New Biotechnology  Volume 32, Number 1  January 2015 RESEARCH PAPER

Emerging pollutants in the

environment: present and future

Research Paper
challenges in biomonitoring,
ecological risks and bioremediation
Maria Gavrilescu1,2, Kateřina Demnerová3, Jens Aamand4,
Spiros Agathos5 and Fabio Fava6
1
‘‘Gheorghe Asachi’’ Technical University of Iasi, Department of Environmental Engineering and Management, 73 Prof.dr.docent D. Mangeron Street, 700050 Iasi,
Romania
2
Academy of Romanian Scientists, 54 Splaiul Independentei, RO-050094 Bucharest, Romania
3
Institute of Chemical Technology Prague, Department of Biochemistry and Microbiology, Technická 3, 166 28 Prague 6, Czech Republic
4
Geological Survey of Denmark and Greenland (GEUS), Department of Geochemistry, Øster Voldgade 10, 1350 Copenhagen, Denmark
5
Catholic University of Louvain, Faculty of Bioengineering, Agronomy and Environment, Earth and Life Institute, Place Croix du Sud 2, Box L7.05.19, B-1348
Louvain-la Neuve, Belgium
6
Alma Mater Studiorum – University of Bologna, Department of Civil, Chemical, Environmental and Materials Engineering, Via Terracini 28, I-40131 Bologna, Italy

Emerging pollutants reach the environment from various anthropogenic sources and are distributed
throughout environmental matrices. Although great advances have been made in the detection and
analysis of trace pollutants during recent decades, due to the continued development and refinement of
specific techniques, a wide array of undetected contaminants of emerging environmental concern need to
be identified and quantified in various environmental components and biological tissues. These pollutants
may be mobile and persistent in air, water, soil, sediments and ecological receptors even at low
concentrations. Robust data on their fate and behaviour in the environment, as well as on threats to
ecological and human health, are still lacking. Moreover, the ecotoxicological significance of some
emerging micropollutants remains largely unknown, because satisfactory data to determine their risk
often do not exist.
This paper discusses the fate, behaviour, (bio)monitoring, environmental and health risks associated with
emerging chemical (pharmaceuticals, endocrine disruptors, hormones, toxins, among others) and
biological (bacteria, viruses) micropollutants in soils, sediments, groundwater, industrial and municipal
wastewaters, aquaculture effluents, and freshwater and marine ecosystems, and highlights new horizons
for their (bio)removal. Our study aims to demonstrate the imperative need to boost research and
innovation for new and cost-effective treatment technologies, in line with the uptake, mode of action and
consequences of each emerging contaminant. We also address the topic of innovative tools for the
evaluation of the effects of toxicity on human health and for the prediction of microbial availability and
degradation in the environment. Additionally, we consider the development of (bio)sensors to perform
environmental monitoring in real-time mode. This needs to address multiple species, along with a more
effective exploitation of specialised microbes or enzymes capable of degrading endocrine disruptors and
other micropollutants. In practical terms, the outcomes of these activities will build up the knowledge
base and develop solutions to fill the significant innovation gap faced worldwide.

Corresponding author: Gavrilescu, M. ([email protected], [email protected])

1871-6784/$ - see front matter ß 2014 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.nbt.2014.01.001 www.elsevier.com/locate/nbt 147
 RESEARCH PAPER New Biotechnology  Volume 32, Number 1  January 2015

Introduction compartments and/or in areas where they were never used, mainly
Over recent decades, the world has experienced the adverse con- due to their persistence during long distance transport. The
sequences of uncontrolled development of multiple human activ- sources and pathways of these emerging contaminants can be
ities in, for example, industry, transport, agriculture, and increasingly associated with the waste and wastewaters resulting
urbanisation. The increase in living standards and higher consumer from industrial, agricultural or municipal activities [7]. Because of
demand have amplified pollution of the air with, for example, CO2 their particular characteristics, these pollutants require changes in
and other greenhouse gases, NOx, SO2 and particulate matter, of the conventional approach to pollution prevention and control,
water with a variety of chemicals, nutrients, leachates, oil spills, although they result from similar domestic, commercial and
among others, and of the soil due to the disposal of hazardous industrial activities, as conventional contaminants [8]. Chemical
wastes, spreading of pesticides, sludge, as well as the use of dispo- micropollutants are often generated through degradation of
sable goods or non-biodegradable materials and the lack of proper organic compounds resulting in accumulation of persistent meta-
Research Paper

facilities for waste [1]. Emerging pollutants (EPs) encompass a wide bolites [9] or from the disposal of products such as pharmaceuticals
range of man-made chemicals (such as pesticides, cosmetics, perso- in the natural environment. The increased appearance of biolo-
nal and household care products, pharmaceuticals, among others), gical pollutants during the production and distribution of drink-
which are in use worldwide and which are indispensable for modern ing water may be related to several factors including changes in
society [2]. It has been shown that between 1930 and 2000, global human demographic behaviour. Also, changes in agricultural
production of anthropogenic chemicals increased from 1 million to practice towards intensive farming and spreading of manure or
400 millions tons per each year [3]. Statistics published by EURO- sludge on agricultural fields may cause leaching to surface and
STAT in 2013 reveal that, between 2002 and 2011, over 50% of the groundwater and health problems [10,11].
total production of chemicals is represented by environmentally Pesticides continue to be detected in surface and groundwater,
harmful compounds (Table 1). Over 70% of these are chemicals with although some of them have gradually been banned and replaced by
significant environmental impact [4]. environmentally friendly substitutes [12,13]. Currently, research
Furthermore, human activities have resulted in contamination of interest is directed toward pesticide metabolites, often detected in
water resources with biological micropollutants, such as viruses and water sources and wastewater effluents at higher concentrations,
bacteria. Such agents have generated renewed awareness due to being also biologically active and toxic [14,15]. Consequently, there
their potential pathogenicity and are referred to as emerging or is high interest in some categories of environmental contaminants,
reemerging pathogens. Biological micropollutants, such as enteric with particular chemical structures and properties, which interfere
bacteria, mycoplasmas, viruses and protozoa, are the source of many with endogenous hormone systems. These contaminants, denoted
waterborne diseases and remain a major cause of death worldwide endocrine disruptors, are poorly inventoried and regulated and
[5]. A significant proportion of these diseases are caused by classical insufficient information exists regarding their occurrence, fate
water related pathogens, but the spectrum of disease is constantly and impact in the environment. Also, because many have pharma-
increasing. Diseases which were thought to be controlled may later ceutical, personal care and household uses (hormones, glucocorti-
reemerge, as exemplified by the appearance of Cryptosporidium, coids, analgesics such as ibuprofen, estriol, additives in drugs and
Legionella, rotavirus and hepatitis A virus in water [6]. cosmetics such as siloxanes and parabens, and household cleansers),
The aim of this paper is to provide a focus on fostering a new more information about their ecotoxicological effects is essential for
challenge driven approach to R&D needs in the field of biomoni- their analysis and removal. Apart from the above endocrine dis-
toring, evaluation of the ecological risks, and bioremediation of ruptors, other products such as fire-retardants, heavy metals (cad-
emerging chemical (pharmaceuticals, endocrine disruptors, hor- mium, lead or mercury), widely used industrials chemicals
mones, toxins, among others) and biological (bacteria, viruses) (Bisphenol A) and some pesticides have been shown to impact
micropollutants in soils, sediments, groundwater, industrial and natural endocrine systems [16–19].
municipal wastewaters, aquaculture effluents, and freshwater and Consequently, endocrine disruptors and their degradation
marine ecosystems. It also identifies future challenges for reducing intermediates constitute a topic of extensive research [16,17].
the environmental impacts from emerging micropollutants, with Pertinent studies indicate that toxicity data are not yet available
greater emphasis on innovative and advanced tools and technol- for these compounds, which originate from various sources,
ogies for monitoring, prevention and mitigation of environmental among which the most relevant are direct releases into waters,
and health pressures and risks. wastewater treatment plants (WWTPs) (effluent and sludge), see-
page from septic tanks, landfilling areas, and surface water run-off
Emerging (micro)pollutants in the environment [20]. Pharmaceuticals, for example, are more concentrated in the
Many chemical and microbial agents that were not traditionally wastewater discharged from hospitals, long-term care facilities and
considered contaminants can be found in various environmental other medical facilities [21–23].

