The DOI matches its Crossref record; 7 of the 7 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Phytoremediation: Mechanisms, plant selection and enhancement by natural and synthetic agents
Open accessAbstract
With current intensive agriculture practices and industrialization, pollution of natural resources like land and water with heavy metals, organic pollutants, radionuclides, pesticides, and fertilizers has become a major concern. Phytoremediation is a cost-effective and environmentally friendly technique that utilizes plants to immobilize, uptake, reduce toxicity, stabilize, or degrade the compounds that are released into the environment from different sources. Studies have shown that heavy metals, organic contaminants, radionuclides, antibiotics, and pesticides can be remediated using plants. Though phytoremediation has been practiced since decades, it is still an emerging technology. This review article summarizes existing information and synthesizes the recent findings on plant species suitable for use in phytoremediation through utilizing different mechanisms, aids that can enhance the efficiency of phytoremediation processes, and strengths and limitations that comes with the application of this technique. Diverse plants remediate different pollutants at different rates through one or multiple mechanisms. The limitations of phytoremediation can be overcome by using several aids including natural and chemical amendments, genetic engineering and natural microbial stimulation. Given the low-cost of phytoremediation compared to conventional technology and sustainability associated with plants and use of renewable energy, phytoremediation can be a reliable solution for a sustainable and economical remediation of soil and water from the organic and inorganic pollutants.
Overview
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Claims other papers make about this one
Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?
In the citing paper
“EDTA significantly increased shoot Pb and TF at 5 mM, confirming its role in xylem loading, while CA promoted moderate uptake with minimal toxicity, supporting its safer profile 1,53–57.”
From Synergistic modulation of antioxidant enzymes by citric acid and EDTA to enhance lead tolerance and phytoextraction efficiency in harmel (2025) · cites this paper as [57]
In the citing paper
“EDTA significantly increased shoot Pb and TF at 5 mM, confirming its role in xylem loading, while CA promoted moderate uptake with minimal toxicity, supporting its safer profile 1,53–57.”
From Synergistic modulation of antioxidant enzymes by citric acid and EDTA to enhance lead tolerance and phytoextraction efficiency in harmel (2025) · cites this paper as [57]
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cites
Biochar effects on soil biota – A review
Lehmann, J., Rillig, M. C., Thies, J., Masiello, C. A., Hockaday, W. C., & Crowley, D. (2011) · Soil Biology and Biochemistry · doi:10.1016/j.soilbio.2011.04.022 · Cited by 5,074
Evangelou, M. W. H., Ebel, M., & Schaeffer, A. (2007) · Chemosphere · doi:10.1016/j.chemosphere.2007.01.062 · Cited by 632
Méndez, A., Gómez, A., Paz-Ferreiro, J., & Gascó, G. (2012) · Chemosphere · doi:10.1016/j.chemosphere.2012.05.092 · Cited by 493
Namgay, T., Singh, B., & Singh, B. P. (2010) · Soil Research · doi:10.1071/sr10049 · Cited by 395
Biochar mediated alterations in herbicide breakdown and leaching in soil
Jones, D. L., Edwards-Jones, G., & Murphy, D. V. (2011) · Soil Biology and Biochemistry · doi:10.1016/j.soilbio.2010.12.015 · Cited by 313
Phytovolatilization of Organic Contaminants
Limmer, M., & Burken, J. (2016) · Environmental Science & Technology · doi:10.1021/acs.est.5b04113 · Cited by 305
Phytoextraction of Cd from a contaminated soil by tobacco and safe use of its metal-enriched biomass
Yang, Y., Ge, Y., Tu, P., Zeng, H., Zhou, X., Zou, D., Wang, K., & Zeng, Q. (2019) · Journal of Hazardous Materials · doi:10.1016/j.jhazmat.2018.09.093 · Cited by 63
Cited by
Heavy Metal Contamination in Agricultural Soil: Environmental Pollutants Affecting Crop Health
Rashid, A., Schutte, B. J., Ulery, A., Deyholos, M. K., Sanogo, S., Lehnhoff, E. A., & Beck, L. (2023) · Agronomy · doi:10.3390/agronomy13061521 · Cited by 837
Priya, A. K., Muruganandam, M., Ali, S. S., & Kornaros, M. (2023) · Toxics · doi:10.3390/toxics11050422 · Cited by 281
Techno-economic analysis of phytoremediation: A strategic rethinking
Wang, J., & Aghajani Delavar, M. (2023) · Science of The Total Environment · doi:10.1016/j.scitotenv.2023.165949 · Cited by 143
Medić, A. B., & Karadžić, I. M. (2022) · World Journal of Microbiology and Biotechnology · doi:10.1007/s11274-022-03349-7 · Cited by 108
Reducing heavy metal contamination in soil and water using phytoremediation
Zhakypbek, Y., Kossalbayev, B. D., Belkozhayev, A. M., Murat, T., Tursbekov, S., Abdalimov, E., Pashkovskiy, P., Kreslavski, V., Kuznetsov, V., & Allakhverdiev, S. I. (2024) · Plants · doi:10.3390/plants13111534 · Cited by 86
Metadata
- Authors
- Kafle, A., Timilsina, A., Gautam, A., Adhikari, K., Bhattarai, A., & Aryal, N.
- Venue
- Environmental Advances
- Publisher
- Elsevier BV
- Published
- 2022-07
- Volume
- 8
- Pages
- 100203
- ISSN
- 2666-7657 (ISSN-L)
- OpenAlex
- W4214487695
- Cited by
- 736
- References
- 7
- FWCI
- 28.71
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- gold
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
How to cite
Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.
- This page
- CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Phytoremediation: Mechanisms, plant selection and enhancement by natural and synthetic agents. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1016/j.envadv.2022.100203
- The paper
- Kafle, A., Timilsina, A., Gautam, A., Adhikari, K., Bhattarai, A., & Aryal, N. (2022). Phytoremediation: Mechanisms, plant selection and enhancement by natural and synthetic agents. Environmental Advances. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.envadv.2022.100203
Data sources
Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.
Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).
Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.