4.4 Article

Afforestation of a trace-element polluted area in SW Spain: woody plant performance and trace element accumulation

期刊

EUROPEAN JOURNAL OF FOREST RESEARCH
卷 129, 期 1, 页码 47-59

出版社

SPRINGER
DOI: 10.1007/s10342-008-0253-3

关键词

Soil remediation; Plant survival; Relative growth rates; Mediterranean woody species; Heavy metals

类别

资金

  1. Regional Ministry of Environment (Junta de Andalucia)
  2. Spanish Ministry of Education

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Trace element soil pollution can have ecotoxic effects on plants, which could negatively affect the restoration of a degraded area. In this work, we studied the revegetation success in different sites within a trace element-polluted area (Guadiamar River Valley, SW Spain). We analysed the survival and growth patterns of afforested plants of seven Mediterranean woody species, and their relation to soil pollution, over 3 years. We also analysed the trace element accumulation in the leaves of these species. The area was polluted mainly by As, Cd, Cu, Pb and Zn (soil total concentrations up to 250, 3.6, 236, 385 and 510 mg kg(-1), respectively). The woody plant performance was very different between sites and between species; in the riparian sites, plant survival rates were nearly 100%, while in the upland terrace sites species such as Quercus ilex and Ceratonia siliqua showed the lowest survival rates (less than 30%) and also the lowest relative growth rates. There were no significant relationships between plant performance and soil pollution in the riparian sites, while in the upland sites mortality, but not growth, was related to soil pollution, although that could be an indirect effect of different substrate alteration between sites. The accumulation of soil pollutants in the studied plants was low, with the exception of Salicaceae species, which accumulated Cd and Zn in the leaves above 1 and 200 mg kg(-1), respectively. We discuss the results with regard to the afforestation of trace-element polluted areas.

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