Please use this identifier to cite or link to this item: http://hdl.handle.net/11455/44703
DC FieldValueLanguage
dc.contributor.authorLin, T.C.en_US
dc.contributor.author楊秋忠zh_TW
dc.contributor.authorPan, P.T.en_US
dc.contributor.authorYoung, C.C.en_US
dc.contributor.authorChang, J.S.en_US
dc.contributor.authorChang, T.C.en_US
dc.contributor.authorCheng, S.S.en_US
dc.date2011zh_TW
dc.date.accessioned2014-06-06T08:13:05Z-
dc.date.available2014-06-06T08:13:05Z-
dc.identifier.issn0944-1344zh_TW
dc.identifier.urihttp://hdl.handle.net/11455/44703-
dc.description.abstractPurpose Bioaugmentation and biostimulation have been widely applied in the remediation of oil contamination. However, ambiguous results have been reported. It is important to reveal the controlling factors on the field for optimal selection of remediation strategy. In this study, an integrated field landfarming technique was carried out to assess the relative effectiveness of five biological approaches on diesel degradation. The limiting factors during the degradation process were discussed. Method A total of five treatments were tested, including conventional landfarming, nutrient enhancement (NE), biosurfactant addition (BS), bioaugmentation (BA), and combination of bioaugmentation and biosurfactant addition (BAS). The consortium consisted of four diesel-degrading bacteria strains. Rhamnolipid was used as the biosurfactant. The diesel concentration, bacterial population, evolution of CO(2), and bacterial community in the soil were periodically measured. Results The best overall degradation efficiency was achieved by BAS treatment (90 +/- 2%), followed by BA (86 +/- 2%), NE (84 +/- 3%), BS (78 +/- 3%), and conventional landfarming (68 +/- 3%). In the early stage, the total petroleum hydrocarbon was degraded 10 times faster than the degradation rates measured during the period from day 30 to 100. At the later stage, the degradation rates were similar among treatments. In the conventional landfarming, contaminated soil contained bacteria ready for diesel degradation. Conclusion The availability of hydrocarbon was likely the limiting factor in the beginning of the degradation process. At the later stage, the degradation was likely limited by desorption and mass transfer of hydrocarbon in the soil matrix.en_US
dc.language.isoen_USzh_TW
dc.relationEnvironmental Science and Pollution Researchen_US
dc.relation.ispartofseriesEnvironmental Science and Pollution Research, Volume 18, Issue 9, Page(s) 1487-1496.en_US
dc.relation.urihttp://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s11356-011-0485-5en_US
dc.subjectBioaugmentationen_US
dc.subjectNutrient enhancementen_US
dc.subjectBiosurfactanten_US
dc.subjectLandfarmingen_US
dc.subjectMicroarray biochipen_US
dc.subjectConsortiaen_US
dc.subjectpolycyclic aromatic-hydrocarbonsen_US
dc.subjectnatural attenuationen_US
dc.subjectagriculturalen_US
dc.subjectsoilen_US
dc.subjectdegradationen_US
dc.subjectfuelen_US
dc.subjectbiodegradationen_US
dc.subjectmineralizationen_US
dc.subjectmicroorganismsen_US
dc.subjectcuttingsen_US
dc.titleEvaluation of the optimal strategy for ex situ bioremediation of diesel oil-contaminated soilen_US
dc.typeJournal Articlezh_TW
dc.identifier.doi10.1007/s11356-011-0485-5zh_TW
item.grantfulltextnone-
item.fulltextno fulltext-
item.cerifentitytypePublications-
item.languageiso639-1en_US-
item.openairecristypehttp://purl.org/coar/resource_type/c_18cf-
item.openairetypeJournal Article-
Appears in Collections:土壤環境科學系
Show simple item record
 

Google ScholarTM

Check

Altmetric

Altmetric


Items in DSpace are protected by copyright, with all rights reserved, unless otherwise indicated.