Skip to main content
NCBI home page
Springer logoLink to Springer
. 2024 May 4;40(6):189. doi: 10.1007/s11274-024-03974-4

Microbial recovery of rare earth elements from various waste sources: a mini review with emphasis on microalgae

Milada Vítová 1,✉, Dana Mezricky 2
PMCID: PMC11068686  PMID: 38702568

Abstract

Rare Earth Elements (REEs) are indispensable in contemporary technologies, influencing various aspects of our daily lives and environmental solutions. The escalating demand for REEs has led to increased exploitation, resulting in the generation of diverse REE-bearing solid and liquid wastes. Recognizing the potential of these wastes as secondary sources of REEs, researchers are exploring microbial solutions for their recovery. This mini review provides insights into the utilization of microorganisms, with a particular focus on microalgae, for recovering REEs from sources such as ores, electronic waste, and industrial effluents. The review outlines the principles and distinctions of bioleaching, biosorption, and bioaccumulation, offering a comparative analysis of their potential and limitations. Specific examples of microorganisms demonstrating efficacy in REE recovery are highlighted, accompanied by successful methods, including advanced techniques for enhancing microbial strains to achieve higher REE recovery. Moreover, the review explores the environmental implications of bio-recovery, discussing the potential of these methods to mitigate REE pollution. By emphasizing microalgae as promising biotechnological candidates for REE recovery, this mini review not only presents current advances but also illuminates prospects in sustainable REE resource management and environmental remediation.

Keywords: Rare earth elements, Recovery, Microorganisms, Algae, Bioleaching, Bioaccumulation

Introduction

Rare earth elements (REEs) are groups of 17 elements in the periodic table including yttrium, scandium and 15 lanthanides. Despite their name, REEs are not actually rare in terms of their abundance in the Earth’s crust. However, they are often dispersed in low concentrations, making their extraction and separation complex and expensive. Due to their importance in modern technologies, there has been growing concern about the supply and sustainability of REEs. They are integral to many aspects of human lives, from the devices we use to the technologies that help address environmental challenges. They are critical in a variety of products including permanent magnets in electric motors or wind turbines, catalysts, lighting, electronics, advanced weapons systems or clean energy technologies like solar panels and rechargeable batteries (Balaram 2019). China has historically dominated the production of rare earths, which has led to concerns about supply chain security. For example, US imported 80% of REEs from China in 2022 and EU imports up to 98% (U.S. Geological Survey 2023; European Commission 2023). Efforts are being made in various countries to diversify rare earth production and recycling methods to reduce dependency on a single source (Brown et al. 2023).

REEs are primarily mined and extracted from ore sources like monazite, bastnasite, or xenotime by heating in acids and solvents (Congressional Research Service 2020). Solid and liquid REE-bearing wastes are generated in various industries (Omodara et al. 2019). Notably, there has been an explosive increase in waste electric and electronic equipment (WEEE). The WEEE were estimated at over 52 million metric tons by 2021 and are considered as secondary sources of REEs (Isildar et al. 2019). Conventional physicochemical methods of REE recovery (e.g., solvent extraction, ion exchange, coprecipitation, and crystallization) are energy-intensive and often cause further pollution. Low-cost and eco-friendly technologies including biosorbents, bio-electrochemical systems, bioleaching, and biomineralization, have become alternatives in the recovery of REEs (Yu et al. 2020). Microorganisms, including bacteria, algae, fungi, yeast and archaea, have been found to play a significant role in the natural cycling of REEs and researchers are exploring the potential of harnessing these microorganisms for the purpose of recovering REEs from various sources (Jalali and Lebeau 2021). However, a relatively low recovery rate and selectivity severely hinder their large-scale applications. Nevertheless, analyses in terms of economic perspectives indicate that REE bio-recovery from waste materials may be a cost-effective approach. This focus was expanded to exploit novel strain resources, genetic engineering of strains and other strategies to improve bio-recovery efficiency (Jung et al. 2023).

The bio-recovery of REEs include particularly bioleaching, biosorption or bioaccumulation (Fig. 1). Bioleaching is based on dissolving REEs from the mineral matrix with organic acids produced by some bacteria and archaea (Dev et al. 2020). Biosorption is a passive, non-metabolic process where REEs are bound to functional groups (such as carboxyl, hydroxyl, and phosphate groups) on the cell walls of both living and dead cells (Giese 2020). In contrast, bioaccumulation is an active process where metals must enter the cell and accumulate inside. Metal uptake is only possible in living cells (Zabochnicka-Świątek and Krzywonos 2014). The mechanisms of uptake and bio-recovery of REEs on the cellular level are schematically summarized in the Fig. 2.

Fig. 1.

Fig. 1

Open in a new tab

Scheme of bio-recovery of rare earth elements

Fig. 2.

Fig. 2

Open in a new tab

Scheme of the mechanisms of uptake and bio-recovery of rare earth elements. Solid to aqueous phase mobilization occurs through (i) redoxolysis, (ii) acidolysis and (iii) complexolysis methods. REEs can either (a) bind with functional groups on microbial surface—biosorption, (b) accumulate inside the cell through channels—bioaccumulation, or (c) get precipitated with inorganic phosphate liberated through phosphatase enzymes—bioprecipitation (Lhamo and Mahanty 2022)

Mechanisms of bio-recovery

Bioleaching

Bioleaching is a process by which microorganisms, usually bacteria or fungi, are used to extract metals from ores, minerals, or secondary sources (Adentuji et al. 2023; Devi and Ganesh 2023). This method is an alternative to traditional chemical or physical processes for metal extraction. Bioleaching is particularly effective for the recovery of metals from low-grade ores or complex mineral sources that are not easily processed using conventional methods.

The bioleaching process generally involves the following steps: (a) Attachment and colonization: microorganisms attach themselves to mineral surfaces; (b) Metabolic activity: Microorganisms release organic acids, enzymes, and other metabolites, promoting the dissolution of minerals and leaching of metals; (c) Recovery: Dissolved metals can be recovered through various methods, such as precipitation, solvent extraction, ion exchange or bio-methods.

Bioleaching has several advantages over traditional methods, including lower energy consumption, reduced environmental impact, and the ability to process ores using methods that are not economically viable using conventional techniques (Pollmann et al. 2018). It is used for the extraction of various metals including REEs. However, the success of bioleaching depends on factors such as the type of microorganisms used, characteristics of the ore, and the environmental conditions of the bioleaching operation (temperature, pH, pulp density, particle size, medium composition, aeration and stirring) (Owusu-Fordjour and Yang 2023).

Biosorption

Biosorption is defined as the transport of toxic metals from aqueous solutions to the surface of dead or living biomass (Jais et al. 2017). Research is focused on removal of toxic metals or metalloids by biomass of different origins. In contrast to physical and chemical methods, biosorption is quick, reversible, inexpensive, and environmentally friendly. Apart from plants, algae are well studied naturally inspired biosorbents that offer various advantages (Goswami et al. 2022). These are mainly: easy production, cultivation under a wide range of growth conditions and high metal binding capacity (Ramírez-Calderón et al. 2020). Cell walls play a main role in the biosorption of metals, exposing binding sites for metal ions. The functional groups (OH−, SO42−, NH2 etc.) of polysaccharides, lipids, and proteins of algal cell walls (these differ in red, brown, or green algae) act as binding sites (Cheng et al. 2019; Giese 2020). The most studied microalga for biosorption is the green alga Chlamydomonas reinhardtii due to its unicellular nature, rapid growth, and ability to adapt to various environments (Mantzorou et al. 2018). Its cell wall structure and surface characteristics make it suitable for adsorbing heavy metals and other pollutants, making it a promising candidate for biosorption studies. In addition, its relatively simple genetic arrangement facilitates genetic engineering for enhanced biosorption capabilities.

There are several reports that show that living algal biomass can be effectively used for biosorption, but mostly inactive biomass and non-living algae have been used for this purpose, including carbonized Parachlorella biomass used for recovery of REEs from clay minerals (Ponou et al. 2014). According to Kumar et al. (2009), five green marine macroalgae, namely Cladophora fasicularis, Ulva lactuca, Chaetomorpha sp, Caulerpa sertularioides, Valoniopsis pachynema can accumulate significant amounts of heavy metals.

Bioaccumulation

Bioaccumulation has been referred to as a two-phase mechanism. The first phase represents passive metal binding to the cell wall. A second phase, metal uptake into the cell, is only possible in living cells (Zabochnicka-Świątek and Krzywonos 2014). Microalgae use various strategies to maintain intracellular metal concentrations at optimal levels and to prevent the entry of non-essential metals in order to maintain inner metal homeostasis (Torres et al. 2008). These mechanisms include metal exclusion or metallic efflux systems and intracellular accumulation. Intracellular accumulation of metals represents an important mechanism for metal tolerance and detoxification (Sriprang and Murooka 2007). Microalgae can produce chelators that are able to complex with metals. These complexes are then localized in the cell to avoid the toxic effects of metals (Nowicka 2022). Metallothioneins (MTs) and phytochelatins (PCs) are the most powerful compounds in metal detoxification, probably having independent functions (Shukla et al. 2016). MTs are metal binding proteins controlling physiological intracellular metal levels (Gaur and Rai 2001). Molecules of MTs possess a number of sulfhydryl groups that allow the binding of metals (Joshi et al. 2016). PCs are short polypeptides found in higher plants, algae (including cyanobacteria), yeasts and nematodes (Wang et al. 2017), playing a role in metal detoxification (Shukla et al. 2016). They were proven to be synthesized and used in algae for detoxification (Balzano et al. 2020). Metals bound to PC are stored in vacuoles, playing a key role in the metal detoxification of the cytoplasm (Joshi et al. 2016; Sriprang and Murooka 2007). Several studies have shown that REEs can accumulate in chloroplasts of algae (Guo et al. 2000; Shen et al. 2002, 2003). Similarly, the REEs Nd and Ce preferentially accumulated in chloroplasts in the green alga Desmodesmus quadricauda while La and Gd were found in the cytoplasm (Řezanka et al. 2016).

