4.4 Article

Uptake and distribution of natural radioactivity in wheat plants from soil

Journal

JOURNAL OF ENVIRONMENTAL RADIOACTIVITY
Volume 79, Issue 3, Pages 331-346

Publisher

ELSEVIER SCI LTD
DOI: 10.1016/j.jenvrad.2004.08.007

Keywords

natural radionuclides; soil; wheat; distribution; transfer factor and annual dose

Ask authors/readers for more resources

The uptake of naturally occurring uranium, thorium, radium and potassium by wheat plant from two morphologically different soils of India was studied under natural field conditions. The soil to wheat grain transfer factors (TF) were calculated and observed to be in the range of 4.0 x 10(-4) to 2.1 x 10(-3) for U-238, 6.0 x 10(-3) to 2.4 x 10(-2) for Th-232, 9.0 x 10(-6) to 1.6 x 10(-2) for Ra-226 and 0.14-3.1 for K-40. Observed ratios (OR) of radionuclides with respect to calcium have been calculated to explain nearly comparable TF. values in spite of differences in soil concentration of the different fields. They also give an idea about the discrimination exhibited by the plant in uptake of essential and nonessential elements. The availability of calcium and potassium in soil for uptake affects the uranium, thorium and radium content of the plant. The other soil factors such as illite clays of alluvial soil which trap potassium in its crystal lattice and phosphates which form insoluble compounds with thorium are seen to reduce their availability to plants. A major percentage (54-75%) of total U-238, Th-212 and Ra-226 activity in the plant is concentrated in the roots and only about 1-2% was distributed in the grains, whereas about 57% of K-40 activity accumulated in the shoots and 16% in the grains. The intake of radionuclides by consumption of wheat grains from the fields studied contributes a small fraction to the total annual ingestion dose received by man due to naturally existing radioactivity in the environment. (C) 2004 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

4.4
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available