TABLE 1
Production of environmentally harmful chemicals, by environmental impact class in EU-27 (million tons) [4]
2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011
Total production of chemicals 330 333 349 351 355 362 338 292 339 347
Environmentally harmful chemicals, total 176 179 191 193 192 194 182 162 184 188
Chemicals with severe chronic environmental impacts 30 31 34 35 36 36 32 30 34 35

148 www.elsevier.com/locate/nbt
New Biotechnology  Volume 32, Number 1  January 2015 RESEARCH PAPER

Research Paper
FIGURE 1
Schematic pathways of some emerging pollutants from sources to receptors [12].
With permission of the publishers.

Although studies and reviews can be found in the literature on one environmental compartment to another [1,12,16,18,24,25].
sources, occurrence, environmental behaviour and fate of emer- Data on the occurrence and concentrations of some pharmaceu-
ging contaminants [12–14,24,25], the pathway of these pollutants ticals in effluents from STPs, WWTPs and surface waters, gathered
from sources to receptors continues to be an essential subject for from a literature survey [24] show that EP concentrations in
advanced research. This is because information is still poor, mainly effluents fluctuate widely (Table 2), most probably due to different
due to the problems generated by the physico-chemical properties doses applied in various regions and inconsistent efficiency of
of target compounds, and the complexity of environmental char- wastewater treatment.
acteristics, among others, which may determine an unexpected Nevertheless information concerning the nature, variability,
behaviour of the emerging pollutants in air, water, or soil transport and fate of these compounds in wastewater and treat-
[12,16,18,24]. To illustrate this situation, a schematic view of ment facilities must be improved, because knowledge in this area is
the routes by which some emerging pollutants enter various still limited. There are few studies devoted to monitoring and
receptors (groundwater, surface water, consumers) was provided understanding the processes involved in conventional or innova-
by Stuart et al. [12] (Fig. 1). Other studies have been carried out on tive wastewater treatment in eliminating or reducing the concen-
the pathways of EP, in particular from humans and animals to trations of a large diversity of emerging pollutants at wastewater
environmental components [12,24,26,27]. facilities [29,30].
Several studies on emerging contaminants have focused on
Micropollutants in water and WWTPs surface waters because they are expected to contain significant
Overall, chemical and biological micropollutants are enriched in concentrations from sources such as WWTP discharges, due to a
WWTPs [28], which should make these micropollutants easier to variable potential removal of wastewater treatment for certain
tackle and diminish the rate of their release into the environment. groups of EPs [12,14,15]. An interesting analysis has been elabo-
Literature surveys on the occurrence of various EPs in effluents rated by Deblonde et al. [25], describing concentrations found in
from Sewage Treatment Plants (SPTs) or WWTPs reaching the wastewater influents and effluents (after treatment), focusing
natural surface waters have discussed an attenuation of their on phthalates, PCBs, PAHs, Bisphenol A and pharmaceuticals
concentration in the natural receptors due to migration or reten- used for human health as well as disinfectants and hormones
tion by sorption, volatilisation, or dispersion, with transfer from (Table 3).

www.elsevier.com/locate/nbt 149
 RESEARCH PAPER New Biotechnology  Volume 32, Number 1  January 2015

TABLE 2
Data on the occurrence and concentration levels of various emerging pollutants in effluents from WWTP/STP and freshwater rivers,
canals [24]Permission of Elsevier, License number 3278700294358, November 30, 2013.
Compounds Range in concentration (ng/l) Lowest PNEC (ng/l) Percentage
of parent
North America Europe Asia and Australia
compound
Effluent, Freshwater- Effluent, Freshwater- Effluent, Freshwater- excreted
WWTP/STP rivers, WWTP/STP rivers, WWTP/STP rivers,
canals canals canals
Antibiotics
Trimethoprim <0.5–7900 2–212 99–1264 0–78.2 58–321 4–150 1000 70
Ciprofloxacin 110–1100 – 40–3353 – 42–720 23–1300 20 70
Research Paper

Sulfamethoxazole 5–2800 7–211 91–794 <0.5–4 3.8–1400 1.7–2000 20,000 6–39

Analgesics and anti-inflammatory
Naproxen <1–5100 0–135.2 450–1840 <0.3–146 128–548 11–181 37,000 –
Ibuprofen 220–3600 0–34.0 134–7100 14–44 65–1758 28–360 5000 5
Ketoprofen 12–110 – 225–954 <0.5–14 – <0.4–79.6 15.6  106 –
Diclofenac <0.5–177.1 11–82 460–3300 21–41 8.8–127 1.1–6.8 10,000 6–39
Salicylic acid 47.2–180 70–121 40–190 <0.3–302 9–2098 – – 6–39
Mefenamic acid – – 1–554 <0.3–169 4.45–396 <0.1–65.1 – –
Acetaminophen – 24.7–65.2 59–220 12–777 1.8–19 4.1–73 9200 5
Antiepileptics
Carbamazepine 111.2–187 2.7–113.7 130–290 9–157 152–226 25–34.7 25,000 5
Beta-blockers
Propranolol – – 30–44 20 50 – 500 <0.5
Atenolol 879 – 1720 314 – – 10  106 50–90
Blood lipid regulators
Clofibric acid ND–33 3.2–26.7 27–120 1–14 154 22–248 12,000 –
Gemfibrozil 9–300 5.4–16 2–28,571 – 3.9–17 1.8–9.1 100,000 –
Bezafibrate ND–260 – 233–340 16–363 – – 100,000 40–69
ND—not detected; dashed line—not reported.

