Environment International 33 (2007) 122 – 138

www.elsevier.com/locate/envint

Review article
Environmental challenge vis a vis opportunity: The case of water hyacinth
Anushree Malik ⁎
Centre for Rural Development and Technology, Indian Institute of Technology Delhi, New Delhi-110 016, India
Received 2 December 2005; accepted 12 August 2006
Available online 28 September 2006

Abstract

Water hyacinth (Eichhornia crassipes) is a noxious weed that has attracted worldwide attention due to its fast spread and congested growth,
which lead to serious problems in navigation, irrigation, and power generation. On the other hand, when looked from a resource angle, it appears
to be a valuable resource with several unique properties. As a result, research activity concerning control (especially biological control) and
utilization (especially wastewater treatment or phytoremediation) of water hyacinth has boomed up in the last few decades. Investigations on
biogas/compost production from water hyacinth have also come up very well mainly from few research groups in India. This review presents a
comprehensive view of the research related to water hyacinth with special emphasis on the recent investigations on water hyacinth control and
utilization technologies conducted in the last 2–3 decades. Based on these significant research achievements, now it is desirable to identify a
management strategy so that the excessive growth can be controlled and the plant can be used in beneficial ways. In the rural areas, water hyacinth
could be used in an integrated manner for decentralized wastewater treatment systems coupled to biogas and compost production from the
resulting biomass. There is a need to work out the techno-economic viability of such integrated model systems.
© 2006 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

Keywords: Water hyacinth; Biological control; Phytoremediation; Biogas; Power alcohol; Root-zone bacteria

Contents

1. Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 123
1.1. Reproduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 123
1.2. Environmental problems . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 123
1.3. Control . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 124
2. Potential utilization of water hyacinth . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 125
2.1. Water hyacinth as phytoremediation agent . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 125
2.1.1. Nutritionally rich wastewaters. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 125
2.1.2. Metals, radionuclide and other pollutants . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 126
2.1.3. Localization of accumulated pollutant in plant parts . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 128
2.1.4. Role of microorganisms in phytoremediation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 129
2.2. Power alcohol production . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 130
2.3. Biogas production . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 130
2.4. Compost . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 132
2.5. Animal fodder/fish feed . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 132
2.6. Others . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 132
3. Conclusions . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 133
References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 134

⁎ Tel.: +91 11 2659 1158; fax: +91 11 2659 1121.

E-mail addresses: anushree@rdat.iitd.ac.in, anushree_malik@yahoo.com.

0160-4120/$ - see front matter © 2006 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
doi:10.1016/j.envint.2006.08.004
 A. Malik / Environment International 33 (2007) 122–138
1. Introduction
The water hyacinth, Eichhornia crassipes (Mart.) Solms, is a
tropical species belonging to the pickerelweed family (Ponte-
deriaceae). A native of Brazil and possibly other central South
American countries, now it occurs in lakes, slowly moving
rivers and swamps in most countries of the world lying between
40°N and 40°S including India, South Africa and the USA
(Center, 1994). It is a free floating aquatic plant well known for
its production abilities and removal of pollutants from water. It
can quickly grow to very high densities (over 60 kg m− 2);
thereby completely clogging water bodies, which in turn may
have negative effects on the environment, human health and
economic development (Fernández et al., 1990; Epstein, 1998).
Water hyacinth grows over a wide variety of wetland types
and prefers nutrient-enriched waters. However, it can tolerate
considerable variation in nutrients, temperature and pH levels.
The optimum pH for growth of water hyacinth is 6–8. It can
grow in a wide range of temperature from 1 to 40 °C (optimum
growth at 25–27.5°C) but it is thought to be cold-sensitive
(Wilson et al., 2005). Growth rates increase with the increase in
water nitrogen amounts (Heard and Winterton, 2000). Salinity
is a major constraint on water hyacinth growth in coastal regions
as salinity levels at 6.0 and 8.0% are lethal (Olivares and
Colonnello, 2000; Muramoto et al., 1991). Water hyacinth
normally occurs in the form of dense mats and as a result blocks
light penetration for the submerged plants and also reduces
dissolved oxygen levels. By releasing allelochemicals (Sun et
al., 1993; Sharma et al., 1996) it antagonizes the growth of other
organisms and reduces the biological diversity (Denny et al.,
2001; Brendonck et al., 2003). Nevertheless, reports on
associated flora, fauna and microbiota are frequently found
(Gopal, 1987). Recently worldwide records of the mycobiota
collected on, or isolated from, water hyacinth have been
compiled (Barreto and Evans, 1996; Evans and Reeder, 2001).
These results indicate that a wide variety of fungi occupy
distinct niches on the plant. A rich population of invertebrates
and lower vertebrate fauna is also associated with the water
hyacinth plant (De Marco et al., 2001). Nevertheless, further
research is required to establish the optimum width of the water
hyacinth fringe that promotes maximum abundance and
diversity of aquatic macroinvertebrates and other aquatic life
(Masifwa et al., 2001).
1.1. Reproduction
Water hyacinth reproduces sexually by seeds and vegeta-
tively by budding and stolen production. For rapid spreading,
the vegetative propagation is more important (Verma et al.,
2003). Daughter plants sprout from the stolons and doubling
times have been reported of 6–18 days. Under favorable
conditions of temperature and nutrient availability, the vegeta-
tive propagation is very fast and the edge of mat can even
enhance by 60 cm/month. Plant canopy shade reduces the
quantity and quality of light available to the plant, thereby
limiting the growth. However, clonal plants such as E. crassipes
might increase light interception via horizontal growth of
123
stolons or rhizomes and placement of new ramets, in less shaded
microsites (Methy et al., 1990). These factors are responsible for
rapid and unlimited clonal growth of the water hyacinth.
Whether sexual reproduction occurs in the water hyacinth
had been a mystery for long time as most of the early
investigators could not observe seeds/seedlings in nature.
However, the observations that even after complete eradication
of vegetative parts, there was recurrence of the water hyacinth
suggested that new plants must have developed from seeds
(Parija, 1934). Subsequently, several other studies also
described the presence of seeds and seedlings, however it
appeared that the germination of seeds into mature plants was
rather sensitive and was limited by unfavorable growth
conditions such as oxygen stress, light and temperature,
dormancy periods etc. (Obeid and Taggel, 1976; Barrett,
1980). The seeds can germinate in a few days or remain
dormant for 15–20 years. They usually sink and remain
dormant until periods of stress (droughts). Upon reflooding, the
seeds often germinate and renew the growth cycle. What
controls the onset of flowering in the water hyacinth is also
poorly understood. Natural populations of water hyacinth may
flower repeatedly throughout the year under favorable growth
conditions; although the intensity of flowering may vary with
seasonal variation in growth rate. Addition of gibberellic acid
(GA3) as well as nutrient deficiency also stimulates flowering
(Maxine and José, 1988). Further, although normal flowering
occurs but often there is no seed production and seeding in
natural E. crassipes populations implying that sexual reproduc-
tion in this introduced plant might rarely occur. Thus, extremely
low genetic variation of E. crassipes in Southern China might
be due to both the introduction event and the lacking of seedling
recruitment. Ren et al. (2005) observed low genetic differentia-
tion of E. crassipes populations (in China), both locally and
regionally. E. crassipes is a tetraploid species, and high ploidy
level of the invasive plant may increase its phenotypic plasticity
(Methy et al., 1990). Such high phenotypic plasticity might
account for the invasive behaviors of Chinese populations,
which possess very low genetic variability (Li et al., 2006).
Hence its successful invasion may mainly be attributed to the
phenotypic plasticity responding to new habitat, competitive
ability increased by rapid clonal growth and strong tolerance to
environment stress rather than the genetic diversity.
1.2. Environmental problems
Water hyacinth is listed as one of the most productive plants
on earth and is considered one of the world's worst aquatic
plants. It can double its size in 5 days and a mat of medium sized
plants may contain 2 million plants per hectare that weigh 270
to 400 T. These dense mats interfere with navigation, recreation,
irrigation, and power generation (Epstein, 1998). Many large
hydropower schemes have to devote significant time and money
in clearing the weed in order to prevent it from entering the
turbine and causing damage and power interruptions. The
blockage of canals and rivers can even cause dangerous
flooding. On the other hand, increased evapotranspiration due
to water hyacinth can have serious implications where water is
124 A. Malik / Environment International 33 (2007) 122–138

already scarce. Water hyacinth can also present many problems
for the fisherman such as decreased fish population, difficult
access to the fishing sites and loss of fishing equipment,
resulting in reduction in catch and subsequent loss of livelihood.
Water hyacinth is blamed for the reduction of biodiversity as
well. These mats competitively exclude native submerged and
floating-leaved plants and its associated fauna, thereby causing
an imbalance in the aquatic micro-ecosystem. Diversity of fish
stocks is also affected. Low oxygen conditions beneath the mats
create good breeding conditions for mosquito vectors of
malaria, encephalitis and filariasis. Lately the hyacinth has
invaded many tropical lakes including Lake Victoria, East
Africa where it caused several of the above described problems
such as reduction in fish catch, interference with transportation
and water supply and breeding of snails, mosquitoes and snakes
(Mailu, 2001; Mironga, 2004). Plummer (2005) reported that
the density of snails Biomphalaria sudanica (hosts of the
disease organism Schistosoma mansoni) was increased in the
vicinity of water hyacinth in Lake Victoria, East Africa. In
Zambia, extensive proliferation of water hyacinth in the Lower
Kafue River has threatened the important economic infrastruc-
ture such as the Kafue Road Bridge, which accounts for about
80% of Zambia's international trade through the south, and the
Kafue Gorge Dam responsible for 60% of the country's
hydropower requirements. Weed management strategies that
involve use of cleaner production approach and the utilization
of the weed for mushroom cultivation and vegetable production
have been suggested here (Thomson et al., 2002). Until only a
few years ago, water hyacinth was a major problem in Florida
covering as many as 125,000 acres of water with up to 200T of
hyacinths per acre (Simberloff et al., 1997; Langeland and
Burks, 1998). As a result boat traffic on several rivers was
halted and millions of dollars a year were used to control and
clear the infestations. Now water hyacinth in Florida is under
“maintenance control” that is the plants are maintained at a low
level by constant vigilance by hundreds of aquatics manage-
ment agencies in the state using herbicides, machines and
biocontrol insects. Water hyacinth has apparently become a
problem in different parts of the world due to its uncontrolled
and rapid growth. Therefore, there is a need to manage its
spread through suitable control measures.
1.3. Control
At an average annual productivity of 50 dry (ash-free) tons
per hectare per year, water hyacinth is one of the most
productive plants in the world (Abbasi and Ramasamy, 1999a).
Mathematical models of the growth of water hyacinth have been
developed to provide a sound basis for assessing existing and
potential control options. These studies show that under
constant experimental conditions, water hyacinth shows logistic
growth (Wilson et al., 2005). As shown in Table 1, to combat
the problems caused by the water hyacinth, various efforts to
control its spread have been taken up that include weed
management methods such as physical removal, chemical
methods (application of herbicides) and release of biological
control agents (Harley et al., 1996). Nevertheless, each of these
has limitations and the most appropriate management strategy is
often site specific. Since any of the above control methods alone
may be ineffective, a logical and site specific integration of
different techniques is desirable (Guitiérrez et al., 2000). For
instance, Center et al. (1999) suggest that biological and
herbicidal controls should be integrated; using herbicides to
maintain water hyacinth infestations below management
thresholds but in a manner that conserves biological control
agent populations. The effect of environmental factors such as

