Table 3.
Bioremediation efficiency of mercury by Vibrio fluvialis (CASKS5) compared with different bacterial species isolated from elsewhere.
| Location | Species | Concentration of mercury used for the experiment, μg/ml | Bioremediation efficiency (in percentage) | References |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Bushehr (Iran) coast | Vibrio parahaemolyticus | 10 | >89.47 | Jafari et al., 2015 |
| Urías estuary, Sinaloa, Mexico | Bacillus sp. | 10 | 68.1 | Green-Ruiz, 2006 |
| Bacillus thuringiensis | 42.7 | Hassen et al., 1998 | ||
| Sialkot (Pakistan) pond | Brevibacterium casei | 50 | 70 | Rehman et al., 2007 |
| Sialkot (Pakistan) pond | Pseudomonas aeruginosa | 50 | 80 | Rehman et al., 2007 |
| Kasur (Pakistan) ponds | Tetrahymena rostrata | 100 | 40 | Muneer et al., 2013 |
| Sialkot (Pakistan) ponds | Pseudomonas sp. | 100 | 65 | Rehman et al., 2008 |
| South Korea municipal waste water treatment plant | Pseudomonas fluorescens | 30 | 34.3 | Noghabi et al., 2007 |
| King Abdul-Aziz Medical City, Jeddah, Saudi Arabia, | Pseudomonas aeruginosa | 150 | 25 | Al-Garni et al., 2010 |
| King Abdul-Aziz Medical City, Jeddah, Saudi Arabia, | Klebsiella pneumoniae | 100 | 15 | Al-Garni et al., 2010 |
| West Coast of India | Enterobacter cloacae | 100 | 0 | Iyer et al., 2005 |
| Cuddalore coast (India) | Vibrio fluvialis | 100 | 60 | Present study |