Heavy metal removal in phytofiltration and phycoremediation: the need to differentiate between bioadsorption and...

Phytoremediation and phycoremediation are cost-effective and environmentally sound technologies for the treatment of polluted streams and wastewaters contaminated with metals. Currently, the most commonly used parameter to assess the metal uptake of biomass is (q) expressed as mg metal g dry weight(-1). By contrast, the bioconcentration factor (BCF) is one of the most widely used factors to evaluate the metal uptake capacity of macrophytes. However, both parameters the metal uptake (q) and the BCF cannot be applied to differentiate between the ability of live plants or photosynthetic microorganisms to adsorb the metal onto their surface through passive mechanisms or to accumulate the contaminant at intracellular level through metabolically active mechanisms. This mini review has the objective of discussing the need to differentiate between bioadsorption and bioaccumulation of metals in live plants and photosynthetic microorganisms used in phytofiltration and phycoremediation processes, respectively. The use of two specific factors, the bioadsorption factor (BAF) and the intracellular accumulation factor (IAF) that have been previously reported in order to make a clear differentiation between these two metal removal mechanisms in Salvinia minima and Leptolyngbya crossbyana is highlighted. It is suggested that the BAF and the IAF can be used in phytofiltration wetlands and phycoremediation lagoons, where there is the need of specific information indicating the fate of the metal in order to gain information about possible removal mechanisms. These factors could also provide a tool to decide whether it is possible to harvest the biomass and to recover a fair amount of metal adsorbed onto the surface by means of desorbent agents. A critical assessment of the use of EDTA as desorbent agent is also included.