Bio-recovery by microalgae

Common microalgae that can be used for metal recovery or wastewater treatment cover a wide spectrum of green, red and brown algae and cyanobacteria. Thanks to their ability to fix CO2 and grow phototrophically they are promising cell factories to produce bioenergy and high-value products with potential for a circular economy (Anyaoha et al. 2024; Goswami et al. 2023). Except for photoautotrophy, there are several types of algae able to grow under chemoheterotrophic or mixotrophic metabolic regimes, which is beneficial in the use of industrial wastewaters containing high organic loads. The most studied strains from this point of view are the green alga Chlorella vulgaris, and the cyanobacterium Arthrospira platensis, cultivated on a wide range of wastewaters of different origins (Wollmann et al. 2019).

Microalgae specialized for growth on harsh habitats (so called extremophiles) are potential candidates for biotechnologies. Strains isolated from such places can grow under severe conditions needed for metal recovery (Malavasi et al. 2020). Such conditions include very low or very high pH (pH2 or pH11), extreme temperatures (< 10 °C or > 40 °C), high organic doses, high salt, or high metal levels. Extremophiles consist of two categories—extremotolerant microorganisms that can survive under extreme conditions but grow optimally under normal conditions and those that need extreme conditions for their metabolic activity (Rampelotto 2013; Varshney et al. 2015).

One of the promising extremophiles with a strong biotechnological potential is the unicellular red alga Galdieria sulphuraria (Čížková et al. 2019b). Strains of this Rhodophyta can grow not only phototrophically but also mixotrophically and heterotrophically on 27 different sugars and sugar alcohols; this is unique among microalgae (Gross and Schnarrenberger 1995; Náhlík et al. 2021). G. sulphuraria withstands highly acidic environments, up to pH 1.8, and temperatures up to 56 °C (Merola et al. 1981; Selvaratnam et al. 2014). Metabolic diversity, combined with the production of high value phycobiliprotein phycocyanin, makes G. sulphuraria a very promising tool for biotechnology (Wan et al. 2016). The next promising acidophilic strain is the green alga Chlamydomonas acidophila isolated from an acidic river in a mining area with a very low pH, and able to grow mixotrophically on glucose, glycerol, and starch (Cuaresma et al. 2011). It produces antioxidants such as the carotenoid lutein (Garbayo et al. 2008).

The advantage of using microalgae for bio-recovery lies mainly in their simple cell structures, easy access to CO2 and nutrients and the ability to grow in extreme environments (Leong and Chang 2020). As a result, they are more efficient in converting energy into biomass (Priyadarshani et al. 2012). Several species of microalgae are already known to be powerful accumulators of toxic metals (e.g., Scenedesmus subspicatus, Chlamydomonas sp., Cyclotella cryptica, Phaeodactylum tricornutum, Porphyridium purpureum, Phormidium ambiguum, Pseudochlorococcum typicum, Chlorella kessleri, Chlorella vulgaris, Phormidium sp., Rhizoclonium hookeri, Spirulina sp., etc.) (Guleri et al. 2020; Schmitt et al. 2001; Shanab et al. 2012). Their success strongly depends on conditions and species used. Moreover, the microalgal biomass can be further reused for other applications such as biofuel production, aquaculture and animal feed, fertilizers, or for the biosynthesis of bioactive compounds such as vitamins and pigments (Goswani et al. 2022; Brar et al. 2017; Schnurr and Allen 2015).

Bio-recovery of REEs

Bacteria, yeast, and fungi

Bio-recovery or bioleaching of REEs using bacteria, yeast, and fungi is an innovative and environmentally friendly approach to extract these valuable materials from ores (namely monazite, bastnasite, or apatite) or various industry wastes (Vo et al. 2024). REEs occur in various forms as phosphates, sulphates, or silicates in these primary resources. Secondary REE resources typically comprise wastes like phosphogypsum, red mud, coal-related resources, and WEEE (Fathollahzadeh et al. 2019; Shi et al. 2023). Traditional extraction methods often involve the use of harsh chemicals and can have significant environmental impacts. Bio-recovery, on the other hand, harnesses the metabolic capabilities of microorganisms to selectively leach and recover REEs (Danouche et al. 2024). Microorganisms active in bioleaching can be both autotrophic and heterotrophic.

Certain bacteria, such as acidophilic bacteria, are well-suited for bioleaching. They thrive in acidic environments and produce organic acids that help dissolve minerals containing REEs. Bacterial strains like Acidithiobacillus ferrooxidans and Acidithiobacillus thiooxidans were studied for their ability to solubilize REEs from ores (Hong et al. 2023; Hosseini et al. 2022; Tayar et al. 2022). Bioleaching by bacteria can be followed by accumulation of REEs by algae Euglena sp. (EugVP) and Chlamydomonas sp. (ChlSG) (García-Balboa et al. 2022).

Some yeast species were found to play a role in bioleaching processes. Yeasts like Yarrowia lipolytica have demonstrated the ability to extract REEs from ores or electronic waste (Ferreira et al. 2022; Shen et al. 2023). Yeasts often produce organic acids and excrete metabolites that facilitate the dissolution of minerals and enhance the availability of REEs.

Fungi are also employed in bioleaching due to their ability to produce organic acids and enzymes that can break down mineral structures. Fungal species like Aspergillus niger or Penicillium spp. were investigated for their potential to extract REEs and were reported as being the two most common chemoautotrophs used for bioleaching (Owusu-Fordjour and Yang 2023; Zhou et al. 2024). Microorganisms efficient in the bioleaching of REEs are summarized in Table 1.

Table 1.

Bacteria, yeasts and fungi efficient in REE recovery

REE Microorganism Mechanism Conditions References
La

Magnetospirillum magneticum

Saccharomyces cerevisiae

Biosorption

Biosorption

batch, 4d, 30 °CC, pH6

batch, 30 °CC, pH4

Mohammadi et al. (2022)

Di Caprio et al. (2016)
Ce, Dy, Er, Eu, Gd, Ho, La, Lu, Nd, Pr, Sm, Tb, Tm

Acidophilium multivorum

Leptospidillum ferriphilum

Bioleaching

Bioleaching

batch, 15d, 30 °CC, pH3

batch, 15d, 30 °CC, pH3

 García-Balboa et al. (2022)

La, Nd, Ce;

REE ore

Yarrowia lipolytica (IM-UFRJ 50678)

Yarrowia lipolytica

Bioleaching

Bioleaching

batch, 45 min, 50 °CC

batch, pH6

Ferreira et al. (2022)

Shen et al. (2023)
Heavy REEs

Bacillus subtilis

Leinsingeria methylohalidivorans

Biosorption

Biosorption

batch, 2–4d, 30 °CC

batch, 2d, 20 °CC

Breuker et al. (2020)

Takahashi et al. (2005)
La, Sm

Bacillus subtilis-alginate

Bacillus subtilis

Biosorption

Biosorption

batch, 1 h, 30 °CC

batch, 20 min, 30 °CC, pH3

Coimbra et al. (2019)

Giese and Jordao (2019)
Gd, Dy, Yb, Lu Saccharomyces cerevisiae Biosorption batch, 2–4d, 30 °CC Breuker et al. (2020)
La, Nd, Dy, Yb Pichia naganishii Biosorption batch, 2–4d, 30 °CC Breuker et al. (2020)
Preference for: Gd Pichia sp. Biosorption batch, 2–4d, 30 °CC Breuker et al. (2020)
Preference for: Ce, Nd, Gd, Dy Catenulostroma chromoblastomyces Biosorption batch, 2–4d, 30 °CC Breuker et al. (2020)
Preference for: Gd, Yb, Lu Pezicomycotina sp. Biosorption batch, 10d, 30 °CC Breuker et al. (2020)
Preference for: Nd, Gd, Gy, Lu Fusarium sp. Biosorption batch, 2–4 d, 30 °CC Breuker et al. (2020)
heavy REEs Escherichia coli Biosorption batch, 30 min, 37 °CC

Takahashi et al. (2005)

Park et al. (2020)
La, Eu, Yb Pseudomonas aeruginosa Biosorption batch, 30 °CC, pH5 Texier et al. (1999)
Nd

Kluyveromyces marxianus

Candida colliculosa

Debaromyces hansenii

Saccharomyces cerevisiae

Biosorption

Biosorption

Biosorption

Biosorption

batch, pH1

batch, pH1

batch, pH1

batch, pH1

 Vlachou et al. (2009)

Ce;

REEs from industry wastes

Aspergillus niger

Aspergillus flavus

Bacillus licheniformis

Biosorption;

Bioleaching

Bioleaching

Bioleaching

Bioleaching

batch, 10d, 30 °CC, pH5

batch, 3d, 28 °CC, pH2

batch, 3d, 28 °CC, pH2

batch, 25 °CC, pH2

semicontinuous, 4d, 30 °CC, pH5.3

Cheng et al. (2022)

