Application of isolated bacterial consortium in UMBR for detoxification of textile effluent: comparative analysis of resultant oxidative stress and genotoxicity in catfish (Heteropneustes fossilis) exposed to raw and treated effluents
- 209 Downloads
A bacterial consortium isolated from activated sludge was identified to be Bacillus sp., Pseudomonas sp., Shigella sp. and E. coli. and was found capable of 98.62 % decolourization of highly toxic textile effluent, when applied in an ultrafiltration (UF) membrane bioreactor (UMBR). Ceramic capillary UF membranes prepared over low cost support proved to be highly efficient in adverse experimental conditions. The UMBR permeate and untreated textile effluent (40 % (v/v)) was then used to treat Heteropneustes fossilis for a comparative assessment of their toxicity. Micronucleus count in peripheral blood erythrocytes and comet assay carried out in liver and gill cells showed significantly lower nuclear and tissue specific DNA damage respectively in organisms exposed to membrane permeate and was further supported by considerably lower oxidative stress response enzyme activities in comparison to raw effluent treated individuals. The results indicate efficient detoxification of textile effluent by the UMBR treatment using the isolated bacterial consortium.
KeywordsTextile effluent membrane bioreactor Genotoxicity Oxidative stress Heteropneustesfossilis
The study was funded by CSIR-Supra Institutional project [Grant Number 41/3/E&YP/SIP0023/2008-RDPD dt. 31.7.2007], CSIR, Govt. of India. Authors acknowledge all members of Ceramic Membrane Division, CSIR – CGCRI, Kolkata; Department of Physiology, DDDB division, CSIR – IICB, Kolkata; Laboratory of Food Science and Technology, Food and Nutrition Division, University of Calcutta, Kolkata and Department of Environmental Science, University of Calcutta, Kolkata, for their constant support during the work.
Conflict of interest
The authors hereby declare that they have no conflict of interest.
- APHA/AWWA/AWEF (2005) Standard methods for the examination of water and wastewater, 21st ed, Washington, DCGoogle Scholar
- Bongers V, Snow GB, Braakhuis BJM (1995) The role of glutathione transferases in head and neck squamous cell carcinogenesis. Oral Oncol Eur J Cancer 31B(6):54–349Google Scholar
- Carlberg I, Mannervik B (1985) Glutathione reductase. In: Meister A (ed) Methods in enzymology, vol 113. Academic Press, New York, pp 484–490Google Scholar
- Chen KC, Wu JY, Liou DJ, Hwang SCJ (2003) Decolorization of the textile azo dyes by newly isolated bacterial strains. J Biotechnol 101:57–68Google Scholar
- Delmas BMC, Penchant E, Couchowron A, Constans J, Sergent C, Simonoff M, Pellagirin JL, Leng B, Concric Dere M (1996) Enzymatic antioxidative system in blood and ash status in HIV infected patients: effects of supplementation with selenium or beta carotene. Am J Clin Nutr 64:101–107Google Scholar
- Dimitrova MST, Tsinova V, Velcheva V (1994) Combined effect of zinc and lead on the hepatic superoxide dismutase-catalase system in carp (Cyprinus carpio). Comp Biochem Physiol Part C 108:43–46Google Scholar
- Eaton AD, Clesceri LS, Rice EW, Greenberg AE (2005) Standard methods for the estimation of water and wastewater. APHA, WashingtonGoogle Scholar
- Froese R, Pauly D (eds) (2000) FishBase 2000: concepts, design and data sources. ICLARM, Los Baños, Laguna, PhilippinesGoogle Scholar
- Gopal A, Shah NP, Roginski H (1996) Bile tolerance, taurocholate and cholesterol removal by Lactobacillus acidophilus and Bifidobacterium spp. Milchwissenschaft 51(11):619–622Google Scholar
- Habig W, Pabst M, Jokoby W (1974) Glutathione-S-transferase. The first enzymatic step in mercapturic acid formation. J Biol Chem 249:7130–7139Google Scholar
- Malik CP, Singh MB (1980) Plant enzymology and histoenzymology. Kalyani Publishers, New Delhi p 53Google Scholar
- Mark WI, Russel S (1991) What cardiologist known about diabetes. Lancet 350:23–28Google Scholar
- USEPA (2002) Methods for measuring the acute toxicity of effluents and receiving waters to freshwater and marine organisms, 5th ed., U.S. Environmental Protection Agency Office of Water (4303T), Washington, DC, pp. 20460. [EPA-821-R-02-012]Google Scholar
- White DA, Asaadi M (1989) Fouling behavior in inorganic tubular membranes. In: Proceedings of the International Technical Conference on Membrane Separation Process, Brighton, UK, 24th–26th May, p 143Google Scholar
- Xing CH, Tardieu E, Qian Y, Wen XH (2000) Ultrafiltration membrane bioreactor for urban wastewater reclamation. J Mem Sci 177:73–82Google Scholar
- Xing CH, Qian Y, Wen XH, Meng YB (1998) Performance of microfiltration membrane bioreactor for domestic wastewater reclamation. In: Proceedings of WEFTEC Asia’98, Singapore, vol 1, p 119Google Scholar