Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 100 of the 101 references it cites were found in a registry or an index; none of the 58 sources its claims cite is checked for support yet.

Chelate facilitated phytoextraction of Pb, Cd, and Zn from a lead–zinc mine contaminated soil by three accumulator plants

Open access

Abstract

This study aims to evaluate the enhancement of phytoextraction of heavy metals (Pb, Cd, and Zn) by species Marrubium cuneatum,Stipa arabica, and Verbascum speciosum, through EDTA amendment. Assisted phytoextraction pot experiments were performed at different EDTA dosages (0, 1, 3, and 5 mmol kg−1 soil). The DTPA-extractable metal content increased in the presence of EDTA, followed by their contents in the tissues of all three studied species. Resulting from oxidative stress, the activity of antioxidant enzymes such as glutathione peroxidase (GPX), superoxide dismutase (SOD), and catalase (CAT) increased when the chelating agent was added. EDTA in higher doses partially decreased chlorophyll concentration, and 5 mmol kg−1 of that reduced the biomass of the studied species. The bioconcentration factor (BCF) for Cd was notably high in all studied plants and considerably elevated for Zn and Pb with the addition of EDTA in M. cuneatum and S. arabica(BCF > 1), whilst an accumulation factor greater than one (AF > 1) was found for Cd in all species and for Pb in the case of S. arabica. In general, the results demonstrated that EDTA can be an effective amendment for phytoextraction of Cd, Zn, and Pb by M. cuneatum,V. speciosum and S. arabica in contaminated soils.

Overview

CoChat Summary

TL;DR

In a six-month greenhouse pot experiment, EDTA amendment increased DTPA-extractable Pb, Cd, and Zn and their accumulation in *Marrubium cuneatum*, *Stipa arabica*, and *Verbascum speciosum*, while 5 mmol kg−1 EDTA caused phytotoxicity and biomass reduction. The authors conclude EDTA-assisted phytoextraction is effective for these metals and species, with predicted optimum EDTA doses of about 7–9 mmol kg−1 depending on species and metal.

Key findings

  • EDTA increased DTPA-extractable soil metals. Available Cd increased by 25%, 19%, and 34% for *M. cuneatum*, *S. arabica*, and *V. speciosum*; available Pb was highest at 5 mmol kg−1 EDTA (+23%, +13%, and +13%); available Zn at 5 mmol kg−1 increased by 34%, 43%, and 35%, respectively, compared with untreated soil.
  • Tissue metal concentrations rose with EDTA. At 5 mmol kg−1, root Pb increased by 154%, 536%, and 525% in *S. arabica*, *V. speciosum*, and *M. cuneatum*, and shoot Pb increased by 563%, 376%, and 211%; shoot Cd increased from 6.65 to 10.75, 6.47 to 13.5, and 2.88 to 11.49 mg kg−1 (increases of 61%, 109%, and 298% for *S. arabica*, *V. speciosum*, and *M. cuneatum*). Zn increases were 53%, 67%, and 12% in roots and 40%, 67%, and 99% in shoots, respectively.
  • At 5 mmol kg−1 EDTA, root biomass decreased by 30%, 20%, and 22% and shoot biomass by 17%, 6%, and 11% in *S. arabica*, *V. speciosum*, and *M. cuneatum*. CAT activity increased by 49%, 23%, and 40%; GPX by 23%, 7%, and 26%; SOD increased up to 77% and 43% in *V. speciosum* and *S. arabica* but not significantly in *M. cuneatum*.
  • BCF for Cd was high in all species, reaching maxima at 5 mmol kg−1 of 7.10, 12.26, and 14.77 for *S. arabica*, *V. speciosum*, and *M. cuneatum*. BCF > 1 occurred for Pb in *M. cuneatum* and *S. arabica* and for Zn in *M. cuneatum* (1.06) and *S. arabica* (1.03). AF > 1 was found for Cd in all species and for Pb in *S. arabica*. Predicted optimum EDTA doses were 9.1, 8.15, and 7.8 mmol kg−1 for Cd; 9.2, 8.1, and 7.8 mmol kg−1 for Pb; and 9.1, 8.1, and 1.8 mmol kg−1 for Zn in *V. speciosum*, *M. cuneatum*, and *S. arabica*, respectively. The highest capability was *S. arabica* for Zn, *M. cuneatum* for Pb, and *V. speciosum* for Cd.

