Phytomanagement of Polluted Sites: Market Opportunities in Sustainable Phytoremediation

Phytomanagement of Polluted Sites

Market Opportunities in Sustainable Phytoremediation

Edited by

Vimal Chandra Pandey

Department of Environmental Science, Babasaheb Bhimrao Ambedkar University, Lucknow, Uttar Pradesh, India

Kuldeep Bauddh

Centre for Environmental Sciences, Central University of Jharkhand, Ranchi, India

Table of Contents

Cover image

Title page

Copyright

Dedication

List of Contributors

About the Editors

Foreword

Preface

Acknowledgments

Vimal Chandra Pandey

Kuldeep Bauddh

Chapter 1. Phytoremediation: From Theory Toward Practice

Abstract

1.1 Introduction to Phytoremediation

1.2 Contaminant Uptake Mechanisms

1.3 Phytoremediation Strategies

1.4 Hyperaccumulation

1.5 Phytoremediation—Theoretical Aspects

1.6 Phytoremediation in Action—Practices

1.7 Phytoremediation With Multiple Benefits: From Ecological to Socioeconomic

1.8 Promotion of Economically Valuable Nonedible Crops in Phytoremediation

1.9 Phytomanagement: A New Paradigm

1.10 Conclusions

1.11 Future Prospects

Acknowledgments

References

Chapter 2. Market Opportunities: in Sustainable Phytoremediation

Abstract

2.1 Introduction to Phytoremediation

2.2 Bringing Sustainability Into Phytoremediation

2.3 Commercial Opportunities for Sustainable Phytoremediation

2.4 Limiting Factors on Phytoremediation

2.5 Concluding Remarks

Acknowledgment

References

Further Reading

Chapter 3. Ecological Restoration of Coal Mine Degraded Lands: Topsoil Management, Pedogenesis, Carbon Sequestration, and Mine Pit Limnology

Abstract

3.1 Coal Mining and Land Degradation

3.2 Surface Coal Mining Process and Generation of Mine Spoils

3.3 Reclamation to Ecological Restoration—A Changing Approach

3.4 Revegetation Planning During Ecological Restoration

3.5 Integration of Biodiversity Conservation and Ecosystem Services During Restoration

3.6 Mine Pit Limnology

3.7 Criteria of Ecological Restoration Success

3.8 Carbon Sequestration in Ecologically Restored Sites

3.9 Monitoring and Aftercare of Restored Site

3.10 Relevant Issues of Ecological Restoration in India

3.11 Summary and Conclusions

References

Further Reading

Chapter 4. Ecorestoration of Fly Ash Deposits by Native Plant Species at Thermal Power Stations in Serbia

Abstract

4.1 Introduction

4.2 Fly Ash Characterizations and Environmental Hazards

4.3 Limiting Factors for Plant Growth on Fly Ash Landfills

4.4 Ecorestoration of Fly Ash Landfills

4.5 Native Plant Species

4.6 Adaptive Response of Native Plants Growing on Fly Ash Landfills

4.7 Conclusion and Future Prospect

Acknowledgments

References

Chapter 5. Ecorestoration of Polluted Aquatic Ecosystems Through Rhizofiltration

Abstract

5.1 Introduction

5.2 Causes of Aquatic Ecosystem Contamination

5.3 Green Techniques for the Restoration of Contaminated Sites

5.4 Rhizofiltration: A Natural and Solar Energy Driven Tool

5.5 Effect of Rhizofiltration on Overall Ecology of Aquatic Ecosystem

5.6 Conclusions

References

Further Reading

Chapter 6. Floral Species in Pollution Remediation and Augmentation of Micrometeorological Conditions and Microclimate: An Integrated Approach

Abstract

6.1 Introduction

6.2 Floral Species and Environment

6.3 Plants and Pollution Mitigation

6.4 Plants and Enhancement of Micrometeorological Conditions

6.5 Plants and Microclimate Management

6.6 Plants and Ecosystem Services

6.7 Conclusion

References

Further Reading

Chapter 7. Phytoremediation of Air Pollutants: Prospects and Challenges

Abstract

7.1 Introduction

7.2 Air Pollution: Sources, Heterogeneity, and Climate Implications

7.3 Phytoremediation of Air Pollution: Mechanisms

7.4 Phytoremediation of Outdoor Air Pollution

7.5 Phytoremediation of Indoor Air Pollution

7.6 Conclusions and Future Prospects

References

Chapter 8. A Review of Phytoremediation Prospects for Arsenic Contaminated Water and Soil

Abstract

8.1 Introduction

8.2 Arsenic Contamination

8.3 Phytoremediation: A Promising Tool

8.4 Strategies of Phytoremediation

8.5 Assisted Phytoremediation

8.6 Aquatic Plants for As Remediation

8.7 Terrestrial Plants for As Remediation

8.8 Successful Phytoremediation Stories

8.9 Conclusions

References

Chapter 9. Aromatic Crops in Phytoremediation: From Contaminated to Waste Dumpsites

Abstract

9.1 Introduction

9.2 Polluted Sites and Their Hazards

9.3 The Challenges of Polluted Sites and Their Remediation Approaches

9.4 Why Aromatic Crop Cultivation in Phytoremediation

9.5 Appropriate Aromatic Crops for Phytoremediation

9.6 Multiple Benefits of Using Aromatic Crops in Phytoremediation

9.7 Promotion of Aromatic Crop-Based Phytoremediation

9.8 Conclusion

9.9 Future Prospects

Acknowledgments

References

Further Reading

Chapter 10. Remediation of Uranium-Contaminated Sites by Phytoremediation and Natural Attenuation

Abstract

10.1 Introduction

10.2 Uranium in Stream Waters, Sediments, and Soil

10.3 Phytotechnologies and the Natural Attenuation of Contamination

10.4 Natural Attenuation and Phytoremediation of Uranium-Contaminated Sites

10.5 Conclusions

Acknowledgments

References

Chapter 11. Sustainable Phytoremediation Strategies for River Water Rejuvenation

Abstract

11.1 Introduction

11.2 Constructed Wetlands

11.3 Designing Constructed Wetlands

11.4 Wetland Construction: Criteria for Subsurface Flow in Constructed Wetlands

11.5 Phytoremediation Strategies

11.6 Mechanisms to Remove Pollutants From Constructed Wetlands

11.7 Conclusions and Future Prospects

Acknowledgments

References

Further Reading

Chapter 12. Restoration of Pesticide-Contaminated Sites Through Plants

Abstract

12.1 Introduction

12.2 Classification of Pesticides

12.3 Potential Health Risks Associated With Pesticides

12.4 Pesticide Remediation Methods

12.5 Factors Affecting the Phytoremediation of Pesticides

12.6 Conclusions

References

Further Reading

Chapter 13. Adaption Mechanisms in Plants Under Heavy Metal Stress Conditions During Phytoremediation

Abstract

13.1 Introduction

13.2 Heavy Metal Contamination of Soil and Their Remediation Using Hyperaccumulator Plants

13.3 Mechanism of Heavy Metal Accumulation and Tolerance in Hyperaccumulator Plants

13.4 Potential Genes to Enhance the Phytoremediation Capability of Plants

13.5 Concluding Remarks and Future Prospects

Acknowledgments

References

Further Reading

Chapter 14. Application of Soil Quality Indicators for the Phytorestoration of Mine Spoil Dumps

Abstract

14.1 Introduction

14.2 Dominant Vegetation on Coal Mine Spoils

14.3 Indicator Parameters for Reclaimed Mine Soil Quality

14.4 Development of Soil Quality Indices

14.5 Applications of a Soil Quality Index

14.6 Conclusion

References

Chapter 15. Rhizoremediation of Polluted Sites: Harnessing Plant–Microbe Interactions