Table 1
Methods for control of water hyacinth
Control method Agents
Physical Permanent drainage of area
Manual removal by hand pulling or
harvesting nets
Mechanized removal through land-based
cranes, draglines or, by water-based
machinery such as mowers, dredges,
barges or aquatic weed harvesters
Chemical 2,4-dichlorophenoxyacetic acid
(2,4-D) + complexed copper
2,4-D amine spray at 2l/ha followed by
2nd spray at 1l/ha
Endothall dipotassium salt, endothall
dimethylalkylamine salts, glyphostate
Biological Classical control by insects:
Neochetinaeichhorniae, N. bruchi and
Sameodes albiguttalis
Allelopathic plants
Coleus amboinicus leaf powder (40g/l)
Lantana
Partheniu
Cassytha powder
Fungal pathogens such as
Alternaria eichhorniae
Reference
Smith et al. (1984)
Harley et al. (1997)
Westerdahl and Getsinger (1988)
Ram and Moolani (2000)
Olaleye and Akinyemiju (1996)
Julien and Griffiths (1998); Julien and
Orapa (1999); Mbati and
Neuenschwander (2005)
Kathiresan (2000); Saxena (2000);
Zhang et al. (2005); Pandey et al. (1993);
Kauraw and Bhan (1994)
Shabana et al. (1996); Shabana and
Mohamed (2005); Babu et al. (2004)
Limitations
Not always feasible
Difficult and labor intensive, may involve
health risk
Expensive, energy intensive, need a convoy of
water and land-based vehicles for transportation
of harvested mats
Expensive, cannot control large infestations,
long term adverse effects on other communities
and environment
Insufficient reduction and resurgence in growth
(Ogwang and Molo, 2004)
Still under R&D stage, may not suffice alone
and better if used with mechanical/chemical
control methods
 A. Malik / Environment International 33 (2007) 122–138 125

light availability and nutrient supply also dramatically modifies
the outcome of the control operations (Heard and Winterton,
2000). Williams et al. (2005) inferred that although weevils
likely played a role in the rapid disappearance of water hyacinth
in Lake Victoria, the cloudy weather of 1997/1998 was
probably a major contributory factor to poor growth and
reduction in water hyacinth biomass lake-wide. Hence to be
fully effective, control strategies must involve favorable
external factors apart from the direct weed control (Julien et
al., 2001). People's participation and social acceptance of the
control programs are important components that decide the fate
of the weed management strategy. The results of a study
conducted by Uchida and Ando (1998) indicate that the
community development approach may contribute significantly
to the solution of the water hyacinth infestation in Bangladesh.
However, the fact remains that the water hyacinth has
successfully resisted all attempts of its eradication by chemical,
biological, mechanical, or hybrid means (Abbasi, 1998; Abbasi
and Ramasamy, 1999a). At present these methods succeed only
in keeping the weed infestation in check at enormous costs.
2. Potential utilization of water hyacinth
Although water hyacinth is often seen as a weed responsible
for many of the problems outlined above, there are other schools
of thought that advocate useful applications for the plant. Water
hyacinth contains more than 95% water but due to its fibrous
tissue and a high energy and protein content, it can be used for a
variety of useful applications. A number of possible uses of the
plant, some which have been developed and others that are still
in their infancy are discussed below.
2.1. Water hyacinth as phytoremediation agent
Water hyacinth is one of the plant species that attracted
considerable attention because of its ability to grow in heavily
polluted water together with its capacity for metal ion
accumulation. As a result, one of its prime utility that has
found world-wide acceptance is in treating wastewaters
(Tchobanoglous et al., 1989). Water hyacinth is quite versatile
plant as far as phytoremediation capability is concerned. Natural
wetland systems colonized by water hyacinth could serve as
“nature's kidneys” for proper effluent treatment to preserve the
earth's precious water resources from getting polluted. It has
been used for decontaminating inorganic nutrients, toxic metals
as well as persistent organic pollutants. Based on the kinds of
wastewater dealt by this plant, this section is being divided into
following subsections.
2.1.1. Nutritionally rich wastewaters
Table 2 shows the application of water hyacinth for treatment
of sewage as well as other nutrient-rich and high BOD
(biological oxygen demand) wastewaters. Nutrient removal
from wastewaters and surface runoff using macrophyte-based

Table 2
Phytoremediation of nutritionally rich wastewater by water hyacinth
Wastewater source Main pollutants Results
Agricultural drainage NO−3 , NH+4 and soluble P 78–81% removal of NO−3 , NH+4
and 54% P removal in 3.6 days.
Aquatic macrophytes perform
better than submerged
Chara sp.
Pig wastewater COD, TN etc. At 200kg COD/ha/d loading
and 10–20d (HRT), 74–93%
COD removal in small-scale
WH ponds while 52% in
pilot-scale ponds
Piggery wastes COD, BOD, TN, TP 50% reduction in all parameters
(tertiary treatment) at 110 kg TN/ha/d and
20 d HRT
Sewage treatment Metals, BOD, nitrates and Removal of metals (20–100%);
phosphates BOD (97%); nitrates and
phosphates (>90%)
Dairy effluent Nitrogen and phosphorus Removal of N (72%) and
P (63%)
Anaerobically digested Total nitrogen (TN), total Reduction (%) of TN (91.7),
flushed dairy manure phosphorus (TP), NH+4 , EC, NH+4 (99.6), TP (98.5) coupled
wastewater Na+ with reduction in EC and Na+
(1:1 dilution)
Secondary effluent SS, TN, COD, BOD, NH+4, Surface-flow wetland (SFW)
and Orthophosphate more efficient in reducing SS
(64.6%), TN (38%), COD
(67.2%) and BOD (72.1%) than
the WSP (waste stabilisation
ponds)
WH: water hyacinth. HRT: hydraulic retention time.
Reference
Reddy et al. (1982)
Polprasert et al. (1992)
Costa et al. (2000)
Sinha and Sinha (2000)
Tripathi and Upadhyay (2003)
Sooknah and Wilkie (2004)
Sajn Slak et al. (2005)
Comments
Field scale study of 1 year
duration
Small-scale and pilot-scale
experiments
Use of harvested WH as animal
diet
Combination of WH,
duckweed and blue-green algae
used
Combination of WH and
duckweed gave max. N (79%)
and P (69%) removal
WH gave best performance
while polyculture (of 3 spp.)
ranked 2nd
1 year pilot level study
comparing SFW (with WH and
Phragmites) and WSP
(with algae)
126 A. Malik / Environment International 33 (2007) 122–138

systems (MBS) has been a topic of great interest during the last
25–30 years. The first phosphorus removal work in Florida was
initiated in the mid-1970s that involved pilot-scale research on
domestic wastewater treatment by natural wetlands (DeBusk et
al., 2001). Besides the domestic drainage, increasingly
concentrated animal husbandry practices and more intensive
row crop farming have expanded pollution problems in rural
sector also (Hammer, 1992). So the use of water hyacinth
wetlands as biological filters for agricultural runoff (Reddy et
al., 1982) or for polishing the treated dairy effluents (Tripathi
and Upadhyay, 2003) provides a promising strategy in view of
the ample space availability in these areas. In this connection,
the ability of water hyacinth to treat piggery wastes in pilot-
scale water hyacinth ponds as well as in the full-scale ponds
under a continuous state has already been demonstrated (Costa
et al., 2000). In India also, water hyacinth-based wastewater
treatment plants (pilot/full-scale) are performing well with
regards to reduction in BOD, COD and total nitrogen reduction
despite poor designing and vegetation management (Trivedy
and Thomas, 2004). Further, in terms of growth output as well
as nutrient reduction from wastewater, water hyacinth has been
found to perform better (Sooknah and Wilkie, 2004) than other
plants such as pennywort (Hydrocotyle umbellata) and water
lettuce (Pistia stratiotes). Moreover, suitable combinations of
water hyacinth with other aquatic plants such as duckweed and/
or blue-green algae produce superior nutrient removal than
water hyacinth alone (Sinha and Sinha, 2000; Tripathi and
Upadhyay, 2003).
Apart from its above documented utilization in treatment of
domestic wastewaters, water hyacinth can be successfully
utilized in treatment of industrial effluents also due to its ability
to survive in presence of toxic contaminants (Table 3).
Jayaweera and Kasturiarachchi (2004) demonstrated that
water hyacinth is a promising candidate for removal of nitrogen
and phosphorus from industrial wastewaters. Further, the use of
water hyacinth in treatment of pulp and paper mill, tannery,
textile and electroplating effluents has also been investigated
(Table 3). Often best results are obtained by appropriate dilution
of the industrial effluents before treatment. It has been observed
that slurry of the plant used for phytoremediation produced
significantly more biogas than that produced by the plants
grown in deionized water (Singhal and Rai, 2003).
2.1.2. Metals, radionuclide and other pollutants
In the last few decades, significant progress in bioremedia-
tion of metals and radionuclides has been made (Prasad and De
Oliveira Freitas, 2003; Malik, 2004). Aquatic plants are known
to accumulate metals from their environment and affect metal
fluxes through those ecosystems. Water hyacinth has excep-
tionally high affinity and accumulation capacity for several
metals (Zaranyika et al., 1994; Polprasert and Katiwada, 1998;
Zhu et al., 1999). Therefore, it is used as a biomarker and is
introduced in wetlands for water phytoremediation (Satyakala
and Jamil, 1992). Table 4 shows some of the studies employing
living water hyacinth plant for removal of metals from metal-
rich synthetic solutions/industrial effluents. Zhu et al. (1999)
have studied the ability of water hyacinth to take up and
translocate six trace elements namely As(V), Cd(II), Cr(VI), Cu
(II), Ni(II) and Se(VI) under controlled conditions. Cd, Cr, Cu,
Ni and As were more highly accumulated in roots than in shoots
whereas Se was accumulated more in shoots than in roots at the
most external concentrations. Moreover, water hyacinth had
high trace element bioconcentration factors (BCF) when
supplied with low external concentrations of all six elements,
particularly Cd (highest BCF = 2150), Cr (1823) and Cu (595).
Thus, it seems to be most efficient at phytoextracting trace
elements and toxic pollutants from wastewater containing low
concentrations of these elements. Recently, heavy metal

Table 3
Phytoremediation of industrial wastewater by water hyacinth
Wastewater source Main pollutants Results Reference Comments
Textile mill effluent Conductivity, BOD, TS, Reduction (%) in conductivity (53.8), Trivedy and Gudekar (1987) WH showed better removal of
TDS and TSS COD (97.4), TSS (62.4%) in pollutants from original waste
3–4 days; NPK also reduced as compared to settled waste
Pectin, carcass-treatment NH4–N and PO4–P Removal rates of NH4–N De Casabianca-Chassany et al. Sodium acts as inhibitory
wastes and manure (11.1–18.08mg l− 1 d− 1) and PO4–P (1992) element
(0.2–0.5 mg l− 1 d− 1) at
100–150mg l− 1 NH4–N loading rate
Electroplating effluents Effluent treated with Treated water used for irrigation of Warrier and Saroja (2000) Length, chlorophyll content
WH for 8 days amaranthus, fenugreek and coriander and total protein levels higher
in plants fed with treated
effluents
Simulated wastewater Malathion Significant absorption and Xia et al. (2001) Microflora also contribute (9%)
degradation (56%) of malathion to degradation
by WH
Pulp and paper mill Metals, BOD etc. Removal of metals and other toxic Singhal and Rai (2003) Biogas production enhanced in
effluent materials from 2.5 times diluted WH grown on effluents
effluent
Industrial effluent Total nitrogen (TN) and 100% TN and TP removal after Jayaweera and Kasturiarachchi Mechanism of pollutant
phosphorus (TP) 9 weeks, 6 months old WH and (2004) removal also studied
21d HRT recommended
Paper mill effluent BOD and COD Significant removal of BOD Menon et al. (2005) –
and COD
 A. Malik / Environment International 33 (2007) 122–138 127

phytoremediation by water hyacinth was demonstrated in
constructed wetlands in Taiwan (Liao and Chang, 2004)
where a high absorption capacity for Pb, Cu, Zn was recorded.
A significant metal removal (over 90%) from aluminum
industry effluents has also been obtained by employing water
hyacinth (Roldán, 2002).
Apart from this, investigations demonstrate that it can also
tackle several recalcitrant organic chemicals such as herbi-
cides. Roy and Hanninen (1994) studied the uptake/elimina-
tion kinetics and metabolism of a well known pollutant
pentachlorophenol (PCP) by water hyacinth. They observed
an initial rapid PCP uptake by the plant that reached a nearly
steady state between 24 and 48 h. The major by-products of
PCP metabolism in the plant were ortho- and para-substituted
chlorohydroxyphenols (chlorocatechols and -hydroquinones),
-anisoles, and -veratroles along with traces of dechlorinated
products of PCP. Nor (1994) studied the removal of phenols
in the presence of copper and zinc by water hyacinth. Results
showed that the water hyacinth has a tremendous capacity to
absorb phenolic compounds as well as Cu and Zn
simultaneously from test solutions containing these substances
and rather some synergistic effect could be detected between
Cu and Zn absorption. Even the filtered aqueous root extracts
of water hyacinth demonstrated phenol removal, indicating
the role of cellular constituents of roots in the absorption
process.
In general, the metal removal efficiency of water hyacinth is
high at higher metal concentration but at the same time toxicity
symptoms (inhibition of chlorophyll synthesis and necrosis)
also appear. Therefore, because of phytotoxicity problems at
higher metal concentrations, the effluent often needs to be
optimally diluted before water hyacinth treatment (Table 4).
Due to these reasons, investigations on metal sorption capacity
of the dried biomass of water hyacinth have gained momentum
(Table 5). Compared to living systems, dried biomass presents
advantages for conservation, transport and handling. Metals
are mostly concentrated at the roots of water hyacinth,
indicating that the root system could act as an efficient
biosorbent for various materials which are soluble in water
(Low and Lee, 1990; Hao et al., 1993; Low et al., 1994).
Therefore, the usefulness of the dried biomass of non-living
water hyacinth roots in removing metal ions from solution has
been actively researched in the last decade (Table 5). The
efficient sorption of uranium, copper as well as basic dyes by
dead water hyacinth roots has been demonstrated (Low et al.,
1994; Shawky et al., 2005). Al Rmalli et al. (2005) have
shown that more than 93% of arsenite (As(III)) and 95% of
arsenate (As(v)) were removed from a solution containing
200μg As/L within 60min of exposure to a powder produced
from dried roots.
There has been little direct comparison of the relative heavy
metal biosorption by water hyacinth or its parts with biosorption