Sallam et al. (2014)

Barnett et al. (2020)

Bahaloo-Horeh and Mousavi (2022)

Shen et al. (2023)

Ma et al. (2023)

Castro et al. (2023b)
La, Ce Agrobacterium sp. HN1 Biosorption batch, 2 h, 30 °CC, pH6.8 Xu et al. (2011)
Sc, La, Sm, Y Candida utilis Biosorption batch, pH5 Korenevsky et al. (1999)
Eu Bacillus thuringiensis Biosorption batch, 2d, pH8 Pan et al. (2017)
Tb Caulobacter crescentum Biosorption batch, 20 min, 30 °CC, pH6 Park et al. (2016)
REEs Arthrobacter niicotianae Bioleaching batch, 30 min Park et al. (2020)
REE ore

Aspergillus niger

Acidithiobacillus ferrooxidans

Gluconobacter oxydans

Bioleaching

Bioleaching

Bioleaching

batch, 7d, 38 °CC, pH5

batch, 60d, 30 °CC, pH3

batch, 5d, 30 °CC, pH3

Zhou et al. (2024)

Fatollahzadeh et al. (2018b)

Tian et al. (2022)

Gao et al. (2023)
REEs from phosphogypsum; gold mine Acidithiobacillus thioxidans Bioleaching batch, 8d, 30 °CC, pH3

Tayar et al. (2022)

Hong et al. (2023)

Hosseini et al. (2022)
REEs from monazite

Enterobacter aerogenes

Penicillium sp.

Pantoea agglomerans

Pseudomonas putida

Burkholderia thailandensis

Bioleaching

Bioleaching

Bioleaching

Bioleaching

Bioleaching

batch, 18d, 30 °CC

batch, 8d, 30 °CC

batch, 14d, 37 °CC

batch, 14d, 37 °CC

batch, 21d, 30 °CC, pH5.3

Fathollahzadeh et al. (2018a)

Corbett et al. (2018)

Castro et al. (2023a)
REEs from fly ash

Candida bombicola

Phanerochaete chrysosporium

Cryptococcus curvatus

Bioleaching

Bioleaching

Bioleaching

batch, 3d, 28 °CC, pH5.5

batch, 3d, 28 °CC, pH5.5

batch, 3d, 28 °CC, pH5.5

 Park and Liang (2019)
Open in a new tab

Benefits of bio-recovery/bioleaching include reduced environmental impact, lower energy consumption, and often, a higher selectivity for target elements compared to conventional methods. Harnessing the biological capabilities of bacteria, yeast, and fungi for the bio-recovery of REEs holds great promise for future sustainable and eco-friendly mining practices. However, challenges such as the slow kinetics of the process and the need for optimization remain areas of ongoing research.

Algae

Biosorption of REEs by algae was described, for example, in the seaweed Sargassum sp., where biomass quickly and efficiently acquired Eu, Gd, La, Nd, Pr and Sm (Oliveira and Garcia 2009; Oliveira et al. 2011, 2012). Similar results were obtained with other species of brown seaweed, such as Sargassum polycystum (Diniz and Volesky 2005, 2006) Sargassum hemiphylum, Ulva pertusa, Schizymenia dubyi (Kano 2013) and Turbinaria conoides (Vijayaraghavan et al. 2010, 2011). Gracilaria gracilis was able to efficiently accumulate, in 70% yield, low concentrations (0.5 mg/l) of REEs (Y, Ce, Nd, Eu and La) occurring in wastewater . The ability of G. gracilis to uptake REEs from such low concentrations overcomes one of the greatest difficulties in recycling these elements so far (Jacinto et al. 2018). A promising candidate for the selective recovery of Sc and REEs from the aquatic environment is the seaweed Posidonia oceanica (Ramasamy et al. 2019). Macroalga Ulva sp. was used for recovery of REEs from industrial wastewaters (Manikandan and Lens 2022; Viana et al. 2023).

Also, some microalgae, such as Chlorella spp. and Nannochloropsis spp. or cyanobacteria Microcystis spp. were shown to be active biosorbents of REEs (La3+ and Ce3+) (Richards and Mullins 2013; Zhou et al. 2004). The ability to accumulate REEs has also been demonstrated in the red alga G. sulphuraria from aqueous solutions containing a mixture of Nd3+, Dy3+ and La3+ at pH 2.5, with an efficiency higher than 90% and at a lanthanide concentration of 0.5 ppm (Minoda et al. 2015). The authors also showed that REEs accumulated inside cells, i.e. they were not only adsorbed onto the cell wall. G. sulphuraria accumulated significant levels of Ce, Nd, La and Y from red mud, a byproduct of alumina production (Náhlík et al. 2023), and REEs from waste luminophores (Singh et al. 2023). Another red alga Galdieria phlegrea was used to test bioaccumulation of REEs from luminophores from fluorescence lamps and energy saving light bulbs added into the medium in the form of a powder. Algal cells were cultured mixotrophically in a liquid medium with the addition of glycerol as a source of carbon. G. phlegrea could grow in the presence of luminophores and accumulate REEs (Čížková et al. 2021). The cyanobacterium Anabaena accumulated dissolved Eu, Sm and Nd and formed Eu particles inside its cell (Fischer et al. 2019). Successful biosorbents of La are also immobilized microalgal cells Ankistrodesmus sp. and Golenkinia sp. (Correa et al. 2016). Recovery of REEs from red mud, was successfully tested in three species of green microalgae D. quadricauda, C. reindhardtii and Parachlorella kessleri. The best growing species was D. quadricauda (2.71 cell doublings /day), which accumulated REEs to the highest level (27.3 mg/kg/day), compared with C. reinhardtii and P. kessleri (Čížková et al. 2019a). As a promising accumulator of REEs, N. oculata was studied, accumulating up to 83% of Ce (Wu et al. 2022). Algae and cyanobacteria efficient in the recovery of REEs are summarized in Table 2.

Table 2.

Algae and cyanobacteria efficient in REE recovery

REE Alga Mechanism Conditions References
Nd

Ankistrodesmus gracilis

Ankistrodesmus densus

Monoraphidium sp.

Chlorella minutissima

Euglena gracilis

Chlamydomonas reinhardtii

Arthronema africanum

Calothrix brevissima

Chlorella sorokiniana

Euglena mutabilis

Euglena stellata

Euglena viridis

Galdieria sulphuraria

Lyngbya taylori

Nostoc ellipsosporum

Nostoc punctforme

Porphyridium purpureum

Prymnesium saltans

Taselmis chuii

Arthrospira platensis

Messastrum gracilis

Biosorption

Biosorption

Biosorption

Biosorption

Bioaccumulation

Biosorption

Biosorption

Biosorption

Biosorption

Biosorption

Biosorption

Biosorption

Biosorption

Biosorption

Biosorption

Biosorption

Biosorption

Biosorption

Biosorption

Biosorption

Biosorption

batch, 1d, pH1.5

batch, 1d, pH1.5

batch, 1d, pH1.5

batch, 1d, pH1.5

batch, 30 min

batch, 3 h

batch, 3 h

batch, 3 h

batch, 3 h

batch, 3 h

batch, 3 h

batch, 3 h

batch, 3 h

batch, 3 h

batch, 3 h

batch, 3 h

batch, 3 h

batch, 3 h

batch, 3 h

batch, 3 h

batch, 3 h

Palmieri et al. (2000)

Guo et al. (2000)

Shen et al. (2002)

Heilmann et al. (2015)
La, Ce

Chaetoeros mulleri

Pavlova lutheri

Tetraselmis chuii

Nannochloropsis spp.

Microcystis spp.

Biosorption

Biosorption

Biosorption

Biosorption

Biosorption

batch, 10d, 35 °CC, 26 °CC

batch, 10d, 35 °CC, 26 °CC

batch, 10d, 35 °CC, 26 °CC

batch, 10d, 35 °CC, 26 °CC

batch, 4d, 28 °CC, pH8, 2000 lx

Richards and Mullins (2013)

Zhou et al. (2004)

La, Eu;

Nd

 Chlorella vulgaris

Biosorption

Biosorption

Biosorption

Biosorption

batch, 20 min, pH3

batch, 20 min, pH4, pH5

batch, 90 min, 21 °CC, 35 °CC, 50 °CC, pH5

batch, RT, 300 µmol/s/m2

Heidelmann et al. (2017)

Ozaki et al. (2003)

Kücüker et al. (2017)

Tunali and Yenigun (2021)

Er, Yb;

La, Nd, Eu, Gd;

Sm, Pr

 Sargassum sp.

Biosorption

Biosorption

batch, 30–40 min, 20 °CC, pH5

batch, 20 °CC, 30 °CC, pH5

Palmieri et al. (2001)

Oliveira and Garcia (2009)

Oliveira et al. (2012)

Oliveira et al. (2011)
La, Eu, Yb

Sargassum polycystum

Sargassum hemiphylum

Schizymenia dubyi

Biosorption

Biosorption

Biosorption

batch, 1d, pH3, pH4.5

batch, 1d, pH3, pH4.5 batch, 1d, pH4

Diniz and Volesky (2005, 2006)

Kano (2013)
La, Ce, Eu, Yb Turbinaria conoides Biosorption batch, 50 min, 6 h, pH4.9 Vijayaraghavan et al. (2010, 2011)
La, Yb Ulva pertusa Biosorption batch, 1d, pH4 Kano (2013)

Y, Eu, La, Ce;

La, Nd, Dy

 Ulva sp. Biosorption

batch

batch

Viana et al (2023)

Manikandan and Lens (2022)
La

Sargassum fluitans

Chloroidium saccharophilum

Stichococcus bacillaris

Desmodesmus multivariabilis

Chlorella vulgaris

Scenedesmus acuminutus

Chlamydomonas reinhardtii

Ankistrodesmus sp.