Abstract

15.1 Introduction

15.2 Rhizoremediation

15.3 Types of Sites Remediated Through Rhizoremediation

15.4 Limiting Factors on Successful Rhizoremediation

15.5 Beneficial Plant–Microbe Interaction

15.6 Engineering in Rhizoremediation

15.7 Appropriate Plants for Rhizoremediation

15.8 Role of Plants in Rhizoremediation

15.9 Conclusion and Future Prospects

Acknowledgments

References

Further Reading

Chapter 16. Phytoremediation of Red Mud Deposits Through Natural Succession

Abstract

16.1 Introduction

16.2 Red Mud Characterizations and Environmental Hazards

16.3 Phytoremediation of Red Mud Deposits

16.4 Description of Plant Species

16.5 Metal Concentrations in Naturally Growing Plant Species

16.6 Phytoremediation Potential of Naturally Growing Species

16.7 Concluding Remarks

Acknowledgments

References

Chapter 17. Eco-Restoration Potential of Vegetation for Contaminated Water Bodies

Abstract

17.1 Introduction to the Contamination of Water Bodies

17.2 Conventional Methods of Restoration and Their Limitations

17.3 Various Approaches of Vegetative Restoration

References

Further Reading

Chapter 18. Phytomanagement of Chromium Contaminated Brown Fields

Abstract

18.1 Introduction

18.2 Chromium and its Contamination in Soils

18.3 Methods to Prevent Soil Pollution

18.4 Chromium Uptake by Plants

18.5 Effects of Chromium on Plants

18.6 Plants Bringing Chromium Remediation

18.7 Mechanisms Involved in Phytoremediation of Chromium

18.8 Genotoxicity Due to Chromium

18.9 Case Studies

18.10 Conclusions

Acknowledgments

References

Chapter 19. Techno-Economic Perspectives of Bioremediation of Wastewater, Dewatering, and Biofuel Production From Microalgae: An Overview

Abstract

19.1 Introduction

19.2 Wastewater Treatment by Microalgae

19.3 Techno-Economic Challenges of Microalgae Harvesting

19.4 Techno-Economic Challenges of Pretreatment of Microalgal Biomass for Biofuels

19.5 Techno-Economic Challenges of Biofuel Production From Microalgae

19.6 Biorefinery Concept of Microalgae

19.7 Conclusions

References

Further Reading

Chapter 20. Exploring the Potential and Opportunities of Current Tools for Removal of Hazardous Materials From Environments

Abstract

20.1 Introduction

20.2 Conventional Tools

20.3 Current Advanced Tools and Technologies

20.4 Conclusion and Future Remarks

Acknowledgment

References

Further Reading

Chapter 21. Recent Advances, Challenges, and Opportunities in Bioremediation of Hazardous Materials

Abstract

21.1 Introduction

21.2 Environmental Pollutions and Their Risk

21.3 Composition of Hazardous Materials

21.4 Conventional Approach for Bioremediation

21.5 Advanced Molecular Approach for Bioremediation

21.6 Conclusion, Challenges, and Future Remarks

Acknowledgments

References

Further Reading

Chapter 22. Economics, Technology, and Environmental Protection: A Critical Analysis of Phytomanagement

Abstract

22.1 Introduction

22.2 Economic Approaches in Addressing Environmental Issues

22.3 Phytomanagement Technologies

22.4 Conclusion

References

Index

Copyright

Elsevier

Radarweg 29, PO Box 211, 1000 AE Amsterdam, Netherlands

The Boulevard, Langford Lane, Kidlington, Oxford OX5 1GB, United Kingdom

50 Hampshire Street, 5th Floor, Cambridge, MA 02139, United States

Copyright © 2019 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.

No part of this publication may be reproduced or transmitted in any form or by any means, electronic or mechanical, including photocopying, recording, or any information storage and retrieval system, without permission in writing from the publisher. Details on how to seek permission, further information about the Publisher’s permissions policies and our arrangements with organizations such as the Copyright Clearance Center and the Copyright Licensing Agency, can be found at our website: www.elsevier.com/permissions.

This book and the individual contributions contained in it are protected under copyright by the Publisher (other than as may be noted herein).

Notices

Knowledge and best practice in this field are constantly changing. As new research and experience broaden our understanding, changes in research methods, professional practices, or medical treatment may become necessary.

Practitioners and researchers must always rely on their own experience and knowledge in evaluating and using any information, methods, compounds, or experiments described herein. In using such information or methods they should be mindful of their own safety and the safety of others, including parties for whom they have a professional responsibility.

To the fullest extent of the law, neither the Publisher nor the authors, contributors, or editors, assume any liability for any injury and/or damage to persons or property as a matter of products liability, negligence or otherwise, or from any use or operation of any methods, products, instructions, or ideas contained in the material herein.

British Library Cataloguing-in-Publication Data

A catalogue record for this book is available from the British Library

Library of Congress Cataloging-in-Publication Data

A catalog record for this book is available from the Library of Congress

ISBN: 978-0-12-813912-7

For Information on all Elsevier publications visit our website at https://www.elsevier.com/books-and-journals

Publisher: Candice Janco

Acquisition Editor: Candice Janco

Editorial Project Manager: Ruby Smith

Production Project Manager: Sojan P. Pazhayattil

Cover Designer: Pablo Souza-Alonso, Vimal Chandra Pandey, Christian J. Bilbow

Typeset by MPS Limited, Chennai, India

Dedication

Dedicated to my beloved wife, Deepti Pandey.

Vimal Chandra Pandey

Dedicated to my mother (Mrs. Shyama Devi) and Father (Shri Suresh Baboo).

Kuldeep Bauddh

List of Contributors

Prerita Agarwal,     Institute of Environment and Sustainable Development, Banaras Hindu University, Varanasi, India

Jitendra Ahirwal,     Department of Environmental Science and Engineering, Centre of Mining Environment, Indian Institute of Technology (Indian School of Mines), Dhanbad, India

Ankit,     Department of Environmental Sciences, Central University of Jharkhand, Ranchi, India

Faiz Ahmad Ansari,     Institute for Water and Wastewater Technology, Durban University of Technology, Durban, South Africa

Omesh Bajpai,     Division of Plant Sciences, Plant & Environmental Research Institute (PERI), Kanpur, Uttar Pradesh, India

Tirthankar Banerjee,     Institute of Environment and Sustainable Development, Banaras Hindu University, Varanasi, India

Kuldeep Bauddh,     Department of Environmental Sciences, Central University of Jharkhand, Ranchi, India

Monalisha Behera,     Department of Environmental Science, Central University of Rajasthan, Ajmer, India

Tanushree Bhattacharya,     Department of Civil and Environmental Engineering, Birla Institute of Technology, Mesra, Ranchi, India

Binayak Chakraborty,     Navsari Agricultural University, Waghai, India

Sukalyan Chakraborty,     Department of Civil and Environmental Engineering, Birla Institute of Technology, Mesra, Ranchi, India

Poulomi Chakravarty,     Centre for Environmental Sciences, Central University of Jharkhand, Ranchi, Jharkhand, India

K. Dhandayuthapani,     Department of Plant Biology and Biotechnology, Arignar Anna Govt. Arts College, Cheyyar, India

Paulo J.C. Favas

University of Trás-os-Montes e Alto Douro (UTAD), School of Life Sciences and the Environment, Vila Real, Portugal

MARE—Marine and Environmental Sciences Centre, University of Coimbra, Coimbra, Portugal

Gordana Gajić,     Department of Ecology, Institute for Biological Research Siniša Stanković, University of Belgrade, Belgrade, Serbia

Nisarg Gohil,     School of Biological Sciences and Biotechnology, Institute of Advanced Research, Gandhinagar, India

Sanjay Kumar Gupta,     Environmental Engineering, Department of Civil Engineering, Indian Institute of Technology, New Delhi, India

Ambuj Bhushan Jha,     Crop Development Centre/Department of Plant Sciences, University of Saskatchewan, Saskatoon, SK, Canada

