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
J. A. Rodríguez-Morales
 -- 1211 2023-04-10 11:11:25 |
2 format correction
Dean Liu
 -18 word(s) 1193 2023-04-12 02:46:10 | |
3 format correction
Dean Liu
 + 2 word(s) 1195 2023-04-24 07:50:02 |

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.
Mendoza-Burguete, Y.; De La Luz Pérez-Rea, M.; Ledesma-García, J.; Campos-Guillén, J.; Ramos-López, M.A.; Guzmán, C.; Rodríguez-Morales, J.A. Bioremediation Techniques. Encyclopedia. Available online: https://encyclopedia.pub/entry/42899 (accessed on 24 November 2024).
Mendoza-Burguete Y, De La Luz Pérez-Rea M, Ledesma-García J, Campos-Guillén J, Ramos-López MA, Guzmán C, et al. Bioremediation Techniques. Encyclopedia. Available at: https://encyclopedia.pub/entry/42899. Accessed November 24, 2024.
Mendoza-Burguete, Yesenia, María De La Luz Pérez-Rea, J. Ledesma-García, Juan Campos-Guillén, M. A. Ramos-López, C. Guzmán, J. A. Rodríguez-Morales. "Bioremediation Techniques" Encyclopedia, https://encyclopedia.pub/entry/42899 (accessed November 24, 2024).
Mendoza-Burguete, Y., De La Luz Pérez-Rea, M., Ledesma-García, J., Campos-Guillén, J., Ramos-López, M.A., Guzmán, C., & Rodríguez-Morales, J.A. (2023, April 10). Bioremediation Techniques. In Encyclopedia. https://encyclopedia.pub/entry/42899
Mendoza-Burguete, Yesenia, et al. "Bioremediation Techniques." Encyclopedia. Web. 10 April, 2023.
Bioremediation Techniques
Edit
This entry is adapted from the peer-reviewed paper 10.3390/microorganisms11040857

Bioremediation is a process that uses biological organisms to remove or re-treat an environmental pollutant through metabolic processes and plants to eradicate hazardous pollutants and restore the ecosystem to its original condition.

bioremediation landfill soil

1. Introduction of Bioremediation Techniques

Bioremediation techniques have been the subject of numerous studies and experiments to evaluate their effectiveness and applicability in the removal of certain pollutants. Researchers focus mainly on the techniques most suitable for the bioremediation of specific pollutants such as heavy metals, hydrocarbons, polymers and their derivatives, and finally organic pollutants. In the wider applicability of the studies mentioned here, it was found that the use of microbial consortia for the bioremediation of heavy metals [1][2][3][4][5][6] and hydrocarbons [7][8][9][10][11][12][13] gave satisfactory results with significant removals. For the biodegradation of polymers, it was found that certain bacterial strains were able to biodegrade plastics in soil [9][14][15][16][17][18], in contrast to other studies that used bacterial consortia [19][20][21][22], resulting in a significant reduction in these contaminants as well as a reduction in biodegradation time by 90 days [20] and 30 days [21], demonstrating that the symbiotic capacity of bacteria can be a viable option. Finally, there is the bioremediation of organic matter, the most commonly used techniques were the isolation of bacteria [23][24], and some studies specifically investigated the bioremediation capacity of Pseudomonas [25][26][27] and bacterial mixtures [28][29][30][31].
The analysis conducted showed that the most commonly used techniques for bioremediation of soils contaminated by leachate are mainly bioaugmentation, microbiological bioremediation, and phytoremediation, which are discussed in the results section. Each technique has its own advantages and disadvantages, and the choice of a particular technique depends on several factors, such as the nature of the contaminants, the availability of resources, and the degree of soil contamination.
Figure 1, shows several remediation methods, among which phytoremediation [32][33][34][35][36][37][38][39] and microbial bioremediation [34][35][37][40][41] stand out, followed by biostimulation and bioaugmentation [7] among other techniques that are discussed in detail. The importance of the selection of the bioremediation technique, the selection of the microorganisms, the target pollutant, and the experimental scale will be addressed as they directly affect the results obtained. The analysis will focus on empirical studies conducted between January 2017 and January 2023. Although there is no single technique that can remediate different types of soils, there are autochthonous (indigenous) microorganisms that, in symbiosis with inoculated microorganisms, produce results with successful pollutant removal rates. They are the key to solving most problems related to biodegradation and bioremediation of pollutants, provided that environmental conditions are suitable for their growth and metabolism [42][43]. The importance of the most commonly used biological techniques today is highlighted in order to provide an objective comparison and to promote the development of innovative, applicable, and economically viable methods.
Microorganisms 11 00857 g001 550
Figure 1. Remediation techniques [36].

