Journals / International Journal of Chemistry and Technology / 2026 / Volume: 9 Issue: 1

Comparative Pot Experimental Studies for Phyto-Remediation of Heavy Metals in Contaminated Water Using Ludwigia Decurrens

Pages
—
Publication Date
2025-06-24
🏛️Bibliographic metadata and full text access for this article are provided via DergiPark.
DergiPark Record ↗
✨

AI Summary & Key Takeaways

AI Insight
⚡ TL;DR(Too Long; Didn't Read)

The results show that the hydrophyte, L. decurrens can efficiently remove HMs at varied concentrations with maximum affinity for Cd among the four heavy metals studied.

📌 3 Key Takeaways

🎯
Objective & Hypothesis:Heavy metal pollution in surface and groundwater bodies has become a major environmental concern, largely driven by the rapid expansion of industries.
📊
Key Findings & Data:The metals were combined in a pot at four different concentrations (10, 20, 30 & 40) ppm using 5 mL of each metal concentration.
💡
Conclusion & Impact:The results show that the hydrophyte, L. decurrens can efficiently remove HMs at varied concentrations with maximum affinity for Cd among the four heavy metals studied.
🔬Design:Research Article
📍Scope:Comprehensive Sample
⚙️Variables:pollution · Heavy metals · L. decurrens

Abstract

Heavy metal pollution in surface and groundwater bodies has become a major environmental concern, largely driven by the rapid expansion of industries. However, an effective and sustainable solution lies in the use of hydrophytes for phytoremediation. This approach offers an environmentally friendly and cost-effective way to remove heavy metals from contaminated water bodies. This study assessed the efficiency of hydrophytes (Ludwigia decurrens) for the removal of some selected heavy metals (HMs) in a combined state under a controlled pot experiment, using four different heavy metal concentrations. L. decurrens plant was obtained at a swampy area of university of Ilorin farm. The metals were combined in a pot at four different concentrations (10, 20, 30 & 40) ppm using 5 mL of each metal concentration. Samples of water and plants parts were taken at 7 days interval, digested using wet acid digestion and the digestates were analyzed for Cd, Cr, Pb and Zn using atomic absorption spectrophotometer (AAS). The plants were separated into different parts, root, stem and leaf. The average HMs percentage removal at different concentrations of (10, 20, 30 & 40) ppm for four weeks was Cd - 94.09%, 97.69%, 99.01% and 99.17%, Cr - was 91.46%, 91.37%, 82.20% and 84.25%, Pb - 90.69%, 85.56%, 97.71`% and 94.53%, while Zn - 50.31%, 51.34%, 77.79% and 83.24% respectively. The heavy metals were removed in order of Cd >Pb> Cr>Zn. The results show that the hydrophyte, L. decurrens can efficiently remove HMs at varied concentrations with maximum affinity for Cd among the four heavy metals studied.

🔖

Cite This Article

Ogundele, D., Ibiyeye, B., Abiola, A. G. M., Oladele, S. G. (2025). Comparative Pot Experimental Studies for Phyto-Remediation of Heavy Metals in Contaminated Water Using Ludwigia Decurrens. International Journal of Chemistry and Technology, Volume: 9 Issue: 1. https://doi.org/10.32571/ijct.1594493

📄 Full Text PDF Viewer

📄

PDF görüntüleyici hazırlanıyor...

References (43)

