Next Article in Journal
Using Industry 4.0’s Big Data and IoT to Perform Feature-Based and Past Data-Based Energy Consumption Predictions
Next Article in Special Issue
Transformative Change Needs Direction
Previous Article in Journal
Refined Information Service Using Knowledge-Base and Deep Learning to Extract Advertisement Articles from Korean Online Articles
Previous Article in Special Issue
Enabling Factors of NTFP Business Development for Ecosystem Restoration: The Case of Tamanu Oil in Indonesian Degraded Peatland
Font Type:
Arial Georgia Verdana
Font Size:
Aa Aa Aa
Line Spacing:
Column Width:

Biomonitoring-Supported Land Restoration to Reduce Land Degradation in Intensively Mined Areas of India

Council of Scientific & Industrial Research—National Environmental Engineering Research Institute (CSIR-NEERI), Nehru Marg, Nagpur 440020, India
Academy of Scientific and Innovative Research, Ghaziabad 201002, India
Institute of Water and Wastewater Technology, Durban University of Technology, P.O. Box 1334, Durban 4000, South Africa
Department of Biological Sciences and Biotechnology, Andong University, Andong 36729, Korea
Authors to whom correspondence should be addressed.
Sustainability 2022, 14(20), 13639;
Submission received: 13 August 2022 / Revised: 4 October 2022 / Accepted: 11 October 2022 / Published: 21 October 2022


Land degradation due to mining is a major concern leading to massive losses of biodiversity and ecosystem services. The biomonitoring of metals in mine voids can help to keep track of ecosystem health. The present study was carried out in a large mine void that is presently used for fly ash disposal in the Angul district of Odisha, India. For the biomonitoring of the fly ash, composite soil and plant samples (non-edible as well as edible, naturally growing in and around the mine void) were collected seasonally four times between April 2018 and February 2019 from the sampling locations. We monitored the metal uptake (Al, Cd, Cr, Fe, Mn, Ni, Pb, Zn) and bioaccumulation to assess the bioaccumulation factor (BAF) in the collected plant samples. The Fe concentration was reported to be high in Tragia involucrate (24.82 mg/kg) and Digitaria ciliaris (24.818 mg/kg), while the soil at the study site is also rich in Fe and Al. Higher concentrations of metals in fruit trees such as Psidium guajava and other plants such as Ficus religiosa, Ipomoea batatas, Delonix regia, Digitaria ciliaris, and Cynodon dactylon were reported from nearby areas. Understanding the presence of metals should be a guiding factor for reducing land degradation. Our study stresses the need for corporate commitment to ensure regular biomonitoring and biomonitoring-supported land restoration for degraded mining areas. Sustainable land restoration supported by biomonitoring has the potential to help achieve the global goals of the UN Decade on Restoration: Land Degradation Neutrality (UNCCD) and Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) 12, 13, and 15.

1. Introduction

Since the 20th century, the growth of the global population, widespread urbanization, and rampant industrialization via the unreasonable exploitation of land resources have resulted in land degradation and the deterioration of the ecological environment [1,2,3]. Approximately 1–6 billion hectares of degraded land is spread across different parts of the world [4]. Mining-induced land depletion is a significant global concern because of the growing global demand for metallic mineral resources [5]. Mining activities have significantly impacted the environment by enhancing land degradation, deforestation, and losses of biodiversity and ecosystem services, followed by the displacement of millions of local households and multiple health hazards [6,7]. Opencast mines produce 8–10 times more waste than underground mines [8]. Overburden results in losses of nutrient-rich topsoil and may also result in the leaching of toxic metals into soil, groundwater aquifers, and freshwater bodies [5]. Metals tend to collect in the water, soil, residue, and living organic entities [6].
Metals may enter the food chain through agricultural activities and drinking water sources, and the concentration of some of these metals (e.g., Hg, Cd) increase at each tropic level, known as biological magnification [9]. Similarly, fly ash (FA), a coal combustion residue of thermal power plants, is another problematic solid and hazardous waste [7]. The conservative method of disposing of FA degrades and contaminates the fertile land [10]. The discarding and management of fly ash deposits is another problem, as it contaminates the soil, air, and water of the region and degrades the agricultural land [10].
In India, the energy demands and utilization rates are humongous, and have been increasing in the last two decades [6]. Odisha state in India has the second-largest coal reserves with more than 24 per cent of the total coal reserves [11]. The biggest solitary coalfield in India, Talcher coalfield, has coal reserves of ~39.64 BT [6]. Although the study of metal-accumulating plants for the remediation of larger metal impacts has received significant attention in the last few decades [10], there is still a vital need to use the findings to improve the mined areas. Biomonitoring can play an important role in characterizing degraded land for restoration using appropriate bioaccumulators. Wu et al. [12] reported that Boehmeria nivea, Chrysanthemum indicum, Miscanthus floridulus, Conyza canadensis, Rubus setchuenensis, Senecio scandens, and Arthraxon hispidus had phytostabilization abilities for Cr, Cd, Ni, and Cu, which can be used for potential phytoremediation [12], whereas Li et al. reported that ecological restoration in mining areas could benefit the structure of the plant community and the recovery of soil properties, which would eventually improve the ecological stability of mining areas [13]. An understanding of the potential for the aggregation of metals in different edible plants and regular biomonitoring are needed to avoid food chain contamination risks and to keep the locals and authorities informed about any probable environmental or health risks. The present study provides an overview of biomonitoring to assess the presence and concentration of metal in the fly ash, soil, and plants (non-edible and edible crops) close to the mine void. The study assesses the importance of the bioaccumulation of metals under the following broader objects:
The bioaccumulation potential of metals in non-edible plants;
The bioaccumulation of metals in edible plants (agriculture and horticulture);
A biomonitoring-supported restoration model for improve sustainable land restoration (SLR)
The bioaccumulation factor (BAF) and plant-based bioremediation were used to understand the variations and capabilities of different plants to be used as effective agents for restoration. Biomonitoring was used as an important tool to assess and reduce land degradation risks by using the broader understanding of the hyperaccumulators to be used in contaminated soil to efficiently restore these landscapes. Biomonitoring-supported sustainable land restoration can be an efficient approach to SLR in heavily mined areas. This also includes climate-sensitive restoration planning for highly degraded mine voids [14]. Biomonitoring-supported restoration planning has the potential to enhance the SLR within a fairly small span of time in countries where mining is quite common across different agroclimatic zones. With an emphasis on the UN Decade on Restoration 2021–2030 goal of restoring degraded lands and national commitments to enhance carbon sinks outside forest areas (tree outside forests), understanding the mine voids, their characters, their contaminants, and the degraded land restoration challenges can help to formulate an effective strategy and restoration plan to help countries’ achieve their global biodiversity, land degradation neutrality (LDN), forest landscape restoration (FLR), and climate targets (especially achieving in nationally determined contributions, also known as NDCs) [3].

2. Study Area and Climate

The study area was in Odisha, a state on the east coast of India, which has a tropical humid coastal climate region [15]. The study was carried out in an abandoned coal mine void that is presently considered for fly ash disposal generated by the thermal power plant at Talcher (Angul district) in Odisha state. The mine void is in a micro-watershed at latitudes 20°52′00″ N to 20°59′00″ N and longitudes 85°07′30″ E and 85°15′30″ E (Figure 1).
The soil is mainly composed of black soil and laterite soil with low levels of organic carbon and nitrogen [16]. The flora in the study area is dominated by plants of the Fabaceae, Anacardiaceae, Mimosaceae, Moraceae, Apocynaceae, Caesalpiniaceae, Combretaceae, and Verbenaceae families [17]. Various sampling points marked in and around the mine void area for this study are presented via Google Earth satellite imagery (Figure 2).

