Tolerance of Some Soil Fungi to the Content of Deep Cycle Battery and Their Bioremediation Potential

Main Article Content

S. I. Douglas
C. U. Wellington
T. G. Sokari

Abstract

Aims: The purpose of this study was to isolate and screen soil fungi that are able to tolerate the contents of spent deep cycle battery (inverter), and to test for their bioremediation potential.

Place and Duration of Study: Sample: Department of Microbiology, Rivers State University, between June 2019 and February 2020.

Methodology: Soil samples were collected from a mechanic village while spent inverter batteries were obtained from a waste vendor. The battery was forced open to extract its contents of the battery. Using standard microbiological techniques, fungi were enumerated and characterized. Stock solution of the battery content was prepared by dissolving the inverter battery content in sterile deionized water. This stock solution was used to carry out the screening test on the fungal isolates to ascertain the fungi that can tolerate the contents of the spent battery.

Results: Total heterotrophic fungal counts for the polluted and unpolluted soil were 6.0 x 103 cfu/g and 7.5 x 104cfu/g respectively. The fungal isolates identified from the polluted soil samples were members of the genera Rhizopus, Mucor, Aspergillus, Penicillium, and Candida, while, the isolates identified from the unpolluted soil sample includes: Candida sp, Aspergillus niger, Penicillium sp, Aspergillus fumigatus, Aspergillus flavus, Mucor sp, Yeast, Fusarium sp and Aspergillus sp. After the screening, total heterotrophic fungal counts for the soil ranged from 1.0 x 102cfu/g to 9.5 x 102cfu/g. Two fungi of the genera: Rhizopus and Mucor had the highest counts during 72 hours of incubation for the screening test. The results obtained from this study indicated that species of Aspergillus, Penicillium, and Candida were the most inhibited by the contents of the spent battery while Rhizopus and Mucor spp were more tolerant to the contents of the inverter. Rhizopus and Mucor spp were therefore, adopted in the bioremediation of soil contaminated with contents from the battery. It was observed that Rhizopus and Mucor spp in a consortium had the highest percentage of heavy metal removal (or uptake) in the following order: Cadmium (66.66%) > Lead (38.15%) > Zinc (26.83%) > Nickel (20.83).

Conclusion: These organisms can be used in the bioremediation of soil polluted with metals from spent deep cycle batteries.

Keywords:
Fungal isolates, soil, inverter battery content, Rhizopus, Mucor.

Article Details

How to Cite
Douglas, S. I., Wellington, C. U., & Sokari, T. G. (2020). Tolerance of Some Soil Fungi to the Content of Deep Cycle Battery and Their Bioremediation Potential. South Asian Journal of Research in Microbiology, 8(1), 34-46. https://doi.org/10.9734/sajrm/2020/v8i130186
Section
Original Research Article

References

Douglas SI, Nrior RR,Kpormon LB. Toxicity of spent phone batteries on microflora in marine, brackish and freshwater ecosystems. Journal of Advances in Microbiology. 2018;12(2):1-10.

Kpormon LB, Douglas SI. Comparative ecotoxicological assay of e-waste (Phone batteries) on some aquatic microflora. Journal of Advances in Biology & Biotechnology.2018;1-10.

Douglas SI, Nwachukwu EU. Effect of spent laptop battery waste on soil microorganisms.International Journal of Current Microbiology & Applied Sciences. 2016;5(11):867-876.

Geoff S, Geoff M, Reidy C. Australia’s guide to environmentally sustainable homes. Your Home.2010;1-5

uRecycle Group. Portable batteries (battery types). 2020;4-5.

McManus MC. Environmental consequences of the use of batteries in low carbon systems: The impact of battery production. Applied Energy. 2012;93:288-295.

Bobby B. Deep cycle versus SLI (Starting, Lighting & Ignition) Battery. Batter Basics.2014;1-5

Tripp-Lite Power Inverter; 2017.

A1 Admin. Selecting Inverter Batteries. A1 Power Technologies Limited;2019.

Dricus D. Lithium ion batteries: How are they used in Solar Systems. Sino Voltaics.2015;1-3.

