Phytoremediation: to mutate or not to mutate?Research Paper 2010-2011A Continuation of 2009-2010 Research Paper:The effectiveness of the phytoremediation of dicofol using
Lycopersiocon
esculentumWilliam John O’BrochtaResearch Instructor: Mrs. Cindy BohlandRoanoke Valley Governor’s School for Science and Technology
AbstractThe purpose of this project was to determine whether brt mutated tomato plantsphytoremediate more than non-mutated tomato plants and if phytoremediation has anydetrimental health effects to the mutated plants. The hypothesis was that tomato plants, mutatedto increase root length and size, would phytoremediate more effectively, with greater negativehealth effects, when 5 mg of dicofol is applied, than non-mutated tomato plants.Phytoremediation ability was measured using a mustard bioassay and laboratory analyticaltesting. Plant health was determined by measuring chlorophyll concentration, leaf area, and plantheight tests. Results showed that phytoremediating did not significantly affect plant health of mutant or wild-type plants. The average chlorophyll concentration of the mutant was 1.4353 mg,while the non-mutated tomato had a value of 2.628 mg. Neither value was statisticallysignificant. The bioassay and GC/MS both showed that phytoremediation did not occur in eithertype of tomato plant. There was 0.63 mg/kg concentration remaining in regular plants, but 0.29mg/kg in mutated plants, showing that the mutated plants had the least amount of dicofolremaining in the soil. However, the soil controls had only 0.52 mg/kg and 0.19 mg/kg. Rootsremaining in the soil after plants were removed may explain this finding. More dicofol wasremoved in the mutated tomato plants when compared to non-mutated plants. A potential reasonfor this phenomenon is the branching and quantity of roots in the mutated tomatoes. Anotherpossibility is that mutated roots contain sucrose or more organic transport molecules that couldaid phytoremediation.IntroductionPollution causes death and disease to spread among human and animal populations, evenin the developed world (Arms, 2004). Commonly spilled chemicals vary widely from pesticides
to lead, many causing possibly harmful effects to people, such as birth defects and cancer (Arms,2004). Heavy metals such as cadmium and mercury occur naturally in rocks and dirt; theyproduce effects just as dangerous as those from human-made sources (Arms, 2004). How canthis situation be rectified? Cleaning up a chemical spill or dangerous concentrations of a certainelement is extremely costly and time consuming. In Canada, 200,000 well sites, usually on largefarms, have built up so much salt that the amount in the soil has become a serious problem(Burtt, 2009). A situation like this merits immediate action, but governments are stronglyopposed to spending the money to clean the site correctly, instead resorting to digging up all of the soil and trucking it away (Burtt, 2009).Three current methods are used to solve soil contamination issues: landfills, incineration,and phytoremediation. Use of landfills to transfer contaminated soil only prolongs an already badproblem (Gardea-Torresdey, 2003). Landfills combine many hazardous pesticides together tocreate a high concentration of dangerous chemicals and leach into groundwater, causing furthercontamination. Incineration emits harmful ash that if inhaled can lead to breathing problems,making the method worse than using a landfill (Gardea-Torresdey, 2003). Phytoremediation isthe new potential solution for this 1.7 trillion dollar problem (Gardea-Torresdey, 2003). Varioustypes of plants are placed on soil that contains either chemical pesticides or heavy metals. Rootscause an increase in the number of pesticide digesting microbes by as much as 10,000 fold(Evans, 2002). Therefore, the addition of the roots allows for pesticide degradation, meaning thatthe amount of chemical is reduced (Evans, 2002). The reduction can be drastic, as much as 75percent in two to three years, compared to 45 percent using bio-remediation (the use of soilmicrobes to digest the pesticide) (Evans, 2002). In a study on contaminated soil sites, Crane(2009) notes that phytoremediation removes between 33 and 46 percent of an oily contaminant,
Search History:
Result 00 of 00
00 results for result for
p.
Phytoremediation: to mutate or not to mutate?
Research found that mutant tomato plants were better than non-mutated plants at removing plant chemicals, but soil microbe bacteria were most effective. Written by William O'Brochta, Roanoke Valley Governor's School.
617
Reads
0
Readcasts
0
Embed Views
More From This User
Notes
Load more