It is unlikely that the conventional treatment of wastewater or In this case, their detection and removal become difficult but
drinking water will be able to remove estrogens, androgens or important, because they put at risk the reuse of treated wastewater
detergent components due to the chemical structural stability of as well as the sustainability of water cycle management. Also, they
these compounds, as well as their low bioavailability, which affects are able to pose adverse risks for human health, associated with the
biodegradation. In addition, municipal sewage sludge is also a repo- development of pathogen resistance, endocrine disruption, and
sitory for these emerging pollutants and only recently has there been
an effort to assess their occurrence and biotreatment potential [31].
Bacteria and enteric viruses are abundant in sewage and the
latter have also been detected in the effluents of WWTPs [32].
Because treated wastewater and untreated sewage may eventually
drain into water resources, biological micropollutants threaten
public health, and the development of new and cost-effective
technologies for disinfection of water is therefore needed. It is
also acknowledged that the treatment of these pollutant species
requires the addition of advanced procedures, such as chemical
degradation assisted by specialised microorganisms, or UV light
action. Recently it was shown that biologically produced zerova-
lent silver nanoparticles (bio-Ag0) can be a very effective disin-
fectant which may be used at WWTPs, a technology which
deserves further attention [33,34].

Micropollutants in freshwater resources

The consequences of micropollutants in aquatic ecosystems are of
particular concern, because living organisms present here are
subjected to exposure with potential consequences for future FIGURE 2

generations. The problem becomes more difficult when micro- Maximum concentration of some emerging contaminants originating from
major sources (agricultural waste, landfills, septic tanks, industrial and
pollutants are present in freshwaters (surface and groundwaters) municipal wastewater) in groundwater (solid horizontal line is the EU
at low (trace) concentrations (nanogram or microgram/L), drinking water limit for pesticides) [14].
depending on their source (Fig. 2) [14]. With permission of the publishers.

150 www.elsevier.com/locate/nbt
New Biotechnology  Volume 32, Number 1  January 2015 RESEARCH PAPER

TABLE 3
Concentrations of some emerging pollutants (mg/L) in influent and effluent of wastewater treatment plants (WWTPs) [25]Permission of
Elsevier, License number 3278701010264, November 30, 2013.
Pharmaceuticals Molecules Influent Effluent Removal
compounds rate (%)
Means RSD Median Min Max n Means RSD Median Min Max n
Antibiotics Clarithromycin 0.344 2 0.15 2 56.4
Ciprofloxacin 0.62 1.48 0.157 0.09 5.524 13 0.234 0.649 0.021 0.007 2.378 13 62.3
Doxycyclin 0.65 0.94 0.098 0.067 2.48 10 0.420 0.426 0.227 0.038 1.09 9 35.4
Erythromycin 0.58 0.242 0.56 0.346 0.83 3 0.297 0.237 0.2305 0.109 0.62 4 48.8
Erythromycin–H2O 2.025 2 0.59 2 70.9
Methronidazole 0.09 1 0.055 1 38.9

Research Paper
Norfloxacin 0.115 0.056 0.0905 0.066 0.25 12 0.0526 0.0985 0.0195 0.007 0.33 10 54.3
Ofloxacin 0.482 0.884 0.156 0.007 2.275 6 0.171 0.317 0.0485 0.007 0.816 6 64.5
Roxithromycin 0.78 0.737 0.81 0.0272 1.5 3 0.472 0.435 0.54 0.008 0.87 3 39.5
Sulfamethoxazole 0.32 0.248 0.2905 0.02 0.674 10 0.264 0.150 0.243 0.07 0.62 11 17.5
Sulfapyridin 0.492 1 0.081 1 83.5
Tetracyclin 48 1 2.375 2 95.1
Trimethoprim 0.43 0.401 0.251 0.0535 1.3 15 0.424 0.363 0.32 0.04 1.34 17 1.4
Antiepileptics Carbamazepine 0.732 0.869 0.25 0.0819 1.68 6 0.774 0.789 0.37 0.042 2.1 13 5.7
4-Aminoantipyrine 1.517 1 0.676 1 55.4
Antipyrin 0.04 1 0.027 1 32.5
Codein 2.8605 2 1.93 2 32.5
Diclofenac 1.039 1.283 0.232 0.16 3.1 6 0.679 0.701 0.55 0.04 2.448 11 34.6
Analgesics and anti- Ibuprofen 13.482 25.639 3.495 0.0143 22.7 10 3.480 1.489 0.56 0.03 12.6 17 74.2
inflammatories Indomethacine 0.136
Ketoprofen 0.483 0.286 0.441 0.146 0.94 5 0.333 0.148 0.34 0.125 0.63 9 31.1
Ketorolac 0.407 0.407 1 0.228 1 44.0
Naproxen 5.077 8.251 2.363 0.206 23.21 7 0.934 0.873 0.452 0.017 2.62 13 81.6
Clofibric acid 0.215 0.251 0.12 0.026 0.5 3 0.131 0.136 0.12 0.012 0.36 5 39.1
Lipid regulators Fenofibric acid 0.079 1 0.196 0.161 0.13 0.078 0.38 3 148.1
Bezafibrate 1.948 2.320 1.4205 0.05 4.9 4 0.763 0.963 0.13 0.035 2.2 5 60.8
Gemfibrozil 1.562 1.704 0.71 0.453 3.525 3 0.757 1.068 0.323 0.0112 2.86 6 51.5
Acebutolol 0.335
Atenolol 1.080 0.946 0.996 0.03 1.197 4 0.468 0.381 0.345 0.16 1.025 4 56.7
Betablockers Celiprolol 0.44 1 0.28 1 36.4
Metoprolol 1.535 2.290 0.61 0.02 4.9 4 0.679 0.657 0.73 0.019 1.7 5 55.8
Propanolol 0.198 0.269 0.005 0.036 0.51 3 0.102 0.0712 0.093 0.03 0.18 5 48.5
Sotalol 1.667 2 0.79 2 52.6
Diuretics Furosemide 0.413 1 0.166 1 59.8
Hydrochlorothiazide 2.514 1 1.176 1 53.2
Amidotrizoic acid 2.5 1 2.494 1 0.2
Diatrizoate 3.3 1 3.3 1 0.0
Iotalamic acid 1.8 1 1.820 1 1.1
Contrast media Iopromide 9.205 2 2.014 1.40 2.63 0.411 3 3 78.1
Iomeprol 6.05 2 1.606 2 73.5
Iohexol 6.7 2 2.706 2 59.6
Iopamidol 2.3 1 1.9 1 17.4
Cosmetics Galaxolide 4.281 5.01 2.031 0.79 10.02 3 1.019 0.243 1.08 0.751 1.225 3 76.2
Tonalide 0.878 2 0.21 2 76.1
Psycho-stimulants Caffeine 56.634 52.769 52.424 3.69 118 4 1.771 3.620 0.64 0.174 12 10 96.9
Paraxanthin 26.722 1 0.836 1 96.9
Desinfectant Triclosan 0.852 0.659 0.317 0.3 1.93 8 0.198 0.161 0.18 0.012 0.219 6 76.8
Antidepressants Fluoxetin 5.85 1 0.112 2 98.1
Plasticisers Molecules
DEP 19.64 19.64 14.8 0.19 50.7 5 0.68 1.11 0.02 0.0002 2.58 5 96.5
DBP 12.44 17.59 5.27 0.15 46.8 6 0.52 1.04 0.34 0.0005 2.38 5 95.8
BBP 9.17 16.1 3 0.01 37.87 5 0.7 1.36 0.076 0.0003 3.13 5 92.4
Phthalates DEHP 39.68 44.81 23.6 0.13 122 7 3.87 4.91 2.75 0.0016 14.2 8 90.2
DMP 1.51 1.39 1.24 0.26 3.32 4 0.038 0.066 0.00019 0.00006 0.115 3 97.5
DIBP 5.98 9.75 1.7 0.04 20.48 4 5.24 2 12.4
Bisphenol A 2.07 3.1 0.563 0.088 11.8 14 0.6 1.09 0.05 0.006 4.09 15 71.0
DEP: diethyl phthalate; DBP: di-n-butyl phthalate BBP: n-butyl benzyl phthalate; DEHP: bis(2-ethylhexyl) phthalate; DMP: dimethyl phtalate; DIBP: diisobutyl phthalate.

