018.07.089
  57. 57. Goltapeh EM, Danesh YR, Varma A, editors. Fungi as Bioremediators. 1st ed. Berlin/Heidelberg: Springer Verlag; 2013. p. 489. DOI: 10.1007/978-3-642-33811-3
  58. 58. Singh H, editor. Mycoremediation Fungal Bioremediation. Hoboken, NJ: John Wiley & Sons; 2006. p. 592. DOI: 10.1002/0470050594
  59. 59. Baldrian P. Wood-inhabiting ligninolytic basidiomycetes in soils: Ecology and constraints for applicability in bioremediation. Fungal Ecology. 2008;1(1):4-12. DOI: 10.1016/j.funeco.2008.02.001
  60. 60. Spina F, Cecchi G, LandinezTorres A, Pecoraro L, Russo F, Wu B, et al. Fungi as a toolbox for sustainable bioremediation of pesticides in soil and water. Plant Biosystems. 2018;152(3):474-488. DOI: 10.1080/11263504.2018.1445130
  61. 61. Deshmukh R, Khardenavis AA, Purohit HJ. Diverse metabolic capacities of fungi for bioremediation. Indian Journal of Microbiology. 2016;56(3):247-264. DOI: 10.1007/s12088-016-0584-6
  62. 62. Ali A, Guo OD, Mahar A, Wang P, Shen F, Li R, et al. Mycoremediation of potentially toxic trace elements—A biological tool for soil cleanup: A review. Pedosphere. 2017;27(2):205-222. DOI: 10.1016/S1002-0160(17)60311-4
  63. 63. Chatterjee S, Sarma MK, Deb U, Steinhauser G, Walther C, Gupta DK. Mushrooms: From nutrition to mycoremediation. Environmental Science and Pollution Research. 2017;24:19480-19493. DOI: 10.1007/s11356-017-9826-3
  64. 64. Kulshreshtha S, Mathur N, Bhatnagar P. Mycoremediation of paper, pulp and cardboard industrial wastes and pollutants. In: Goltapeh E, Danesh Y, Varma A, editors. Fungi as Bioremediators. 1st ed. Berlin/Heidelberg: Springer; 2013. pp. 77-116. DOI: 10.1007/978-3-642-33811-3_4
  65. 65. Purnomo AS, Mori T, Putra SR, Kondo R. Biotransformation of heptachlor and heptachlor epoxide by white-rot fungus Pleurotus ostreatus. International Biodeterioration and Biodegradation. 2013;82:40-44. DOI: 10.1016/j.ibiod.2013.02.013
  66. 66. Bharath Y, Singh SN, Keerthiga G, Prabhakar R. Mycoremediation of contaminated soil in MSW sites. In: Ghosh SK, editor. Waste Management and Resource Efficiency. Singapore: Springer Nature; 2019. pp. 321-329. DOI: 10.1007/978-981-10-7290-1_28
  67. 67. Joutey NT, Bahafid W, Sayel H, El Ghachtouli N. Biodegradation: Involved microorganisms and genetically engineered microorganisms. In: Chamy R, Rosenkranz F, editors. Biodegradation. London, UK: IntechOpen Limited; 2013. pp. 290-320. DOI: 10.5772/56194
  68. 68. de Lima Souza HM, Sette LD, da Mota AJ, do Nascimento Neto JF, Rodrigues A, de Oliveira TB, et al. Filamentous fungi isolates of contaminated sediment in the Amazon region with the potential for benzo(a)pyrene degradation. Water, Air, and Soil Pollution. 2016;227:431. DOI: 10.1007/s11270-016-3101-y
  69. 69. Harms H, Schlosser D, Wick LY. Untapped potential: Exploiting fungi in bioremediation of hazardous chemicals. Nature Reviews Microbiology. 2011;9:177-192. DOI: 10.1038/nrmicro2519
  70. 70. Acevedo F, Pizzul L, del Pilar Castillo M, Cuevas R, Diez MC. Degradation of polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons by the Chilean white-rot fungus Anthracophyllum discolor. Journal of Hazardous Materials. 2011;185(1):212-219
  71. 71. Thakur M. Mycoremediation—A potential tool to control soil pollution. Asian Journal of Environmental Sciences. 2014;9(1):21-31
  72. 72. Baldrian P, Gabriel J, Nerud F, Zadraˇzil F. Influence of cadmium and mercury on activities of ligninolytic enzymes and degradation of polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons by Pleurotus ostreatus in soil. Applied and Environmental Microbiology. 2000;66(6):2471-2478
  73. 73. Stamets P. Mycelium Running: How Mushrooms Can Help Save the World. New York: Random House; 2005. pp. 83-84
