Submitted Successfully!
To reward your contribution, here is a gift for you: A free trial for our video production service.
Thank you for your contribution! You can also upload a video entry or images related to this topic.
Version Summary Created by Modification Content Size Created at Operation
1
Jiahua Ma
 -- 1389 2022-05-18 16:27:45 |
2 No change
Zhang Talib Hong
 Meta information modification 1389 2022-05-18 17:51:23 | |
3 No change
Zhang Talib Hong
 Meta information modification 1389 2022-05-18 17:51:49 | |
4 format corrected.
Beatrix Zheng
 Meta information modification 1389 2022-05-19 04:36:03 |

Video Upload Options

We provide professional Video Production Services to translate complex research into visually appealing presentations. Would you like to try it?
No, upload directly Yes

Confirm

Are you sure to Delete?
Yes No
Cite
If you have any further questions, please contact Encyclopedia Editorial Office.
Ma, J.; , .; Kalhoro, M.; Osei, M.; Khaliq, G.; Hong, Z. Application of Microbes in Pesticide Degradation. Encyclopedia. Available online: https://encyclopedia.pub/entry/23077 (accessed on 15 November 2024).
Ma J,  , Kalhoro M, Osei M, Khaliq G, Hong Z. Application of Microbes in Pesticide Degradation. Encyclopedia. Available at: https://encyclopedia.pub/entry/23077. Accessed November 15, 2024.
Ma, Jiahua, , Mohammad Kalhoro, Matthew Osei, Ghulam Khaliq, Zhang Hong. "Application of Microbes in Pesticide Degradation" Encyclopedia, https://encyclopedia.pub/entry/23077 (accessed November 15, 2024).
Ma, J., , ., Kalhoro, M., Osei, M., Khaliq, G., & Hong, Z. (2022, May 18). Application of Microbes in Pesticide Degradation. In Encyclopedia. https://encyclopedia.pub/entry/23077
Ma, Jiahua, et al. "Application of Microbes in Pesticide Degradation." Encyclopedia. Web. 18 May, 2022.
Application of Microbes in Pesticide Degradation
Edit
This entry is adapted from the peer-reviewed paper 10.3390/su14095574

Microbes (fungal and bacterial) applications have been identified for the bio-degradation of agro-chemicals within the environment. The efficiency of microbial species to bio-degrade chemicals varies considerably. Pesticide remediation using microbes transforms harmful chemicals into nontoxic, eco-friendly, and beneficial metabolites. During pesticides decomposition, the biosorption rate for a single strain is insufficient, whereas the focus of degradation studies is rapidly turning towards microbiological consortiums, and pesticide bio-degradability is determined through pesticide components, available mechanisms, and the promiscuity of enzymes. Certain pesticides break down relatively faster than others. The slower ones are trinitrotoluene (TNT), polychlorinated biphenyl (PCBs), and pentachlorophenol (PCP). However, methomyl, pyrethroids, 1,3-dichloropropene, and atrazine can degrade faster. Axenic cultured cells are concentrated more on pesticides breakdown than microbial consortia. Earlier research has examined various microbial communities that, particularly axenic strains, may degrade chemicals quickly. During investigations, both single and a mixture of microbial strains are effective. Although axenic cells seem critical in metabolic studies, their physiology and molecular compositions are related to pesticide decomposition. The synthesis of the consortium was achieved premised on the performances of axenic colonies in pesticide degrading, and the microbial consortia became identified to have the tremendous potential.