Golenkinia sp.

Ulva innatifida

Sargassum hemiphyllum

Biosorption

Biosorption

Biosorption

Biosorption

Biosorption

Biosorption

Biosorption

Biosorption

Biosorption

Bioaccumulation

Bioaccumulation

batch, 45 min, pH4, pH5

batch, 5 h, pH6

batch, 5 h, pH6

batch, 6 h, pH6

batch, 5 h, pH6

batch, 5 h, pH6

batch, 5 h, pH6

batch, 8 h, 23 °CC, pH7.5

batch, 8 h, 23 °CC, pH7.5

batch, 1.25d, 15 °CC, pH3

batch, 1.25d, 15 °CC, pH3

Palmieri et al. (2001)

Birungi and Chirwa (2013)

Birungi and Chirwa (2014)

Correa et al. (2016)

Sakamoto et al. (2008)
Eu Acutodesmus acuminutus Biosorption batch, 40 °CC, pH4, pH7 Furuhashi et al. (2019)
Nd, Eu

Chlorella brevissima

Chlorella kessleri

Calothrix brevissima

Biosorption

Biosorption

Biosorption

batch, RT, 25 °CC, 60, 80, 100 µmol/s/m2

batch, RT, 25 °CC, 60, 80, 100 µmol/s/m2

batch, RT, 25 °CC, 60, 80, 100 µmol/s/m2

 Heilmann et al. (2021)
Pr

Turbinaria conoides

Sargassum wightii

Biosorption

Biosorption

batch, 1 h, pH5

batch, 1 h, pH5

 Vijayaraghava and Jegan (2015)

La, Nd, Dy;

Y, Sm;

Ce, Eu, Tb

 Galdieria sulphuraria

Bioaccumulation

Bioaccumulation

Bioaccumulation

batch, 0.5d, 42 °CC, pH1.5

batch, 45 °CC, pH3

batch, 1d, 37 °CC, pH2.5–5.5, 50 µmol/s/m2

Minoda et al. (2015)

Sun et al. (2022)

Iovinella et al. (2022)
Sc, REE Posidonia oceanica Biosorption batch, 1d, 20 °CC, pH5 Ramasamy et al. (2019)
La, Ce Cystoseira indica Biosorption batch, 8 h, 55 °CC, pH5–5.5 Keshtkar et al. (2018)
Ce Arthrospira sp. Biosorption batch, pH5–5.5, 300 µmol/s/m2 Sadovsky et al. (2016)
Y, La, Ce, Pr, Nd, Eu, Gd, Tb, Dy

Ulva lactuca

Ulva intestinalis

Fucus spiralis

Fucus vesiculosus

Gracilaria sp.

Osmundea pinnatifida

Biosorption

Biosorption

Biosorption

Biosorption

Biosorption

Biosorption

batch, 3d, 20 °CC, pH8.5

batch, 3d, 20 °CC, pH8.5

batch, 3d, 20 °CC, pH8.5

batch, 3d, 20 °CC, pH8.5

batch, 3d, 20 °CC, pH8.5

batch, 3d, 20 °CC, pH8.5

 Pinto et al. (2020)
La, Ce, Nd, Gd Desmodesmus quadricauda Bioaccumulation batch, 1d, 30 °CC, pH6.5–7.5, 50–750 µmol/s/m2 Řezanka et al. (2016)
Y, Ce, Nd, Eu, La Gracilaria gracilis Bioaccumulation batch, 2d, 20 °CC Jacinto et al. (2018)
Tm Turbinaria conoides biosorption batch, 3.5 h, 32 °CC, pH5 Rangabhashiyam and Vijayaraghavan (2019)
Ce, Nd, Tb, La

Nostoc sp.

Synechococcus elongatus

Calothrix brevissima

Desmonostoc muscorum

Komarekiella

Biosorption

Biosorption

Biosorption

Biosorption

Biosorption

Batch, 23 °CC, 37 °CC, pH8, 300 µmol/s/m2

batch, 23 °CC, 37 °CC, pH8, 300 µmol/s/m2

batch, 23 °CC, 37 °CC, pH8, 300 µmol/s/m2

batch, 23 °CC, 37 °CC, pH8, 300 µmol/s/m2

batch, 23 °CC, 37 °CC, pH8, 300 µmol/s/m2

 Paper et al. (2023)
Eu, Sm, Nd

Anabaena sp.

Anabaena cylindrica

Biosorption

Biosorption

batch, 12d, 22 °CC, pH6.8

batch, 12d, 22 °CC, pH6.8

 Fischer et al. (2019)
REEs from luminophores

Galdieria sulphuraria

Galdieria phlegrea

Bioaccumulation

Bioaccumulation

batch, 1d, 40 °CC, pH3, 350 µmol/s/m2

batch, 5d, 39 °CC, pH4, 150 µmol/s/m2

Singh et al. (2023)

Čížková et al. (2021)
REEs from red mud

Galdieria sulphuraria

Phormidium sp.

Oscillatoria sp.

Lyngbya sp.

D. quadricauda

C. reinhardtii

P. kessleri

Bioaccumulation

Bioaccumulation

Bioaccumulation

Bioaccumulation

Bioaccumulation

Bioaccumulation

Bioaccumulation

batch, 3d, 40 °CC, pH3, 500 µmol/s/m2

batch, 45d

batch, 45d

batch, 45d

batch, 5d, 30 °CC, pH 6.5–7.5, 500 µmol/s/m2

batch, 5d, 30 °CC, pH6.5–7.5, 500 µmol/s/m2

batch, 5d, 30 °CC, pH 6.5–7.5, 500 µmol/s/m2

Náhlík et al. (2023)

Dubey and Dubey (2011)

Čížková et al. (2019a)
REEs from ore Phormidium Biosorption batch, 1–120 min, RT, pH 1–8 Kim et al. (2011)
Open in a new tab

Conclusion

The global significance of REEs underscores the potential for substantial benefits through research progress in their recovery. Advancements in REE recovery methods not only contribute to a more secure and diversified supply chain but also alleviate dependence on limited sources. Additionally, enhanced recovery techniques can mitigate environmental impacts associated with conventional extraction, promoting sustainability and responsible utilization of resources. Progress in REE recovery research holds the promise of fostering technological innovation, economic growth, and environmental stewardship on a global scale.

However, despite the promise of microbial recovery methods, challenges remain, including optimizing the efficiency of REE recovery, scaling up laboratory processes for industrial applications, and understanding the ecological impact of introducing engineered microorganisms into natural environments. To overcome all these challenges, research in this field needs to focus on improving the efficiency, cost-effectiveness and environmental sustainability of microbial recovery methods for REEs, including exploring mechanisms and molecular regulation within cells during bio-recovery.

A multidisciplinary approach is crucial for addressing the challenges associated with the recovery of REEs. A comprehensive strategy that integrates expertises from various fields such as geology, chemistry, engineering, and environmental science is essential. Additionally, economists, policymakers, and industry experts are important in creating a supportive framework that incentivizes responsible REE recovery. Ultimately, a multidisciplinary strategy will not only enhance the efficiency of the recovery process but will also promote sustainable practices, contributing to the responsible utilization of these critical resources.

Acknowledgements

We acknowledge prof. J. D. Brooker for critical reading and language editing of the text, and our mentor Dr. Vilém Zachleder for his lifelong support and friendship.

Author contributions

MV collected the algal data and wrote the manuscript; DM collected the bacteria and fungi data and revised the manuscript. Both authors have read and agreed to the published version of the manuscript.

Funding

Open access publishing supported by the National Technical Library in Prague. The research was funded by institutional support RVO 67985939 of the Czech Academy of Sciences, Technology Agency of the Czech Republic (project TNO 1000044), and the article is based upon work from COST Action PLANTMETALS, CA19116, supported by COST (European Cooperation in Science and Technology).

Data availability

No datasets were generated or analysed during the current study.

Declarations

Competing interests

The authors declare no competing interests.

