4.7 Article

Metal-immobilizing Serratia liquefaciens CL-1 and Bacillus thuringiensis X30 increase biomass and reduce heavy metal accumulation of radish under field conditions

期刊

ECOTOXICOLOGY AND ENVIRONMENTAL SAFETY
卷 161, 期 -, 页码 526-533

出版社

ACADEMIC PRESS INC ELSEVIER SCIENCE
DOI: 10.1016/j.ecoenv.2018.06.033

关键词

Metal-tolerant bacteria; Metal-contaminated soil; Heavy metal immobilization; Radish; Cd and Pb uptake of radish

资金

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

向作者/读者索取更多资源

In this study, metal-tolerant bacteria Serratia liquefaciens CL-1 and Bacillus thuringiensis X30 were compared for their Cd and Pb immobilization in solution and impacts on biomass and Cd and Pb uptake in a radish in metal-contaminated soils under field conditions. Strains CL-1 and X30 significantly reduced water-soluble Cd and Pb concentrations (45-67%) and increased the pH in solution compared to the controls. These strains significantly increased the biomass (25-99%) and decreased edible tissue Cd and Pb uptake in the radish (37-81%) and DTPA-extractable Cd and Pb contents (18-44%) of the rhizosphere soil compared to the un-inoculated controls. Strain CL-1 had higher potential to reduce edible tissue Cd and Pb uptake in the radish and DTPA-extractable Cd content than strain X30. Also, these strains significantly increased Cd translocation factor and strain CL-1 also significantly increased Pb translocation factor of the radish. Furthermore, strain CL-1 significantly increased the ratio of small soil aggregates ( < 0.25 mm and 0.25-0.50 mm) of the rhizosphere soil. The results showed that these strains reduced the edible tissue Cd and Pb uptake through decreasing Cd and Pb availability in the soil and increasing Cd or Pb translocation from the roots to the leaves of the radish. The results also suggested the bacteria-related differences in reduced heavy metal uptake in the radish and the mechanisms involved under field conditions.

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