Bacteriological Assessment of Soil Contaminated with Cement Dust

Israel Obaroh; Tajudeen Yahaya; Umar Ibrahim

doi:doi:10.11648/j.fem.20160203.11

| Peer-Reviewed

Bacteriological Assessment of Soil Contaminated with Cement Dust

Israel Obaroh, Tajudeen Yahaya, Umar Ibrahim

Published in Frontiers in Environmental Microbiology (Volume 2, Issue 3)

Received: 5 September 2016 Accepted: 12 October 2016 Published: 28 October 2016

Views: Downloads:

Download PDF

Share This Article

Twitter
Linked In
Facebook

Abstract

The bacterial population and diversity in soil around a cement plant were assessed at two different sites. Site A (test site) was covered with cement dust, while site B (control site) was free of cement dust. Four soil samples were collected from the surface and below the surface at both sites and their bacterial density and diversity quantified. The bacteriological assessment were carried out using standard methods of analyses. The highest bacterial count of 209.33 x 10⁴ was observed in surface soil sample in site B, while the least count of 66.00 x 10⁴ was observed in soil sample obtained below the surface at site A. A total of 12 bacterial isolates were characterized which include; Micrococcus species, Kleibsella oxytoca, Clustridium species, Proteus mirabilis, Enterobacter cloacae, Citrobacter species, Cryseobacterium meningosepticum, Pseudomonas species, Klebsiella ornithinolytica, Pantoea, Acinobacter baumanii, and Serratia liquefaciens. Seven species were Gram- negative bacterial isolates there are; Proteus mirabilis, Enterobacter cloacae, Citrobacter species, Pseudomonas species, Klebsiella ornithinolytica, Pantoea species, Serratia liquefaciens, while five species were Gram-positive bacteria isolates, which includes; Micrococcus species, Klebsiella oxytoca, Clustridium species, Cryseobacterium meningosepticum, Acinobacter baumanii. These results showed that cement dust can reduce the abundance and diversity of soil bacteria. Therefore, there is a need to put in place appropriate pollution prevention and control strategies in the cement plant.

Published in	Frontiers in Environmental Microbiology (Volume 2, Issue 3)
DOI	10.11648/j.fem.20160203.11
Page(s)	12-17
Creative Commons	This is an Open Access article, distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/), which permits unrestricted use, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, provided the original work is properly cited.
Copyright	Copyright © The Author(s), 2016. Published by Science Publishing Group