Footnotes

Publisher's Note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

References

  1. Anyaoha KE, Krujatz F, Hodgkinson I, Maletz R, Dornack C. Microalgae contribution in enhancing the circular economy drive of biochemical conversion systems—a review. Carbon Resour Convers. 2024;7:100203. doi: 10.1016/j.crcon.2023.10.003. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  2. Bahaloo-Horeh N, Mousavi SM. A novel green strategy for biorecovery of valuable elements along with enrichment of rare earth elements from activated spent automotive catalysts using fungal metabolites. J Hazard Mater. 2022;15(430):128509. doi: 10.1016/j.jhazmat.2022.128509. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  3. Balaram V. Rare earth elements: a review of applications, occurrence, exploration, analysis, recycling, and environmental impact. Geosci Front. 2019;10:1285–1303. doi: 10.1016/j.gsf.2018.12.005. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  4. Balzano S, Sardo A, Blasio M, Chahine TB, Dell’Anno F, Sansone C, Brunet C. Microalgal metallothioneins and phytochelatins and their potential use in bioremediation. Front Microbiol Sec Microbiotechnol. 2020 doi: 10.3389/fmicb.2020.00517. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  5. Barnett MJ, Palumbo-Roe B, Deady EA, Gregory SP. Comparison of three approaches for bioleaching of rare earth elements from bauxite. Minerals. 2020 doi: 10.3390/min10080649. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  6. Birungi ZS, Chirwa EMN. Phytoremediation of lanthanum using algae from eutrophic freshwater sources. Proc Water Environ. 2013 doi: 10.2175/193864713813667728. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  7. Birungi ZS, Chirwa EMN. The kinetics of uptake and recovery of lanthanum using freshwater algae as biosorbents: comparative analysis. Bioresour Technol. 2014;160:43–51. doi: 10.1016/j.biortech.2014.01.033. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  8. Brar A, Kumar M, Vivekanand V, Pareek N. Photoautotrophic microorganisms and bioremediation of industrial effluents: current status and future prospects. Biotechnol. 2017;7:1–8. doi: 10.1007/s13205-017-0600-5. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  9. Breuker A, Ritter SF, Schippers A. Biosorption of rare earth elements by different microorganisms in acidic solutions. Metals. 2020;10:954. doi: 10.3390/met10070954. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  10. Brown RM, Mirkouei A, Reed D, Thompson V. Current nature-based biological practices for rare earth elements extraction and recovery: bioleaching and biosorption. Renew Sustain Energy Rev. 2023;173:113099. doi: 10.1016/j.rser.2022.113099. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  11. Castro L, Gomez-Alvarez H, Carmona M, Gonzalez F, Munoz JA. Influence of biosurfactants in the recovery of REE from monazite using Burkholderia thailandensis. Hydrometallurgy. 2023 doi: 10.1016/j.hydromet.2023.106178. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  12. Castro L, Gomez-Alvarez H, Gonzalez F, Munoz JA. Biorecovery of rare earth elements from fluorescent lamp powder using the fungus Aspergillus niger in batch and semicontinuous systems. Miner Eng. 2023 doi: 10.1016/j.mineng.2023.108215. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  13. Cheng SY, Show P-L, Lau BF, Chang J-S, Ling TC. New prospects for modified algae in heavy metal adsorption. Trends Biotechnol. 2019;37(11):1255–1268. doi: 10.1016/j.tibtech.2019.04.007. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  14. Cheng Y, Zhang T, Zhang L, Ke Z, Kovarik L, Dong H. Resource recovery: adsorption and biomineralization of cerium by Bacillus licheniformis. J Hazard Mater. 2022 doi: 10.1016/j.jhazmat.2021.127844. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  15. Čížková M, Mezricky D, Rucki M, Tóth TM, Náhlík V, Lanta V, Bišová K, Zachleder V, Vítová M. Bio-mining of lanthanides from red mud by green microalgae. Molecules. 2019;24:1356. doi: 10.3390/molecules24071356. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  16. Čížková M, Mezricky P, Mezricky D, Rucki M, Zachleder V, Vítová M. Bioaccumulation of rare earth elements from waste luminophores in the red algae, Galdieria phlegrea. Waste Biomass Valor. 2021;12:3137–3146. doi: 10.1007/s12649-020-01182-3. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  17. Čížková M, Vítová M, Zachleder V. The red microalga Galdieria as a promising organism for applications in biotechnology. Microalgae Physiol Appl. 2019;1:17. doi: 10.5772/intechopen.89810. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  18. Coimbra NV, Gonçalves FS, Nascimento M, Giese EC. Study of adsorption isotherm models on rare earth elements biosorption for separation purposes. Int Schol Sci Res Innov. 2019;13:200–203. [Google Scholar]
  19. Congressional Research Service (2020) An overview of rare earth elements and related issues for congress. https://crsreports.congress.gov/product/pdf /R/R46618
  20. Corbett M, Eksteen J, Niu X-Z, Watkin E. Syntrophic effect of indigenous and inoculated microorganisms in the leaching of rare earth elements from Western Australian monazite. Res Microbiol. 2018;169(10):558–568. doi: 10.1016/j.resmic.2018.05.007. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  21. Correa FDN, Luna AS, da Costa ACA. Kinetics and equilibrium of lanthanum biosorption by free and immobilized microalgal cells. Adsorpt Sci Technol. 2016;35:137–152. doi: 10.1177/0263617416672667. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  22. Cuaresma M, Casal C, Forján E, Vílchez C. Productivity and selective accumulation of carotenoids of the novel extremophile microalga Chlamydomonas acidophila grown with different carbon sources in batch systems. J Ind Microbiol Biotechnol. 2011;38:167–177. doi: 10.1007/s10295-010-0841-3. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  23. Danouche M, Bounaga A, Oulkhir A, Boulif R, Zeroual Y, Benhida R, Lyamlouli K. Advances in bio/chemical approaches for sustainable recycling and recovery of rare earth elements from secondary resources. Sci Total Environ. 2024;914:168811. doi: 10.1016/j.scitotenv.2023.168811. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  24. Dev S, Sachan A, Dehghani F, Ghosh T, Briggs BR, Aggarwal S. Mechanisms of biological recovery of rare-earth elements from industrial and electronic wastes: a review. Chem Eng J. 2020;397:124596. doi: 10.1016/j.cej.2020.124596. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  25. Devi AS, Ganesh S. Recent bioleaching approaches employed for the extraction of metals in mining fields for the purpose of utilization and creating the sustainable future. Environ Qual Manage. 2023 doi: 10.1002/tqem.22085. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  26. Di Caprio F, Altimari P, Zanni E, Uccelletti D, Toro L, Pagnanelli F. Lanthanum biosorption by different Saccharomyces cerevisiae strains. Chem Eng Trans. 2016;49:37–42. doi: 10.3303/CET1649007. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  27. Diniz V, Volesky B. Biosorption of La, Eu and Yb using Sargassum biomass. Water Res. 2005;39(1):239–247. doi: 10.1016/j.watres.2004.09.009. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  28. Diniz V, Volesky B. Desorption of lanthanum, europium and ytterbium from Sargassum. Separ Purif Technol. 2006;50:71–76. doi: 10.1016/j.seppur.2005.11.010. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  29. Dubey K, Dubey KP. A study of the effect of red mud amendments on the growth of cyanobacterial species. Bioremed J. 2011;15:133–139. doi: 10.1080/10889868.2011.598483. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  30. European Commission. Critical raw materials 2023https://single-market-economy.ec.europa.eu/sectors/raw-materials/areas-specific-interest/critical-rawmaterials_en Accessed 18 Jan 2024
  31. Fathollahzadeh H, Becker T, Eksteen JJ, Kaksonen AH, Watkin ELJ. Microbial contact enhances bioleaching of rare earth elements. Bioresour Technol Rep. 2018;3:102–108. doi: 10.1016/j.biteb.2018.07.004. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  32. Fathollahzadeh H, Hackett MJ, Khaleque HN, Eksteen JJ, Kaksonen AH, Watkin ELJ. Better together: potential of co-culture microorganisms to enhance bioleaching of rare earth elements from monazite. Bioresour Technol Rep. 2018;3:109–118. doi: 10.1016/j.biteb.2018.07.003. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  33. Fathollahzadeh H, Eksteen JJ, Kaksonen AH, Watkin ELJ. Role of microorganisms in bioleaching of rare earth element from primary and secondary resources. Appl Microbiol Biotechnol. 2019;103:1043–1057. doi: 10.1007/s00253-018-9526-z. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  34. Ferreira DM, Silva JAS, Sérvulo EFC, Frescura VLA, Dognini J, Silva AAMJ, Oliveira FJS. Valorization of solid waste from oil refining and biodiesel industries for the biorecovery of rare earth elements. Biomass Conver Bioref. 2022;12:2891–2900. doi: 10.1007/s13399-020-00819-6. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  35. Fischer CB, Korsten S, Rosken LM, Cappel F, Beresko C, Ankerhold G, Schonleber A, Geimer S, Ecker D, Wehner S. Cyanobacterial promoted enrichment of rare earth elements europium, samarium and neodymium and intracellular europium particle formation. RSC Adv. 2019;9(56):32581–32593. doi: 10.1039/c9ra06570a. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  36. Furuhashi Y, Honda R, Noguchi M, Hara-Yamamura H, Kobayashi S, Higashimine K, Hasegawa H. Optimum conditions of pH, temperature and preculture for biosorption of europium by microalgae Acutodesmus acuminatus. Biochem Eng J. 2019;143:58–64. doi: 10.1016/j.bej.2018.12.007. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  37. Gao B, Gan M, Sun C, Chen H, Liu X, Liu Q, Wang Y, Cheng H, Zhou H, Chen Z. Bioleaching of ion-adsorption rare earth ores by biogenic lixiviants derived from agriculture waste via a cell-free cascade enzymatic process. Hydrometallurgy. 2023 doi: 10.1016/j.hydromet.2023.106189. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  38. Garbayo I, Cuaresma M, Vílchez C, Vega JM. Effect of abiotic stress on the production of lutein and β-carotene by Chlamydomonas acidophila. Process Biochem. 2008;43:1158–1161. doi: 10.1016/j.procbio.2008.06.012. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  39. García-Balboa C, Martínez-Alesón García P, López-Rodas V, Costas E, Baselga-Cervera B. Microbial biominers: sequential bioleaching and biouptake of metals from electronic scraps. MicrobiologyOpen. 2022 doi: 10.1002/mbo3.1265. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  40. Gaur J, Rai LC. Algal adaptation to environmental stresses. Springer; 2001. Heavy metal tolerance in algae. [Google Scholar]