3. Materials and Methods

To understand the potential for biomonitoring-supported SLR development, we performed a field-based study to understand the characteristics of the contaminants, especially the metals, in the degraded mine void that is to be used for dumping fly ash, another potential hazardous byproduct from thermal power plants. We used the following procedure for continuous biomonitoring in the mine void and adjoining areas to understand the extent of toxicity and the bioaccumulation potential of the plants (non-edible, agriculture, and horticulture). Statistical analyses were conducted to find out the mean and standard deviation using MS-Excel 2013 (Microsoft Inc. Redmond, Washington, DC, USA), as well as bioaccumulation factor of the metals in plants.

3.1. Sample Collection and Analysis

Plant, fly ash, and soil samples were collected seasonally four times between April 2018 and February 2019 from the sampling locations. To understand the metal concentrations in the different plants, we sampled non-edible plants near the mine void as well as edible plants growing in nearby human habitations. This gave us a comparative understanding of the metal uptake rates by various plants. The topsoil (0–15 cm depth) from agricultural lands of the villages close to the mine void was collected using a steel shovel to understand the metal concentration. Plant (herbs, shrubs, and trees) and soil samples were collected within the buffer distance of 5 to 10 m from the mine void area and also from the villages close to the mine void, with a focus on edible plants from horticulture and agriculture, as many edible crops tend to bioaccumulate metals in the fruits. Twenty different plant species were considered for the study and 3 replicate samples for each species from each location were collected from the study area. Out of these, 5 species were collected from the mine void and 15 from the nearby locations. For the herb and shrub samples whole plants were taken, while for tree sample only the leaves were taken for the bioaccumulation study. The soil, fly ash, and plant samples were stored in airtight plastic zip-lock bags, and codes were assigned to these samples. GPS locations of the various samples collection points were recorded with the help of a hand-held GPS device (Garmin make, model-Montana 650).

3.2. Sample Digestion

All samples were digested following the Unites States Environmental Protection Agency (USEPA) methodology No. 3050B and the metal analyses were carried out via inductively coupled plasma–optical emission spectrometry (ICP-OES) (Thermo Fisher Model- iCAP6300 DUO). Here, 1 gm composite dried samples were digested with 10 mL of nitric acid and 5 mL of hydrogen peroxide and boiled in a digestion block at 180–220 °C until the solution turned transparent. The processed examples were then made up to 50 mL with deionized distilled water. The final solution was filtered with the help of cellulose filter paper (USEPA, 2013). Calibration curve plots of the prepared standards were plotted with an accuracy of 99.9% using ICP-OES. Various plant, fly ash, and soil samples were analyzed for metal using ICP-OES.

3.3. Bioaccumulation Factor for Metal in Plant Samples

A plant’s ability to accumulate a particular metal with respect to its concentration in the soil is known as the bioaccumulation factor (BAF) [18]. The BAF provides an insight into the effectiveness of a plant in terms of metal accumulation and translocation [19]. The bioaccumulation factor for each sample plant was evaluated following the given equation [20]:
BAF = Concentration   of   metal   in   plant   tissue   ÷   Concentration   of   metal   in   soil

4. Results and Discussion

An analysis of the samples provided a broader understanding of the different toxic, semi-toxic, and non-toxic metals present in the different plant, fly ash, and soil samples from the study area. The analysis of the metal content in the fly ash revealed that the fly ash was enriched with Al (4.14 mg/kg) as the most abundant metal, followed by Mn > Fe > Ni > Cr > Pb > Cd. In the soil samples, the concentration of Fe (64.35 mg/kg) was observed to be relatively high, followed by Al, Zn, Mn, Cr, Pb, Cd, and Ni (Table 1).
In all plant samples, Al and Fe showed relatively high concentrations, except for in Sorghastrum nutans, where Fe was absent (Table 2). The Al, Fe, and Mn concentrations were observed to be relatively high due to their geogenic nature and being present in high concentrations in the laterite soil belt [16]. The soil in Odisha state is rich in minerals, while Fe and Mn mining is predominant across the state, which has resulted in high uptake rates of Fe and bioaccumulation by non-edible plants. Certain plants such as Tragia involucrata were observed to have relatively high concentrations of Al (11.120 mg/kg), Cr (0.030 mg/kg), and Fe (53.780 mg/kg) amongst the metals. Cynodon dactylon, Digitaria ciliaris, Ficus religiosa, and Lantana camara showed relatively high concentrations of Mn (3.400 mg/kg) and Ni (0.240 mg/kg), Zn (0.560 mg/kg), Cd (0.007 mg/kg), and Pb (0.040 mg/kg) respectively. Cd was either absent in most of the sampled and analyzed non-edible plants or it was relatively low in concentration amongst the other metals (Table 2).
The concentrations of metals in edible plants indicated that Psidium guajava and Oryza sativa contained relatively high of Al (11.830 mg/kg) and Fe (39.660 mg/kg), whereas Cd was observed to have relatively low concentrations amongst the metals. The Cr (0.290 mg/kg), Mn (1 mg/kg), Ni (0.540 mg/kg), Pb (0.200 mg/kg), and Zn (2.970 mg/kg) concentrations were observed to be relatively high in Momordica charantia, Solanum lycopersicum, Ipomoea batatas, Psidium guajava, and Oryza sativa, respectively (Table 3).

4.1. Bioaccumulation Factor for Metals in Non-Edible Plant Samples

Our study attempted to analyzed the native plant diversity in the area, which has the potential to bioaccumulate metals leached in the soil due to mining activities. The bioaccumulation factor (BAF) values for naturally growing non-edible plant samples, crops, vegetables, and fruit plant samples varied from 0.34 to 6.11 for Al, followed by a below detection limit (BDL) of 24.0 for Cd, a BDL of 44.66 for Cr, a BDL of 9.39 for Fe, a BDL of 34.70 for Mn, a BDL of 25.71 for Ni, a BDL of 76.92 for Pb, and a range 0.03 to 3.16 for Zn. Details are provided in Appendix A. The bioaccumulation factors for all the metals were highest in grass, except for Cr and Cd, whereas the bioaccumulation factors for Cd and Cr were found to be highest in trees (Figure 3).
Digitaria sanguinalis was observed to have relatively high concentrations of three metals, i.e., Al (4.400 mg/kg), Fe (4.330 mg/kg), and Zn (0.600 mg/kg); similarly, Cynodon dactylon was observed to have relatively high concentrations of two metals, i.e., Mn (34.700 mg/kg) and Ni (11.440 mg/kg) (Appendix A). It has been proven in past too that Digitaria sanguinalis has relatively high bioaccumulation potential for Al, Fe, and Zn [24,25], while Cynodon dactylon has high bioaccumulation potential for Mn and Ni [26,27,28,29]. Since Digitaria ciliaris and Cynodon dactylon are capable of accumulating three (Al, Fe, Zn) or two metals (Mn, Ni) at relatively high concentrations, it is an efficient phytoremediation plant that can be introduced as a pioneer species for rapid soil amelioration and to create a substrate ready for SLR in mine voids and adjoining degraded landscapes. The high concentrations of Al and Fe in Digitaria ciliaris may also have been due to the fact that the study area’s soil is rich in Al and Fe, being an Fe ore and Mn mining belt. The other toxic element with a high concentration observed in the samples was Cd, which showed a relatively high concentration (3.500 mg/kg) in leaf samples of Ficus religiosa. There is clear evidence that Ficus religiosa is a very strong biosorbent and that its leaves absorb Cd from liquid as well as semi-liquid solutions [30,31,32]. Salman et al. (2020) [31] reported that Ficus religiosa has the potential to uptake Cr, while Tariq et al. (2019) [33] reported the bioaccumulation potential of Cu in Ficus religiosa.

