Effects of Amaranthus hypochondriacus Enhanced by Biodegradable Chelating Agent on the Remediation of Cadmium Contaminated Farmland

doi:10.11924/j.issn.1000-6850.casb2021-0820

Abstract

Abstract:

To provide a theoretical basis and technical support for the remediation of Cd contaminated farmland, the effects of Amaranthus hypochondriacus on the remediation of Cd contaminated farmland were evaluated. The effects of the planting modes of Amaranthus hypochondriacus, as well as the effects of the type, filling amount and filling time of chelating agents on the remediation of Cd contaminated farmland were investigated through field trials. The results showed that based on the analysis of Cd extraction efficiency, the labor cost of planting management, and potential environmental risks of Amaranthus hypochondriacus, the strip sowing mode was better than the direct seeding mode and transplanting mode, and NTA was better than EDDS and citric acid. 85 days after planting Amaranthus hypochondriacus, the remediation efficiency was the best under the application of 450 kg/hm² NTA. The extraction efficiency of Cd in the aboveground part and underground part of Amaranthus hypochondriacus was 5.4% and 1.2%, respectively. The extraction efficiency of Cd was 6.6% under single-cropping, the relative improvement rate was 40.5%, and the total extraction efficiency was 13.2%. Therefore, the application of biodegradable chelating agent of NTA could effectively improve the remediation efficiency of Cd contaminated farmland by Amaranthus hypochondriacus, and the technology of Amaranthus hypochondriacus enhanced by NTA is a green, economical, efficient and environmental-friendly remediation method for Cd contaminated farmland, which has a broad application prospect.

Key words: biodegradable chelating agent, Amaranthus hypochondriacus, farmland remediation, cadmium, planting mode, extraction efficiency

CLC Number:

QUAN Shengxiang, SHI Xuefeng, LIU Xiaoyue, LI Changwu, GE Yi, ZHANG Yan. Effects of Amaranthus hypochondriacus Enhanced by Biodegradable Chelating Agent on the Remediation of Cadmium Contaminated Farmland[J]. Chinese Agricultural Science Bulletin, 2022, 38(25): 85-89.

Figures/Tables 6

References 22

[1]	谢运河, 纪雄辉, 吴家梅, 等. 镉砷污染土壤“三高”富集植物筛选与修复成本分析[J]. 环境科学与技术, 2020, 43(S1):116-121.
[2]	VAALGAMAA S, CONLEY D J. Detecting environmental change in estuaries: Nutrient and heavy metal distributions in sediment cores in estuaries from the Gulf of Finland, Baltic Sea[J]. Estuarine coastal & shelf science, 2008, 76(1):45-56.
[3]	GUPTA D K, CHATTERJEE S, DATTA S, et al. Role of phosphate fertilizers in heavy metal uptake and detoxification of toxic metals[J]. Chemosphere, 2014, 108(8):134-144.
[4]	环境保护部, 国土资源部. 全国土壤污染状况调查公报[R]. 北京, 2014.
[5]	ZHUANG P, MCBRIDE M B, XIA H, et al. Health risk from heavy metals via consumption of food crops in the vicinity of Dabaoshan mine, South China[J]. Science of the total environment, 2009, 407(5):1551-1561.
[6]	DU Y, HU X F, WU X H, et al. Affects of mining activities on Cd pollution to the paddy soils and rice grain in Hunan Province, central south China[J]. Environmental monitoring and assessment, 2013, 185(12):9843-9856.
[7]	WU G, KANG H, ZHANG X, et al. A critical review on the bioremoval of hazardous heavy metals from contaminated soils: Issues, progress, eco-environmental concerns and opportunities[J]. Journal of hazardous materials, 2010, 174(1-3):1-8.
[8]	谷佳林, 苏世鸣, 陈延华, 等. 施肥与填闲种植籽粒苋对油麦菜Cd和土壤Cd的影响[J]. 农业环境科学学报, 2020, 39(10):2198-2204.
[9]	CAO X D, MA L Q, CHEN M, et al. Phosphate-induced metal immobilization in a contaminated site[J]. Environmental pollution, 2003, 122(1):19-28.
[10]	郭楠, 迟光宇, 史奕, 等. 玉米与籽粒苋不同种植模式下植物生长及Cd累积特征[J]. 应用生态学报, 2019, 30(9):3164-3174.
[11]	张春慧. 污灌农田Cd、Cr及其强化修复技术研究[D]. 杨凌: 西北农林科技大学, 2014:4-9.
[12]	谷雨, 蒋平, 谭丽, 等. 6种植物对土壤中镉的富集特性研究[J]. 中国农学通报, 2019, 35(30):119-123.
[13]	张胜爽, 勾昕, 张凌云. 不同种类的氮肥对籽粒苋富集镉的影响[J]. 科学技术与工程, 2020, 20(15):6286-6291.
[14]	魏忠平, 谷雷严, 罗庆, 等. 草酸强化超富集植物东南景天修复镉铅污染土壤研究[J]. 沈阳农业大学学报, 2020, 51(6):734-740.
[15]	韩廿, 黄益宗, 魏祥东, 等. 螯合剂对油葵修复镉砷复合污染土壤的影响[J]. 农业环境科学学报, 2019, 38(8):1891-1900.
[16]	韩廿. 螯合剂对植物修复镉砷复合污染农田的研究[D]. 天津: 农业农村部环境保护科研监测所, 2020:1-5.
[17]	EVANGELOU M W H, EBEL M, SCHAEFFER A. Chelate assisted phytoextraction of heavy metals from soil. Effect, mechanism, toxicity, and fate of chelating agents[J]. Chemosphere, 2007, 68(6):989-1003.
[18]	LESTAN D, LUO C L, LI X D. The use of chelating agents in the remediation of metal-contaminated soils: A review[J]. Environmental pollution, 2008, 153(1):3-13.
[19]	BUCHELI-WITSCHEL M, EGLI T. Environmental fate and microbial degradation of aminopolycarboxylic acids[J]. Fems microbiology reviews, 2001, 25(1):69-106.
[20]	胡亚虎, 魏树和, 周启星, 等. 螯合剂在重金属污染土壤植物修复中的应用研究进展[J]. 农业环境科学学报, 2010, 29(11):2055-2063.
[21]	MEERS E, RUTTENS A, HOPGOOD M J, et al. Comparison of EDTA and EDDS as potential soil amendments for enhanced phytoextraction of heavy metals[J]. Chemosphere, 2005, 58(8):1011-1022.
[22]	NEUGSCHWANDTNER R W, TLUSTOS P, KOMÁREK M, et al. Phytoextraction of Pb and Cd from a contaminated agricultural soil using different EDTA application regimes: Laboratory versus field scale measures of efficiency[J]. Geoderma, 2008, 144(3-4):446-454.

