1
،*
2
1 -
!
2 -
# $% &
!
[email protected]:, -( ( #& #* '()
,
& . /0 1&( 2 3 0 2 0 #& 4 0 '( 5 6&7 0 5 ( 5 . 8 9
: ;
1 $ < 6 ! ; = .' / 8 /? ! 7@ / A '&BC!
<
5<
#& 5 D ! 1&(
$&* &
1&( 2 EF 1&( 2 3 0 2 G&# ! H 0 . 2 0 5 I&J7! = .
Bacillus sphaericus 0
4 .
. K 0 #&
3 L0 /?* @ = M 5<
G 2 8 N* O
PQ 2 R S 8 L!
0 / 2 8 /
. 2 0 J
.TU , 7 1VF 0
/
#!
V . 5 ?0 28 X&! , X 5 5
&
/0
?0 35
× 35
× 3 .
5 /0 \ /0 ' J ] K $&
^ . . &
/2 I&J7! = . 2 0 '_ ` , 7 1VF
D@
5
? &: ! a 7@ / A ' b\ $& 0 .
@ /
? / A ' b\ 0 .TU D M $8 0 .'
2 &) M $8 /0 \ /0 ' J . 2 0 '_ ` $&
' M 2 / & ] K $&
X2 = &0 . J =
/0 '
. X&! N&! ! /0 /0 \ F13
, 7 1VF .TU 0 . 2 0 . % 0 ) 123
&
( &*
F5
) . 2 0 0
.TU 5 / 0 , 7 1VF A 264
&
J 0 ( &*
127 163
&
. < ' /0
: "#
. 0 M 8 0 #& 4 . 2 0 B`
Assessment of soil penetration and impact resistance by Microbial Induced Carbonate Precipitation method
Davood Namdar Khojasteh1*, Seyed Abdollah Hashemi Babaheidari2
1 Assistant Professor, Department of Soil Science, Shahed University, Tehran, Iran
2 Assistant Professor, Department of Plant Protection, Shahed University, Tehran, Iran Corresponding Author Email: [email protected]
Abstract
Microbial Induced Carbonate Precipitation (MICP), an environmentally friendly biotechnology, has recently been developed as an effective technique of stabilizing the soil surface layer. In this technique, urea is hydrolyzed by microorganism’s enzymes, resulting in calcium carbonate precipitation in the presence of calcium ions. In this study, Bacillus sphaericus was used for carbonate precipitation. This study was performed as a factorial experiment in a completely randomized design with three factors of bacterial isolation, nutrient content and solution volume with three replications. The quantity of penetration and impact resistance were measured after 28 days of applying the treatments in trays with dimensions of 35 35 3 cm. The findings of this investigation indicated that the solution volume and bacterial concentration had no statistically significant effect on the thickness of
the surface layer at a level of 5%, while the level of nutrients had a statistically significant effect on the thickness of the layer. As the bacterial concentration enhanced, the impact resistance increased, but the penetration reduced. The highest and lowest impact resistance was obtained in treatments F13 (double bacterial spray, without nutrients and solution volume 123 ml) and F5 (without bacteria, nutrient 0.5 M and solution volume 264 ml) with values of 127 and 163 mm, respectively.
Keywords: Bacteria; Carbonate Precipitation; Wind Erosion; Dust
$ ) 5 B` . 0 M 8 ( B 5 . &) /2 ( 9 /X& 9 IS ^ .
. 0 .
9 , L8 P a L7 ( ' Q / Xj 5 /? j #X / (V )
1396 (
! B` . 5 .
' B` $ j 3 ]
7 J8 K(X! /2 ) 2
Miller et al. 2008 .(
8 ! / 8 3 a 3 ?* @ l 0 m _ 5 & , = n . B` .
X? / T /# @0 / 8 &&U! 5 ! I ? 3 ] 5 '_ `
F / A 6 PA
15 5
, 0 X2 F & .
100 #X .$ $ ) ' &0 5 1391
M 8 3 ( $& .(
o GXF 3 ] p J 0 M 8 3 3 G&BO 5 2 8 /0 . 0 (0 7@ / A .
1&_ ) a L 5 1383
Mb0 /0 =& 3 ( /* < 5 . &) . 0 M 8 .(
q b .