4.2. Bioaccumulation Factor for Metals in Edible Plant Samples

In the case of edible plants (vegetables), Ipomoea batatas had relatively high concentrations of two metals i.e., Mn (25.710) and Ni (25.710) (Figure 4). The other two plants with relatively high concentrations of Fe (6.931) and Zn (3.166) were Oryza sativa and Psidium guajava, with relatively high concentrations of Al (6.112) and Pb (76.923) (Figure 4). Apart from Mn and Ni, it was also reported that Ipomoea batatas has high bioaccumulation affinity towards Cd, Pb, Zn, As, Fe, and Cu [34,35], but in our study Ipomoea batatas showed high affinity towards Mn and Ni. Zhou et al. (2020) [36] reported the bioaccumulation of Cu, Pb, Fe, and Zn in Oryza sativa [37,38].
The BAF for Cr (44.667) was also relatively high in Delonix regia species present in the study area. Saralathambavani and Prathipa (2012) [39] reported Delonix regia to have strong bioabsorbance for Cr from the soil in polluted industrial areas. Krishnani et al. (2021), Yap et al. (2021), and Maiti et al. (2015) [40,41,42] also confirmed the strong bioaccumulation of metals by fruiting plants such as Psidium guajava, Mangifera indica, and Eucalyptus globulus, similar to our findings for Psidium guajava and Mangifera indica. These findings need special consideration to avoid these plants in the restoration of mine voids, as they may facilitate the entry of metals and the contamination of the food chain.

5. Biomonitoring-Supported Sustainable Land Restoration

The extensive biomonitoring in the study area at Talcher helped the authors to design an appropriate site-specific SLR system. We suggest the use of a biomonitoring-supported restoration model to maximize the outputs for enhanced SLR success. To initiate the implementation of the framework, strong bioaccumulator plants for different metals should be identified (e.g., Digitaria sanguinalis, Cynodon dactylon, Calotropis gigantean, Delonix regia, Tragia involucrate) followed by their mass propagation, as many of them are less known and underutilized non-edible plants. Further scientific interventions will be needed to develop seed germination and vegetative propagation protocols for these plants, as many of them might be lesser known and underutilized wild edibles. We suggest this approach to be implemented in three strategically relevant stages (Figure 5). In the first stage, an appropriate combination of potential herbs and shrubs should be planted (with a focus on nitrogen-fixing, fast-growing, high-biomass-yielding species), which can serve as pioneers for the degraded landscape. For stage two, in the next plantation and restoration season (the monsoon season is the preferred season in India), the non-performers (non-acclimatized species, dead plants) should be replaced by performers (after undertaking regular monitoring of the survivability and mortality of all planted plants), along with the mass plantation of shrubs and small trees. Stage three should follow same process and should continue with a regular plantation and replacement of non-performers until complete SLR targets are achieved for the larger landscape. Manure, fertilizer, and mycorrhizal combinations should be applied regularly to enhance soil amelioration and facilitate plant growth. The regular biomonitoring of the plants and soil on a yearly basis is necessary to determine the existing metal concentrations in the plants and soil. Dead and decayed plants should be used for mulching and biochar preparations to enhance the soil carbon content, water-holding capacity, and uptake of metals. The suggested SLR approach has the potential to accelerate the process of land restoration and enhance the biodiversity values in a record time period of 4–5 years if appropriate care is taken.
In the present study, we observed two herbs showing relatively high bioaccumulation rates of metals, e.g., Tragia involucrate (Al, Cd, Cr, Fe, Ni, Zn) and Cynodon dactylon (Mn, Ni, Pb). Of the shrubs, Calotropis gigantea had a relatively higher affinity to bioaccumulate metals than other shrubs in the study area. The right mixture of herbs and shrubs should be planted in heavily degraded mine voids to initiate habitat succession, soil amelioration, and soil formation. The involvement of local communities can help them with livelihood and alternative livelihood opportunities, with support from indigenous and traditional knowledge in the selection of species, mass propagation, seed collection, germination, nursery raising, and planting. Azadirachta indica was observed to have the potential to bioaccumulate metals (Al, Cd, Mn, Ni, Pb, etc.). We explored research papers to identify which other plants in this combination can also be included to enhance the regeneration and restoration rates. Table 4 shows different species of herbs, shrubs, and trees that can be used for the bioaccumulation and reclamation of mine voids in site-specific situations. Biomonitoring-supported restoration is an effective approach to help meet the UN Decade on Restoration (2021–2030) goals and SDGs 12, 13, and 15, followed by the LDN targets of the UNFCCC.

6. Conclusions

The study area is an extensively mined and heavily industrialized zone containing high concentrations of various metals. However, during the continuous biomonitoring, some metals such as Fe were observed to be above the permissible limits in certain samples (Table 1). The bioaccumulation factors for all metals were found to be highest in grass, except for Cr and Cd, whereas the bioaccumulation factors for Cd and Cr were found to be the highest in trees. However, Fe is non-toxic, while the other metals are toxic in nature, even in low concentrations; hence, their concentrations need to be monitored very frequently to avoid any potential hazard due to the consumption of these plants by livestock or humans. It is important to understand that fruiting trees that are consumed by local people should be avoided in the early stages of restoration. Preference should be given to trees and plants with timber, fuelwood, and other non-edible purposes. These results also show that the mine void and adjoining areas falling under the study area, despite containing heavy metals, are not under a severe threat of metal toxicity, and active restoration or assisted natural regeneration every year followed by the regular biomonitoring of heavy metals in the mine void surroundings can help reduce the metal concentrations in the soil via effective phytoremediation measures (restoration using non-palatable native plants with effective biomass removal at regular intervals). Our observations in the nearby surrounding areas indicate higher concentrations of bioaccumulated metals in the fruit, leaves, or other plant parts of Psidium guajava, Ficus religiosa, Ipomoea batatas, Delonix regia, Digitaria ciliaris, and Cynodon dactylon, which is further supported by other studies. Most of these trees and fruiting plants are planted without a scientific consultation with the mining authorities; hence, this study discourages the planting of fruit trees, even in vicinity of the mine void location. Hence, the SLR approach should avoid the planting of fruiting trees in the contaminated site, supported by the use of grazing restrictions. The biomonitoring of edible plants (agriculture, horticulture, and vegetable crops) is required to avoid any chances of food chain contamination in the extensively mined and industrialized zones of the country. Our study provides substantial scientific evidence to support biomonitoring as an important tool for sustainable land restoration by using plant-based phytoremediation to absorb toxic metals from contaminated soil and to promote soil amelioration, in turn reducing risks for not only lower invertebrates but also larger mammals such as livestock reared by the local inhabitations. This approach can ensure human well-being by addressing the risks and using the sustainable land restoration approach in the long run to reduce toxicity. Native species that have fruit and leaves that are not consumed by livestock, humans, or wild animals can be used in an organized manner following the natural course of succession of native trees to ameliorate soils contaminated by fly ash and other mining wastes dumped in the mine void areas. Since Digitaria ciliaris and Cynodon dactylon are capable of accumulating three semi toxic (Al, Fe, Zn) and two toxic metals (Mn, Ni) at relatively high concentrations, they can be considered efficient phytoremediation plant that can be introduced at the pioneer stage for rapid soil amelioration and to create a substrate ready for SLR in mine voids and the adjoining degraded landscapes. These plants follow the natural course of succession (the combination of pioneer, seral, and climatic climax stages) when combined to grow together and have synergistic effects in absorbing and bioaccumulating multiple metals from the soil that can help to restore the soil health and ameliorating soil characteristics to improve the ecosystem health in the long run.

