| Literature DB >> 30388794 |
Guijie Tong1, Shaohua Wu2, Yujie Yuan3, Fufu Li4, Lian Chen5, Daohao Yan6.
Abstract
Samples of wheat and soil were collected in the Lihe watershed in East China, the migration and accumulation processes of four common trace metals (Cu, Pb, Cd and Ni) in each part of the wheat plant (root, stem, leaf and grain) were analyzed, and a mechanistic model was proposed to simulate these processes based on wheat growth techniques. Model results show that Cu and Cd migrate more easily with wheat grains, while most Pb and Ni accumulate in roots. Modeling results were shown to be relatively good, with an error of 25.29% in value and 26.38% in fluctuation, and had smaller dispersion degree than actual measurement results. Monte Carlo simulation results also match quite well with actual measurement results, and modeling results are slightly smaller in the simulation of Leaf-Cu, Grain-Cu and Leaf-Ni. Trace metal pollution risk in wheat is evaluated based on this model; our results show that the northwest and northeast parts in the research area are not suitable for growing wheat. In general, this model is relatively accurate, and can evaluate the wheat pollution risk before seeding wheat, providing scientific references for the early selection of wheat safety sowing areas.Entities:
Keywords: pollution; risk evaluation; spatial analysis; trace metals; wheat growth
Mesh:
Substances:
Year: 2018 PMID: 30388794 PMCID: PMC6266972 DOI: 10.3390/ijerph15112432
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Int J Environ Res Public Health ISSN: 1660-4601 Impact factor: 3.390
Figure 1Location of study area.
Figure 2Distribution of (a) soil samples, and (b) wheat samples.
Absorption rate formulas for trace metals in each part of wheat.
| Item | Root (R) | Stem (St) | Leaf (L) | Grain (G) |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| rS−i | rS−R | rS−R rR−St | rS−R rR−St rSt−L | rS−R rR−St rSt−G |
| rA−i | rA−L rL−St rSt−R | rA−L rL−St | rA−L | rA−G |
Figure 3Absorption rate in wheat.
Main parameters and sources.
| Data Type | Parameter | Source |
|---|---|---|
|
| Soil weight MS | This study |
| Soil trace metal contents Cs, Ct | This study | |
|
| Trace metals contents in the atmosphere CA | This study |
| Adsorption rate of atmospheric particles fp | Rein, etc., 2011 [ | |
| Deposition velocity of particles vdep | Rein, etc., 2011 [ | |
|
| The initial mass of wheat each part Mi,0 | This study |
| The maximum mass of wheat each part Mi,max | This study | |
| The water content of wheat each part Wi | This study | |
| The surface area of wheat each part Ai | This study | |
| The growth coefficient of wheat each part Gi | Rein, etc., 2011 [ | |
|
| Soil-water KSw | Fantke, etc., 2011 [ |
| Atmosphere-water KAw | Rein, etc., 2011 [ | |
| Root-water KRw | Fantke, etc., 2011 [ | |
| Stem-water KStw | Fantke, etc., 2011 [ | |
| Leaf-water KLw | Fantke, etc., 2011 [ | |
| Grain-water KGw | Fantke, etc., 2011 [ | |
| Flux Q | Rein, etc., 2011 [ | |
|
| Volume conversion factor fc | Fantke, etc., 2011 [ |
| Diffusion rate DR | Verma, 2006 [ | |
| The permeability of leaf and grain PL, PG | Trapp, etc., 2007 [ |
Initial mass, maximum mass and growth rate in each wheat part.
| Item | Mi,0 (kg) | Mi,max (kg) | Gi |
|---|---|---|---|
|
| 0.0025 | 0.25 | 0.0075 |
|
| 0.00125 | 0.45 | 0.08 |
|
| 0.00125 | 0.05 | 0.08 |
|
| 0.0000056 | 0.56 | 0.14 |
Figure 4Changes in mass and flux over time in the wheat growth process. (a) Mass; (b) Flux (down-up); (c) Flux (up-down).
Figure 5The accumulation process of Cu, Cd, Pb and Ni in wheat parts. (a) Root (b) Stem (c) Leaf (d) Grain.
The modeling results of trace metals contents in wheat/mg·kg−1.
| Element | Cu | Cd | Pb | Ni |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 16.25 ± 6.76 | 0.72 ± 0.14 | 16.26 ± 8.42 | 9.14 ± 6.56 | |
| 3.55 ± 1.48 | 0.21 ± 0.04 | 1.44 ± 0.7 | 2.84 ± 2.04 | |
| 6.07 ± 2.52 | 0.43 ± 0.08 | 7.31 ± 3.79 | 3.40 ± 2.44 | |
| 5.25 ± 2.18 | 0.1 ± 0.02 | 0.54 ± 0.28 | 0.82 ± 0.59 |
Wheat absorption (BCFsw) and grain absorption (BCFsg) capacities for different trace metals.
| Element | Cu | Cd | Pb | Ni |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 22.1 | 0.6 | 36.3 | 28.9 | |
|
| 1.41 | 2.43 | 0.7 | 0.56 |
|
| 0.24 | 0.17 | 0.01 | 0.03 |
Figure 6Root mean squares (RMS) of measured values and modeling values, (a) the RMS of Cu, (b) the RMS of Cu, (c) the RMS of Cu, (d) the RMS of Cu.
Figure 7(a) Value difference rates (VDR) and (b) Fluctuation difference rates (FDR) of the modeling results.
Figure 8Comparison between Monte Carlo simulation and actual measurement results.
Figure 9Risk evaluation of trace metals pollution in wheat.