A critical review on operation and performance of source water control strategies for cyanobacterial blooms: Part II-mechanical and biological control methods

Kibuye, Faith A.; Zamyadi, Arash; Wert, Eric C.

doi:10.1016/j.hal.2021.102119

Cited by 37 publications

(38 citation statements)

References 238 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Apart from its importance, there are some constraints to the use of cyanobacteria, as they secrete some toxins like cylindrospermopsin, anatoxin, and saxitoxin in fresh water with harmful effects on humans, animals, and aquatic biota (Moreira et al, 2021). Therefore, some mechanical, that is, artificial mixing, hypolimnetic aeration, dredging, and sonication and biological (biomanipulation, macrophytes, and straws), methods should be employed to manage cyanobacterial bloom (Kibuye et al, 2021).…”

Section: Production Of Secondary Metabolitesmentioning

confidence: 99%

Phytostimulants in sustainable agriculture

Bano

Waqar

Asadullah³

et al. 2022

Front. Sustain. Food Syst.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The consistent use of synthetic fertilizers and chemicals in traditional agriculture has not only compromised the fragile agroecosystems but has also adversely affected human, aquatic, and terrestrial life. The use of phytostimulants is an alternative eco-friendly approach that eliminates ecosystem disruption while maintaining agricultural productivity. Phytostimulants include living entities and materials, such as microorganisms and nanomaterials, which when applied to plants or to the rhizosphere, stimulate plant growth and induce tolerance to plants against biotic and abiotic stresses. In this review, we focus on plant growth-promoting rhizobacteria (PGPR), beneficial fungi, such as arbuscular mycorrhizal fungi (AMF) and plant growth-promoting fungi (PGPF), actinomycetes, cyanobacteria, azolla, and lichens, and their potential benefits in the crop improvement, and mitigation of abiotic and biotic stresses either alone or in combination. PGPR, AMF, and PGPF are plant beneficial microbes that can release phytohormones, such as indole acetic acid (IAA), gibberellic acid (GA), and cytokinins, promoting plant growth and improving soil health, and in addition, they also produce many secondary metabolites, antibiotics, and antioxidant compounds and help to combat biotic and abiotic stresses. Their ability to act as phytostimulator and a supplement of inorganic fertilizers is considered promising in practicing sustainable agriculture and organic farming. Glomalin is a proteinaceous product, produced by AMF, involved in soil aggregation and elevation of soil water holding capacity under stressed and unstressed conditions. The negative effects of continuous cropping can be mitigated by AMF biofertilization. The synergistic effects of PGPR and PGPF may be more effective. The mechanisms of control exercised by PGPF either direct or indirect to suppress plant diseases viz. by competing for space and nutrients, mycoparasitism, antibiosis, mycovirus-mediated cross-protection, and induced systemic resistance (ISR) have been discussed. The emerging role of cyanobacterial metabolites and the implication of nanofertilizers have been highlighted in sustainable agriculture.

show abstract

Section: Production Of Secondary Metabolitesmentioning

confidence: 99%

Phytostimulants in sustainable agriculture

Bano

Waqar

Asadullah³

et al. 2022

Front. Sustain. Food Syst.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Kibuye et al found that among surveyed utilities, algaecide addition and aeration were the two most frequently deployed source water management strategies [ 2 ]. Chemical dosing can be an effective short-term strategy for ongoing HAB impact minimization; however, long-term algaecide use, such as with copper-based compounds, may cause eco-toxicity in other non-target organisms [ 16 , 17 ]. Non-copper-based algaecides, such as hydrogen peroxide, are also receiving growing attention as an alternative to traditional chemical dosing [ 5 ].…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Evaluating Ultrasonicator Performance for Cyanobacteria Management at Freshwater Sources