  74. 74. Kumari M, Abraham J. Biodegradation of diesel oil using yeast rhodosporidium toruloides. Research Journal of Environmental Toxicology. 2011;5:369-377
  75. 75. Sood N, Patle S, Lal B. Bioremediation of acidic oily sludge-contaminated soil by the novel yeast strain Candida digboiensis TERI ASN6. Environmental Science and Pollution Research. 2010;17:603-610
  76. 76. Abioye OP, Akinsola RO, Aransiola SA, Damisa D, Auta SH. Biodegradation of crude oil by Saccharomyces cerevisiae isolated from fermented zobo (locally fermented beverage in Nigeria). Pakistani Journal of Biological Sciences. 2013;16:2058-2061
  77. 77. El Hanafy AA, Anwar Y, Mohamed SA, Al-Garni MS, Sabir JS, Osama AH, et al. Isolation and molecular identification of two fungal strains capable of degrading hydrocarbon contaminants on Saudi Arabian environment. International Journal of Biological, Biomolecular, Agricultural, Food and Biotechnological Engineering. 2015;9(12):1075-1078
  78. 78. Al-Nasrawi H. Biodegradation of crude oil by fungi isolated from Gulf of Mexico. Journal of Bioremediation and Biodegradation. 2012;3(4):1-6
  79. 79. Adenipekun CO, Lawal R. Uses of mushrooms in bioremediation: A review. Biotechnology and Molecular Biology Reviews. 2012;7(3):62-68. DOI: 10.5897/BMBR12.006
  80. 80. Rhodes CJ. Mycoremediation (bioremediation with fungi)—Growing mushrooms to clean the earth. Chemical Speciation and Biology. 2014;26(3):196-198
  81. 81. Obire O, Anyanwu E, Okigbo R. Saprophytic and crude oil degradation fungi from caw dung dropping as bioremediation agents. International Journal of Agriculture Technology. 2008;4(2):81-89
  82. 82. Miethe D, Riis V, Stimming M. UFZ-Umweltforschungszentrum Leipzig-Halle GmbH, Leipzig (Germany). Sektion Umweltmikrobiologie; Integrated project: Microbiological and physiological studies on the presence of residual concentrations in mineral-oilcontaminated soils after rehabilitation. Final report. Pt. 2; Mikrobiologische und physiologische Untersuchungen zur Frage der Restkonzentration bei der Sanierung mineraloelkontaminierter Boeden. Abschlussbericht. T. 1996;2
  83. 83. Fan B, Zhao Y, Mo G, Ma W, Wu J. Co-remediation of DDT-contaminated soil using white rot fungi and laccase extract from white rot fungi. Journal of Soils Sediments. 2013;13:1232-1245
  84. 84. Gao D, Du L, Yang J, Wu W, Liang H. A critical review of the application of white rot fungus to environmental pollution control. Critical Reviews in Biotechnology. 2010;30(1):70-77
  85. 85. Isikhuemhen OS, Anoliefo GO, Oghale OI. Bioremediation of crude oil polluted soil by the white rot fungus, Pleurotus tuberregium (Fr.) Sing. Environmental Science and Pollution Research International. 2003;10(2):108-112
  86. 86. Lebo SE Jr, Gargulak JD, McNally TJ. Lignin. In: Kirk-Othmer Encyclopedia of Chemical Technology. Vol. 15. Hoboken, NJ: John Wiley & Sons; 2001. pp. 1-32
  87. 87. Fetzer JC. The chemistry and analysis of the large polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons. Polycyclic Aromatic Compounds. 2000;27(2):143-162
  88. 88. Kristanti RA, Hadibarata T, Toyama T, Tanaka Y, Mori K. Bioremediation of crude oil by white rot fungi Polyporus sp. Journal of Microbiology and Biotechnology. 2011;21(9):995-1000
  89. 89. Mohammadi-Sichani M, Assadi MM, Farazmand A, Kianirad M, Ahadi AM, Hadian-Ghahderijani H. Ability of Agaricus bisporus, Pleurotus ostreatus and Ganoderma lucidum compost in biodegradation of petroleum hydrocarbon-contaminated soil. International Journal of Environmental Science and Technology. 2018:1-8
  90. 90. Treu R, Falandysz J. Mycoremediation of hydrocarbons with basidiomycetes—A review. Journal of Environmental Science and Health. Part. B. 2017;52(3):148-155. DOI: 10.1080/03601234.2017.1261536