Keywords

Cement, Soil, Dust, Bacterial

References

[1]	Sundararaj, D. (2004). Microbiology of soil. Microbiology, 3th Edition. Tata McGraw-Hill Publishing Company Limited, Mumbai.
[2]	Anthoniraj, S. (2004). Microbiology of soil. Microbiology, 3th Edition. Tata McGraw-Hill Publishing Company Limited, Mumbai.
[3]	Pelczar, M. J., Chan, E.C.S., Krieg, Noel, R.(2003). Microbiology of soil. Microbiology, 5th Edition. Tata McGraw-Hill Publishing Company Limited, New Delhi.
[4]	Muthakaruppan, P. (2004). Microbiology of soil. Microbiology, 3th Edition. Tata McGraw-Hill Publishing Company Limited, Mumbai.
[5]	Carreto, L., E. Moore, M. F., Nobre, R. Wait, P. W., Riley, R. J. Sharp, and M. S. da Costa. (1996). Rubrobacterxylanophilus sp. nov., a new thermophilic species isolated from a thermally polluted effluent. Int. J. Syst. Bacteriol. 46: 460-465.
[6]	Addo, M. A., Darko, E. O., Gordon, C., Nyarko, B. J. B. (2013). Contamination of soils and loss of productivity of cowpea (Vigna unguiculata) caused by cement dust pollution. International Journal of Research in Chemistry and Environment. 3(1): 272-282.
[7]	Mandre, M. (1995). Physiological and biochemical responses of coniferous trees to alkaline dust impact. In M. Mandre (Ed) Dust Pollution and Forest Ecosystem, a Study of conifers in an Alkalized Environment Inst of Ecology. Publication. Tallinn, pp. 44-65.
[8]	Mlitan, A. B., Alrayes, H. M., Alremally, A. M., Almedaham, A. M. Oaen, S. O., Alderwish, M. N. (2013). Toxicity of heavy metals and microbial analysis of souil samples collected from the area around Zliten cement Factory. Open Journal of Air Pollution. 2: 25-28.
[9]	Laj, P., Sellegri, K. (2003). Les aerosols atmosphériques: impacts locaux, effets globaux. Revue française des Laboratoires. 349: 23-34.
[10]	Ayanwale, V. A., Bala, J. (2002) Method evaluation for assessing the spatial distribution of urban soil. Journal of Environmental Quality. 31. 1576-1588.
[11]	Madigon, M. T., Martinko, J. M. (2006). Biology of Microorganisms.11th Edition. Upper saddle.
[12]	Krieg, N. R. and Holt, J. G. (1984). Bergey’s Manual of systematic Bacteriology, Vol. 1. Williams 8. Wilkins Co., Baltimore, pp 161-172.
[13]	Ogbulie, N.(1998). Characterization of the bacterial from soil. Journal of Microbiology 35: 234-238.
[14]	Cheesbrough, M. Discrete Laboratory Practice in Tropic Countries Part 1, Cambridge Second Edition. Press Syndicate, University of Cambridge. 247-258 pp.
[15]	Yahaya T., Okpuzor, J. and Adedayo, F. (2011). Investigation of General Effects of Cement Dust to Clear the Controversy Surrounding Its Toxicity. Asian Journal of Scientific Research, 4: 315–325.
[16]	Stanley, H. O., Odu, N. N., Immanuel, O. M. (2014). Impact of cement dust pollution on physic-chemical and microbiological properties of soil around Larfarge Cement WAPCO, Ewekoro, Southwestern Nigeria. International Journal of Advanced Biological Research. 4(4): 404-404.
[17]	Kulandaivel, S., Nagarajan, S., Priyanga, A., Saravanapandian, R. and Thangarani, A. (2015). Effect of Cement Dust Pollution on Microbial Properties and Alkaline Phosphatase Enzyme Activity in Soil. International Journal of Microbiology and Applied Science. 4(2): 641-646.
[18]	. Stanley, H. O., Odu, N. N. and Immanuel, O. M. (2014). Impact of cement dust pollution on physicochemical and microbiological properties of soil around Lafarge cement WAPCO, Ewekoro, Southwestern Nigeria. International Journal of Biological Research. 4(4): 400-404.
[19]	Adesemoye, A. O., Opere, B. O. and Makinde, S. C. O. (2006). Microbial content of abattoir wastewater and its contaminated soil in Lagos, Nigeria. African Journal of Biotechnology 5: 1963-1968.
[20]	Maier, R. M., Drees, K. P., Neilson, J. W., Henderson, D. A., Quade, J., Betancourt, J. L., Navarro- Gonzalez. R., Rainey, F. A. and McKay, C. P. (2004). Microbial life in the Atacama Desert. Science. 306: 1289-1290.
[21]	Fierer, N. Schimel, J. P., Holden, P. A. (2003). Variations in microbial community composition through two soil depth profiles. Soil Biology and Biochemistry. 35: 167-176.
[22]	Trojanovska, S., Brotz, M. L. and Bhave, M. (1997). Detection of heavy metal ion resistance genes inGram-positive and Gram-negative bacteria isolated from a lead-contaminated site. Biodegradation. 8: 113-124.
[23]	Brim, H., Heuer, H., Krogerrecklenfort, E., Mergeay, M. and Smalla, K. (1999). Characterization of the bacterial community of a zinc-polluted soil. Journal of Microbiology. 45: 326-338.
[24]	Kelly, J. J., Haggblom, M. M., Tate, R. L. (2003). Effects of heavy metal contamination and remediation on soil microbial communities in the vicinity of a zinc smelter as indicated by analysis of microbial community phospholipid fatty acid profiles. Biology and Fertility of Soils. Vol. 38. P. 65-71.
[25]	Meitz, J. A. and Sjorgen, R. E. (1983). Incidence of plasmid linked antibiotic and heavy metal resistant enterics in water sediment from agricultural and harbor sites. Water Air and Soil Pollution. 20: 147-159.
[26]	Laukova, A., Marekova, M., Vasilkova, Z., Papajova, I. and Juris, P. (2002). Selected microbial consortium of raw and digested slurry and its susceptibility to enterocins. World Journal of Microbiology and Biotechnology. 18: 11-15.
[27]	Malik, A., Khan, I. F. and Aleem, A. (2002). Plasmid incidence in bacteria from agricultural and industrial soils. World Journal of Microbiology and Biotechnology. 18: 827-833.

