Abstract
Enhanced phytoextraction proposes the use of soil amendments to increase the heavy-metal content of above-ground harvestable plant tissues. This study compares the effect of synthetic aminopolycarboxylic acids [ethylenediamine tetraacetatic acid (EDTA), nitriloacetic acid (NTA), and diethylenetriamine pentaacetic acid (DTPA)] with a number of biodegradable, low-molecular weight, organic acids (citric acid, ascorbic acid, oxalic acid, salicylic acid, and NH4 acetate) as potential soil amendments for enhancing phytoextraction of heavy metals (Cu, Zn, Cd, Pb, and Ni) by Zea mays. The treatments in this study were applied at a dose of 2 mmol/kg(-1) 1 d before sowing. To compare possible effects between presow and postgermination treatments, a second smaller experiment was conducted in which EDTA, citric acid, and NH4 acetate were added 10 d after germination as opposed to 1 d before sowing. The soil used in this screening was a moderately contaminated topsoil derived from a dredged sediment disposal site. This site has been in an oxidized state for more than 8 years before being used in this research. The high carbonate, high organic matter, and high clay content characteristic to this type of sediment are thought to suppress heavy-metal phytoavailability. Both EDTA and DTPA resulted in increased levels of heavy metals in the above-ground biomass. However, the observed increases in uptake were not as large as reported in the literature. Neither the NTA nor organic acid treatments had any significant effect on uptake when applied prior to sowing. This was attributed to the rapid mineralization of these substances and the relatively low doses applied. The generally low extraction observed in this experiment restricts the use of phytoextraction as an effective remediation alternative under the current conditions, with regard to amendments used, applied dose (2 mmol/kg(-1) soil), application time (presow), plant species (Zea mays), and sediment (calcareous clayey soil) under study.
Abstract from the paper’s OpenAlex record, shown for indexing and research. Copyright remains with the authors or the publisher. Read at the source ↗
The text the model read, with the source record’s inline markup (italics, sub- and superscripts) rendered and its character entities decoded; quote offsets refer to the raw text.
Claims 5
Claim · model-written summary
EDTA increased heavy metal levels in aboveground biomass.
Zea maysNot reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“Both EDTA and DTPA resulted in increased levels of heavy metals in the above-ground biomass.”
t0“Enhanced Phytoextraction: In Search of EDTA Alternatives”
e1“by Zea mays”
Claim · model-written summary
DTPA increased heavy metal levels in aboveground biomass.
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“Both EDTA and DTPA resulted in increased levels of heavy metals in the above-ground biomass.”
t0“Enhanced Phytoextraction: In Search of EDTA Alternatives”
e1“by Zea mays”
Claim · model-written summary
NTA applied before sowing had no significant effect on heavy metal uptake.
- Treatment
- NTAe0
- Outcome
- uptakee0
- Direction
- any significant effecte0
- Qualifier
- when applied prior to sowinge0
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“Neither the NTA nor organic acid treatments had any significant effect on uptake when applied prior to sowing.”
t0“Enhanced Phytoextraction: In Search of EDTA Alternatives”
e1“by Zea mays”
Claim · model-written summary
Organic acid treatments before sowing had no significant effect on uptake.
- Treatment
- organic acid treatmentse0
- Outcome
- uptakee0
- Direction
- any significant effecte0
- Qualifier
- when applied prior to sowinge0
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“Neither the NTA nor organic acid treatments had any significant effect on uptake when applied prior to sowing.”
t0“Enhanced Phytoextraction: In Search of EDTA Alternatives”
e1“by Zea mays”
Claim · model-written summary
The observed extraction was too low for effective phytoextraction under the studied conditions.
- Outcome
- restricts the use of phytoextraction as an effective remediation alternativee0
- Qualifier
- under the current conditionse0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“The generally low extraction observed in this experiment restricts the use of phytoextraction as an effective remediation alternative under the current conditions”
t0“Enhanced Phytoextraction: In Search of EDTA Alternatives”
e1“by Zea mays”
The same questions in other papers
organic acid · nutrient: content · Zea mays (maize)Positive and negative results
2 papers in the same direction as this paper · 2 in the opposite direction
- positive
- positive
- no effect
1 paper more in this group
See all 5 papers →ethylenediaminetetraacetic acid · growth · Zea mays (maize)Positive and negative results
6 papers in the same direction as this paper · 5 in the opposite direction
- negative
- negative
- negative
8 papers more in this group
See all 12 papers →Claims are grouped by organism, treatment and what was measured or targeted. A paper counts as positive when any of its claims in the group is positive.