4.7 Article

Differential assimilation of nitrogen dioxide by 70 taxa of roadside trees at an urban pollution level

Journal

CHEMOSPHERE
Volume 61, Issue 5, Pages 633-639

Publisher

PERGAMON-ELSEVIER SCIENCE LTD
DOI: 10.1016/j.chemosphere.2005.03.033

Keywords

air pollution; deciduous; evergreen; nitrogen dioxide (NO2); roadside tree; urban air

Ask authors/readers for more resources

In order to screen for the best species for mitigating nitrogen dioxide (NO2) by plants at urban levels, we investigated assimilation of nitrogen dioxide by 70 taxa of woody plants that are mostly utilized as roadside trees. They were fumigated with N-15-labeled NO2 at 0.1 mu l l(-1) for 8 h, and the amount of reduced nitrogen derived from NO2 (in mg N g(-1) dry weight) in the leaves (designated NO2 assimilation capability hereafter) were determined. Data were analyzed in the comparison with the previously reported ones obtained at 4 mu l l(-1) NO2. Among the 70 taxa, the value of NO2 assimilation capability differed by a factor of 122 between the highest (Prunus yedoensis; 0.061) and the lowest (Cryptomeria japonica; 0.0005). Based on the analysis of NO2 assimilation capability values at 0.1 and 4 mu l l(-1) NO2, the 70 taxa of woody plants appeared to be classified into four types: those of high NO2 assimilation and high NO2 resistance, those of high NO2 assimilation but low NO2 resistance, those of low NO2 assimilation and low NO2 resistance, and those of low NO2 assimilation but high NO2 resistance. The first, second, third and fourth types include 13, 11, 35 and 11 taxa, respectively. The broad-leaf deciduous trees may have advantages of high biomass and fast growth as compared with woody plants of other habits. Thus, four broad-leaf deciduous species, Robinia pseudo-acacia, Sophora japonica, Populus nigra and Prunus lannesiana, were concluded here to be the best phytoremediators for the urban air. (C) 2005 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

Authors

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

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.7
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available