Table 4
Phytoremediation of metal-rich wastewater by live water hyacinth
Metals studied Accumulation/removal
Ag 70% removal after 24hrs
cultivation in solution
containing 40 mg l− 1 Ag
Zn, Cr and Cd Complete removal of metals
after 24 days of plant growth in
contaminated solution
Zn, Co, Fe, Ni, Cu, Pb Accumulation significantly
and Cr higher in the roots than in
the tops
Pb (0.5–10 mg l− 1) 85–92% Pb removal in 10 days
at pH 7.0–7.5
As(V), Cd(II), Cr(VI), Cd and Cr: Highest, Se and Cu:
Cu(II), Ni(II), Se(VI) moderate, As and Ni: poor
Pb contaminated 99% removal from
industrial effluents battery industry effluent
(4.45mg l− 1 Pb)
As, Cr, Hg, Ni, Zn – As: (26), Cr (108) and Hg (327)
(5–50mg l− 1)
Ni and Zn from Active uptake of Ni and Zn up
Electroplating to 40% effluent conc.
effluents (5–100%)
Zn (2–4mg l− 1) More metal accumulation in
roots
Maximum bioaccumulation
capacity (mg kg− 1 dry wt)
8000
– Delgado et al. (1993)
Ni accumulation similar both in
the tops and roots
Growth cessation and wilting
below pH 4.5
Cd: shoots (371) and roots
(6103) Cr: Shoots (119) and
roots (3951); Se accumulation
more in shoots
Maximum accumulation at
40 to 50g l− 1 (wet wt. plant), at
30mg l− 1 Pb conc. within first
12h of contact
at 5 mg l− 1 initial conc.
Absorption capacity gradually
declined in 80% and 100%
effluent conc.
Accumulation increased
linearly with increasing initial
conc. of metal
Reference Comments
Pinto et al. (1987) Biogas production from
harvested plants recycling of
metal (98% purity) from
residual sludge recommended
Phytotoxicity symptoms: Cd
(necrosis above 2.5 ppm);
Cr and Zn (chlorosis at 9ppm)
Zaranyika et al. (1994) Field investigation in Lake
Chivero, Zimbabwe show high
concentration factors for
studied metals
Mukherjee and Mondal Sorption not much dependent
(1995) on pH
Zhu et al. (1999) Efficient concentration even
from low external
concentrations
Carvalho dos Santos and For optimum removal
Lenzi (2000) adjustment of pH (7) and temp.
(20°C–25 °C) needed
Ingole and Bhole (2003) Removal efficiency high at
higher conc. but toxicity
symptoms also appear
Sridevi et al. (2003)
Rupainwar et al. (2004) Toxicity at > 4.0mg l− 1 Zn
conc.
128 A. Malik / Environment International 33 (2007) 122–138

Table 5
Pollutant biosorption by dried/processed water hyacinth plant parts
Pollutant
Basic dyes (methylene blue
andVictoria blue)
Pb, Cd, Cu, Zn
Pb, Cu, Zn, Cd, Cr, Mn, Ni,
Co, Au, Ag (5 mg l− 1)
Lead (15–25mg l− 1)
Mercury (10–40mg l− 1)
Organic pollutants
viz.methylene blue (MB),
Congo red (CR),
p-nitrophenol (PNP),
phenol (P)
Arsenic
Uranium (20–100 μgml− 1)
Water hyacinth part
Dried roots
Dried roots and aerial parts
Treated roots
Activated carbon prepared
from water hyacinth
Activated carbon prepared
from water hyacinth
Activated carbon prepared
from water hyacinth
Powdered dried root
Dried roots
Maximum sorption capacity/
removal
Methylene blue (128.9mg g− 1)
and Victoria blue
(145.4mg g− 1)
Pb (47 mg g− 1), Cd (27),
Cu (23), Zn (20)
Acidic and basic treatments
increased the metal uptake
16.61mg g− 1 at pH 5, particle
size (125–180μm)
28.4mg g− 1 at pH 5, particle
size (125–180μm)
MB (139mg g− 1), CR (154),
PNP (149), P (59)
93% of As(III) and 95% of
As(v) removal from 200μg
As l− 1 within 60min
64000U6+ μg g− 1
Reference Comments
Low et al. (1995) Sorption depends on pH,
sorbent dose and dye conc.
Schneider et al. (1995) WH found to be better
biosorbent than yeast, bacterial
and fungal strains
Yao and Ramelow (1997)
Shekinah et al. (2002) Pb removal increased with
increase in pH from 2 to 4
Kadirvelu et al. (2004) Sorption dependent on contact
time, pH, Hg(II) and carbon
conc. Data fitted both
Freundlich and Langmuir
isotherm models
Rashwan and Girgis (2004) Activated carbon prepared from
WH showed better adsorption
than commercial activated
carbon
Al Rmalli et al. (2005) As conc. in treated solution
< 10μg l− 1 (WHO guideline
limit value)
Shawky et al. (2005) Rapid sorption depends on pH,
sorbent dose and U conc.;
follows Langmuir isotherm

by various other biosorbents. Schneider et al. (1995) however,
have shown that dried roots and aerial parts of water hyacinth
are better biosorbent than yeast (Candida parapsilosis),
bacterial (Mycobacterium phlei) and fungal (Rhizopus oryzae)
strains. The authors suggested that the dried biomass of the
plant might be placed in simple bags and used in a very low-cost
metal ion removal system for decontamination of chemical and
mining industry wastewaters. Udaya Simha et al. (2002)
showed that the root of water hyacinth is an effective and
attractive proposition compared to activated carbon in removing
fluoride from water bodies. Further, activated carbon prepared
from water hyacinth plant has been found to show better
adsorption of pollutants like dyes and phenol than commercial
activated carbon and the same has been used for the removal of
metals like Hg and Pb also (Table 5).
2.1.3. Localization of accumulated pollutant in plant parts
There are many instances where wetlands inhabited by
aquatic plants are employed for the removal of pollutants,
including metals, from waters. Despite considerable informa-
tion on the influence of aquatic plants on metal fluxes at larger
scales, many studies take a black box approach, focusing on
influent and effluent pollutant concentrations. Small-scale
laboratory research on the other hand has mainly addressed
the kinetics of metal uptake by plants. However, less is known
about the extent to which metals are taken up and how they are
distributed within plants. This may have important conse-
quences for the capacity and rate of metal uptake, the metal
residence time in plants and wetlands and the eventual release
of metals (Ellis et al., 1994). To improve the understanding of
the importance and roles of aquatic plants, investigations on
the metal uptake and localization are crucial. Some of these
studies suggest the role of humic acids or metal binding
proteins present in plant for their metal binding properties
(Table 6). X-ray absorption spectroscopy (XAS) has been often
used to determine the speciation and binding of metals,
including mercury, europium and chromium in the water
hyacinth (Table 6). Interestingly, the insight into the speciation
and localization of metals in plant tissues also provides a clue
to the rate and extent of uptake by particular plant parts. For
example, it is often observed that the roots accumulate much
higher concentration of metals or other pollutants (at some
instances 100 times more) as compared to the shoots. The
detailed investigations indicate that it is because the biochem-
istry for uptake in the two tissues is different. The smaller,
harder cations often bind preferentially to the smaller atoms
such as N and O in the roots while when translocated to the
shoots, they are bound to more complex compounds such as
oxalates or phytochelatins (Lytle et al., 1998). Similarly, using
mercury L3 X-ray absorption spectra of hyacinth roots and
shoots, Riddle et al. (2002) demonstrated that Hg is ionically
bound to oxygen ligands (carboxylate groups) in roots while
covalently bound to sulfur groups (probably in phytochelatins)
in the shoots. Although relatively short-term laboratory studies
indicate that the level of mercury uptake for shoots is much
lower than that for the roots, higher levels of Hg in hyacinth
shoots taken from the field have been observed. Thus, the
metal concentration in shoots may continue to rise longer than
 A. Malik / Environment International 33 (2007) 122–138 129

Table 6
Accumulation of metals in water hyacinth
Growth medium and
Metal studied
Nile river water > 50% of metals retained in
supplemented with roots; less in leaves (30%) and
Cd, Pb, Sr (0 to petiols (20%)
100μg ml− 1)
Nile river water Cd accumulated by WH against
supplemented with Cd concentration gradient
Wetland receiving urban Root Pb conc. 145 ± 15–1110 ±
runoff (Fe, Zn, Cu 145 μg g− 1 dry mass; root Cu
and Pb) conc. 147 ± 70–303 ±
108 μg g− 1 dry mass
Eu (III) absorption by Maximum conc. of Eu(III)
water hyacinth roots found on the root hairs
Tropical lake, Brazil Higher methyl mercury
(203HgCl2) (Me203Hg) production in roots
(aerobic condition) as
compared to water and
sediments
Lab and field When grown in 1/4 strength
(San Francisco Bay Hoagland's solution
Delta region) (1 ppm Hg) WH accumulated
0.20ppm Hg in shoots and
16.0ppm in roots
WH plants from Nile Metal binding capacities of
Delta, Egypt humic acids (HAs) isolated
from leaves (WHL), stems
(WHS) and roots (WHR) of
WH generally exceeds the
respect. plant parts
Technique employed
X-ray microanalysis
Isolation and purification of
Cd-binding protein with
sephadex A-25 and
fractionation on sephadex
G-100
Energy dispersive X-ray
microanalysis, scanning
transmission electron
microscopy of
freeze-substituted root sections
Scanning electron microscopy
(SEM), X-ray absorption
spectroscopy (XAS), Nuclear
Magnetic Resonance (NMR)
and Infrared (IR)
spectroscopies
Liquid scintillation
Hg L3 X-ray absorption
spectroscopy (XAS) of WH
roots and shoots
Chemical (elemental,
carbohydrates and amino acid
analysis) and spectral
(UV–visible, FTIR and NMR)
analysis of HAs
Location/binding Reference
Metals detected in Ca-oxalate Mazen and El Maghraby
crystals (1997)
Cd bound to two major protein El-Enany and Mazen, 1996
fractions; MW 25–20kD
contained 35% and MW
12–8 kD contained 40% of
bound Cd.
Fe conc. decreased Vesk and Allaway (1997); Vesk
centripetally (max at root et al. (1999)
surface > cell wall > cell) while
Zn, Cu, Pb increased
centripetally (cells > cell
wall > root surface)
Eu bound to oxygen ligands via Kelley et al. (1999);
carboxylate group Kelley et al. (2000)
Methylation stimulated by Mauro et al. (2001)
sodium sulfate but not detected
in heat-sterilized roots; role of
sulfidogenic bacteria in
methylation
Hg ionically bound to oxygen Riddle et al. (2002)
ligands (carboxylate groups) in
roots while covalently bound to
sulfur groups in shoots
Similarity in carbohydrate/ Ghabbour et al. (2004)
amino acid distributions and
tight metal binding capacities
of WHL, WHS, WHR and
respect. plant part, indicates
role of HAs in metal binding