www.elsevier.com/locate/nbt 151
 RESEARCH PAPER New Biotechnology  Volume 32, Number 1  January 2015

TABLE 4
Emerging contaminants detected in European groundwaters and surface waters as originating from wastewater treatment or other
point sources [12]Permission of Elsevier, License Number 3278710639716, November 30, 2013.
Site Source Compounds detected
UK surface water
England and Wales Contaminated and Polychlorinated dibenzo-p-dioxins and dibenzofurans detected in all sediments sampled
control sites
Thames in south west London WTW Ibuprofen, paracetamol and salbutamol quantified in all samples. Mefenamic acid (NSAID) in
and rural river 70% of samples. Propanolol (b-blocker) < LOD
Tyne Estuary WTW Clotrimazole, dextropropoxyphene, erythromycin, ibuprofen, propanalol, tamoxifen, trimetho-
prim quantified Clofibric acid, diclofenac, mefenamic acid, paracetamol < LOD
Tees, Mersey, Aire river and estuary Industry-WTW APEs detected above threshold
Research Paper

Taff&Ely, South Wales WTW Trimethoprim, erythromycin, amoxicillin, paracetamol, tramadol, codeine, naproxen, ibupro-
fen, diclofenac, carbamazepine, gahapentin most frequently detected 41 others detected
including illicit drugs
Inland streams WTW Ibuprofen, mefamic acid, diclofenac, propanalol, dextropropoxyphene, erythromycin, tri-
methoprim, acetyl-sulfamethoxazole, detected Paracetamol, lofepramine not detected
Ouse, West Sussex WTW Bisphenol A, oestrone, 17b-oestrodiol consistently detected, Propanalol, sulfamethoxazole,
carbamazepine, indomethacine, diclofenac variably detected Mebeverine, thioridazine, tamox-
ifen, meclofenamic acid
UK Diuron
Stream, Tunbridge Wells Storm event, Simazine, diuron, NP, endosulfan sulphate, pendimethalin
fruit growing
Thames, 1988–1997 Atrazine, simazine, lindane
European groundwater
Eastern England STW Pharmaceuticals [<20–max]: ibuprofen (5044), erythromycin (1022), dextropropoxyphene (082),
diclofenac (568), mefenamic acid (366), propanolol (215), acetyl-sulfamethoxazole (239), tri-
methoprim (42)
Berlin, Germany STW Pharmaceuticals: clofibric acid (7300), clofibric acid derivative (2900), propyphenazone (1465),
Phenazone (1250), salicylic acid (1225), primidone (690), gentisic acid (540), N-methylphena-
cetin (470), diclofenac (380), gemfibrozil (340), ibuprofen (200), fenofibrate (45), ketoprofen (30)
Leipzig, Germany STW Bisphenol A (7000), NP (1000), caffeine ( 140), carbamazepine (90), tonalide ( 6), galoxalide
( 2.8)
Halle, Germany STW Bisphenol A ( 1 to 1136), carbamazepine ( 2 to 83), galaxolide (3–19)
Baden-Würtemberg, Germany STW Maximum concentrations: amidotrizoic acid (1100), carbamazepinc (900), diclofenac (590),
Sotalol (560), sulfamethoxazole (410), iopamidol (300), anhydro-erythromycin (49), phenazone
(25)
France Regional survey Hormones (0.4–4): levonorgestrel (4), progesterone (1.6), testosterone (1.4); Pharmaceuticals
(0–14): oxazepam (14), carbamazepine (10.4), acetaminophen (10.3), metformin (9.9), diclo-
fenac (9.7), salicylic acid (metabolite) (6.5), atenolol (5.5), sulfamethoxazole (3)
APEs: alkyl phenol ethoxylates; LOD: limit of detection; NSAID: non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drug; STW: Sewage Treatment Work; WTW: wastewater treatment work.

