Advertisement

Plant and Soil

, Volume 334, Issue 1–2, pp 235–245 | Cite as

Antimony uptake and toxicity in sunflower and maize growing in SbIII and SbV contaminated soil

  • Martin Tschan
  • Brett Robinson
  • C. Annette Johnson
  • Annina Bürgi
  • Rainer Schulin
Regular Article

Abstract

Using pot experiments, we investigated the uptake of antimony (Sb) by sunflower (Helianthus annuus L. cv. Iregi), and maize (Zea mays L. cv. Magister) in two different soils, a potting mix and an agricultural soil. In one treatment Sb was added to the experimental soils as KSb(OH)6 (“SbV-treatment”) and in the other as Sb2O3 (“SbIII-treatment”). Soluble soil Sb concentrations were linearly related to the applied Sb rates, ranging from 0.02 (controls) to 175 mg L−1 soil solution. Accumulation of Sb tended to be slightly higher in the SbV treatment in sunflower, while no difference in Sb uptake between the two Sb treatments was found in maize. The half maximal effective concentration (EC50) values derived from the dose-response curves were higher for the SbV than for the SbIII treatment when they were related to soluble soil Sb concentrations, but differences became insignificant when they were related to shoot Sb concentrations. Maize was substantially more sensitive to Sb toxicity than sunflower, indicating physiological differences in Sb tolerance between the two plant species. Our results show that on soils with high Sb contamination, as often found in shooting ranges, plants may suffer from Sb toxicity.

Keywords

Antimony uptake Antimony speciation Sunflower Maize Soil contamination 

Notes

Acknowledgements

We gratefully acknowledge Anna Grünwald, Björn Studer, René Saladin and Viktor Stadelmann for their generous help and support in the laboratory. This project was financially supported by the Swiss National Science Foundation (Grants No. 200021-103768).