Author Contributions

Conceptualization, S.D.; data curation, S.S. and S.C.; formal analysis, S.S. and S.C.; funding acquisition, S.D. and P.R.P.; investigation, S.S., S.D., R.J. and S.C.; methodology, S.D.; project administration, S.D. and P.R.P.; resources, R.J. and V.M.S.; supervision, S.D., P.R.P. and K.S.; validation, S.D.; visualization, S.S., S.D. and K.S.; writing—original draft, S.S. and S.C.; writing—review and editing, S.D. and K.S. All authors have read and agreed to the published version of the manuscript.


This research received no external funding.

Institutional Review Board Statement

This study did not require ethical approval.

Informed Consent Statement

Not Applicable.

Data Availability Statement

Data is contained within the article.


The authors are also thankful to the Knowledge Resource Center of CSIR-NEERI for the plagiarism check under the number CSIR-NEERI/KRC/2020/JUNE/WTMD-BDU-AID/1.

Conflicts of Interest

The authors declare no conflict of interest for this study.

Appendix A

Table A1. Bioaccumulation factor (BAF) of metals in non-edible Plant samples.
Table A1. Bioaccumulation factor (BAF) of metals in non-edible Plant samples.
Sl. NoPlant SpeciesBotanical NameAlCdCrFeMnNiPbZn
1 Billygoat-weedAgeratum conyzoides1.0540.2500.0110.0230.2500.2620.1150.133
2Indian Lilac Azadirachta indica2.6250.4708.5932.13024.2943.9819.3960.353
3Crown FlowerCalotropis gigantea4.2221.00013.1333.5996.7451.6195.5770.526
4Common hackberryCeltis occidentalis0.924BDL0.7780.0330.4080.0950.1150.032
5DhoobCynodon dactylon2.5060.6755.8151.34234.70911.4486.8230.251
6Nut grassCyperus rotundus3.0251.0752.9110.6392.9973.2629.3270.546
7North Indian RosewoodDalbergia sissoo1.4000.50032.8330.3990.8834.00010.3850.241
8Non edible CrabgrassDigitaria ciliaris4.4071.66718.9264.3378.4640.8412.8210.602
9 Royal PoincianaDelonix regia1.0061.00044.6670.4396.8202.90510.7690.566
10PeepalFicus religiosa1.3663.5005.5560.3429.2761.4290.4620.224
11Weeping figFicus benjamina2.226BDL7.7782.7800.7140.952BDL0.138
12Spanish FlagLantana camara3.5031.15019.9312.0012.8161.09516.0450.313
13Bitter vineMikania micrantha0.341BDL0.1110.0421.2230.0950.0380.043
14Rangoon CreeperQuisqualis indica0.341BDL0.1110.0421.3250.095BDL0.043
15Black LocustRobinia pseudoacacia1.9160.1502.2220.1120.4180.1432.6920.064
16Non edible SugarcaneSaccharum spontaneum1.8901.00010.2781.77612.3701.33313.0770.378
17Indian GrassSorghastrum nutans0.682BDL0.556BDL0.4080.0481.1540.053
18Narrowleaf CattailTypha angustifolia1.5870.2501.7040.2331.9030.4132.0510.121
19Broadleaf cattailTypha latifolia1.770BDL0.7781.9710.4080.4762.8850.075
20Indian stinging nettleTragia involucrata5.7470.50033.6119.39811.8714.4522.4620.594
Table A2. Bioaccumulation factor (BAF) of metals in edible crops, vegetables and fruit plants samples.
Table A2. Bioaccumulation factor (BAF) of metals in edible crops, vegetables and fruit plants samples.
SL. NoPlant SpeciesBotanical NameAlCdCrFeMnNiPbZn
1OkraAbelmoschus esculentus2.8741.27111.0224.4040.4970.49722.9120.284
2Spleen amaranthAmaranthus dubius2.04124.0002.6220.5685.4865.4869.4620.213
3CapsicumCapsicum annuum2.4060.7001.1110.255BDLBDL1.3460.186
4PapayaCarica papaya2.7450.64310.0002.7372.9052.90517.1540.600
5TurmericCurcuma longa2.7010.3506.6670.51210.00010.0008.8460.394
6MangoMangifera indica5.7450.7757.7782.6373.8103.81016.3460.410
7Bitter GourdMomordica charantia2.2740.05033.0370.2120.1590.1594.2310.146
8DrumstickMoringa oleifera5.6721.40026.8890.3541.2381.23816.4101.032
9BananaMusa balbisiana2.6781.08310.0004.1733.4633.46319.3970.414
10 RiceOryza sativa4.3740.66716.5836.9311.4521.45220.5133.166
11TomatoSolanum lycopersicum0.911BDL1.1110.2370.7380.7381.7310.096
12BrinjalSolanum melongena3.3201.2505.2221.0853.3413.34112.3080.250
13GuavaPsidium guajava6.1121.8338.9631.5574.2384.23876.9230.849
14PomegranatePunica granatum0.873BDL5.4440.0470.1430.1430.3850.064
15Sweet PotatoIpomoea batatas1.6581.070BDL0.01225.71425.71446.1540.479
16Indian JujubeZiziphus mauritiana4.8800.50011.2782.9821.5241.52413.4621.457


