Acta Scientific Environmental Science

Volume 1 Issue 1 April 2022

Review Article

Application of Microorganisms for Bioremediation of Heavy Metals

Krupa Prajapati, Mansiben Prajapati, Reeyaben Panchal, Sarita

Received: March 16, 2022
Sharma* and Meenu Saraf S
Published: March 29, 2022
Department of Microbiology and Biotechnology, School of Science, Gujarat
© All rights are reserved by Sarita Sharma.,
University, Ahmedabad, Gujarat, India
et al.
*Corresponding Author: Sarita Sharma, Department of Microbiology and
Biotechnology, School of Science, Gujarat University, Ahmedabad, Gujarat, India.

Abstract
As a result of rapid industrialization, heavy metal pollution has become a major global concern. Toxicological manifestations occur
from the accumulation of heavy metals as a result of anthropogenic activities. When heavy metals enter the food chain at somewhat
greater concentrations, they have a detrimental effect on human health. Ion exchange, coagulation, precipitation, reverse osmosis,
nanofiltration, ultra-filtration, and other traditional procedures for heavy metal cleanup are employed. Because of the high energy
and reagent needs, these approaches are effective yet costly. They also produce a lot of hazardous sludge and byproducts, which con-
taminate the environment. As a result, it is essential to formulate effective, efficient, cost-effective, and ecologically acceptable ways
for reducing heavy metal ion concentrations in the environment from harmful to safe levels. Bioremediation is a technique for clean-
ing up contaminated environments by using microorganisms or enzymes to convert hazardous heavy metals into less dangerous
forms. Bioremediation is a ‘green’ approach for removing heavy metals from the environment without releasing hazardous byprod-
ucts or metabolites. Their short generation time, large surface area and ease of genetic manipulation make them ideal candidates for
the bioremediation process. Bioremediation techniques’ effectiveness is determined by a variety of factors, both biotic and abiotic,
which primarily determine the bioavailability of metal for remediation. The tapering metal ion at various loci or sites is caused by
various metal microbe interactions such as sorption, accumulation, mineralization, and transformation. This review focuses on the
origins of heavy metals, their toxicological manifestations, and heavy metal bioremediation employing microorganisms.
Keywords: Heavy Metal; Microorganism; Bioremediation; Biomineralization; Biosorption

Introduction significant amount of harmful sludge and pollutants, which pollute

Metal bioavailability to endemic populations has increased as the environment. The use of microorganisms in bioremediation
a result of modern globalization and industrialization, influencing is an effective, efficient, and environmentally acceptable way for
the variety and composition of endemic populations in diverse removing heavy metal. Indigenous microorganisms are often used
agricultural fields and drinkable water sources. Heavy metals’ in polluted site remediation, whereas site treatment necessitates
persistence causes health concerns; a typical example is mercury excavation of contaminated soil or water from the site, followed by
poisoning in Minamata, Japan [14]. For heavy metal cleaning, treatment at a different location, perhaps using genetically modified
ion exchange, coagulation, precipitation, reverse osmosis, bacteria. Many metals contaminated places can be remedied using
nanofiltration, ultra filtration, and other traditional methods the unique traits of genetically designed organisms as well as
are used. These methods are effective but expensive due to the indigenous species [4]. This review provides an overview of the
high energy and reagent requirements. They also generate a occurrence of heavy metals and their toxicity, as well as microbial
tolerance responses and various bioremediation strategies.

Citation: Sarita Sharma., et al. “Application of Microorganisms for Bioremediation of Heavy Metals". Acta Scientific Environmental Science 1.1 (2022):
01-09.
Application of Microorganisms for Bioremediation of Heavy Metals

