Cited by 9Mercury impact and mitigation studiesHeavy Metal Pollution RemediationChromium effects and bioremediation

Assessment of heavy metals content and diversity of mercury-tolerant bacteria in heavy metal-polluted environmental samples and mercury bioremediation ability of isolated strains

Open access
Yadav, Vinay, Manjhi, Anjali, Vadakedath, Nithya·2025·Environmental Advances

Abstract

• Heavy metals content in environmental samples is above the permissible limit. • Diverse mercury-tolerant bacteria is identified in heavy metal contaminated sites. • The study offers potential mercury-tolerant bacteria for bioremediation application. • Serratia quinivorans DCS_A1 reduces mercury content in multifold within 72 h. • Native isolates DCL_26, DCS_A1, and R_24 significantly lower mercury phytotoxicity. Mercury contamination disrupts ecosystems by causing toxicity and bioaccumulation in higher trophic levels. This study inspected the heavy metals content and the culturable diversity of mercury-resistant and detoxifying bacteria in samples from dumping site, thermal power plant and sewage treatment plant situated in/near Chandigarh, India. Most of the analyzed heavy metals were found above the permissible limit in these sites. Among 87 isolated bacteria, 45 could resist >200 µM ionic mercury (HgCl 2 ). Markedly, 10 and 4 isolates harbored the key genes required for mercury detoxification, merA and merB gene, respectively. The merA gene-containing strain's phylogeny indicated the resistant strains belong to Alphaproteobacteria, Betaproteobacteria , Bacilli and Gammaproteobacteria . Nine isolates could volatilize HgCl 2 efficiently, while two could volatilize organic mercury (CH 3 HgCl). The isolates Niallia circulans DCL_26, Serratia quinivorans DCS_A1, and Pseudomonas hibiscicola R_24 were found to resist and volatilize up to ≥300 μM HgCl 2 . Appreciably, S. quinivo…

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1016/j.envadv.2025.100624

Cites

1 of 1 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

We couldn’t retrieve this paper’s full text, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Authors
Yadav, V., Manjhi, A., & Vadakedath, N.
Affiliations
Institute of Microbial Technology (IN)
Corresponding author
Vadakedath, Nithya
Venue
Environmental Advances
Publisher
Elsevier BV
Published
2025-04
Volume
19
Pages
100624
ISSN
2666-7657 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W4408019384
Cited by
9
References
1
Citations by year
2026: 5 · 2025: 4
FWCI
3.44
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Environmental Advances (publishedVersion, cc-by-nc-nd)
  • DOAJ (DOAJ: Directory of Open Access Journals) (submittedVersion, cc-by-sa)
Topics
  • Physical Sciences › Environmental Science › Health, Toxicology and Mutagenesis › Mercury impact and mitigation studies
  • Physical Sciences › Environmental Science › Water Science and Technology › Heavy Metal Pollution Remediation
  • Physical Sciences › Environmental Science › Health, Toxicology and Mutagenesis › Chromium effects and bioremediation
Keywords
heavy metal contamination, mercury bioremediation, merA gene, mercury volatilization, Niallia circulans, industrial wastewater, sewage treatment plant effluent, thermal power plant effluent, mercury detoxification

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review