chronic toxicity [35]. The uptake, mode of action, and biological (Bio)monitoring and ecological risk assessment for
endpoints of each emerging contaminant must be researched and emerging pollutants
documented to establish a correlation between contaminant and R&D for impact and risk assessment
consequence. The relevance of emerging and new chemical and biological agents
A successful approach to the problem of emerging contaminants and their impact on soil, water and ecosystems can be addressed by
should be highly interdisciplinary [36]. Drinking water resources the following research challenges:
such as groundwater are often contaminated by extremely low - identification and preparation of comprehensive lists of
concentrations of pesticides in the nanogram to microgram/L emerging contaminants;
range, but still above the EU limit values. Surveys of groundwater - characterisation of interactions and physical/chemical fate of
contaminants detected in several European areas show that most of such chemicals/biological emerging pollutants in soil, sediment
these EPs can be associated with the impact of WWTP or other point and water ecosystems;
sources (Table 4), more significantly than recognised hitherto - assessment of the functioning of the water/soil system in the
[12,37,38]. presence of emerging pollutants.
Moreover, European monitoring programmes discriminate Establishing action plans for emerging and reemerging infec-
among the most frequently detected EP in groundwater (Fig. 3) tious agents is an additional need worldwide. There is little tox-
[12]. The risk to groundwater posed by the presence of these EPs, icological information for the majority of the chemicals in use,
and consequently to drinking water, is clear. Development of new predominantly with regard to long-term, low-level exposure. Cur-
technologies for treatment of drinking water resources to below rent challenges which the environment is facing are often hidden
the EU threshold limit is urgent. so that long-term threats or intermittent exposure can restructure

152 www.elsevier.com/locate/nbt
New Biotechnology  Volume 32, Number 1  January 2015 RESEARCH PAPER

Research Paper
FIGURE 3
The most frequently detected compounds in European groundwater included in the Environmental Agency database (DEET = N,N-dimethyl-toluamide; BASA = N-
buthylbenzene sulphonamide; BBSA = N-buthylbenzene sulphonamide) [12].
With permission of the publishers.

ecosystems and often lead to a decrease in biodiversity and a loss of toxic compounds, despite the time and necessary costs for these
important functions and services [39,40]. In this context, a major tests.
problem lies in the identification of future hazardous or poten- Online monitoring would have the advantage that it can
tially dangerous chemicals and biological agents hazardous or improve the reliability of monitoring data, but involves expensive
potential dangerous. An inventory of the available information equipment and relative high maintenance costs [43,44]. An effi-
in terms of persistence, fluxes, toxicity, endocrine disruption cient option now being applied refers to passive sampling meth-
potential of both individual compounds and complex mixtures ods, such as Polar Organic Chemical Integrative Samplers (POCIS),
is lacking. which can sample water over a long period, providing time
Although the literature on the fate of these substances appears weighted average (TWA) concentrations [45,46].
to be extensive, data about their environmental effects at the Understanding the causes of ecosystem harm or effects resulting
realistic low concentrations at which they exist in different media from chronic exposure to a pollutant is not an easy task and one
are limited, especially when exposure to these compounds could which requires innovative approaches. Also, there is a growing
occur. Hence, the development of new technologies for remedia- agreement that chemical data alone are not sufficient to assess the
tion and disinfection of water resources to drinking water stan- potential risks of all emerging pollutants, and those analyses of
dards is an ongoing challenge. In several cases, regulations to pollution-induced biological and biochemical effects are desirable
impose long-term impact assessment of the exposure to low levels to evaluate the impact of chemical pollutants on human health.
of chemical compounds in the environment are missing, because
important classes of these compounds have not yet been studied in Biomonitoring and biosensors
detail. This has been mainly attributable to the lack of appropriate Biomonitoring tools (e.g. bioassays, biomarkers, microbial com-
standards for instrumental analysis techniques in the case of low munity analyses) have great potential for increasing confidence in
concentrations of micropollutants in environmental components the risk assessment of both regulated and emerging chemical
[1,16]. To understand the full range of potential contaminant pollutants. Sensors developed to determine several analytes
effects, it is important to measure and monitor pollutant concen- in parallel are useful tools in environmental monitoring and
trations at the emission source, within the environmental com- screening.
partments as well as in living organisms (invertebrates, fish, The comprehensive term ‘biosensor’ denotes a system capable
among others) [41,42]. Currently, some groups of physico-chemi- of detecting the presence of a substrate by using biological com-
cal treatment methods could be applied, coupled with toxicity ponents, which then provides a quantifiable signal [47]. Recently,
tests after each stage of treatment, to remove one or more classes of there has been an expansion of studies and research on biosensing

www.elsevier.com/locate/nbt 153
 RESEARCH PAPER New Biotechnology  Volume 32, Number 1  January 2015

techniques and devices for environmental monitoring and simi- allow the determination of contamination bioaccessibility as well
larly for genetic engineering and sensor cell development. For as the prediction of microbial degradation and availability in the
example, it is assumed that many endocrine disruptors can bind to environment is a crucial part of environmental (bio)monitoring
the oestrogen receptor (ER) as agonists or antagonists. Therefore, [54].
the chemical binding capacity of ER would be a factor in screening Quantifying the bioavailability of organic contaminants in soil
or testing the potential toxicity of these substances on the envir- and sediment is crucial for risk assessment and decision making for
onment and biosensors for endocrine disruptors have been devel- contaminated land remediation. It would therefore be highly
oped, taking advantage of this property [48,49]. Moreover, opportune to develop techniques that can directly predict micro-
molecular self-assembly, inspired by nature, has been proposed bial bioavailability and the environmental degradation potential
to synthesise nanostructures with distinctive functions, because of these contaminants.
current detection methods for pathogenic bacteria, protozoa,
Research Paper

viruses, or helminths proved to be sometimes inaccurate, but also Innovative approaches in bioremediation of emerging
costly in terms of resources and time [50]. The self-assembly pollutants
technique makes possible organised, patterned nanostructures Environmental hazards and risks that occur as a result of accumu-
which can involve biomaterials (proteins, lipids, nucleic acids), lated toxic chemicals or biological micropollutants could be
without external control and directions, which can then be reduced or eliminated through the application of various (bio)-
applied to the development of amperometric immunosensors technologies [1]. These could take the form of treatment/remedia-
[51,52]. tion of historic pollution, disinfection of water resources
Because monitoring of multiple species would be recommended addressing chemical and biological agents resulting from changed
in a real-time parallel procedure, the current tendency is to human demographic behaviour, breakdown of public health mea-
develop large-scale biosensor clusters, especially if highly minia- sures and current industrial/agricultural practices through pollu-
turised signal transduction elements are necessary. Genomics is a tion prevention and control [55,56].
new tool in recognising and understanding the molecular path- Thanks to biotechnological solutions some of these pollutants
ways disturbed by emerging pollutants, and is able to relate them can be readily degraded or removed. Studies have demonstrated
to both the whole organism and population level effects. Tech- that these solutions involve the action of microbes, plants and
nologies such as DNA microarrays are successfully applied in animals under specific conditions that address both abiotic and
ecotoxicogenomics, an emerging field in ecotoxicology, to under- biotic factors, so as to achieve contaminant mineralisation, trans-
stand the effects of pollutants at the molecular level [53]. Further- formation or immobilisation [1,57–59]. For example, the combi-
more, the bioavailability of nanoparticles in environmental nation of biological processes with adsorption on solids in the
compartments can be investigated by developing molecular bio- treatment of wastewaters can provide 45–99% removal efficiency
markers as detection tools for emerging contaminants. This is of EDCs (Endocrine Disrupting Chemicals) from influent [16].
essential for risk assessment and decision making for remediation Monitoring and managing the biological aspects of bioremedia-
of contaminated soils and sediments. Measuring the concentra- tion require the characterisation of the fate and behaviour of the
tion levels of polluting compounds through techniques which compounds of interest in the environment to update the choice of

FIGURE 4
R&D needs for emerging pollutants in the environment considering sources, biomonitoring, ecological risks and bioremediation.

