International Journal of Botany

and Research (IJBR)

IMPACT OF HEAVY METALS ON MORPHOLOGICAL

RESPONSES OF ALBIZIA LEBBECK (L.)

S. SOMASEKHAR1 & K. V. MADHUSUDHAN2

In high anthropogenic pressure locales, pollution of the environment because of heavy metals is a major
concern. To understand the impact of these pollutants, this study explores its influence on the morphological features of
the important arid legume tree, Albizia lebbeck. This plant was subjected to the differential action of certain heavy
metals such as mercury and lead in varying concentrations (1 M, 10 M, 100 M and 1mM). All the different stress
treatments had influenced the plants growth. The least weight of the root was observed at1mM concentration of heavy
metal. There was 14.06% and 23.46% reduction in morphological parameters because of mercury and lead, respectively.
Increasing heavy metal treatments resulted in decreased germination percentage, shorter root and shoot lengths, and
reduced dry mass accumulation in root and shoot. The impact on the root was more than the shoot. In addition, mercury

Original Article
showed more adverse effects than lead; however, the effect was more prominent at 1mM concentration. Nevertheless,
different morphological parameters had different effect due to the heavy metals; this differential impact may act as a
bio-indicator for pollution by heavy metals.

KEYWORDS: Albizia lebbeck, Mercury, Lead, Heavy Metals & Growth

Received: Jan 11, 2017; Accepted: Feb 03, 2017; Published: Feb 22, 2017; Paper Id.: IJBRAPR20173

INTRODUCTION

Heavy metals have an adverse impact environmentally, ecologically and on evolution. The toxicity of the
heavy metals is more significant in the localities with high anthropogenic pressure. The chief heavy metals for
environmental pollution are cadmium, copper, lead, chromium and mercury. The buildup of heavy metals in the
soil has a negative influence on agriculture. The consequences are uncertain food safety and therefore its
marketability, stunted crop growth because of phytotoxicity and depletion of soil microorganisms. The metabolic
activities of plants modify the geological and biological redistribution of heavy metals. This is usually by the
movement of the heavy metals through soil, water and soil. Imperils on the soil by heavy metals need to be
continuously monitored as it is known to affect surface water as well as ground water. Mercury and lead are the
most toxic, and there are literatures substantiating this fact (Tripathi and Tripathi1998, Gothberg et al., 2004,
Arunima et al., 2015). Mercury is silvery in nature and is found in both organic and inorganic forms. Entry of
mercury into the plant is by two main paths: uptake of the oxidized form (Hg (II) or methyl mercury), which is
adsorbed on the soil particles, and uptake of the dissolved form in soil water, through roots (Boszke et al., 2008).
Mercury is reported to have a negative influence even at very low concentrations. Farmers use mercury-based
pesticides, which directly influence agricultural plants. Their toxicity effect is borne by photosynthesis and
transpiration, which are some of the most fundamental plant physiological processes. The plants morphology,

www.tjprc.org [email protected]
16 S. Somasekhar & K. V. Madhusudhan

anatomy and physiology are imbalanced, as well as pollen germination, pollen tube formation and thereby fruit production
(Gill et al., 2014). If mercury is the most toxic heavy metal, lead (Pb) is the most widely found heavy metal, according to
the environmental protection agency (EPA). Lead is toxic only next to mercury. It enters the food chain because of
industries, mining and wrong farming practices, and ultimately causes health issues for humans. Even though Pb is a toxic
metal, it is absorbed through the roots and translocated to the shoot. The permissible limit of PB in agricultural soils is 100
mg Pb kg-1 soil. However, this level is on the increase as a result of anthropogenic and industrial actions. This has a
negative effect on plant growth, as it modifies the ultrastructure of chloroplast, inactivates the enzymes for CO2 fixation,
photosynthesis, and inhibits lipid peroxidation and antioxidant machinery.

