Diatom microalgae as smart nanocontainers for biosensing wastewater pollutants: recent trends and innovations

Figures & data

Table 1. Microalgae for metal removal from wastewater

Metals	Microalgal strain	Removal efficiency (%)	References
Copper, zinc, cadmium, and mercury	Cladophora fracta; live algae	Cu^2+, Zn^2+, Cd^2+, and Hg^2+ were 99%, 85%, 97%, and 98%, respectively	[11]
Cadmium	Scenedesmus sp. Chlorella sp. Chlorella vulgaris	73% 33–41% 66%	[12]
Chromium	Chlorella vulgaris Scenedesmus sp. Spirulina sp.	50.7–80.3% 92.89% 82.67%	[13–15]
Copper	Spirulina maxima Chlorella vulgaris Scenedesmus obliquus	94.9% 96.3% 72.4–91.7%	[16,30]
Lead	Chlorella vulgaris Chlorella sp. Pseudochlorococcum typicum	89.26% 66.3% 70%	[17,18,32]
Mercury	Chlorella vulgaris Chlorella vulgaris Pseudochlorococcum typicum	79–86% 34.21–93% 97%	[18–20]
Nickel	Scenedesmus sp. Chlorella vulgaris Chlorella miniate	97% 33–41% 60-73%	[12,21]
Zinc	Chlorella sp Synechocystis sp Scenedesmus sp	60–70% 40% 98%	[21,32]
Cadmium, Copper, Lead, and Zinc	Haslea ostrearia, Phaeodactylum tricornutum, Skeletonema costatum, and Tetraselmis suecica; live algae	Reduction in Cu and Cd	[22]
Chromium	Chlorella miniata; dried algae; cultivated in domestic wastewater	75% and 100% removal for Cr (III) and Cr (VI), respectively	[23]
Lead, Cadmium, Copper, and Arsenic	Cyanophyta (Oscillatoria princeps 92%, Oscillatoria subbrevis 2%, and Oscillatoria formosa 1%) and Chlorophyta (Spirogyra aequinoctialis 3%, Mougeta sp. 1%, and others 1%); dried algae	Metals were removed	[24]

Table 2. Deformed diatoms on exposure to metals

Diatoms	Teratology	Pollutant	References
Nitzschia fonticola	Deformed raphe channel	Zinc and copper	[90]
Achnanthidium pyrenaicum	Abnormal outline	Fluoranthene (pesticides)	[91]
Amphora pediculus	Distorted outline	Cadmium	[92]
Fragilaria capitellata	Deformed valve outline	Pesticides	[93]
Nitzschia amphibia	Distorted outline	Cadmium, arsenic, lead, mercury, copper, zinc	[94]
Fragilaria nanoides	Deformed central area	Copper	[95]
Eunotia sp.	Distorted outline (twist in middle of the valve)	Copper	[95]
Fragilaria recapitellata	Distorted valve outline	Zinc and copper	[96]
Reimeria uniseriata	Deformed valve outline	Cadmium, arsenic, lead, mercury, copper, zinc	[90]
Discostella pseudostelligera	Deformed striation pattern in the side of the valve	Cyanide and heavy metals	[97]
Eunotia spp.	Bent or dilate, absence of symmetry	Copper, iron, zinc, nickel	[98]
Brachysira microcephala	Distorted outline	Cadmium, zinc, lead	[77]
Phaeodactylum tricornutum	Abnormal boundaries or wrinkled shaped	Copper and zinc	[99]
Gomphonema pseudoaugur	Dilated in the middle of the valve	Lead and selenium	[89]

Figure 1. Diatoms undergoing valve deformation and increase lipid accumulation under stress conditions during remediation of pollutants

Figure 2. Schematic representation of surface modification and treatment of DE, and their application in the removal of dyes and metal ions along with regeneration. Reproduced with permission from [145]

Figure 3. Lab on Chip Diatom Electro Machine (LOC-DEM) to remove wastewater pollutants while clean separating the algal concentrate flowing at hydrodynamic flow under the influence of intracellular spectral recomposition of light

Ji L, Xie S, Feng J, et al. Heavy metal uptake capacities by the common freshwater green algae Cladophora fracta. J Appl Phycol. 2012;24(4):979–983.

 Web of Science ®Google Scholar

Wong J, Wong Y, Tam N. Nickel biosorption by two chlorella species, C. Vulgaris (a commercial species) and C. Miniata (a local isolate). Bioresour Technol. 2000;73(2):133–137.

 Web of Science ®Google Scholar

Chan A, Salsali H, McBean E. Heavy metal removal (copper and zinc) in secondary effluent from wastewater treatment plants by microalgae. ACS Sustain Chem Eng. 2014;2(2):130–137.

