4.5 Article

Soil-ecological evaluation of willows in a floodplain

Journal

JOURNAL OF PLANT NUTRITION AND SOIL SCIENCE
Volume 175, Issue 2, Pages 245-252

Publisher

WILEY-V C H VERLAG GMBH
DOI: 10.1002/jpln.201100063

Keywords

heavy metals; microbial activity; phytoremediation; willow coppice

Funding

  1. Federal Ministry of Education and Research (BMBF, Germany) [02WT0870]
  2. Mecklenburg-Western Pomerania (Landesgraduiertenforderung, MV, Germany)

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Willows (Salix spp.) were supposed to be suitable candidates for the phytoremediation of polluted floodplain soils, but it is unknown how willow growth alters concentrations and mobility of pollutants under the conditions of ongoing periodically flooding. Therefore, effects of willow cropping on total concentrations and mobility of As and heavy metals and soil microbial properties were determined after three and four growing seasons under willows in comparison to native grassland in a flood channel of a River Elbe floodplain (Central Germany). After 4 y of willow coppice, the heavy metal concentrations (mg?kg1) were increased not only in the grass control plots (final Cu 274, Pb 276, Zn 935) but also under the willows (final Cu 248, Pb 251, Zn 779) compared to the initial concentrations (initial Cu 170, Pb 156, Zn 579). This increase might likely be caused by the ongoing sedimentation by flood events. The smaller increase under willows compared to grass might be related to an initial net effect of phytoextraction. The concentrations of the mobile fractions of Cd, Cu, Ni, and Zn were significantly lower under willows than under grass. Higher beta-glucosidase activities under willows than under grass might indicate a starting net decomposition of organic matter. Therefore, the study of long-term and large-scale effects are recommend before an appropriate evaluation of willow short-rotation coppice for phytoremediation of polluted floodplains will be established.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.5
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available