  91. 91. Ellouze M, Sayadi S. Whiterot fungi and their enzymes as a biotechnological tool for xenobiotic bioremediation. In: El-Din M, Saleh H, editors. Management of Hazardous Wastes. London, UK: Intech Open Limited; 2016. pp. 103-120. DOI: 10.5772/64145
  92. 92. Abdel-Hamid AM, Solbiati JO, Cann IKO. Chapter one: Insights into lignin degradation and its potential industrial applications. In: Sariaslani S, Gadd GM, editors. Advances in Applied Microbiology. San Diego, CA: Academic Press/Elsevier; 2013. pp. 1-28. DOI: 10.1016/B978-0-12-407679-2.00001-6
  93. 93. Manavalan T, Manavalan A, Heese K. Characterization of lignocellulolytic enzymes from white-rot fungi. Current Microbiology. 2015;70:485-498. DOI: 10.1007/s00284-014-0743-0
  94. 94. Voběrková S, Solčány V, Vršanská M, Vojtěch A. Immobilization of ligninolytic enzymes from white-rot fungi in cross-linked aggregates. Chemosphere. 2018;202:694-707. DOI: 10.1016/j.chemosphere.2018.03.088
  95. 95. Li X, Wang Y, Pan Y, Yu H, Zhang X, Shen Y, et al. Mechanisms of Cd and Cr removal and tolerance by macrofungus Pleurotus ostreatus HAU-2. Journal of Hazardous Materials. 2017;330:1-8. DOI: 10.1016/j.jhazmat.2017.01.047
  96. 96. Boonsong BS, Klaypradit W, Wilaipun P. Antioxidant activities of extracts from five edible mushrooms using different extractants. Agriculture and Natural Resources. 2016;50(2):89-97. DOI: 10.1016/j.anres.2015.07.002
  97. 97. Thakur M. Mushrooms as a biological tool in mycoremediation of polluted soils. In: Jindal T, editor. Emerging Issues in Ecology and Environmental Science. Cham, Switzerland: Springer Nature; 2019. pp. 27-42. DOI: 10.1007/978-3-319-99398-0_3
  98. 98. Bezalel L, Hadar Y, Fu Peter P, Freeman James P, Cerniglia Carl E. Metabolism of phenanthrene by the white rot fungus Pleurotus ostreatus. Applied and Environmental Microbiology. 1996;62(7):2547-2553
  99. 99. John A, Bumpus J. Biodegradation of polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons by Phanerochaete chrysosporium. Applied and Environmental Microbiology. 1989;55(1):154-158
  100. 100. Pozdnyakova NN. Involvement of the ligninolytic system of white-rot and litter-decomposing fungi in the degradation of polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons. Biotechnology Research International. 2012
  101. 101. Sutherland JB, Selby AL, Freeman JP, Evans FE, Cerniglia CE. Metabolism of phenanthrene by Phanerochaete chrysosporium. Applied and Environmental Microbiology. 1991;57(11):3310-3316
  102. 102. Lee H, Choi YS, Kim MJ. Degradation ability of oligocyclic aromates by Phanerochaete sordida selected via screening of white-rot fungi. Folia Microbiologica. 2010;55(5):447-453
  103. 103. Ting WTE, Yuan SY, Wu SD, Chang BV. Biodegradation of phenanthrene and pyrene by Ganoderma lucidum. International Biodeterioration and Biodegradation. 2011;65(1):238-242
  104. 104. Pozdnyakova NN, Balandina SA, Dubrovskaya EV, Golubev CN, Turkovskaya OV. Ligninolytic basidiomycetes as promising organisms for the mycoremediation of PAH-contaminated environments. IOP Conference Series: Earth and Environmental Science. 2018;107. DOI: 10.1088/1755-1315/107/1/012071
  105. 105. Kannangara S, Undugoda L, Rajapaksha N, Abeywickrama K. Depolymerizing activities of aromatic hydrocarbon degrading Phyllosphere fungi in Sri Lanka. Journal of Bioremediation & Biodegradation. 2016;7:6. DOI: 10.4172/2155-6199.1000372
  106. 106. Govarthanan M, Fuzisawa S, Hosogaia T, Chang Y-C. Biodegradation of aliphatic and aromatic hydrocarbons using the filamentous fungus Penicillium sp. CHY-2 and characterization of its manganese peroxidase activity. RSC Advances. 2017;7:20716-20723
  107. 107. Simanjorang SW, Subowo YB. The ability of soil-borne fungi to degrade polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbon (PAH). AIP Conference Proceedings. 2018;2021(1):030019. DOI: 10.1063/1.5062743
