Macrophyte Potential to Treat Leachate Contaminated with Wood Preservatives: Plant Tolerance and Bioaccumulation Capacity
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Pentachlorophenol and chromated copper arsenate (CCA) have been used worldwide as wood preservatives, but these compounds can toxify ecosystems when they leach into the soil and water. This study aimed to evaluate the capacity of four treatment wetland macrophytes, Phalaris arundinacea, Typha angustifolia, and two subspecies of Phragmites australis, to tolerate and treat leachates containing wood preservatives. The experiment was conducted using 96 plant pots in 12 tanks filled with three leachate concentrations compared to uncontaminated water. Biomass production and bioaccumulation were measured after 35 and 70 days of exposure. There were no significant effects of leachate contamination concentration on plant biomass for any species. No contaminants were detected in aboveground parts of the macrophytes, precluding their use for phytoextraction within the tested contamination levels. However, all species accumulated As and chlorinated phenols in belowground parts, and this accumulation was more prevalent under a more concentrated leachate. Up to 0.5 mg pentachlorophenol/kg (from 81 µg/L in the leachate) and 50 mg As/kg (from 330 µg/L in the leachate) were accumulated in the belowground biomass. Given their high productivity and tolerance to the contaminants, the tested macrophytes showed phytostabilization potential and could enhance the degradation of phenols from leachates contaminated with wood preservatives in treatment wetlands.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".