1. Background
2. Objectives
3. Methods
3.1. Heavy Metals
3.2. Bacterial Strains
3.3. Determining Lead Removal Activities of Each Strain
3.4. Optimization Experiment
3.5. Statistical Analysis
4. Results
4.1. Lead Removal Activity of Lactobacillus strains
| Lactobacillus Strains | % Pb Removed |
|---|---|
| L. acidophilus ATCC4356 | 53.9 ± 0.013 |
| L. plantarum ATCC8014 | 47.7 ± 0.025 |
| L. rhamnosus ATCC7469 | 30.5 ± 0.054 |
| L. fermentum ATCC9338 | 44.2 ± 0.04 |
| L. casei ATCC39392 | 33.3 ± 0.02 |
aThe bacteria were incubated 24 h in MRS broth supplemented with 5 mg.L-1 Pb.
bValues are mean ± SD of three replicates.
4.2. Plackett-Burman Design Analysis to Find Critical Factors for Response Values of Lead Removal
| Standard No. | Run | Factors | Removal of Lead (%) for L. acidophilus ATCC4356 | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| A | B | C | D | E | F | |||
| 7 | 1 | - | + | + | + | - | + | 68.9 |
| 5 | 2 | + | + | - | + | + | - | 55.6 |
| 1 | 3 | + | - | + | - | - | - | 55.7 |
| 4 | 4 | + | - | + | + | - | + | 71.1 |
| 3 | 5 | - | + | + | - | + | - | 54.0 |
| 2 | 6 | + | + | - | + | - | - | 53.6 |
| 12 | 7 | - | - | - | - | - | - | 52.9 |
| 10 | 8 | + | - | - | - | + | + | 53.9 |
| 8 | 9 | - | - | + | + | + | - | 62.4 |
| 11 | 10 | - | + | - | - | - | + | 54.3 |
| 9 | 11 | - | - | - | + | + | + | 57.1 |
| 6 | 12 | + | + | + | - | + | + | 59.7 |
Abbreviations: A, live status; B, time (hour); C, pH; D, bacterial concentration (g.L-1); E, temperature (°C); F, metal (lead) concentration (mg.L-1).
a - and + represent the low and high levels, respectively.
4.3. Optimum Factors for Response Values of Metal Removal and Analysis for the Central Composite Design
| Run | No. of Factors (-1 Level, +1 Level) | Response | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | 2 | 3 | R | |
| A: pH (3.42, 7.58) | B: Lead Concentration (109.32, 400.68) | C: Bacterial Concentration (1.09, 4.01) | Lead Removal (%) | |
| 1 | 3.4 | 109 | 1.1 | 50.4 |
| 2 | 5.5 | 255 | 2.5 | 49.0 |
| 3 | 5.5 | 10 | 2.5 | 56.0 |
| 4 | 5.5 | 255 | 2.5 | 50.8 |
| 5 | 2.0 | 255 | 2.5 | 34.7 |
| 6 | 3.4 | 401 | 4.0 | 56.5 |
| 7 | 5.5 | 255 | 0.1 | 48.6 |
| 8 | 5.5 | 255 | 2.5 | 54.0 |
| 9 | 7.6 | 109 | 4.0 | 70.2 |
| 10 | 9.0 | 255 | 2.5 | 60.0 |
| 11 | 5.5 | 255 | 5.0 | 60.3 |
| 12 | 7.6 | 109 | 1.1 | 66.1 |
| 13 | 3.4 | 401 | 1.1 | 50.3 |
| 14 | 5.5 | 500 | 2.5 | 53.2 |
| 15 | 7.6 | 401 | 4.0 | 72.0 |
| 16 | 5.5 | 255 | 2.5 | 53.8 |
| 17 | 5.5 | 255 | 2.5 | 52.5 |
| 18 | 5.5 | 255 | 2.5 | 59.6 |
| Source | Sum of Squares | df | Mean Square | F Value | P Value |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Model | 1206 | 9 | 134 | 15.2 | 0.0004b |
| A-pH | 594 | 1 | 594 | 67.4 | < 0.0001b |
| B-Pb concentration | 1.47 | 1 | 1.47 | 0.167 | 0.6935 |
| C-Bacterial Concentration | 110 | 1 | 111 | 12.6 | 0.0075b |
| AB | 173 | 1 | 174 | 19.7 | 0.0022b |
| AC | 171 | 1 | 171 | 19.4 | 0.0023b |
| BC | 193 | 1 | 193 | 21.9 | 0.0016b |
| A2 | 53.0 | 1 | 53.0 | 6.02 | 0.0397b |
| B2 | 2.50 | 1 | 2.50 | 0.283 | 0.6090 |
| C2 | 2.06 | 1 | 2.06 | 0.233 | 0.6421 |
| Residual | 70.5 | 8 | 8.81 | ||
| Lack of Fit | 4.57 | 3 | 1.52 | 0.115 | 0.9473 |
| Pure Error | 65.9 | 5 | 13.2 | ||
| Cor Total | 1276 | 17 |
aStd.Dev. = 2.97, R-Squared = 0.944, Mean = 55.4, Adjusted R2 = 0.882, C.V.% = 5.3, Predicted R2 = 0.869
bSignificant