in the roots. This longer time to reach maximum concentration
in the shoots may be due to the time required for the active
synthesis of sulfur-containing metal binding proteins or
phytochelatins.
The differential localization of metals within the plant tissues
may also be important in determining how well the metals may
be bound and released on senescence of the plants. Evidences
suggest that cell wall-bound metals are released slowly due to
the slow breakdown of the cell walls (Suren, 1989) and as a
result may be exported from a wetland to a lesser extent (or
later) than those metals bound intracellularly. Jackson et al.
(1994) found that the export of Cu, Cr, Ni and Zn in a wetland
study was greater than that of Al, Fe and Mn, suggesting
binding of the later group of metals to cell-wall. Vesk et al.
(1999) also observed that Fe levels decreased centripetally
across the water hyacinth root and were higher in cell walls than
within the cells. In contrast with Fe, trace metal (Cu, Zn and Pb)
levels increased centripetally across the root, tended to be
higher inside cells and were highest within the cells in the stele.
Despite considerable variability, such studies may help in
identifying general patterns and devising better phytoremedia-
tion strategies, which are based on sound understanding of the
fate of metal taken up by the plant.
2.1.4. Role of microorganisms in phytoremediation
Both plants and soil microorganisms have certain limitations
with respect to their individual abilities to remove/break down
the pollutants. A synergistic action by both rhizosphere
microorganisms (that leads to increased availability of pollu-
tants) and plants (that leads to their removal and/or degradation)
may overcome many of the limitations and thus provide a useful
basis for enhancing remediation of contaminated environments
(Chaudhry et al., 2005). Although the importance of the plants
in supplying oxygen and nutrients to the rhizosphere microbes
via fine roots and of the beneficial effect of microorganisms on
plant root growth has been sufficiently explored, few studies
consider the degradative capacities of plant–microbe consor-
tium (Harvey et al., 2002; Ramos et al., 2005).
Regarding the water hyacinth pond (WHP), two groups of
bacteria (suspended bacteria and the biofilm bacteria) can be
130 A. Malik / Environment International 33 (2007) 122–138
categorized. Polprasert and Katiwada (1998) showed the
significance of both the suspended and biofilm bacteria in the
WHP system by developing an integrated kinetic model
(incorporating the activities of these two groups of bacteria)
for calculating BOD5 removal efficiency. Their model was
validated by experimental results and they found that the
contribution of biofilm bacteria attached to the roots of water
hyacinth was directly related to the improvement on the effluent
quality. Further, the ability of water hyacinth to remove
pollution from raw sewage has been found to be impaired by
sewage toxicity. However, when plants were adapted using an
active bio-degrader consortium consisting of Pseudomonas
aeruginosa, Escherichia coli, Klebsiella ozaenae, Klebsiella
edwardsiella and Bacillus subtilis they could grow even in
100% raw sewage (Ayade, 1998). In synergy with the active
bio-degrader, the efficiency of the adapted water hyacinth to
remove pollutants (nutrients) from raw sewage was enhanced
by 93% whereas the unadapted plants (without bio-degrader)
could not even survive. Malik (2006) demonstrated that
bactericide treatment of the water hyacinth roots decreased
the Se removal capacity, indicating an important role of root-
zone bacteria in Se removal from contaminated solutions.
Singhal and Mahto (2004) also reported that the suppression of
bacterial activity in root–water interface by means of antibiotics
severely hampered water hyacinth growth. With the advent and
availability of several In-situ monitoring techniques, it is
desirable to investigate the microbial flora associated with
healthy and potent water hyacinth plants in order to develop
more efficient WHPs.
Although phytoremediation of wastewater with the water
hyacinth is no doubt yielding and many investigations have
been directed towards it, the quantities of the weed that can be
utilized in this manner are very low. Further, this utilization
option leaves the basic problem of disposal of the weed
unsolved. Therefore, it is desirable to look at the other
utilization options that can ensure mass consumption of the
weed biomass.
2.2. Power alcohol production
Realization of the non-renewable nature of fossil fuels has
led to a search for effective alternative renewable sources to
meet future energy demands. Hemicellulose component of the
lignocellulosic biomass is considered as an attractive raw
material for the production of fuel ethanol. Relatively high
content of hemicellulose (30–55% of dry weight) in the water
hyacinth indicates that it could be a good source of
hemicellulose for bioconversion (Nigam, 2002). Water hyacinth
also contains appreciable amounts of crude protein, which could
provide the nitrogen source in any bioconversion process.
However, the production of fuel ethanol from biomass is a
multistage process that involves prehydrolysis, hydrolysis,
fermentation, and distillation. Also, many of the substances
produced during hydrolysis may have an inhibitory effect on the
microorganisms in subsequent fermentation steps. Neverthe-
less, investigations concerning feasibility of methanol produc-
tion from water hyacinth have been reported (Marc et al., 1983).
Saccharification of the water hyacinth and subsequent
fermentation of the reducing sugars to alcohol using Sacchar-
omyces cerevisiae has been explored (Abraham and Kurup,
1996). Various fermentation parameters were optimized during
this study and a maximum yield of 0.38g alcohol/g sugar
concentration was obtained at 29°C, pH 4, and 3 d incubation
period. Enzymatic saccharification was found to be much
superior to the acid hydrolysis of the cellulosic wastes
(Abraham and Kurup, 1997). Nigam (2002) also investigated
ethanol production from untreated and treated water hyacinth
hemicellulose acid hydrolysate using Pichia stipitis NRRL Y-
7124. The author observed maximum yield of 0.35g ethanol/g
substrate concentration for the treated material, which is
comparable with those obtained during fermentation of sugar
cane baggase. However, the presence of acetic acid in the
hydrolysate decreased the ethanol yield and productivity
considerably. Butanediol fermentation has a competitive
advantage over ethanol or acetone butanol fermentation, in
which the end- products are considerably more toxic. A scheme
for the microbial production of 2, 3-butanediol from the water
hyacinth has been formulated (Motwani et al., 1993). In this
investigation, various integrations were tested and compared.
Prefermentation hydrolysis followed by combined hydrolysis
fermentation (PH-CHF) has been found to be more efficient
than combined hydrolysis fermentation (CHF) and separate
hydrolysis fermentation (SHF). Encouraging results were
obtained with anaerobic-fixed-film and UASB reactor systems
for the continuous production of 2, 3-butanediol. As is clear
from the above discussion, pre-treatment of biomass is
mandatory for alcohol production which often requires a
relatively high temperature, strong acids/alkali and pressurized
reactors. Thomas and Eden (1990) suggested that due to
negative energy balance, hydrolysis of water hyacinths to
produce fuel is feasible only in the situations where there is a
high need for ethanol as a liquid fuel.
2.3. Biogas production
Conversion of organic matter (usually animal or human
waste) to biogas is a well established small and medium scale
technology. The possibility of converting water hyacinth to
biogas has also emerged as an area of major interest for many
years. Production of up to 0.67 l g- 1 volatile matter biogas yield
has been reported (Table 7). Better yields of biogas are obtained
using mixture of animal waste and water hyacinth (Kumar,
2005) and the sludge obtained from mixed feed with better
nitrogen, phosphorus and potassium content can be utilized as
very good manure. However, use of the water hyacinth for
digestion in a traditional digester presents some problems
(Mshandete et al., 2004) such as large digester size, lower biogas
conversion efficiency (due to very high water content) and
mandatory pre-treatment before digestion (to remove air
entrapped in the tissue). Pretreatment with fungi or chemicals
increase the biodegradability of water hyacinth for sufficient
biogas production (Ali et al., 2004). As shown in Table 7, efforts
have been made to optimize the operating parameters as well as
the design of an appropriate water hyacinth biogas digester
 A. Malik / Environment International 33 (2007) 122–138 131

Table 7
Biogas production from water hyacinth
Reference Investigation Results
Chin and Goh (1978) Lab and field scale studies Gas yields of up to 0.67l g− 1 volatile matter at 37 °C
Hanisak et al. (1980) – 0.4 1 of biogas/g volatile solids at 60% methane
Madamwar et al. (1990) Optimization of operating conditions Maximum methane production (0.64l/l of digester/d) at
optimum temperature —35°C, TSS — 7 to 9% (w/v),
Retention time: 7–9d water hyacinth–cattle dung
ratio: 7:3 w/w
Patel et al. (1992) Effects of biological/chemical additives on biogas Enhanced gas production by addition of gelatin,
production from water hyacinth–cattle dung mixture polyvinyl alcohol, powdered activated charcoal, pectin,
kaolin, silica gel, aluminum powder, bentonite and
talc powder
Moorhead and Nordstedt (1993) Optimization of parameters such as particle size Biogas yields (0.20 to 0.28l g− 1 volatile solids optimum
(1.6–12.7mm), N content (10 and 30mg N/kg dm) and at 6.4 mm particle size, highest inoculum and N content
inoculum volume (2.5–10l)
Kivaisi and Mtila (1998) Biphasic reactor (rumen reactor + UASB) Biogas with 80% CH4; average yield 0.44l− 1 g− 1
volatile solids
Ali et al. (2004) Pretreatment with fungi or chemicals to increase Untreated water hyacinth: 0.10l g− 1 dm;
the biodegradability of water hyacinth Phanerochaete chrysosporium pretreatment: 0.24l g− 1
dm; pyrogaliol red + P. chrysosporium: 0.31l g− 1 dm
Kumar (2005) Water hyacinth + night soil (1:3 and 3:1) Enhanced biogas production, rich in CH4