Albizia lebbeck (L.) Benth., locally known as shirish, belongs to the Mimosaceae family. It is a leguminous tree
that is commonly found along roadsides. It is also cultivated in industrial areas. This plant is reported to have several
medicinal properties. Currently, the spotlight is on plants that can successfully acclimatize the polluted soil and play a
significant role in bioremediation. Keeping this trend in mind, this study ventures to understand the consequences of
mercury and lead pollution in the soil. The heavy metal toxicity is estimated based on the morphological changes and
buildup of proline in Albizia lebbeck.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Albizia lebbeck seeds were collected locally. Only healthy, uniform seeds were used in the investigation.
The seeds were surface sterilized to prevent fungal contamination. Diluted sodium hypochlorite was used for this purpose.
Thereafter, the seeds were washed repeatedly in distilled water. The seeds were now placed on Whatman filter paper
No. 42, which was kept in petri dishes (15cm diameter). This set-up was maintained at room temperature (28C 2) and
light intensity of approximately 150 Wm-2. The study was of random type wih five replications of every treatment.
Mercury and lead were used in the form of mercuric chloride and lead nitrate, respectively. They were used in the
following concentrations: 1M, 10 M, 100 M and 1mM. All solutions were changed on a daily basis, and distilled water
served as the control. The plants were subjected to heavy metal stress, and test data were noted on day 4 and day 8.
The set-up was maintained for 8 days. Seed germination percentage, root and shoot lengths and dry weight of the root and
shoot were the parameters considered in the study. The dry weight was measured after the plant material was kept at 80C
in an oven. Statistical analysis was applied to the data using Duncans multiple range (DMR) test to drive significance
(Duncan, 1955).

RESULTS AND DISCUSSIONS

Environmental pollution by heavy metals is a matter of great concern. Theses metals disturb the ecological,
evolutionary, environmental, and nutritional balances. Table 1 illustrates the data of the study on the plant Albizia lebbeck
L. On heavy metal treatments (mercury and lead at 1 M, 10 M, 100 M and 1mM concentrations), there was reduced
seed germination and seedling growth, with the most impact noticed at 1mM concentration. The control plants did not
report any significant change in the growth parameters. Mercury showed a 34 % decrease in seed germination at
1mMheavy metal stress, 52% at 100 M and 64 % at 10 M. Lead showed a 40 % decrease in seed germination at
1mMheavy metal stress, followed by 58% at 100 M and 67 % at 10 M. These data reported the lesser impact of lead
compared to mercury, with higher concentrations having more drastic influence on growth. The finding correspond to the
ones in literature (Farooqi et al., 2009, Pandey and Tripathi 2010). Reduced seed germination is suspected to be because of
the rapid breakdown of the reserve food in the seeds subjected to heavy metal stress. A similar impact was noticed in maize

Impact Factor (JCC): 2.6392 NAAS Rating: 4.08

by Kalimuthu & Siva, (1990). They used 20, 50, 100 and 200 g/ml lead acetate and mercuric chloride, respectively. Iqbal
et al. (2014) reported a similar influence in tomato plant because of changes in osmotic potential. Jaja and Odoemena
(2004) also conducted studies on tomato with ferric and lead salts. They too noticed a shift in osmotic potential. Becerril et
al., (1989) reported lower water uptake and transport in plants subjected to heavy metals. There may even be embryonic
damage and seeding death because of heavy metal stress (Wierzbicka and Obidzinska, 1998). Bewley and Black (1983)
blamed the negative impact on the failure in water absorption when treated with heavy metals. Root and shoot lengths were
also reduced by heavy metals, with the effect more significant with increasing concentrations. At 1mMconcentration of
mercury and lead, 85% and 75% reduced root length and 70% and 60% reduced shoot length were observed, respectively.
Root growth was more inhibited than shoot growth, with mercury having a greater influence. Similar observations have
been reported in Albiziasps.(Farooqi et al., 2009, Pandey and Tripathi 2011) and other plants (Jaja and Odoemena 2004,
Pandey and Tripathi 2014). Consequently, because of reduction in root and shoot growth, the root and shoot biomass was
also reduced by mercury and lead (43% and 54% at 100 M and 54% and 61% at 1mM, respectively). Here also mercury
was more toxic than lead, with higher concentrations having an effect of greater magnitude. Albizia lebbeck (Farooqi et al.,
2009, Iqbal et al., 2014), Albizia procera [Pandey and Tripathi 2010, 2011], and Shorea robusta (Pandey and Tripathi 2014
) also reported similar impacts.

