ReviewInternational journal of environmental research and public health2022
The Phytomanagement of PFAS-Contaminated Land.
Review in International journal of environmental research and public health, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 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
6 citing papers in PubMed.
- Review: Potential of Food Plants to Contribute to Human Intake of Per- and Polyfluoroalkyl Substances.Journal of agricultural and food chemistry · 2026Review
- Article
- Article
- Elucidating governing factors of PFAS removal by polyamide membranes using machine learning and molecular simulations.Nature communications · 2024Article
- A novel approach to identify critical knowledge gaps for food safety in circular food systems.NPJ science of food · 2024Review
- Toxicity of Per- and Polyfluoroalkyl Substances to Aquatic Invertebrates, Planktons, and Microorganisms.International journal of environmental research and public health · 2022Review
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.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Globally, several hundred thousand hectares of both agricultural and urban land have become contaminated with per- and polyfluoroalkyl substances (PFAS). PFAS compounds are resistant to degradation and are mobile in soil compared to other common contaminants. Many compounds have KD values (matrix/solution concentration quotients) of <10. PFAS compounds endanger the health of humans and ecosystems by leaching into groundwater, exposure via dust, and, to a lesser extent, through plant uptake. This review aims to determine the feasibility of phytomanagement, the use of plants, and the use of soil conditioners to minimize environmental risk whilst also providing an economic return in the management of PFAS-contaminated land. For most sites, PFAS combinations render phytoextraction, the use of plants to remove PFAS from soil, inviable. In contrast, low Bioaccumulation Coefficients (BAC; plant and soil concentration quotients) timber species or native vegetation may be usefully employed for phytomanagement to limit human/food chain exposure to PFAS. Even with a low BAC, PFAS uptake by crop plants may still exceed food safety standards, and therefore, edible crop plants should be avoided. Despite this limitation, phytomanagement may be the only economically viable option to manage most of this land. Plant species and soil amendments should be chosen with the goal of reducing water flux through the soil, as well as increasing the hydrophobic components in soil that may bind the C-F-dominated tails of PFAS compounds. Soil conditioners such as biochar, with significant hydrophobic components, may mitigate the leaching of PFAS into receiving waters. Future work should focus on the interactions of PFAS with soil microbiota; secondary metabolites such as glomalin may immobilize PFAS in soil.
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.