John Korstad

Department of Biology and Global Environmental Sustainability, Oral Roberts University, Tulsa, OK, United States

Department of Biology and Renewable Energy, Oral Roberts University, Tulsa, OK, United States

Adarsh Kumar

Department of Experimental Biology and Biotechnology, Institute of Natural Sciences and Mathematics, Ural Federal University, Ekaterinburg, Russia

Department of Environmental Science and Engineering, Center of Mining Environment, Indian Institute of Technology (Indian School of Mines), Dhanbad, India

Manoj Kumar,     Centre for Environmental Sciences, Central University of Jharkhand, Ranchi, Jharkhand, India

Narendra Kumar,     Department of Environmental Science, Babasaheb Bhimrao Ambedkar University, Lucknow, India

Sanjeev Kumar,     Department of Environmental Sciences, Central University of Jharkhand, Ranchi, India

Virendra Kumar,     UP State Bioenergy Development Board, Yojana Bhawan, Lucknow, India

Subodh K. Maiti,     Department of Environmental Science and Engineering, Centre of Mining Environment, Indian Institute of Technology (Indian School of Mines), Dhanbad, India

Naina Marwa,     Plant Ecology and Environmental Science Division, National Botanical Research Institute, Lucknow, India

R.E. Masto,     Industrial Biotechnology and Waste Utilization Research Group, CSIR-Central Institute of Mining and Fuel Research (Digwadih Campus), Dhanbad, India

Tripti Mishra,     Plant Ecology and Environmental Science Division, CSIR-National Botanical Research Institute, Lucknow, India

Amarendra Narayan Misra,     Centre for Life Sciences, Central University of Jharkhand, Ranchi, India

Miroslava Mitrović,     Department of Ecology, Institute for Biological Research Siniša Stanković, University of Belgrade, Belgrade, Serbia

S. Mukhopadhyay,     Industrial Biotechnology and Waste Utilization Research Group, CSIR-Central Institute of Mining and Fuel Research (Digwadih Campus), Dhanbad, India

Vimal Chandra Pandey,     Department of Environmental Science, Babasaheb Bhimrao Ambedkar University, Lucknow, India

Manoj S. Paul,     Department of Botany, St. John’s College, Agra, India

Pavle Pavlović,     Department of Ecology, Institute for Biological Research Siniša Stanković, University of Belgrade, Belgrade, Serbia

Majeti Narasimha Vara Prasad,     Department of Plant Sciences, University of Hyderabad, Hyderabad, India

João Pratas

MARE—Marine and Environmental Sciences Centre, University of Coimbra, Coimbra, Portugal

Department of Earth Sciences, Faculty of Sciences and Technology, University of Coimbra, Coimbra, Portugal

Instituto do Petróleo e Geologia (Institute of Petroleum and Geology), Dili, Timor-Leste

Ashish Praveen

Plant Ecology and Environmental Science Division, National Botanical Research Institute, Lucknow,India

Academy of Scientific and Innovative Research (AcSIR), New Delhi, India

Apurva Rai,     Plant Ecology and Environmental Science Division, National Botanical Research Institute, Lucknow, India

Upendra Nath Rai,     CSIR-National Botanical Research Institute, Lucknow, India

Robert Ramírez-García,     School of Biological Sciences and Biotechnology, Institute of Advanced Research, Gandhinagar, India

Anita Rani,     Dyal Singh College, University of Delhi, New Delhi, India

Poonam Rani

Department of Botany, Meerut College Meerut, Chaudhary Charan Singh University, Meerut, India

Department of Biotechnology, Meerut Institute of Engineering and Technology, Meerut, India

Mangaldeep Sarkar,     Navsari Agricultural University, Waghai, India

Pallavi Sharma,     Centre for Life Sciences, Central University of Jharkhand, Ranchi, India

Rashwet Shrinkhal,     Centre for Tribal and Customary Law, Central University of Jharkhand, Ranchi, India

Anurakti Shukla,     Institute of Environment & Sustainable Development, Banaras Hindu University, Varanasi, India

Devendra Pratap Singh,     Department of Environmental Science, Babasaheb Bhimrao Ambedkar University, Lucknow, India

Naveen Kumar Singh,     Environmental Science Discipline, Department of Chemistry, Manipal University, Jaipur, India

Rajani Singh,     Centre for Life Sciences, Central University of Jharkhand, Ranchi, India

Ritu Singh,     Department of Environmental Science, Central University of Rajasthan, Ajmer, India

Vijai Singh,     School of Biological Sciences and Biotechnology, Institute of Advanced Research, Gandhinagar, India

Pablo Souza-Alonso,     Department of Plant Biology and Soil Science, University of Vigo, Campus As Lagoas-Marcosende, Vigo, Spain

N.K. Srivastava,     Industrial Biotechnology and Waste Utilization Research Group, CSIR-Central Institute of Mining and Fuel Research (Digwadih Campus), Dhanbad, India

Sudhakar Srivastava,     Institute of Environment & Sustainable Development, Banaras Hindu University, Varanasi, Uttar Pradesh, India

Sweta,     Department of Environmental Sciences, Central University of Jharkhand, Ranchi, India

Jaya Tiwari,     Centre for Environmental Health, Asian Institute of Public Health, Bhubaneswar, India

R.C. Tripathi,     Industrial Biotechnology and Waste Utilization Research Group, CSIR-Central Institute of Mining and Fuel Research (Digwadih Campus), Dhanbad, India

Tripti,     Department of Experimental Biology and Biotechnology, Institute of Natural Sciences and Mathematics, Ural Federal University, Ekaterinburg, Russia

Atul Kumar Upadhyay,     Department of Environmental Science, Babasaheb Bhimrao Ambedkar University, Lucknow, India

Zeba Usmani,     Department of Environmental Science and Engineering, Center of Mining Environment, Indian Institute of Technology (Indian School of Mines), Dhanbad, India

About the Editors

Dr. Vimal Chandra Pandey is currently a CSIR-Pool Scientist in the Department of Environmental Science, Babasaheb Bhimrao Ambedkar (Central) University, Lucknow, India. Prior to this position, he was a consultant at the Council of Science and Technology, Uttar Pradesh, India. Dr. Pandey has also worked as a Young Scientist at the Plant Ecology and Environmental Sciences Division, CSIR-National Botanical Research Institute, Lucknow, India. Dr. Pandey is an environmental botanist, internationally recognized in the area of phytomanagement of fly ash. His current research interest is phytomanagement of polluted sites through ecologically and socio-economically valuable plants with minimum inputs and low maintenance towards nature sustainability in term of raising rural livelihoods and maintaining ecosystem services (phytoremediation of heavy metals, fly ash deposits, red mud sites, mine sites; revegetation of waste dumpsites; restoration of degraded lands). He has published over 50 research and review articles in reputed international journals with high impact factors and four book chapters. Dr. Pandey has been involved in 04 research projects. Dr. Pandey also received CSTUP-Young Scientist award, SERB-Young scientist award, UGC-Dr. D.S. Kothari Postdoctoral Fellowship and CSIR-Pool Scientist Award. He is an editorial board member of international journals such as Bulletin of Environmental Contamination and Toxicology (BECT), Springer; Tropical Plant Research. He is a member (MNASc) of the National Academy of Sciences, India (NASI). Dr. Pandey is also a member of Specialist Groups (i.e. Agro-ecosystems, Ecosystem Restoration and Sustainable Use and Management of Ecosystems) of Commission on Ecosystem Management (CEM), International Union for Conservation of Nature (IUCN). Dr. Pandey is serving as a potential reviewer for various reputed journals, in the field of environmental sciences, of Elsevier, Springer, Wiley, Taylor & Francis, etc. ORCID iD: https://orcid.org/0000-0003-2250-6726?lang=en; https://orcid.org/0000-0003-2250-6726, Google Scholar: https://scholar.google.co.in/citations?user=B-5sDCoAAAAJ&hl.

