Rehabilitation potential of coarse rejects from iron ore mining amended by different levels of fertiliser as a substrate for the establishment and growth of the native plant spec

THAI NGUYEN UNIVERSITY UNIVERSITY OF AGRICULTURE AND FORESTRY MISHEL VALERY VALIÑA RAÑADA TOPIC TITLE: “REHABILITATION POTENTIAL OF COARSE REJECTS FROM IRON ORE MINING AMENDED BY DIFFERENT LEVELS OF FERTILISER AS A SUBSTRATE FOR THE ESTABLISHMENT AND GROWTH OF THE NATIVE PLANT SPECIES IN PILBARA REGION, WESTERN AUSTRALIA” BACHELOR THESIS Study Mode: Major: Faculty: Batch: Full-time Environmental Science and Management International Programs Office K45-AEP Thai Nguyen, 20/11/2017 Thai Nguyen University of Agriculture and Forestry Degree Program Bachelor of Environmental Science and Management Student Name Mishel Valery Valiña Rañada Student ID DTN1454290046 Research Title “Rehabilitation potential of Coarse Rejects from Iron Ore Mining amended by Different Levels of Fertiliser as a Substrate for the Establishment and Growth of the Native Plant Species in Pilbara Region, Western Australia” Supervisors Dr Eddie van Etten and MSc Nguyen Thi Thu Huong As the degraded land expands along with the developments of mining industry, rehabilitation becomes a global priority As a top producer of iron ore in Australia, the Pilbara region of Western Australia is now facing major problems such as the accumulation of mine wastes including coarse rejects and the limiting source of topsoil which is crucial in mine rehabilitation There are studies and rehabilitation strategies that utilized several mine wastes including tailings, overburden and waste rocks However, the potential of iron ore mining “coarse rejects” on the rehabilitation of mine sites and revegetation of native plant species has rarely been investigated The insufficient studies regarding this potential, constrained the mining companies to reuse the increasing piles of coarse rejects as a substitute to the declining source of topsoil Consequently, this study aims to compare the seed germination, growth performances and survivorship of the three native plant species of Pilbara region in Western Australia namely, Eucalyptus leucophloia, Triodia pungens and Acacia tumida Coarse rejects were confirmed to have the potential to act as a substrate for the revegetation of Pilbara plants Coarse rejects ii substrates promoted the greatest seed germination for all the species However, the study revealed that a sufficient amount of 5g fertiliser was essential to sustain the nutrients needed by the growing plants This maximized the growth performances of all the native plant species in terms of leaf number, plant height and plant dry weight (biomass) Conversely, medium (15g) and high (45g) levels of fertiliser amendment caused detrimental effects to the plants The height and dry weight responses of E leucophloia and T pungens species were statistically proven to be significantly affected by different levels of fertiliser On the other hand, there was no significant evidence that the growth performance of T pungens was affected by different levels of fertiliser Keywords: coarse reject, rehabilitation, revegetation, mine waste, iron ore mining, waste rock Number of pages Date of Submission 63 pages November 20, 2017 iii ACKNOWLEGEMENT “I’ve been there with God, I’ve done that through God” - MVVR I owe my deepest gratitude to my ever-supportive parents, “Mama” Valery and “Dadi” Misael, and loving sisters, Marize and