2. Bioventing technique

The bioventing technique requires controlled stimulation of airflow and small amounts of oxygen to release pollutants into the atmosphere through biodegradation by increasing the activities of indigenous microorganisms. This technique has gained popularity [43][44]. Bioventing is limited by the inability to oxygenate the polluted soil and the inadequate aeration of the surface contamination [10][36][42].

3. Biosparging Technique

In this technique, air is blown below the water table to raise the oxygen content of the groundwater and accelerate bacterial bioremediation of contaminants [45]. Both techniques, bioventing and biosparging, have been used simultaneously to ensure the efficient removal of soil contaminants despite unfavorable conditions. Biosparging can also combine soil and groundwater to reduce the concentration of dissolved oil compounds in groundwater mixed with soil below the water table and within the capillary fringe. It is a simple and cost-effective method with great flexibility [42].

4. Bioaugmentation Technique

In bioaugmentation, there are specific sites where microorganisms are needed to extract the pollutants. They are also able to displace indigenous microorganisms, which means they can clean the site quickly. The removal of toxic chemicals through bioaugmentation has already been reported in environments such as soil and water. However, a number of limitations have also been documented [46]. For example, it has been observed that the number of exogenous microorganisms decreases after their addition to a polluted site due to abiotic and biotic stresses. These arise from inadequate growth nutrients such as substrates, temperature fluctuations, and pH, and competition between introduced and indigenous microorganisms [47][48].

5. Microbial Bioremediation

Bacteria and fungi are the most commonly used microorganisms to remove heavy metals from contaminated soils; although, yeasts and algae are also often used. Bioremediation using microorganisms will be successful when the cultivation of a single strain is replaced by clusters of bacterial strains. The microbes/bacteria used for bioremediation are more than 25 genera that have great potential for Municipal Solid Wastes (MSW) [36][49].
For these reasons, the objective is to provide a background on the involvement of microorganisms in the decontamination of leachate-contaminated soils and their subsequent bioremediation. In addition, the factors limiting the growth of bacteria depending on the environmental conditions are highlighted. Finally, the strategies to improve the decontamination of leachate-contaminated soils based on recently published reports were evaluated through a systematic analysis of the available scientific evidence on the subject over the last five years, highlighting their principles, advantages, limitations, and possible solutions. The prospects for bioremediation are also discussed.

6. Phytoremediation Technology

Phytoremediation technology is gradually being accepted and used as an effective method for regulating ecological stability and purifying water quality [50]. Phytoremediation techniques purify contaminated soil, water, and groundwater through various pathways, such as phytoextraction, phytofiltration, phytostabilization, phytovolatilization, and phytodegradation (Figure 1) [32][36].
With over 500 million years of evolution, plants have developed highly regulated mechanisms to mitigate toxicity. Some of these heavy metal wastes such as zinc, copper, manganese, nickel, and cobalt are essential trace elements for plant growth [51], or through the unique and selective absorption, transport, and bioaccumulation of plant roots to achieve pollutant degradation and removal. Therefore, phytoremediation has also been frequently combined with other methods.
The efficiency of phytoremediation is often influenced by many factors, such as plant type, pollutant concentration, composition, accumulation, degradation site, auxiliary methods, and even the genotype of the same plant [52].
According to the available research, different plant species have different abilities to remove pollutants, and different genotypes of the same plant have different cleaning efficiency. It was found that broadleaf, composite, sunflower, hemp, and other plants were among the efficient plant metal storage plants, but their cleaning efficiency was closely related to the characteristics of plant species [53].