02

Heavy metals: Occurrence metals on living forms are depicted in table 1 [20]. Figure 1
Metals or metalloids with an atomic density more than 5 g/ schematic flow chart shows sources of heavy metal contamination
cm are classified as heavy metal [4]. The impact of these metals
3 and biomagnifications of heavy metals (image created by PP in MS
on the environment and human health is referred to as “toxic Office 365 ProPlus, PowerPoint).
metal.” Heavy metals are naturally found in the environment as a
result of biogeochemical cycles, rock weathering, ore leaching, coal
mining, or volcanic eruptions. Metals are harmful and long-lasting
pollutants that are discharged into the environment as a result
of human activities such as industrial, mining, and agricultural
operations (repeated application of fertilizers and pesticides), and
they cannot be degraded or removed. (See Figure 1). When present
at low concentrations, heavy metals such as copper, zinc, and
nickel are required for life and play a important role in metabolic
processes in living organisms; they are known as microelements or
trace elements. Maximum prokaryotic and eukaryotic organisms
are hazardous to elevated doses of these metal ions. Mercury,
cadmium, and lead, among other non-essential heavy metals,
caused catastrophic harm to organisms even at extremely low
quantities. They enter the body system through food, air, and water
to a minor level, bio-accumulate over time, and create human
health issues [6]. The three classes of heavy metals classified the
metals as toxic metals (such as Zn, Ni, Cu, Hg, Cr, Pb, Cd, As, Co, Sn
etc.), precious metals (such as Au, Pd, Pt, Ag etc.), and radionuclides
(such as Th, U, Am, Ra etc.). Heavy metals are stable in nature, but
their persistence in the environment causes pollution, and their Figure 1: Schematic flow chart shows sources of heavy metal
bioaccumulation or biomagnification in the food chain poses a contamination and biomagnifications of heavy metals (image
severe health and environmental concern. The sources of heavy created by PP in MS Office 365 ProPlus, PowerPoint).
metals permitted limits, and harmful effects of various heavy

Accepted
Accept-
range in
Heavy Toxic effect on Toxic effect on ed range
Source drinking References
metal prokaryotes eukaryotes in soil
water
(mg/kg)
(ppb)
Anemia
Liver injuries
Emission from indus- Low sperm count
Destroys nucleic
try and combustion of Miscarriage
acid and proteins
blended fuels, Loss of memory [4,18]
Lead Inhibit enzyme 15 400
Coal burning, Nausea
activity and
Manufacture of batteries Inhibit seed germination,
transcription
and lead based paints chlorophyll production
Inhibition of Calvin cycle
enzymes

Citation: Sarita Sharma., et al. “Application of Microorganisms for Bioremediation of Heavy Metals". Acta Scientific Environmental Science 1.1 (2022):
01-09.
Application of Microorganisms for Bioremediation of Heavy Metals

03

Phosphate fertilizer Fibrosis

Detergent Denature protein, Emphysema
Refined petroleum Destroy nucleic acid, Vitamin-D deficiency [4,18]
Cadmium 5 20
Products Hinder cell division Lung cancer
By product of Zn and Pb and transcription Chlorosis
refining Leaf rolls
Metal plating industries Destroy cell
Combustion of fossil fuels membrane Pulmonary fibrosis
[4,18]
Nickel Nickel mining Hinder enzyme Renal edema 2,00,000 35
Electroplating activities and Dermatitis
Power plants oxidative stress
Abdominal pain anemia
Electroplating industry Denature protein,
Diarrhea
Mining Destroy nucleic acid,
Headache
Copper Biosolids Decreased viability, 1300 2–60 [31]
Liver and kidney damage
Smelting Inhibition of
Metabolic disorders
Refining respiration
Nausea and vomiting
Coal combustion Nausea
Fertilizers Inactivates iron Deafness [4,18]
Cobalt >1-2 50
Mining of lead, iron and sulfur enzymes Vomiting
silver Nerve problems
Abdominal pain
Coal and waste
Death Nausea
combustion [4]
Zinc Decrease in biomass Diarrhea 5000 2-25
Mining
Inhibits growth Anemia
Steel processing
Metal fume fever
Volcano Denature protein,
Memory loss
Forest fire Inhibits enzyme
Insomnia [4]
Mercury Fossil fuels function, 2 72
Kidney failure
Mining and pulp industries Disrupt cell
Neuro muscular effect
Waste incineration membrane

Table 1: Toxicity of various heavy metals and their effect on life forms.