Mabeth I wouldn’t be able to achieve this success without your love and guidance Thank you for always believing that “I can” especially in times that I doubt myself This study wouldn’t be successful without the supervision of Dr Eddie van Etten who guided me all throughout the research study Your efforts to help me obtain a successful research outcome are undeniably priceless Likewise, I’m truly grateful to Ms Nguyen Thi Thu Huong who undoubtedly helped and supported me all the way through this research study despite of her busy schedule Your words of encouragement never failed to inspire me during the stressful days of my research study I would also like to extend my sincere appreciation to Edith Cowan University for welcoming us warmly, especially to Dr Blake who even allotted his time to introduce some of the breathtaking places of Western Australia It is also a pleasure to thank the mining company who financially supported the expenses of this research experiment My stay in Australia was made extra special because of the wonderful people who I’ve met and become my second family Words can’t express how thankful I am and my whole family to Wong’s family (Chee, Mum Natalie, Hui Lee, Isabel, Joshua and Caitlyn), Saints family, Catherine, Sendy and Bestie Sheila not just for literally “walking” with me around Perth but also for “walking” with me in God’s path Thanks for the memorable journey that I’ll surely treasure for a lifetime To Tito Jomar, Tita Janet, Ate Jen, Kuya Jean Marc, Ate Jona, Ate Noemi, Kuya John and Sammy, thank you very much for allowing me to experience what it’s like to be in the “most livable city in the world” I enjoyed every single hour of stay with you, guys! You all made my stay in Australia even special A very special thanks to Ninang Isca, Tita Beth, Tito Mike and other relatives who had provided things for the success of my internship and had encouraged me on pursuing my dreams I’m more than blessed to have you all as a family I’m also indebted to my twin sister “by heart”, An-ne, who’ve been my “partner-in-crime” for years now; countries down, 192 to go! iv To the Advanced Education Program of Thai Nguyen University of Agriculture and Forestry and the University of California, Davis, thank you for giving me an opportunity to develop myself and enhance my knowledge and skills through this exchange student program I will forever cherish the memories and friendship built within the 4-year University experience here in Vietnam, which are made unforgettable by the awesome people who surrounded me with positive thoughts; shoutout to Jean, Katleen, Erika, Carlo, Mommy Shelah, 302 Ates, pinoy k45 and k45 class! Like any other success story, I also encountered tons of trials along the way I wouldn’t be able to face it with courage without the “slapping words of wisdom” of my best friend, Kate Thank you for always enlightening my blurry mind I love you to the moon and back And to the person who brought up uncountable challenges to my life that made me even stronger to face the everyday reality, thank you, Kenneth, for being my partner, brother, best friend, P.A and #3 fan (next to God and my family) who keeps on pushing me to my limits, so I can always show the best version of me Above all, I dedicate these achievements to God, my Almighty Father All of these wouldn’t be possible if it wasn’t for His unconditional love, amazing grace and overwhelming blessings The Researcher, Mishel Valery V Rañada