4.4 Article

The true distribution and accumulation of radiocaesium in stem of Scots pine (Pinus sylvestris L.)

期刊

JOURNAL OF ENVIRONMENTAL RADIOACTIVITY
卷 58, 期 2-3, 页码 243-259

出版社

ELSEVIER SCI LTD
DOI: 10.1016/S0265-931X(01)00068-6

关键词

-

向作者/读者索取更多资源

The radial and vertical distributions of radiocaesium, potassium and calcium were determined in two Scots pine stands (17 and 58 yr old) similarly affected by the Chernobyl fallout, For both age classes, concentrations are always the lowest in the stemwood, highest in the inner bark and intermediary levels were observed for the outer bark. Due to the cumulative character of its biomass, however, stemwood is a long-term major reservoir of Cs-137. With tree development, changes in the Cs-137 radial distribution are well described by variations in the sap ascent pattern and reveal an important transfer between tree rings. It is shown that, both the biomass evolution and knowledge of the evolution of the Cs-137 radial gradient are important to predicting Cs-137 accumulation in wood with time. According to the common transfer factor (TF) approach, one would expect a decrease in radiocaesium accumulation with time (from 0.0047 +/- 0.0013 to 0.0035 +/- 0.0008 M-2 kg(-1) for the 17 and 58 yr old trees, respectively). With the wood immobilisation potential (WIP) approach, it was, however, clearly shown that additional annual uptake was highest for the older stand (3.12 +/- 0.23 Bq cm(-3) yr(-1) for the 58-year-old stand compared to 1.99 +/- 0.30 Bq cm(-3) yr(-1) for the younger stand), Following the WIP approach, it was moreover possible to distinguish between the Cs-137 incorporated via the root uptake process and a possible lasting effect of interception. It is shown that, whereas for the younger stand 5yr old at the time of the accident) root uptake contributed exclusively to the wood contamination, the former process explained only 48% of the measured total Cs-137 content in the wood of the older tree. (C) 2001 Elsevier Science 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

4.4
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