  1. Obinna, I.B.; Ebere, E.C. Heavy Metal and Organic P ollutant Journal. 2019, 1–38.
  2. Yuan, Y.; Niu, B.; Yu, Q.; Guo, X.; Guo, Z.; Wen, J.; Wang, N. Angew. Chem. 2020, 132, 1236–1243.
  3. Arise, R.O.; Aboyewa, J.A.; Osioma, E. Nigeria. Journal of Basic Applied. Science. 2015, 23, 141–155.
  4. Sheela, T.; Sadasivam, S.K. Journal of Applied. Biology. 2020, 8, 42–46.
  5. Salawu, M.O.; Sunday, E.T.; Oyelola, H.; Oloyede, B.; Sunday, E. T.; Oloyede, H.O.B. Accepted Manuscript. 2018, 04,001
  6. Fernández, M.R.; Juan, S.; Albornoz, C.B.; Larsen, K.; Najle, R. Environmental Earth Sciences, 2018, 0(0), 0.
  7. Farid, N.; Ullah, A.; Khan, S.; Butt, S.; Khan, A.Z.; Afsheen, Z.; El-serehy, H. A.; Yasmin, H.; Ayaz, T.; Ali, Q. Environmental. 2023, 28-38.
  8. DalCorso, G.; Fasani, E.; Manara, A.; Visioli, G.; Furini, A. International Journal of Molecular. Science. 2019, 20, 3412.
  9. Parmar, S.; Singh, V. Journal of Plant Science. 2015, 2, 1–8.
  10. Shawky, E.M.; Elgindi, M.R.; Baky, M.H. Journal of environmental. 2023, 2, 1024.
  11. El-Khatib, A.A.; Hegazy, A.K.; Aboelkassem, A. Int. J. Phytoremediat. 2014, 16, 29–45.
  12. Fabunmi, I.; Olumdeji, O.; Uyimadu, J.P.; Adeleye, A. Journal of Applied. Biology. 2014, 7, 12.1, 39-47.
  13. AOAC. Official methods of analysis (18th ed.). Arlington, VA: Association of Official Analytical Chemists. 2005.
  14. Wilson, B.; Pyatt, F.B. Bull. Environ. Contam. Toxicol. 2007, 78, 390–394.
  15. Basílico, G.; Faggi, A.; de Cabo, L. Springer: Cham, Switzerland, 2018; pp. 169–178.
  16. Mojiri, A.; Tajuddin, R.M.; Ahmad, Z.; Ziyang, L.; Aziz, H.A.; Amin, N.M. International journal of Environmental, Science and Technology. 2018, 15 (9), 1949–1956.
  17. Abedi, T.; Mojiri, A. Plants, 2020, 9(4), 500.
  18. Khan, Z.; Elahi, A.; Bukhari, D.A.; Rehman, A. Journal of Saudi Chemical Society, 2022, 101569.
  19. Al-Khafaji, M.S.; Al-Ani, F.H.; Ibrahim, A.F. KSCE Journal of Civil Engineering, 2018, 22(4), 1077 -1082.
  20. Bokhari, S.H.; Mahmood-Ul-Hassan, M.; Ahmad, M. International journal of phytoremediation. 2019, 21(8), 799-806.
  21. Kumari, M.; Tripathi, B.D. Ecotoxicol. Environ. Saf. 2015, 112, 80–86.
  22. Yang, G.L.; Zheng, M.M.; Tan, A.J.; Liu, Y.T.; Feng, D.; Lv, S.M. Biology, 2021, 10(6), 544.
  23. Akhter, M.F.; Omelon, C.R.; Gordon, R.A.; Moser, D. Macfie, S.M. Environmental and Experimental Botany, 2014, 100, 10-1 9.
  24. Nocito, F.F.; Lancilli, C.; Dendena, B.; Lucchini, G.; Sacchi, G.A. Plant, cell & environment, 2011, 34(6), 994-1008.
  25. Shaibur, M.R.; Tanzia, F.S.; Nishi, S.; Nahar, N.; Parvin, S.; Adjadeh, T. A. Journal of hazardous materials advances, 2022, 7, 100102.
  26. Bingöl, N.A.; Akin, B.; Kocaçalişkan, İ.; Nalbantoğlu, B.; Meşeli, O. Turkish Journal of Botany, 2021, 45(6), 553-562.
  27. Ayaz, T.; Khan, S.; Khan, A.Z.; Lei, M.; Alam, M. Journal of environmental management, 2020, 255, 109833.
  28. Chanu, L. B.; Gupta, A. Chemosphere, 2016, 156, 407-411.
  29. Ashraf, U.; Kanu, A.S.; Deng, Q.; Mo, Z.; Pan, S.; Tian, H.; Tang, X. Frontiers in Plant Science, 2017, 8, 259.
  30. Tan, H.W.; Pang, Y.L.; Lim, S.; Chong, W.C.; Lai, C.W.; Abdullah, A.Z. Sustainability, 2023, 15(20), 15170.
  31. Ha, N.T.H.; Sakakibara, M.; Sano, S. Clean–Soil, Air, Water, 2009, 37(9), 720-725.
  32. Rodrigues, A. C. D.; Rocha, M. V. D. C.; Lima, E. S. A.; Pinho, C. F. D.; Santos, A. M. D.; Santos, F. S. D.; AmaralSobrinho, N. M. B. D. International Journal of Phytoremediation, 2020 22(10), 1019-1 027.
  33. Kastratović, V.; Jaćimović, Ž. Agriculture & Forestry/Poljoprivreda i šumarstv, 2020, 66(1).
  34. Haddad, M.; Nassar, D.; Shtaya, M. Scientific reports, 2023, 13(1), 4121.
  35. Eid, E.M.; Shaltout, K.H.; Almuqrin, A.H.; Aloraini, D.A.; Khedher, K.M.; Taher, M.A.; Barcelo, D.; Science of The Total Environment, 2021, 782, 146887.
  36. Pusz, A.; Wiśniewska, M.; Rogalski, D. Resources, 2021, 10(5), 46.
  37. Yadav, P.; Chakraborty, A.; Srivastava, S.; Sahani, S.; Singh, P. CRC Press, 2022, (pp. 237-249).
  38. Galal, T.M.; Al-Sodany, Y. M.; Al-Yasi, H M. International journal of phytoremediation, 2020, 22(4), 373-382.
  39. Pandey, V.C.; Bajpai, O.; Singh, N. Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, 2016, 54, 58-73.
  40. Uddin, M.M.; Zakeel, M.C. M.; Zavahir, J.S.; Marikar, F.M.; Jahan, I. Toxics, 2021, 9(12), 360.
  41. Pasricha, S.; Mathur, V.; Garg, A.; Lenka, S.; Verma, K.; Agarwal, S. Environmental Challenges, 2021, 4, 100197
  42. Obinna, I.B.; Ebere, E.C. Heavy Metal and Organic P ollutant Journal. 2019, 1–38.
  43. Rodrigues, A. C. D.; Rocha, M. V. D. C.; Lima, E. S. A.; Pinho, C. F. D.; Santos, A. M. D.; Santos, F. S. D.; AmaralSobrinho, N. M. B. D. International Journal of Phytoremediation, 2020 22(10), 1019-1 027.