Volume 6, Issue 7, July – 2021 International Journal of Innovative Science and Research Technology
ISSN No:-2456-2165
Ecological Monitoring and Evaluation Using Plants
Anuradha kumari1
1
Integrated B.tech M.tech Dual Degree in Biotechnology, KIIT University, Bhubaneswar, Odisha, India
Abstract:- This review represents an important review
on plant toxin tests for environmental evaluation and
monitoring. Diverse phytotoxicity experiment are
mentioned, benefits and drawbacks of plant toxicity
analysis, and future research application. Terrestrial,
water plants, and algae are important constituent of
biota. Marine plants are becoming very significant for
the examining and evaluation of pesticide, discharge, and
industrial toxins. In international organizations, plant
toxicity experiments are needed for ecological examining
and evaluation with the help of laws related to detection
of pesticide, herbicide, and Rodenticide, Toxic
Substances. Probable research application for plant
toxicity experiment is mentioned with respect to the part
in management of air contaminations, dangerous waste,
toxic discharge and pesticides.
Keywords:- Phytotoxicity, Environmental Monitoring, Air
Pollution, Pesticides.
I. INTRODUCTION
Pollution has become part of the current ecology.
Wellbeing of living beings is directly related to the well
being of ecology. As a result, a clear perception of all kind
of threats caused by ecological contaminants to wellbeing of
living beings and environment is required. Awareness of
the presence of an ecological stress scenario is the
requirement for its resolution. Due to this under
consideration, significant steps have been taken to build
up efficient procedures for ecological health evaluation.
[1]
Vegetation provides an efficient biodiversity
monitoring system. Plants have an elevated ability to absorb
numerous pollutants that helps in monitoring system.
Flora can even stand elevated levels of contaminants and
frequently mobilize them in plasma membrane.
Accumulation of toxins in plants implies accumulation in
diverse ecological divisions whichare evaluated by physical-
chemical methods. [2] The connection between quantity and
reaction is an ignored region of study. There is additional
research required at the area and ecological level in
addition to the cell and sub cell levels. [3]
IJISRT21JUL657 www.ijisrt.com
Biological evaluation is known as the evaluation of the
reaction of living beings to conversion in their ecosystem.
[4] The research shows us the utilization of flora, including
land and aquatic vegetation as bio monitors by detecting
changes because of the existence of pollutants. For
accomplishing this we need proper measurement of the
quantity of a given material in the flora, measuring the
reaction of those pollutants on the growth of plant or on
their catabolic and anabolic processes and measuring
difference in species constitution. [5]
The technique is to count biological reaction in fauna
or flora that is exposed to polluted areas. An evident benefit
of this process is a display of the results of the effect of
pollutants on living beings. The utilization of bio-markers
will eliminate the doubt linked with present
environmental risk evaluations and offer significant
measurement of biological deterioration. [6] In difference to
the exact nature of evaluations on contact, researches of
biological reaction assimilate the influence of all the
damaging factors, including cooperative and hostile
reactions.
Surely, it will by no means be feasible to
substitute direct physiochemical evaluators of contaminant
concentrations completely by evaluation of reaction in bio
indicators. A great measurement of contact pathways of
damaging substances in different experiment procedures is
also required for a improved calculation of reaction
happening in that area.[7] It is understandable that
artificial and natural control procedures are needed to be
utilized at the same time, which permits a recognition of
the associations between the contaminant quantity and the
natural reaction that they show in company of different
contaminants and chemical, physical, and different
circumstances specific for different area. Due to these
relations it may assist in recognition of the contribution from
different contaminantsto the total biological reaction
evaluated. [8]
The understanding obtained makes it probable to
minimize the effect of hostile pollutants for ecosystem
and evaluate the additional environmental changes in
areas prone to exhaustive industrial contact. In this paper
numerous problems will be evaluated, different test
recommended for the evaluation of the environment with the
help of flora, benefits and drawbacks of plant toxicity
experiments, and determination of potential research
applications.
1060
Volume 6, Issue 7, July – 2021 International Journal of Innovative Science and Research Technology
ISSN No:-2456-2165
II. DIFFERENT PHYTOTOXICITY charophytes, fish and zooplanktons without purification.
EXPERIMENTS [9] Kerneldevelopment and radicle development experiments do
not involve plant nutrients and catalysts in the water
United states Experiments management system. The accumulation of plant nutrients
and catalysts can obstruct or react with the test substances.
Comprehensive Emergency  Still in progress [11] Algae cannot be analyzed by utilizing flow through
Response,Compensation
Liability Act 1980 process but plants are an exception.