Methods

  • Pot experiment using soil from the Angouran Pb–Zn mine, Iran (loamy, pH 7.12, EC 0.31 dS m−1; total Zn 568.42, Pb 472, and Cd 6.85 mg kg−1). *M. cuneatum*, *S. arabica*, and *V. speciosum* were grown for six months in a greenhouse; 36 pots were arranged in a completely randomized design with three replications, and EDTA was applied at 0, 1, 3, and 5 mmol kg−1 soil 50 days before harvest.
  • Total and DTPA-extractable soil metals and root/shoot metal concentrations were measured by ICP-OES. TF, BCF, and AF were calculated, along with chlorophyll, MDA, and CAT, GPX, APX, and SOD activities. One-way ANOVA with Tukey tests (P < 0.05) was used, and quadratic/cubic regression predicted optimal EDTA doses from shoot biomass and shoot metal concentration.

Limitations

  • The authors state that further studies are needed under various ecological field conditions to validate the findings, and they note EDTA’s low biodegradability and potential toxicity to plants and soil microorganisms. They also state that greenhouse/pot data may not definitively classify plants as accumulators or excluders and that long-term field accumulation should be studied.
  • Evident from the text: the study used a single contaminated mine soil and one greenhouse pot trial with three replications, with no field validation. The predicted optimal EDTA doses (about 7–9 mmol kg−1) exceed the tested range of 0–5 mmol kg−1, so those optima are extrapolations from the regression models.

Model-written summary. Check it against the paper before relying on it.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1038/s41598-023-48666-5

Cites

100 of 100 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Nothing to recompute.

Figures

Figure 1 DTPA-extractable Cd (a), Pb (b), and Zn (c) and total content of Cd (d), Pb (e), and Zn (f) metals under EDTA treatment (mean ± SD; n = 3). Different letters for each attribute denote a significant difference from the corresponding control and other treatments (P < 0.05, Tukey’s test). CK, E1, E2, and E3 represent soil treated with EDTA of 0, 1, 3, and 5 mmol kg−1, respectively.
Figure 1 DTPA-extractable Cd (a), Pb (b), and Zn (c) and total content of Cd (d), Pb (e), and Zn (f) metals under EDTA treatment (mean ± SD; n = 3). Different letters for each attribute denote a significant difference from the corresponding control and other treatments (P < 0.05, Tukey’s test). CK, E1, E2, and E3 represent soil treated with EDTA of 0, 1, 3, and 5 mmol kg−1, respectively.CC BY · PubMed Central
Figure 2 The effect of EDTA on the root Pb (a), Cd (b), and Zn (c) and shoot Pb (d), Cd (e), and Zn (f) contents of the studied species (mean ± SD; n = 3). Different letters for each attribute denote a significant difference from the corresponding control and other treatments (P < 0.05, Tukey’s test). CK, E1, E2, and E3 represent soil treated with EDTA of 0, 1, 3, and 5 mmol kg−1, respectively.
Figure 2 The effect of EDTA on the root Pb (a), Cd (b), and Zn (c) and shoot Pb (d), Cd (e), and Zn (f) contents of the studied species (mean ± SD; n = 3). Different letters for each attribute denote a significant difference from the corresponding control and other treatments (P < 0.05, Tukey’s test). CK, E1, E2, and E3 represent soil treated with EDTA of 0, 1, 3, and 5 mmol kg−1, respectively.CC BY · PubMed Central
Figure 3 The effect of EDTA on CAT (a), GPX (b), APX (c), and SOD (d) enzyme activities and the concentration of lipid peroxidation (e) and total chlorophyll (f) of the studied species leaf (mean ± SD; n = 3). Different letters for each attribute denote a significant difference from the corresponding control and other treatments (P < 0.05, Tukey’s test). CK, E1, E2, and E3 represent soil treated with EDTA of 0, 1, 3, and 5 mmol kg−1, respectively.
Figure 3 The effect of EDTA on CAT (a), GPX (b), APX (c), and SOD (d) enzyme activities and the concentration of lipid peroxidation (e) and total chlorophyll (f) of the studied species leaf (mean ± SD; n = 3). Different letters for each attribute denote a significant difference from the corresponding control and other treatments (P < 0.05, Tukey’s test). CK, E1, E2, and E3 represent soil treated with EDTA of 0, 1, 3, and 5 mmol kg−1, respectively.CC BY · PubMed Central
Figure 4 Optimum dose of EDTA application for Cd (a), Pb (b), and Zn (c) absorption based on shoot biomass and its metal concentration.
Figure 4 Optimum dose of EDTA application for Cd (a), Pb (b), and Zn (c) absorption based on shoot biomass and its metal concentration.CC BY · PubMed Central

Verification

Claims the paper makes

0 Valid · 0 Not valid · 41 Not checked · 110 Own results and interpretations

55 more claims

Create a free account to see all 151 claims and to verify the 56 references still open.