Conventional methods Metal-microbe interaction

Physical and chemical methods for removing heavy metals are Biosorption
commonly used, but instead of completely destroying them, they Biosorption is one of the bioremediation methods. Biosorption
only transform them from toxic to less toxic forms. Ion exchange, is a passive method that does not include microbial metabolism
reverse osmosis, electrochemical treatment, electro dialysis, ultra [9]. Both dead and living biomass can be employed in biosorption.
filtration, solvent extraction, and chemical precipitation are some Even in much diluted metal solutions, this approach can be applied
of the common methods for removing heavy metals from the [33]. Gram-positive bacteria have multiple layers of peptidoglycan,
environment. These processes are costly because they take a lot which include teichoic acid, amino acids (alanine and glutamate),
of energy and reagents, and they produce a lot of toxic sludge and and meso-diaminopimelic acids, whereas gram-negative bacteria
byproducts, which harm the environment [9]. only have one layer [21]. This layer contains enzymes, glycoprotein,
lipopolysaccharides, and phospholipids, which act as ligands and
provide active sites for metal binding [7]. In the cell wall, complex

Citation: Sarita Sharma., et al. “Application of Microorganisms for Bioremediation of Heavy Metals". Acta Scientific Environmental Science 1.1 (2022):
01-09.
Application of Microorganisms for Bioremediation of Heavy Metals

04

carbohydrates, lipids, nucleic acids, and proteins combine to catalysed by enzymes and result in electron transfer from the
produce an additional polymer material (EPS). EPS has a strong mineral surface, resulting in sulphide oxidation to sulphate [29].
metal-binding ability to complex heavy metals, preventing metal There is no physical contact between the mineral surface and
access into the microbial intracellular environment. As a result, the microorganisms in non-contact methods. There is a secretion
they shield bacteria from metal toxicity [30]. of low molecular weight organic acids that are the outcome of
microbial metabolism in non-contact bioleaching. Heavy metals
Bioaccumulation and soil particles containing heavy metal minerals can be dissolved
The process of bioaccumulation is a metabolically active one by these organic acids [15]. Solubilised metal can be purified via
[9]. Heavy metal ions are transferred through the lipid bilayer into adsorption, ion exchange, membrane separation, and selective
the cytoplasm or intracellular regions by transporter proteins in precipitation processes.
bioaccumulation [30]. There are two stages to the bioaccumulation
process. Metal ions are adsorbed onto cells in the first stage, which Biomineralization
is fast and similar to biosorption. The second stage is more time- Biomineralization is the process by which living bacteria
consuming and involves active transport of metal species within convert aqueous metal ions into crystalline precipitates. Metals are
cells [16]. Metal ion sequestration is supported by metal-binding removed from the solution as a result of this reaction, providing a
entities such as proteins and peptide ligands [30]. This metal can way of detoxification as well as bio recovery [24]. Mineral formation
be found in particulate form, insoluble forms, and by products after is aided by the presence of a cell wall and additional organic layers
sequestration [19,22]. Endocytosis, ion channels, carrier-mediated (EPS and S-layer), which are highly variable and reactive interface
transport, complex permeation, and lipid permeation are just a few with varied hydrocarbon composition and structure [30]. Organic
of the mechanisms that allow heavy metals to accumulate in the ligands such as amine, carboxyl, hydroxyl, phosphoryl, and sulphur
bacterial membrane [8]. deprotonate as pH rises, leaving the microbial surface with a net
negative charge. Because our hazardous metals have positive
Biotransformation charges, they precipitate into more solid and compact mineral forms
The structure of a chemical compound is changed during in a consistent manner [23,35]. Microbes precipitate biomineral
biotransformation, resulting in the production of a molecule with such as oxides, sulphides, oxalate, sulphates, and phosphates [24].
a higher polarity [2]. As a result of this metal-microbe interaction,
metal and organic molecules are changed from harmful to less Microorganisms- the key players in bioremediation
toxic ones. Microorganisms have used a variety of enzymatic Bioremediation techniques that use microorganisms are
modification methods to change metals and reduce their toxicity, divided into bioaccumulation, biosorption, biotransformation,
including oxidation, reduction, alkylation, and methylation [32]. and biomineralization, whereas phytoremediation techniques use
Microbes have several characteristics that make them excellent plants and plant components in a metal-containing environment
for biotransformation, such as a high surface-to-volume ratio, [27]. Biosorption is a beneficial technology that plays a significant
rapid growth, high metabolic activity, and the ability to maintain role in the elimination of heavy metals. Biosorption is an emerging
sterility. Microbial transformation is used to biotransform a variety technology and a passive absorption technique involving adsorption
of contaminants, including hydrocarbons, pharmaceuticals, and on the cell surfaces of biological materials that are mainly
metals [17]. The mobility of heavy metal may be reduced indirectly reversible and metabolism-independent. Heavy metals accumulate
through the formation of biosurfactans, pigments, or siderophores. inside cellular components through a complex process known as
bioaccumulation. Microbial biosorption has several advantages,
Bioleaching including a low operating cost, a simple, highly effective, and
Microbes such as bacteria and fungus are used in bioleaching. ecologically acceptable approach [11,27]. Heavy metals including
They’re found in nature and help to dissolve metal sulphides and Cu, Zn, Ni, Cr, Co, Mo, Fe, and Mn are necessary micronutrients for
oxides from ores and secondary wastes [30]. In bioleaching, there microbes, plants, and animals [11]. Metals, on the other hand, had a
are primarily two mechanisms. There are two types of bioleaching: variety of physiological, biochemical, and genotoxic impacts on all
contact and non-contact. Microbes and mineral sulphide make types of living things when their concentrations were beyond their
physical contact in the contact mechanism. Some processes are