v TABLE OF CONTENT List of Figures List of Tables PART I INTRODUCTION 1.1 Research Rationale 1.2 Research Objectives 1.2 Hypothesis 1.3.1 Null Hypothesis 1.3.2 Alternative Hypothesis 1.3 Limitations 1.4 Definitions PART II LITERATURE REVIEW 11 2.1 Iron Ore Mining Industry in Pilbara, Western Australia 11 2.2 Mining Rehabilitation in Pilbara, Western Australia 13 2.3 Rehabilitation Potential of Coarse Rejects 16 2.4 Fertiliser Amendments on Mine Wastes 18 2.5 Revegetation of Native Plant Species 22 PART III METHODS 25 3.1 Materials 25 3.1.1 Pre- treatment and preparation of seeds: 25 3.1.2 Substrates and fertiliser preparation: 25 3.1.3 Soil analysis 26 3.1.4 Data recording and experimental pot labelling 26 3.2 Methods 27 vi 3.2.1 Time and Place of Study 27 3.2.2 Research Approach 28 3.2.3 Experimental Layout 31 3.2.4 Experimental Methods 32 3.2.5 Data gathering 34 3.2.6 Statistical Analysis 36 PART IV RESULTS 37 4.1 Seed Germination Rate 37 4.2 Number of Leaves 38 4.3 Height of Plant 40 4.4 Dry weight (Biomass) 43 4.5 Survivorship 45 4.6 Chemical Analysis of Substrates 45 PART V DISCUSSION 48 PART VI CONCLUSION 54 PART VII RECOMMENDATION 546 REFERENCES 57 APPENDICES 64 vii List of Figures Figure Research approach 28 Figure Actual Experimental Layout 31 Figure The graph of seed germination rate of Eucalyptus leucophloia (Species 1), Triodia pungens (Species 2) and Acacia tumida (Species 3) 38 Figure Weekly data for Eucalyptus leucophloia species' number of leaves 39 Figure Weekly data for Triodia pungens species' number of leaves 39 Figure Weekly data for Acacia tumida species' number of leaves 40 Figure The graph of the mean height of Eucalyptus leucophloia (Species 1), Triodia pungens (Species 2) and Acacia tumida (Species 3) 41 Figure Weekly data of Eucapyltus leucophloia species' mean plant height 42 Figure Weekly data of Triodia pungens species' mean plant height 42 Figure 10 Weekly data of Acacia tumida species' mean plant height 43 Figure 11 The graph of mean dry weight of Eucalyptus leucophloia (Species 1), Triodia pungens (Species 2) and Acacia tumida (Species 3) 44 Figure 12 Survivorship (%) of Eucalyptus leucophloia, Triodia pungens and Acacia tumida on different levels of fertiliser treatments (T1, T2, T3 and T4) 45 List of Tables Table Substrate contents of every experimental treatment 29 Table ANOVA results of the plant height data of Eucalyptus leucophloia (Species 1), Triodia pungens (Species 2) and Acacia tumida (Species 3) 40 Table ANOVA results on the biomass data of Eucalyptus leucophloia (Species 1), Triodia pungens (Species 2) and Acacia tumida (Species 3) 43 Table Summary table of chemical analysis of raw coarse rejects (CR) and the coarse reject substrates treated with different levels of fertiliser (T1, T2, T3 and T4) taken halfway through the experiment (at week 11) 45 PART I INTRODUCTION 1.1 Research Rationale Australia holds the world’s richest iron ore reserves and is responsible for over half (55%) of the global output Moreover, 94% of the country’s total production is produced from Pilbara region alone of Western Australia In addition, Western Australia’s production had been rising annually by an average rate of 12% (Western Australia’s Iron Ore Profile 2016) The escalating industry of iron ore in Western Australia, particularly in Pilbara region, has resulted in the expansion of degraded land In addition, millions of tonnes of mine wastes are generated annually, while the source of