4.5 Article

Rhizosphere Concentrations of Zinc and Cadmium in a Metal Contaminated Soil After Repeated Phytoextraction By Sedum Plumbizincicola

期刊

INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF PHYTOREMEDIATION
卷 13, 期 8, 页码 750-764

出版社

TAYLOR & FRANCIS INC
DOI: 10.1080/15226514.2010.525558

关键词

Zn; Cd; repeated phytoextraction; Sedum plumbizincicola; rhizosphere properties

资金

  1. National Natural Science Foundation of China [40921061, 40871155]
  2. Innovative Engineering of the Chinese Academy of Sciences [KSCX2-YW-G-053]
  3. High-Technology Research and Development Program of the People's Republic of China [2006AA10Z406]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

A growth chamber pot experiment and a field plot experiment were conducted with the installation of rhizobags to study the effects of repeated phytoextraction by Sedum plumbizincicola on the bioavailability of Cd and Zn in the rhizosphere and bulk soil. Repeated phytoextraction gave significantly lower Cd and Zn concentrations in both rhizosphere and bulk soil solutions compared with soil without repeated phytoextraction. The depletion rates of NH4OAc-extractable Zn in rhizosphere soil in each treatment (L-PS, L-NPS, H-PS, and H-NPS) were 59.7, 18.0, 16.3, and 18.6%, respectively. For NH4OAc-extractable Cd, the depletion rates in treatments L-PS, L-NPS, H-PS, and H-NPS were 6.67, 29.4, 40.3, and 41.4%, respectively. Plant shoot biomass decreased in the order H-PS H-NPS L-PS L-NPS, with dry weights of 0.56, 0.42, 1.43, and 1.21 g pot-1, respectively. Plant Cd uptake increased with increasing aqua-regia extractable metal concentrations. The NH4OAc extraction procedure was satisfactory to predict the bioavailability of Cd and Zn in rhizosphere soil in terms of shoot uptake by S. plumbizincicola with positive correlation coefficients of 0.545 (p 0.05) and 0.452 (p 0.05), respectively. The field study results show a slight decrease in water soluble and NH4OAc-extractable metals, a trend similar to that found in the pot experiment.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.5
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据