序号	处理代号	处理方式
1	CK	空白，不做任何处理
2	T1	种植籽粒苋，直播
3	T2	种植籽粒苋，条播
4	T3	种植籽粒苋，育苗插播
5	T4	T3基础上，螯合剂EDDS，种植后75 d，450 kg/hm2
6	T5	T3基础上，螯合剂NTA，种植后75 d，450 kg/hm2
7	T6	T3基础上，螯合剂柠檬酸，种植后75 d，450 kg/hm2
8	T7	T3基础上，螯合剂NTA，种植后75 d，150 kg/hm2
9	T8	T3基础上，螯合剂NTA，种植后75 d，300 kg/hm2
10	T9	T3基础上，螯合剂NTA，种植后75 d，450 kg/hm2
11	T10	T3基础上，螯合剂NTA，种植后75 d，600 kg/hm2
12	T11	T3基础上，螯合剂NTA，种植后75 d，750 kg/hm2
13	T12	T3基础上，螯合剂NTA，种植后65 d，450 kg/hm2
14	T13	T3基础上，螯合剂NTA，种植后75 d，450 kg/hm2
15	T14	T3基础上，螯合剂NTA，种植后85 d，450 kg/hm2

序号	处理代号	处理方式
1	CK	空白，不做任何处理
2	T1	种植籽粒苋，直播
3	T2	种植籽粒苋，条播
4	T3	种植籽粒苋，育苗插播
5	T4	T3基础上，螯合剂EDDS，种植后75 d，450 kg/hm2
6	T5	T3基础上，螯合剂NTA，种植后75 d，450 kg/hm2
7	T6	T3基础上，螯合剂柠檬酸，种植后75 d，450 kg/hm2
8	T7	T3基础上，螯合剂NTA，种植后75 d，150 kg/hm2
9	T8	T3基础上，螯合剂NTA，种植后75 d，300 kg/hm2
10	T9	T3基础上，螯合剂NTA，种植后75 d，450 kg/hm2
11	T10	T3基础上，螯合剂NTA，种植后75 d，600 kg/hm2
12	T11	T3基础上，螯合剂NTA，种植后75 d，750 kg/hm2
13	T12	T3基础上，螯合剂NTA，种植后65 d，450 kg/hm2
14	T13	T3基础上，螯合剂NTA，种植后75 d，450 kg/hm2
15	T14	T3基础上，螯合剂NTA，种植后85 d，450 kg/hm2

