2006
DOI: 10.1016/j.jenvrad.2006.03.006
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

A comparison of the soil migration and plant uptake of radioactive chlorine and iodine from contaminated groundwater

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
1
1
1

Citation Types

3
34
0

Year Published

2007
2007
2018
2018

Publication Types

Select...
5
2

Relationship

0
7

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 51 publications
(37 citation statements)
references
References 24 publications
3
34
0
Order By: Relevance
“…Blank and spiked sample digestions were done to measure the effects of quench and the efficiency of the digestion. An extraction efficiency of 41% was calculated, similar to the 45% recorded by Ashworth and Shaw (personal communication) [2].…”
Section: Plant Tissuesupporting
confidence: 77%
See 3 more Smart Citations
“…Blank and spiked sample digestions were done to measure the effects of quench and the efficiency of the digestion. An extraction efficiency of 41% was calculated, similar to the 45% recorded by Ashworth and Shaw (personal communication) [2].…”
Section: Plant Tissuesupporting
confidence: 77%
“…Colle et al [3] reported even higher values, "60% of the contamination was extracted from the soils by the plants after one vegetative period." Other investigators have recorded similar results, showing that 36Cl is both highly mobile, and highly bioavailable [2,4,7,11]. Chloride has traditionally been considered to be chemically inert and to behave conservatively in soil with very low sorption values, but recent research suggests that chloride participates in a complex biogeochemical cycle that forms and mineralizes organically bound chlorine [8,9].…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 76%
See 2 more Smart Citations
“…2B). We propose that the discrepancy between 131 I inventories of deposition and accumulation is mechanistic rather than an artifact of sampling, and might be explained by three endmember processes: (i) Secondary deposition by an undetected (nonprecipitation) process, such as uptake or sorption of gaseous I 2 directly from the atmosphere (21) ; or, translocation of iodine from subsurface to surface soil via either (ii) root uptake (22) or (iii) volatilization (23,24) of iodine that, upon initial deposition, penetrated to soil depths greater than 2.5 cm. Details of the upward transport of volatilized iodine can include diffusion to surface soil and entrapment in the rhizosphere, or escape to the atmosphere with subsequent stomatal uptake (23) or redeposition from dew or fog (25) as in mechanism 1 above.…”
Section: Resultsmentioning
confidence: 99%