See all claims — free account
  • It may state two separate claims as one. 76
  • Probably not a substantial claim. 23

Create a free account to see these claims.

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

Each contradiction between two passages listed here was confirmed by an independent check.

4 of 4

Cited works that were retracted

Works this paper cites that were later retracted, from the retraction notices publishers deposit. Major when the notice came out before this paper was published.

1 of 1

Citations

Cites

1 retracted

Show all 101 references

Research works printed but not linked: 3

  1. Mohamed, H., Mohamed, H., Mostefa, T., Yasmina, B. & Ayoub, K. Phytoremediation potential of spontaneous plant species in soils contaminated by hexavalent chromium in Djelfa city (Algeria). Res. J. Chem. Environ. 26, 66–74 (2022).
  2. Tananonchai, A., Sampanpanish, P., Chanpiwat, P., Tancharakorn, S. & Sukkha, U. Effect of EDTA and NTA on cadmium distribution and translocation in Pennisetum purpureum Schum cv. Mott. Environ. Sci. Pollut. Res. 26, 9851–9860 (2019). · DOI · Paper page
  3. Lorestani, B., Cheraghi, M. & Yousefi, N. Phytoremediation potential of native plants growing on a heavy metals contaminated soil of copper mine in Iran. Int. J. Geol. Earth Environ. Sci. 5, 299–304 (2011).

Cited by

See all 22

Metadata

Authors
Hosseinniaee, S., Jafari, M., Tavili, A., Zare, S., & Cappai, G.
Affiliations
  • University of Tehran (IR)
  • University of Cagliari (IT)
Corresponding author
  • Hosseinniaee, Sadegh
  • Jafari, Mohammad
Venue
Scientific Reports
Published
2023-12-01
Volume
13
Issue
1
Pages
21185-21185
ISSN
2045-2322 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W4389224971
Cited by
22
References
101
Citations by year
2026: 9 · 2025: 3 · 2024: 9 · 2023: 1
FWCI
1.40
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Licence
Locations
  • Scientific Reports (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • Research Square (submittedVersion, cc-by)
  • PubMed Central (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • UNICA IRIS Institutional Research Information System (University of Cagliari) (submittedVersion, other-oa)
  • DOAJ (DOAJ: Directory of Open Access Journals) (submittedVersion, cc-by-sa)
Topics
  • Physical Sciences › Environmental Science › Pollution › Heavy metals in environment
  • Physical Sciences › Environmental Science › Water Science and Technology › Environmental and Analytical Chemistry Studies
  • Physical Sciences › Chemistry › Analytical Chemistry › Heavy Metals in Plants
Keywords
phytoextraction, heavy metal remediation, EDTA chelation, lead, cadmium, zinc, mine-contaminated soil, Stipa arabica, Verbascum speciosum, antioxidant enzymes, oxidative stress, bioconcentration factor, accumulation factor, chelating agents
MeSH terms
Biodegradation, Environmental, Cadmium, Edetic Acid, Lead, Plants, Soil, Soil Pollutants, Zinc, Metals, Heavy

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.

A language model drew the claims from the paper on 2026-11-15, under version 3 of the claim definition (model deepseek-v4.1-flash, prompt extract-v3).

A second model labelled each claim on 2026-11-15 (model jev-1.13-20260917, definition revision gold-guideline-v0.2).

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: Chelate facilitated phytoextraction of Pb, Cd, and Zn from a lead–zinc mine contaminated soil by three accumulator plants. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1038/s41598-023-48666-5
The paper
Hosseinniaee, S., Jafari, M., Tavili, A., Zare, S., & Cappai, G. (2023). Chelate facilitated phytoextraction of Pb, Cd, and Zn from a lead–zinc mine contaminated soil by three accumulator plants. Scientific Reports. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-023-48666-5

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.