Citation: Sarita Sharma., et al. “Application of Microorganisms for Bioremediation of Heavy Metals". Acta Scientific Environmental Science 1.1 (2022):
01-09.
Application of Microorganisms for Bioremediation of Heavy Metals

05

threshold levels. Heavy metal concentrations have a significant by 78 % utilizing a 16 mg/L metal ion concentration [5]. As a type of
impact on microbial communities in two ways: (i) metabolic mercury-resistant strain, Pseudomonas aeruginosa can selectively
function suppression and (ii) genetic material regulation [12]. adsorb mercury ions with a maximal absorption capability of
about 180 mg/g. These mercury ions are accumulated by cysteine-
Due to their metal sequestering capabilities, algae, bacteria, rich transport proteins, which have a high affinity for mercury ions
fungi, and yeast have proven to be potential metal bio-sorbents. and are enriched in sulfhydryl groups. In an aqueous solution, both
Metal removal using intact microbial cells and cell-bound EPS dead and living Arthrobacter viscosus biomass can convert Cr(VI)
has been successful in both ambient and industrial wastewater to Cr(III). When Cr(VI) concentrations are less than 100 mg/L,
sources [9,26]. The use of metal-resistant strains in a single, 100 % Cr(VI) can be removed from the aqueous solution by using
consortium, and immobilized form for heavy metal removal has an acidic condition (pH 2). From a 100 mg/L Cu(II) containing
achieved promising benefits. The biosorption capability of any solution, Eichhornia spp. biomass obtained from Chandola Lake can
bio-sorbent, on the other hand, is determined by its prehistory, remove 85.0 % copper (Cu). The bacteria Rhodobacter capsulatus
pretreatment, and experimental settings. The bio-sorbent should can absorb Zn(II) with a maximum absorption capability of 164
be inexpensive, efficient, and simple to cultivate and harvest. To mg/g. The bacteria Bacillus cereus RC-1 has Cd(II) biosorption
improve biosorption, the organism should be adaptable to changes capacity in both living and dead cells, with living cells having 24.01
in bioreactor configuration, as well as physical and chemical mg/g and dead cells having 31.95 mg/g biosorption capacity [34].
conditions [10].
Metal-binding is mostly accomplished by the microbial cell
Bioremediation by bacteria wall. Electrostatic forces enable microbial surfaces to bind metal
Bacteria are the most common bacteria on the planet, and cations due to their anionic nature. Peptidoglycan, teichoic, and
they can survive in a variety of environments. Bacteria have been teichuronic acids make up the thicker cell wall of Gram-positive
frequently utilized to clean up heavy metal contaminants from bacteria. Teichoic and teichuronic acids are missing in Gram-
the environment due to their advantages such as small size, rapid negative bacteria, and the peptidoglycan layer is thin. Gram-
growth rate, and ease of cultivation. Through functional groups positive bacteria are more efficient in trapping metal ions than
like carboxyl, amino, phosphate, and sulphate, heavy metal ions Gram-negative bacteria [11]. When the pH is raised, the overall
can be adsorbed on bacteria’s polysaccharide slime layers. Heavy negative charge on the cell’s surface grows until the functional
metal ions can attach to these groups and accumulate in significant groups are deprotonated, which aids electrochemical attraction
amounts. Bacterial absorption capabilities for heavy metal ions and, eventually, metal ion absorption [24]. Extracellular polymeric
typically range from 1 mg/g to 500 mg/g [34]. substances (EPS) produce by bacteria, which are made up of
nucleic acids, proteins, lipids, and complex polysaccharides, also
Bacillus sp. has been recognized as having a high potential for
play a role in heavy metal ion adsorption. By preventing heavy
metal sequestration and has been exploited in the production
metals from entering the intracellular environment, the EPS on
of commercial biosorbents. Using Bacillus subtilis and Bacillus
the microbial cell surface can protect microorganisms against
megaterium, Above and his colleagues examined the biosorption
toxicity [13]. Heavy metal ions such as mercury (Hg), cobalt (Co),
of lead (Pb), chromium (Cr), and cadmium (Cd) in tannery effluent
copper (Cu), and cadmium (Cu) can be readily accumulated by the
[1,22]. Staphylococcus saprophyticus removes chromium (Cr), lead
presence of cationic and anionic functional groups on EPS [24].
(Pb), and copper (Cu) ions from industrial wastewaters at optimal
Heavy metal ions that have been adsorbed can be transferred into
pH values of 2.0, 4.5, and 3.5, respectively. A large amount of lead
living bacterial cells in a metabolism-dependent manner, and their
(Pb) was removed from a synthetic medium using Micrococcus
redox state can be modified to lessen their toxicity. The ability
luteus. Bacteria thrive in mixed cultures because they are more
of reductase from living bacteria to change the physicochemical
stable and survive longer. As a result, consortia of cultures are
circumstances of heavy metal ions after binding by functional
metabolically superior for metal biosorption and are more suited
groups can decrease their toxicity, which will improve their ability
for field use [34]. De Jaysankar et al. used a bacterium consortium
to remediate heavy metal pollutions [11].
of Acinetobacter sp. and Arthrobacter sp. to reduce chromium (Cr)

