## 3 Results
### Effects of Bioremediation on Soil Chemical Properties  
Inoculation with indigenous microbes led to the highest decline in SOC in soils inoculated with _P. aeruginosa_ by 65%, pH-H\({}_{2}\)O in soils inoculated with S. aureus by 15%, and EC in soils inoculated with _E. coli_ by 26% (Table 4). However, bioremediation of non-essential toxic elements also led to an increase in EC, with the control having the highest increase of 520%, followed by 254% in soils inoculated with _S. aureus_.  
\begin{table}
\begin{tabular}{l c c c} \hline
**Soil Properties** & **B.I. \(\pm\) SD** & **P.I. \(\pm\) SD** & **R.I. (\%)** \\ \hline pH-H\({}_{2}\)O & 7.85 \(\pm\) 0.06 & 8.58 \(\pm\) 0.09 & 9 \\ SOC (\%) & 0.39 \(\pm\) 0.26 & 1.14 \(\pm\) 0.21 & 196 \\ EC (mS/m) & 18.55 \(\pm\) 13.11 & 72.85 \(\pm\) 2.57 & 293 \\ N (\(\mu\)g/kg) & 718.5 \(\pm\) 57.47 & 898.25 \(\pm\) 31.84 & 25 \\ P (mg/kg) & 26.03 \(\pm\) 0.64 & 32.8 \(\pm\) 2.52 & 26 \\ K (mg/kg) & 61.2 \(\pm\) 0.82 & 65.03 \(\pm\) 1.22 & 6 \\ Al (mg/kg) & 35.1 \(\pm\) 1.91 & 73.7 \(\pm\) 5.9 & 110 \\ Cr (mg/kg) & 10.5 \(\pm\) 0.21 & 13.8 \(\pm\) 0.44 & 31 \\ Pb (mg/kg) & 5.09 \(\pm\) 0.1 & 6.7 \(\pm\) 0.44 & 32 \\ Cd (mg/kg) & 1.55 \(\pm\) 0.04 & 2.4 \(\pm\) 0.57 & 54 \\ As (mg/kg) & 19.5 \(\pm\) 0.36 & 25.57 \(\pm\) 1.63 & 31 \\ \hline pH-H\({}_{2}\)O = soil active acidity; SOC = soil organic carbon; EC = electrical conductivity; SD = standard deviation; R.I. = relative Impact. & \\ \end{tabular}
\end{table}
Table 2: Effects of irrigation with TWW on soil chemical properties.  
\begin{table}
\begin{tabular}{c c c c c c c c c c} \hline
**Treatment** & **Al \(\pm\) SD** & **R.I. (\%)** & **As \(\pm\) SD** & **R.I. (\%)** & **Cr \(\pm\) SD** & **R.I. (\%)** & **Pb \(\pm\) SD** & **R.I. (\%)** & **Cd \(\pm\) SD** & **R.I. (\%)** \\  & **(mg/kg)** & **(\%)** & **(mg/kg)** & **(\%)** & **(mg/kg)** & **(\%)** & **(mg/kg)** & **(\%)** & **(mg/kg)** & **(\%)** \\ \hline P.I. & 73.7 \(\pm\) 5.9 & – & 25.57 \(\pm\) 1.63 & – & 13.8 \(\pm\) 0.44 & – & 6.7 \(\pm\) 0.44 & – & 2.4 \(\pm\) 0.57 & – \\ Control & 43.5 \({}^{\rm b}\)\(\pm\) 0.27 & –41 & 24.87 \(\pm\) 0.32 & – & 7.91 \({}^{\rm b}\)\(\pm\) 0.05 & –43 & 6.4 \({}^{\rm ab}\)\(\pm\) 0.08 & –4 & 2 \({}^{\rm a}\)\(\pm\) 0.02 & –16 \\ _A. flavus_ & 40.4 \({}^{\rm b}\)\(\pm\) 1.11 & –45 & 25.30 \({}^{\rm c}\)\(\pm\) 0.36 & –1 & 8.68 \({}^{\rm c}\)\(\pm\) 0.16 & –37 & 6.3 \({}^{\rm a}\)\(\pm\) 0.25 & –8 & 2.2 \({}^{\rm a}\)\(\pm\) 0.04 & –10 \\ _S. aureus_ & 69.87 \({}^{\rm c}\)\(\pm\) 2.01 & –5 & 25.03 \({}^{\rm c}\)\(\pm\) 0.9 & –2 & 6.94 \({}^{\rm a}\)\(\pm\) 0.26 & –50 & 6.6 \({}^{\rm ab}\)\(\pm\) 0.24 & –2 & 2.02 \({}^{\rm a}\)\(\pm\) 0.06 & –15 \\ _P. aeruginosa_ & 32.07 \({}^{\rm a}\)\(\pm\) 1.1 & –57 & 20.53 \({}^{\rm a}\)\(\pm\) 0.97 & –20 & 8.48 \({}^{\rm c}\)\(\pm\) 0.21 & –39 & 6.86 \({}^{\rm ab}\)\(\pm\) 0.32 & –3 & 2.31 \({}^{\rm a}\)\(\pm\) 0.06 & –3 \\ _E. coli_ & 42.2 \({}^{\rm b}\)\(\pm\) 1.08 & –43 & 23.3 \({}^{\rm b}\)\(\pm\) 0.52 & –9 & 8.44 \({}^{\rm c}\)\(\pm\) 0.27 & –39 & 6.5 \({}^{\rm ab}\)\(\pm\) 0.28 & –3 & 1.99 \({}^{\rm a}\)\(\pm\) 0.04 & –17 \\ _p_-value & \multicolumn{2}{c}{0.001} & –0.001 & – & \multicolumn{2}{c}{0.001} & – & \multicolumn{2}{c}{0.191} & – & \multicolumn{2}{c}{0.231} \\ \hline \end{tabular}
\end{table}
Table 3: Concentrations of non-essential toxic elements post-bioremediation and their relative impacts.  
Inoculation with indigenous microbes led to a decline in the concentration of essential elements with the highest decline in N being in soils inoculated with _S. aureus_ by 19%, P in soils inoculated with _P. aeruginosa_ by 38%, and K in soils inoculated with _A. flavus_ by 50% (Table 5).