(Madamwar et al., 1990; Moorhead and Nordstedt, 1993). Some
attempts have also been made to increase the gas production by
stimulating the microbial activity using various biological and
chemical additives under different operating conditions (Patel et
al., 1992). Plants with a higher content of heavy metals (Cr, Cu,
Ni and Zn) and those used for phytoremediation produce higher
CH4 yield than the control (Geeta et al., 1990; Patel et al., 1993;
Singhal and Rai, 2003).
However, since water hyacinth biomass is lighter than water,
it floats and clogs the digester. Therefore, it is not feasible to
feed it even after chopping/mincing, to the conventional biogas
digesters (Abbasi et al, 1992). All these problems imply that it is
not feasible to use a conventional, single stage reactor for water
hyacinth-based biogas plants. Therefore, multi-phasic reactors
that can overcome several problems of feeding, frothing,
clogging and low reactor efficiency have been extensively
investigated in the past two decades. The concepts of feed
pretreatment, phase separation, and whole-cell immobilization
technology have been integrated for the development of rational
and cost-effective two- and three-stage methane recovery
systems from the water hyacinth (Annachhatre and Khanna,
1987). A two-stage system with an open alkali pretreatment
stage and a combined immobilized reactor (12 h HRT) resulted
in significant gas yield of 0.44 l− 1 g− 1 d− 1 (dry wt basis).
Attempts have also been directed towards extraction of
volatile fatty acids (VFAs) from the water hyacinth to be used as
feed-supplement in slurry biogas digesters (Abbasi and
Ramasamy, 1996), and solid-feed digesters to generate fuel
(Abbasi and Ramasamy, 1999b). Systematic studies are
available on biphasic reactors where biogas (60% methane)
yield of 0.38m3 kg− 1 volatile solids d− 1 could be obtained
(Ramasamy and Abbasi, 1999). Here the water hyacinth is
aerobically fermented in ‘acid-phase’ reactors (continuously
stirred tanks seeded with partly digested cowdung slurry) to
generate volatile fatty acids (VFA). The VFA are then converted
to methane in upflow anaerobic filter (UAF) reactors seeded
with a consortium of methanogenic bacteria. Recently, Ganesh
et al. (2005) have demonstrated a simplified biphasic biogas
reactor where inexpensive and easily available equipment such
as plastic buckets, hosepipes, and plastic taps are used for the
VFA extraction. Further, after VFA extraction the ‘spent’ water
hyacinth has been vermicomposted in high-rate vermireactors.
Kivaisi and Mtila (1998) studied the effect of various factors on
biogas production from water hyacinth–cowdung mixture in a
two-stage (biphasic) bioreactor. They observed that by
optimizing the loading rate, sludge retention time and dilution
rate in the rumen reactor, and connecting it to a methanogenic
reactor (upflow anaerobic sludge blanket reactor), 100%
conversion efficiency of the VFA into biogas was achieved.
Sharma et al. (1999) reported that the water hyacinth could be
successfully digested in a novel fed batch digestion system for
producing a steady rate of biogas. A triphasic digestion where
three reactions of the system are separated in each reactor (that
is alkali pretreatment reactor, acid reactor, and methane reactor)
has also been tested for the production of biogas from the water
hyacinth (Ingole and Bhole, 2000). The authors observed that
the nature of the water hyacinth feed influences the digestion
and gas production. Solid-phase fermentation of water hyacinth
effected by daily sprinkling of aqueous suspension of
biodegradative bacteria on water hyacinth biomass bed has
also been reported (Chanakya et al., 1993). Such a system can
be operated in semi-continuous mode by adopting a simple
weekly feeding technique and removing spent material from
below in uncomplicated way suitable for small-scale rural
applications.
It is always desirable to find ways and means of utilizing
water hyacinth by low-cost, simple and labor-intensive
technology so that farmers and householders living near the
wetlands are encouraged to harvest the weed, thus keeping it
under control when other means of controlling it are not
available. Biogas production from the water hyacinth could
provide one of such options. Nevertheless, it would be better if
132 A. Malik / Environment International 33 (2007) 122–138
the utilization options could be more simple (requiring
minimum infrastructure) and massive. Composting appears to
be one such promising option for not only a large-scale
utilization of the water hyacinth, but also for its ultimate
disposal.
2.4. Compost
The water hyacinth can be used on the land either as surface
mulch (Woomer et al., 2000) or as compost. Mulching field
crops with water hyacinth was found to increase the production
of lady's finger (67%), potato (14%) and tomato (90%) as
compared to control (no mulching) treatment (Sannigrahi et al.,
2002). However, Stocker and Haller (1999) observed that
mulching with water hyacinth that was treated with maximum
label rates of glyphosate, and 2,4-D herbicides reduced growth
of tomato as compared to untreated water hyacinth when used
as mulch. Therefore, while using water hyacinth for mulching
or composting purpose care needs to taken that it is not sprayed
with herbicides. Conventional composting, which is suitable for
labor intensive, low capital production can be done by mixing
dried plant with ash, soil and some animal manure/organic
municipal waste. Vermicomposting of the water hyacinth is
more advantageous because the water hyacinth loses its ability
to reproduce vegetatively after it has passed through the
earthworm gut (Abbasi and Ramasamy, 1996). Also, vermicasts
produced during vermicomposting are believed to contain
enzymes and hormones that stimulate plant growth and
discourage pathogens (Ismail, 1997; Abbasi and Ramasamy,
1999a; Szczeck, 1999). Substantial work on vermicomposting
of water hyacinth has been conducted at India in terms of the
optimization of the earthworm species and worm density,
pretreatment of the water hyacinth prior to composting as well
as development of high-rate vermireactors, (Table 8). It has also
been demonstrated that application of the water hyacinth
vermicompost did not have any adverse effect on the growth
and flowering of vegetable crops.
2.5. Animal fodder/fish feed
The high water and mineral content of water hyacinth
indicates that the nutrients in water hyacinth may be available
and suitable to some animals. Boiled and chopped water
hyacinth along with vegetable waste, rice bran, copra cake and
Table 8
Vermicopmost production from water hyacinth
Study
Effect of ‘high-rate’ and ‘low-rate’ vermireactors
Comparison of epigeic species (Eudrilus eugeniae Kinberg, and
Perionyx excavatus Perrier) and two anecic species
(Lampito mauritii Kinberg and Drawida willsi Michaelson)
Vermicomposting of different forms of WH (fresh whole plants,
chopped plants, dried plants, ‘spent’ plant, precomposted
plant) by E. eugeniae
Effect of worm density (50–150 adults/l of digester volume) on
vermicomposting of composted (20d) WH
salt is used to make a suitable feed for pigs in China. In
Malaysia, Indonesia, Philippines and Thailand cooked and
supplemented water hyacinth is used as feed for pigs, ducks and
fish (Van Der Meer and Verdegem, 1996). Dehydrated water
hyacinth has been added to the diet of channel catfish
fingerlings to increase their growth (Gopal, 1987). The water
hyacinth has also been recommended as cattle feed (Kivaisi and
Mtila, 1995). It can be included either in fresh forms or as silage
with paddy straw in place of green para grasses or hay (Mitra et
al., 1997). Recently, Aboud et al. (2005) reported that addition
of 10% or 20% molasses to water hyacinth silage significantly
improved the in vitro organic matter digestibility. Solid state
fermentation using white rot fungi and two Pleurotus spp. also
improves digestibility of water hyacinth and converts it into
mycoprotein — a rich ruminant feed (Mukherjee et al., 2004;
Mukherjee and Nandi, 2004). The use of water hyacinth for
animal feed in developing countries could help solve some of
the nutritional problems that exist in these countries.
2.6. Others
The fibers from the stems of the water hyacinth plant can be
used to make rope, baskets or even good quality paper if
blended with waste paper or jute. Several small-scale cottage
industry papermaking projects have been successful in a
number of countries, including Philippines, Indonesia, and
India. The potential use of the water hyacinth as a pulp material
for producing greaseproof paper has also been successfully
investigated (Goswami and Saikia, 1994). Another application
of water hyacinth is the production of fiberboards for a variety
of end uses such as bituminized board for low-cost roofing
material, indoor partition walls etc. Extensively utilization of
water hyacinth can also be made through the proposed
technology for briquetting of charcoal dust obtained from the
pyrolysis of the water hyacinth. In India, many natives use the
water hyacinth as a medicinal plant mainly to treat the goitre
disease (Oudhia, 1999a,b). They have optimized the formula-
tions i.e. either fresh water hyacinth, table salt and Piper
longum mixed in equal quantity (12 g mixture/d) or dried and
burnt water hyacinth taken with fresh cow urine. Natives also
apply fresh juice of water hyacinth in fresh wounds while in
septic wounds, it is applied with vinegar.
Antioxidizing agents are those essential compounds that
improve the body physiological self-defense against cancer,
Result Reference
‘high-rate’ vermireactor produced 5.6 times greater vermicast/l Gajalakshmi et al. (2001a)
digester volume/d than the ‘low-rate’ reactors
Efficiency of vermiconversion of water hyacinth: Dung (6:1) Gajalakshmi et al., 2001b
mixtures followed the trend E. eugeniae>P. excavatus>
L. mauritii>D. willsi
Precomposted forms most favored as feed and fresh whole form Gajalakshmi et al. (2002a)
least favored; spent weed favored over the corresponding fresh
forms
Vermicast yield increased from the 46.6% Gajalakshmi et al. (2002b)
(50 worms l− 1) to 93.4% (150 worms l− 1)
 A. Malik / Environment International 33 (2007) 122–138
cardiovascular and neurodegenerative diseases, HIV etc.
Certain components of the water hyacinth seem to display
antioxidative properties and some studies even claim that it
exhibits nearly the same antioxidizing agent properties as
Vitamins C and E (Abo-Bakr et al., 1984; Rustom et al., 1991;
Shore, 1998). Bodo et al. (2004a) demonstrated that the water
hyacinth displays effective antioxidative activity like soya and
garlic. The water hyacinth is supposed to contain high amounts
of cysteine-based proteins like metallothioneins. It is well
known that cysteine is also the main component of glutathione
and displays antioxidative activity against O2− and OH free
radicals. The antioxidative activity of the water hyacinth leaves
was estimated as being of 40 ± 2nmol eg/gdp (equivalent-
glutathione per gram of dry plant material). The antioxidative
activity was mainly attributed to the presence of significant
amount of glutathione (32 ± 1.6nmol/g dry hyacinth leaves,
which corresponds to ca. 3.2nmol/g of fresh hyacinth leaves)
along with other antioxidizing agents such as cysteine and SH-
containing derivatives present in the plant leaves. Regarding
extraction, the drying procedure was found to exert an influence
on the content of the antioxidizing agents in the raw vegetal
mass. The freeze-drying technique was found to be best for
achieving high yields of antioxidizing agents while lower yields
were obtained upon heating at 60 °C or sun-drying, suggesting
thermal and photodecomposition of the antioxidizing agent.
Bodo et al. (2004b) recently optimized the process for
extraction of proteic mass from dried and crushed water
hyacinth with an aim of glutathione recovery. The total protein
mass extracted was 75–76 wt.% of the initial mass of dry
hyacinth leaves, at 30 °C, pH 8.2 and a solid (dried leaf)/liquid
(buffer) ratio of 1:8.0. Although a minimum time of 20min was
recommended, the time had no influence on the amount of
extracted proteins.
The leaves of water hyacinth grown in sewage wastewater
were also found to contain about 33% of average crude protein
(dry weight basis). These leaves are a rich source of vitamins
and minerals. Hence, the water hyacinth grown in enriched
medium such as sewage lagoons could potentially serve as a
