Review Integrated phytobial remediation for sustainable management of arsenic in soil and water Madhumita Roy b, ⁎, Ashok K. Giri a , Sourav Dutta b , Pritam Mukherjee b a Molecular and Human Genetics Division, CSIR-Indian Institute of Chemical Biology, 4Raja S.C. Mallick Road, Kolkata 700032, West Bengal, India b Techno India University, Salt Lake, Kolkata 700091, India abstract article info Article history: Received 14 June 2014 Received in revised form 10 November 2014 Accepted 15 November 2014 Available online xxxx Keywords: Arsenic Bioremediation Phytoremediation Rhizoremediation Hyperaccumulation Transgenic Constructed wetland Arsenic (As), cited as the most hazardous substance by the U.S. Agency for Toxic Substance and Disease Registry (ATSDR, 2005), is an ubiquitous metalloid which when ingested for prolonged periods cause extensive health ef- fects leading to ultimate untimely death. Plants and microbes can help mitigate soil and groundwater As problem since they have evolved elaborate detoxification machineries against this toxic metalloid as a result of their co- existence with this since the origin of life on earth. Utilization of the phytoremediation and bioremediation po- tential of the plants and microbes, respectively, is now regarded as two innovative tools that encompass biology, geology, biotechnology and allied sciences with cutting edge applications for sustainable mitigation of As epidemic. Discovery of As hyperaccumulating plants that uptake and concentrate large amounts of this toxic metalloid in their shoots or roots offered new hope to As phytoremediation, solar power based nature's own green remediation. This review focuses on how phytoremediation and bioremediation can be merged to- gether to form an integrated phytobial remediation which could synergistically achieve the goal of large scale re- moval of As from soil, sediment and groundwater and overcome the drawbacks of the either processes alone. The review also points to the feasibility of the introduction of transgenic plants and microbes that bring new hope for more efficient treatment of As. The review identifies one critical research gap on the importance of remediation of As contaminated groundwater not only for drinking purpose but also for irrigation purpose and stresses that more research should be conducted on the use of constructed wetland, one of the most suitable areas of applica- tion of phytobial remediation. Finally the review has narrowed down on different phytoinvestigation and phytodisposal methods, which constitute the most essential and the most difficult part of pilot scale and field scale applications of phytoremediation programs. © 2014 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved. Contents 1. Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 181 2. Bioremediation of arsenic . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 182 3. Phytoremediation of arsenic . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 183 3.1. Mechanism of phytoremediation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 184 3.1.1. Arsenic uptake . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 184 3.1.2. Arsenic transport . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 184 3.1.3. Detoxification . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 185 3.2. Different types of arsenic phytoremediation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 185 3.2.1. Phytoextraction/phytoaccumulation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 185 3.2.2. Phytostabilization/phytoimmobilisation/phytorestoration . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 186 3.2.3. Phytovolatilization/rhizovolatilization . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 186 3.2.4. Phytofiltration/rhizofiltration . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 186 3.2.5. Phytostimulation/natural attenuation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 187 4. Phytobial remediation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 187 4.1. Phytobialremediation by free living microbes . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 188 4.1.1. Mobilization . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 188 Environment International 75 (2015) 180–198 ⁎ Corresponding author. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.envint.2014.11.010 0160-4120/© 2014 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved. Contents lists available at ScienceDirect Environment International journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/envint