Cited by 257Heavy metals in environmentHeavy Metals in PlantsHeavy Metal Pollution Remediation

Do Arabidopsis halleri from nonmetallicolous populations accumulate zinc and cadmium more effectively than those from metallicolous populations?

Open access
Bert, Valérie, Bonnin, Isabelle, Saumitou‐Laprade, Pierre, De Laguérie, Patrick, Petit, Daniel·2002·New Phytologist

Abstract

• The ability of metallicolous and nonmetallicolous populations of Arabidopsis halleri to accumulate zinc (Zn), cadmium (Cd) and lead (Pb) is compared here in order to explore the extent and variability of this trait in wild A. halleri plants. • Aerial plant parts and the soil around the harvested plants were collected and analysed for metal concentrations or total and extractable metal concentrations, respectively, for 20 metallicolous and 13 nonmetallicolous populations. • Results show that metallicolous and nonmetallicolous populations have the same ability to accumulate Zn and Cd but that neither population type is able to accumulate Pb. Between populations within type, an homogenous accumulating response is observed for Zn, whereas the ability to accumulate Cd is variable. • Zn and Cd accumulation to very high concentrations is a constitutive property of the species. The Zn and Cd hyperaccumulator trait of A. halleri from contaminated sites was confirmed. Interestingly, nonmetallicolous plants are Zn and Cd hyperaccumulators. The possibility of using A. halleri in phytoremediation is discussed.

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.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1046/j.1469-8137.2002.00432.x

Cites

17 of 17 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

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.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

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?

  • Zn and Cd are hyperaccumulated by almost all the subspecies and populations of Arabidopsis halleri found in soils of both contaminated and non-contaminated habitats.

    “Zn and Cd are hyperaccumulated by almost all the subspecies and populations of Arabidopsis halleri found in the soils of both contaminated and non-contaminated habitats (Bert et al., 2002).”

    From Plant hyperaccumulators: a state-of-the-art review on mechanism of heavy metal transport and sequestration (2025) · cites this paper as Bert et al., 2002

    The section ‘Metal accumulation and hyperaccumulation in natural populations of A. halleri’ (page not available) reports hyperaccumulation in plants from both contaminated and uncontaminated soils, but contradicts ‘almost all’: only 24% of sampled plants exceeded the Zn threshold, and 10% of individuals from uncontaminated soils and 17% from contaminated soils exceeded the Cd threshold. It explicitly says Cd hyperaccumulation is not widespread in either population type. (LLM, conf=0.90)

    Checked by a reasoning model — may be wrong.

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured
  • Zn is hyper-accumulated by A. halleri compared to facultative accumulation of Pb and Cd.

    “Zn is hyper-accumulated by A. halleri compared to facultative accumulation of Pb and Cd (Bert et al., 2000; Küpper et al., 2000; Bert et al., 2002; Pauwels et al., 2006; Stein et al., 2017).”

    From Plant hyperaccumulators: a state-of-the-art review on mechanism of heavy metal transport and sequestration (2025) · cites this paper as Bert et al., 2002

    The “Metal accumulation and hyperaccumulation in natural populations” section describes Zn accumulation as broadly consistent across populations and Cd hyperaccumulation as variable. But it explicitly says A. halleri did not behave as a Pb accumulator, contrary to the claim that Pb is facultatively accumulated. (LLM, conf=0.87)

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured

Self-check

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

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Bert, V., Bonnin, I., Saumitou‐Laprade, P., De Laguérie, P., & Petit, D.
Affiliations
  • Université Libre de Bruxelles (BE)
  • Centre National de la Recherche Scientifique (FR)
Corresponding author
Bert, Valérie
Venue
New Phytologist
Publisher
Wiley
Published
2002-06-18
Volume
155
Issue
1
Pages
47-57
ISSN
  • 0028-646X (ISSN-L)
  • 1469-8137
OpenAlex
W2042352928
Cited by
257
References
17
Citations by year
2026: 4 · 2025: 4 · 2024: 9 · 2023: 3 · 2022: 6 · 2021: 13 · 2020: 8 · 2019: 10 · 2018: 13 · 2017: 9 · 2016: 18 · 2015: 21 · 2014: 10 · 2013: 14 · 2012: 13
FWCI
9.25
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • New Phytologist (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • Dépôt institutionnel de l'Université libre de Bruxelles (Université Libre de Bruxelles) (submittedVersion)
  • HAL (submittedVersion)
Topics
  • Physical Sciences › Environmental Science › Pollution › Heavy metals in environment
  • Physical Sciences › Chemistry › Analytical Chemistry › Heavy Metals in Plants
  • Physical Sciences › Environmental Science › Water Science and Technology › Heavy Metal Pollution Remediation
Keywords
Arabidopsis halleri, metal hyperaccumulation, zinc accumulation, cadmium accumulation, lead accumulation, phytoremediation, metal-contaminated soil, population variation, extractable metals

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