4.7 Article

Citric acid enhances Ce uptake and accumulation in rice seedlings exposed to CeO2 nanoparticles and iron plaque attenuates the enhancement

期刊

CHEMOSPHERE
卷 240, 期 -, 页码 -

出版社

PERGAMON-ELSEVIER SCIENCE LTD
DOI: 10.1016/j.chemosphere.2019.124897

关键词

CeO2 nanoparticles (NPs); Uptake; Rice seedling; Citric acid; Iron plaque

资金

  1. Tianjin Municipal Science and Technology Commission [16JCZDJC39200]
  2. National Key R&D Program of China [2018YFD0800303]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

To assess the role of citric acid, as a typical low-molecular-weight organic acid from root exudates, on cerium (Ce) uptake, accumulation and translocation in rice seedlings (Oryza sativa L) exposed to two CeO2 nanoparticles (NPs) (14 nm and 25 nm). A hydroponic experiment was performed under two citric acid levels (0.01 and 0.04 mmol L-1) combined with iron plaque presence. Citric acid significantly enhanced surface-Ce, root-Ce and shoot-Ce accumulation, irrespective of NPs size and iron plaque presence. The increased surface-Ce was associated with the promoted interactive attraction between NPs and root surface, and the enhanced NPs dissolution. Surface-Ce (containing crystalline and amorphous fractions of iron plaque) accumulation increased with the increase of citric acid concentrations. However, the enhancement influence of 0.01 mmol L-1 citric acid on root-Ce, shoot-Ce accumulations, rice-Ce distribution and TFroot-shoot was more remarkable than citric acid (0.04 mmol L-1), which suggested higher food security risk for human health with environment-level citric acid. Iron plaque presence attenuated the enhancement effect of citric acid on rice-Ce accumulation and distribution (containing surface-Ce, root-Ce and shoot-Ce) due to the reduced attractive interaction between NPs and root surface from the effect of Fe2+ being dissolved by iron plaque. Above effect of citric acid and iron plaque was more remarkable in 25 nm NP than 14 nm NP. (C) 2019 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

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

4.7
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