Metal Phytoextraction—A Survey of Potential Risks

Angle, J. S.; Linacre, Nicholas A.

doi:10.1080/16226510500215779

Cited by 53 publications

(20 citation statements)

References 48 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…This technique uses metal tolerant plants for mechanical stabilisation of polluted land in order to prevent bulk erosion, reduce air-borne transport and leaching of pollutants. In contrast to phytoextraction, plants are required that take up only small amounts of metals in order to prevent transfer into the wildlife food chain [2,5]. Furthermore, phytostabilisation may be the most cost-effective treatment for metal polluted soils, especially in the case of extensive pollution.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 97%

“In situ” phytostabilisation of heavy metal polluted soils using Lupinus luteus inoculated with metal resistant plant-growth promoting rhizobacteria

Dary

Chamber-Perez

Palomares

et al. 2010

Journal of Hazardous Materials

435

133

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 97%

“In situ” phytostabilisation of heavy metal polluted soils using Lupinus luteus inoculated with metal resistant plant-growth promoting rhizobacteria

Dary

Chamber-Perez

Palomares

et al. 2010

Journal of Hazardous Materials

435

133

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

“…Improved crops will be bred for commercial application, and bioengineered plants will be developed with unique properties. Despite their technical value, bioengineered plants may not be accepted by the public even for phytoremediation [273,282], especially bioengineered strains of food plants.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…During remediation operations, sites will exclude large wildlife, but small mammals which are resident in small areas might be harmed. On the other hand, dig and haul will destroy all local wildlife [273].…”

Section: Risks To Wildlife During Phytoextraction Operationsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Phytoremediation of Soil Trace Elements

Chaney

Broadhurst

Centofanti

2010

Trace Elements in Soils

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

“…This rule must not apply to the premature herbage. The Cd load of the (post-)winter herbage as well as of the soil itself is a serious hazard to winter grazing and thereby soil ingesting local herbivores (Table 1; [12,98,99]). Nevertheless, the rapidly growing green matter in the pre-tillering to the post-anthesis state shows a temporary and significant decline in the critical toxicants As, Cd, Cr, Pb, U, and Zn (Table 1) and could potentially serve as a roughage supplement for the domestic livestock.…”

Section: Applicability Of the Herbage From The Metalliferous Soil Amentioning

confidence: 99%

Gradual Accumulation of Heavy Metals in an Industrial Wheat Crop from Uranium Mine Soil and the Potential Use of the Herbage

Gramss

Voigt

2016

Agriculture

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Abstract:Testing the quality of heavy-metal (HM) excluder plants from non-remediable metalliferous soils could help to meet the growing demands for food, forage, and industrial crops. Field cultures of the winter wheat cv. JB Asano were therefore established on re-cultivated uranium mine soil (A) and the adjacent non-contaminated soil (C). Twenty elements were determined by Inductively Coupled Plasma Mass Spectrometry (ICP-MS) from soils and plant sections of post-winter seedlings, anthesis-state, and mature plants to record within-plant levels of essential and toxic minerals during ripening and to estimate the (re)use of the soil-A herbage in husbandry and in HM-sensitive fermentations. Non-permissible HM loads (mg·kg −1 ·DW) of soil A in Cd, Cu, and Zn of 40.4, 261, and 2890, respectively, initiated the corresponding phytotoxic concentrations in roots and of Zn in shoots from the seedling state to maturity as well as of Cd in the foliage of seedlings. At anthesis, shoot concentrations in Ca, Cd, Fe, Mg, Mn, and Zn and in As, Cr, Pb, and U had fallen to a mean of 20% to increase to 46% during maturation. The respective shoot concentrations in C-grown plants diminished from anthesis (50%) to maturity (27%). They were drastically up/down-regulated at the rachis-grain interface to compose the genetically determined metallome of the grain during mineral relocations from adjacent sink tissues. Soil A caused yield losses of straw and grain down to 47.7% and 39.5%, respectively. Nevertheless, pronounced HM excluder properties made Cd concentrations of 1.6-3.08 in straw and 1.2 in grains the only factors that violated hygiene guidelines of forage (1). It is estimated that grains and the less-contaminated green herbage from soil A may serve as forage supplement. Applying soil A grains up to 3 and 12 in Cd and Cu, respectively, and the mature straw as bioenergy feedstock could impair the efficacy of ethanol fermentation by Saccharomyces cerevisiae.

show abstract

Metal Phytoextraction—A Survey of Potential Risks

Cited by 53 publications

References 48 publications

“In situ” phytostabilisation of heavy metal polluted soils using Lupinus luteus inoculated with metal resistant plant-growth promoting rhizobacteria

“In situ” phytostabilisation of heavy metal polluted soils using Lupinus luteus inoculated with metal resistant plant-growth promoting rhizobacteria

Phytoremediation of Soil Trace Elements

Gradual Accumulation of Heavy Metals in an Industrial Wheat Crop from Uranium Mine Soil and the Potential Use of the Herbage

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About