ArticleEcotoxicology (London, England)2011
Phytoremediation of metals from fly ash through bacterial augmentation.
Article in Ecotoxicology (London, England), 2011. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
5 citing papers in PubMed, 25 citations in OpenAlex.
- A phytoremediation approach for the restoration of coal fly ash polluted sites: A review.Heliyon · 2024Review
- Metal-resistant rhizobacteria isolates improve Mucuna deeringiana phytoextraction capacity in multi-metal contaminated soils from a gold mining area.Environmental science and pollution research international · 2017Article
- Accumulation and translocation of heavy metal by spontaneous plants growing on multi-metal-contaminated site in the Southeast of Rio Grande do Sul state, Brazil.Environmental science and pollution research international · 2016Article
- Effect of plant growth-promoting bacteria (PGPR) and arbuscular mycorrhizal fungi (AMF) inoculation on oats in saline-alkali soil contaminated by petroleum to enhance phytoremediation.Environmental science and pollution research international · 2015Article
- Effect of PGPR Serratia marcescens BC-3 and AMF Glomus intraradices on phytoremediation of petroleum contaminated soil.Ecotoxicology (London, England) · 2014Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Different combinations of four bacterial strains isolated from fly ash were used by us to study their impact on phytoextraction of metals from fly ash by Brassica juncea grown in fly ash amended with farm yard manure (50:50 w/w). Out of 11 bacterial consortia, a combination of two strains i.e. Paenibacillus macerans NBRFT5 + Bacillus pumilus NBRFT9 (C7) inoculated in the rhizosphere was found to enhance Pb accumulation maximally by 278%, Mn by 75%, Zn by 163%, Cr by 226% and Ni by 414% compared to control. It is possible that these bacteria, known for N(2) fixation, solubilization of phosphorus and uptake of micronutrient, could promote the plant growth resulting in higher accumulation of metals. However, a combination of four bacteria, namely Micrococcus roseus NBRFT2 + Bacillus endophyticus NBRFT4 + Paenibacillus macerans NBRFT5 + Bacillus pumilus NBRFT9 (C4) was able to increase Cd uptake maximally by 237%. Further, the translocation of metal was invariably more from root to stem than from stem to leaf which was regulated by plant transport mechanism and metal mobility. Bacteria are known to excrete protons, organic acids, enzymes and siderophores to enhance the mobilization of metals which boosted the phytoextraction of metals from fly ash.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.