7. Theoretical Basis

Obtaining information about platforms is useful. However, keywords are useful for selecting large amounts of information and refining the search methodology to obtain accurate results [54].
Currently, there are different methods and strategies depending on the area in different parts of the world. Common methods include biostimulation, bioaugmentation, biopiles, and bioeradication. All bioremediation techniques have their own advantages and disadvantages, as they have their own specific application [55].
Researchers deals with the applications of bioremediation of leachate-contaminated soils treated with microorganisms and the efficiency of each type of strain used, and is organized as follows:
The paper includes a description of different bioremediation techniques with microorganisms and a classification of specific soil types, as well as an analysis of the information and discussions. Finally, the conclusions indicate the contributions of the article and suggestions for future work on bioremediation systems with results according to the microorganisms or strains used, and the most recommended to obtain better treatment results in soils contaminated with landfill leachate.

References

  1. Kumar, N.M.; Sudha, M.C. Characterization of Leachate and Groundwater in and Around Saduperi Municipal Solid Waste Open Dump Site, Vellore District, Tamil Nadu, India. In Energy, Environment, and Sustainability; Springer Nature: Berlin/Heidelberg, Germany, 2018; pp. 279–299.
  2. Adriano, J.S.; Oyong, G.G.; Cabrera, E.C.; Janairo, J.I.B. Screening of Silver-Tolerant Bacteria from a Major Philippine Landfill as Potential Bioremediation Agents. Ecol. Chem. Eng. S 2018, 25, 469–485.
  3. Ohlbaum, M.; Wadgaonkar, S.L.; van Bruggen, J.J.A.; Nancharaiah, Y.V.; Lens, P.N.L. Phytoremediation of seleniferous soil leachate using the aquatic plants Lemna minor and Egeria densa. Ecol. Eng. 2018, 120, 321–328.
  4. Sahu, S.; Rajbonshi, M.P.; Gujre, N.; Gupta, M.K.; Shelke, R.G.; Ghose, A.; Rangan, L.; Pakshirajan, K.; Mitra, S. Bacterial strains found in the soils of a municipal solid waste dumping site facilitated phosphate solubilization along with cadmium remediation. Chemosphere 2022, 287, 132320.
  5. Liu, S.-J.; Xi, B.-D.; Qiu, Z.-P.; He, X.-S.; Zhang, H.; Dang, Q.-L.; Zhao, X.-Y.; Li, D. Succession and diversity of microbial communities in landfills with depths and ages and its association with dissolved organic matter and heavy metals. Sci. Total. Environ. 2019, 651, 909–916.
  6. Nayanthika, I.V.K.; Jayawardana, D.T.; Bandara, N.J.G.J.; Manage, P.M.; Madushanka, R.M.T.D. Effective use of iron-aluminum rich laterite based soil mixture for treatment of landfill leachate. Waste Manag. 2018, 74, 347–361.
  7. Liu, Q.; Li, Q.; Wang, N.; Liu, D.; Zan, L.; Chang, L.; Gou, X.; Wang, P. Bioremediation of petroleum-contaminated soil using aged refuse from landfills. Waste Manag. 2018, 77, 576–585.
  8. Lu, C.; Hong, Y.; Liu, J.; Gao, Y.; Ma, Z.; Yang, B.; Ling, W.; Waigi, M.G. A PAH-degrading bacterial community enriched with contaminated agricultural soil and its utility for microbial bioremediation. Environ. Pollut. 2019, 251, 773–782.
  9. Koshlaf, E.; Shahsavari, E.; Haleyur, N.; Osborn, A.M.; Ball, A.S. Effect of biostimulation on the distribution and composition of the microbial community of a polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbon-contaminated landfill soil during bioremediation. Geoderma 2018, 338, 216–225.