Cite This Article

Plain Text BibTeX RIS

APA Style

Israel Obaroh, Tajudeen Yahaya, Umar Ibrahim. (2016). Bacteriological Assessment of Soil Contaminated with Cement Dust. Frontiers in Environmental Microbiology, 2(3), 12-17. https://doi.org/10.11648/j.fem.20160203.11

Copy | Download

ACS Style

Israel Obaroh; Tajudeen Yahaya; Umar Ibrahim. Bacteriological Assessment of Soil Contaminated with Cement Dust. Front. Environ. Microbiol. 2016, 2(3), 12-17. doi: 10.11648/j.fem.20160203.11

Copy | Download

AMA Style

Israel Obaroh, Tajudeen Yahaya, Umar Ibrahim. Bacteriological Assessment of Soil Contaminated with Cement Dust. Front Environ Microbiol. 2016;2(3):12-17. doi: 10.11648/j.fem.20160203.11

Copy | Download

@article{10.11648/j.fem.20160203.11,
  author = {Israel Obaroh and Tajudeen Yahaya and Umar Ibrahim},
  title = {Bacteriological Assessment of Soil Contaminated with Cement Dust},
  journal = {Frontiers in Environmental Microbiology},
  volume = {2},
  number = {3},
  pages = {12-17},
  doi = {10.11648/j.fem.20160203.11},
  url = {https://doi.org/10.11648/j.fem.20160203.11},
  eprint = {https://article.sciencepublishinggroup.com/pdf/10.11648.j.fem.20160203.11},
  abstract = {The bacterial population and diversity in soil around a cement plant were assessed at two different sites. Site A (test site) was covered with cement dust, while site B (control site) was free of cement dust. Four soil samples were collected from the surface and below the surface at both sites and their bacterial density and diversity quantified. The bacteriological assessment were carried out using standard methods of analyses. The highest bacterial count of 209.33 x 104 was observed in surface soil sample in site B, while the least count of 66.00 x 104 was observed in soil sample obtained below the surface at site A. A total of 12 bacterial isolates were characterized which include; Micrococcus species, Kleibsella oxytoca, Clustridium species, Proteus mirabilis, Enterobacter cloacae, Citrobacter species, Cryseobacterium meningosepticum, Pseudomonas species, Klebsiella ornithinolytica, Pantoea, Acinobacter baumanii, and Serratia liquefaciens. Seven species were Gram- negative bacterial isolates there are; Proteus mirabilis, Enterobacter cloacae, Citrobacter species, Pseudomonas species, Klebsiella ornithinolytica, Pantoea species, Serratia liquefaciens, while five species were Gram-positive bacteria isolates, which includes; Micrococcus species, Klebsiella oxytoca, Clustridium species, Cryseobacterium meningosepticum, Acinobacter baumanii. These results showed that cement dust can reduce the abundance and diversity of soil bacteria. Therefore, there is a need to put in place appropriate pollution prevention and control strategies in the cement plant.},
 year = {2016}
}