topsoil, which is essentially used for post-mining rehabilitation, is becoming limited (Bell, 2002; Garnett, 2004; Van Vreeswyk et al., 2004; Yanez, 2014) As the mining industry expands and develops, rehabilitation becomes a global priority (Shackelford et al., 2017) Although there are studies made to test the rehabilitation potential of mine wastes in general, there are gaps in our knowledge that need thorough research specifically on the potential of iron ore coarse rejects (Lottermoser, 2011) Previous studies recommended fertilizing to replace the nutrient banks lost during vegetation removal and other mining processes (Bell, 2002) However, there is only limited knowledge with regards to the appropriate rates and application method of macro-nutrients and micro-nutrients considering the potential environmental impact, cost-effectivity and labor-efficiency (Lottermoser, 2011) For these reasons, the industry is constrained from utilizing coarse rejects and other mine waste for the revegetation of native plant species Figure D - Preparation of fertiliser Figure D - Wetting of substrates before sowing Figure D - Preparation of seeds for sowing Figure D - Sowing of seeds Figure D - Arranging of pots in the glasshouse 68 Appendix E Other research documentation Figure E - Preparation of experiment Figure E - Research experiment visit Figure E - Reviewing of results Figure E - Consultation with Dr Van Etten 69 Appendix F Chemical analysis methods provided by the CSBP laboratory The summary of methods used on the chemical analysis of coarse reject substrates and the actual coarse reject samples The list below only includes the methods used to analyze the selected soil parameters provided in the results section 70 Appendix G Results Seed germination rate Table 1: (Species 1) Eucalyptus leucophloia Replications (T1) Control (T2) Low 9 10 9 10 10 7 9 9 10 10 (T3) Medium 4 10 (T4) High 1 1 0 Table 2: (Species 2) Triodia pungens Replication (T1) Control (T2) Low 1 2 3 1 3 10 (T3) Medium 2 (T4) High 0 1 0 0 Table 3: (Species 3) Acacia tumida Replication (T1) Control (T2) Low 6 3 4 10 (T3) Medium 2 1 1 (T4) High 2 1 71 Number of leaves Table 1: (Species 1) Eucalyptus leucophloia (T1) Control (T2) Low Replicates (G) 12 2 12 12 18 18 8 12 10 10 (T3) Medium 14 0 8 (T4) High 0 0 0 0 0 Table 2: (Species 2) Triodia pungens (T2) Low Replicates (G) (T1) Control 14 4 37 10 2 16 10 (T3) Medium 12 16 17 (T4) High 0 31 22 0 Table 3: (Species 3) Acacia tumida (T2) Low Replicates (G) (T1) Control (T3) Medium (T4) High 3 10 6 0 0 4 6 0 10 3 6 0 72 Height of plants Table 1: (Species 1) Eucalyptus leucophloia raw data Replicates (G) Control (T1) Low (T2) Medium (T3) 1.6 11 10.3 2 9.1 2.5 7.8 5.3 1.1 11.5 8.8 1.8 14.2 6.3 1.2 5.8 1.5 7.6 2.3 5.4 4.6 10 1.9 7.4 3.6 High (T4) 0 0 0 0 0 Table 2: (Species 1: Eucalyptus leucophloia) Single factor ANOVA summary table Groups Count Sum Average Variance Control (T1) 10 17.9 1.79 0.201 Low (T2) 10 88.6 8.86 7.367111 Medium (T3) 10 36.1 3.61 12.62989 High (T4) 10 0 ANOVA (Species 1: Eucalyptus leucophloia) Source of Variation SS df Between Groups 438.99 Within Groups 181.78 36 Total 620.77 MS 146.33 5.05 F 28.98 P-value 1.04E-09 F crit 2.87 39 Table 3: (Species 2) Triodia pungens Replicates (G) Control (T1) Low (T2) 4.3 4.8 5.9 8.5 10.9 2.1 5.1 5 5.3 3.4 15.6 3.8 3.7 6.4 5.5 6.3 10 10 5.2 5.4 Medium (T3) 1.6 11.2 14.2 10.9 9.8 4.8 6.2 High (T4) 0 24.9 26.7 0 3.5 73 Table 4: (Species 2: Triodia pungens) Single factor