Dr. Kuldeep Bauddh is currently Assistant Professor of Environmental Science at the Centre for Environmental Sciences, Central University of Jharkhand, Ranchi, India. He received his PhD in Environmental Science from the Babasaheb Bhimrao Ambedkar University, Lucknow, Uttar Pradesh, India in 2014. Dr. Bauddh is engaged in teaching the thrust areas of environmental sciences like environmental pollution, monitoring and management, environmental toxicology and industrial safety, and climate change. His main research areas are phytoremediation, restoration of mining dump sites, and slow-release fertilizers. He has published two books (Edited) with Springer entitled Algae and Environmental Sustainability and Phytoremediation Potential of Bioenergy Plants, has published more than 28 research papers in national and international journals, contributed 12 book chapters, and 6 articles in popular magazines. Dr. Bauddh is a reviewer of research journals like International Journal of Phytoremediation, Chemosphere, Ecological Engineering, Sustainability of Water Quality and Ecology, and Bulletin of Environmental Contamination and Toxicology.

Foreword

Deep Narayan Pandey, Additional Principal Chief Conservator of Forests, Indian Forest Service, Jaipur, India

Phytomanagement of polluted sites is an important collection of scientific literature in the form of chapters, that reveal practical and viable ways of remediating polluted sites through ecologically and socioeconomically valuable plants. The strategies are also such that provide many co-benefits, including the sequestration of pollutants. Support to the green economy is particularly noteworthy. Phyto products, such as biofuels (biodiesel, biogas, and bioethanol), aromatic essential oils, crops that have been ameliorated through biofortification, ornamental plants, pulp-paper biomass as well as different derived wood products, are important additional benefits.

Currently, there is a pressing need to develop phytomanagement of polluted sites through green technologies that benefit society directly and indirectly. Ecologically and socioeconomically valuable and native plant-based phytoremediation is a superb example of practical sustainability that has an optimistic future across nations. This book will fill the gap that often exists between the theory and practice of phytoremediation through phytomanagement. It is the responsibility of all to address the challenges of the remediation and management of ever increasing numbers and areas of industrially contaminated sites through valuable plants with optimum and evidence-based inputs. The strategies suggested here are not only low cost and low maintenance; they also have the potential to improve rural livelihoods and maintain ecosystem services.

This book is, therefore, focused on the current findings and state-of-the-art methodologies and strategies of phytoremediation and phytomanagement of polluted sites. I am happy to note the efforts of Dr. Vimal Chandra Pandey, together with Dr. Kuldeep Bauddh, in bringing out this valuable volume through the leading global publisher of science—Elsevier Publishing—with 22 chapters covering various aspects of the phytomanagement of polluted sites. The work deserves all appreciation. This book will also support a potential market in sustainable phytoremediation. The book has current environmental, ecological, social, and economic significance, and will be a significant asset for students, researchers, industrialists, practitioners, policy makers, and stakeholders alike.

Preface

Vimal Chandra Pandey and Kuldeep Bauddh

Ever-increasing numbers and areas of polluted sites are a major concern worldwide due to modern urbanization, industrial revolution, and over-population growth and have resulted in environmental damage including the contamination of ecosystems. These contaminated ecosystems can be divided in two categories, that is, contaminated terrestrial and aquatic ecosystems. There are a wide range of industrial dumpsites including fly ash dumps, mine spoils, red mud deposits, and sewage sludge dumpsites, etc. These polluted sites are a source of inorganic and organic pollutants, the degradation of soil and water system, and serious dust pollution to the atmosphere. These pose potential toxic impacts on flora and fauna, and are also recognized as ecological, economic, and social challenges. The main challenge is to develop new, feasible and cost-effective solutions for the remediation of these polluted sites.

The phytoremediation of polluted sites in a safe and sustainable way is crucial worldwide. Therefore, the phytomanagement of polluted sites through native plants with economically importance is a holistic approach toward ecological, economic, and social sustainability. There are some factors that influence phytoremediation efficiency such as the survivability of plants in polluted sites, plant ability to uptake pollutants, perennial nature, unpalatable nature or low palatability, vegetative spread, and extent of root systems. Therefore, native plants with economic importance having these characteristics should be utilized for the phytomanagement of polluted sites. A number of plant species (including trees, grasses, shrubs, and aquatic plants) are subjected to characterization their potential for sustainable phytoremediation programs. Therefore, all phytoremediation work should be screened on the basis of native plants with economic importance.

In order to fully utilize polluted sites and to overcome the disadvantage of phytoremediation, Phytomanagement of Polluted Sites addresses economically valuable and native plant-based phytoremediation and provides a way of obtaining profitable outputs as green economy. It is, thus, desirable to remediate polluted sites through native plants with economic importance such as biofuel crops, essential oil producing aromatic crops, pulp-paper producing trees, fiber crops, timber trees, etc. This book will be useful for stakeholders and practitioners to select specific plant species according to the site-specificity of industrial dumpsites or contaminated ecosystems. As this book will show, there are clearly some potential opportunities in the phytoremediation of polluted sites that also yield phytoproducts such as biodiesel, aromatic oil, biofortified products, and pulp-paper biomass while restoring contaminated ecosystems.

This book provides accurate knowledge of and insight into phytomanagement of polluted sites through ecologically and socioeconomically valuable plants. The screening and conservation of the genetic resource of native and economically valuable plant-based phytoremediation is of pivotal importance for the future development of effective plans for the remediation of polluted sites with economic returns. In this book, an attempt has also been made to popularize phytoremediation toward profitable phytoremediation through the phytomanagement of polluted sites among ecological engineers, researchers, environmental scientists, practitioners, policy makers, and stakeholders. This book also addresses the market opportunities in phytoremediation toward the sustainable development of polluted sites. It will be a useful asset to students, researchers, practitioners, policy makers, and stakeholders alike.

This book contains theoretical and practical methodologies along with laboratory and field work and includes 22 chapters written by authors from nine countries: India, South Africa, Portugal, Russia, Serbia, Canada, Spain, Timor-Leste, and the United States. These chapters cover a broad range of topics in the phytomanagement, phytoremediation, phytorestoration, and rhizoremediation of polluted sites.

Acknowledgments

Vimal Chandra Pandey

First of all, I Thank God for his blessings, which gave me inspiration, passion and power to complete this project successfully.

I would like to thank all the authors of this book for their excellent contributions as well as the reviewers for their objective observations. I especially thank Prof. Claudio Bini for his time and expertise in reviewing the first two chapters of the book. I also thank Associate Prof. Cora Bulmau for her excellent review of the manuscript.

I am thankful to Laura Kelleher and Candice Janco (Acquisitions Editor), Brianna Garcia and Ruby Smith (Editorial Project Manager), and Narmatha Mohan (Copyrights Coordinator) from Elsevier for their excellent coordination of this fascinating project, as well as the anonymous reviewers for recommending this book and making critical suggestions.

I have no words to express my gratitude to my beloved wife, Deepti Pandey, for her unending support and encouragement. I am also thankful to my charming little sons, Devansh and Ivaan, who really missed me during this project.

I acknowledge Pablo Souza-Alonso for designing the image of the book cover according to my concept. He really worked hard to make my vision real.

I thank all those whose names do not feature here, but have helped me directly or indirectly in shaping this project.

Kuldeep Bauddh

The authors of this book completed the most challenging assignment of accomplishing this dream with their kind contributions and cooperation. I express my deep gratitude to Prof. Rana Pratap Singh, my PhD supervisor, and Dr. Narendra Kumar, Department of Environmental Science, Babasaheb Bhimrao Ambedkar University, Lucknow, and Professor Manoj Kumar, Head of the Centre for Environmental Sciences, Central University of Jharkhand, Ranchi, for their positive direction and precious advice.

I especially thank Dr. Vimal Chandra Pandey (the editor of this book) for his vision and foresight, which inspired me to complete this book along with him.