  1. Xie, H.; Zhang, Y.; Wu, Z.; Lv, T. A bibliometric analysis on land degradation: Current status, development, and future directions. Land 2020, 9, 28. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  2. Dhyani, S.; Lahoti, S.; Khare, S.; Pujari, P.; Verma, P. Ecosystem based Disaster Risk Reduction approaches (EbDRR) as a prerequisite for inclusive urban transformation of Nagpur City, India. Int. J. Disaster Risk Reduct. 2018, 32, 95–105. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  3. Dhyani, S.; Bartlett, D.; Kadaverugu, R.; Dasgupta, R.; Pujari, P.; Verma, P. Integrated climate sensitive restoration framework for transformative changes to sustainable land restoration. Restor Ecol. 2020, 28, 1026–1031. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  4. Braganza, C. Desertification-An Ecological Cataclysm. Int. J. Novel Res. Devel. 2022, 7, 662–666. [Google Scholar]
  5. Luckeneder, S.; Giljum, S.; Schaffartzik, A.; Maus, V.; Tost, M. Surge in global metal mining threatens vulnerable ecosystems. Glob. Environ. Change 2021, 69, 0959–3780. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  6. Ranjan, A.K.; Sahoo, D.; Gorai, A.K. Quantitative assessment of landscape transformation due to coal mining activity using earth observation satellite data in Jharsuguda coal mining region, Odisha, India. Environ. Dev. Sustain. 2020, 23, 4484–4499. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  7. Ahamad, A.; Raju, N.J.; Madhav, S.; Khan, A.H. Heavy elements contamination in groundwater and associated human health risk in the industrial region of southern Sonbhadra, Uttar Pradesh, India. Environ. Geochem. Health 2020, 42, 3373–3391. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  8. Bishwal, R.M.; Sen, P.; Jawed, M. Future challenges of overburden waste management in Indian coal mines. In Waste Management and Resource Efficiency; Springer: Singapore, 2019; pp. 1003–1011. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  9. Gasparotto, J.; Martinello, K.D.B. Coal as an energy source and its impacts on human health. Energy Geosci. 2021, 2, 113–120. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  10. Pandey, V.C.; Sahu, N.; Singh, D.P. Physiological profiling of invasive plant species for ecological restoration of fly ash deposits. Urban For. Urban Green 2020, 54, 126773. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  11. Dhyani, S.; Singh, S.; Kadaverugu, R.; Pujari, P.; Verma, P. Habitat suitability modelling and nature-based solutions: An efficient combination to realise the targets of Bonn challenge and SDGs in South Asia. In Nature-based Solutions for Resilient Ecosystems and Societies; Springer: Singapore, 2020; pp. 347–364. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  12. Wu, B.; Peng, H.; Sheng, M.; Luo, H.; Wang, X.; Zhang, R.; Xu, F.; Xu, H. Evaluation of phytoremediation potential of native dominant plants and spatial distribution of heavy metals in abandoned mining area in Southwest China. Ecotoxicol. Environ. Saf. 2020, 220, 112368. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  13. Li, X.; Lei, S.; Liu, F.; Wang, W. Analysis of plant and soil restoration process and degree of refuse dumps in open-pit coal mining areas. Int. J. Environ. Res. Public Health 2020, 17, 1975. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
  14. Kumar, S.; Das, G.; Shin, H.S.; Kumar, P.; Patra, J.K. Diversity of plant species in the steel city of Odisha, India: Ethnobotany and implications for conservation of urban bio-resources. Braz. Arch. Biol. Technol. 2018, 61. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  15. Mishra, M.C.; Senapati, S.; Rao, B.H. Odisha. In Geotechnical Characteristics of Soils and Rocks of India; CRC Press: Leiden, The Netherlands, 2021; pp. 511–527. [Google Scholar]
  16. Mahalik, G.; Satapathy, K.B.; Sahoo, S. Floral diversity and quantitative analysis of tree diversity of northern tropical semi-evergreen forests in Dhenkanal district of Odisha, India. Int. J. Botany Stud. 2018, 3, 15–19. [Google Scholar]
  17. Anning, A.K.; Akoto, R. Assisted phytoremediation of heavy metals contaminated soil from a mined site with Typha latifolia and Chrysopogon zizanioides. Ecotoxicol. Environ. Saf. 2018, 148, 97–104. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  18. Aladesanmi, O.T.; Oroboade, J.G.; Osisiogu, C.P.; Osewole, A.O. Bioaccumulation factor of selected heavy metals in Zea mays. J. Health Pollut. 2019, 9, 191207. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  19. Gebeyehu, H.R.; Bayissa, L.D. Levels of heavy metals in soil and vegetables and associated health risks in Mojo area, Ethiopia. PLoS ONE 2020, 15, e0227883. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  20. Khan, Z.I.; Ugulu, I.; Zafar, A.; Mehmood, N.; Bashir, H.; Ahmad, K.; Sana, M. Biomonitoring of heavy metals accumulation in wild plants growing at soon valley, Khushab, Pakistan. Pak. J. Bot. 2021, 53, 247–252. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  21. Liu, J.; Dong, Y.; Xu, H.; Wang, D.; Xu, J. Accumulation of Cd, Pb and Zn by 19 wetland plant species in constructed wetland. J. Hazard. Mater. 2007, 147, 947–953. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  22. Jaishankar, M.; Tseten, T.; Anbalagan, N.; Mathew, B.B.; Beeregowda, K.N. Toxicity, mechanism and health effects of some heavy metals. Interdiscip. Toxicol. 2014, 7, 60. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  23. World Health Organization. Quality Control Methods for Medicinal Plant Materials; WHO: Geneva, Switzerland, 1998. [Google Scholar]
  24. Shah, A.; Niaz, A.; Ullah, N.; Rehman, A.; Akhlaq, M.; Zakir, M.; Suleman, M. Comparative study of heavy metals in soil and selected medicinal plants. J. Chem. 2013, 2013, 621265. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  25. Zhan, F.; Li, B.; Jiang, M.; Li, T.; He, Y.; Li, Y.; Wang, Y. Effects of arbuscular mycorrhizal fungi on the growth and heavy metals accumulation of bermudagrass [Cynodon dactylon (L.) Pers.] grown in a lead–zinc mine wasteland. Int. J. Phytoremediation 2019, 21, 849–856. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  26. Mahohi, A.; Raiesi, F. The performance of mycorrhizae, rhizobacteria, and earthworms to improve Bermuda grass (Cynodon dactylon) growth and Pb uptake in a Pb-contaminated soil. Environ. Sci. Pollut. Res. 2021, 28, 3019–3034. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  27. Dehdezi, A.A.; Alaei, E.; Azadi, P.; Shavandi, M.; Mousavi, S.A. Role of Phytoremediation in Reducing Cadmium and Nickle Toxicity in Soil Using Species (Cynodon dactylon L.). J. Hum. Environ. Health Promot. 2021, 7, 213–220. [Google Scholar]