  108. 108. Ye J-S, Yin H, Jing Q, Peng H, Qin H-M, Zhang N, et al. Biodegradation of anthracene by Aspergillus fumigatus. Journal of Hazardous Materials. 2010;185(1):174-181. DOI: 10.1016/j.jhazmat.2010.09.015
  109. 109. Steffen K, Hatakka A, Hofrichter M. Removal and mineralization of polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons by litter-decomposing basidiomycetous fungi. Applied Microbiology and Biotechnology. 2003;60(1-2):212-217
  110. 110. Rafin C, Potin O, Veignie E, Sahraoui L-HA, Sancholle M. Degradation of benzo[a]pyrene as sole carbon source by a non-white rot fungus, Fusarium solani. Journal Polycyclic Aromatic Compounds. 2006;21(1-4):311-329
  111. 111. Su D, Li PJ, Frank S, Xiong XZ. Biodegradation of benzo[a]pyrene in soil by Mucor sp. SF06 and Bacillus sp. SB02 co-immobilized on vermiculite. Journal of Environmental Sciences. 2006;18(6):1204-1209
  112. 112. Saraswathy A, Hallberg R. Degradation of pyrene by indigenous fungi from a former gasworks site. FEMS Microbiology Letters. 2002;210:227-232
  113. 113. Launen L, Pinto L, Wiebe C, Kiehlmann E, Moore M. The oxidation of pyrene and benzo[a]pyrene by non basidiomycete soil fungi. Canadian Journal of Microbiology. 1995;41:477-488
  114. 114. Sack U, Günther T. Metabolism of PAH by fungi and correlation with extracellular enzymatic activities. Journal of Basic Microbiology. 1993;33(4):269-277
  115. 115. Shalini G, Bhawana P. Bioremediation of polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons (PAHs): An overview. In: Bioremediation Technology: Hazardous Waste Management. 1st ed. London: CRC Press; 2020
  116. 116. Górska EB, Urszula J, Dobrzyński JJD, Gałązka A, Sitarek M, Gozdowski D, et al. Production of ligninolytic enzymes by cultures of white rot fungi. Polish Journal of Microbiology. 2014;3(4):461-465
  117. 117. Have RT, Teunissen PJM. Oxidative mechanisms involved in lignin degradation by white-rot fungi. Chemical Reviews. 2001;101:3397-3413
  118. 118. Christian V, Shrivastava R, Shukla D, Modi HA, Vyas BRM. Degradation of xenobiotic compounds by lignin-degrading white-rot fungi: Enzymology and mechanisms involved. Indian Journal of Experimental Biology. 2005;43:301-312
  119. 119. Hatakka A. Lignin-modifying enzymes from selected white-rot fungi—Production and role in lignin degradation. FEMS Microbiology Reviews. 1994;13:125-113
  120. 120. Hofrichter M. Review: Lignin conversion by manganese peroxidase (MnP). Enzyme and Microbial Technology. 2002;30:454-466
  121. 121. Fritsche W, Hofrichter M. Aerobic degradation of recalcitrant organic compounds by microorganisms. Environmental Biotechnology Concepts and Applications. 2005:223
  122. 122. Levasseur A, Lomascolo A, Chabrol O, Ruiz-Duenas FJ, BoukhrisUzan E, Piumi F, et al. The genome of the white-rot fungus Pycnoporus cinnabarinus: A basidiomycete model with a versatile arsenal for lignocellulosic biomass breakdown. BMC Genomics. 2014;15:486. DOI: 10.1186/1471-2164-15-486
  123. 123. Senthivelan T, Kanagaraj J, Panda RC. Recent trends in fungal laccase for various industrial applications: An eco-friendly approach—A review. Biotechnology and Bioprocess Engineering. 2016;21:19-38. DOI: 10.1007/s12257-015-0278-7
  124. 124. Hofrichter M, Ullrich R, Pecyna MJ, Liers C, Lundell T. New and classic families of secreted fungal heme peroxidases. Applied Microbiology and Biotechnology. 2010;87:871-897. DOI: 10.1007/s00253-010-2633-0
  125. 125. Kues U. Fungal enzymes for environmental management. Current Opinion in Biotechnology. 2015;33:268-278. DOI: 10.1016/j.copbio.2015.03.006
  126. 126. Lauber C, Schwarz T, Khanh Nguyen Q, Lorenz P, Lochnit G, Zorn H. Identification, heterologous expression and characterization of a dye-decolorizing peroxidase of Pleurotus sapidus. AMB Express. 2017;7(164):1-15. DOI: 10.1186/s13568-017-0463-5