Citation: Sarita Sharma., et al. “Application of Microorganisms for Bioremediation of Heavy Metals". Acta Scientific Environmental Science 1.1 (2022):
01-09.
Application of Microorganisms for Bioremediation of Heavy Metals

06

Bioremediation by fungi amide, carboxyl, hydroxyl, and phosphate groups, which function
Fungi can be developed easily, produce a high yield of as metal-binding sites, as nitrogen and oxygen atoms capable of
biomass, and can easily be manipulated genetically as well as forming covalent bonds with metal ions [24]. The accumulation
morphologically. Fungi show high resistance to a large number of of large amounts of heavy metals by distinct algae species is both
heavy metals and simultaneously can accumulate micronutrients reliant and independent of their metabolism. The most promising
(Cu, Zn, Ni, Co, and Mn) and non-nutrient metals (Cd, Pb, Hg, and Ag). seaweeds for biosorption are brown and red algae [11].
Fungi have exhibited a high take up of heavy metals and therefore
In comparison to fungi and bacteria, algae have not been
they found a broader application to adsorb these metals [13,24].
extensively studied as a bio-sorbent. Algal bioaccumulation is aided
Through ion exchange and coordination, the chitin-chitosan
by a variety of metabolic mechanisms. Biosorption is a surface
complex, glucuronic acid, polysaccharides, polyphosphates,
phenomenon that mainly involves cell surface sequestration. As a
proteins, lipids, and inorganic ions in fungal cells play a major role
result, altering the algal cell wall could have a significant impact
in heavy metal adsorption [11,28]. The adsorption capability and
on metal ion binding. To improve the metal binding capacity
specificity of fungus strains to a heavy metal ion are influenced
of biomass and understand the intrinsic mechanism, many
by different types of ionizable sites and diverse functional groups
approaches for modifying cell walls in algae have been used [11].
such as amine, carboxyl, hydroxyl, phosphate, and sulfhydryl
Dead Chlorella vulgaris cells were employed to remove cadmium
groups. With significant biosorption capacities, Aspergillus niger
(Cd), copper (Cu), and lead (Pb) ions from aqueous solution under
has been deemed a potential bio-sorbent for removing Pb(II).
varied pH, bio-sorbent dosage, and contact time conditions. The
The bio-removal of Cr(VI) from mine drainage by a native fungal
results revealed that the biomass of C. vulgaris is an exceptionally
isolate Aspergillus fumigatus has been investigated. The functional
efficient bio-sorbent for the removal of cadmium (Cd), copper
groups on the acidic surface of Termitomyces clypeatus biomass
(Cu), and lead (Pb) from a mixed solution containing 50 mg/L of
can absorb Cr(VI). Cu(II) removal from wastewater was examined
each metal ion at 95.5 %, 97.7%, and 99.4%, respectively [10].
using unmodified yeast cell biomass of Saccharomyces cerevisiae.
Cladophora fascicularis has a maximal adsorption capacity to Pb(II)
Saccharomyces cerevisiae can remove copper (Cu), zinc (Zn), and
of 198.5 mg/g at pH 5.0. Sargassum sp., a free and immobilized
cadmium (Cd) pollutants in a high-salt environment, and sodium
marine algae, has been demonstrated to have a high ability to
chloride can boost the adsorption ability [13,34].
remove Cu(II) from aqueous solutions. With a very high adsorption
Algae mediated bioremediation capacity of 160 mg/g at pH 4.5, Cystoseira crinitophylla has been
examined for Cu(II) biosorption. Cu(II), Cd(II), and Zn(II) removal
Algae can grow in both freshwater and the ocean as a
capabilities in aqueous solutions have been examined in macro-
photosynthetic organism. Algae are autotrophic, requiring few
algae Saccharina japonica and Sargassum fusiforme. Desmodesmus
nutrients and producing a considerable amount of biomass when
sp., a green microalga, has been used to bioremediate Cu(II) and
compared to other microbial biosorbents. They have a high sorption
Ni(II) from wastewater at a high capacity [34]. Metal-binding
capacity and can be found in considerable quantities [3]. Metal ion
phytochelatins and polyphosphate bodies are produced by
binding sites may exist in certain polysaccharides found in algal
macroalgae and are responsible for their high metal tolerance or
cell walls. Algae cell walls contain polysaccharides that contain
metal ion sequestration in storage vacuoles [24,27].