ANOVA summary table Groups Count Sum Average Variance Control (T1) 10 49.8 4.98 3.208444 Low (T2) 10 73.4 7.34 13.49156 Medium (T3) 10 63.7 6.37 25.02233 High (T4) 10 57.1 5.71 113.6788 ANOVA (Species 2: Triodia pungens) Source of Variation SS Between Groups 30.17 Within Groups 1398.61 Total df MS 10.06 38.85 36 1428.78 F 0.26 P-value 0.85 F crit 2.87 39 Table 5: (Species 3) Acacia tumida Replicates (G) Control (T1) Low (T2) 4.2 5.9 4.9 5.8 4.7 4.5 5.1 4.1 4.4 3.4 14 2.8 8.5 4.6 9.1 3.2 5.3 10 4.2 4.4 Medium (T3) 3.7 7.5 8.2 9.4 3.3 2.3 5.4 6.3 High (T4) 0 0 0 0 0 Table 6: (Species 3: Acacia tumida) Single factor ANOVA summary table Groups Count Sum Average Variance Control (T1) 10 41.2 4.12 0.584 Low (T2) 10 61.9 6.19 13.71211 Medium (T3) 10 50.1 5.01 8.396556 High (T4) 10 0 ANOVA (Species 3: Acacia tumida) Source of Variation SS Between Groups 217.15 Within Groups 204.234 Total 421.384 df 36 MS 72.38333 5.673167 F 12.75889 P-value 7.83E-06 F crit 2.866266 39 74 Plant dry weight (biomass) Table 1: (Species 1) Eucalyptus leucophloia Replicates (G) Control (T1) Low (T2) 0.016 4.499 0.005 4.884 4.029 0.002 5.7582 0.003 1.653 15.326 0.004 0.959 4.634 0.008 2.592 10 0.004 2.109 Medium (T3) 5.747 1.061 0 3.446 3.105 0.677 0.459 High (T4) 0 0 0 0 0 Table 2: (Species 1: Eucalyptus leucophloia) Single factor ANOVA summary table Groups Count Sum Average Variance Control (T1) 10 0.042 0.004 0.000 Low (T2) 10 46.443 4.644 16.552 Medium (T3) 10 14.495 1.450 3.925 High (T4) 10 0.000 0.000 0.000 ANOVA (Species 1: Plant's dry weight) Source of Variation SS Between Groups 143.74 Within Groups 184.29 Total 328.04 df 36 MS 47.91 5.12 F 9.36 P-value 0.0001 F crit 2.87 39 Table 3: (Species 2) Triodia pungens Replicates (G) Control (T1) Low (T2) 0.007 0.842 0.012 1.513 0.03 0.166 0.148 0.123 0.016 3.573 0.012 0.283 0.009 0.009 0.036 3.233 0.016 0.062 10 0.017 0.09 Medium (T3) 0.008 1.368 0.589 0.009 1.231 0.042 0.178 High (T4) 0 0.033 10.862 15.223 0 0.347 75 Table 4: (Species 2: Triodia pungens) Single factor ANOVA summary table Groups Count Sum Average Variance Control (T1) 10 0.303 0.030 0.002 Low (T2) 10 9.894 0.989 1.840 Medium (T3) 10 3.425 0.343 0.288 High (T4) 10 26.465 2.647 31.089 ANOVA (Species 2: Plant's dry weight) Source of Variation SS Between Groups 40.84 Within Groups 298.98 Total df 36 339.81 MS 13.61 8.30 F 1.64 P-value 0.20 F crit 2.87 39 Table 5: (Species 3) Acacia tumida Replicates (G) Control (T1) Low (T2) 0.182 2.467 0.166 1.003 0.244 0.974 0.12 0.225 0.937 0.123 0.976 0.134 1.089 0.159 1.216 0.137 1.014 10 0.14 1.03 Medium (T3) 0.117 2.735 3.518 4.118 1.934 0.542 0.265 1.754 High (T4) 0 0 2.834 0 0 Table 6: (Species 3: Acacia tumida) Single factor ANOVA summary table Groups Count Sum Average Variance Control (T1) 10 1.630 0.163 0.002 Low (T2) 10 10.706 1.071 0.351 Medium (T3) 10 14.983 1.498 2.396 High (T4) 10 2.834 0.283 0.803 ANOVA (Species 3: Plant's dry weight) Source of Variation SS Between Groups 12.25 Within Groups 31.97 Total 44.22 df 36 MS 4.08 0.89 F 4.60 P-value 0.01 F crit 2.87 39 76 Chemical analysis of coarse rejects samples and coarse rejects substrate (2017) Table 1: Summary of chemical analysis results Chemical Analysis (CR) Coarse Rejects (T1) Control (T2) Low (T3) Medium (T4) High Color LTGR GRBR GRBR GRBR GRBR Gravel (%) 5 5 Texture 1.5 (sand/ loam) 1.5 (sand/ loam) 1.5 (sand/ loam) 1.5 (sand/ loam) 1.5 (sand/ loam) Ammonium Nitrogen (mg/kg) 4.3 7.7 73.7 190.3 598.7 Nitrate Nitrogen (mg/kg) 14.3