Evidence map›Paper›PMID 39217584›Full record

ReviewAdvances in biochemical engineering/biotechnology2024

Phytoextraction Options.

Alla Samarska, Oliver Wiche

Abstract readReview
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Review in Advances in biochemical engineering/biotechnology, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
0citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

2 authors.

Alla SamarskaApplied Geoecology Group, Faculty of Natural and Environmental Sciences, Zittau/Görlitz University of Applied Sciences, Zittau, Germany.
Oliver WicheApplied Geoecology Group, Faculty of Natural and Environmental Sciences, Zittau/Görlitz University of Applied Sciences, Zittau, Germany. oliver.wiche@hszg.de.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Wastewaters often contain an array of economically valuable elements, including elements considered critical raw materials and elements for fertilizer production. Plant-based treatment approaches in constructed wetlands, open ponds, or hydroponic systems represent an eco-friendly and economical way to remove potentially toxic metal(loid)s from wastewater (phytoextraction). Concomitantly, the element-enriched biomass represents an important secondary raw material for bioenergy generation and the recovery of raw materials from the harvested plant biomass (phytomining). At present, phytoextraction in constructed wetlands is still considered a nascent technology that still requires more fundamental and applied research before it can be commercially applied. This chapter discusses the different roles of plants in constructed wetlands during the phytoextraction of economically valuable elements. It sheds light on the utilization of plant biomass in the recovery of raw materials from wastewater streams. Here, we consider phytoextraction of the commonly studied water pollutants (N, P, Zn, Cd, Pb, Cr) and expand this concept to a group of rather exotic metal(loid)s (Ge, REE, PGM) highlighting the role of phytoextraction in the face of climate change and finite resources of high-tech metals.

Indexed as

Metals, HeavyPlantsWastewaterWater Pollutants, ChemicalWater PurificationWetlandsBiodegradation, EnvironmentalBiomassMetals, HeavyWastewaterWater Pollutants, ChemicalAquatic plantsMetalloidsMetalsPhytominingPhytoremediationWastewater

Identifiers

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.