  10. Ajona, M.; Vasanthi, P. Bioremediation of petroleum contaminated soils—A review. Mater. Today: Proc. 2021, 45, 7117–7122.
  11. Mihai, F.C.; Plana, R.; Taherzadeh, M.J.; Aswathi, M.K.; Ezeah, C. Bioremediation of organic contaminants based on biowaste composting practices. In Handbook of Bioremediation: Physiological, Molecular and Biotechnological Interventions; Elsevier: Amsterdam, The Netherlands, 2020; pp. 701–714.
  12. Steliga, T.; Wojtowicz, K.; Kapusta, P.; Brzeszcz, J. Assessment of biodegradation efficiency of polychlorinated biphenyls (PCBs) and petroleum hydrocarbons (TPH) in soil using three individual bacterial strains and their mixed culture. Molecules 2020, 25, 709.
  13. Jerin, I.; Rahi, S.; Sultan, T.; Islam, S.; Sajib, S.A.; Hoque, K.M.F.; Reza, A. Diesel degradation efficiency of Enterobacter sp., Acinetobacter sp., and Cedecea sp. isolated from petroleum waste dumping site: A bioremediation view point. Arch. Microbiol. 2021, 203, 5075–5084.
  14. Dey, S.; Tribedi, P. Microbial functional diversity plays an important role in the degradation of polyhydroxybutyrate (PHB) in soil. 3 Biotech 2018, 8, 171.
  15. Kumar, R.; Pandit, P.; Kumar, D.; Patel, Z.; Pandya, L.; Kumar, M.; Joshi, C.; Joshi, M. Landfill microbiome harbour plastic degrading genes: A metagenomic study of solid waste dumping site of Gujarat, India. Sci. Total. Environ. 2021, 779, 146184.
  16. Soleimani, Z.; Gharavi, S.; Soudi, M.; Moosavi-Nejad, Z. A survey of intact low-density polyethylene film biodegradation by terrestrial Actinobacterial species. Int. Microbiol. 2020, 24, 65–73.
  17. Paliya, S.; Mandpe, A.; Kumar, M.S.; Kumar, S. Aerobic degradation of decabrominated diphenyl ether through a novel bacterium isolated from municipal waste dumping site: Identification, degradation and metabolic pathway. Bioresour. Technol. 2021, 333, 125208.
  18. Martínez-Ruiz, M.; Molina-Vázquez, A.; Santiesteban-Romero, B.; Reyes-Pardo, H.; Villaseñor-Zepeda, K.R.; Meléndez-Sánchez, E.R.; Araújo, R.G.; Sosa-Hernández, J.E.; Bilal, M.; Iqbal, H.M.; et al. Micro-algae assisted green bioremediation of water pollutants rich leachate and source products recovery. Environ. Pollut. 2022, 306, 119422.
  19. Tao, Y.; Li, H.; Gu, J.; Shi, H.; Han, S.; Jiao, Y.; Zhong, G.; Zhang, Q.; Akindolie, M.S.; Lin, Y.; et al. Metabolism of diethyl phthalate (DEP) and identification of degradation intermediates by Pseudomonas sp. DNE-S1. Ecotoxicol. Environ. Saf. 2019, 173, 411–418.
  20. Aromolaran, O.; Fagade, O.E.; Olarenwaju, H.M.; Ogunjobi, A.A. Degradation of di-(2-ethylhexyl) phthalate by Bacillus aquimaris isolated from Ajakanga municipal solid waste leachate. Malays. J. Microbiol. 2020, 16, 117–123.
  21. Janczak, K.; Dąbrowska, G.B.; Raszkowska-Kaczor, A.; Kaczor, D.; Hrynkiewicz, K.; Richert, A. Biodegradation of the plastics PLA and PET in cultivated soil with the participation of microorganisms and plants. Int. Biodeterior. Biodegrad. 2020, 155, 105087.
  22. Ru, J.; Huo, Y.; Yang, Y. Microbial Degradation and Valorization of Plastic Wastes. Front. Microbiol. 2020, 11, 442.
  23. Bian, R.; Shi, W.; Duan, Y.; Chai, X. Effect of soil types and ammonia concentrations on the contribution of ammonia-oxidizing bacteria to CH4 oxidation. Waste Manag. Res. 2019, 37, 698–705.
  24. Nissim, W.G.; Cincinelli, A.; Martellini, T.; Alvisi, L.; Palm, E.; Mancuso, S.; Azzarello, E. Phytoremediation of sewage sludge contaminated by trace elements and organic compounds. Environ. Res. 2018, 164, 356–366.