  127. 127. Mäkelä MR, Marinović M, Nousiainen P, Liwanag AJ, Benoit I, Sipilä J, et al. Aromatic metabolism of filamentous fungi in relation to the presence of aromatic compounds in plant biomass. Advances in Applied Microbiology. 2015;91:63-137. DOI: 10.1016/bs.aambs.2014.12.001
  128. 128. Morel M, Ngadin AA, Droux M, Jacquot JP, Gelhaye E. The fungal glutathione S-transferase system. Evidence of new classes in the wood-degrading basidiomycete Phanerochaete chrysosporium. Cellular and Molecular Life Sciences. 2009;66:3711-3725. DOI: 10.1007/s00018-009-0104-5
  129. 129. Boopathy R, Manning J. Surfactant-enhanced bioremediation of soil contaminated with 2, 4, 6-trinitrotoluene in soil slurry reactors. Water Environment Research. 1999;71(1):119-124
  130. 130. Mannig JF, Boopathy R, Kulpa CF. A Laboratory Study in Support of the Pilot Demonstration of Biological Soil Slurry Reactor. Argonne, IL: Argonne National Laboratory; 1995
  131. 131. Singh DK, Agarwal HC. Chemical release and nature of soil-bound DDT residues. Journal of Agriculture and Food Chemistry. 1992;40:1713-1716
  132. 132. Siddique T, Okeke BC, Arshad M, Frankenberger WT. Temperature and pH effects on biodegradation of hexachlorocyclohexane isomers in water and a soil slurry. Journal of Agricultural and Food Chemistry. 2002;50(18):5070-5076
  133. 133. Foght J, April T, Biggar K, Aislabie J. Bioremediation of DDT-contaminated soils: A review. Bioremediation Journal. 2001;5(3):225-246
  134. 134. Boul L, Garnham ML, Hucker D, Baird D, Aislabie J. Influence of agricultural practices on the levels of DDT and its residues in soil. Environmental Science and Technology. 1994;28:1397-1402
  135. 135. Owen RB, Dimond JB, Getchell AS. DDT: Persistence in northern spodosols. Journal of Environmental Quality. 1977;6:359-360
  136. 136. Dimond JB, Owen RB. Long-term residue of DDT compounds in forest soils in Maine. Environmental Pollution. 1996;92:227-230
  137. 137. Hong Q, Zhang Z, Hong Y, Li S. A microcosm study on bioremediation of fenitrothion-contaminated soil using Burkholderia sp. FDS-1. International Biodeterioration and Biodegradation. 2007;59(1):55-61
  138. 138. Xu B, Jianying G, Yongxi Z, Haibo L. Behaviour of DDT in Chinese tropical soils. Journal of Environmental Science and Health. 1994;B29:37-46
  139. 139. Andrea MM, Tomita RY, Luchini LC, Musumeci MR. Laboratory studies on volatilization and mineralization of 14c-p, p’-DDT in soil, release of bound residues and dissipation from solid surfaces. Journal of Environmental Science and Health Part B. 1994;29(1):133-139
  140. 140. Nash RG, Harris WG, Lewis CC. Soil pH and metallic amendment effects on DDT conversion to DDE. Journal of Environmental Quality. 1973;2:390-394
  141. 141. Migliore L, Fiori M, Spadoni A, Galli E. Biodegradation of oxytetracycline by Pleurotus ostreatus mycelium: A mycoremediation technique. Journal of Hazardous Materials. 2012;215:227-232
  142. 142. Xiao X, Chen H, Si C, Wu L. Influence of biosurfactant-producing strain Bacillus subtilis BS1 on the mycoremediation of soils contaminated with phenanthrene. International Biodeterioration and Biodegradation. 2012;75:36-42
  143. 143. Singh M, Srivastava PK, Verma PC, Kharwar RN, Singh N, Tripathi RD. Soil fungi for mycoremediation of arsenic pollution in agriculture soils. Journal of Applied Microbiology. 2015;119(5):1278-1290
  144. 144. Seidu A, Quainoo AK, Addae G, Stenchly K. Mycoremediation of diesel contaminated soil with oyster mushroom (Pleurotus ostreatus) using maize (Zea mays) as the test crop. UDS International Journal of Development. 2015;2(2):1-8

Written By

Raman Kumar Ravi, Shalini Gupta and Reeta Verma

Submitted: 20 June 2021 Reviewed: 31 August 2021 Published: 28 June 2022