Vaughan

Barnett²,

Bourke³

et al. 2023

Toxins

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Algal blooms consisting of potentially toxic cyanobacteria are a growing source water management challenge faced by water utilities globally. Commercially available sonication devices are designed to mitigate this challenge by targeting cyanobacteria-specific cellular features and aim to inhibit cyanobacterial growth within water bodies. There is limited available literature evaluating this technology; therefore, a sonication trial was conducted in a drinking water reservoir within regional Victoria, Australia across an 18-month period using one device. The trial reservoir, referred to as Reservoir C, is the final reservoir in a local network of reservoirs managed by a regional water utility. Sonicator efficacy was evaluated through qualitative and quantitative analysis of algal and cyanobacterial trends within Reservoir C and surrounding reservoirs using field data collected across three years preceding the trial and during the 18-month duration of the trial. Qualitative assessment revealed a slight increase in eukaryotic algal growth within Reservoir C following device installation, which is likely due to local environmental factors such as rainfall-driven nutrient influx. Post-sonication quantities of cyanobacteria remained relatively consistent, which may indicate that the device was able to counteract favorable phytoplankton growth conditions. Qualitative assessments also revealed minimal prevalence variations of the dominant cyanobacterial species within the reservoir following trial initiation. Since the dominant species were potential toxin producers, there is no strong evidence that sonication altered Reservoir C’s water risk profiles during this trial. Statistical analysis of samples collected within the reservoir and from the intake pipe to the associated treatment plant supported qualitative observations and revealed a significant elevation in eukaryotic algal cell counts during bloom and non-bloom periods post-installation. Corresponding cyanobacteria biovolumes and cell counts revealed that no significant changes occurred, excluding a significant decrease in bloom season cell counts measured within the treatment plant intake pipe and a significant increase in non-bloom season biovolumes and cell counts as measured within the reservoir. One technical disruption occurred during the trial; however, this had no notable impacts on cyanobacterial prevalence. Acknowledging the limitations of the experimental conditions, data and observations from this trial indicate there is no strong evidence that sonication significantly reduced cyanobacteria occurrence within Reservoir C.

show abstract

“…Compared to these abiotic measures, controlling HABs through biological factors and biotic interactions is eco-friendly [23,24]. The biological phenomenon of allelopathy has emerged as a promising biological approach [25].…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Cumulative Effects of Physical, Chemical, and Biological Measures on Algae Growth Inhibition

Li¹,

Wang²,

Zhang³

et al. 2022

Water

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Measures based on concurrent alterations of an environment’s physical, chemical, and biological factors are commonly adopted to control harmful algal blooms (HABs). It was postulated that the combinations and interactions of multiple measures could exert cumulative effects (as the overall effect may or may not be equal to the additive sum for each measure individually). However, few studies have further assessed whether the cumulative effect is synergistic, additive, or antagonistic. This study proposed a framework to distinguish and quantify the cumulative effects. We also designed an experiment to investigate the cumulative effect of the combined utilization of physical (flow velocity), chemical (copper), and biological (propionamide) measures on algae growth inhibition. The results show that the cumulative effect of physical and chemical measures on algae growth inhibition was antagonistic; the cumulative effect of physical and biological measures was antagonistic; the cumulative effect of chemical and biological measures was synergistic, and the cumulative effect of all the measures together tended to be antagonistic. These results showed that the synergistic interactions between chemical and biological measures produced antagonistic effects when physical measures were added. Through response surface methodology analysis, we also found that the physical factor was the most significant factor affecting the cumulative effect, followed by the chemical factor and then the biological factor. Our results provide a more detailed understanding of the interaction patterns among multiple measures that affect algal growth. Importantly, this understanding can be further integrated into future strategy development to fully exploit the potential of the cumulative effect at its maximum performance.

show abstract

A critical review on operation and performance of source water control strategies for cyanobacterial blooms: Part II-mechanical and biological control methods

Cited by 37 publications

References 238 publications

Phytostimulants in sustainable agriculture

Phytostimulants in sustainable agriculture

Evaluating Ultrasonicator Performance for Cyanobacteria Management at Freshwater Sources

Cumulative Effects of Physical, Chemical, and Biological Measures on Algae Growth Inhibition

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About