4.7 Article

Effects of willow and Sedum alfredii Hance planting patterns on phytoremediation efficiency under AC electric field

出版社

SPRINGER HEIDELBERG
DOI: 10.1007/s11356-023-30341

关键词

AC electric field; Phytoremediation; Interplanting; Salix sp.; Sedum alfredii Hance; Heavy metals; Photosynthetic parameters

向作者/读者索取更多资源

This study investigated the remediation of heavy metal-contaminated soil using alternating current (AC) electric field-assisted phytoremediation. The results showed that AC electric field greatly enhanced the efficiency of phytoremediation for soil cadmium (Cd), regardless of the planting patterns. The interplanting of willow and Sedum alfredii showed the highest Cd accumulation in the whole plant, indicating its potential as an effective remediation technique.
Heavy metal contamination to soil is tricky due to its difficult removal, long retention time, and biomagnified toxicity. The green and low-cost phytoremediation with electric field treatment and planting pattern selection is an emerging and more effective approach to remove heavy metals from soils. In this study, alternating current (AC) electric field-assisted phytoremediation was examined with different planting patterns, i.e., monoculture willow (Salix sp.), monoculture Sedum alfredii Hance, and interplanting of willow and S. alfredii. AC electric field greatly increased phytoremediation efficiency to soil cadmium (Cd) regardless of planting patterns, either single plant species of willow or S. alfredii. The Cd removal capacity of willow and S. alfredii raises apparently under 0.5 V cm(-1) AC electric field. Under different planting patterns of AC electric field treatment, Cd accumulation in the whole plant by interplanting was 5.63 times higher than monoculture willow, but only 0.75 times as high as monoculture S. alfredii. The results showed that AC electric field-assisted interplanting of willow and S. alfredii is a promising remediation technique for efficiently clean-up Cd-contaminated soil.

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