154 www.elsevier.com/locate/nbt
New Biotechnology  Volume 32, Number 1  January 2015 RESEARCH PAPER

bioremediation strategy. However, at present it is difficult to removal of other micropollutants such as pharmaceuticals
suppose that the environmental impacts of trace chemicals would and personal care products (PPCPs), while recruitment of other
be minimised or removed, mostly as a consequence of insufficient heterotrophic bacteria seems to be necessary to further degrade the
information being available. This highlights the importance of a intermediate metabolites of these micropollutants produced by
consistent link between R&D needs for the assessment and treat- the action of aerobic nitrifiers [63,65].
ment of emerging pollutants and the tools, equipment and know- Scientifically validated and innovative processes and tools are
how which contributes to the fulfilment of these needs. Such an further necessary to tackle these matters and the public and
integrated approach should take into consideration the entire decision makers’ needs in terms of chemicals and pathogens
lifecycle of the pollutants, from the source of emission to their impacts on environment and human health.
removal through treatment and remediation techniques, without
neglecting the impacts and risks they may pose to the environ- Concluding remarks

Research Paper
ment and human health (Fig. 4). Ensuring the elimination of emerging contaminants of environ-
Pollution control in the aquatic environment can be achieved mental concern requires future studies and research to develop
by applying the well-established activated sludge wastewater treat- robust (bio)remediation processes elaborated on a sustainable
ment. However, biological processes carried out in conventional basis. Our analysis shows that emerging contaminants continue
treatment systems (activated sludge) showed a low efficiency in to cause new and serious challenges to water, air, soil, natural
removing EDCs from wastewater, even in WWTP units with multi- resources, ecosystems and human health. It is also evident that the
ple biological treatment units [57]. production of new chemicals extends and often goes beyond the
Membrane bioreactors (MBRs) are regarded as feasible options power of current safety monitoring and risk assessment methods,
in relation to conventional treatment plants, because they have as well as of existing preventative and remediation technologies.
proved to be efficient in removing recalcitrant compounds that Some issues should be addressed so as to generate a synergistic
cannot be eliminated or biodegraded in activated sludge systems. effect between the environmental influence on fate and (bio)avail-
Some studies have shown that the elimination of EDCs in MBRs ability of chemical (organic and inorganic) contaminants and the
before disinfection may result in removal effectiveness of 96% for selection and performance of the most appropriate bioremediation
cholesterol, stigmastanol and coprostanol in municipal waste- processes, as well as of complementary techniques that support the
water, compared to 85% efficiencies obtained in a conventional effective operation and monitoring of a bioremediation approach.
treatment plant, with influents of similar loadings. However, if the Considering the current situation and based on our study, it is clear
sludge retention time (SRT) is extended, MBR performance for the that several interconnected factors must be taken into account:
removal of several compounds may diminish [16,60]. contaminant concentration; contaminant/contamination charac-
Isolation of activated sludge bacteria capable of degrading teristics and category; scale and level of contamination; the risk
endocrine disruptors can provide great opportunities to effectively intensity generated for health or the environment; the opportunity
remove these compounds, which are sometimes difficult to to be applied in situ or ex situ; the later use of the site; and available
degrade even by advanced treatment processes such as hydrolysis resources. Moreover, the removal of pollutants from any given
or photocatalysis. White rot fungi and their oxidative enzymes are environment would be made more predictable by applying multi-
also attractive candidates to decontaminate waters containing disciplinary techniques. The results of R&D efforts will lead to future
EDCs, such as the ubiquitous plasticiser Bisphenol A [61,62]. regulations, entailing their occurrence, bioremediation targets and
The development of innovative/advanced packed or fluidised their potential environmental and health risks.
bed bioreactors or MBRs is also necessary for a more effective
exploitation of such specialised microbes or enzymes. Acknowledgements
The growing outbreaks of infectious waterborne diseases are a The colleagues of the Experts Group of the Environmental
challenge to both the water and public health sector. The devel- Biotechnology section of the European Federation of
opment of new (bio) technologies for water disinfection and Biotechnology are kindly acknowledged for their comments on
monitoring biological micropollutants is therefore urgent. Novel the manuscript. The content of the present paper in the form of a
concepts for the removal of such agents and of potential usefulness position paper on the major R&D priorities on was read and
for the biotreatment of water and wastewater are starting to approved by them (http://www.efb-central.org/images/uploads/
emerge [63,64]. The recently demonstrated co-metabolism of PP_emergingpollutants_26.02.2012.pdf).
estrogenic compounds during nitrification (including the action The support of CNCS – UEFISCDI, project number PN-II-ID-PCE-
of ammonia oxidising Archaea) might also be applicable to the 2011-3-0559, contract 265/2011 is highly acknowledged.

References
[1] Gavrilescu M. Environmental biotechnology: achievements, opportunities and [5] Theron J, Cloete TE. Emerging waterborne infections: contributing factors,
challenges. Dynamic Biochemistry Process Biotechnology and Molecular Biol- agents and detection tools. Critical Reviews in Microbiology 2002;28:1–26.
ogy 2010;4:1–36. [6] WHO. Emerging issues in water and infectious diseases. http://www.who.int/
[2] Thomaidis NS, Asimakopoulos AG, Bletsou AA. Emerging contaminants: a water_sanitation_health/emerging/emerging.pdf.
tutorial mini-review. Global NEST Journal 2012;14:72–9. [7] IKSR-CIPR-ICBR. Strategy for micro-pollutants – strategy for municipal and
[3] WWF, TOXIC CHEMICALS. http://wwf.panda.org/about_our_earth/teacher_ industrial wastewater. Koblenz, Germany: International Commission for the
resources/webfieldtrips/toxics/. Protection of the Rhine (ICPR); 2010.
[4] EUROSTAT. http://epp.eurostat.ec.europa.eu/tgm/table.do?tab=table&init=1& [8] Kolpin DW, Furlong ET, Meyer MT, Thurman EM, Zaugg SD, Barber LB, et al.
plugin=1&language=en&pcode=ten00011. Pharmaceuticals, hormones, and other organic wastewater contaminants in U.S.

