4.6 Review

Assessment of Methods for Determining Bioavailability of Trace Elements in Soils: A Review

期刊

PEDOSPHERE
卷 27, 期 3, 页码 389-406

出版社

SCIENCE PRESS
DOI: 10.1016/S1002-0160(17)60337-0

关键词

bioaccessibility; bioavailability; biosensors; chemical extractions; contaminated soils; metalloids; metals

资金

  1. European Research Area Network (ERA-NET) Sustainable Management of Soil and Groundwater Under the Pressure of Pollution and Contamination (SNOWMAN) Project Sustainable Management of Trace Element Contaminated Soils (SuMaTECS)

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Trace element-contaminated soils (TECSs) are one of the consequences of the past industrial development worldwide. Excessive exposure to trace elements (TEs) represents a permanent threat to ecosystems and humans worldwide owing to the capacity of metal(loid)s to cross the cell membranes of living organisms and of human epithelia, and their interference with cell metabolism. Quantification of TE bioavailability in soils is complicated due to the polyphasic and reactive nature of soil constituents. To unravel critical factors controlling soil TE bioavailability and to quantify the ecological toxicity of TECSs, TEs are pivotal for evaluating excessive exposure or deficiencies and controlling the ecological risks. While current knowledge on TE bioavailability and related cumulative consequences is growing, the lack of an integrated use of this concept still hinders its utilization for a more holistic view of ecosystem vulnerability and risks for human health. Bioavailability is not generally included in models for decision making in the appraisal of TECS remediation options. In this review we describe the methods for determining the TE bioavailability and technological developments, gaps in current knowledge, and research needed to better understand how TE bioavailability can be controlled by sustainable TECS management altering key chemical properties, which would allow policy decisions for environmental protection and risk management.

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

4.6
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