Impact of Anaerobically Treated and Untreated (raw) Distillery Effluent Irrigation on Soil Microflora, Growth, Total Chlorophyll and Protein Contents of Phaseolus Aureus L
Overview
Authors
Affiliations
Impact of distillery effluent (untreated and treated) irrigation on soil microflora of the pots used for growing Phaseolus aureus L. was investigated. The growth of the P. aureus plants as affected by distillery effluent irrigation was also evaluated. The irrigation of the pots by 1-10% distillery effluent (anaerobically treated) stimulated the growth of the soil microflora (increased number of bacteria, fungi and actinomycetes) and P. aureus plants (increased shoot and root lengths, biomass, chlorophyll and protein contents). Further, 15-20% distillery effluent (anaerobically treated) had toxic effect on soil micro flora as indicated by reduced number of bacteria, fungi and actinomycetes. Reduction in shoot, root, lengths, biomass, chlorophyll, protein contents of P. aureus was also observed when irrigated by 15-20% treated distillery effluent. All the concentrations of raw distillery effluent reduced the bacterial population. However, the treated distillery effluent concentrations <10% had stimulatory effect on fungal and actinomycetes population. However, raw effluent concentrations >5% reduced the same. Raw distillery effluent was more toxic to P. aureus than treated distillery effluent as concentrations >5%, had reduced the growth (shoot, root length and biomass) of the test plant. Raw distillery effluent had adverse effect to total chlorophyll contents and all the test concentrations reduced the total chlorophyll level. However, untreated (raw) distillery effluent stimulated the protein content initially. It has been concluded from-present study that lower concentrations of the raw distillery effluent (1-5%) and treated distillery effluent (1-10%) had stimulated the growth of P. aureus and soil microflora except soil bacteria (inhibited by all the concentration of the raw effluent). However, higher concentrations (raw effluent: 10-20%; treated effluent 15-20%) had toxicity to test parameters.
Kanwal A, Farhan M, Sharif F, Hayyat M, Shahzad L, Ghafoor G Sci Rep. 2020; 10(1):11361.
PMID: 32647263 PMC: 7347546. DOI: 10.1038/s41598-020-68208-7.
Naveed S, Rehim A, Imran M, Anwar M, Hussain S Environ Sci Pollut Res Int. 2018; 25(31):31113-31124.
PMID: 30187412 DOI: 10.1007/s11356-018-3067-y.
Chandra R, Kumar V Environ Monit Assess. 2016; 189(1):26.
PMID: 28000121 DOI: 10.1007/s10661-016-5746-9.
Chandra R, Kumar V Environ Sci Pollut Res Int. 2016; 24(3):2605-2619.
PMID: 27826829 DOI: 10.1007/s11356-016-8022-1.
Singh U, Abhishek A, Bhaskar M, Tandan N, Ansari N, Singh N Bioinformation. 2015; 11(3):138-44.
PMID: 25914448 PMC: 4403035. DOI: 10.6026/97320630011138.