Adsorption capacity
Microbial group Biosorbents Target metals Reference
(mg/g)
Pseudomonas aeruginosa Hg(II) 180 [34]
Bacillus cereus Cd(II) 31.9 [34]
Staphylococcus epidermidis Cr(VI) 56 [34]
Bacillus licheniformis Cr(VI) 62 [11]
Enterobacter sp. Cd(II) 46.2 [11]
Bacteria Bacillus coagulans, Bacillus
Cr(VI) 39.9 [11]
megaterium
Bacillus firmus Pb(II), Cu(II), Zn(II) 467, 381, 418 [11]
Enterobacter cloacae Pb(II) 2.3 [11]
Micrococcus luteus Cu(II), Pb(II) 408, 1965 [11]
Arthrobacter viscosus Cr(VI) 1161 [34]

Citation: Sarita Sharma., et al. “Application of Microorganisms for Bioremediation of Heavy Metals". Acta Scientific Environmental Science 1.1 (2022):
01-09.
Application of Microorganisms for Bioremediation of Heavy Metals

07

Aspergillus niger Pb(II), Cd(II) 34.4, 11 [11,34]

Lepiota hystrix Pb(II), Cu(II) 3.89, 8.50 [11]
Fungi Saccharomyces cerevisiae Cr(VI), Cu(II) 6.6, 16 [34]
Mucar rouxii Ni(II) 0.36 [11]
Trichoderma Cd(II) 21.7 [34]
Penicillium simplicissimum Pb(II), Co(II) 76.9, 54.6 [34]
Spirogyra sp. Cr(VI), Cu(II) 133.30, 49 [11]
Chlorealla sorokintana Cd(II) 13.33 [11]
Chlorella vulgaris U 14.3 [34]
Algae Dunaliella sp. Cr(VI) 58.3 [11]
Cladophora fascicularis Pb(II) 198.5 [34]
Cu(II), Cd(II), Cr(III),
Ulva lactuca 64.5 62.5, 60.9, 68.9 [11,34]
Pb(II)

Table 2: Heavy metal removal by living microorganisms.