I acknowledge my loving wife, Sweta Bauddh, for her unending support and encouragement.

I acknowledge my family members—my parents (Mr. Suresh Baboo and Mrs. Shyama Devi), my sister’s family (Mrs. Kalpana Devi, Mr. Ajay Hans, Ananya, Komal, and Akshay), my younger brother (Jagdeep), and all my relatives. Their dreams and ambition made me strong enough to complete the project.

I give my joyful thanks to all my friends whose well wishes will stay with me.

I take this opportunity, also, to thank the service provided by the team at Elsevier Publishers and everyone who collaborated in producing this book.

Chapter 1

Phytoremediation

From Theory Toward Practice

Vimal Chandra Pandey¹* and Omesh Bajpai²,    ¹Department of Environmental Science, Babasaheb Bhimrao Ambedkar University, Lucknow, India,    ²Division of Plant Sciences, Plant & Environmental Research Institute (PERI), Kanpur, Uttar Pradesh, India

Abstract

This introductory chapter summarizes the progress of the theoretical and practical aspects of phytoremediation, mainly focusing on phytoremediation actions. Several expansions in the theory and practices of phytoremediation have been achieved around the world mainly in developed countries during the past decade, though phytoremediation is still not popularized as a holistic approach with multiple benefits to remediate environmental pollution. Coordinating, we also attempt to link the gap between the theory and practice of phytoremediation through describing the term phytomanagement. The last section of this introductory chapter discusses the topic, sustainability issues of phytoremediation, in detail. In conclusion, economically valuable, unpalatable, and native plant-based phytoremediation is a promising idea to generate an income for phytocompanies, provide revenue to landowners, and for multiple benefits to the environment as well as to reduce the dangers faced by animals. In our opinion, our evidence-based suggestions and specific cases of phytoremediation around the world offer to put phytoremediation into action.

Keywords

Pollutants; uptake mechanisms; phytoremediation strategies; hyperaccumulator; phytomanagement

1.1 Introduction to Phytoremediation

There are many locations that have been significantly degraded due to urbanization, industrialization, and changing agricultural practices all over the world. All these activities contaminate soil, air, and water, thereby posing a severe threat to ecosystems and human health (Kang, 2014). Mainly two pollutants (inorganic and organic) are responsible for the deterioration of the health of soil and water ecosystems. Inorganic pollutants include heavy metals (Cd, Cr, Pb, Ni, Zn, Se, Cu, and Co), metalloids (As, Hg, and Se) (Pandey et al., 2011; Ye et al., 2011), and radionuclides (U, Ra, Sr, and Cs) (Dushenkov, 2003; Cerne et al., 2011), while leading organic pollutants are hydrocarbons, trichloroethylene (TCE), herbicides, Methyl tertiary-butyl ether, and trinitrotoluene (Hong et al., 2001; Davis et al., 2002). All these xenobiotics are nonbiodegradable in nature and persist in soil ecosystems for a long time, posing a serious threat to the environment. Inorganic pollutants have a high toxicity, and thus have a negative influence on ecosystems. Finally, DNA damage occurs in fauna including humans because of their mutagenic nature (Baudouin et al., 2002). In the European Union, a wide range of industrial development including urban expansion has created a significant legacy of polluted sites over two centuries: approximately 2.5 million sites are potentially contaminated (Kumpiene et al., 2014; EEA (European Environment Agency), 2014) and almost 342,000 polluted sites have been recognized (Panagos et al., 2013). Among polluted sites, 37% are trace element cases, 38% are mineral oil cases, and 13% are polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons are the most common polluted sites of concern (Mench et al., 2010). In addition, coal mining, fly-ash (FA) dumps, red mud deposits, and other waste deposits are liable for the contamination of ecosystems. Developed and developing countries are both facing significant topsoil pollution, which poses great risks to the environment as well as to human health (FAO and ITPS, 2015). Additionally, soil pollutants may be shifted over time to aquatic ecosystems through leaching or wind dispersal.

Conventional technologies are not totally adequate enough to restore polluted soil due to certain limitations: they are costly (often expensive), labor-intensive, destructive, and not eco-friendly, they are also limited by certain technical barriers (Meuser, 2013; Yao et al., 2012). For sustainable environmental and agricultural development, the contaminated sites need to be remediated and the entry of pollutants into the food chain needs to be minimized. In view of this, the plant-based remediation technique known as phytoremediation has gained much regard over the past two decades. It is a simple, vital, cost-effective, low-labor-intensive, widely acceptable, compatible, eco-friendly, sustainable, reliable, and promising technology which is applicable in large areas, particularly when native, ecologically and socioeconomically valuable plants are used for the remediation of polluted sites and an income is generation from produced phytoproducts from contaminated lands (Pandey et al., 2015a, 2016). Phytoremediation is useful in the remediation of wide-ranging pollutants, and is 10-fold cheaper than conventional technologies (Nascimento and Xing, 2006). Plants keep the inherent capacity to neutralize both organic and inorganic pollutants via different processes such as bioaccumulation, translocation, and degradation, thereby acting as a vital sink for biologically hazardous pollutants (Schwitzguébel, 2000).

Thlaspi caerulescens and Viola calaminaria are listed as the first to accumulate heavy metals in leaves with high concentrations (Baumann, 1885). Certain plants grown on metalliferous soils have the ability to accumulate high concentrations of heavy metals in their different parts without any negative effects on growth (Reeves and Brooks, 1983). Chaney (1983) was the first person who suggested the use of hyperaccumulators in phytoremediation. The first field trial on hyperaccumulators was conducted in 1991 for phytoremediation of Zn and Cd heavy metals (Baker et al., 1991). FA, a coal combustion residue, has been accepted as a significant hazardous material to residents of thermal power plants. There are three main problems with FA, such as the easy dispersibility of fine FA particles during the summer season by wind, the leaching of heavy metals into water and soil, and its hostile substrate chemistry (Pandey et al., 2009; Pandey and Singh, 2012). Several efforts have been made to remediate FA dumps through biological interventions (Juwarkar and Jambhulkar, 2008; Hrynkiewiez et al., 2009; Babu and Reddy, 2011). Some reports on the accumulation potential of plants in FA amended soil for the remediation of heavy metals has been documented and suggested for FA remediation (Maiti and Jaiswal, 2008; Kumari et al., 2013). Additionally, certain plants that naturally grow on FA deposits have also been evaluated for their phytostabilization, phytoremediation, and revegetation prospectives, toward increasing rural livelihoods and retaining ecosystem services (Pandey et al., 2012a,b, 2015b,c; Pandey, 2013b). However, sustainable phytoremediation (or phytomanagement) with economically valuable and unpalatable plants is a promising option for the remediation of FA deposits, due to being aesthetically pleasing, cost-effective, and low risk.

Worldwide, acceptable phytoremediation has an over 300-year old history of wastewater discharges, but the concept of using plants for the remediation of heavy metals and other pollutants was first reported in1983 (Blaylock, 2008). The term phytoremediation was coined in 1989 by Dr. Ilya Raskin, Rutgers University, New Jersey, United States (Raskin et al., 1994). All over the world, there are several phytoremediation companies that are engaged in the remediation of polluted sites and have handled many projects of phytoremediation. However, it is time to use sustainable phytoremediation (in broad terms phytomanagement), through the harnessing of ecologically and socioeconomically native plant species, for the revitalization of contaminated land with low risk and an economic return (Pandey et al., 2015a, 2016). Phytomanagement is a potential approach that will help boost phytoremediation business and environmental remediation. This concept can be explored through the discussion of current trends and needs in phytoremediation businesses and organizations. Participation among different stakeholders such as practitioners, researchers, policymakers, landowners, and phytoremediation companies are required in order to strengthen our knowledge of phytoremediation toward the development of business. Thus, it is important to conduct workshops, conferences, seminars, and symposia on ecologically and socioeconomically native plant species, in order to scrutinize their characteristics and prioritize them for the phytomanagement of polluted sites in different areas of the world.