www.elsevier.com/locate/nbt 155
 RESEARCH PAPER New Biotechnology  Volume 32, Number 1  January 2015

streams, 1999–2000: a national reconnaissance. Environmental Science and [38] Loos R, Gawlik BM, Locoro G, Rimaviciute E, Contini S, Bidoglio G. Eu-wide
Technology 2002;36:1202–11. survey on polar organic persistent pollutants in European river waters. Envir-
[9] Sørensen SR, Holtze MS, Simonsen A, Aamand J. Degradation and mineraliza- onmental Pollution 2009;157:561–8.
tion of nanomolar concentrations of the herbicide dichlobenil and its persistent [39] Schaeffer RB, von der Ohe PC, Rasmussen J, Kefford BJ, Beketov MA, Schultz R,
metabolite 2,6-dichlorobenzamide by Aminobacter spp. isolated from Dichlobe- et al. Thresholds for the effects of pesticides on invertebrate communities and
nil-treated soils. Applied Environmental Microbiology 2007;73:399–406. leaf breakdown in stream ecosystems. Environmental Science and Technology
[10] Goel PK. Water pollution: causes, effects and control. New Delhi, India: New Age 2012;46:5134–42.
International; 2009. [40] Galic N, Schmolke A, Forbes V, Bavenco H, van den Brink PJ. The role of
[11] Houtman CJ. Emerging contaminants in surface waters and their relevance for ecological models in linking ecological risk assessment to ecosystem services
the production of drinking water in Europe. Journal of Integrative Environ- in agroecosystems. Science of the Total Environment 2012;415:93–100.
mental Sciences 2010;7:271–95. [41] Peijnenburg W, Capri E, Kula C, Liess M, Luttik R, Montforts M, et al. Evaluation
[12] Stuart M, Lapworth D, Crane E, Hart A. Review of risk from potential emerging of exposure metrics for effect assessment of soil invertebrates. Critical Reviews in
contaminants in UK groundwaters. Science of the Total Environment 2012;446: Environmental Science and Technology 2012;42:1862–93.
1–21. [42] Yi AX, Leung KMY, Lam MHW, Lee J-S, Giesy JP. Review of measured concen-
[13] Gavrilescu M. Fate of pesticides in the environment and its bioremediation. trations of triphenyltin compounds in marine ecosystems and meta-analysis of
Engineering in Life Sciences 2005;5:497–526. their risks to humans and the environment. Chemosphere 2012;89:1015–25.
Research Paper

