4.7 Article

Land management of bracken needs to account for bracken carcinogens - A case study from Britain

Journal

JOURNAL OF ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGEMENT
Volume 151, Issue -, Pages 258-266

Publisher

ACADEMIC PRESS LTD- ELSEVIER SCIENCE LTD
DOI: 10.1016/j.jenvman.2014.12.052

Keywords

Scotland; Cancer; Natural toxins; Pteridium aquilinum; Groundwater contamination; Soil contamination; Ptaquiloside

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Bracken ferns are some of the most widespread ferns in the World causing immense problems for land managers, foresters and rangers. Bracken is suspected of causing cancer in Humans due to its content of the carcinogen ptaquiloside. Ingestion of bracken, or food and drinking water contaminated with ptaquiloside may be the cause. The aim of this study was to monitor the content of ptaquiloside in 20 bracken stands from Britain to obtain a better understanding of the ptaquiloside dynamics and to evaluate the environmental implications of using different cutting regimes in bracken management. The ptaquiloside content in fronds ranged between 50 and 5790 mu g/g corresponding to a ptaquiloside load in the standing biomass of up to 590 mg/m(2) in mature fronds. Ptaquiloside was also found in the underground rhizome system (11-657 mu g/g) and in decaying litter (0.1-5.8 mu g/g). The amount of ptaquiloside present in bracken stands at any given time is difficult to predict and did not show any correlations with edaphic growth factors. The content of ptaquiloside turned out to be higher in fronds emerging after cutting compared to uncut fronds. Environmental risk assessment and bracken management must therefore be based on actual and site specific determinations of the ptaquiloside content. Care must be taken to avoid leaching from cut ferns to aquifers and other recipients and appropriate precautionary measures must be taken to protect staff from exposure to bracken dust. (C) 2015 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