substantial dietary supplement or mineral source and it is
desirable to optimize the process of extraction of vitamins from
this plant (Ingole and Bhole, 2002). A very old study by Neogi
and Rajagopal (1949) compared several procedures for the
production of carotene from fresh water hyacinths using
untreated/blanched leaves. Blanching was found to raise the
yield of carotene by about 42%. A maximum yield of 85.3%
(29.6 mg carotene/100 g dried leaves) is attainable when
extractions are made by direct heating over a water bath
employing high-boiling petroleum ether. However, recent
claims have been made regarding invention of an improved,
convenient and economically feasible eco-friendly process for
the extraction of beta-carotene enriched extract from water
hyacinth which operates at ambient temperature and requires no
agitation (Panchanadikar et al., 2005). Thus, water hyacinth
could be regarded as better and economic raw material than
other bioresources (Ingole and Bhole, 2002).
The water hyacinth has been used as the sole carbon source
in the culture medium for the production of a cellobiase-rich
133
preparation using Aspergillus niger (Ismail et al., 1996).
Processed water hyacinth has also been used as a low-cost
substitute in growth media for cultivation of Rhizobium spp.
Various agricultural and industrial wastes including water-
hyacinth and pea husks were partially hydrolyzed to amino
acids with the help of acetic acid (1–20%). Protein hydrolysate
from the water hyacinth, singly or in combination with other
hydrolysates was substituted with the nutrient yeast extract in
equal concentration (mg/ml) in yeast extract mannitol (YEM)
medium for the growth of Rhizobium spp. (Gulati, 1980). The
medium consisting of hydrolysates of pea husk and water-
hyacinth (5% acetic acid) in equal proportions showed similar
growth of Rhizobium spp. to that with the YEM medium.
Further, sugars obtained by saccharification of various deligni-
fied wastes using Trichoderma reesei QM9414 have also been
tested as possible substrates for the growth of Rhizobium
inoculants (Gulati, 1987). A mixture containing molasses,
hydrolysates of the water-hyacinth and pea husk (1:2:2) was
used as a substitute for mannitol (10 g− 1 l− 1) and it was found to
give a better yield of R. trifolii and R. japonicum than the
standard yeast extract mannitol medium. The author claims that
considering the Rhizobium inoculants requirements in India,
such substitution for mannitol can result in net saving of
5000kg of mannitol, which is equivalent to one million dollars.
Milled water hyacinth biomass (4% w/v) has been used as the
major carbon source in Mandels and Andreotti medium for
cellulase production by T. reesei ATCC 26921 (Mukhopad-
hyayand Nandi, 1999). Omission of all other nutrients except
(NH4)2SO4, KH2PO4, yeast extract and Tween-80 from the
basal medium did not reduce the yield of cellulose significantly
while addition of poultry manure further increased the cellulase
production. The lignocellulosic hydrolyzate of the water
hyacinth has also been used as a sole carbon source for
riboflavin production by Aspergillus terreus (Foaad and Afifi,
2000). The results showed that the highest amount of the
riboflavin occurred in the fermentation medium composed of
50% hydrolysate and 50% of basal medium containing glucose,
asparagines etc. These investigations suggest the potential use
of the water hyacinth as a medium for cellular growth. Recent
studies demonstrate that the oyster mushroom (Pleurotus sajor-
caju) can also be successfully cultivated on the water hyacinth
biomass (Gupta et al., 2004).
3. Conclusions
The recent research on the water hyacinth has enhanced our
knowledge about the basic as well as applied aspects of this
plant. We have now a clearer picture of the environmental
factors that affect the survival and growth of this plant. This
information may have positive implications for the control as
well as utilization of the water hyacinth for the wastewater
treatment. Better application practices and more efficient
herbicides for the control of water hyacinth have been worked
out. Significant research has focused on the biological control
methods using classical insect agents but the use of allelopathic
plant species and mycopathogens has also been explored.
Finally, a holistic approach combining watershed management
134 A. Malik / Environment International 33 (2007) 122–138
(to control nutrient supply) and an integrated biological and
herbicidal control seems to offer a viable control option.
Proper and large-scale utilization could serve as a positive
approach to the control of water hyacinth. The papers discussed
in the current review have demonstrated the versatility of the
water hyacinth to deal with domestic/industrial wastewaters of
diverse origin and nature. The unique capacity of water hyacinth
to scavenge and concentrate the pollutants from relatively low
strength wastewaters has also been established. The progress in
pilot/full-scale application of the water hyacinth-based waste-
water treatment systems has revalidated their beneficial
application. In contrast to the traditional black-box approach,
detailed investigations on the speciation and fate of contaminant
in the water hyacinth tissues and the role of rhizospheric
microorganisms have given sound understanding of the phyto-
remediation phenomenon. Such advancements could provide a
basis for improving the efficacy of biological remediation.
Other utilization options including water hyacinth-based power
alcohol, biogas, compost or animal feed production also exist.
Although there may be media controversies regarding the
efficiency and quality of the production, research reports
suggest that such conversions are technically viable. Production
of value added materials like antioxidizing agents, vitamins and
growth media from the water hyacinth has been explored to
some extent. However, there is a need to establish technical and
commercial viability of such applications.
As far as the less advantaged rural areas (especially in
developing countries) are concerned, the application of water
hyacinth for decentralized wastewater treatment coupled with
biogas, manure or animal feed production from the harvested
biomass could offer a sustainable system. However, till date the
utilization has never developed into sustainable activities other
than localized cottage industries or to support very poor
communities in subsistence existences such as the production of
biogas. With technologies on various aspects, well researched
individually, what is needed is a dedicated field scale testing of
the region-specific integrations. Government interventions and
people's participation could further break the barrier and
provide the much-needed social acceptance. However, the
problem caused by water hyacinth to the communities far
outweighs the benefits that might occur through utilization.
Therefore, utilization and control strategies should go hand in
hand and rather should try to complement each other.
References
Abbasi SA. Weeds of despair, and hope. In: Abbasi SA, et al, editor. Wetlands of
India, vol. III. New Delhi: Discovery Publishing House; 1998. p. 12–21.
Abbasi SA, Ramasamy EV. Utilization of biowaste solids by extracting volatile
fatty acids with subsequent conversion to methane and manure. Proceedings
of the twelfth international conference on solid waste technology and
management. Philadelphia, 1996, pp. 4C1–4C8.
Abbasi SA, Ramasamy EV, editors. Biotechnological methods of pollution
control. Hyderabad: Orient Longman (Universities press India Ltd); 1999.
p. 168.
Abbasi SA, Ramasamy EV. Anaerobic digestion of high solid waste. In:
Proceedings of eight national symposium on environment IGCAR,
Kalpakkam, India, 1999b, pp. 220–224.
Abbasi SA, Nipaney PC, Ramasamy EV. Use of aquatic weed salvinia as full/
partial feed in commercial digesters. Indian J Technol 1992;30:451–7.
Abo-Bakr TM, El Shemi NM, Mesallam AS. Isolation and chemical evaluation
of proteins from water hyacinth. Qual Plant Foods Hum Nutr 1984;
34:67–73.
Aboud AAO, Kidunda RS, Osarya J. Potential of water hyacinth (Eicchornia
crassipes) in ruminant nutrition in Tanzania. Livest Res Rural Dev 2005;17
[http://www.log1.net/search/lrrd/lrrd17/8/abou17096.htm (Published 5
August 2005)].
Abraham M, Kurup GM. Bioconversion of tapioca (Manihot esculenta) waste
and water hyacinth (Eichhornia crassipes) — influence of various physico-
chemical factors. J Ferment Bioeng 1996;82:259–63.
Abraham M, Kurup GM. Kinetics of the enzymatic saccharification of
pretreated tapioca waste (Manihot esculenta) and water hyacinth
(Eichhornia crassipes). Appl Biochem Biotechnol — Part A Enzyme
Eng Biotechnol 1997;66:133–45.
Ali N, Chaudhary BL, Khandelwal SK. Better use of water hyacinth for fuel,
manure and pollution free environment. Indian J Environ Prot 2004;
24:297–303.
Al Rmalli SW, Harrington CF, Ayub M, Haris PI. A biomaterial based approach
for arsenic removal from water. J Environ Monit 2005;7:279–82.
Annachhatre AP, Khanna P. Methane recovery from water hyacinth through
whole-cell immobilization technology. Biotechnol Bioeng 1987;29:805–18.
Ayade BB. Development of toxicity tolerant water hyacinth (Eichhornea
crassipes) for effective treatment of raw sewage. Acta Biotechnol 1998;18:
43–50.
Babu RM, Sajeena A, Seetharaman K. Solid substrate for production of Alter-
naria alternata conidia: A potential mycoherbicide for the control of
Eichhornia crassipes (water hyacinth). Weed Res 2004;44:298–304.
Barrett SCH. Sexual reproduction in Eichhornia crassipes (water hyacinth): 2.
Seed production in natural populations. J Appl Ecol 1980;17:113–24.
Barreto RW, Evans HC. Fungal pathogens of some Brazilian aquatic weeds and
their potential use in biocontrol. In: Moran VC, Hoffmann H (eds).,
Proceedings of the IX international symposium on biological control of
weeds, Stellenbosch, South Africa, 1996, pp 121–126.
Bodo R, Azzouz A, Hausler R. Antioxidative activity of water hyacinth
components. Plant Sci 2004;166:893–9.
Bodo R, Ahmanache K, Hausler R, Azzouz A. Optimized extraction of total
proteic mass from water hyacinth dry leaves. J Environ Eng Sci 2004;3:
529–36.
Brendonck L, Maes J, Rommens W, Dekeza N, Nhiwatiwa T, Barson M, et al.
The impact of water hyacinth (Eichhornia crassipes) in a eutrophic
subtropical impoundment (Lake Chivero, Zimbabwe). II. Species diversity.
Arch Hydrobiol 2003;158:389–405.
Carvalho dos Santos M, Lenzi E. The use of aquatic macrophytes (Eichhornia
crassipes) as a biological filter in the treatment of lead contaminated
effluents. Environ Technol 2000;21:615–22.
Center TD. Biological control of weeds: waterhyacinth and waterlettuce. In:
Rosen D, Bennett FD, Capinera JL, editors. Pest management in the
subtropics, biological control—a Florida perspective. UK: Intercept Ltd;
1994. p. 481–521.
Center TD, Dray Jr FA, Jubinsky GP, Grodowitz MJ. Biological control of water
hyacinth under conditions of maintenance management: can herbicides and
insects be integrated? Environ Manage 1999;23:241–56.
Chanakya HN, Borgaonkar S, Meena G, Jagadish KS. Solid-phase biogas
production with garbage or water hyacinth. Bioresour Technol 1993;46:
227–31.
Chaudhry Q, Blom-Zandstra M, Gupta S, Joner EJ. Utilising the synergy
between plants and rhizosphere microorganisms to enhance breakdown of
organic pollutants in the environment. Environ Sci Pollut Res 2005;12:
34–48.
Chin KK, Goh TN. Bioconversion of solar energy: Methane production through
water hyacinth. Symp Energy Biomass Waste 1978:215–28.
Costa RHR, Bavaresco ASL, Medri W, Philippi LS. Tertiary treatment of
piggery wastes in water hyacinth ponds. Water Sci Technol 2000;42: 211–4.
DeBusk TA, Dierberg FE, Reddy KR. The use of macrophyte-based systems for
phosphorus removal: an overview of 25 years of research and operational
results in Florida. Water Sci Technol 2001;44:39–46.
 A. Malik / Environment International 33 (2007) 122–138
De Casabianca-Chassany M-L, Boonne C, Basseres A. Eichhornia crassipes
systems on three ammonium-containing industrial effluents (pectin, carcass-
treatment wastes and manure): production and purification. Bioresour
Technol 1992;42:95–101.
Delgado M, Bigeriego M, Guardiola E. Uptake of Zn, Cr and Cd by water
hyacinths. Water Res 1993;27:269–72.
De Marco Jr P, ReisAraújo MA, Barcelos MK, Loureiro Dos Santos MB.
Aquatic invertebrates associated with the water-hyacinth (Eichhornia
crassipes) in an eutrophic reservoir in tropical Brazil. Stud Neotrop Fauna
Environ 2001;36:73–80.
