Research Article

Phytoremediation efficiencies of Brassica napus and Chenopodium quinoa in soils contaminated with Pb using chelator complexes

Volume: 6 Number: 1 May 15, 2022
EN TR

Phytoremediation efficiencies of Brassica napus and Chenopodium quinoa in soils contaminated with Pb using chelator complexes

Abstract

Heavy metal pollution is one of the essential pollutions, and phytoremediation is one of the preferred methods to eliminate this pollution. The use of the degradable chelating agent for phytoremediation efficiency is a promising and low-cost method for removing soil contaminated with heavy metals. In this study, it was investigated whether phenanthroline and humic acid increase phytoremediation activities for Brassica napus L. and Chenopodium quinoa Wild. species and their applicability. The study was carried out under greenhouse conditions with 3 replications according to a complete random block trial design by applying 4 doses of each of the (i) control (without chelate), (ii) EDTA, (iii) nitro, (iv) pyridine, (v) 1-10 phenanthroline and (vi) humic acid treatments (0, 2.5, 5 and 10 mmol kg-1 The obtained results showed that the highest tolerance indices (TI) for B. napus was found at 2.5 mmol kg-1 nitro chelate. TI of C. quinoa was highest at 5 mmol kg-1 pyridine chelate. Maximum Pb accumulations were found at 5 mmol kg-1 1-10 phenanthroline and 5 mmol kg-1 pyridine chelates in B. napus and C. quinoa, respectively. In both species, while Pb accumulations were high in roots, they were low in stems and leaves. Bioconcentration factors (BCF) were calculated highest at 2.5 mmol kg-1 nitro and 1-10 phenanthroline for B. napus and C. quinoa, respectively. These species were used as hyperaccumulator plants in many studies. Increasing the performance of hyperaccumulator plants to be used in cleaning the habitats exposed to heavy metal pollution will increase the efficiency of phytoremediation.

Keywords

Project Number

FMB-BAP 17-0246

References

  1. Adiloğlu S, Adiloğlu A, Eryılmaz-Açıkgöz F, Yeniaras T, Solmaz Y (2015). Labada (Rumex patientia L.) bitkisinin kurşun kirliliğinin gideriminde kullanim kapasitesinin araştirilmasi. International Anatolia Academic Online Journal Sciences Journal 3(2): 1-7.
  2. Alaribe FO, Agamuthu P, (2015). Assessment of phytoremediation potentials of Lantana camara in Pb impacted soil with organic waste additives. Ecological Engineering 83: 513-520.
  3. Ali SY, Chaudhury S (2016). EDTA-enhanced phytoextraction by Tagetes sp. and effect on bioconcentration and translocation of heavy metals. Environmental Processes 3(4): 735-746.
  4. Badr N, Fawazy M, Al-Qahtani KM (2012). Phytoremediation: an ecological solution to heavy-metal-polluted soil and evaluation of plant removal ability. World Applied Sciences Journal 16: 1292-1301.
  5. Ben Rejeb K, Ghnaya T, Zaier H, Benzarti M, Baioui R, Ghabriche R, Meriem W, Stanley L, Chedly A (2013). Evaluation of the Cd2+ phytoextraction potential in the xerohalophyte Salsola kali L. and the impact of EDTA on this process. Ecological Engineering 60: 309-315.
  6. Bhattacharya T, Chakraborty S, Banerjee DK (2010). Heavy metal uptake and its effect on macronutrients, chlorophyll, protein, and peroxidase activity of Paspalum distichum grown on sludge-dosed soils. Environmental Monitoring and Assessment 169(1-4): 15-26.
  7. Chen Y, Lin Q, Luo Y, He Y, Zhen S, Yu YL, Tian GM, Wong MH (2003). The role of citric acid on the phytoremediation of heavy metal contaminated soil. Chemosphere 50(6): 807-811.
  8. Clemens S (2006). Toxic metal accumulation. responses to exposure and mechanisms of tolerance in plants. Biochimie 88(11): 1707-1719.

Details

Primary Language

English

Subjects

Structural Biology

Journal Section

Research Article

Publication Date

May 15, 2022

Submission Date

November 29, 2021

Acceptance Date

December 31, 2021

Published in Issue

Year 2022 Volume: 6 Number: 1

APA
İpek Tanyıldız, A., Kılıç, D. D., & Sürmen, B. (2022). Phytoremediation efficiencies of Brassica napus and Chenopodium quinoa in soils contaminated with Pb using chelator complexes. Anatolian Journal of Botany, 6(1), 13-17. https://doi.org/10.30616/ajb.1030084
AMA
1.İpek Tanyıldız A, Kılıç DD, Sürmen B. Phytoremediation efficiencies of Brassica napus and Chenopodium quinoa in soils contaminated with Pb using chelator complexes. Ant J Bot. 2022;6(1):13-17. doi:10.30616/ajb.1030084
Chicago
İpek Tanyıldız, Aslıhan, Dudu Duygu Kılıç, and Burak Sürmen. 2022. “Phytoremediation Efficiencies of Brassica Napus and Chenopodium Quinoa in Soils Contaminated With Pb Using Chelator Complexes”. Anatolian Journal of Botany 6 (1): 13-17. https://doi.org/10.30616/ajb.1030084.
EndNote
İpek Tanyıldız A, Kılıç DD, Sürmen B (May 1, 2022) Phytoremediation efficiencies of Brassica napus and Chenopodium quinoa in soils contaminated with Pb using chelator complexes. Anatolian Journal of Botany 6 1 13–17.
IEEE
[1]A. İpek Tanyıldız, D. D. Kılıç, and B. Sürmen, “Phytoremediation efficiencies of Brassica napus and Chenopodium quinoa in soils contaminated with Pb using chelator complexes”, Ant J Bot, vol. 6, no. 1, pp. 13–17, May 2022, doi: 10.30616/ajb.1030084.
ISNAD
İpek Tanyıldız, Aslıhan - Kılıç, Dudu Duygu - Sürmen, Burak. “Phytoremediation Efficiencies of Brassica Napus and Chenopodium Quinoa in Soils Contaminated With Pb Using Chelator Complexes”. Anatolian Journal of Botany 6/1 (May 1, 2022): 13-17. https://doi.org/10.30616/ajb.1030084.
JAMA
1.İpek Tanyıldız A, Kılıç DD, Sürmen B. Phytoremediation efficiencies of Brassica napus and Chenopodium quinoa in soils contaminated with Pb using chelator complexes. Ant J Bot. 2022;6:13–17.
MLA
İpek Tanyıldız, Aslıhan, et al. “Phytoremediation Efficiencies of Brassica Napus and Chenopodium Quinoa in Soils Contaminated With Pb Using Chelator Complexes”. Anatolian Journal of Botany, vol. 6, no. 1, May 2022, pp. 13-17, doi:10.30616/ajb.1030084.
Vancouver
1.Aslıhan İpek Tanyıldız, Dudu Duygu Kılıç, Burak Sürmen. Phytoremediation efficiencies of Brassica napus and Chenopodium quinoa in soils contaminated with Pb using chelator complexes. Ant J Bot. 2022 May 1;6(1):13-7. doi:10.30616/ajb.1030084

Cited By

Anatolian Journal of Botany is licensed under CC BY 4.0cc.svg?ref=chooser-v1by.svg?ref=chooser-v1.