microbiome organic agriculture environment bio-engineering biosensors

1. Microbial Biosensors and Applications in Sensing Pesticide Residues

Farmers use different chemical fertilizers and pesticides to enhance crop productivity [1][2]. Certain agro-chemicals are intentionally utilized in soil fertilizing to prevent infestations, bacterial and fungus infection, grasses, nematodes, and rodents [3]. These agricultural chemicals remnants ultimately infect the ecosystem and nutrition supply, potentially direct or indirect. The continuous introduction of agrochemicals into the environment raises residue buildup and impacts living organisms, particularly humans [4][5]. The most important groups of chemicals include organophosphate, organo-nitrate, organochlorine, and related compounds, which are destructive to different living micro-organisms in the ecosystem. To provide a comprehensive awareness of the existing concentrations of pesticides, one must look at residue accumulation and the contaminants sustained, interacting pathways with the soil, and the biota observed in a particular region [6][7].
The microbial sensor is one of the emerging applications for assessing pollutants by coupling micro-organisms with a transducer to allow analysts to detect from various sources in a fast, precise, and sensitive manner [8]. Previously, microbe biosensors strongly depended on functional cell respiratory and metabolic activities to recognize a chemical, potentially a substrate, or inhibit their metabolic mechanisms [9]. Moreover, existing microbial biosensors are constituted of transmitters that interact with fixed viable or non-viable microbial cells, exceptionally genetically engineered species. Non-viable micro-organisms targeted periplasmic enzymes identified in permeability cells or whole-cells were evidenced to be cheaper than cellular enzymes. The transportable/portable cell ensembles of biosensing were also developed using freeze-dried biosensors isolates of micro-organisms for high-throughput pollution assessment [10]. Although microbes are highly effective at exploiting a broader range of chemical compounds according to their diverse metabolic culture, genetically modified capabilities, and resistance to an extensive range of ecological factors, microbial biosensors are much more beneficial for research on pesticides in the coming years.
However, several researchers have introduced advanced, sensitive, dependable, and productive chromatographic technologies to determine chemical compounds from the samples of environmental materials. Furthermore, these techniques are time-consuming and labor-intensive, and they require complex and expensive instruments and competent specialists [11]. These challenges and problems should be solved where biosensors are the cheapest and most excellent alternative for chemical analysis. Therefore, these bio-reporters (antibodies, whole-cell, DNA, enzymes, and RNA) have been applied to the development of biosensing and have already been revealed to be practical components [12]. Certain elements are widely modified through the action and execute particular functions. However, microbial biosensors are whole-cell with biological reporter genes, and many are linked with physio-chemical sensing to provide signal processing [13]. Signal production may be accomplished through variations in proton level, gas release or uptake, and luminescence, depending on the nature of the microbe’s metabolic process of the compounds.

2. Microbes in Biochemical Degradation of Pesticides

The primary motive behind mixing the cultures’ sustained functionality is to minimize metabolic stress and labor allocation throughout pesticide degradation. However, single-step microbiological biotransformation has delivered more effectiveness in agro-chemical degrading, particular pesticides with different substrates could require multiple systems and degradation activities because they can be decomposed using a single strain [14]. All those complicated activities may be fulfilled by a cohort of different micro-organisms, individually engineered for targeted functionalities that facilitate collaboration at the macro level of the population [15]. This is found in the natural ecosystem, wherein single strains need not function effectively, and many species provide supportive responsibilities [16]. Contaminants can be degraded by microbes exploiting specific metabolic systems. Pesticides decomposition genes, mRNA, enzymatic, and metabolism, could be applied to analyze the entire systems biology in microbes [14]. Different bio-informatics strategies are developed to recognize every micro-organism’s gene regulatory systems and cell biology throughout pesticide breakdown. Systems biology research of individual microbe strains and colonies in the laboratories and fields may describe the regulatory procedures and environmental limitations driving microbial ecosystem performances. Integrating innovative microbial information obtained from systems research findings within current nutrients chain tools will improve overall predicting capabilities, which is crucial for forming mitigating approaches and regulations in modern pesticide conditions [16][17].

3. Pesticide Degradation through Microbial Engineering

Agro-chemicals can be degraded through microbial consortia present across the environment. While chemicals enter soil and groundwater sources, a microbial consortium uses its capabilities to fix them via various metabolic mechanisms [18]. Microbial consortiums are more tolerant to environmental variations in ecosystems than monocultures; they potentially execute complex functions [19]. Quorum Sensing Promotes the allocation of pesticide degrading work, allowing complicated activities to be completed. A consortium may include genera that are related or unrelated, as well as a diversity of species. The consortium components interact via various procedures, including neutralism, cooperation, amensalism, competition, predation, commensalism, and microbial strains exhibiting neutralism cannot engage with others, enabling them to degrade agro-chemicals independently [20]. In contrast, each strain can degrade in commensalism, but the other does not. The relationship that emerges whenever a nearby strain’s development affects the metabolic products of one strain is characterized as amensalism.
These strains produce alternative primary metabolites when competing for the same chemical pesticides. During predation, components of the secondary strain impede the development of those from the initial. The cooperating process enables the strains to benefit from each other, although the initial strain (A) metabolites may sometimes limit themselves throughout pesticide breakdown. Syntrophic relationships in chemical degradation are enabled through microbial strain collaboration. Two bacterial species, Sphingomonas sp. TFEE and Burkholderia sp. MN1 have been found to decompose the pesticide fenitrothion using syntrophic interactions, whereas individual microbes in a consortium have diverse metabolic pathways that can execute complicated tasks effectively [21][22][23]. Several auxotrophic strains cultivated simultaneously and have compatible metabolic activities may sustain each other in a syntrophic co-culture [24][25]. Connectivity within the natural microbial community usually involves transmitting diffusible signal molecules among different microbes. The majority of bacterium QS is mediated through acyl-homoserine lactone (AHL), the diffusible signal component in Gram-negative bacteria. It can play a role of an arbitrator via peptides in Gram-positive bacteria [26][27].
Quorum Sensing underpins the fundamental ideas of communication and operating effectiveness in a pesticide degrading consortia [28]. Engineered microbial interactions are the first process in forming a synthesized consortium. Gene-level modification of QS molecules is critical to the efficacy of the structuring of a synthesized microbial population. Combined microbial strains emerge whenever a few species localize and collaborate to provide a particular function [29]. However, a few of the collaboration’s microbial strains do not engage in metabolic activities, but are promoted by the metabolism of additional consortium participants. These strains are usually referred to as cheating strains [30]. To engineer extensive and accessible consortia, several genome-wide and computational methodologies could be implemented. An engineering model system will help with large-scale pesticide decomposition inside the environment [31]. Computational capabilities are required to understand the behaviors and consequences of modified metabolic processes and anticipate the communities’ dynamics. Chemical degrading mechanisms can be determined using in silico technologies [32].
These types of technologies could be helpful in anticipating and developing novel metabolic interactions between engineered microbial communities. Engineering sustainable microbial communities for pesticide degradation seems important; hence, strategies for long-lasting and strong microbiomes for pesticide bioremediation in the ecosystem should be developed [10]. This research suggests that developing an artificial microbial consortium under natural conditions requires an accurate assessment of its development, output, and activity. The biocontainment of such microbial consortiums could guarantee that the augmented features will not damage natural ecosystems.