.5 2 '( 5 6&7 X j #X #* . K?j) 2
1394 8 3 &: ! B` =& rX (
( ' Q & 5 GJ GXF 1 (& M 2 0 ) . (K ! 3Q# / Xj 5
Bennion et al.
2007; Goudie and Middleton, 2006) G A 0 0 6 ! 6&7 B` ! 8 s S 5 .
/0 1 (& 2 5 ! 5 1 0 ( t j 0 ( 5 3 :
' G B! j 9
) Anderson,
(2014
; .
; / Xj 5 . 0 M 8 , 2 '&BC! ' j . & M ) M $8 ) ( 5 .
1(& #&
( &` =# 0 5 K ) # $&8 #& # ( )
Goudie and Middleton, 2006 (
&X&
; ( &` K 3A L7 &X& . X& )) 0 = .
#X #* . K?j) D* L 1394
u
Anderson, 2014 (
j .
; = a 1(& #
0 ' M 2
M $8
3 ] B(n
M $8
/ 2 . )
v* 0 5 K . 0 '&BC! _ 5 < 3 : 2 K &X& .
.
& X 3Q# V '( 5 6&7 *< A 0 ! F 4Tj N \ G&BO . B 5 3 : . K?j) 0
#X #*
1394 .(
, $& & . 1(& #& 5 K
0 ; 9 /0 0 9 w * &
'( 5 6&7 @
b )
K B` 4 #X ' 9& )
1397 0 5 $B # w * &0 . 8 . ( '( 5 6&7
0 / 8 O =&JJ7 /j ! N ; 9 ?0 1&( 2 3 0 2 0 #& 4 X MICP
= 5 ;
K '&BC! M 8 M 2 . 0 )
#X # 1394
#& 4 ; .(
1&( 2 3 0 2 0
X X& G 9 G&# ! 1(& #& 1&(* 0 , 2 I S 5 MICP
0 2 ?0 G7 2 3
' ) 0 ) ' : &(0 '&BC! '&( 2 1&( 2 1396
a 8 2 S /0 .(
= 1 /0 ;
B` 0) 0 3 0 2 1&( #& '&* ?8 5 X& G 0 / 3 ] &B(n
#X 1395 ( /0
, ( 2 /2 . S .
1&( 2 G&# ! ?0
)
=&0 3 ] GX
2 /V&
Nj
#7
. )
9& ) '
#X 1397 (.
. 2 0 # X 0 /?* @ = 5 s Bacillus sphaericus
. 2 0 = 0 X&! R @ . 0 /0 \ /0 ' J . T) ] K $&
. 0
% &
/?* @ = . 2 0
Bacillus sphaericus PTCC1 1487 (CIP S25 001) 5
M o) 5 X .
? a )
IROST (
3 a /0 ' 2
m*
!
&
/ M . ) . 2 0 / . 6&7 . F .
Nutrient Agar
M . ) . ' 2
3 /0 ' 2 .
7 - 5 . 0 ! 0 # 5 25°C
5 x) . .
5 &XS _ '_ ` /0 & . 0 . 2 0 / *< 0 N
. 8 #% ; /0 . 2 0 5
. 2 0 0 6&7
' 2 t , Germany) Nutrient Broth (Merck®
/0 & 5 ! ' 2
#& ! 0 # . L! 5 8 . .
5°C / 28 200 j . 2 0 '_ ` . . /J&O
/0 M 5< K , 7 ' 2 6&7 5 ;
&
. 12 !
1. , S ! 8 #% 5 K 0
y 600
=&&?!nm ' 2 6&7 5 .
Nutrient Broth
X K M . 0 /0
/
. 2 0 '&?Xj /2 ' ; $ /# /0 /j ! 0 . 0 / 1
0 0 0OD=
cell/ml 109
) ' et Ooi
al. 2008
< ' 0 . 12 ! $& = &0 M 5< #! 0 = n 5 x) ( 5
/ 0
< ' /0 .
3 L0 /?* @ =
M 5<
G 2 8 N* O
PQ 2 R S L!
8 0 / 2 8 . 2 0 / j )
. 2 0 / j j j (
J
0) .TU D@
0 5 / 0 ( A , 7 1VF )
123 264 369
&
&*
( 0 /
#!
