##plugins.themes.academic_pro.article.sidebar##

Download
pdf
Statistic
Read Counter : 293 Download : 208

##plugins.themes.academic_pro.article.main##

Abstract

Present paper dedicated to moss biomonitoring technique issues as a multi-media tool of pollution control. In recent years, this method has become a popular way of controlling the level of environmental pollution. In many studies, method of biomonitoring with mosses has proven to be relatively accurate, practical and simple method. Nevertheless, a number of shortcomings and questions have been identified through series of studies. One of the most important questions is what kind of moss biomonitoring method we should use – passive or active biomonitoring? Despite the large number of publications and the continued use of the transplant method, there are also a number of serious unresolved issues. In particular, there is no consensus on the optimal exposure duration, moss type, moss bag form, quantity of samples and pre-experimental preparations. All the problems that were listed below a considerable barrier on the way of standardization of this technique. This review paper collected and analyzed moss biomonitoring studies in order to present different experimental methods and experimental preparations of biomonitoring control of air and water pollution used in different study, and to present advantages and disadvantages of this technique and show the future perspective and possible solutions

##plugins.themes.academic_pro.article.details##

Creative Commons License

This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License.

How to Cite
Urinova Sadoqatoy Kobuljanovna. (2022). Active and Passive Moss Biomonitoring for Water and Air Pollution Control. Texas Journal of Multidisciplinary Studies, 7, 315–323. Retrieved from https://zienjournals.com/index.php/tjm/article/view/1396

References

  1. C. Carballeira, A. Carballeira, J.R. Aboal, J.A. Fernandez. Biomonitoring freshwater FISH farms by measuring nitrogen concentrations and the δ15N signal in living and devitalized moss transplants. Environmental Pollution 245 (2019) 1014-1021.
  2. Fabrizio Monaci, Stefania Ancora, Nicola Bianchi, Ilaria Bonini, Luca Paoli, Stefano Loppi. Combined use of native and transplanted moss for post-mining characterization of metal(loid) river contamination. Science of the Total Environment 750 (2021) 141669
  3. Santiago Díaz, Rubén Villares, Alejo Carballeira. Uptake Kinetics of As, Hg, Sb, and Se in the Aquatic Moss Fontinalis antipyretica Hedw. Water Air Soil Pollut (2012) 223:3409–3423
  4. Mattia Cesa, Andrea Baldisseri, Giovanni Bertolini, Ezio Dainese, Monia Dal Col, Ugo Dalla Vecchia, Paolo Marchesini, Pier Luigi Nimis. Implementation of an active ‘bryomonitoring’ network for chemical status and temporal trend assessment under the Water Framework Directive in the Chiampo Valley’s tannery district (NE Italy). Journal of Environmental Management 114 (2013) 303-315
  5. S. Debén,, J.A. Fernández, A. Carballeira, G. Kosior, J.R. Aboal. Improving active biomonitoring in aquatic environments: The optimal number and position of moss bags. Ecological Indicators 93 (2018) 753–758
  6. S. Debén, J.A. Fernández, P. Giráldez, A. Vázquez Arias, J.R. Aboal. Methodological advances to biomonitor water quality with transplanted aquatic mosses. Science of the Total Environment 706 (2020) 136082
  7. Mattia Cesa, Alesssandro Bizzotto, Claudio Ferraro, Flaminio Fumagalli, Pier Luigi Nimis. S.TR.E.A.M., system for trace element assessment with mosses. An equation to estimate mercury concentration in freshwaters. Chemosphere 75 (2009) 858–865
  8. Grzegorz Kosior, Eiliv Steinnes, Aleksandra Samecka-Cymerman, Syverin Lierhagen, Krzysztof Kolon, Agnieszka Dołhanczuk-Srodka, Zbigniew Ziembik. Trace elements in native and transplanted Fontinalis antipyretica and Platyhypnidium riparioides from rivers polluted by uranium mining. Chemosphere 171 (2017) 735-740
  9. S. Deben, J.A. Fernandez, A. Carballeira, J.R. Aboal. Using devitalized moss for active biomonitoring of water pollution. Environmental Pollution 210 (2016) 315-322
  10. Marı´a Dolores Va´zquez, Rube´n Villares, Alejo Carballeira. Biomonitoring urban fluvial contamination on the basis of physiological stress induced in transplants of the aquatic moss Fontinalis antipyretica Hedw. Hydrobiologia (2013) 707:97–108
  11. Mattia Cesa, Alberto Bertossi, Giovanni Cherubini, Emanuele Gava, Denis Mazzilis, Elisa Piccoli, Pierluigi Verardo, Pier Luigi Nimis. Development of a standard protocol for monitoring trace elements in continental waters with moss bags: inter- and intraspecific differences. Environ Sci Pollut Res (2015) 22:5030–5040
  12. F. Capozzi,S. Giordano,J.R. Aboal,P. Adamo,R. Bargagli,T. Boquete,A. Di Palma,C. Real,R. Reski,V. Spagnuolo,K. Steinbauer,M. Tretiach,Z. Varela,H. Zechmeister,J.A. Fernández. Best options for the exposure of traditional and innovative moss bags: A systematic evaluation in three European countries[J]. Elsevier Ltd,2016,214
  13. Cesa, M., Nimis, P.L., Buora, C. et al. Moss bags as sentinels for human safety in mercury-polluted groundwaters. Environ Sci Pollut Res 21, 6714–6722 (2014). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11356-014-2588-2
  14. Anna Di Palma, Aridane G. González, Paola Adamo, Simonetta Giordano, Ralf Reski, Oleg S. Pokrovsky. Biosurface properties and lead adsorption in a clone of Sphagnum palustre (Mosses): Towards a unified protocol of biomonitoring of airborne heavy metal pollution. Chemosphere, Volume 236, 2019, 124375, ISSN 0045-6535, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chemosphere.2019.124375.
  15. Sofia Augusto, Cristina Máguas, Cristina Branquinho, Guidelines for biomonitoring persistent organic pollutants (POPs), using lichens and aquatic mosses – A review. Environmental Pollution, Volume 180, 2013, 330-338, ISSN 0269-7491, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.envpol.2013.05.019.
  16. Rogova, Natalia & Ryzhakova, Nadezhda & Borisenko, Alex. (2018). Effect of placement conditions for active monitoring of trace element with the epiphytic moss. Environmental Monitoring and Assessment. 190. 10.1007/s10661-018-7087-3.
  17. 安丽,曹同,俞膺浩.不同苔藓植物对重金属富集能力的比较[J].上海师范大学学报(自然科学版),2006(06):64-70.
  18. 任昭杰,黄正莉,李林,赵遵田.苔藓植物对济南市环境质量生物指示的研究[J].山东科学,2011,24(01):28-32.
  19. Gecheva, Gana & Yurukova, Lilyana. (2013). Water pollutant monitoring with aquatic bryophytes: A review. Environ Chem Lett. 12. 10.1007/s10311-013-0429-z.
  20. Ares, J.R. Aboal, A. Carballeira, S. Giordano, P. Adamo, J.A. Fernández. Moss bag biomonitoring: A methodological review. Science of The Total Environment, Volume 432, 2012, Pages 143-158, ISSN 0048-9697, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.scitotenv.2012.05.087