References

  1. Agmas, B.; Adugna, M. Attitudes and practices of farmers with regard to pesticide use in NorthWest Ethiopia. Cogent Environ. Sci. 2020, 6, 1791462.
  2. Tadesse, A. Increasing Crop Production through Improved Plant Protection; Plant Protection Society of Ethiopia (PPSE): Addis Ababa, Ethiopia, 2008.
  3. Liu, S.; Zheng, Z.; Li, X. Advances in pesticide biosensors: Current status, challenges, and future perspectives. Anal. Bioanal. Chem. 2013, 405, 63–90.
  4. Negatu, B.; Kromhout, H.; Mekonnen, Y.; Vermeulen, R. Use of chemical pesticides in Ethiopia: A cross-sectional comparative study on knowledge, attitude and practice of farmers and farm workers in three farming systems. Ann. Occup. Hyg. 2016, 60, 551–566.
  5. Asghar, U.; Malik, M.; Javed, A. Pesticide exposure and human health: A review. J. Ecosys. Ecograph. S 2016, 5, 2.
  6. Rose, M.T.; Cavagnaro, T.R.; Scanlan, C.A.; Rose, T.J.; Vancov, T.; Kimber, S.; Kennedy, I.R.; Kookana, R.S.; Van Zwieten, L. Impact of herbicides on soil biology and function. Adv. Agron. 2016, 136, 133–220.
  7. Mulchandani, A. Microbial biosensors for organophosphate pesticides. Appl. Biochem. Biotechnol. 2011, 165, 687–699.
  8. Kumar, V.; Upadhyay, N.; Kumar, V.; Sharma, S. A review on sample preparation and chromatographic determination of acephate and methamidophos in different samples. Arab. J. Chem. 2015, 8, 624–631.
  9. Sporring, S.; Bøwadt, S.; Svensmark, B.; Björklund, E. Comprehensive comparison of classic Soxhlet extraction with Soxtec extraction, ultrasonication extraction, supercritical fluid extraction, microwave assisted extraction and accelerated solvent extraction for the determination of polychlorinated biphenyls in soil. J. Chromatogr. A 2005, 1090, 1–9.
  10. Balootaki, P.A.; Hassanshahian, M. Microbial biosensor for marine environments. Bull. Environ. Pharmacol. Life Sci. 2014, 3, 1–13.
  11. Adetunji, C.O.; Nwankwo, W.; Ukhurebor, K.E.; Olayinka, A.S.; Makinde, A.S. Application of Biosensor for the Identification of Various Pathogens and Pests Mitigating Against the Agricultural Production: Recent Advances. In Biosensors in Agriculture: Recent Trends and Future Perspectives; Springer: Cham, Switzerland, 2021; pp. 169–189.
  12. Malhotra, B.D.; Chaubey, A.; Singh, S. Prospects of conducting polymers in biosensors. Anal. Chim. Acta 2006, 578, 59–74.
  13. Karim, F.; Fakhruddin, A. Recent advances in the development of biosensor for phenol: A review. Rev. Environ. Sci. Biotechnol. 2012, 11, 261–274.
  14. Lindemann, S.R.; Bernstein, H.C.; Song, H.-S.; Fredrickson, J.K.; Fields, M.W.; Shou, W.; Johnson, D.R.; Beliaev, A.S. Engineering microbial consortia for controllable outputs. ISME J. 2016, 10, 2077–2084.
  15. Bhatt, P.; Zhou, X.; Huang, Y.; Zhang, W.; Chen, S. Characterization of the role of esterases in the biodegradation of organophosphate, carbamate, and pyrethroid pesticides. J. Hazard. Mater. 2021, 411, 125026.
  16. Bhatt, P. Smart Bioremediation Technologies: Microbial Enzymes; Academic Press: Cambridge, MA, USA, 2019.
  17. Chakraborty, R.; Wu, C.H.; Hazen, T.C. Systems biology approach to bioremediation. Curr. Opin. Biotechnol. 2012, 23, 483–490.
  18. Jariyal, M.; Jindal, V.; Mandal, K.; Gupta, V.K.; Singh, B. Bioremediation of organophosphorus pesticide phorate in soil by microbial consortia. Ecotoxicol. Environ. Saf. 2018, 159, 310–316.