1.2 Contaminant Uptake Mechanisms

The very first step toward the management of contaminated soil through phytoremediation is the penetration and movement of water as well as air through breaking the condensed soil and creating passages, which is physically performed by the root growth of remediating plants (Gerhardt et al., 2009; Ammari et al., 2013). Such kind of growth not only physically cracks the soil but also changes the whole soil biology after developing the microbial community in and around the root system (i.e., rhizosphere) of the introduced plant. The capability to remediate organic and inorganic contaminants is different in the soil of vegetated and nonvegetated lands because of these soil microbes (Robinson et al., 2009; Batty and Dolan, 2013; Gerhardt et al., 2015).

Different biochemical such as organic acids (citric acid), bicarbonate anions, protons, and additional cations are exuded into the rhizosphere of these plants and affect the chemical properties of the soil with the ultimate effect on the mobility, bioavailability, and degradation of different soil contaminants (Pilon-Smits, 2005; Gerhardt et al., 2009; Robinson et al., 2009; Maestri et al., 2010; Padmavathiamma and Li, 2012; Tak et al., 2013; Stephenson and Black, 2014; Gerhardt et al., 2015; Ullah et al., 2015). The plants also mitigate the leaching of contaminants to the groundwater by their up taking of water from the soil (Vangronsveld et al., 2009; Mench et al., 2010). Increased contaminant flux has also been recorded many times, which facilitate the remediation from elsewhere in the rhizosphere (Jiang et al., 2010; Padmavathiamma and Li, 2012).

1.2.1 Plant Metabolism for Organic Contaminants

When we see the degradation mechanism, it has been reported that several volatile monoaromatic pollutants, such as benzene, toluene, ethyl-benzene, and xylene; polyaromatic hydrocarbons (PAHs); polychlorinated biphenyls (PCBs), and pesticides (dichlorodiphenyltrichloroethane and hexachlorocyclohexane) have different ways of degrading: (1) with microbes in the rhizosphere (rhizodegradation); (2) by plant exudates (phytodegradation); and (3) in the plant (Pilon-Smits, 2005; Vangronsveld et al., 2009; Sun et al., 2011; Tu et al., 2011; Becerra-Castro et al., 2013; Stephenson and Black, 2014). Phytostabilization is another, but less used way, to remediate organic pollutants (2,4,6-trinitrotoluene (TNT) and pyrene), in which the accumulation of pollutants occurs in the root tissues (Pilon-Smits, 2005; Yoon et al., 2006; Macci et al., 2013; Cruz-Hernández et al., 2013; Stephenson and Black, 2014; Das et al., 2015).

The plants are able to minimize the injurious effects of different organic contaminants by reducing, converting, and catabolizing these hazardous contaminants within the cells, adapted by plants this can be understood by the green liver model of Sandermann (1994). Sun et al. (2015) approved this model on Daucus carota var. sativus (carrot) and demonstrated plant’s ability to degrade phthalate esters. This unique ability of plants is because of the presence of several enzymes, used in their detoxification system. Actually, these enzymes detoxify the contaminants through the process of degradation and conjugation (Kvesitadze et al., 2009; Glick, 2015). Some important enzymes responsible for the biocontrol of organic contaminants are catalase, cytochrome P450 monooxygenases, dehalogenase, glutathione-S-transferase, hydrolase, laccase, nitroreductase, peroxidase, and polyphenol peroxidase; which directly participate in the tolerance, stabilization, and deposition of these contaminants (Kvesitadze et al., 2009; Yu and Powles, 2014; Schwitzguébel, 2017). The initial metabolism of this process of detoxification including ring-breaking activities (necessary for benzene derivatives) is mediated by oxygenase enzymes (cytochrome P450 monooxygenases) (Sandermann, 1994; Kvesitadze et al., 2009). Now the functional groups are introduced into the contaminants to increase their activity and solubility due to better polarity (Komives and Gullner, 2005), and this step is assessed by certain other groups of the enzymes such as aryl and alkyl hydroxylation, ester hydrolysis, and N- or O-dealkylation (Sun et al., 2015; Schwitzguébel, 2017). These activated compounds are now conjugated with the plant’s own polar molecules (amino acids, carbohydrates, glutathione, malonic acid, and sulfate). The conjugation, including peptide conjugation and ether, ester, or thioether linkages is accelerated by transferase enzymes (glycosyl transferases and glutathione S-transferases) (Kvesitadze et al., 2009; Aken et al., 2010). The product of this conjugation may be soluble and/or bond. The soluble conjugates can be totally disintegrated into CO2 and H2O molecules for further use; while, the bound conjugates are expelled out of the cell to the apoplast, by the process of exocytosis, and are then assimilated into the cell wall (Komossa et al., 1995; Kvesitadze et al., 2009).

Although, this green liver model has clearly demonstrated the processes of organic contaminant transformation and the responsible enzymes used in this process, a thorough understanding of the mechanisms of these processes at a molecular level is still the subject of research, which will be useful in the prediction as well as manipulation of xenobiotic transformation (Glick, 2010; Sun et al., 2015; Vergani et al., 2017).

After decoding this process to a molecular level, genetic engineering will be helpful toward the improvement of the stability and efficiency of phytoremediation (Doty, 2008). The data provided by this next generation sequencing and omics approaches, permits further networking studies of genetics, enzyme kinetics, metabolisms, etc. (Bell et al., 2014; Ufarté et al., 2015; Bouhajja et al., 2016).

There are several exclusive studies describing detailed phytoremediation mechanisms (Stephenson and Black, 2014; Fester et al., 2014; Yavari et al., 2015; Gerhardt et al., 2015), which may be considered in order to gain an understanding of the biochemistry of the mechanisms. Here, we cannot conclude without pointing out the problem of phytovolatilization, in which some low molecular weight contaminants (TCE, benzene, toluene, ethyl-benzene, xylene, etc.,) are taken up by the roots, translocated to the leaves, and released through the stomata via evaporation (Yoon et al., 2006; Vangronsveld et al., 2009; Lee, 2013; Cook and Hesterberg, 2013).

Different ways for remediating organic contaminants have been demonstrated, not only in the laboratory, but also successfully in field trails (Zeeb et al., 2006; Gerhardt et al., 2009, 2015; Mahanty et al., 2011; Lee, 2013; Batty and Dolan, 2013; Kang, 2014; Yavari et al., 2015; Hou et al., 2015). And now these described practices are effectively implemented commercially throughout the world. In the case of the United States, more than US$1 trillion was spent on the remediation of contaminated sites in 1 year alone for the phytomanagement of organic contaminants (Stroud et al., 2007). Thus, it is extremely clear that the management of contaminated sites with plants is becoming a big market and is expanding day by day.

1.2.2 Plant Metabolism for Inorganic Contaminants

The remediation of inorganic contaminants, that is, salt (NaCl) and metal through plants has its own mechanism. Salt (NaCl) has only been included in the list of contaminants, because of its toxic impact on plants (Deinlein et al., 2014; Qadir et al., 2014; Jesus et al., 2015; Parihar et al., 2015). Although several metals (Cu, Zn, Mn, Fe, Mg) are essential nutrients for plant growth, in excess the same metals start showing toxic activity (Jadia and Fulekar, 2009; Maestri et al., 2010; Vamerali et al., 2010; Singh et al., 2011). Nonessential metal(loid)s such as As, Cd, Cr, and Pb always show toxic impacts in plants as well as animals, even in low concentrations (Jadia and Fulekar, 2009; Vamerali et al., 2010; Singh et al., 2011). Other hazardous metal(loid)s and radioisotopes have also been identified for phytoremediation, including Co, Cr, Cs, Cu, Hg, Mo, Ni, Pb, Sb, Se, Sr, Tl, U, Zn, etc. (Vangronsveld et al., 2009; Vamerali et al., 2010; Tangahu et al., 2011; Lee, 2013; Tak et al., 2013; Hansda et al., 2014; Cabello-Conejo et al., 2014; Herzig et al., 2014; Ullah et al., 2015).

