4.7 Article

Isolation of As-tolerant bacteria and their potentials of reducing As and Cd accumulation of edible tissues of vegetables in metal(loid)-contaminated soils

期刊

SCIENCE OF THE TOTAL ENVIRONMENT
卷 579, 期 -, 页码 179-189

出版社

ELSEVIER
DOI: 10.1016/j.scitotenv.2016.10.239

关键词

Metal(loid)-tolerant and plant growth-promoting bacteria; Metal(loid)-contaminated soils; Vegetables; Bioavailability; Edible tissue As and Cd uptake

资金

  1. Chinese National Natural Science Foundation [41471273]
  2. Social Development Program of Jiangsu Province [BE2013710, BE2016744]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

In this study, three As-tolerant bacteria Ralstonia eutropha Q2-8, Rhizobium tropici Q2-13, and Exiguobacterium aurantiacum Q3-11 were isolated from the rhizosphere and bulk soils of Chinese cabbage. The strains were characterized for their production of indole-3-acetic acid (IAA) and siderophores, their effects on soil metal(loid) bio-availability and organic matter content, and their effects on the edible tissue growth and metal(loid) accumulation of Chinese cabbage and radish in the metal(loid)-contaminated soil. The strains produced IAA and siderophores and increased the edible tissue biomass (ranging from 74% to 124%) of the vegetables compared to the controls. Furthermore, strain Q2-8 reduced As contents (ranging from 22% to 50%), while strains Q2-13 and Q3-11 decreased Cd contents (ranging from 21% to 53%) of the edible tissues of the vegetables compared to the controls. Strains Q2-8, Q2-13, and Q3-11 decreased the DTPA-extractable Cd contents (ranging from 16% to 41%) and increased the organic matter contents of the rhizosphere soils compared to the controls. The results showed the effects of the strains on the increased edible tissue growth and reduced As and Cd uptake of the edible tissues and highlighted the possibility to develop a new bacterial-assisted technique for reduced metal(loid) uptake of vegetables in the metal(loid)-contaminated soils. (C) 2016 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