Heavy metals have a drastic impact on plant growth, with the magnitude being greater with more concentration.
Eun et al. (2000) considered low water potential, lesser nutrient uptake and secondary stress to be the cause in plants
subjected to heavy metal stress. The morphology of roots was the most impacted (Oncel et al., 2000, Elloumi et al., 2007,
Pant et al., 2011 and Seyyedi, 1999). Heavy metals are also reported to inhibit cell division and cell elongation, as well as
reduced mitosis in the meristematic cells of roots and sensitivity of the enzymes in the photosynthetic carbon reduction
cycle (De Filippis and Ziegler, 1993). In roots, this results in lesser root cells and surface area for effective water uptake
and translocation, which may result in nutrient deficiency. The root accumulates the heavy metals, and limits their transport
to the shoots. The effect of Cr, Ni and Hgon Albizia lebbek was analyzed by studying its leaf area, root length and shoot
length and similar conclusions were drawn (Tripathi and Tripathi, 1999). In laboratory settings, similar findings were
reported (Farooqi et al., 2009), with lead in the concentrations of 10, 30, 50, 70 and 90 mol/L producing significant
(p<0.05) differences in seed germination and seedling length in A. lebbeck; 50, 70 and 90 mol/L lead treatments produced
the most severe effect. There are wide-ranging studies on the influence of lead on plant morphology, such as stomata,
productivity and yield (Hussain et al.,2006), growth tolerance index (Wojas et al., 2007), leaf area (Nosalewicz et al.,
2008), inhibition of root elongation (Ghani et al., 2010), plant height (Farooqi et al., 2011) and root, shoot and dry biomass
(Azad, 2011). Cell death has been noticed on high lead concentrations (Seregin and Ivanov, 2001). Different treatments of
Pb (NO3)2 (200, 400, 600 and 800M) also exhibited the same influence (Azad, 2011). This study illustrates the fact that
heavy metals may inhibit plant growth and development. Because the roots are the most affected plant part, the supply of
nutrients and water is impacted. This physiological change indirectly affects hormone production and usage, which may
then result in inhibited root and shoot growth. The growth of the plant may become stunted even before the heavy metals
are translocated to the shoots.

CONCLUSIONS

This study indicates that both lead and mercury have a negative impact on plant growth. It influences significant
growth parameters as well as seed germination. In A. lebbeck, mercury had more deleterious effects than lead. Mercury was

www.tjprc.org [email protected]
18 S. Somasekhar & K. V. Madhusudhan

highly toxic for seedling growth. The findings of this study indicate the level of tolerance of this species, and its suitability
for plantation in heavy metal contaminated areas. The amount of seedling required for effective land coverage is dependent
on various factors, such as nature of the heavy metal pollutant in the medium or water for cultivation and concentration.
Further investigations need to be performed to appraise the consequences of heavy metals on germination and growth in A.
lebbeck.

REFERENCES

1. Arunima, K., Seema, V., & Siddiqui H. Z. (2015). Toxic effect of lead and mercury on germination of gram seeds.
International Journal of Food Science and Technology, 5 (3), 13-18

2. Azad, S. H. M., (2011). Toxic effects of lead on growth and some biochemical and ionic parameters of sunflower (Helianthus
annuus L.) seedlings. Cur. Res. J. Bio. Sci., 3: 398-403.

3. Becerril J, lez-Murua CGl, Munoz-Rueda A, De Felipe MR. (1989). Changes induced by cadmium and lead in gas exchange
and water relations of clover and lucerne. Plant Physiol Biochem 27: 913-918.

4. Bewley JD, Black M. (1983). Physiology and Biochemistry of Seeds, Springer-Verlag, New York P: 115-117.

5. Boszke, L., Kowalski, A., Astel, A., Baraski, A., Gworek, B. & Siepak, J. (2008), Mercury mobility and bioavailability in soil
from contaminated area, Environ. Geol., 55(5), 1075-1087.

6. De Filippis, L.F. & Ziegler H. (1993). Effect of sublethal concentrations of zinc, cadmium and mercury on the photosynthetic
carbon reduction cycle of Euglena. J. Plant Physiol., 142, 167172.

7. Duncan M. (1955). Multiple range and multiple tests. Biometrics, 42:1-47.

8. Elloumi, N., Ben, F., Rhouma, A., Ben, B., Mezghani. I. & Boukhris, M., (2007). Cadmium induced growth inhibition and
alteration of biochemical parameters of almond seedling grown in solution culture. Acta Physiol. Plant., 29, 5762..

9. Eun, S.O., Youn, H.S. & Lee Y. (2000). Lead disturbs microtubule organization in the root meristem of Zea mays. Physiol.
Plant., 110(3), 357365.