  41. Giese EC. Biosorption as green technology for the recovery and separation of rare earth elements. World J Microbiol Biotechnol. 2020;36:52. doi: 10.1007/s11274-020-02821-6. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  42. Giese EC, Jordao CS. Biosorption of lanthanum and samarium by chemically modified free Bacillus subtilis cells. Appl Water Sci. 2019;9(8):182. doi: 10.1007/s13201-019-1052-3. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  43. Goswami RK, Agrawal K, Mehariya S, Rajagopal R, Karthikeyan OP, Verma P. Development of economical and sustainable cultivation system for biomass production and simultaneous treatment of municipal wastewater using Tetraselmis indica BDUG001. Environ Technol. 2023;17:1–21. doi: 10.1080/09593330.2023.2166429. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  44. Goswami RK, Agrawal K, Shah MP, Verma P. Bioremediation of heavy metals from wastewater: a current perspective on microalgae-based future. Letters Appl Microbiol. 2022;75(4):701–717. doi: 10.1111/lam.13564. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  45. Goswami RK, Agrawal K, Verma P. Microalgal-based remediation of wastewater: a step towards environment protection and management. Environ Quality Manage. 2022;32(1):105–123. doi: 10.1002/tqem.21850. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  46. Gross W, Schnarrenberger C. Heterotrophic growth of two strains of the acido-thermophilic red alga Galdieria sulphuraria. Plant Cell Physiol. 1995;36:633–638. doi: 10.1093/OXFORDJOURNALS.PCP.A078803. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  47. Guleri S, Saxena A, Singh KJ, Rinku DR, Kapoor N, Tiwari A. Phycoremediation: a novel and synergistic approach in wastewater remediation. J Microbiol Biotechnol Food Sci. 2020;10(1):98–106. doi: 10.15414/jmbfs.2020.10.1.98-106. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  48. Guo P, Wang J, Li X, Zhu J, Reinert T, Heitmann J, Butz T. Study of metal bioaccumulation by nuclear microprobe analysis of algae fossils and living algae cells. Nucl Instrum Methods Phys Res. 2000;161:801–807. doi: 10.1016/S0168-583X(99)00933-7. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  49. Heidelmann GP, Roldão TM, Egler SG, Nascimento M, Giese EC. Microalgae biomass use for lanthanides biosorption. Holos. 2017;6(33):170–179. doi: 10.15628/holos.2017.6436. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  50. Heilmann M, Breiter R, Becker AM. Towards rare earth element recovery from wastewaters: biosorption using phototrophic organisms. Appl Microbiol Biotechnol. 2021;105:5229–5239. doi: 10.1007/s00253-021-11386-9. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  51. Heilmann M, Jurkowski W, Buchholz R, Brueck T, Becker AM. Biosorption of neodymium by selected photoautotrophic and heterotrophic species. J Chem Eng Process Technol. 2015;6:241. doi: 10.4172/2157-7048.1000241. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  52. Hong C, Tang Q, Liu S, Kim H, Liu D. A two-step bioleaching process enhanced the recovery of rare earth elements from phosphogypsum. Hydrometallurgy. 2023;221:106140. doi: 10.1016/j.hydromet.2023.106140. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  53. Hosseini SM, Vakilchap F, Baniasadi M, Mousavi SM, Khodadadi Darban A, Farnaud S. Green recovery of cerium and strontium from gold mine tailings using an adapted acidophilic bacterium in one-step bioleaching approach. J Taiwan Inst Chem Eng. 2022;138:104482. doi: 10.1016/j.jtice.2022.104482. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  54. Iovinella M, Lombardo F, Ciniglia C, Palmieri M, di Cicco MR, Trifuoggi M, Race M, Manfredi C, Lubritto C, Fabbricino M, De Stefano M, Davis SJ. Bioremoval of yttrium (III), cerium (III), europium (III), and terbium (iii) from single and quaternary aqueous solutions using the extremophile Galdieria sulphuraria (Galdieriaceae, Rhodophyta) Plants. 2022;11:1376. doi: 10.3390/plants11101376. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  55. Isildar A, van Hullebusch ED, Lenz M, Du Laing G, Marra A, Cesaro A, Panda S, Akcil A, Kucuker MA, Kuchta K. Biotechnological strategies for the recovery of valuable and critical raw materials from waste electrical and electronic equipment (WEEE)—a review. J Hazard Mater. 2019;362:467–481. doi: 10.1016/j.jhazmat.2018.08.050. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  56. Jacinto J, Henriques B, Duarte AC, Vale C, Pereira E. Removal and recovery of critical rare elements from contaminated waters by living Gracilaria gracilis. J Hazard Mater. 2018;344:531–538. doi: 10.1016/j.jhazmat.2017.10.054. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  57. Jais NM, Mohamed RMSR, Al-Gheethi AA, Hashim MKA. The dual roles of phycoremediation of wet market wastewater for nutrients and heavy metals removal and microalgae biomass production. Clean Technol Environ Policy. 2017;19:37–52. doi: 10.1007/s10098-016-1235-7. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  58. Jalali J, Lebeau T. The role of microorganisms in mobilization and phytoextraction of rare earth elements: a review. Front Environ Sci. 2021;9:688430. doi: 10.3389/fenvs.2021.688430. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  59. Joshi R, Pareek A, Singla-Pareek SL (2016) Plant metallothioneins: classification, distribution, function, and regulation. In: Plant Metal Interaction: Emerging Remediation Techniques 1, Elsevier, Ed. Parvaiz Ahmad. 10.1016/B978-0-12-803158-2.00009-6
  60. Jung H, West ZSZIAC, Banta S. Genetic modification of Acidithiobacillus ferrooxidans for rare-earth element recovery under acidic conditions. Environ Sci Technol. 2023;57(48):19902–19911. doi: 10.1021/acs.est.3c05772. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  61. Kano N. Engineering “biomass now—sustainable growth and use”. Rijeka: Intech Open; 2013. Biosorption of lanthanides using select marine biomass; pp. 101–124. [Google Scholar]
  62. Keshtkar AR, Moosavian MA, Sohbatzadeh H, Mofras M. La(III) and Ce(III) biosorption on sulfur functionalized marine brown algae Cystoseira indica by xanthation method: response surface methodology isotherm and kinetic study. Groundwater Sustain Dev. 2018;8:144–155. doi: 10.1016/j.gsd.2018.10.005. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  63. Kim JA, Dodbiba G, Tanimura Y, Mitsuhashi K, Fukuda N, Okaya K, Matsuo S, Fujita T. Leaching of rare-earth elements and their adsorption by using blue-green algae. Mater Trans. 2011;52:1799–1806. doi: 10.2320/matertrans. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  64. Korenevsky AA, Sorokin VV, Karavaiko GI. Biosorption of rare earth elements. Process Metal. 1999;9:299–306. doi: 10.1016/S1572-4409(99)80119-9. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  65. Kücüker MA, Wieczorek N, Kuchta K, Copty NK. Biosorption of neodymium on Chlorella vulgaris in aqueous solution obtained from hard disk drive magnets. PLoS ONE. 2017 doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0175255. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  66. Kumar JIN, Oommen C, Kumar RN. Biosorption of heavy metals from aqueous solution by green marine macroalgae from Okha Port, Gulf of Kutch, India. Am-Euras J Agric Environ Sci. 2009;6(3):317–323. [Google Scholar]
  67. Leong YK, Chang J-S. Bioremediation of heavy metals using microalgae: recent advances and mechanisms. Bioresource Technol. 2020 doi: 10.1016/j.biortech.2020.122886. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  68. Lhamo P, Mahanty B. Bioleaching of rare earth elements from industrial and electronic wastes: mechanism and process efficiency. In: Sinharoy A, Lens PNL, editors. Environmental technologies to treat rare earth elements pollution: principles and engineering. IWA Publishing; 2022. [Google Scholar]