 Web of Science ®Google Scholar

Li Y, Yang X, Geng B. Preparation of immobilized sulfate-reducing bacteria-microalgae beads for effective bioremediation of copper-containing wastewater. Water Air Soil Pollut. 2018;229(3):1–13.

 PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar

Malakootian M, Yousefi Z, Limoni ZK. Removal of lead from battery industry wastewater by Chlorella vulgaris as green micro-algae (case study: Kerman, Iran). Desalin Water Treat. 2019;141:248–255.

 Web of Science ®Google Scholar

Shanab S, Essa A, Shalaby E. Bioremoval capacity of three heavy metals by some microalgae species (Egyptian Isolates). Plant Signal Behav. 2012;7(3):392–399.

 PubMedGoogle Scholar

Kumar R, Goyal D. Waste water treatment and metal (Pb 2+, Zn 2+) removal by microalgal based stabilization pond system. Indian J Microbiol. 2010;50(S1):34–40.

 PubMedGoogle Scholar

Chong A, Wong Y, Tam N. Performance of different microalgal species in removing nickel and zinc from industrial wastewater. Chemosphere. 2000;41(1–2):251–257.

 PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar

Gagneux-Moreaux S, Cosson RP, Bustamante P, et al. Growth and metal uptake of microalgae produced using salt groundwaters from the Bay of Bourgneuf. Aquat Living Resour. 2006;19(3):247–255.

 Web of Science ®Google Scholar

Han X, Wong YS, Wong MH, et al. Feasibility of using microalgal biomass cultured in domestic wastewater for the removal of chromium pollutants. Water Environ Res. 2008;80(7):647–653.

 PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar

Sulaymon AH, Mohammed AA, Al-Musawi TJ. Competitive biosorption of lead, cadmium, copper, and arsenic ions using algae. Environ Sci Pollut Res. 2013;20(5):3011–3023.

 PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar

Morin S, Coste M 2006. Metal-induced shifts in the morphology of diatoms from the Riou mort and Riou viou streams (South West France). 91–106.

 Google Scholar

Rimet F, Ector L, Dohet A, et al. Impacts of fluoranthene on diatom assemblages and frustule morphology in indoor microcosms. Vie et Milieu. 2004;54:145–156.

 Web of Science ®Google Scholar

Morin S, Coste M, Hamilton PB. SCANNING ELECTRON MICROSCOPY OBSERVATIONS OF DEFORMITIES IN SMALL PENNATE DIATOMS EXPOSED TO HIGH CADMIUM CONCENTRATIONS(1). J Phycol. 2008;44(6):1512–1518.

 PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar

Debenest T, Coste M, Delmas F, et al. Les frustules déformés de diatomées benthiques et les pesticides: le cas des pollutions agricoles dans les coteaux de Gascogne (Sud-Ouest de la France). Diatomania. 2006;10:62–65.

 Google Scholar

Woodard K, Neustupa J. Morphometric asymmetry of frustule outlines in the pennate diatom luticola poulickovae (Bacillariophyceae). Symmetry. 2016;8(12):150.

 Google Scholar

Cattaneo A, Couillard Y, Wunsam S, et al. Diatom taxonomic and morphological changes as indicators of metal pollution and recovery in Lac Dufault (Québec, Canada). J Paleolimnol. 2004;32(2):163–175

 Web of Science ®Google Scholar

Olenici A, Blanco S, Borrego-Ramos M, et al. Exploring the effects of acid mine drainage on diatom teratology using geometric morphometry. Ecotoxicology. 2017;26(8):1018–1030.

 PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar

Szabó K, Kiss KT, Taba G, et al. Epiphytic diatoms of the Tisza River, kisköre reservoir and some oxbows of the Tisza River after the cyanide and heavy metal pollution in 2000. Acta Bot Croat. 2005;64(1):1–46.

 Google Scholar

Sienkiewicz E, Gąsiorowski M. The evolution of a mining lake-From acidity to natural neutralization. SciTotal Environ. 2016;557-558:343–354.

 Google Scholar

Pandey LK, Kumar D, Yadav A, et al. Morphological abnormalities in periphytic diatoms as a tool for biomonitoring of heavy metal pollution in a river. Ecol Indic. 2014;36:272–279.

 Web of Science ®Google Scholar

Renzi M, Roselli L, Giovani A, et al. Early warning tools for ecotoxicity assessment based on Phaeodactylum tricornutum. Ecotoxicology. 2014;23(6):1055–1072.

 PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar

Gautam S, Pandey LK, Vinayak V, et al. Morphological and physiological alterations in the diatom Gomphonema pseudoaugur due to heavy metal stress. Ecol Indic. 2017;72:67–76.

 Web of Science ®Google Scholar

Sriram G, Kigga M, Uthappa U, et al. Naturally available diatomite and their surface modification for the removal of hazardous dye and metal ions: a review. Adv Colloid Interface Sci. 2020;282:102198.

 PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar