4.3 Article

Capacity of Landscaping Plants to Accumulate Airborne Particulate Matter in Hangzhou, China

Journal

POLISH JOURNAL OF ENVIRONMENTAL STUDIES
Volume 29, Issue 1, Pages 153-161

Publisher

HARD
DOI: 10.15244/pjoes/101606

Keywords

PM; landscaping plants; dust-retention capacity; gravimetric analysis; leaf surfaces microstructure

Funding

  1. Project of National Natural Science Foundation of China [51508515]
  2. Science and Technology Innovation Activity Plan of Undergraduates in Zhejiang Province in China [2018R412044]

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Plants have a great capacity to absorb airborne particulate matter (PM), which can be used to improve air quality in severely polluted regions. We selected eight common landscaping plants in Hangzhou, China, and determined the different-sized PM adsorption capacities of their leaf surfaces and wax layers using gravimetric analysis. In addition, we used scanning electron microscopy to observe surface microstructures of the leaves to determine relationships between their microstructural characteristics and adsorption capacities. Results showed that the capacity of these eight species to accumulate PM varied markedly, showing obvious differences in particle retention between trees and shrubs. The densities of PM per unit leaf area of the various plants ranged from 12.4 mu g/cm(2) to 151.8 mu g/cm(2), with Fatsia japonica > Ilex latifolia > Eriobotrya japonica > Magnolia grandiflora > Rhododendron pulchrum > Cinnamomum camphora > Trifolium repens > Albizia julibrissin. There was a close relationship between surface microstructures of the leaves and their PM adsorption capacities: the rougher the leaf surface and the greater the furrow depth, the better their capacity for PM adsorption, resulting in a greater dust-retention capacity. Clearly, understanding retention of PM on different plants can aid in the selection of landscaping plants to reduce urban air pollution.

Authors

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

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.3
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available