  28. Maiti, S.K.; Nandhini, S. Bioavailability of metals in fly ash and their bioaccumulation in naturally occurring vegetation: A pilot scale study. Environ. Monit. Assess. 2006, 116, 263–273. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  29. Tariq, M.; Farooq, U.; Athar, M.; Salman, M.; Tariq, M.; Shahida, S.; Farooqi, Z.H. Lab-scale continuous flow studies for comparative biosorption of cadmium (II) on untreated and xanthated Ficus religiosa biomass. Water Environ. Res. 2021, 93, 2681–2695. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  30. Salman, S.M.; Muhammad, S.; Iqbal, M.; Aijaz, M.; Siddique, M.; Ali, A.; Nawaz, S.; Kamran, A.W. Biosorption of Pb (II) and Cd (II) Ions from Aqueous Solution by Chemically Modified Syzygium cumini Leaves and its Equilibrium, Kinetic and Thermodynamic Studies. Pak. J. Sci. Ind. Res. A Phys. Sci. 2020, 63, 18–29. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  31. Rao, K.S.; Anand, S.; Venkateswarlu, P. Adsorption of cadmium from aqueous solution by Ficus religiosa leaf powder and characterization of loaded biosorbent. CLEAN–Soil Air Water 2011, 39, 384–391. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  32. Tariq, M.; Farooq, U.; Athar, M.; Salman, M.; Tariq, M. Biosorption of Cu (II) from aqueous solution onto immobilized Ficus religiosa branch powder in a fixed bed column: Breakthrough curves and mathematical modeling. Korean J. Chem. Eng. 2019, 36, 48–55. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  33. Chidi, O.; Kelvin, R. Surface interaction of sweet potato peels (Ipomoea batata) with Cd (II) and Pb (II) ions in aqueous medium. Chem. Int. 2018, 4, 221–229. [Google Scholar]
  34. Chuma, F. Assessment of heavy metals concentration in ipomoea batatas and spinach consumed in Zanzibar by Energy Dispersive X-ray Fluorescence (EDXRF). Braz. J. Radiat. Sci. 2021, 9, 1–17. [Google Scholar]
  35. Zhou, J.; Du, B.; Liu, H.; Cui, H.; Zhang, W.; Fan, X.; Cui, J.; Zhou, J. The bioavailability and contribution of the newly deposited heavy metals (copper and lead) from atmosphere to rice (Oryza sativa L.). J. Hazard. Mater. 2020, 384, 121285. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  36. Wu, Q.; Liu, C.; Wang, Z.; Gao, T.; Liu, Y.; Xia, Y.; Yin, R.; Qi, M. Zinc regulation of iron uptake and translocation in rice (Oryza sativa L.): Implication from stable iron isotopes and transporter genes. Environ. Pollut. 2022, 297, 118818. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  37. Xu, B.; Wang, F.; Zhang, Q.; Lan, Q.; Liu, C.; Guo, X.; Cai, Q.; Chen, Y.; Wang, G.; Ding, J. Influence of iron plaque on the uptake and accumulation of chromium by rice (Oryza sativa L.) seedlings: Insights from hydroponic and soil cultivation. Ecotoxicol. Environ. Saf. 2018, 162, 51–58. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  38. Saralathambavani, D.; Prathipa, V. Strategies of heavy metals uptake by plants growing under urban environment. Asian J. Soil Sci. 2012, 7, 304–311. [Google Scholar]
  39. Krishnani, K.K.; Choudhary, K.; Boddu, V.M.; Moon, D.H.; Meng, X. heavy metals biosorption mechanism of partially delignified products derived from mango (Mangifera indica) and guava (Psidium guiag) barks. Environ. Sci. Pollut. Res. 2021, 28, 32891–32904. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  40. Yap, C.K.; Razali, A.; Nulit, R.; Peng, S.H.T.; Yap, C.W.; Okamura, H.; Ismail, M.S. Biomonitoring of heavy metals in the Guava (Psidium guajava) for Their Health Risk Assessment in Kluang, Malaysia. Food Sci. Eng. 2021, 13–20. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  41. Maiti, S.K.; Kumar, A.; Ahirwal, J. Bioaccumulation of metals in timber and edible fruit trees growing on reclaimed coal mine overburden dumps. Int. J. Min. Reclam. Environ. 2016, 30, 231–244. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  42. Sharma, P.; Kumar, S. Bioremediation of heavy metals from industrial effluents by endophytes and their metabolic activity: Recent advances. Bioresour. Technol. 2021, 339, 125589. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  43. Garba, S.T.; Gudusu, M.; Inuwa, L.B. Accumulation Ability of the Native Grass Species, Cyperus rotundus for the heavy metals; Zinc (Zn), Cadmium (Cd), Nickel (Ni) and Lead (Pb). Int. Res. J. Pure Appl. Chem 2018, 17, 1–15. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  44. Sultana, T.; Majumdar, S.; Mitra, A.K. Phytoremediation potential of nickel by Cyperus rotundus along with its rhizospheric fungi. J. Mycopathol. Res. 2018, 55, 383–389. [Google Scholar]
  45. Banerjee, R.; Jana, A.; De, A.; Mukherjee, A. Phytoextraction of heavy metals from coal fly ash for restoration of fly ash dumpsites. Bioremediat. J. 2020, 24, 41–49. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  46. Khodijah, N.S.; Suwignyo, R.A.; Harun, M.U.; Robiartini, L. Phytoremediation potential of some grasses on lead heavy metals in tailing planting media of former tin mining. Biodiversitas J. Biol. Diver. 2019, 20, 1973–1982. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  47. Maiti, D.; Pandey, V.C. Metal remediation potential of naturally occurring plants growing on barren fly ash dumps. Environ. Geochem. Health 2021, 43, 1415–1426. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  48. Yang, Y.; Shen, Q. Phytoremediation of cadmium-contaminated wetland soil with Typha latifolia L. and the underlying mechanisms involved in the heavy-metal uptake and removal. Environ. Sci. Pollut. Res. 2020, 27, 4905–4916. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  49. Mani, D.; Kumar, C. Biotechnological advances in bioremediation of heavy metals contaminated ecosystems: An overview with special reference to phytoremediation. Int. J. Environ. Sci. Tech. 2014, 11, 843–872. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  50. Teimoory, H.; Kodikara, K.A.S.; De Silva, P.M.C.S.; Madarasinghe, S.K.; Ranasinghe, P.; Somasiri, H.P.P.S.; Danee, M.; Dahdouh-Guebas, F.; Jayatissa, L.P. Heavy metals Contents in Surface Sediments of Kalametiya Lagoon, Sri Lanka and heavy metals Uptake by Typha angustifolia L., A Wetland Sedge. In 18th Academisc Sessions; University of Ruhuna: Matara, Sri Lanka, 2021. [Google Scholar]
  51. Sharma, V.; Pant, D. Biocompatible metal decontamination from soil using Ageratum conyzoides. Environ. Sci. Pollut. Res. 2018, 25, 22294–22307. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  52. Parihar, J.K.; Parihar, P.K.; Pakade, Y.B.; Katnoria, J.K. Bioaccumulation potential of indigenous plants for heavy metals phytoremediation in rural areas of Shaheed Bhagat Singh Nagar, Punjab (India). Environ. Sci. Pollut. Res. 2021, 28, 2426–2442. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  53. Mahato, A.; Ghosh, D.; Maiti, S.K. Phytoremediation and environmental bioremediation. In Phytoremediation Technology for the Removal of Heavy Metals and Other Contaminants from Soil and Water; Elsevier: Amsterdam, The Netherlands, 2022; pp. 1–18. [Google Scholar]