Federal Insecticide,  aquatic and marine algae The major drawback of plant toxicity experiments is
Fungicide, andRodenticide development
Act 1982 that they have are not utilized or tested frequently their use is
 water lentils development rare. The inadequate degree of plant toxicity testing is also
 land kernel development, obvious from the scientific researches. The inadequate
saplingappearance, plant information on plant toxicity make evaluation of results
vitality complicated [12] other problems with plant toxicity
 marine and terrestrial experiments are species assortment (wild or cultured),
ground testing hybrid variant, test procedure (in-situ or ex-situ), test
divisions(growth, viability, and wound), and way of contact.
 crop rotation and irrigated In comparison with animal toxicity experiments,
plant residue absorption
phytotoxicity experiments need more contact or longer
and metabolism
reaction time, may display either triggering or prohibiting
Food and Drug  aquatic and marine algae property, and can be extra hard to understand because of
Administration 1987under the development complex soil related factors connected with ground and
National Environmental
 land kernel development sediment factors.[13]
Policy Act 1969
andradicle elongation
 Early sapling development IV. FUTURE RESEARCH APPLICATIONS
Toxic Substances Control  aquatic and marine algae
Act 1985 A. Air pollution
development Air pollution evaluation is one sector where complex
 water lentils development flora can contribute in a special way. Determination of air
 land kernel development quality can be done with the help of species of algae,
andradicle elongation symbiotic organisms, herbs and shrubs have been utilized,
 ground nutrient absorption even though these researches had a very limited reach.
Water Quality Act 1987Clean  aquatic and marine algae Taking into account that air pollution results in acid rain,
Water Act 1977 ozone depletion and green house affect leading to
development global warming making it essential to start a large scale
 water lentils development and long term bio monitoring air pollution system utilizing
Table 1:- Different Phytotoxicity Experiments plants can be very efficient [14]. For inside air quality,
spiderwort plant has been verified to be efficient bio monitor.
III. BENEFITS AND DRAWBACKS OF PLANT Plants are called lungs of earth because they filter and
TOXICITY TEST cleanse the air. Utilizing flora as natural purifiers to enhance
both inside and outside air quality has a potential to be used
Plant toxicity experiments like algae, kernel for very important industrial and ecological applications.
development, radicle elongation, nascent sapling and plant Research is required to regulate the test procedures and
development experiments are needed to be incorporated as authenticate test conclusions.
component of the experiment system in order to build up an
inclusive testing report for a toxin, herbicide, toxic B. Toxic discharge regulation
discharge, or harmful areas. Plant toxicity experiments in Toxic discharge bio evaluation has turned into an
particular the kernel development, radicle development, and important factor to evaluate water quality and has lead to a
nascent sapling development experiments, have numerous water quality related approach for contamination control
benefits over fauna toxicity experiments. For instance, plant utilized by central and State regulated organizations for
kernels can be bought in large quantity and lot of them can National contaminant Discharge removal System
be used for a years. Preservation charge is minimum, and compliances. Presence of toxins can be tested with the help
the experiment can be done rapidly. [10] of water lentils and plant kernelshave been utilized for Toxic
discharge regulation. Evaluation procedures could be
Samples of water with small amount of oxygen enhanced and by including different complex plants like
dissolved in it, for example various waste discharge or pore fennel pondweed (stuckenia pectinata), broad arrowhead
water, and they do not need exposure to air for phytotoxicity (Sagittaria latifolia), bulrushes (typha), and pondweed
experiments, due to this sample does not get contaminated by {Elodea canadensis), all ofthem can lead to a more efficient
other factors . Samples of water with elevated cloudiness do biological evaluation system. Research is required to build a
not need purification for plant toxicity experiments, while test procedure, compare conclusions, and enhance the data.
some samples cannot be analyzed with the help of [15]

IJISRT21JUL657 www.ijisrt.com 1061

Volume 6, Issue 7, July – 2021 International Journal of Innovative Science and Research Technology
C. Harmful Wastage Regulation
The inclination of ecology and toxicology is in the
direction of experimenting a series of species from diverse
levels of food chain like microbes, phytoplanktons, plants,
vertebrata and invertebrata. This advancement is
predominantly helpful for evaluating unidentified pollutants,
compound substances and hazardous toxin, since some
contaminants may damage just a single food chain level.