V . .TU /& ! . 0
5 / 0 5 A Nutrient broth
) 3 ) & < 2 ( &*
10 ) 1 3 0 2 &0 ( &*
12 / 2
) K ( &*
Zomorodian et al. 2019 .(
' 1 . )*# + , -. / 0 1 / # )*#
Nutrient broth
x) 5< V 5 M
. 8
&
$
#
&
X
&
0 . / X . 2 0 2 <
5 9*
2
&
. B
. Q2 ! 5 K 0 x%
. 121 /j
&
(
&
l 8 15 ' 3 /0PSI
G 5 x)
5 !
= /0 J J!
B 3 2
&
&
/0
?0 35
× 35
× 3 .
/ b . 5 . &
X 3 QS G&# ! / ' b\
&` ; %2 ] K $& 'j $*
5 /?* @ = .
x&* 2 5 K 0 . T) ] K $&
5 #! / 02
G# ) . &
2 .(
5 0 /0 \ /0 ' J . &
/ & 2 5 /0 < .
200 p K! 5
40 0 . X 3 a /0 .
& . # #! / 0
.
5 & q b . . &
5 /?* @ = 5 ?0 q b . X&! . 0 m = . &
28 . V 5
1 Optical Density
2Colis
' 2 . 2 ' *1 34 ) 56 / 7 8 #
.9 :&# ;
<3 34 ) 56 3 =&> -& 2.
^
? &: ! . 2 0 '_ ` /2
! / A ' b\ = &0 . / A ' b\ 0 . 0 X&
0 . %
)
2t $& /0 (BS 183
&
A ' b\ = X2 ) . 2 0 0 X&! /
' b\ /0 (WBt 170
&
' /0
, 7 1VF . 2 0 '_ ` G0 K : ^ . <
? sQ X&! =&0 /2 D@ .
5 . j a
$& /0 / A ' b\ = &0 196
&
, 7 1VF 0 . 2 0 . % 0 0 X&!
123
&
) &*
WC1
BS2
(
$& /0 / A ' b\ = X2 159
&
, 7 1VF 0 . 2 0 0 X&!
264
&
&*
) WB WC2
' /0 (
<
.
? sQ X&! =&0 /2 .TU . 2 0 '_ ` G0 K : ^ D@ .
5 a /0 j
$& 0 ' b\ = &0 /2 . S 188
&
J 0 ' b\ = X2 152
&
0 . X&! N&! ! /0
'_ ` D@ 0 . 2 0 5
/ 0 ) WB C1
) .TU A Ka 0 . 2 0 0 ( WB C0
. 8 z K! ( : 2 ^
J G0
D@ X&! =&0 /2 .TU , 7 1VF . 2 0 '_ ` 5
? sQ a / j .
1&b\
) / A = ! 209
&
X&! ( F4
) / A ' b\ = X2 140
&
X&! ( F3
G# ) 0 3
.(
' 3 . 34 ) 56 / @&", A BC & D / # )E"F G&H ' > /I /
/6 ) $ -& 2.
J . 2 0 '_ ` $& M $8 0 /2 /0 \ /0 ' J 0 . 2 0 '_ ` &: ! ^ &) M $8 /0 \ /0 '
? M 2 / & ] K $& 2 ) / & ] K /0 \ /0 ' J = &0 .' / .
141
&
(
) . 2 0 . % 0 0 D@
2t ) /0 \ /0 ' J = X2 (BS 209
&
) . 2 0 0 D@ ( ' /0 (WBt
. <
: 0 ^ D@ X&! =&0 sQ /2 , 7 1VF .TU G0 J
5
? a . (&
) / & ] K /0 ' J = &0 148
&
'_ ` 0 X&! . 0 ( 5
/ 0 , 7 1VF .TU A 264
&
) &*
C1
WC2
) / & ] K /0 ' J = X2 ( 192
&
0 ( '_ ` 0 X&! . 5
/ 0 , 7 1VF .TU A 123
&
) &*
WC1
C1
( 0 . sQ X&! =&0 /2 , 7 1VF . 2 0 '_ ` G0 J : 0 ^
? D@ . 5
. 2 0 0 X&! /0 \ /0 ' J = X2 / & ] K = &0 . j a , 7 1VF
264
&
) &*
WB WC2
$& /0 ( 234
&
1VF . 2 0 . % 0 0 X&! /0 \ /0 ' J = &0
, 7 123
&
) &*
WC1
BS2
D@ M $8 0 /2 ' '&?O = / & ] K M 2 . 8 z K! (
/0 ' J . 2 0 '_ ` 2 /0 \
? M &) .
