4.7 Article

Exceptional nitrogen-resorption efficiency enables Maireana species (Chenopodiaceae) to function as pioneers at a mine-restoration site

期刊

SCIENCE OF THE TOTAL ENVIRONMENT
卷 779, 期 -, 页码 -

出版社

ELSEVIER
DOI: 10.1016/j.scitotenv.2021.146420

关键词

Maireana; Mine site restoration; Pioneer species; Tailings

资金

  1. Australian Government through the Australian Research Council Industrial Transformation Training Centre for Mine Site Restoration [ICI150100041]
  2. Australian Research Council [LP160100598]
  3. Research Fellowship in Restoration Ecology - EcoHealth Network
  4. Research Fellowship in Restoration Ecology - Curtin University
  5. Research Fellowship in Restoration Ecology - Gelganyem Limited
  6. Australian Research Council [LP160100598] Funding Source: Australian Research Council

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Tailings are challenging substrates for plant re-establishment, but some pioneer species from the genus Maireana show promise for restoring magnetite tailings due to their high leaf nitrogen resorption efficiency during senescence. These Maireana species do not rely on biologically fixed nitrogen from the atmosphere, instead effectively scavenging trace amounts of nitrogen from the substrate through rapid transpiration.
Tailings are among the most challenging mined substrates for plant re-establishment, in particular because of a lack of soil-like structure and nitrogen. Potential pioneer plants are sometimes found in such disturbed and infertile sites. We present a group of pioneer species from the genus Maireana (Chenopodiaceae) that are promising candidates for the restoration of magnetite tailings. We found that these Maireana species did not rely on biologically fixed N from the atmosphere, but exhibited an exceptionally high leaf N-resorption efficiency (about 95%) during leaf senescence, at the same time effectively scavenging trace amount of N from the substrate, in part through rapid transpiration. (c) 2021 Elsevier B.V. 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