Research is required to regulate the test, authenticate test
conclusions, and augment the data. [16] Sediment quality
criterion is more of a concern recently, concluding by the
present literature and studies. Water plants are helpful
because they live on top of and underneath earth. They can
be utilized to evaluate the quality of the column of water,
subsurface water and whole sediment. An experiment
procedure utilizing flora for sediment quality criterion is
required to be evaluated and approved. [17]
V. CONCLUSION
The growing degradation and contamination of the
environment need a foundation of biological guardsystem
that gives data on unfavourable effects on wellbeing of
human and ecosystem. Extremely receptive phytotoxitytest
have been made that facilitate the sighting of degradation
caused by herbicides, industrial waste, radiation and
complex metals. Plant based evaluation can play a
significant part in improving risk evaluation, ecological
monitoring and guarding the environment. Through this
paper we can conclude that we need more research in this
sector as plant based ecological assessment has high
potential in future like Toxic discharge regulation and
Harmful Wastage Regulation. This can finally help us
attain sustainable development and reduce pollution.
REFERENCES
[1]. Bascietto, J., Hinckley, D., Plafkin, J., & Slimak, M.
(1990). Ecotoxicity and ecological risk assessment.
Regulatory applications at EPA. Part1. Environmental
Science & Technology, 24(1), 10-15.
[2]. Lewis, M. A. (1990). Are laboratory‐derived toxicity
data for freshwater algae worth the effort?.
Environmental Toxicology and Chemistry: An
International Journal, 9(10), 1279- 1284.
[3]. Swanson, S. M., Rickard, C. P., Freemark, K. E., &
MacQuarrie, P. (1991). Testing for pesticide toxicity to
aquatic plants: recommendations for test species.
Plants for toxicity assessment: second volume.
[4]. Freemark, K., MacQuarrie, P., Swanson, S., &
Peterson, H. (1990). Development of guidelines for
testing pesticide toxicity to nontarget plants for
Canada. In Plants for toxicity assessment. ASTM
International.
[5]. Wang, W. (1990). Literature review on duckweed
toxicity testing. Environmental research, 52(1), 7-22.
[6]. Freemark, K., & Boutin, C. (1995). Impacts of
agricultural herbicide use on terrestrial wildlife in
temperate landscapes: a review with special
reference to North America. Agriculture,
Ecosystems & Environment, 52(2-3), 67-91.
IJISRT21JUL657 www.ijisrt.com
ISSN No:-2456-2165
[7]. Pimentel, D., McLaughlin, L., Zepp, A., Lakitan, B.,
Kraus, T., Kleinman, P., ... & Selig,
[8]. G. (1991). Environmental and economic effects of
reducing pesticide use. BioScience, 41(6),402-409.
[9]. Goolsby, D. A., Coupe, R. C., & Markovchick, D. J.
(1991). Distribution of selected herbicides and nitrate
in the Mississippi River and its major tributaries, April
through June 1991 (No. 91-4163). US Department of
the Interior, US Geological Survey.
[10]. Freemark, K., & Boutin, C. (1994). Nontarget-plant
risk assessment for pesticide registration.
Environmental Management, 18(6), 841-854.
[11]. Bishop, W. E., & Perry, R. L. (1981). Development
and evaluation of a flow-through growth inhibition test
with duckweed (Lemna minor). In Aquatic Toxicology
and Hazard Assessment. ASTM International.
[12]. Davis, J. A. (1981). Comparison of Static-replacement
and Flow-through Bioassays Using Duckweed'Lemna
Gibba'G-3. US Environmental Protection Agency,
Office of Pesticides and Toxic Substances.
[13]. Benenati, F. (1990). Plant Keystone to risk assessment.
ASTM STP 1091, pp. 513. American Society for
Testing and Materials, Phila- delphia, PA.
[14]. Fletcher, J. S. , Muhitch, M. S., Vann, D. R. ,
McFarlane. J. C. , and Benenati, F. E. (1985).
PHYTOTOX database evaluation of surro- gate plant
species recommended by the U
[15]. .S. Environmental Protection Agency and the
Organization for Economic Cooperation and
Development. Environ. Tuxi‹’ol. Chem. 4, 523—532.
[16]. Kromroy, K. W., Olson, M. F., Grigal, D. F., Teng, P.
S., French, D. R., & Amundson,
[17]. G. H. (1990). A bioindicator system assessing air
quality within Minnesota. In Plants for Toxicity
Assessment. ASTM International.
[18]. Walsh, G. E., Weber, D. E., Brashers, L. K., & Simon,
T. L. (1990). Artificial sediments for use in tests with
wetland plants. Environmental and experimental
botany, 30(3), 391-396.
[19]. Burton, G. A. (1992). ES&T
Series: Assessing Contaminated
Aquatic Sediments. Environmental Science &
Technology, 26(10), 1862-1863.
[20]. Adams, W. J., Kimerle, R. A., & Barnett Jr, J. W.
(1992). Sediment quality and aquatic life assessment.
Environmental science & technology, 26(10), 1864-
1875.
1062