10. Farooqi, Z.R., M.Z. Iqbal, M. Kabir & M. Shafiq. (2009). Toxic effects of lead and cadmium on germination and growth of
Albizia lebbeck (L.) Benth. Pakistan Journal of Botany, 41(1):27-33

11. Ghani, A., Shah, A. U. & Akhtar, U., (2010). Effect of lead toxicity on growth, chlorophyll and lead (Pb+) contents of two
varieties of maize (Zea mays L.). Pak. J. Nut., 9: 887-891.

12. Gothberg, A., Greger, M., Holm, K. & Bengtsson, B. E., (2004). Influence of nutrient levels on uptake and effects of mercury,
cadmium and lead in water spinach. J. Environ. Qual., 33: 12471255.

13. Iqbal MZ, Athar M & Shafiq M. (2014) Phytotoxic effects of mercury on seed germination and seedling growth of Albizia
lebbeck (L.) Benth. (Leguminosae) Advances in Enviro Research, 3:207-216

14. Iqbal, M.Z. & K. Rahmati. (1992). Tolerance of Albizia lebbeck to Cu and Fe application. Ecologia, 11: 427-430

15. Jaja E.T.,, & Odoemena C.S.I. (2004). Effect of Pb, Cu and Fe compounds on the germination and early seedling growth of
tomato varieties. J Appl Sci Environ Manage 8 (2): 51- 53.

16. Kalimuthu, K. & S.R. Siva. (1990). Physiological effects of heavy metals on Zea mays (maize) seedlings. Indian Journal of
Plant Physiology, 33: 242-244.

Impact Factor (JCC): 2.6392 NAAS Rating: 4.08

17. Nosalewicz. A., Olga. K. & Nosalewicz. M., (2008). Effects of various concentrations of lead and cadmium on earley growth
of maize. Acta Agrophysica, 11: 715-723.

18. Oncel, I., Keles, Y. & Ustun A.S. (2000). Interactive effects of temperature and heavy metal stress on the growth and some
biochemical compoubd in wheat seedling. Environ. Pollut., 107, 315320.

19. Pandey, P. & Tripathi A.K. (2010). Bioaccumulation of heavy metal in soil and different plant parts of A. procera (Roxb.)
seedling. The Bioscan, 5(2), 263266.

20. Pandey, P. & Tripathi A.K. (2011). Effect of Heavy metals on morphological and Biochemical characteristics of Albizia
procera (Roxb. Benth.) seedling. International Journal of Environmental Science, 1(5), 10091018.

21. Pandey.P., Tripathi A.K.(2014) Impact of heavy metals on morphological and biochemical parameters of Shorea robusta
plant. Ekolgia (Bratislava), 33 (2) 116126

22. Pant, P.P., Tripathi, A.K. & Gairola S. (2011). Phytpremediation of Arsenic using Cassia fistula Linn. seedling. International
Journal of Research in Chemistry and Environment, 1(1), 2428.

23. Seregin, I. V. and Ivanov, V. B., 2001. Physiological aspects of cadmium and lead toxic eff ects on higher plants. Russ. J. Plant
Physiol. 48: 523-544.

24. Seyyedi, M., Timko, M.P. & Sundqvist C. (1999). Protochlorophylliden POR and chlorophyll formation in the lip I mutant of
pea. Physiol. Plant., 106, 344354.

25. Tandy, S., Schulin, R. & Nowack B. (2006). The influence of EDDS on the uptake of heavy metals in hydroponically grown
sunflowers. Chemosphere, 62, 14541463.

26. Tripathi, A.K. & Tripathi S. (1998). Changes in some physiological and biochemical characters in Albizia lebbek as bio-
indicators of heavy metal toxicity. J. Environ. Biol., 20(2), 9398.

27. Wierzbicka M, Obidzinska J. 1998. The effect of lead on seed imbibition and germination in different plant species. Plant Sci
137: 155-171.

28. Wojas, S., Ruszczynska, A., Bulska, E., Wojciechowski, M. and Antosiewicz, D. M., 2007. Ca2+ dependent plant response to
Pb2+ is regulated by LCT1. Enviorn. Poll., 147: 584-592.

APPENDIX

Table 1: Seed Germination, Root Length, Shoot Length, Dry Weight (DW) of Root and Dry Weight (DW) of Shoot
in Control and Different Treatments of Lead and Mercury in Albizia lebbeck, on Day 06 After Induction of Stress

The mean values (n=5) in a row followed by different letter for each plant species are significantly different (P0.05)
according to Duncans multiple range (DMR) test. Figures in parentheses represent per cent of control.

www.tjprc.org [email protected]