  54. Vandana, U.K.; Gulzar, A.B.M.; Singha, L.P.; Bhattacharjee, A.; Mazumder, P.B.; Pandey, P. Hyperaccumulation of arsenic by Pteris vittata, a potential strategy for phytoremediation of arsenic-contaminated soil. Environ. Sust. 2020, 3, 169–178. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  55. Zeng, P.; Guo, Z.; Xiao, X.; Peng, C.; Feng, W.; Xin, L.; Xu, Z. Phytoextraction potential of Pteris vittata L. co-planted with woody species for As, Cd, Pb and Zn in contaminated soil. Sci. Total Environ. 2019, 650, 594–603. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  56. Zhao, X.; Joo, J.C.; Lee, J.K.; Kim, J.Y. Mathematical estimation of heavy metals accumulations in Helianthus annuus L. with a sigmoid heavy metals uptake model. Chemosphere 2019, 220, 965–973. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  57. Mani, D.; Sharma, B.; Kumar, C. Phytoaccumulation, interaction, toxicity and remediation of cadmium from Helianthus annuus L. (sunflower). Bull. Environ. Contam. Toxicol. 2007, 79, 71–79. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  58. Selvam, A.; Wong, J.W.C. Phytochelatin systhesis and cadmium uptake of Brassica napus. Environ. Tech. 2008, 29, 765–773. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  59. Kamran, M.; Malik, Z.; Parveen, A.; Huang, L.; Riaz, M.; Bashir, S.; Mustafa, A.; Abbasi, G.H.; Ali, U. Ameliorative effects of biochar on rapeseed (Brassica napus L.) growth and heavy metals immobilization in soil irrigated with untreated wastewater. J. Plant Growth Regul. 2020, 39, 266–281. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  60. Liu, D.; Zou, J.; Wang, M.; Jiang, W. Hexavalent chromium uptake and its effects on mineral uptake, antioxidant defence system and photosynthesis in Amaranthus viridis L. Bioresour. Technol. 2008, 99, 2628–2636. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  61. Sangeetha, P.; Venkatachalam, P.; Geetha, N. Exploring the phytoremediation potential of Calotropis gigantea L. Using a combined FTIR and principal component analysis. In vitro Plant Breeding Towards Novel Agronomic Traits; Springer: Singapore, 2019; pp. 75–82. [Google Scholar]
  62. Pandey, S.K.; Bhattacharya, T. Effect of two biodegradable chelates on metals uptake, translocation and biochemical changes of Lantana Camara growing in fly ash amended soil. Int. J. Phytoremediation 2018, 20, 214–224. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  63. Alaribe, F.O.; Agamuthu, P. Lantana camara—An ecological bioindicator plant for decontamination of Pb-impaired soil under organic waste-supplemented scenarios. Pedosphere 2019, 29, 248–258. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  64. Liu, Y.; Zhao, X.; Liu, R.; Zhou, J.; Jiang, Z. Biomonitoring and phytoremediation potential of the leaves, bark, and branch bark of street trees for heavy metals pollution in urban areas. Environ. Monit. Assess. 2022, 194, 1–14. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  65. Leung, H.M.; Yue, P.Y.K.; Sze, S.C.W.; Au, C.K.; Cheung, K.C.; Chan, K.L.; Yung, K.L.K.; Li, W.C. The potential of Mikania micrantha (Chinese creeper) to hyperaccumulate heavy metals in soil contaminated by electronic waste. Environ. Sci. Pollut. Res. 2019, 26, 35275–35280. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  66. Usman, K.; Al-Ghouti, M.A.; Abu-Dieyeh, M.H. The assessment of cadmium, chromium, copper, and nickel tolerance and bioaccumulation by shrub plant Tetraena qataranse. Sci. Rep. 2019, 9, 1–11. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  67. Naseem, K.; Imran, Q.; Ur Rehman, M.Z.; Tahir, M.H.; Najeeb, J. Adsorptive removal of heavy metals and dyes from wastewater using Azadirachta indica biomass. Int. J. Environ. Sci. Techn. 2022, 1–24. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  68. Sun, W.; Ji, B.; Khoso, S.A.; Tang, H.; Liu, R.; Wang, L.; Hu, Y. An extensive review on restoration technologies for mining tailings. Environ. Sci. Pollut. Res. 2018, 5, 33911–33925. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  69. Morales-Estupiñan, M.J.; Recalde, S.; Orozco, K.; Ponce, W. Analysis of heavy metals in Azadirachta indica A. Juss Leaves, as Bioindicator for Monitoring Enviromental Pollution in Guayaquil, Ecuador 2020. In Proceedings of the 6th World Congress on New Technologies, Online, 19–21 August 2020. [Google Scholar]
  70. Luo, J.; Cai, L.; Qi, S.; Wu, J.; Gu, X.S. heavy Metal remediation with Ficus microcarpa through transplantation and its environmental risks through field scale experiment. Chemosphere 2018, 193, 244–250. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  71. Ultra Jr, V. Fly ash and compost amendments and mycorrhizal inoculation enhanced the survival and growth of Delonix regia in Cu-Ni mine tailings. Philipine J. Sci. 2020, 149, 479–489. [Google Scholar]
  72. Kalam, S.U.; Naushin, F.; Khan, F.A.; Rajakaruna, N. Long-term phytoremediating abilities of Dalbergia sissoo Roxb. (Fabaceae). SN Appl. Sci. 2019, 1, 1–8. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  73. Fan, M.; Liu, Z.; Nan, L.; Wang, E.; Chen, W.; Lin, Y.; Wei, G. Isolation, characterization, and selection of heavy metals -resistant and plant growth-promoting endophytic bacteria from root nodules of Robinia pseudoacacia in a Pb/Zn mining area. Microbiol. Res. 2018, 217, 51–59. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  74. Netty, N. Bioaccumulation of nickel by five wild plant species on nickel-contaminated soil. IOSR J. Eng. 2018, 260, 1–7. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  75. Jambhulkar, H.P.; Juwarkar, A.A. Assessment of bioaccumulation of heavy metals by different plant species grown on fly ash dump. Ecotoxicol. Environ. Saf. 2009, 72, 1122–1128. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
Figure 1. Map showing the location of the study area (map not to scale).
Figure 1. Map showing the location of the study area (map not to scale).
Sustainability 14 13639 g001
Figure 2. GPS locations of various sampling points in and around the abandoned mine void.
Figure 2. GPS locations of various sampling points in and around the abandoned mine void.
Sustainability 14 13639 g002
Figure 3. Bioaccumulation factors of metals in non-edible plant samples.
Figure 3. Bioaccumulation factors of metals in non-edible plant samples.
Sustainability 14 13639 g003
Figure 4. Bioaccumulation of metals in edible plant samples.
Figure 4. Bioaccumulation of metals in edible plant samples.
Sustainability 14 13639 g004
Figure 5. Biomonitoring-supported sustainable land restoration model for degraded mine voids in India.
Figure 5. Biomonitoring-supported sustainable land restoration model for degraded mine voids in India.
Sustainability 14 13639 g005
Table 1. Concentrations of metals in samples of fly ash; soil; non-edible plants; and crops, vegetables, and fruits (mg/kg).
Table 1. Concentrations of metals in samples of fly ash; soil; non-edible plants; and crops, vegetables, and fruits (mg/kg).
Sl. No.MetalsFly AshSoilNon Edible PlantsEdible Plants
Concentration (mg/kg)
X ± SDConcentration (mg/kg)
X ± SDConcentration (mg/kg)
X ± SDConcentration (mg/kg)
X ± SD
