4.7 Article

Can liming reduce cadmium (Cd) accumulation in rice (Oryza sativa) in slightly acidic soils? A contradictory dynamic equilibrium between Cd uptake capacity of roots and Cd immobilisation in soils

期刊

CHEMOSPHERE
卷 193, 期 -, 页码 547-556

出版社

PERGAMON-ELSEVIER SCIENCE LTD
DOI: 10.1016/j.chemosphere.2017.11.061

关键词

Rice; Cadmium; pH; Liming; Transport protein; Iron

资金

  1. National Key Research and Development Plan [SQ2017YFNC060064]
  2. National Natural Science Foundation [31571616]
  3. National Commonwealth Agricultural Project [201403015]
  4. Chinese Academy of Agricultural Sciences [CAAS-XTCX2016018]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Cadmium (Cd) accumulation in rice is strongly controlled by liming, but information on the use of liming to control Cd accumulation in rice grown in slightly acidic soils is inconsistent. Here, pot experiments were carried out to investigate the mechanisms of liming on Cd accumulation in two rice varieties focusing on two aspects: available/exchangeable Cd content in soils that were highly responsive to liming, and Cd uptake and transport capacity in the roots of rice in terms of Cd accumulation-relative gene expression. The results showed that soil availability and exchangeable iron, manganese, zinc and Cd contents decreased with increased liming, and that genes related to Cd uptake (OsNramp5 and OsIRT1) were sharply up-regulated in the roots of the two rice varieties. Thus, iron, manganese, zinc and Cd contents in rice plants increased under low liming applications but decreased in response to high liming applications. However, yield and rice quantities were only slightly affected. These results indicated that Cd accumulation in rice grown in slightly acidic soils presents a contradictory dynamic equilibrium between Cd uptake capacity by roots and soil Cd immobilisation in response to liming. The enhanced Cd uptake capacity under low liming dosages increases risks to human health. (C) 2017 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