  69. Ma J, Li S, Wang J, Jiang S, Panchal B, Sun Y. Bioleaching rare earth elements from coal fly ash by Aspergillus niger. Fuel. 2023;354:129387. doi: 10.1016/j.fuel.2023.129387. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  70. Malavasi V, Soru S, Cao G. Extremophile microalgae: the potential for biotechnological application. J Phycol. 2020;56:559–573. doi: 10.1111/jpy.12965. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  71. Manikandan NA, Lens PL. Biorefining of green macroalgal biomass and its application in the adsorptive recovery of rare earth elements. Sep Purif Technol. 2022 doi: 10.1016/j.seppur.2022.122200. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  72. Mantzorou A, Navakoudis E, Paschalidis K, Ververidis F. Microalgae: a potential tool for remediating aquatic environments from toxic metals. Int J Env Sci Technol. 2018;15:1815–1830. doi: 10.1007/s13762-018-1783-y. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  73. Merola A, Castaldo R, Luca PD, Gambardella R, Musacchio A, Taddei R. Revision of Cyanidium caldarium. Three species of acidophilic algae. G Bot Ital. 1981;115:189–195. doi: 10.1080/11263508109428026. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  74. Minoda A, Sawada H, Suzuki S, Miyashita S, Inagaki K, Yamamoto T, Tsuzuki M. Recovery of rare earth elements from the sulfothermophilic red alga Galdieria sulphuraria using aqueous acid. Appl Microbiol Biotechnol. 2015;99:1513–1519. doi: 10.1007/s00253-014-6070-3. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  75. Mohammadi M, Reinicke B, Wawrousek K. Biosorption and biomagnetic recovery of La3+ by Magnetospirillum magneticum AMB-1 biomass. Sep Purif Technol. 2022;303:122140. doi: 10.1016/j.seppur.2022.122140. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  76. Náhlík V, Čížková M, Singh A, Mezricky D, Rucki M, Andresen E, Vítová M. Growth of the red alga Galdieria sulphuraria in red mud-containing medium and accumulation of rare earth elements. Waste Biomass Valor. 2023;14(7):1–11. doi: 10.1007/s12649-022-02021-3. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  77. Náhlík V, Zachleder V, Čížková M, Bišová K, Singh A, Mezricky D, Řezanka T, Vítová M. Growth under different trophic regimes and synchronization of the red microalga Galdieria sulphuraria. Biomolecules. 2021;11:939. doi: 10.3390/biom11070939. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  78. Nowicka B. Heavy metal–induced stress in eukaryotic algae—mechanisms of heavy metal toxicity and tolerance with particular emphasis on oxidative stress in exposed cells and the role of antioxidant response. Environ Sci Poll Res. 2022;29:16860–16911. doi: 10.1007/s11356-021-18419-w. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  79. Oliveira RC, Garcia O., Jr Study of biosorption of rare earth metals (La, Nd, Eu, Gd) by Sargassum sp. biomass in batch systems: physicochemical evaluation of kinetics and adsorption models. Adv Mater Res. 2009;71:605–608. doi: 10.4028/www.scientifc.net/AMR.71-73.605. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  80. Oliveira RC, Guibal E, Garcia O. Biosorption and desorption of lanthanum (III) and neodymium (III) in fixed-bed columns with Sargassum sp.: perspectives for separation of rare earth metals. Biotechnol Prog. 2012;28:715–722. doi: 10.1002/btpr.1525. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  81. Oliveira RC, Jouannin C, Guibal E, Garcia O. Samarium (III) and praseodymium (III) biosorption on Sargassum sp.: batch study. Process Biochem. 2011;46:736–744. doi: 10.1016/j.procbio.2010.11.021. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  82. Omodara L, Satu Pitkaaho S, Turpeinen E-M, Saavalainen P, Oravisjarvi K, Keiski RL. Recycling and substitution of light rare earth elements, cerium, lanthanum, neodymium, and praseodymium from end-of-life applications—a review. J Clean Prod. 2019;236:117573. doi: 10.1016/j.jclepro.2019.07.048. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  83. Owusu-Fordjour EY, Yang X. Bioleaching of rare earth elements challenges and opportunities: a critical review. J Environ Chem Eng. 2023;11:110413. doi: 10.1016/j.jece.2023.110413. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  84. Ozaki T, Kimura T, Ohnuki T, Yoshida Z, Francis AJ. Association mechanisms of europium (III) and cerium (III) with Chlorella vulgaris. Environ Toxicol Chem. 2003;22:2800–2805. doi: 10.1897/02-481. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  85. Palmieri MC, Garcia O, Jr, Melnikov P. Neodymium biosorption from acidic solutions in batch system. Process Biochem. 2000;36:441–444. doi: 10.1016/S0032-9592(00)00236-3. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  86. Palmieri MC, Volesky B, Garcia O. Biosorption of lanthanum using Sargassum fluitans in batch system. Hydrometallurgy. 2001;67:31–36. doi: 10.1016/S0304-386X(02)00133-0. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  87. Pan X, Wu W, Chen Z, Rao W, Guan X. Biosorption and extraction of europium by Bacillus thuringiensis strain. Inorg Chem Commun. 2017;75:21–24. doi: 10.1016/j.inoche.2016.11.012. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  88. Paper M, Koch M, Jung P, Lakatos M, Nilges T, Brück TB. Rare earths stick to rare cyanobacteria: future potential for bioremediation and recovery of rare earth elements. Front Bioeng Biotechnol. 2023 doi: 10.3389/fbioe.2023.1130939. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  89. Park D, Middleton A, Smith R, Deblonde G, Laudal D, Theaker N, Hsu-Kim H, Jiao Y. A biosorption-based approach for selective extraction of rare earth elements from coal byproducts. Sep Purif Technol. 2020 doi: 10.1016/j.seppur.2020.116726. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  90. Park DM, Reed DW, Yung MC, Eslamimanesh A, Lencka MM, Anderko A, Fujita Y, Riman RE, Navrotsky A, Jiao Y. Bioadsorption of rare earth elements through cell surface display of lanthanide binding tags. Environ Sci Technol. 2016;50:2735–2742. doi: 10.1021/acs.est.5b06129. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  91. Park S, Liang Y. Bioleaching of trace elements and rare earth elements from coal fly ash. Int J Coal Sci Technol. 2019;6(1):74–83. doi: 10.1007/s40789-019-0238-5. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  92. Pinto J, Costa M, Henriques B, Soares J, Dias M, Viana T, Ferreira N, Vale C, Pinheiro-Torres J, Pereira E. Competition among rare earth elements on sorption onto six seaweeds. J Rare Earths. 2020;39(6):734–741. doi: 10.1016/j.jre.2020.09.025. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  93. Pollmann K, Kutschke S, Matys S, Raf J, Hlawacek G, Lederer FL. Bio-recycling of metals: recycling of technical products using biological applications. Biotechnol Adv. 2018;36(4):1048–1062. doi: 10.1016/j.biotechadv.2018.03.006. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  94. Ponou J, Wang LP, Dodbiba G, Okaya K, Fujita T, Mitsuhashi K, Atarashi T, Satoh G, Noda M. Recovery of rare earth elements from aqueous solution obtained from Vietnamese clay minerals using dried and carbonized Parachlorella. J Environ Chem Eng. 2014;2:1070–1081. doi: 10.1016/j.jece.2014.04.002. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  95. Priyadarshani I, Sahu D, Rath B. Microalgal bioremediation: current practices and perspectives. J Biochem Technol. 2012;3:299–304. [Google Scholar]
  96. Ramasamy DL, Porada S, Sillanpaa M. Marine algae: a promising resource for the selective recovery of scandium and rare earth elements from aqueous systems. Chem Eng J. 2019;371:759–768. doi: 10.1016/j.cej.2019.04.106. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  97. Ramírez-Calderón OA, Abdeldayem OM, Pugazhendhi A, Rene ER. Current updates and perspectives of biosorption technology: an alternative for the removal of heavy metals from wastewater. Curr Poll Rep. 2020;6:8–27. doi: 10.1007/s40726-020-00135-7. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  98. Rampelotto PH. Extremophiles and extreme environments. Life. 2013;3(3):482–485. doi: 10.3390/life3030482. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  99. Rangabhashiyam S, Vijayaraghavan K. Biosorption of Tm(III) by free and polysulfone-immobilized Turbinaria conoides biomass. J Ind Eng Chem. 2019;80:318–324. doi: 10.1016/j.jiec.2019.08.010. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  100. Řezanka T, Kaineder K, Mezricky D, Řezanka M, Bišová K, Zachleder V, Vítová M. The effect of lanthanides on photosynthesis, growth, and chlorophyll profile of the green alga Desmodesmus quadricauda. Photosynth Res. 2016;130:335–340. doi: 10.1007/s11120-016-0263-9. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  101. Richards RG, Mullins BJ. Using microalgae for combined lipid production and heavy metal removal from leachate. Ecol Model. 2013;249(1):59–67. doi: 10.1016/j.ecolmodel.2012.07.004. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  102. Sadovsky D, Brenner A, Astrachan B, Asaf B, Gonen R. Biosorption potential of cerium ions using Spirulina biomass. J Rare Earth. 2016;34(6):644–652. doi: 10.1016/S1002-0721(16)60074-1. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  103. Sakamoto N, Kano N, Imaizumi H. Biosorption of uranium and rare earth elements using biomass of algae. Bioinorg Chem Appl. 2008 doi: 10.1155/2008/706240. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  104. Sallam AM, El-Sayed EM, Amin MM, El-Aassy IE, El-Feky MH, Nada AA, Harpy NM. Biosorption of rare earth elements by two fungal genera from lower carboniferous carbonaceous shales, in southwestern Sinai. Egypt J Appl Environ Biol Sci. 2014;4:146–154. [Google Scholar]