Conclusion Conflicts of Interest

The current paper examined the industrial sources of heavy We declare that here are no conflicts of interest.
metals, their negative consequences on human health, and the Bibliography
many strategies used to degrade these heavy metals utilising
various types of microorganisms. Microorganisms are everywhere; 1. Abioye O P., et al. “Biosorption of lead, chromium and cad-
mium in tannery effluent using indigenous microorganisms”.
they make up a huge portion of the planet’s living material and play
Brazilian Journal of Biological Sciences 5.9 (2018): 25-32.
a critical role in ecosystem maintenance. It has demonstrated the
use of bioremediation as a superior alternative to conventional 2. Asha S and Vidyavathi M. “Cunninghamella–a microbial model
procedures for the removal of heavy metals from contaminated sites, for drug metabolism studies–a review”. Biotechnology Advanc-
which are less effective and expensive due to the quantity of energy es 27.1 (2009): 16-29.

required. Biosorption, biotransformation, and bioaccumulation 3. Das N., et al. “Biosorption of heavy metals–an overview”.
are some of the different pathways for heavy metal breakdown (2008).
employing microbes, with biosorption being the most common.
Some bacteria are resistant to heavy metals and can be utilized 4. Dave D., et al. “Microbes as a boon for the bane of heavy met-
als”. Environmental Sustainability 3.3 (2020): 233-255.
to remove them effectively, as they can employ both live cells and
the metabolites they create. Large scope for genetic engineering to 5. De J., et al. “Detoxification of toxic heavy metals by marine bac-
improve the efficiency of organisms, as well as the combination of teria highly resistant to mercury”. Marine Biotechnology 10.4
all three physical, chemical, and biological approaches, offers up a (2008): 471-477.
larger window for heavy metal pollution remediation.
6. Duruibe J O., et al. “Heavy metal pollution and human biotoxic
effects”. International Journal of Physical Sciences 2.5 (2007):
Acknowledgments
112-118.
We are glad to Sarita Sharma for her guidance and continuous
support, also grateful to Prof. (Dr.) Meenu Saraf, HOD of the 7. Fomina M and Gadd G M. “Biosorption: current perspectives
on concept, definition and application”. Bioresource Technol-
Department of Microbiology and Biotechnology, University School
ogy 160 (2014): 3-14.
of Sciences, Gujarat University, Gujarat, India, for keeping us with
the necessary assets to finish this task.

Citation: Sarita Sharma., et al. “Application of Microorganisms for Bioremediation of Heavy Metals". Acta Scientific Environmental Science 1.1 (2022):
01-09.
Application of Microorganisms for Bioremediation of Heavy Metals

08

8. Geva P., et al. “Increased copper bioremediation ability of new 21. Nanda M., et al. “Multimetal tolerance mechanisms in bacte-
transgenic and adapted Saccharomyces cerevisiae strains”. ria: The resistance strategies acquired by bacteria that can be
Environmental Science and Pollution Research 23.19 (2016): exploited to ‘clean-up’heavy metal contaminants from water”.
19613-19625. Aquatic Toxicology 212 (2019): 1-10.

9. Gupta P and Diwan B. “Bacterial exopolysaccharide mediated 22. Panchal R., et al. “Bacterial Exopolysaccharides: Types, its Bio-
heavy metal removal: a review on biosynthesis, mechanism synthesis and their Application in Different Fields”. Acta Scien-
and remediation strategies”. Biotechnology Reports 13 (2017): tific Biotechnology 3.3 (2022): 1-19 .
58-71.
23. Rochlani A., et al. “Plant Growth Promoting Rhizobacteria as
10. Igiri B E., et al. “Toxicity and bioremediation of heavy metals Biofertilizers: Application in Agricultural Sustainability”. Acta
contaminated ecosystem from tannery wastewater: a review”. Scientific Microbiology 5.4 (2022): 12-21.
Journal of Toxicology (2018).
24. Saraswat R., et al. Journal Homepage:-www. journalijar. com.
11. Jacob J M., et al. “Biological approaches to tackle heavy met-
al pollution: a survey of literature”. Journal of Environmental 25. Sarita Sharma., et al. “Phytomining of Heavy Metals: A Green
Management 217 (2018): 56-70. Technology to Sustainable Agriculture”. International Journal
of Innovative Research in Science, Engineering and Technology
12. Jaishankar M., et al. “Toxicity, mechanism and health effects of 10.6 (2021): 7527-7538.
some heavy metals”. Interdisciplinary Toxicology 7.2 (2014):
60-72. 26. Sharma S., et al. “Exploring the Biotic Stress Tolerance Poten-
tial of Heavy Metal Tolerate Rhizobacteria Isolated from Mines
13. Jalpa Dabhi., et al. “Bioremediation of Heavy Metals: A brand Area and Landfill Site”. Acta Scientific Microbiology 5.2 (2022):
New Methodology to Sustainable Agriculture”. International 31-37.
Journal of Innovative Research in Science, Engineering and
Technology 10.6 (2021): 6031-6049. 27. Sharma Sarita., et al. “Elucidate the Influence of Heavy Met-
al on Bacterial Growth Isolated from a Mining Location and
14. James A K., et al. “Rethinking the Minamata tragedy: what mer- A Waste Dump: Using their Inducible Mechanism”. Current
cury species was really responsible?”. Environmental Science Trends in Biomedical Engineering and Biosciences 20.2 (2021):
and Technology 54.5 (2020): 2726-2733. 556034.