Copy | Download

TY  - JOUR
T1  - Bacteriological Assessment of Soil Contaminated with Cement Dust
AU  - Israel Obaroh
AU  - Tajudeen Yahaya
AU  - Umar Ibrahim
Y1  - 2016/10/28
PY  - 2016
N1  - https://doi.org/10.11648/j.fem.20160203.11
DO  - 10.11648/j.fem.20160203.11
T2  - Frontiers in Environmental Microbiology
JF  - Frontiers in Environmental Microbiology
JO  - Frontiers in Environmental Microbiology
SP  - 12
EP  - 17
PB  - Science Publishing Group
SN  - 2469-8067
UR  - https://doi.org/10.11648/j.fem.20160203.11
AB  - The bacterial population and diversity in soil around a cement plant were assessed at two different sites. Site A (test site) was covered with cement dust, while site B (control site) was free of cement dust. Four soil samples were collected from the surface and below the surface at both sites and their bacterial density and diversity quantified. The bacteriological assessment were carried out using standard methods of analyses. The highest bacterial count of 209.33 x 104 was observed in surface soil sample in site B, while the least count of 66.00 x 104 was observed in soil sample obtained below the surface at site A. A total of 12 bacterial isolates were characterized which include; Micrococcus species, Kleibsella oxytoca, Clustridium species, Proteus mirabilis, Enterobacter cloacae, Citrobacter species, Cryseobacterium meningosepticum, Pseudomonas species, Klebsiella ornithinolytica, Pantoea, Acinobacter baumanii, and Serratia liquefaciens. Seven species were Gram- negative bacterial isolates there are; Proteus mirabilis, Enterobacter cloacae, Citrobacter species, Pseudomonas species, Klebsiella ornithinolytica, Pantoea species, Serratia liquefaciens, while five species were Gram-positive bacteria isolates, which includes; Micrococcus species, Klebsiella oxytoca, Clustridium species, Cryseobacterium meningosepticum, Acinobacter baumanii. These results showed that cement dust can reduce the abundance and diversity of soil bacteria. Therefore, there is a need to put in place appropriate pollution prevention and control strategies in the cement plant.
VL  - 2
IS  - 3
ER  -

Copy | Download

Author Information

Israel Obaroh

Department of Biological Sciences Kebbi State University of Science and Technology, Aliero, Nigeria
Tajudeen Yahaya

Department of Biology, Federal University Birnin, Kebbi, Nigeria
Umar Ibrahim

Department of Biological Sciences Kebbi State University of Science and Technology, Aliero, Nigeria

Download PDF

Sections

Plain Text BibTeX RIS

APA Style

Israel Obaroh, Tajudeen Yahaya, Umar Ibrahim. (2016). Bacteriological Assessment of Soil Contaminated with Cement Dust. Frontiers in Environmental Microbiology, 2(3), 12-17. https://doi.org/10.11648/j.fem.20160203.11

Copy | Download

ACS Style

Israel Obaroh; Tajudeen Yahaya; Umar Ibrahim. Bacteriological Assessment of Soil Contaminated with Cement Dust. Front. Environ. Microbiol. 2016, 2(3), 12-17. doi: 10.11648/j.fem.20160203.11

Copy | Download

AMA Style

Israel Obaroh, Tajudeen Yahaya, Umar Ibrahim. Bacteriological Assessment of Soil Contaminated with Cement Dust. Front Environ Microbiol. 2016;2(3):12-17. doi: 10.11648/j.fem.20160203.11

