Effect of nonionic surfactants on naphthalene dissolution and biodegradation

Mulder, Henk; Wassink, G.R.; Breure, A.M.; Andel, J. van; Rulkens, W.H.

doi:10.1002/(sici)1097-0290(19981120)60:4<397::aid-bit1>3.0.co;2-h

Cited by 28 publications

(8 citation statements)

References 28 publications

(58 reference statements)

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Positive effects of surfactants may result from a stimulation of dissolution or desorption rates (Volkering et al, 1995;Grimberg et al, 1996;Mulder et al, 1998;Willumsen and Arvin, 1999) or from surfactant-mediated dispersion, solubilization, or emulsification of poorly soluble substrates (Aronstein et al, 1991;Tiehm, 1994;Miller, 1995;Volkering et al, 1998). Negative effects may also occur, however, for example because a surfactant may be toxic or due to preferential biodegradation of surfactants (Miller, 1995;Volkering et al, 1998).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

The enhancement by surfactants of hexadecane degradation by Pseudomonas aeruginosa varies with substrate availability

Noordman

Wachter

Boer

et al. 2002

Journal of Biotechnology

106

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

The enhancement by surfactants of hexadecane degradation by Pseudomonas aeruginosa varies with substrate availability

Noordman

Wachter

Boer

et al. 2002

Journal of Biotechnology

106

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

“…One means that has been proposed to enhance the bioavailability of hydrophobic organic chemicals (HOCs) such as DDT is the addition of surfactants (Rouse et al, 1994, andVolkering et al, 1998). Surfactants can increase the apparent solubility of HOCs (Edwards et al, 1991;Guha et al, 1998;Jafvert et al, 1994;and Kile and Chiou, 1989), correspondingly increase rates of mass transfer from nonaqueous phases (Grimberg et al, 1995), and thus potentially increase the bioavailability of HOCs (Grimberg et al, 1996;Mulder et al, 1998;Tiehm et al, 1997;and Volkering et al, 1995). You et al (1996) have shown that the application of a nonionic surfactant can significantly increase the initial rate of degradation of DDT spiked into clean sand.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Surfactant‐Enhanced Solubilization and Anaerobic Biodegradation of 1,1,1‐ Trichloro‐2,2‐bis(p‐chlorophenyl)‐ethane (DDT) in Contaminated Soil

Walters

Aitken²

2001

Water Environment Research

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The hydrophobic pesticide 1,1,1-trichloro-2,2-bis(pchlorophenyl)-ethane (DDT) is a persistent contaminant in soils and sediments, although it has long been known to be biodegradable under anaerobic conditions. Addition of a nonionic surfactant was evaluated as a means of enhancing the solubilization, potential bioavailability, and anaerobic biodegradability of DDT and its metabolites-1,1-dichloro-2,2-bis(p-chlorophenyl)-ethane (DDD) and 1,1-dichloro-2,2-bis(pchlorophenyl)-ethylene (DDE)-in an aged contaminated soil. Approximately 12 mg surfactant/g soil was required before concentrations greater than the critical micelle concentration were observed in the liquid phase in soil microcosms. At greater doses, solubilization of each DDT, DDD, and DDE isomer increased linearly with the surfactant dose. Solubilization data were consistent with equilibrium models that account for simultaneous partitioning of hydrophobic compounds between the aqueous, soil, and pseudomicellar phases.Significantly greater rates and extents of DDT degradation were observed in anaerobic microcosms that were regularly fed a cellulose substrate or amended with surfactant (with or without cellulose) relative to controls. The surfactant substantially increased the rate of DDT degradation during the first 9 weeks, although there were no significant differences between cellulose-fed microcosms and surfactant-amended microcosms after 31 weeks. In addition, DDD accumulated at less than stoichiometric amounts in surfactant-amended microcosms, whereas DDD accumulated nearly stoichiometrically with DDT loss in all other microcosms. Concentrations of DDE were unchanged throughout the course of the microcosm experiment. Water Environ. Res., 73, 15 (2001).

show abstract

“…A number of studies have reported that nonionic surfactants enhanced the biodegradation of HOCs. Some of these studies concluded that substrates in the micellar pseudophase were not bioavailable, and that enhanced biodegradation was due only to the ability of the surfactant to increase the dissolution rate of the compound to the aqueous phase (Mulder et al, 1998;Volkering et al, 1995), while others proposed that HOCs present within the micellar pseudophase were indeed bioavailable (Guha and Jaffe, 1996a,b;Guha et al, 1998;Liu et al, 1995;Tiehm, 1994). The reported increases in mineralization vary from less than 10% to more than 300%, and this wide range of responses can be explained by the fact that different nonionic surfactants, surfactant doses, and bacterial strains were used in these studies.…”

Section: Influence Of Surfactants On Biodegradationmentioning

confidence: 99%

Use of a whole‐cell biosensor to assess the bioavailability enhancement of aromatic hydrocarbon compounds by nonionic surfactants

Keane

Lau

Ghoshal

2007

Biotech & Bioengineering

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

ABSTRACT:The whole-cell bioluminescent biosensor Pseudomonas putida F1G4 (PpF1G4), which contains a chromosomally-based sep-lux transcriptional fusion, was used as a tool for direct measurement of the bioavailability of hydrophobic organic compounds (HOCs) partitioned into surfactant micelles. The increased bioluminescent response of PpF1G4 in micellar solutions (up to 10 times the critical micellar concentration) of Triton X-100 and Brij 35 indicated higher intracellular concentrations of the test compounds, toluene, naphthalene, and phenanthrene, compared to control systems with no surfactants present. In contrast, Brij 30 caused a decrease in the bioluminescent response to the test compounds in single-solute systems, without adversely affecting cell growth. The decrease in bioluminescent response in the presence of Brij 30 did not occur in the presence of multiple HOCs extracted into the surfactant solutions from crude oil and creosote. The effect of the micellar solutions on the toluene biodegradation rate was consistent with the bioluminescent response in single-solute systems. None of the surfactants were toxic to PpF1G4 at the doses employed in this study, and PpF1G4 did not produce a bioluminescent response to the surfactants nor utilize them as growth substrates. TEM images suggest that the surfactants did not rupture the cell membranes. The results demonstrate that for Pseudomonas putida F1, nonionic surfactants such as Triton X-100 and Brij 35, at doses between 2 and 10 CMC, may increase the bioavailability and direct uptake of micellar phase HOCs that are common pollutants at contaminated sites. Biotechnol. Bioeng. 2008;99: 86-98.

show abstract

Effect of nonionic surfactants on naphthalene dissolution and biodegradation

Cited by 28 publications

References 28 publications

The enhancement by surfactants of hexadecane degradation by Pseudomonas aeruginosa varies with substrate availability

The enhancement by surfactants of hexadecane degradation by Pseudomonas aeruginosa varies with substrate availability

Surfactant‐Enhanced Solubilization and Anaerobic Biodegradation of 1,1,1‐ Trichloro‐2,2‐bis(p‐chlorophenyl)‐ethane (DDT) in Contaminated Soil

Use of a whole‐cell biosensor to assess the bioavailability enhancement of aromatic hydrocarbon compounds by nonionic surfactants

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About