[14] Lapworth DJ, Goodly DC. Source and persistence of pesticides in a semi-con- [43] Vanrolleghem PA, Lee DS. On-line monitoring equipment for wastewater treat-
fined chalk aquifer of southeast England. Environmental Pollution 2006; ment processes: state of the art. Water Science and Technology 2003;47:1–34.
144:1031–44. [44] Yoo CK, Villez K, Van Hulle SWH, Vanrolleghem PA. Enhanced process mon-
[15] Clausen L, Arildskov NP, Larsen F, Aamand J, Albrechtsen HJ. Degradation of the itoring for wastewater treatment systems. Environmetrics 2007;19:602–17.
herbicide dichlobenil and its metabolite BAM in soils and surface sediments. [45] MacLeod SL, McClure EL, Wong CS. Laboratory calibration and field deploy-
Journal of Contaminated Hydrology 2007;89:157–73. ment of the polar organic chemical integrative sampler for pharmaceuticals and
[16] Caliman FA, Gavrilescu M. Pharmaceuticals, personal care products and endo- personal care products in wastewater and surface water. Environmental Tox-
crine disrupting agents in the environment – a review. Clean 2009;37:277–303. icology and Chemistry 2007;26:2517–29.
[17] Preda C, Ungureanu MC, Vulpoi C. Endocrine disruptors in the environment [46] Alvarez DA, Hucking JN, Petty JD, Jones-Lepp T, Stuer-Lauridsen F, Getting DT,
and their impact on human health. Environmental Engineering and Manage- et al. Tool for monitoring hydrophilic contaminants in water: polar organic
ment Journal 2012;11:1697–706. chemical integrative sampler (POCIS). In: Greenwood R, Mills G, Vrana B,
[18] Gavrilescu M. Behaviour of persistent pollutants and risks associated with their editors. Passive sampling techniques in environmental monitoring. Amster-
presence in the environment – integrated studies. Environmental Engineering dam, The Netherlands: Elsevier; 2007. p. 171–97.
and Management Journal 2009;8:1517–31. [47] Gu MB, Mitchell RJ, Kim BC. Whole-cell-based biosensors for environmental
[19] Cook SM, VanDuinen BJ, Love NG, Skerlos SJ. Life cycle comparison of envir- biomonitoring and application. Advances in Biochemical Engineering/Biotech-
onmental emissions from three disposal options for unused pharmaceuticals. nology 2004;87:269–305.
Environmental Science and Technology 2012;46:5535–41. [48] Martins TD, Ribeiro ACC, de Camargo HS, da Costa Filho PA, Cavalcante HPM,
[20] Murray KE, Thomas SM, Bodour AA. Prioritizing research for trace pollutants Dias DL. New insights on optical biosensors: techniques, construction and
and emerging contaminants in the freshwater environment. Environmental application. In: Rinken T, editor. State of the art in biosensors – general aspects.
Pollution 2010;58:3462–71. Rijeka, Croatia: InTech; 2013. p. 112–39.
[21] Fatta-Kasinos D, Meric S, Nikolaou A. Pharmaceutical residues in environmental [49] Scognamiglio V, Pezzotti I, Pezzotti G, Cano J, Manfredonia I, Bounasera K, et al.
waters and wastewater: current state of knowledge and future research. Analy- Towards an integrated biosensor array for simultaneous and rapid multi-
tical and Bioanalytical Chemistry 2011;399:251–75. analysis of endocrine disrupting chemicals. Analytica Chimica Acta 2013;7
[22] Lienert J, Koller M, Konrad J, McArdell CS, Schuwirth N. Multiple-criteria 51:161–70.
decision analysis reveals high stakeholder preference to remove pharmaceuti- [50] Cabaj J, Soloducho J. Layered biosensor construction. In: Rinken T, editor. State
cals from hospital wastewater. Environmental Science and Technology of the art in biosensors – general aspects. Rijeka, Croatia: InTech; 2013. p. 37–66.
2011;45:3848–57. [51] Grieshaber D, MacKenzie R, Voros J, Reimhult E. Electrochemical biosensors –
[23] Verlicchi P, Galletti A, Aukidy MA. Hospital wastewaters: quali-quantitative sensor principles and architectures. Sensors 2008;8:1400–58.
characterization and for strategies for their treatment and disposal. In: Sharma [52] Luz RAS, Iost RM, Crespilho FN. Nanomaterials for biosensors and implantable
SK, Sanghi R, editors. Wastewater reuse and management. Dordrecht, Germany: biodevices. In: Crespilho FN, editor. Nanobioelectrochemistry. From implan-
Springer; 2013. p. 225–52. table biosensors to green power generation. Dordrecht, Germany: Springer;
[24] Pal A, Gin KY-H, Lin AY-C, Reinhard M. Impacts of emerging organic con- 2013. p. 27–48.
taminants on freshwater resources: review of recent occurrences, sources, fate [53] Poynton HC, Vulpe CD. Ecotoxicogenomics: emerging technologies for emer-
and effects. Science of the Total Environment 2010;408:6062–9. ging contaminants. Journal of the American Water Resources Association
[25] Deblonde T, Cossu-Leguille C, Hartemann P. Emerging pollutants in waste- 2009;45:83–96.
water: a review of the literature. International Journal of Hygiene and Environ- [54] McAllister L, Semple KT. Measurement of bioaccessibility of organic pollutants
mental Health 2011;214:442–8. in soil. Methods in Molecular Biology 2010;599:1–14.
[26] Bedding ND, McIntyre AE, Perry R, Lester JN. Organic contaminants in the [55] Cohen ML. Resurgent and emergent disease in a changing world. British Medical
aquatic environment. I. Sources and occurrence. Science of the Total Environ- Bulletin 1998;54:523–32.
ment 1982;25:143–67. [56] Ghernaout D, Ghernaout B, Naceur MW. Embodying the chemical water
[27] Halling-Sørensen B, Nors NS, Lanzky PF, Ingerslev V, Holten Lützhøft HC, treatment in the green chemistry – a review. Desalination 2011;271:1–10.
Jørgensen SE. Occurrence, fate and effects of pharmaceutical substances in [57] Gavrilescu M, Chisti Y. Biotechnology, a sustainable alternative for chemical
the environment – a review. Chemosphere 1998;36:357–93. industry. Biotechnology Advances 2005;23:471–99.
[28] RECLAIM WATER. http://www.reclaim-water.org/. [58] Sørensen SR, Simonsen A, Aamand J. Constitutive mineralization of low con-
[29] Parker DS. Introduction of new process technology into the wastewater treat- centrations of the herbicide linuron by a Variovorax sp. strain. FEMS Micro-
ment sector. Water Environment Research 2011;83:483–97. biology Letters 2009;292:291–6.
[30] Libralato G. The small-scale approach in wastewater treatment. In: Sharma SK, [59] Uhlı́k O, Leewis MC, Kurzawová V, Lovecká P, Štursa P, Demnerová K, et al.
Sanghi R, editors. Wastewater reuse and management. Dordrecht, Germany: Approaches to microbial diversity analysis in contaminated environments. In:
Springer; 2013. p. 195–224. Płaza G, editor. Trends in bioremediation and phytoremediation. Kerala, India:
[31] Stamatelatou K, Pakou C, Lyberatos G. In: Moo-Young M, editor. 2nd ed., Research Signpost; 2010. p. 55–71.
Comprehensive biotechnology, vol. 6, 2nd ed. Amsterdam: Elsevier; 2011. p. [60] Spring AJ, Bagley DM, Andrews RC, Lemanik S, Yang P. Removal of endocrine
473–84. disrupting compounds using a membrane bioreactor and disinfection. Journal
[32] Hovi T, Stenvik M, Partanen H, Kangas A. Poliovirus surveillance by examining of Environmental Engineering and Science 2007;6:131–7.
sewage specimens. Quantitative recovery of virus after introduction into sewerage [61] Arboleda C, Cabana H, De Pril E, Jones JP, Jimenez GA, Mejia AI, et al.
at remote upstream location. Epidemiology and Infection 2001;127:101–6. Elimination of Bisphenol A and Triclosan using the enzymatic system of
[33] De Gusseme B, Sintubin L, Baert L, Thibo E, Hennebel T, Vermeulen G, et al. autochthonous Colombian forest fungi. ISRN Biotechnology 2013. http://
Biogenic silver for disinfection of water contaminated with viruses. Applied dx.doi.org/10.5402/2013/968241. ID 968241.
Environmental Microbiology 2010;76:1082–7. [62] Wesenberg D, Kyriakides I, Agathos SN. White-rot fungi and their enzymes for
[34] Macková M, Uhlı́k O, Lovecká P, Viktorová J, Nováková M, Demnerová K, et al. the treatment of industrial dye effluents. Biotechnology Advances 2003;22:
Bacterial degradation of polychlorinated biphenyls. In: Loy A, Mandl M, Barton 161–87.
LL, editors. Geomicrobiology: molecular and environmental perspective. Dor- [63] Forrez I, Boon N, Verstraete W. biodegradation of micropollutants and prospects
drecht, Germany: Springer; 2010. p. 347–66. for water and wastewater biotreatment. In: Moo-Young M, editor. 2nd ed.,
[35] Rosal R, Rodrı́guez A, Perdigón-Melón JA, Petre A, Garcı́a-Calvo E, Gómez MJ, Comprehensive biotechnology, vol. 6, 2nd ed. Amsterdam, The Netherlands:
et al. Occurrence of emerging pollutants in urban wastewater and their removal Elsevier; 2011. p. 485–94.
through biological treatment followed by ozonation. Water Research [64] Poynton HC, Loguinov AV, Varshavsky JR, Chan S, Perkins EJ, Vulpe CD. Gene
2010;44:578–88. expression profiling in Daphnia magna. Part I: Concentration-dependent profiles
[36] Rosenfeld PE, Feng LGH. Risks of hazardous wastes. Amsterdam: Elsevier; 2011. provide support for the no observed transcriptional effect level. Environmental
[37] Johnson AC, Williams RJ, Simpson P, Kanda R. What difference might sewage Science and Technology 2008;42:6250–6.
treatment performance make to endocrine disruption in rivers. Environmental [65] Stahl DA, de la Torre JR. Physiology and diversity of ammonia-oxidizing
Pollution 2007;147:194–202. archaea. Annual Review of Microbiology 2012;66:83–101.

156 www.elsevier.com/locate/nbt