15. Jin Y., et al. “Effects and mechanisms of microbial remediation 28. Sharma S and Bhatt R. “Enhanced Production and Character-
of heavy metals in soil: a critical review”. Applied Sciences 8.8 ization of Commercially Important Thermostable Amylolytic
(2018): 1336. Enzyme”. International Journal of Innovative Research in Sci-
ence, Engineering and Technology 13.7 (2014): 6031-6049.
16. Kanamarlapudi S L R K., et al. “Application of biosorption for
removal of heavy metals from wastewater”. Biosorption 18.69 29. Srichandan H., et al. “Sequential leaching of metals from spent
(2018): 70-116. refinery catalyst in bioleaching–bioleaching and bioleaching–
chemical leaching reactor: comparative study”. Hydrometal-
17. Karigar C S and Rao S S. “Role of microbial enzymes in the bio- lurgy 150 (2014): 130-143.
remediation of pollutants: a review”. Enzyme Research (2011).
30. Tayang A and Songachan L S. “Microbial bioremediation of
18. Li C., et al. “A review on heavy metals contamination in soil: ef- heavy metals”. Current Science, 120.6 (2021): 1013.
fects, sources, and remediation techniques”. Soil and Sediment
Contamination: An International Journal 28.4 (2019): 380-394. 31. Trevors J T and Cotter C M. “Copper toxicity and uptake in mi-
croorganisms”. Journal of Industrial Microbiology and Biotech-
19. Mishra A and Malik A. “Recent advances in microbial metal nology 6.2 (1990): 77-84.
bioaccumulation”. Critical Reviews in Environmental Science
and Technology 43.11 (2013): 1162-1222. 32. Valls M and De Lorenzo V. “Exploiting the genetic and biochem-
ical capacities of bacteria for the remediation of heavy metal
20. Mohite B V., et al. “Prospective of microbial exopolysaccharide pollution”. FEMS Microbiology Reviews 26.4 (2002): 327-338.
for heavy metal exclusion”. Applied Biochemistry and Biotech-
nology 183.2 (2017): 582-600.

Citation: Sarita Sharma., et al. “Application of Microorganisms for Bioremediation of Heavy Metals". Acta Scientific Environmental Science 1.1 (2022):
01-09.
Application of Microorganisms for Bioremediation of Heavy Metals

09

33. Vasudevan P., et al. “Biosorption of heavy metal ions” (2001).

34. Yin K., et al. “Microorganism remediation strategies towards

heavy metals”. Chemical Engineering Journal 360 (2019):
1553-1563.

35. Zhang K., et al. “Lead removal by phosphate solubilizing bacte-

ria isolated from soil through biomineralization”. Chemosphere
224 (2019): 272-279.

Assets from publication with us

• Prompt Acknowledgement after receiving the article
• Thorough Double blinded peer review
• Rapid Publication
• Issue of Publication Certificate
• High visibility of your Published work

Website: www.actascientific.com/
Submit Article: www.actascientific.com/submission.php
Email us: [email protected]
Contact us: +91 9182824667

Citation: Sarita Sharma., et al. “Application of Microorganisms for Bioremediation of Heavy Metals". Acta Scientific Environmental Science 1.1 (2022):
01-09.