As inorganic contaminants cannot be chemically degraded, certain plant species have ability to immobilize contaminants in their rhizospheric zone or to accumulate in roots and then aboveground plant biomass; and from there they may be extracted. The mechanism of defense adopted by plants under heavy metal contamination can be further understood by the provided flowchart (Fig. 1.1).

Figure 1.1 The defense mechanisms in plants under heavy metal conditions.

In contaminated soil with high pH, metals exist in the form of insoluble phosphates and carbonates (Tak et al., 2013). Thus, to increase the bioavailability of these contaminants, first it is important to vegetate contaminated lands. Because organic acids and protons are exuded from plants along with the microbial metabolism, these insoluble complexes form free ionic species (Padmavathiamma and Li, 2012; Stephenson and Black, 2014). Further, these ionic species become biologically available for biosurfactants and chelators (Maestri et al., 2010; Tak et al., 2013; Ullah et al., 2015). These ionic species bind with chelators and then can pass through cellular membranes more easily (Nowack et al., 2006; Johnson and Singhal, 2015). These contaminants are transported within plants just similarly to nutrient transportation: (1) apoplastic and (2) symplastic, and/or transmembrane pathways (Robinson et al., 2009; Maestri et al., 2010; Singh et al., 2011; Padmavathiamma and Li, 2012). After transportation, salt (NaCl) is mainly sequestered into the vacuoles (Manousaki and Kalogerakis, 2011; Hasegawa, 2013), while metals are sequestered in the cell walls, vacuoles, and/or Golgi complex (Singh et al., 2011). These plants do not remove the contaminants, but stabilize them with the association of selective microorganisms and decrease the risk of potential receptors (plants as well as animals) (Robinson et al., 2009; Mench et al., 2010; Vamerali et al., 2010; Padmavathiamma and Li, 2012; Pelfrêne et al., 2015). In addition, plants also restore the soil properties of contaminated sites, except the stabilization of contaminants (Vangronsveld et al., 2009; Mench et al., 2010). Plants used for the phytoremediation of contaminants are called hyperaccumulators (sometimes phytoextractors) and can take up high concentrations of contaminants (Whiting et al., 2001a,b; Prasad and de Oliveira Freitas, 2003; Vangronsveld et al., 2009; Robinson et al., 2009; Maestri et al., 2010; Manousaki and Kalogerakis, 2011; Jaffré et al., 2013; Cabello-Conejo et al., 2014).

At the same time, some other plants producing a high biomass (mostly grasses) but accumulating lower concentrations of contaminants can also be used for phytoextraction (Vangronsveld et al., 2009; Vamerali et al., 2010; Fiorentino et al., 2013; Chang et al., 2014; Jesus et al., 2015). When utilizing these hyperaccumulators, it is important to harvest the biomass with a high percentage of contaminants to avoid their leaching into the soil/water of the site (Mench et al., 2010; Kumpiene et al., 2012; Hu et al., 2013; Sinha et al., 2013; Chang et al., 2014; Placek et al., 2016). The timing of harvesting may be different depending on the plants used for the phytoextraction. For example, if we are using herbaceous plants, harvesting is required at the end of each growing season; in the case of shrubs and trees (where the contaminants accumulate in the bark and/or wood), we can wait for years. On the other hand, if the contaminants are accumulating in the foliage and the plants are deciduous, it is extremely important to harvest them in a timely manner (Placek et al., 2016). After harvesting, the disposal of the biomass with a high concentration of contaminants is a huge task and presently there are several approved methods, such as incineration, gasification, slow pyrolysis followed by steam activation, flash pyrolysis, hydrolysis, and liquefaction (Nsanganwimana et al., 2014; Gonsalvesh et al., 2016). In phytoremediation, it is also important to know the nature of given contaminants. If they are volatile in nature they cannot be accumulated in plant systems and can be released in ambient air via evapotranspiration and then redeposited back into the soil through rain (Vangronsveld et al., 2009; Weyens et al., 2009), although, there are some transgenic plants that convert reactive contaminants into nonreactive ones before their release into the atmosphere (Bizily et al., 2000; Jadia and Fulekar, 2009). For example, Bizily et al. (2000) reported the use of transgenic Poplar sp. for the uptake of methylmercury (a volatile organomercurial compound) and its conversion into ionic Hg by organomercurial lyase, then into nonreactive Hg by mercuric reductase. However, it is still volatilized in the atmosphere, redeposited back into the soil, and remethylated to methylmercury by bacteria (Bizily et al., 2000). Thus, there is work to be done in future in the direction of stabilizing volatile contaminants safely.

To quantify the abilities of a plant for phytoremediation, there are some quantitative factors to consider, such as bioconcentration and translocation factors. Bioconcentration is the ratio of metal content between plant parts (root or shoots) and soil (Esringü et al., 2014). If the bioconcentration value is <1 for a plant species, the plant will be contaminant-tolerant and may be used for revegetation and phytostabilization (Yang et al., 2014), on the other hand, if the value is >1 for a plant, this indicates the bioaccumulating capacity of that plant (Pandey et al., 2015d; Meeinkuirt et al., 2016). While, translocation is calculated as the ratio of metal content between the root and shoot (Esringü et al., 2014). If the translocation value is >1 for a plant, there is a proficient translocation of contaminants from plant roots to shoots, and thus, proves that plant as a good phytoextractor (Yang et al., 2014). On the other hand, if the value is <1, there is no translocation of contaminants from plant roots to shoots, and thus, may be used for phytostabilization (Yang et al., 2014; Pandey et al., 2015d; Meeinkuirt et al., 2016). The total soil metal extraction at a given time may be calculated through the multiplication of the metal concentration in the aboveground plant parts with the total biomass of the plant (Mench et al., 2009; Chang et al., 2014; Esringü et al., 2014).

1.3 Phytoremediation Strategies

The strategies used for the process of phytoremediation can be categorized into five types, which include phytoextraction/phytoaccumulation, phytostabilization, phytodegradation, rhizofiltration, and phytovolatilization (Table 1.1).

Table 1.1

1.3.1 Phytoextraction/Phytoaccumulation

It is the process of absorption of contaminants from contaminated sites (soil, water, sediments) by roots, and their translocation and accumulation in the aboveground plant parts. The process is also known as phytomining or biomining (Pivetz, 2001). Plants that have the genetic ability to tolerate higher concentrations of nonfavorable contaminants, are used for it (Van Nevel et al., 2007; Hasanuzzaman and Fujita, 2012). These plants are grown on contaminated sites for some time, harvested, and then incinerated to reprocess the contaminants. To decrease the concentration of these contaminants in contaminated soil up to a permissible limit, several cycles have been used to grow, harvest, and incinerate. After incineration, the ash is used in landfilling following guidelines for hazardous waste disposal.

It is an old and efficient practice to translocate the metal contaminants from contaminated sites, using plants (Brooks, 1998; EPA, 2000). The plant species that we are going to use for phytoextraction should have some necessary features, such as high translocation factor, high bioconcentration factor, high tolerance against contaminants, rapid growth, high biomass production, good root system, good assimilation rate, and easy harvesting (EPA, 2000). Baker and Brooks (1989) reported that plants from the Asteraceae, Brassicaceae, Lamiaceae, Euphorbiaceae, and Scrophulariaceae families are more suitable to be used for phytoextraction. As it is a biological process and performed by the plants, phytoextraction removes contaminants from contaminated sites without any adverse effect on the properties of soil, water, and sediments (Yanai et al., 2006).