. 2 /2 .TU .TU G0 J : 0 ^
.TU . 2 0 '_ ` M $8 0 /0 / & ] K M 2 D@ X&! =&0 sQ . 0
5
? a
0 . % 0 0 X&! /0 \ /0 ' J = &0 0 ) .TU
C0
BS2
J 0 ( 140
&
= X2
.TU . 2 0 0 X&! /0 \ /0 ' J )
WB C0
0 ( J 216
&
. 0 G0 J : 2 ^
? sQ X&! =&0 /2 , 7 1VF .TU . 2 0 '_ ` D@ .
5 j a G# )
4 . X&! N&! ! /0 /0 \ /0 ' J = X2 = &0 .(
F13
, 7 1VF .TU 0 . 2 0 . % 0 )
123
&
( &*
F5
.TU . 2 0 0) 5
/ 0 , 7 1VF A 264
&
J 0 ( &*
127 163
&
/0
. < '
! " # $ % & ' .4
J, / 7
D@ . 2 0 '_ ` , 7 1VF / A ' b\ 5< ^ 5
? &: ! a ' b{\ ${& 0 .
D@ / A ' b\ 0 .TU D@ / 7@ / A 5
? a {0 {X&! / A ' b\ = &0 .'
5 / 0 ) .TU A t
C1
$& /0 ( 183
&
) .TU 0 X&! / A ' b\ = X2 t
C0
${& /0 ( 162
&
2 ^ { . { { &0 ${& / A ' b\ '_ ` M $8 0 0 @ 3 a /0 M $8 . {: {
D@ X&! =&0 /2 .TU , 7 1VF . 2 0 '_ ` G0 K 5
? sQ a / { j .
1&b\
) / A = ! 209
&
X&! ( F4
X2 ) / A ' b\ = 140
&
X&! ( F3
. 0
$8 /0 \ /0 ' J 5< ^
? &: ! , 7 1VF .TU M / { /0 {\ /{0 ' J .
? &: ! . 2 0 '_ ` M $8 0 D@ .
5 / X /0 \ /0 ' J . 0 a M ${8 0 /2 . S /0 /
M 2 / & ] K $& 2 &) M $8 /0 \ /0 ' J . 2 0 '_ ` $&
{ /0 {\ /0 ' J = &0 .' /
) / & ] K 141
&
0 D@ ( ) . 2 0 . % 0
2t ) /0 {\ /0 ' J = X2 (BS 209
&
( {
) . 2 0 0 D@
=&{0 /{2 { , 7 1VF .TU . 2 0 '_ ` G0 J : 2 ^ . < ' /0 (WBt
X&!
? sQ D@ .
5 . { X&! N{&! ! /{0 /0 {\ /{0 ' J = X2 = &0 . j a F13
, 7 1VF .TU 0 . 2 0 . % 0 ) 123
&
( &*
F5
.T{U { . 2 0 0) 5
/ 0 1{VF A {
, 7 264
&
J 0 ( &*
127 163
&
. < ' /0 5 K
4 { ;
&
{0 # {( 2 3 { 0 2
&
1 . {0
' J B 0
3 ] B(n
'{ { 0 { @ B{( ^ { K $& o) 6 !
) Kalkan, 2020; Martinez et al., 2013; Peng et al., 2020; Maleki et al., 2016; Shahrokhi-
Shahraki et al., 2015 (
K; L
. ? * ' XF 0 /?* @ = 5A { {0 /{* J = ( . V
{
. X Q / X&Xa # ! N!
M N
) . O a X7 & .p . &X\ = . &| 8 .p #* . K?j 1394
( '&BC! 0 : G 0 5 . /0 0 0 0 / $ .
( ?&BS t0 .5 2 8 ) 4< / . $ M &) 5 . & j _ 19
) 73 :(
321 - 329 .
) . ' ) . 0 1396
(
$ p &: ! 0. # w * &0 .5 ( 0 0 /
/ =& 5 / ..
12 ) 4 :(
12 - 24 .