References

  1. Ainsworth N, Cooke JA, Johnson MS (1990) Distribution of antimony in contaminated grassland 1 vegetation and soils. Environ Pollut 65:65–77CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  2. Amereih S, Meisel T, Scholger R, Wegscheider W (2005) Antimony speciation in soil samples along two Austrian motorways by HPLC-ID-ICP-MS. J Environ Monit 7:1200–1206CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  3. Asher CJ, Reay PF (1979) Arsenic uptake by barley seedlings. Aust J Plant Physiol 6:459–466CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Baes CF, Mesmer RE (eds) (1986) Arsenic, Antimony, Bismuth. In The hydrolysis of cations. pp 366–375. Krieger, Malabar, FLGoogle Scholar
  5. Baroni F, Boscagli A, Protano G, Riccobono F (2000) Antimony accumulation in Achillea ageratum, Plantago lanceolata and Silene vulgaris growing in an old Sb-mining area. Environ Pollut 109:347–352CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  6. Belzile N, Chen YW, Wang ZJ (2001) Oxidation of antimony (III) by amorphous iron and manganese oxyhydroxides. Chem Geol 174:379–387CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Blaser P, Pannatier EG, Walthert L (2008) The base saturation in acidified Swiss forest soils on calcareous and noncalcareous parent material. A pH-base saturation anomaly. J Plant Nutr Soil Sci 171:155–162CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Blay K (2000) Sorption wässriger Antimon-Spezies an bodenbildende Festphasen und Remobilisierung durch natürliche Komplexbildner. PhD Thesis, Technische Universität MünchenGoogle Scholar
  9. Bowen HJM (1979) Environmental chemistry of the elements. Academic, LondonGoogle Scholar
  10. Buschmann J, Sigg L (2004) Antimony(III) binding to humic substances: influence of pH and type of humic acid. Environ Sci Technol 38:4535CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  11. Cornelis G, Van Gerven T, Vandecasteele C (2006) Antimony leaching from uncarbonated and carbonated MSWI bottom ash. J Hazard Mater 137:1284–1292CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  12. Filella M, Belzile N, Chen YW (2002) Antimony in the environment: a review focused on natural waters I. Occurence. Earth-Sci Rev 57:125–176CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Filella M, Belzile N, Lett MC (2007) Antimony in the environment: a review focused on natural waters. III. Microbiota relevant interactions. Earth-Sci Rev 80:195–217CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Gebel T (1997) Arsenic and antimony: comparative approach on mechanistic toxicology. Chem Biol Interact 107:131–144CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  15. Gresch M, Wettstein B (2002) Antimon- und Bleibelastung bei Schiessanlagen, Fallbeispiel Eschenbach (SG). Semester Thesis, ETH ZurichGoogle Scholar
  16. Gulz PA, Gupta SK, Schulin R (2005) Arsenic accumulation of common plants from contaminated soils. Plant Soil 272:337–347CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Gurnani N, Sharma A, Talukder G (1994) Effects of antimony on cellular systems in animals—a review. Nucleus 37:71–96Google Scholar
  18. Johnson CA, Moench H, Wersin P, Kugler P, Wenger C (2005) Solubility of antimony and other elements in samples taken from shooting ranges. J Environ Qual 34:248–254PubMedGoogle Scholar
  19. Kabata-Pendias A, Pendias H (1984) Trace elements in soils and plants. CRC Press, Boca RatonGoogle Scholar
  20. Krachler M, Emons H, Zheng J (2001) Speciation of antimony for the 21st century: promises and pitfalls. Trac-Trends Anal Chem 20:79–90CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Leuz AK (2002) Redox chemistry of antimony in aquatic systems: e.g. Lakes. DiplomaGoogle Scholar
  22. Leuz AK, Hug SJ, Wehrli B, Johnson CA (2006a) Iron-mediated oxidation of antimony(III) by oxygen and hydrogen peroxide compared to arsenic(III) oxidation. Environ Sci Technol 40:2565–2571CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  23. Leuz AK, Monch H, Johnson CA (2006b) Sorption of Sb(III) and Sb(V) to goethite: influence on Sb(III) oxidation and mobilization. Environ Sci Technol 40:7277–7282CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  24. Oorts K, Smolders E, Degryse F, Buekers J, Gasco G, Cornelis G, Mertens J (2008) Solubility and toxicity of antimony trioxide (Sb2O3) in soil. Environ Sci Technol 42:4378–4383CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  25. Pratas J, Prasad MNV, Freitas H, Conde L (2005) Plants growing in abandoned mines of Portugal are useful for biogeochemical exploration of arsenic, antimony, tungsten and mine reclamation. J Geochem Explor 85:99–107CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Rooney CP, McLaren RG, Cresswell RJ (1999) Distribution and phytoavailability of lead in a soil contaminated with lead shot. Water Air Soil Pollut 116:535–548CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Sachs L (2004) Angewandte Statistik. Springer, BerlinGoogle Scholar
  28. SPSS for Windows, Rel. 17.0.0. (2008) Chicago: SPSS IncGoogle Scholar
  29. Tighe M, Lockwood P, Wilson S (2005) Adsorption of antimony(v) by floodplain soils, amorphous iron(III) hydroxide and humic acid. J Environ Monit 7:1177–1185CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  30. Tschan M, Robinson B, Schulin R (2008) Antimony uptake by Zea mays (L.) and Helianthus annuus (L.) from nutrient solution. Environ Geochem Health 30:187–191CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  31. Tschan M, Robinson BH, Nodari M, Schulin R (2009a) Antimony uptake by different plant species from nutrient solution, agar and soil. Environ Chem 6:144–152CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Tschan M, Robinson BH, Schulin R (2009b) Antimony in the soil-plant system—a review. Environ Chem 6:106–115CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. Woolson EA, Axley JH, Kearney PC (1973) Chemistry and phytotoxicity of arsenic in soils. 2. Effects of time and phosphorus. Soil Sci Soc Am J 37:254–259CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media B.V. 2010

Authors and Affiliations

  • Martin Tschan
    • 1
  • Brett Robinson
    • 2
  • C. Annette Johnson
    • 3
  • Annina Bürgi
    • 1
  • Rainer Schulin
    • 1
  1. 1.Eidgenössische Technische Hochschule (ETH) ZurichInstitute of Terrestrial Ecosystems ITESZurichSwitzerland
  2. 2.Agricultural and Life Sciences DivisionLincoln UniversityCanterburyNew Zealand
  3. 3.Swiss Federal Institute for Environmental Science and Technology (EAWAG)DübendorfSwitzerland

Personalised recommendations