Cited by 222Heavy metals in environmentHeavy Metals in PlantsHeavy Metal Pollution Remediation

Distribution and Metal-Accumulating Behavior of Thlaspi caerulescens and Associated Metallophytes in France

Reeves, Roger D., Schwartz, Christophe, Morel, Jean Louis, Edmondson, John·2001·International Journal of Phytoremediation

Abstract

The heavy metal hyperaccumulator Thlaspi caerulescens is widespread in France on many kinds of sites and substrates, including Zn/Pb/Cd mine and smelter wastes, Ni-rich serpentine outcrops and a variety of nonmetalliferous soils. Thlaspi caerulescens is remarkable among the metallophytes of France because it accumulates Zn to high concentrations (almost always >0.1%, and often >1% in the dry matter) regardless of the total Zn concentration of the substrate. The extraordinary uptake of Zn from soils of normal Zn concentration draws attention to the need for studies of the mechanisms by which such mobilization and uptake can occur. Different populations of Thlaspi caerulescens in France show considerable variation in their ability to accumulate Cd; individuals in some populations contain as much as 0.1 to 0.4% Cd, the highest levels recorded in vascular plants. The hyperaccumulation of Ni (sometimes exceeding 1%) from serpentine soils in France is also noteworthy. Despite the generally low biomass, some very large individuals occur, giving good potential for selective breeding to improve the value of Thlaspi caerulescens for phytoremediation, especially of Cd. The high Zn uptake from all kinds of soils is a property shared by the related T. brachypetalum, and T. alpinum shows dual Zn- and Ni uptake, depending on the substrate. The extent to which other species of Thlaspi occurring in France exhibit metal accumulation is also discussed.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1080/15226510108500054

Cites

40 of 40 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

This paper’s full text isn’t openly available, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

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?

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Reeves, R. D., Schwartz, C., Morel, J. L., & Edmondson, J.
Affiliations
  • Massey University (NZ)
  • Laboratoire Sols et Environnement (FR)
  • National Museums Liverpool (GB)
Venue
International Journal of Phytoremediation
Published
2001-04
Volume
3
Issue
2
Pages
145-172
ISSN
  • 1522-6514 (ISSN-L)
  • 1549-7879
OpenAlex
W2009049195
Cited by
222
References
40
Citations by year
2026: 10 · 2025: 6 · 2024: 9 · 2023: 4 · 2022: 15 · 2021: 11 · 2020: 13 · 2019: 7 · 2018: 10 · 2017: 12 · 2016: 5 · 2015: 14 · 2014: 5 · 2013: 5 · 2012: 10
FWCI
7.97
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • International Journal of Phytoremediation (publishedVersion)
  • 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
Thlaspi caerulescens, metal hyperaccumulation, metallophytes, zinc uptake, cadmium accumulation, nickel accumulation, serpentine soils, phytoremediation, heavy metal distribution

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