1Al0.187–4.1401.909 ± 1.494123.120–238.420172.430 ± 59.4290.660–11.1293.930 ± 2.7021.690–11.8366.205 ± 3.240
2Cd0–0.0010 ± 00.010–0.0200.016 ± 0.0050–0.0070.001 ± 0.0020.000–0.0480.005 ± 0.012
3Cr0.001–0.0400.016 ± 0.0170.150–0.4100.323 ± 0.1500–0.4020.090 ± 0.1130.000–0.2970.089 ± 0.082
4Fe0.021–9.2002.118 ± 3.56699.870–224.460171.486 ± 64.3530–53.7848.003 ±12.2800.070–39.66810.266 ± 11.558
5Mn0.084–1.0500.533 ± 0.4061.800–25.44011.596 ± 12.3280.025–3.4050.561 ± 0.8410.085–3.7100.766 ± 0.844
6Ni0.003–0.0520.029 ± 0.0170.140–0.3600.266 ± 0.1130.001–0.2400.036 ± 0.0540.000–0.5400.085 ± 0.133
7Pb0–0.0030.001 ± 00.030–0.1700.113 ± 0.0730–0.0420.012 ± 0.0130.001–0.2000.047 ± 0.050
Table 2. Concentrations of metals in non-edible plant samples (mg/kg).
Table 2. Concentrations of metals in non-edible plant samples (mg/kg).
Sl.NoPlant SpeciesBotanical NameAl *Cd **Cr **Fe **Mn* *Ni **Pb **Zn **
Permissible Limit150.021.30202001020.60
1 Billygoat weed Ageratum conyzoides2.040BDLBDL0.1300.0250.006BDL0.125
2Indian LilacAzadirachta indica5.0830.0010.07712.1882.3830.0840.0240.331
3Crown FlowerCalotropis gigantea8.1760.0020.11820.60.6620.0340.0150.494
4Common hackberryCeltis occidentalis1.790BDL0.0070.1900.0400.002BDL0.030
5DhoobCynodon dactylon4.8530.0010.0527.6783.4050.2400.0180.236
6Nut grassCyperus rotundus5.8580.0020.0263.6570.2940.0690.0240.513
7North Indian RosewoodDalbergia sissoo2.7110.0010.2962.2840.0870.0840.0270.227
8Non edible CrabgrassDigitaria ciliaris8.5350.0030.17024.8180.8300.0180.0070.565
9 Royal Poinciana Delonix regia1.9490.0020.4022.5130.6690.0610.0280.531
10PeepalFicus religiosa2.6450.0070.0501.9600.9100.0300.0010.210
11Weeping figFicus benjamina4.310BDL0.07015.9100.0700.020BDL0.130
12Spanish FlagLantana camara6.7830.0020.17911.4500.2760.0230.0420.294
13Bitter vineMikania micrantha0.660BDL0.0010.2400.1200.002BDL0.040
14Rangoon CreeperCombretum indicum0.660BDL0.0010.2400.1300.002BDL0.040
15Black LocustRobinia pseudoacacia3.710BDL0.0200.6400.0410.0030.0070.060
16Non edible SugarcaneSaccharum spontaneum3.6600.0020.09310.1631.2140.0280.0340.355
17Indian GrassSorghastrum nutans1.320BDL0.005BDL0.0400.0010.0030.050
18Narrowleaf CattailTypha angustifolia L.3.073BDL0.0151.3330.1870.0090.0050.113
19Broadleaf cattailTypha latifolia3.427BDL0.00711.2800.0400.0100.0080.070
20 Indian stinging nettle Tragia involucrata11.1290.0010.30353.7841.1650.0940.0060.558
BDL, below detection limit. * permissible limit reported by Jaishankar et al., 2014 [21]. ** permissible limit according to World Health Organization, 1998 [22]; Shah et al., 2013 [23].
Table 3. Concentrations of metals in edible crop, vegetable, and fruit plant samples (mg/kg).
Table 3. Concentrations of metals in edible crop, vegetable, and fruit plant samples (mg/kg).
Sl. No.Plant SpeciesBotanical NameAlCdCrFeMnNiPbZn
Permissible Limit150.021.30202001020.60
1OkraAbelmoschus esculentus5.5660.0030.09925.2050.8000.0100.0600.267
2Spleen amaranthAmaranthus dubius3.9530.0480.0243.2480.8840.1150.0250.200
3CapsicumCapsicum annuum4.6600.0010.0101.4600.0850.0000.0040.175
4PapayaCarica papaya5.3160.0010.09015.6630.6550.0610.0450.564
5TurmericCurcuma longa5.2300.0010.0602.9300.1800.2100.0230.370
6MangoMangifera indica11.1250.0020.07015.0900.4000.0800.0430.385
7Bitter GourdMomordica charantia4.403BDL0.2971.2150.1040.0030.0110.137
8DrumstickMoringa oleifera10.9830.0030.2422.0240.7300.0260.0430.969
9BananaMusa balbisiana5.1860.0020.09023.8810.5400.0730.0500.389
10RiceOryza sativa8.4700.0010.14939.6680.6960.0310.0532.973
11TomatoSolanum lycopersicum1.765BDL0.0101.3551.0000.0160.0050.090
12BrinjalSolanum melongena6.4300.0030.0476.2080.9780.0700.0320.235
13GuavaPsidium guajava11.8360.0040.0818.9110.8610.0890.2000.797
14PomegranatePunica granatum1.690BDL0.0490.2700.1700.0030.0010.060
15Sweet PotatoIpomoea batatas3.2100.002BDL0.0703.7100.5400.1200.450
16Indian JujubeZiziphus mauritiana9.4510.0010.10217.0640.4650.0320.0351.368
Table 4. Plants having bioaccumulation potential for metals.
Table 4. Plants having bioaccumulation potential for metals.
Sl. No.SpeciesMetalsReferences
1Tragia involucrataAl, Cd, Cr, Fe, Mn, Ni, Pb ZnPresent Study, [43]
2Digitaria sanguinalisAl, Cd, Cr, Fe, Mn, Ni, Pb ZnPresent Study, [19,20]
3Cynodon dactylonAl, Cd, Cr, Fe, Mn, Ni, Pb ZnPresent Study, [24,25,26,27]
4Cyperus rotundusAl, Cd, Cr, Fe, Mn, Ni, Pb ZnPresent Study, [44,45]
5Saccharum spontaneumAl, Cd, Cr, Fe, Mn, Ni, Pb ZnPresent Study, [46,47,48]
6Typha latifoliaAl, Cd, Cr, Fe, Mn, Ni, Pb ZnPresent Study, [49,50]
7Typha angustifoliaAl, Cd, Cr, Fe, Mn, Ni, Pb ZnPresent Study, [51]
8Ageratum conyzoidesAl, Cd, Cr, Fe, Mn, Ni, Pb ZnPresent Study, [52,53]
9Sorghastrum nutansAl, Cd, Cr, Fe, Mn, Ni, Pb ZnPresent Study, [54]
10Pteris vittataCu, Ni, Zn, AsPresent Study, [55,56]
11Helianthus annuusCd[57,58]
12Brassica napusCd[59,60]
13Amaranthus viridisCd, Cr, Co, Cu, Fe, Zn, Mn[61,52]
14Medicago polymorphaCd, Cr, Co, Cu, Fe, Zn, Mn[52]
15Parthenium hysterophorusCd, Cr, Co, Cu, Fe, Zn, Mn[52]
1Calotropis giganteanAl, Cd, Cr, Fe, Mn, Ni, Pb ZnPresent Study, [62]
2Lantana camaraAl, Cd, Cr, Fe, Mn, Ni, Pb ZnPresent Study, [63,64]
3Quisqualis indicaAl, Cd, Cr, Fe, Mn, Ni, Pb ZnPresent Study, [65]
4Mikania micranthaAl, Cd, Cr, Fe, Mn, Ni, Pb ZnPresent Study, [66]
5Tetraena qatarensisCd, Cr, Cu, Ni[67]
1Azadirachta indicaAl, Cd, Cr, Fe, Mn, Ni, Pb ZnPresent Study, [68,69]
2Ficus benjaminaAl, Cd, Cr, Fe, Mn, Ni, Pb ZnPresent Study, [70]
3Delonix regiaAl, Cd, Cr, Fe, Mn, Ni, Pb ZnPresent Study, [71]
4Ficus religiosaAl, Cd, Cr, Fe, Mn, Ni, Pb ZnPresent Study, [28,29]
5Dalbergia sissooAl, Cd, Cr, Fe, Mn, Ni, Pb ZnPresent Study, [72]
6Robinia pseudoacaciaAl, Cd, Cr, Fe, Mn, Ni, Pb ZnPresent Study. [73]
7Celtis occidentalisAl, Cd, Cr, Fe, Mn, Ni, Pb ZnPresent Study, [74]
8Millettia pinnataCr, Cu, Pb, Zn, Mn, Fe. Ni, Cd[75]
9Tectona grandisCr, Cu, Pb, Zn, Mn, Fe. Ni, Cd[75]
10Senna siameaCr, Cu, Pb, Zn, Mn, Fe. Ni, Cd[75]
11Dendrocalamus strictusCr, Cu, Pb, Zn, Mn, Fe. Ni, Cd[75]
Publisher’s Note: MDPI stays neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Share and Cite

MDPI and ACS Style

Singh, S.; Dhyani, S.; Janipella, R.; Chakraborty, S.; Pujari, P.R.; Shinde, V.M.; Singh, K. Biomonitoring-Supported Land Restoration to Reduce Land Degradation in Intensively Mined Areas of India. Sustainability 2022, 14, 13639.

AMA Style

Singh S, Dhyani S, Janipella R, Chakraborty S, Pujari PR, Shinde VM, Singh K. Biomonitoring-Supported Land Restoration to Reduce Land Degradation in Intensively Mined Areas of India. Sustainability. 2022; 14(20):13639.

Chicago/Turabian Style

Singh, Sunidhi, Shalini Dhyani, Ramesh Janipella, Soumya Chakraborty, Paras Ranjan Pujari, V. M. Shinde, and Kripal Singh. 2022. "Biomonitoring-Supported Land Restoration to Reduce Land Degradation in Intensively Mined Areas of India" Sustainability 14, no. 20: 13639.

Note that from the first issue of 2016, this journal uses article numbers instead of page numbers. See further details here.

Article Metrics

Back to TopTop