处理代号	干重产量/(t/hm²)		植物镉含量/(mg/kg)		提取效率/%		单茬提取效率/%	相对提高率/%	年度总提取效率/%
处理代号	地上部分	地下部分	地上部分	地下部分	地上部分	地下部分	单茬提取效率/%	相对提高率/%	年度总提取效率/%
T1	5.56±0.08	1.21±0.04	3.0±0.05	2.7±0.08	3.7	0.7	4.4	-5.0	8.7
T2	6.05±0.08	1.39±0.04	2.7±0.08	3.1±0.09	3.6	0.9	4.5	-1.6	9.0
T3	6.08±0.11	1.38±0.05	2.8±0.06	3.0±0.11	3.7	0.9	4.6	—	9.2
T4	6.08±0.10	1.35±0.05	3.6±0.06	2.8±0.06	4.8	0.8	5.6	22.4	11.3
T5	6.13±0.09	1.34±0.04	3.9±0.08	3.5±0.05	5.2	1.0	6.3	33.7	12.6
T6	6.15±0.09	1.32±0.04	3.4±0.06	3.2±0.07	4.6	0.9	5.5	19.8	11.0
T7	5.95±0.10	1.39±0.04	3.2±0.13	2.8±0.06	4.2	0.9	5	7.3	10.0
T8	6.01±0.07	1.43±0.02	3.8±0.11	3.6±0.13	5.0	1.1	6.1	30.9	12.2
T9	6.13±0.09	1.34±0.04	3.9±0.08	3.5±0.05	5.2	1.0	6.3	33.7	12.6
T10	5.63±0.10	1.27±0.05	4.2±0.03	3.4±0.08	5.2	0.9	6.1	30.8	12.2
T11	5.65±0.11	1.25±0.05	4.1±0.04	3.5±0.04	5.1	1.0	6	31.3	12.1
T12	5.95±0.10	1.34±0.05	3.6±0.07	3.4±0.06	4.7	1.0	5.7	23.8	11.4
T13	6.13±0.09	1.34±0.04	3.9±0.08	3.5±0.05	5.2	1.0	6.3	33.7	12.6
T14	6.14±0.11	1.40±0.04	4.0±0.09	3.9±0.13	5.4	1.2	6.6	40.5	13.2

处理代号	干重产量/(t/hm²)		植物镉含量/(mg/kg)		提取效率/%		单茬提取效率/%	相对提高率/%	年度总提取效率/%
处理代号	地上部分	地下部分	地上部分	地下部分	地上部分	地下部分	单茬提取效率/%	相对提高率/%	年度总提取效率/%
T1	5.56±0.08	1.21±0.04	3.0±0.05	2.7±0.08	3.7	0.7	4.4	-5.0	8.7
T2	6.05±0.08	1.39±0.04	2.7±0.08	3.1±0.09	3.6	0.9	4.5	-1.6	9.0
T3	6.08±0.11	1.38±0.05	2.8±0.06	3.0±0.11	3.7	0.9	4.6	—	9.2
T4	6.08±0.10	1.35±0.05	3.6±0.06	2.8±0.06	4.8	0.8	5.6	22.4	11.3
T5	6.13±0.09	1.34±0.04	3.9±0.08	3.5±0.05	5.2	1.0	6.3	33.7	12.6
T6	6.15±0.09	1.32±0.04	3.4±0.06	3.2±0.07	4.6	0.9	5.5	19.8	11.0
T7	5.95±0.10	1.39±0.04	3.2±0.13	2.8±0.06	4.2	0.9	5	7.3	10.0
T8	6.01±0.07	1.43±0.02	3.8±0.11	3.6±0.13	5.0	1.1	6.1	30.9	12.2
T9	6.13±0.09	1.34±0.04	3.9±0.08	3.5±0.05	5.2	1.0	6.3	33.7	12.6
T10	5.63±0.10	1.27±0.05	4.2±0.03	3.4±0.08	5.2	0.9	6.1	30.8	12.2
T11	5.65±0.11	1.25±0.05	4.1±0.04	3.5±0.04	5.1	1.0	6	31.3	12.1
T12	5.95±0.10	1.34±0.05	3.6±0.07	3.4±0.06	4.7	1.0	5.7	23.8	11.4
T13	6.13±0.09	1.34±0.04	3.9±0.08	3.5±0.05	5.2	1.0	6.3	33.7	12.6
T14	6.14±0.11	1.40±0.04	4.0±0.09	3.9±0.13	5.4	1.2	6.6	40.5	13.2