Denny P, Wanda FM, Timothy T. The impact of water hyacinth, Eichhornia
crassipes (Mart) Solms on the abundance and diversity of aquatic
macroinvertebrates along the shores of northern Lake Victoria, Uganda.
Hydrobiologia 2001;452:79–88.
El-Enany AE, Mazen AMA. Isolation of CD-binding protein of water hyacinth
(Eichhornia crassipes) grown in Nile river water. Water Air Soil Pollut
1996;87:357–62.
Ellis JB, Shutes RB, Revitt DM, Zhang TT. Use of macrophytes for pollution
treatment in urban wetlands. Resour Conserv Recycl 1994;22:1–12.
Epstein P. Weeds bring disease to the east African waterways. Lancet
1998;351:577.
Evans HC, Reeder RH. Fungi associated with Eichhornia crassipes (water
hyacinth) in the Upper Amazon Basin and prospects for their use in
biological control. In: Julien MH, Hill MP, Center TD, Jianqing D, editors.
Biological and integrated control of water hyacinth, Eichhornia crassipes.
ACIAR proceedings 102. Canberra, Australia, 2001. pp 62–70.
Fernández OA, Sutton DL, Lallana VH, Sabbatini MR, Irigoyan JH. Aquatic
weed problems and management in South and Central America. In:
Charudattan R, editor. Aquatic weeds—the ecology and management of
nuisance aquatic vegetation. New York: Oxford University Press; 1990.
p. 406–25.
Foaad MA, Afifi AF. Riboflavin production by Aspergillus terreus using
lignocellulosic hydrolyzate of water hyacinth. Egypt J Biotechnol
2000;7:101–11.
Gajalakshmi S, Ramasamy EV, Abbasi SA. Assessment of sustainable
vermiconversion of water hyacinth at different reactor efficiencies employ-
ing Eudrilus eugeniae Kinberg. Bioresour Technol 2001a;80:131–5.
Gajalakshmi S, Ramasamy EV, Abbasi SA. Potential of two epigeic and two
anecic earthworm species in vermicomposting water hyacinth. Bioresour
Technol 2001b;76:177–81.
Gajalakshmi S, Ramasamy EV, Abbasi SA. Vermicomposting of different forms
of water hyacinth by the earthworm Eudrilus eugeniae, Kinberg. Bioresour
Technol 2002a;82:165–9.
Gajalakshmi S, Ramasamy EV, Abbasi SA. High-rate composting–vermicom-
posting of water hyacinth (Eichhornia crassipes, Mart. Solms). Bioresour
Technol 2002b;83:235–9.
Ganesh PS, Ramasamy EV, Gajalakshmi S, Abbasi SA. Extraction of volatile
fatty acids (VFAs) from water hyacinth using inexpensive contraptions, and
the use of the VFAs as feed supplement in conventional biogas digesters
with concomitant final disposal of water hyacinth as vermicompost.
Biochem Eng J 2005;27:17–23.
Geeta GS, Jagadeesh KS, Reddy TKR. Nickel as an accelerator of biogas
production in water hyacinth (Eichornia crassipes Solms.). Biomass
1990;21:157–61.
Ghabbour EA, Davies G, Lam Y-Y, Vozzella ME. Metal binding by humic acids
isolated from water hyacinth plants (Eichhornia crassipes [Mart.] Solm-
Laubach: Pontedericeae) in the Nile Delta, Egypt. Environ Pollut
2004;131:445–51.
Gopal B. Water hyacinth, aquatic plant studies series. Elsevier; 1987.
Goswami T, Saikia CN. Water hyacinth — a potential source of raw material for
greaseproof paper. Bioresour Technol 1994;50:235–8.
Guitiérrez EL, Ruiz EF, Uribe EG, Martínez JM. Biomass and productivity of
water hyacinth and their application in control programs. In: Hill MP, editor.
Proceedings of the second IOBC global working group on the biological and
integrated control of water hyacinth, vol. 102. Beijing, China: ACIAR;
2000. p. 109–19.
Gulati SL. Growth of Rhizobia in protein hydrolysates. Zentralblatt fur
Bakteriologie, Parasitenkunde, Infektionskrankheiten und Hygiene. Zweite
135
naturwissenschaftliche Abteilung: Mikrobiologie der Landwirtschaft der
Technologie und des Umweltschutzes 1980;135:296–301.
Gulati SL. Sugars produced from cellulosic wastes as possible substrates for
growth of Rhizobium inocula. Biol Wastes 1987;21:301–5.
Gupta M, Sarmah R, Gupta S. Nutrient composition of Pleurotus sajor-caju
grown on different substrates. J Food Sci Technol 2004;41:584–6.
Hammer DA. Designing constructed wetlands systems to treat agricultural non-
point source pollution. Ecol Eng 1992;1:49–87.
Hanisak MD, Williams LD, Ryther JH. Recycling the nutrients in residues from
methane digesters of aquatic macrophytes for new biomass production.
Resour Recov Conserv 1980;4:313–23.
Hao Y, Roach AL, Ramelow GJ. Uptake of metal ions by nonliving biomass
derived from Sphagnum moss and water hyacinth roots. J Environ Sci
Health 1993;A28:2333–2343.
Harley KLS, Julien MH, Wright AD. Water hyacinth: a tropical worldwide
problem and methods for its control. Proceedings of the 2nd international
weed control congress, Copenhagen, 1996, Volume II, pp. 639–644.
Harley KLS, Julien MH, Wright AD. Water hyacinth: a tropical world wide
problem and methods for its control, proceedings of the first meeting of the
international water hyacinth consortium. World Bank; 1997.
Harvey PJ, Campanella BF, Castro PML, Harms H, Lichtfouse E, Schäffner AR,
et al. Phytoremediation of polyaromatic hydrocarbons, anilines and phenols.
Environ Sci Pollut Res 2002;9:29–47.
Heard TA, Winterton SL. Interactions between nutrient status and weevil
herbivory in the biological control of water hyacinth. J Appl Ecol
2000;37:117–27.
Ingole NW, Bhole AG. Biogas from water hyacinth by triphasic digestion
process. J Inst Eng, India, Environ Eng Div 2000;81:13–6.
Ingole NW, Bhole AG. Utilization of water hyacinth relevant in water treatment
and resource recovery with special reference to India. J Water Supply: Res
Technol, AQUA 2002;51:283–95.
Ingole NW, Bhole AG. Removal of heavy metals from aqueous solution by
water hyacinth (Eichhornia crassipes). J Water Supply: Res Technol, AQUA
2003;52:119–28.
Ismail SA. Vermicology the biology of earthworms. Hyderabad: Orient
Longman; 1997. p. 92.
Ismail AM, Abdel-Naby MA, Abdel-Fattah AF. Utilization of water hyacinth
cellulose for production of cellobiase-rich preparation by Aspergillus niger
1. Microbios 1996;83:191–8.
Jackson LJ, Rasmussen JB, Kalff J. A mass balance analysis of trace metals in
two weedbeds. Water Air Soil Pollut 1994;22:107–19.
Jayaweera MW, Kasturiarachchi JC. Removal of nitrogen and phos-
phorus from industrial wastewaters by phytoremediation using water
hyacinth (Eichhornia crassipes (Mart.) Solms). Water Sci Technol
2004;50:217–25.
Julien MH, Griffiths MW. Biological control of weeds. A world catalogue of
agents and their target weeds, 4th edition. Wallingford: CABI Publishing;
1998 [223 p].
Julien MH, Orapa W. Successful biological control of water hyacinth
(Eichhornia crassipes) in Papua New Guinea by the weevils Neochetina
bruchi and Neochetina eichhorniae (Coleoptera: Curculionidae). In:
Spencer NR, editor. Proceedings of the X international symposium on
biological control of weeds. Bozeman, Montana, USA: Montana State
University; 1999. p. 1027.
Julien MH, Hill MP, Center TD, Jianqing D. Biological and integrated control
of water hyacinth, Eichhornia crassipes. Proceedings of the second
meeting of the global working group for the biological and integrated
control of water hyacinth, Beijing, China. ACIAR Proceedings No. 102,
2001, [152 p.]
Kadirvelu K, Kanmani P, Senthilkumar P, Subburam V. Separation of mercury
(II) from aqueous solution by adsorption onto an activated carbon prepared
from Eichhornia crassipes. Adsorp Sci Technol 2004;22:207–22.
Kathiresan RM. Allelopathic potential of native plants against water hyacinth.
Crop Prot 2000;19:705–8.
Kauraw LP, Bhan VM. Efficacy of cassytha powder to water hyacinth and
marigold to Parthenium population. Weed News 1994;1:3–6.
Kelley C, Mielke RE, Dimaquibo D, Curtis AJ, Dewitt JG. Adsorption of Eu(III)
onto roots of water hyacinth. Environ Sci Technol 1999;33:1439–43.
136 A. Malik / Environment International 33 (2007) 122–138
Kelley C, Curtis AJ, Uno JK, Berman CL. Spectroscopic studies of the
interaction of Eu(III) with the roots of water hyacinth. Water Air Soil Pollut
2000;119:171–6.
Kivaisi AK, Mtila M. Chemical composition and in vitro degradability of whole
plants and shoots of the water hyacinth (Eicchornia crassipes) by rumen
micro-organisms. Tanzan Vet J 1995;15:121–9.
Kivaisi AK, Mtila M. Production of biogas from water hyacinth (Eichhornia
crassipes) (mart) (solms) in a two-stage bioreactor. World J Microbiol
Biotechnol 1998;14:125–31.
Kumar S. Studies on efficiencies of bio-gas production in anaerobic digesters
using water hyacinth and night-soil alone as well as in combination. Asian J
Chem 2005;17:934–8.
Langeland KA, Burks KC, editors. Identification and biology of non-native
plants in Florida's natural areas. University of Florida; 1998. [165 p. UF/
IFAS Distribution].
Li W, Wang B, Wang J. Lack of genetic variation of an invasive clonal plant
Eichhornia crassipes in China revealed by RAPD and ISSR markers.
Aquat Bot 2006;84:176–80.
Liao SW, Chang WL. Heavy metal phytoremediation by water hyacinth at
constructed wetlands in Taiwan. J Aquat Plant Manage 2004;42:60–8.
Low KS, Lee CK. Removal of arsenic from solution by water hyacinth
(Eichhornia crassipes (Mart) Solms). Ibid 1990;13:129–31.
Low KS, Lee CK, Tai CH. Biosorption of copper by water hyacinth roots. J
Environ Sci Health 1994;A29:171–88.
Low KS, Lee CK, Tan KK. Biosorption of basic dyes by water hyacinth roots.
Bioresour Technol 1995;52:79–83.
Lytle CM, Lytle FW, Yang N, Qian J-H, Hansen D, Zayed A, et al. Reduction of
Cr(VI) to Cr(III) by wetland plants: potential for in situ heavy metal
detoxification. Environ Sci Technol 1998;32:3087–93.
Madamwar D, Patel A, Patel V. Effect of temperature and retention time on
methane recovery from water hyacinth–cattle dung. J Ferment Bioeng
1990;70:340–2.
Mailu AM. Preliminary assessment of the social, economic and environmental
impacts of water hyacinth in the Lake Victoria basin and the status of
control, biological and integrated control of water hyacinth, Eichhornia
crassipes (2001) ACIAR Proceedings No. 102.
Malik A. Metal bioremediation through growing cells. Environ Int 2004;
30:261–78.
Malik A. Water Hyacinth for phytoremediation. In: Teixeira da Silva Jaime A,
editor. Floriculture, ornamental and plant biotechnology: advances and
topical issues (vol. III). 1st edition. London, UK: Global Science Books Ltd.;
2006. p. 298–303.
Marc B, Philippe G, Christian A, Sylvain F. Methanol from water hyacinth.
Symp Pap — Energy Biomass Wastes 1983:1031–55.
Masifwa WF, Twongo T, Denny P. The impact of water hyacinth, Eichhornia
crassipes (Mart) solms on the abundance and diversity of aquatic
macroinvertebrates along the shores of northern Lake Victoria, Uganda.
Hydrobiologia 2001;452:79–88.
Mauro JBN, Guimarães JRD, Melamed R. Mercury methylation in macrophyte
roots of a tropical lake. Water Air Soil Pollut 2001;127:271–80.
Maxine AW, José B. The role of nutrient levels on flowering in water hyacinth.
Aquat Bot 1988;31:367–72.
Mazen AMA, El Maghraby OMO. Accumulation of cadmium, lead and
strontium, and a role of calcium oxalate in water hyacinth tolerance. Biol
Plant 1997;40:411–7.
Mbati G, Neuenschwander P. Biological control of three floating water weeds,
Eichhornia crassipes, Pistia stratiotes, and Salvinia molesta in the Republic
of Congo. Biocontrol 2005;50:635–45.
Menon S, Salasa A, Shinu M, Meera V. Treatment of paper mill effluent with
water Hyacinth. Pollut Res 2005;24:175–6.
Methy M, Alpert P, Roy J. Effects of light quality and quantity on growth of the
clonal plant Eichhornia crassipes. Oecologia 1990;84.
Mironga JM. Geographic information systems (GIS) and remote sensing in the
management of shallow tropical lakes. Appl Ecol Environ Res 2004;
2:83–103.
Mitra T, Biswas P, Mandal L, Banerjee GC. Effect of feeding water hyacinth
(Eichhornia crassipes) in different forms on the palatability in buffalo
calves. Indian Vet J 1997;74:935–7.
Moorhead KK, Nordstedt RA. Batch anaerobic digestion of water hyacinth:
effects of particle size, plant nitrogen content and inoculum volume.
Bioresour Technol 1993;44:71–6.
Motwani M, Seth R, Daginawala HF, Khanna P. Microbial production of 2,3-
butanediol from water hyacinth. Bioresour Technol 1993;44:187–95.
Mshandete A, Kivaisi A, Rubindamayugi M, Mattiasson BO. Anaerobic batch co-
digestion of sisal pulp and fish wastes. Bioresour Technol 2004;95:19–24.
Mukherjee S, Mondal GC. Removal of lead by water hyacinth. Indian J Chem
Technol 1995;2:59–62.
Mukherjee R, Nandi B. Improvement of in vitro digestibility through biological
treatment of water hyacinth biomass by two Pleurotus species. Int
Biodeterior Biodegrad 2004;53:7–12.
Mukherjee R, Ghosh M, Nandi B. Improvement of dry matter digestibility of
water hyacinth by solid state fermentation using white rot fungi. Indian J