  25. Qin, L.; Xu, Z.; Liu, L.; Lu, H.; Wan, Y.; Xue, Q. In-situ biodegradation of volatile organic compounds in landfill by sewage sludge modified waste-char. Waste Manag. 2020, 105, 317–327.
  26. Nivedita, S.; Arnepalli, D.N.; Krishnan, C. Kinetics and Stoichiometry of an Efficient Methanotroph Methylosarcina sp. LC-4 Isolated from a Municipal Solid Waste Dumpsite. J. Environ. Eng. 2021, 147, 04021011.
  27. Liu, S.J.; Zheng, M.X.; Sun, X.J.; Xi, B.D.; He, X.S.; Xiao, X. Evolution properties and dechlorination capacities of particulate organic matter from a landfill. J. Hazard. Mater. 2020, 400, 123313.
  28. Karimi, H.; Mahdavi, S.; Asgari Lajayer, B.; Moghiseh, E.; Rajput, V.D.; Minkina, T.; Astatkie, T. Insights on the bioremediation technologies for pesticide-contaminated soils. Environ. Geochem. Health 2022, 44, 1329–1354.
  29. Zegzouti, Y.; Boutafda, A.; El Fels, L.; El Hadek, M.; Ndoye, F.; Mbaye, N.; Kouisni, L.; Hafidi, M. Screening and selection of autochthonous fungi from leachate contaminated-soil for bioremediation of different types of leachate. Environ. Eng. Res. 2019, 25, 722–734.
  30. Dadrasnia, A.; Azirun, M.S.; Ismail, S.B. Optimal reduction of chemical oxygen demand and NH3-N from landfill leachate using a strongly resistant novel Bacillus salmalaya strain. BMC Biotechnol. 2017, 17, 85.
  31. Boteva, S.; Kenarova, A. Impact of Methane Concentration and Temperature on the Activity of a Methanotrophic Strain Isolated from a Municipal Landfill. Comptes Rendus L’académie Bulg. Des Sci. 2017, 70, 1271–1279.
  32. Tan, B.; He, L.; Dai, Z.; Sun, R.; Jiang, S.; Lu, Z.; Liang, Y.; Ren, L.; Sun, S.; Zhang, Y.; et al. Review on recent progress of bioremediation strategies in Landfill leachate—A green approach. J. Water Process. Eng. 2022, 50, 103229.
  33. Jagaba, A.H.; Kutty, S.R.M.; Lawal, I.M.; Aminu, N.; Noor, A.; Al-dhawi, B.N.S.; Usman, A.K.; Batari, A.; Abubakar, S.; Birniwa, A.H.; et al. Diverse Sustainable Materials for the Treatment of Petroleum Sludge and Remediation of Contaminated Sites a Review. Clean. Waste Systems 2022, 2, 100010.
  34. Ye, J.; Chen, X.; Chen, C.; Bate, B. Emerging sustainable technologies for remediation of soils and groundwater in a municipal solid waste landfill site—A review. Chemosphere 2019, 227, 681–702.
  35. Emenike, C.U.; Jayanthi, B.; Agamuthu, P.; Fauziah, S.H. Biotransformation and Removal of Heavy Metals: A Review of Phytoremediation and Microbial Remediation Assessment on Contaminated Soil. Environ. Rev. 2018, 26, 156–168.
  36. Praveen, R.; Nagalakshmi, R. Review on bioremediation and phytoremediation techniques of heavy metals in contaminated soil from dump site. Mater. Today Proc. 2022, 68, 1562–1567.
  37. Ojuederie, O.B.; Babalola, O.O. Microbial and plant-assisted bioremediation of heavy metal polluted environments: A review. Int. J. Environ. Res. Public. Health 2017, 14, 1504.
  38. Liu, Z.; Tran, K.Q. A review on disposal and utilization of phytoremediation plants containing heavy metals. Ecotoxicol. Environ. Saf. 2021, 226, 112821.
  39. Allamin, I.A.; Shukor, M.Y. Phytoremediation of PAHs in Contaminated Soils: A Review. Bioremediation Sci. Technol. Res. 2021, 9, 1–6.
  40. Sharma, P.; Parakh, S.K.; Singh, S.P.; Parra-Saldívar, R.; Kim, S.-H.; Varjani, S.; Tong, Y.W. A critical review on microbes-based treatment strategies for mitigation of toxic pollutants. Sci. Total. Environ. 2022, 834, 155444.