Chibuike GU, Obiora SC. Heavy metal polluted soils: Effect on plants and bioremediation methods. Applied and Environmental Soil Science.2014;1:1-12.

Jin HP, Dane L, Periyasamy P, Girish C, Nanthi B, Jae-Woo C. Role of organic amendments on enhanced bioremediation of heavy metal(loid) contaminated soils. Journal of Hazardous Materials. 2011;185 (1) 549–574.

Agwu A, Kalu AU. Bioremediation and environmental sustainability in Nigeria. International Journal of Academic Research in Progressive Education and Development. 2012;1(3):26-31.

American Public Health Association (APHA). Standard methods for the examination of water and wastewater. 23rd edition, American Public Health Association, Washington D.C; 2017.

Nnaji CC, Agunwamba JC. Quality assessment of water receiving effluents from crude oil flow stations in Niger Delta, Nigeria. Water and environment journal.2014;28(1):104-113.

Cheesbrough M. District laboratory practice in tropical countries (2nd edition). Cambridge; Cambridge University Press. 2006;64:65,69.

Barnett HL, Hunter BB. Illustrated Genera of Imperfect Fungi. 3rd ed. Burgess. Publishing Company, Minnesota, USA. 1972;32 – 80.

Odokuma LO, Akponah E. Effect of nutrient supplementation on biode-gradation and metal uptake by three bacteria in crude oil impacted fresh and brackish waters of the Niger Delta. Journal of Cell and Animal Biology. 2010;4(1):001-018.

Menkit MC, Amaechi AK. Evaluation of first and second order degradation rates and biological half-lives in crude oil contaminated soil. Asian Journal of Biotechnology and Genetic Engineering.2019;1-11.

Environmental guidelines and standards for the petroleum industry in Nigeria (EGASPIN). The Department Of Petroleum Resources, Lagos. 3rd Edition. 1991;184-186.

Zaidi A, Oves M, Ahmad E, Khan MM. Importance of free-living fungi in heavy metal remediation. Biomanagement of metal-contaminated soils.2011;479-494.

Sinha S, Chattopadhyay P, Pan I, Chatterjee S, Chanda P, Bandyopadhyay D, Das K, Sen S. Microbial transformation of xenobiotics for environmental bioremediation. African Journal of Biotechnology.2009;8(22):1-4.

Ayangbenro AS, Babalola OO. A new strategy for heavy metal polluted environments: A review of microbial biosorbents. International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health. 2017;14(1):94.

Sarabjeet SA, Dinesh G. Microbial and plant derived biomass for removal of heavy metals from wastewater. Bioresource Technology. 2007;98(12):2243-2257.

Klimek B, Niklinska M. Zinc and copper toxicity to soil bacteria and fungi from zinc polluted and unpolluted soils: A comparative study with different types of biology plates. Bulletin of environmental contamination and toxicology. 2007;78(2): 112-117.

Corwin DL, Lesch SM. Apparent Soil electrical conductivity measurements in agriculture. Computers and Electronics in Agriculture.2005;46(1-3):11-43.

United States Department of Agriculture (USDA); 2013.

Ademola OO, Adhika B, Balakrishna P. Bioavailabilty of heavy metals in soil: impact on microbial biodegradation of organic compounds and possible improvement strategies. International Journal of Molecular Sciences. 2013;(14): 10197-10228.

Tanee FBG, Gighi JG, Albert E. Analysis of soil chemical parameters of an uncleaned crude oil spill site at Biara, Gokana LGA of Rivers State, Nigeria. Scientia Africana. 2014;13(2):1-4.

Giri B, Shukla A, Mukerji KG. Soil microbial diversity in relation to chemical transformations and biotic interactions. Current Concepts in Botany.2006;191.

Barin R, Talebi M, Beheshti M. Fast bioremediation of petroleum-contaminated soils by a consortium of biosurfactant/ bioemulsifier producing bacteria. International Journal of Environmental Science and Technology.2014;11(6): 1701-1710.

Ataikiru TL, Okorhi BF,Akpaiboh JI. Microbial community structure of an oilpolluted site in Effurun, Nigeria. International Research Journal of Public and Environmental Health. 2017;4(3):41-47.