Copy | Download

@article{10.11648/j.fem.20160203.11,
  author = {Israel Obaroh and Tajudeen Yahaya and Umar Ibrahim},
  title = {Bacteriological Assessment of Soil Contaminated with Cement Dust},
  journal = {Frontiers in Environmental Microbiology},
  volume = {2},
  number = {3},
  pages = {12-17},
  doi = {10.11648/j.fem.20160203.11},
  url = {https://doi.org/10.11648/j.fem.20160203.11},
  eprint = {https://article.sciencepublishinggroup.com/pdf/10.11648.j.fem.20160203.11},
  abstract = {The bacterial population and diversity in soil around a cement plant were assessed at two different sites. Site A (test site) was covered with cement dust, while site B (control site) was free of cement dust. Four soil samples were collected from the surface and below the surface at both sites and their bacterial density and diversity quantified. The bacteriological assessment were carried out using standard methods of analyses. The highest bacterial count of 209.33 x 104 was observed in surface soil sample in site B, while the least count of 66.00 x 104 was observed in soil sample obtained below the surface at site A. A total of 12 bacterial isolates were characterized which include; Micrococcus species, Kleibsella oxytoca, Clustridium species, Proteus mirabilis, Enterobacter cloacae, Citrobacter species, Cryseobacterium meningosepticum, Pseudomonas species, Klebsiella ornithinolytica, Pantoea, Acinobacter baumanii, and Serratia liquefaciens. Seven species were Gram- negative bacterial isolates there are; Proteus mirabilis, Enterobacter cloacae, Citrobacter species, Pseudomonas species, Klebsiella ornithinolytica, Pantoea species, Serratia liquefaciens, while five species were Gram-positive bacteria isolates, which includes; Micrococcus species, Klebsiella oxytoca, Clustridium species, Cryseobacterium meningosepticum, Acinobacter baumanii. These results showed that cement dust can reduce the abundance and diversity of soil bacteria. Therefore, there is a need to put in place appropriate pollution prevention and control strategies in the cement plant.},
 year = {2016}
}

Copy | Download

TY  - JOUR
T1  - Bacteriological Assessment of Soil Contaminated with Cement Dust
AU  - Israel Obaroh
AU  - Tajudeen Yahaya
AU  - Umar Ibrahim
Y1  - 2016/10/28
PY  - 2016
N1  - https://doi.org/10.11648/j.fem.20160203.11
DO  - 10.11648/j.fem.20160203.11
T2  - Frontiers in Environmental Microbiology
JF  - Frontiers in Environmental Microbiology
JO  - Frontiers in Environmental Microbiology
SP  - 12
EP  - 17
PB  - Science Publishing Group
SN  - 2469-8067
UR  - https://doi.org/10.11648/j.fem.20160203.11
AB  - The bacterial population and diversity in soil around a cement plant were assessed at two different sites. Site A (test site) was covered with cement dust, while site B (control site) was free of cement dust. Four soil samples were collected from the surface and below the surface at both sites and their bacterial density and diversity quantified. The bacteriological assessment were carried out using standard methods of analyses. The highest bacterial count of 209.33 x 104 was observed in surface soil sample in site B, while the least count of 66.00 x 104 was observed in soil sample obtained below the surface at site A. A total of 12 bacterial isolates were characterized which include; Micrococcus species, Kleibsella oxytoca, Clustridium species, Proteus mirabilis, Enterobacter cloacae, Citrobacter species, Cryseobacterium meningosepticum, Pseudomonas species, Klebsiella ornithinolytica, Pantoea, Acinobacter baumanii, and Serratia liquefaciens. Seven species were Gram- negative bacterial isolates there are; Proteus mirabilis, Enterobacter cloacae, Citrobacter species, Pseudomonas species, Klebsiella ornithinolytica, Pantoea species, Serratia liquefaciens, while five species were Gram-positive bacteria isolates, which includes; Micrococcus species, Klebsiella oxytoca, Clustridium species, Cryseobacterium meningosepticum, Acinobacter baumanii. These results showed that cement dust can reduce the abundance and diversity of soil bacteria. Therefore, there is a need to put in place appropriate pollution prevention and control strategies in the cement plant.
VL  - 2
IS  - 3
ER  -

Copy | Download