  41. Yadav, K.K.; Gupta, N.; Kumar, V. Singh Bioremediation of heavy metals from contaminated sites using potential species: A review. Indian. J. Environ. 2017, 1, 65–84.
  42. Azubuike, C.C.; Chikere, C.B.; Okpokwasili, G.C. Bioremediation techniques–classification based on site of application: Principles, advantages, limitations and prospects. World J. Microbiol. Biotechnol. 2016, 32, 180.
  43. Chipasa, K.B.; Mędrzycka, K. Mȩdrzycka Behavior of lipids in biological wastewater treatment processes. J. Ind. Microbiol. Biotechnol. 2006, 33, 635–645.
  44. Philp, J.C.; Atlas, R.M. Bioremediation of Contaminated Soils and Aquifers. In Bioremediation; ASM Press: Washington, DC, USA, 2014; pp. 139–236.
  45. Vidali, M. Bioremediation. An overview. Pure Appl. Chem. 2001, 73, 1163–1172.
  46. Sayqal, A.; Ahmed, O.B. Advances in Heavy Metal Bioremediation: An Overview. Appl. Bionics Biomech. 2021, 2021, 1609149 .
  47. Stroo, H.F.; Ward, C.H. Bioaugmentation for Groundwater Remediation; Springer Science & Business Media: Berlin/Heidelberg, Germany, 2012; Volume 5.
  48. Bouchez, T.; Patureau, D.; Dabert, P.; Juretschko, S.; Doré, J.; Delgenès, P.; Moletta, R.; Wagner, M. Ecological study of a bioaugmentation failure. Environ. Microbiol. 2000, 2, 179–190.
  49. Khan, S.; Naushad, M.; Lima, E.C.; Zhang, S.; Shaheen, S.M.; Rinklebe, J. Global soil pollution by toxic elements: Current status and future perspectives on the risk assessment and remediation strategies—A review. J. Hazard. Mater. 2021, 417, 126039.
  50. Cano, V.; Vich, D.V.; Rousseau, D.P.L.; Lens, P.N.L.; Nolasco, M.A. Influence of recirculation over COD and N-NH4 removals from landfill leachate by horizontal flow constructed treatment wetland. Int. J. Phytoremediation 2019, 21, 998–1004.
  51. Deng, F.; Zeng, F.; Chen, G.; Feng, X.; Riaz, A.; Wu, X.; Gao, W.; Wu, F.; Holford, P.; Chen, Z.-H. Metalloid hazards: From plant molecular evolution to mitigation strategies. J. Hazard. Mater. 2020, 409, 124495.
  52. Jagaba, A.; Kutty, S.; Lawal, I.; Abubakar, S.; Hassan, I.; Zubairu, I.; Umaru, I.; Abdurrasheed, A.; Adam, A.; Ghaleb, A.; et al. Sequencing Batch Reactor Technology for Landfill Leachate Treatment: A State-of-the-Art Review. J. Environ. Manag. 2021, 282, 111946.
  53. Wei, Z.; Xu, T.; Zhao, D. Treatment of per- And polyfluoroalkyl substances in landfill leachate: Status, chemistry and prospects. Environ. Sci. Water Res. Technol. 2019, 5, 1814–1835.
  54. Martínez-Sánchez, R.A.; Rodriguez-Resendiz, J.; Álvarez-Alvarado, J.M.; Macías-Socarrás, I. Solar Energy-Based Future Perspective for Organic Rankine Cycle Applications. Micromachines 2022, 13, 944.
  55. Abatenh, E.; Gizaw, B.; Tsegaye, Z.; Wassie, M. The Role of Microorganisms in Bioremediation- A Review. Open J. Environ. Biol. 2017, 2, 38–46.
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: Environmental Sciences
Contributors MDPI registered users' name will be linked to their SciProfiles pages. To register with us, please refer to https://encyclopedia.pub/register :
Yesenia Mendoza-Burguete
,
María de la Luz Pérez-Rea
,
J. Ledesma-García
,
Juan Campos-Guillén
,
M. A. Ramos-López
,
C. Guzmán
,
J. A. Rodríguez-Morales
View Times: 3.9K
Revisions: 3 times (View History)
Update Date: 24 Apr 2023
Table of Contents
    1000/1000
    Hot Most Recent
    ScholarVision Creations
    Feedback