1.3.2 Phytostabilization

The use of vegetation to restrict the mobility and bioavailability of contaminants in the soil, water, and/or sediments through physical, chemical, and biological modification is termed phytostabilization. It is a simple and cost-effective in situ method with low environmental invasion utilizing selective plants (Jadia and Fulekar, 2009). Amendments in the chemical and biological characteristics of contaminated sites by increasing organic matter content and cation-exchange capacity, is the main approach (Alvarenga et al., 2009). Additionally, the prevention of hazardous contaminants from dispersing via leaching (contamination of groundwater) and erosion (spreading of toxic elements through water and/or wind to other sites), as well as their entry into the food chain are the other aims of phytostabilization (Raskin and Ensley, 2000).

As per current trends in field practices and research, phytostabilization is mainly focusing on the stabilization of metals, such as Cr, Cd, As, Hg, Cu, and Zn (EPA, 1997, 2004). For this, it works on metal solubility and mobility through certain changes in the soil environment (Aggarwal and Goyal, 2007). Besides metals, phytostabilization is also used to fix low-level radioactive contaminated sites; however, it is important to evaluate the accumulation and leaching of radionuclides extremely carefully (Lasat et al., 1998; Watt et al., 2002).

1.3.3 Phytodegradation

The term phytodegradation is used to designate the enzymatic breakdown of contaminants into more simple or less-toxic products by plants either in the rhizosphere before their uptake or sometimes in the root after their uptake followed by further synthesis. It is an influential decontamination process and also known as phytotransformation. If phytodegradation occurs in the rhizosphere, the required enzymes are released from the roots of plants (EPA, 2000; Meagher et al., 2000; Rugh, 2001). Several microorganisms in association with plant roots also help with this process (Garbisu and Alkorta, 2001). On the other hand, if degradation takes place within the plants, it is important that the plant should be able to uptake the contaminants and translocate them to the place of transformation in their original form, without any lethal effect on the plant cells (Singh et al., 2008, 2009; Hasanuzzaman and Fujita, 2012).

There is a wide range of contaminants that can be metabolized, including herbicides, insecticides, pesticides, chlorinated solvents, munitions, and inorganic contaminants (Thompson et al., 1998; Pivetz, 2001; Gerhardt et al., 2009). The plant enzymes used in this process are also identified; some common examples are dehalogenase, nitrilase, phosphatase, nitroreductase, and oxidoreductase (EPA, 2000). These deliver the best results in the case of low contaminated soils.

1.3.4 Rhizofiltration

Rhizofiltration is the process of absorption of contaminants present in the rhizosphere into the root system of plants. This remediation process is used to decontaminate aquatic ecosystems using aquatic or land plants. During the utilization of this process, plants are grown on the contaminated site (in situ) or in an ex situ environment. Contaminants are absorbed through plant roots until saturation is reached, and finally, the plants are harvested with their roots. As the accumulation of contaminants occurs in the roots without any translocation to the shoots, there is an extremely low chance of atmospheric contamination (Dushenkov et al., 1995).

Rhizofiltration can be applied in the remediation of metals (Cr, Cd, Co, Cu, Ag, Hg, Ni, Mn, Pb, Zn, Mo) (Juwarkar et al., 2010), metalloids (As, Se) (Rathinasabapathi and Srivastava, 2006; Ye et al., 2011), and radioactive elements (137Cs, 239Pu, 90Sr, 234U) (Cook et al., 2009; Cerne et al., 2011; EPA, 1998; Fulekar et al., 2010; Hegazy and Emam, 2010). Indian mustard, rye, sunflower, tobacco, and spinach are some important plants used for this technique (Henry, 2000). In this technique, terrestrial plants have been widely used because of their rapid growth and fibrous root systems. In in situ conditions, these plants are used as floating rafts; while in ex situ conditions, engineered tank or pipe systems have been utilized to grow these plants. The introduction of microorganisms in the rhizosphere has also been reported to stimulate the uptake of contaminants (Entry et al., 1997; Westhoff, 1999; Turnau et al., 2006).

1.3.5 Phytovolatilization

Phytovolatilization is a process, in which plants extract contaminants from contaminated sites through their roots, convert the more toxic elements into less-toxic ones within the plant, and release them into the atmosphere through their leaves. This method is based on the evapotranspiration mechanism and mainly used for Hg, Se, and organic solvent contamination (Bizily et al., 1999; Bañuelos et al., 2000; Karami and Shamsuddin, 2010). Tritium (3H), an isotope, has also been reported to be remediated by following this method utilizing woody plants (Murphy, 2001). Phytovolatilization efficiency is influenced by the climate of remediation sites as well as the genetic capability of the utilized plant species. At the same time, the absorption, translocation, and chemical fate of these contaminants are strongly dependent on their concentration at the contaminated sites (Meagher, 2000). As per the report of the Environmental Protection Agency, United States, Alfalfa, Black locust, Canola, and Indian mustard are good phytovolatilizing species (EPA, 2000).

Although this method has been reported to remediate several hazardous contaminants, overall it does not solve the problem completely. It just pulls the contaminants from the soil, water, and/or sediments and releases them into the atmosphere. We know that the concentration of the released material is low and often less toxic but it still disturbs the natural equilibrium of the atmosphere.

1.4 Hyperaccumulation

The ability of plants to uptake heavy metals from contaminated soil and accumulate them within themselves to a higher level than in the contaminated soil is called hyperaccumulation. This accumulation should be higher by at least 100 times (Brooks, 1998), but in most plants used for this purpose is ranges from 50 to 500 times higher (Clemens, 2006). Currently, about 500 plant species have been identified for their potential of hyperaccumulation abilities (McGrath and Zhao, 2003; Sarma, 2011). The exact reason(s) behind this unique capability of plants is still not clear; but as per the latest research, the defense mechanism could be a possible reason behind it. Actually, these plants are protecting themselves from different pathogens and/or herbivores by accumulating hazardous materials in their tissues which are poisonous in nature.

The difference in the accumulating capability of hyperaccumulators depends on the surrounding environment and the presence of responsible genes, their regulation, and expression (Rascio and Navari-Izzo, 2011). Hyperaccumulation starts with the uptake of metals from the soil, followed by the formation of a metallocomplex with the help of specific proteins (to detoxify the poisonous effects of the metals), their translocation from plant roots to shoots via the apoplast or symplast, distribution and sequestration of these metals at a cellular level inside the tissues, and finally the accumulation of these metals in the metabolically less active cells of the tissue (Kotrba et al., 2009). Some examples of hyperaccumulators have been provided in Table 1.2 with target metals.

Table 1.2

In general, it is a well-known fact that plants with the capability of hyperaccumulation grow slowly and produce less biomass which are major disadvantages of natural hyperaccumulators. For hyperaccumulation, transportation of metals after metalloprotein formation is an extremely important step, which is mainly governed by the ZIP family of genes; other genes from the HMA, MATE, YSL, and MTP families have also been reported to be involved in this process (Pagliano et al., 2006; Poschenrieder et al., 2006). As the different families of the genes responsible for this overall process have been identified, they can now be transferred to a plant with rapid growth (De Souza et al., 1998), and the process of accumulation can be accelerated. The basic process of the hyperaccumulation of metals in plants is represented with the flowchart shown in Fig. 1.2.

Figure 1.2 The basic process of the hyperaccumulation of metals in plants. Based and modified from Kotrba, P., Najmanova, J., Macek, T., Ruml, T., Mackova, M., 2009. Genetically modified plants in phytoremediation of heavy metal and metalloid soil and sediment pollution. Biotechnol. Adv. 27(6), 799–810.

1.5 Phytoremediation—Theoretical Aspects

In theory, phytoremediation approaches are simple, cost-effective, widely accepted publicly, and applicable in large areas, as compared to physical or chemical approaches. Apart from that, phytoremediation has a number of ecologic and socioeconomic advantages. Thus, phytoremediation is quite a novel technique for remediating polluted sites through trees, grasses, and herbs. Pollutants may be either inorganic or