Exp Biol 2004;42:837–43.
Mukhopadhyay S, Nandi B. Optimization of cellulase production by Tricho-
derma reesei ATCC 26921 Using a simplified medium on water hyacinth
biomass. J Sci Ind Res 1999;58:107–11.
Muramoto S, Aoyama I, Oki Y. Effect of salinity on the concentration of
some elements in water hyacinth (Eichhornia crassipes) at critical levels.
J Environ Sci Health 1991;A26:205–15.
Neogi S, Rajagopal K. A method for the production of carotene concentrate
from water hyacinth (Eichhornia crassipes). J Sci Ind Res India 1949;
8B:119–21.
Nigam JN. Bioconversion of water hyacinth (Eichhornia crassipes) hemi-
cellulose acid hydrolysate to motor fuel ethanol by xylose-fermenting yeast.
J Biotechnol 2002;97:107–16.
Nor YM. Phenol removal by Eichhornia crassipes in the presence of trace
metals. Water Res 1994;28:1161–6.
Obeid M, Taggel M. Factors affecting dormancy and germination of seeds of
Eichhornia crassipes (Mart.) Solms, from the Nile. Weed Res 1976;16:
71–80.
Ogwang JA, Molo R. Threat of water hyacinth resurgence after a successful
biological control program. Biocontrol Sci Technol 2004;14:623–6.
Olaleye VF, Akinyemiju OA. Effect of a glyphosate (N-(Phosphonomethyl)
glycine) application to control Eichhornia crassipes Mart. on fish
composition and abundance in Abiala Creek, Niger Delta, Nigeria. J Environ
Manage 1996;47:115–22.
Olivares E, Colonnello G. Salinity gradient in the Mánamo River, a
dammed distributary of the Orinoco Delta, and its influence on the
presence of Eichhornia crassipes and Paspalum repens. Interciencia
2000;25:242–8.
Oudhia P. Medicinal weeds in rice fields of Chhattisgarh (India). Int Rice Res
Notes 1999a;24:40.
Oudhia P. Studies on allelopathy and medicinal weeds in chickpea fields. Int
Chickpea Pigeonpea Newsl 1999b;6:29–33.
Panchanadikar VV, Joshi SP, Babu SS, Bhide SR. Beta-carotene enriched extract
from water hyacinth Eichhornia crassipes. US patent 424725000 (USPTO),
A61K035/78 (Intl Class) 09/29/05, #20050214389. 2005.
Pandey DK, Kauraw LP, Bhan VM. Inhibitory effect of parthenium (Parthenium
hysterophorus L.) residue on growth of water hyacinth (Eichhornia
crassipes Mart Solms.). II. Relative effect of flower, leaf, stem, and root
residue. J Chem Ecol 1993;19:2663–70.
Parija P. A note on the reappearance of water hyacinth seedlings in cleared tanks.
Indian J Agric Sci 1934;4:1049.
Patel VB, Patel AR, Madamwar DB. Effect of adsorbents on anaerobic digestion
of water-hyacinth–cattle dung. Bioresour Technol 1992;40:179–81.
Patel VB, Patel AR, Patel MC, Madamwar DB. Effect of metals on anaerobic
digestion of water hyacinth–cattle dung. Appl Biochem Biotechnol
1993;43:45–50.
Pinto CLR, Caconia A, Souza MM. Utilization of water hyacinth for removal
and recovery of silver from industrial wastewater. Water Sci Technol
1987;19:89–101.
Plummer ML. Impact of invasive water hyacinth (Eichhornia crassipes) on snail
hosts of schistosomiasis in Lake Victoria, East Africa. Eco Health
2005;2:81–6.
Polprasert C, Katiwada NR. An integrated kinetic model for water hyacinth
ponds used for wastewater treatment. Water Res 1998;32:179–85.
 A. Malik / Environment International 33 (2007) 122–138
Polprasert C, Kessomboon S, Kanjanaprapin W. Pig wastewater treatment in
water hyacinth ponds. Water Sci Technol 1992;26:2381–4.
Prasad MNV, De Oliveira Freitas HM. Metal hyperaccumulation in plants —
biodiversity prospecting for phytoremediation technology. Electron J
Biotechnol 2003;6:110–46.
Ram S, Moolani MK. Herbicidal weed control of water hyacinth under semi-arid
conditions. Pestology 2000;24:69–71.
Ramasamy EV, Abbasi SA. Utilization of biowaste solids by extracting volatile
fatty acids with subsequent conversion to methane and manure. J Solid
Waste Technol Manag 1999;26:133–9.
Ramos JL, González-Pérez MM, Caballero A, Dillewijn PV. Bioremediation of
polynitrated aromatic compounds: plants and microbes put up a fight. Curr
Opin Biotechnol 2005;16:275–81.
Rashwan WE, Girgis BS. Adsorption capacities of activated carbons derived
from rice straw and water hyacinth in the removal of organic pollutants from
water. Adsorp Sci Technol 2004;22:181–94.
Reddy KR, Campbell KL, Graetz DA, Portier KM. Use of biological filters
for treating agricultural drainage effluents. J Environ Qual 1982;11:
591–5.
Ren M-X, Zhang Q-G, Zhang D-Y. Random amplified polymorphic DNA
markers reveal low genetic variation and a single dominant genotype in
Eichhornia crassipes populations throughout China. Weed Res 2005;
45:236–44.
Riddle SG, Tran HH, Dewitt JG, Andrews JC. Field, laboratory, and X-ray
absorption spectroscopic studies of mercury accumulation by water
hyacinths. Environ Sci Technol 2002;36:1965–70.
Roldán G. Treating industrial wastes in Colombia using water hyacinth.
Waterlines 2002;21:6–8.
Roy S, Hanninen O. Pentachlorophenol: uptake/elimination kinetics and
metabolism in an aquatic plant, Eichhornia crassipes. Environ Toxicol
Chem 1994;13:763–73.
Rupainwar DC, Rai S, Swami MSN, Sharma YC. Uptake of zinc from water and
wastewater by a commonly available macrophyte. Int J Environ Stud
2004;61:395–401.
Rustom IYS, Lopez-Leiva MH, Nair BM. Optimization of extraction of peanut
proteins with water by response surface methodology. J Food Sci
1991;56:1660–3.
Sajn Slak A, Bulc TG, Vrhovsek D. Comparison of nutrient cycling in a surface-
flow constructed wetland and in a facultative pond treating secondary
effluent. Water Sci Technol 2005;51:291–8.
Sannigrahi AK, Chakrabortty S, Borah BC. Large scale utilization of water
hyacinth (Eichhornia crassipes) as raw material for vermi composting and
surface mulching in vegetable cultivation. Ecol Environ Conserv 2002;
8:269–71.
Satyakala G, Jamil K. Chromium-induced biochemical changes in Eichhornia
crassipes (mart) solms and Pistia stratiotes L. Bull Environ Contam Toxicol
1992;48:921–8.
Saxena MK. Aqueous leachate of Lantana camara kills water hyacinth. J Chem
Ecol 2000;26:2435–47.
Schneider IAH, Rubio J, Misra M, Smith RW. Eichhornia crassipes as
biosorbent for heavy metal ions. Miner Eng 1995;8:979–88.
Shabana YM, Mohamed ZA. Integrated control of water hyacinth with a
mycoherbicide and a phenylpropanoid pathway inhibitor. Biocontrol Sci
Technol 2005;15:659–69.
Shabana YM, Baka ZAM, Abdel Fattan GM. Effect of designed mycoherbicide
prepared from host specific candidate Alternaria eichhorniae on some
physiological and ultrastructural characters of waterhyacinth. Ann Agric Sci
1996;41:421–43.
Sharma A, Gupta MK, Singhal PK. Toxic effects of leachate of water hyacinth
decay on growth of Scenedesmus obliquus (Chlorophyta). Water Res
1996;30:2281–6.
Sharma A, Unni BG, Singh HD. A novel fed-batch digestion system for
biomethanation of plant biomasses. J Biosci Bioeng 1999;87:678–82.
Shawky S, Geleel MA, Aly A. Sorption of uranium by non-living water hyacinth
roots. J Radioanal Nucl Chem 2005;265:81–4.
Shekinah P, Kadirvelu K, Kanmani P, Senthilkumar P, Subburam V. Adsorption
of lead(II) from aqueous solution by activated carbon prepared from Eich-
hornia. J Chem Technol Biotechnol 2002;77:458–64.
137
Shore JK. Un régime alimentaire riche en antioxydants. Ottawa: CRDI Explorer;
1998. p. 2–4.
Simberloff D, Schmitz DC, Brown TC. Strangers in paradise: impact and
management of nonindigenous species in Florida. Island Press; 1997 [467 p].
Singhal PK, Mahto S. Role of water hyacinth in the health of a tropical urban
lake. J Environ Biol 2004;25:269–77.
Singhal V, Rai JP. Biogas production from water hyacinth and channel grass
used for phytoremediation of industrial effluents. Bioresour Technol
2003;86:221–5.
Sinha AK, Sinha RK. Sewage management by aquatic weeds (water hyacinth
and duckweed): economically viable and ecologically sustainable bio-
mechanical technology. Environ Educ Inf 2000;19:215–26.
Smith LW, Williams RE, Shaw M, Green KR. A water hyacinth eradication
campaign in New South Wales, Australia. In: Thyagarajan G, editor. Proc.
int. conf. water hyacinth. Nairobi: UNEP; 1984. p. 925–35.
Sooknah RD, Wilkie AC. Nutrient removal by floating aquatic macrophytes
cultured in anaerobically digested flushed dairy manure wastewater. Ecol
Eng 2004;22:27–42.
Sridevi B, Sharief SD, Dawood N, Noorjahan CM, Prabakar K. Bioabsorption
of nickel and zinc by water hyacinth–Eichhornia sp. Ecol Environ Conserv
2003;9:361–5.
Stocker RK, Haller WT. Residual effects of herbicide-treated Eichhornia
crassipes used as a soil amendment. Hydrobiologia 1999;415:329–33.
Sun WH, Yu SW, Yang SY, Zhao PW, Yu ZW, Wu HM, et al. Allelochemicals
from root exudates of water hyacinth. Acta Phytophysiol Sin 1993;19:92–6.
Suren AM. Histological changes in macrophyte tissue during decomposition.
Aquat Bot 1989;22:27–40.
Szczeck MM. Suppressiveness of vermicompost against fusarium wilt of
tomato. J Phytopathol Phytopathologische Zeitschrift 1999;47:155–61.
Tchobanoglous G, Maitski FK, Thomson K, Chadwick TH. Evolution and
performance of city of San Diego pilot scale aquatic wastewater treatment
system using water hyacinth. J WPCF 1989;61:11–2.
Thomas TH, Eden RD. Water hyacinth — a major neglected resource. Mat Sci,
Wind Energy, Biomass Technol 1990;3:2092–6.
Thomson S, Enala TM, Mick M. Control of aquatic weeds through pollutant
reduction and weed utilization: a weed management approach in the lower
Kafue River of Zambia. Physics Chem Earth, Parts A/B/C 2002;27: 983–91.
Tripathi BD, Upadhyay AR. Dairy effluent polishing by aquatic macrophytes.
Water Air Soil Pollut 2003;143:377–85.
Trivedy PK, Gudekar VR. Treatment of textile industry waste using water
hyacinth. Water Sci Technol 1987;19:103–7.
Trivedy RK, Thomas S. Review of performance data of few pilot and full scale
aquatic weed based waste treatment plants from India. Asian J Microbiol
Biotechnol Environ Sci 2004;6:157–62.
Uchida H, Ando K. Water hyacinth control program through community
development approach: a case study in a Bangladesh village. Jpn Agri Res Q
1998;32:181–6.
Udaya Simha L, Panigrahy BK, Ramakrishna SV. Preliminary studies on
fluoride adsorption by water hyacinth. Indian J Environ Prot 2002;
22:506–11.
Van Der Meer MB, Verdegem MCJ. Comparison of amino acid profiles of feeds
and fish as a quick method for selection of feed ingredients: a case study of
Colossoma macropomum (Cuvier). Aquac Res 1996;27:487–95.
Verma R, Singh SP, Ganesha Raj K. Assessment of changes in water hyacinth
coverage of water bodies in northern part of Bangalore city using temporal
remote sensing data. Curr Sci 2003;2003:792–804.
Vesk PA, Allaway WG. Spatial variation of copper and lead concentrations of
water hyacinth plants in a wetland receiving urban run-off. Aquat Bot
1997;59:33–44.
Vesk PA, Nockolds CE, Allaway WG. Metal localization in water hyacinth roots
from an urban wetland. Plant Cell Environ 1999;22:149–58.
Warrier RR, Saroja S. Impact of depolluted electroplating effluents on the
growth and productivity of selected crops. Ecol Environ Conserv
2000;6:251–3.
Westerdahl HE, Getsinger KD. Aquatic plant identification and herbicide use
guide, volume II: aquatic plants and susceptibility to herbicides. Technical
report 1988; A-88–9 Department of the Army, Waterways Experiment
Station, Corps of Engineers, Vicksburg, MS.
138 A. Malik / Environment International 33 (2007) 122–138
Williams AE, Duthie HC, Hecky RE. Water hyacinth in Lake Victoria: why did
it vanish so quickly and will it return? Aquat Bot 2005;81:300–14.
Wilson JR, Holst N, Rees M. Determinants and patterns of population growth in
water hyacinth. Aquat Bot 2005;81:51–67.
Woomer PL, Muzira R, Bwamiki D, Mutetikka D, Amoding A, Bekunda MA.
Biological management of water hyacinth waste in Uganda. Biol Agri Hortic
2000;17:181–96.
Xia H, Wu L, Tao Q. Water hyacinth accelerating the degradation of malathion
in aqueous solution. China Environ Sci 2001;21:553–5.
Yao H, Ramelow GJ. Evaluation of treatment techniques for increasing the
uptake of metal ions from solution by nonliving biomass derived from
several strains of lichen, Sphagnum (peat) moss, and Eichhornia crassipes
(water hyacinth) root. Microbios 1997;90:97–109.
Zaranyika MF, Mutoko F, Murahwa H. Uptake of Zn, Co, Fe and Cr by water
hyacinth (Eichhornia crassipes) in Lake Chivero, Zimbabwe. Sci Total
Environ 1994;153:117–21.
Zhang M, Ling B, Kong C, Liang G, Dong Y. Allelopathic effects of lantana
(Lantana camera L.) on water hyacinth (Eichhornia crassipes (Mart.)
Solms). Allelopathy J, 2005;15:125–9.
Zhu YL, Zayed AM, Qian J-H, de Souza M, Terry M. Phytoaccumulation of
trace elements by wetland plants: II. Water hyacinth. J Environ Qual
1999;28:339–44.