  105. Schmitt D, Müller A, Csögör Z, Frimmel FH, Posten C. The adsorption kinetics of metal ions onto different microalgae and siliceous earth. Water Res. 2001;35:779–785. doi: 10.1016/S0043-1354(00)00317-1. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  106. Schnurr PJ, Allen DG. Factors affecting algae biofilm growth and lipid production: a review. Renew Sustain Energy Rev. 2015;52:418–429. doi: 10.1016/j.rser.2015.07.090. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  107. Selvaratnam T, Pegallapati AK, Montelya F, Rodriguez G, Nirmalakhandan N, Van Voorhies W, Lammers PJ. Evaluation of a thermo-tolerant acidophilic alga, Galdieria sulphuraria, for nutrient removal from urban wastewaters. Biores Technol. 2014;156:395–399. doi: 10.1016/j.biortech.2014.01.075. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  108. Shanab S, Essa A, Shalaby E. Bioremoval capacity of three heavy metals by some microalgae species (Egyptian Isolates) Plant Signal Behav. 2012;7:392–399. doi: 10.4161/psb.19173. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  109. Shen CD, Xu JR, Yu JF. Effect of the rare earth element of Eu on the growth and chlorophyll content of Chlorella vulgaris. Freshwater Fish. 2003;33:23–26. [Google Scholar]
  110. Shen H, Ren QG, Mi Y, Shi XF, Yao HY, Jin CZ, Huang YY, He W, Zhang J, Liu B. Investigation of metal ion accumulation in Euglena gracilis by fluorescence methods. Nucl Instrum Methods Phys Res Sect B. 2002;189:506–510. doi: 10.1016/S0168-583X(01)01132-6. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  111. Shen L, Zhou H, Shi Q, Meng X, Zhao Y, Qiu G, Zhang X, Yu H, He X, He H, Zhao H. Comparative chemical and non-contact bioleaching of ion-adsorption type rare earth ore using ammonium sulfate and metabolites of Aspergillus niger and Yarrowia lipolytica to rationalise the role of organic acids for sustainable processing. Hydrometallurgy. 2023;216:106019. doi: 10.1016/j.hydromet.2023.106019. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  112. Shi S, Pan J, Dong B, Zhou W, Zhou C. Bioleaching of rare earth elements: perspectives from mineral characteristics and microbial species. Minerals. 2023;13:1186. doi: 10.3390/min13091186. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  113. Shukla D, Trivedi PK, Nath P, Tuteja N. Abiotic stress response in plants. Wiley-VCH; 2016. Metallothioneins and phytochelatins: role and perspectives in heavy metal(loid)s stress tolerance in crop plants; pp. 237–264. [Google Scholar]
  114. Singh A, Čížková M, Náhlík V, Mezricky D, Schild D, Rucki M, Vítová M. Bio-removal of rare earth elements from hazardous industrial waste of CFL bulbs by the extremophile red alga Galdieria sulphuraria. Front Microbiol. 2023;14:1130848. doi: 10.3389/fmicb.2023.1130848. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  115. Sriprang R, Murooka Y. Accumulation and detoxification of metals by plants and microbes. In: Singh SN, Tripathi RD, editors. Environmental bioremediation technologies. Berlin, Heidelberg: Springer; 2007. pp. 77–100. [Google Scholar]
  116. Sun Y, Lu T, Pan Y, Shi M, Ding D, Ma Z, Liu J, Yuan Y, Fei L, Sun Y. Recovering rare earth elements via immobilized red algae from ammonium-rich wastewater. Environ Sci Ecotechnol. 2022;12:100204. doi: 10.1016/j.ese.2022.100204. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  117. Takahashi Y, Chatellier TX, Hattori KH, Kato K, Fortin D. Adsorption of rare earth elements onto bacterial cell walls and its implication for REE sorption onto natural microbial mats. Chem Geol. 2005;219:53–67. doi: 10.1016/j.chemgeo.2005.02.009. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  118. Tayar SP, Palmieri MC, Bevilaqua D. Sulfuric acid bioproduction and its application in rare earth extraction from phosphogypsum. Miner Eng. 2022 doi: 10.1016/j.mineng.2022.107662. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  119. Texier AC, Andrès Y, Faur-Brasquet C, Le Cloireç P. Selective biosorption of lanthanide (La, Eu, Yb) ions by Pseudomonas aeruginosa. Environ Sci Technol. 1999;33(1):489–495. doi: 10.1021/es9807744. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  120. Tian Y, Hu X, Song X, Yang A. Bioleaching of rare-earth elements from phosphate rock using Acidithiobacillus ferrooxidans. Lett Appl Microbiol. 2022;75(5):1111–1121. doi: 10.1111/lam.13745. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  121. Torres MA, Barros MP, Campos SCG, Pinto E, Rajamani S, Sayre RT, Colepicolo P. Biochemical biomarkers in algae and marine pollution: a review. Ecotoxicol Environ Saf. 2008;71:1–15. doi: 10.1016/j.ecoenv.2008.05.009. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  122. Tunali M, Yenigun O. Biosorption of Ag+ and Nd3+ from single and multi-metal solutions (Ag+, Nd3+, and Au3+) by using living and dried microalgae. J Mater Cycles Waste Manag. 2021;23(2):764–777. doi: 10.1007/s10163-020-01168-2. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  123. U.S. Geological Survey (2023) Mineral commodity summaries 2023. U.S. Geological Survey Accessed 18 Jan 2024
  124. Varshney P, Mikulic P, Vonshak A, Beardall J, Wangikar PP. Extremophilic micro-algae and their potential contribution in biotechnology. Bioresour Technol. 2015;184:363–372. doi: 10.1016/j.biortech.2014.11.040. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  125. Viana T, Henriques B, Ferreira N, Pinto RJB, Monteiro FLS, Pereira E. Insight into the mechanisms involved in the removal of toxic, rare earth, and platinum elements from complex mixtures by Ulva sp. Chem Eng J. 2023;453:139630. doi: 10.1016/j.cej.2022.139630. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  126. Vijayaraghavan K, Jegan J. Entrapment of brown seaweeds (Turbinaria conoides and Sargassum wightii) in polysulfone matrices for the removal of praseodymium ions from aqueous solutions. J Rare Earths. 2015;33(11):1196–1203. doi: 10.1016/S1002-0721(14)60546-9. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  127. Vijayaraghavan K, Sathishkumar M, Balasubramanian R. Biosorption of lanthanum, cerium, europium, and ytterbium by a brown marine alga. Turbinaria Conoides Ind Eng Chem Res. 2010;49(9):4405–4411. doi: 10.1021/ie1000373. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  128. Vijayaraghavan K, Sathishkumar M, Balasubramanian R. Interaction of rare earth elements with a brown marine alga in multi-component solutions. Desalination. 2011;265:54–56. doi: 10.1016/j.desal.2010.07.030. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  129. Vlachou A, Symeopoulos BD, Koutinas AA. A comparative study of neodymium sorption by yeast cells. Radiochim Acta. 2009;97:437–441. doi: 10.1524/ract.2009.1632. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  130. Vo PHN, Danaee S, Hai HTN, Huy LN, Nguyen TAH, Nguyen HTM, Kuzhiumparambil U, Kim M, Nghiem LD, Ralph PJ. Biomining for sustainable recovery of rare earth elements from mining waste: a comprehensive review. Sci Total Environ. 2024;908:168210. doi: 10.1016/j.scitotenv.2023.168210. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  131. Wan M, Wang Z, Zhang Z, Wang J, Li S, Yu A, Li Y. A novel paradigm for the high-efficient production of phycocyanin from Galdieria sulphuraria. Bioresour Technol. 2016;218:272–278. doi: 10.1016/j.biortech.2016.06.045. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  132. Wang Y, Zhang C, Zheng Y, Ge Y (2017) Phytochelatin synthesis in Dunaliella salina induced by arsenite and arsenate under various phosphate regimes. Ecotoxicol Environ Safety 136:150–160. 10.1016/j.ecoenv.2016.11.002 [DOI] [PubMed]
  133. Wollmann F, Dietze S, Ackermann J-U, Bley T, Walther T, Steingroewer J, Krujatz F. Microalgae wastewater treatment: biological and technological approaches. Eng Life Sci. 2019;19:860–871. doi: 10.1002/elsc.201900071. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  134. Wu D, Hou Y, Cheng J, Han T, Hao N, Zhang B, Fan X, Ji X, Chen F, Gong D, Wang L, McGinn P, Zhao L, Chen S. Transcriptome analysis of lipid metabolism in response to cerium stress in the oleaginous microalga Nannochloropsis oculata. Sci Total Environ. 2022;838:156420. doi: 10.1016/j.scitotenv.2022.156420. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  135. Xu S, Zhang S, Chen K, Han J, Liu H, Wu K. Biosorption of La3+ and Ce3+ by Agrobacterium sp. HN1. J Rare Earths. 2011;29(3):265–270. doi: 10.1016/S1002-0721(10)60443-7. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  136. Yu Z, Han H, Feng P, Zhao S, Zhou T, Kakade A, Kulshrestha S, Majeed S, Li X. Recent advances in the recovery of metals from waste through biological processes. Bioresour Technol. 2020;297:122416. doi: 10.1016/j.biortech.2019.122416. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  137. Zabochnicka-Światek M, Krzywonos M. Potentials of biosorption and bioaccumulation processes for heavy metal removal. Pol J Environ Stud. 2014;23(2):551–561. [Google Scholar]
  138. Zhou H, Wang J, Yu X, Kang J, Qiu G, Zhao H, Shen L. Effective extraction of rare earth elements from ion-adsorption type rare earth ore by three bioleaching methods. Separ Purif Technol. 2024;330:125305. doi: 10.1016/j.seppur.2023.125305. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  139. Zhou PJ, Shen H, Song LR, Shen YW, Liu YD. Kinetic studies on the combined effects of lanthanum and cerium on the growth of Microcystis aeruginosa and their accumulation by M. aeruginosa. Bull Environ Contamination Toxicol. 2004;72:711–716. doi: 10.1007/s00128-004-0303-. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]

Associated Data

This section collects any data citations, data availability statements, or supplementary materials included in this article.

Data Availability Statement

No datasets were generated or analysed during the current study.

Articles from World Journal of Microbiology & Biotechnology are provided here courtesy of Springer

RESOURCES