Enriching Indigenous Ureolytic Bacteria in Coastal Beach Sand

  • Yi-Jie Wang
  • Xiao-Le Han
  • Ning-Jun JiangEmail author
Conference paper
Part of the Environmental Science and Engineering book series (ESE)


In this study, a series of enrichment tests were conducted to investigate the effectiveness of two enriching media on the indigenous ureolytic bacteria in Hawaiian coastal beach sand. Sand collected from the intertidal zone of the Kailua Beach was used in the study, which was subjected to the erosion action of wave and tide periodically. Two media applied were YE (yeast extract only) and YEU medium (yeast extract with urea). Shaking incubation test was conducted up to 72 h to stimulate the indigenous ureolytic bacteria. The pH, ammonium concentration, ureolytic activity, and viable bacterial colony number of the enriched bacterial solution were measured at 6 h, 12 h, 24 h, 48 h and 72 h respectively. Results show that the primary stimulation occurred within the first 48 h. The concentration of ammonium ions and ureolytic activity were significantly increased and the viable bacterial colony number was slightly decreased at the end of the enrichment. These observations indicate that the ureolytic bacteria resided in the intertidal zone can be enriched effectively.


Ureolytic bacteria Coastal erosion Enrichment ureolytic activity 


  1. 1.
    Bird ECF (1985) Coastline changes. a global review. Wiley, ChichesterGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Ruggiero P, Komar PD, McDougal WG, Marra JJ, Beach RA (2001) Wave runup, extreme water levels and the erosion of properties backing beaches. J Coast Res 17(2):407–419Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Fletcher CH, Romine BM, Genz AS, Barbee MM, Dyer M, Anderson TR, Richmond BM (2011) National assessment of shoreline change: historical shoreline change in the Hawaiian Islands. Director 51(3):ix–xvi(8)Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Romine BM, Fletcher CH, Barbee MM, Anderson TR, Frazer LN (2013) Are beach erosion rates and sea-level rise related in Hawaii. Global Planet Change 108:149–157CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Finkl CW (1981) Beach nourishment, a practical method of erosion control. Geo-Mar Lett 1(2):155CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Shin EC, Oh YI (2007) Coastal erosion prevention by geotextile tube technology. Geotext Geomembr 25(4–5):264–277CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Van Rijn LC (2011) Coastal erosion and control. Ocean Coast Manag 54(12):867–887CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Wheeler JL (1992) U.S. Patent No. 5,129,756. Washington, DC: U.S. Patent and Trademark OfficeGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Gedan KB, Kirwan ML, Wolanski E, Barbier EB, Silliman BR (2011) The present and future role of coastal wetland vegetation in protecting shorelines: answering recent challenges to the paradigm. Clim Change 106(1):7–29CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Meyer DL, Townsend EC, Thayer GW (1997) Stabilization and erosion control value of oyster cultch for intertidal marsh. Restor Ecol 5(1):93–99CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Mortensen BM, Haber MJ, DeJong JT, Caslake LF, Nelson DC (2011) Effects of environmental factors on microbial induced calcium carbonate precipitation. J Appl Microbiol 111(2):338–349CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Jiang NJ, Yoshioka H, Yamamoto K, Soga K (2016) Ureolytic activities of a urease-producing bacterium and purified urease enzyme in the anoxic condition: implication for subseafloor sand production control by microbially induced carbonate precipitation (MICP). Ecol Eng 90:96–104CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Jiang NJ, Soga K, Kuo M (2016) Microbially induced carbonate precipitation for seepage-induced internal erosion control in sand–clay mixtures. J Geotech Geoenvironmental Eng 143(3):04016100CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Keykha HA, Asadi A, Huat BB, Kawasaki S (2018) Microbial induced calcite precipitation by Sporosarcina pasteurii and Sporosarcina aquimarina. Environ Geotech, 1–5Google Scholar
  15. 15.
    Whiffin VS (2004) Microbial CaCO3 precipitation for the production of biocement (Doctoral dissertation, Murdoch University)Google Scholar
  16. 16.
    Greenberg AE, Clesceri LS, Eaton AD (1992) Standard methods for the examination of water and wastewater, 18th edn. EPS Group. Inc., Hanover, MarylandGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Nature Singapore Pte Ltd. 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Department of Civil and Environment EngineeringUniversity of Hawaii at ManoaHonoluluUSA

Personalised recommendations