  19. Irving, S.E.; Choudhury, N.R.; Corrigan, R.M. The stringent response and physiological roles of (pp) pGpp. in bacteria. Nat. Rev. Microbiol. 2021, 19, 256–271.
  20. Mishra, S.; Pang, S.; Zhang, W.; Lin, Z.; Bhatt, P.; Chen, S. Insights into the microbial degradation and biochemical mechanisms of carbamates. Chemosphere 2021, 279, 130500.
  21. LaPara, T.M.; Zakharova, T.; Nakatsu, C.H.; Konopka, A. Functional and structural adaptations of bacterial communities growing on particulate substrates under stringent nutrient limitation. Microb. Ecol. 2002, 44, 317–326.
  22. Arenas, F.; Sánchez, I.; Hawkins, S.J.; Jenkins, S.R. The invasibility of marine algal assemblages: Role of functional diversity and identity. Ecology 2006, 87, 2851–2861.
  23. Briones, A.; Raskin, L. Diversity and dynamics of microbial communities in engineered environments and their implications for process stability. Curr. Opin. Biotechnol. 2003, 14, 270–276.
  24. Gangola, S.; Sharma, A.; Bhatt, P.; Khati, P.; Chaudhary, P. Presence of esterase and laccase in Bacillus subtilis facilitates biodegradation and detoxification of cypermethrin. Sci. Rep. 2018, 8, 12755.
  25. Adebami, G.E.; Kuila, A.; Ajunwa, O.M.; Fasiku, S.A.; Asemoloye, M.D. Genetics and metabolic engineering of yeast strains for efficient ethanol production. J. Food Process Eng. 2021, e13798.
  26. Lyon, G.J.; Novick, R.P. Peptide signaling in Staphylococcus aureus and other Gram-positive bacteria. Peptides 2004, 25, 1389–1403.
  27. Slamti, L.; Lereclus, D. The oligopeptide ABC-importers are essential communication channels in Gram-positive bacteria. Res. Microbiol. 2019, 170, 338–344.
  28. Gao, B.; Sabnis, R.; Costantini, T.; Jinkerson, R.; Sun, Q. A peek in the micro-sized world: A review of design principles, engineering tools, and applications of engineered microbial community. Biochem. Soc. Trans. 2020, 48, 399–409.
  29. Qian, X.; Chen, L.; Sui, Y.; Chen, C.; Zhang, W.; Zhou, J.; Dong, W.; Jiang, M.; Xin, F.; Ochsenreither, K. Biotechnological potential and applications of microbial consortia. Biotechnol. Adv. 2020, 40, 107500.
  30. Brenner, K.; Karig, D.K.; Weiss, R.; Arnold, F.H. Engineered bidirectional communication mediates a consensus in a microbial biofilm consortium. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA 2007, 104, 17300–17304.
  31. Bhatt, P.; Bhatt, K.; Sharma, A.; Zhang, W.; Mishra, S.; Chen, S. Biotechnological basis of microbial consortia for the removal of pesticides from the environment. Crit. Rev. Biotechnol. 2021, 41, 317–338.
  32. Hawley, A.K.; Brewer, H.M.; Norbeck, A.D.; Paša-Tolić, L.; Hallam, S.J. Metaproteomics reveals differential modes of metabolic coupling among ubiquitous oxygen minimum zone microbes. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA 2014, 111, 11395–11400.
More
© Text is available under the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY) license; additional terms may apply. By using this site, you agree to the Terms and Conditions and Privacy Policy.
Upload a video for this entry
Information
Subjects: Microbiology
Contributors MDPI registered users' name will be linked to their SciProfiles pages. To register with us, please refer to https://encyclopedia.pub/register :
Jiahua Ma
,
,
Mohammad Kalhoro
,
Matthew Osei
,
Ghulam Khaliq
,
Zhang Hong
View Times: 1.7K
Revisions: 4 times (View History)
Update Date: 24 May 2022
Table of Contents
    1000/1000
    Hot Most Recent
    ScholarVision Creations
    Feedback