.$ $ z . . &
. . B l . ) . 1391 ( 0 ` /X& B` ) 0 . .
&8 Uj 3 ?* @ 9 IS
. 2 ) 7 :(
63-81 .
) . . a L .R 5 1&_
1383 (
$&8 3 &a L &: ! 0 :. 0 M 8. / < ' &X& #
8 /?* @ ) . 0 M
. - $ ' - ( 2 . ?&BS t0 57
) 2 :(
225-234
# 2 2 . X& 0 l . s 5 .
$ B!
. . ) 1395 ( 0 5 . 2 0 #& 4 0 3 0 2
. !
= '&BC .
4< 3 J&J7! .
47 ) 19 :(
407-415 .
&2 .p.R 0 . / (V ) . \ 8 . & 5 0 .
1396 ( 0 B` } '&BC!. ( 5 . X& ) 5 K
2 =&X $ ) X
6 ! 8 . Ka ? a
' 9&
) .R 0 .~ ; B*$O . . * .s 1397
( 0 ' 2 6&7 p . ) & % . 2 0 : 0. 3 0 2 ( 5 4
. 0 2 3 J&J7! 5 . 0 M 8 , 2 1&( 2 7
) 3 :(
32-28 .
Anderson, J., Bang S., Bang S. S., Lee S. J., Choi S. R., & Dho N. Y. (2014). Reduction of wind erosion potential using microbial calcite and soil fibers. In: Geo-Congress 2014: Geo-characterization and Modeling for Sustainability. p 1664-1673.
Bennion, P., Hubbard R., O’Hara S., Wiggs G., Wegerdt J., Lewis S., Small I., van der Meer J., & Upshur R.
(2007). The impact of airborne dust on respiratory health in children living in the Aral Sea region.
International journal of epidemiology, 36(5):1103-1110.
Deriase, S. F., & El-Gendy, N. S. (2014). Mathematical correlation between microbial biomass and total viable count for different bacterial strains used in biotreatment of oil pollution. Biosci. Biotechnol. Res. Asia, 11, 61-65.
Goudie, A. S., & Middleton N. J. (2006). Dust storm control. Desert Dust in the Global System:193-199.
Kalkan, E. (2020). A Review on the Microbial Induced Carbonate Precipitation MICP for Soil Stabilization.
International Journal of Earth Sciences Knowledge and Applications, 2(1): 38-47.
Maleki, M., Ebrahimi, S., Asadzadeh, F., & Tabrizi, M. E. (2016). Performance of microbial-induced carbonate precipitation on wind erosion control of sandy soil. International journal of environmental science and technology, 13(3): 937-944.
Martinez, B. C., DeJong, J. T., Ginn, T. R., Montoya, B. M., Barkouki, T. H., Hunt, C., Tanyu, B. and Major. D.
(2013). Experimental optimization of microbial-induced carbonate precipitation for soil improvement.
Journal of Geotechnical and Geoenvironmental Engineering, 139(4): 587-598.
Miller, S. D., A. P. Kuciauskas, M. Liu, Q. Ji, J. S. Reid, D. W. Breed, A. L. Walker, and A. A. Mandoos.
(2008). Haboob dust storms of the southern Arabian Peninsula. Journal of Geophysical Research:
Atmospheres 113(D1).
Ooi, T., Ariff A., Halimi M., & Shamsuddin Z. (2008). Growth kinetics of diazotrophic Bacillus sphaericus UPMB10 cultured using different types and concentrations of carbon and nitrogen sources. Malaysian Journal of Microbiology, 4(2):15-25.
Peng, D., Qiao, S., Luo, Y., Ma, H., Zhang, L., Hou, S., Wu, B. and Xu, H. (2020). Performance of microbial induced carbonate precipitation for immobilizing Cd in water and soil. Journal of hazardous materials, 400: 123116.
Shahrokhi-Shahraki, R., Zomorodian, S. M. A., Niazi, A., & O'Kelly, B. C. (2015). Improving sand with microbial-induced carbonate precipitation. Proceedings of the Institution of Civil Engineers-Ground Improvement, 168(3): 217-230.
Zomorodian, S. M. A., Ghaffari H., & O'Kelly B. C. (2019). Stabilisation of crustal sand layer using biocementation technique for wind erosion control. Aeolian Research, 40:34-41.
