Cited by 1,684Heavy metals in environmentHeavy Metal Pollution RemediationEnvironmental and Analytical Chemistry Studies

A review on heavy metals (As, Pb, and Hg) uptake by plants through phytoremediation

Open access
Tangahu, Bieby Voijant, Sheikh Abdullah, Siti Rozaimah, Basri, Hassan, Idris, Mushrifah, Anuar, Nurina, Mukhlisin, Muhammad·2011·International Journal of Chemical Engineering

Abstract

Heavy metals are among the most important sorts of contaminant in the environment. Several methods already used to clean up the environment from these kinds of contaminants, but most of them are costly and difficult to get optimum results. Currently, phytoremediation is an effective and affordable technological solution used to extract or remove inactive metals and metal pollutants from contaminated soil and water. This technology is environmental friendly and potentially cost effective. This paper aims to compile some information about heavy metals of arsenic, lead, and mercury (As, Pb, and Hg) sources, effects and their treatment. It also reviews deeply about phytoremediation technology, including the heavy metal uptake mechanisms and several research studies associated about the topics. Additionally, it describes several sources and the effects of As, Pb, and Hg on the environment, the advantages of this kind of technology for reducing them, and also heavy metal uptake mechanisms in phytoremediation technology as well as the factors affecting the uptake mechanisms. Some recommended plants which are commonly used in phytoremediation and their capability to reduce the contaminant are also reported.

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 · 10.1155/2011/939161

Cites

62 of 62 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?

  • EDTA, NTA, and malate are chelating chemicals that can be used to immobilize heavy metal ions.

    “Ethylenediamine tetraacetic acid (EDTA), nitrilotriacetic acid (NTA), and malate are chelating chemicals that can be used to immobilize HM ions (Tangahu et al., 2011; Gaur et al., 2014).”

    From Plant hyperaccumulators: a state-of-the-art review on mechanism of heavy metal transport and sequestration (2025) · cites this paper as Tangahu et al., 2011

    Section 5.5 identifies EDTA and NTA as chelating agents, but says they increase heavy-metal bioavailability to aid phytoextraction, rather than immobilizing the metals. The table in Section 9 explicitly says EDTA mobilizes metals and may cause leaching. The passages found do not identify malate as a chelating agent. (LLM, conf=0.88)

    Checked by a reasoning model — may be wrong.

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured
  • Industrial hemp's inability to take up mercury may be due to mercury's highly variable charges, from its unique electron configuration, playing a key role in uptake through plant root cells.

    “The findings suggest that industrial hemps’ inability to uptake Hg may be due to Mercury’s highly variable charges, due to its unique electron configuration, playing perhaps a key role in its uptake through plant root cells [6], [30].”

    From Enhanced tolerance of industrial hemp (Cannabis sativa L.) plants on abandoned mine land soil leads to overexpression of cannabinoids (2019) · cites this paper as [6]

    Section 2.3 describes mercury in several ionic forms, and Section 4 says ionic species interact during heavy-metal uptake by plant roots. Neither section attributes those forms to mercury’s electron configuration or links them to an inability of industrial hemp to take up mercury. Page numbers are unavailable in our copy. (LLM, conf=0.84)

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured
  • The permeability of cell membranes and the number of palisades may be reduced in the presence of mercury, resulting in the buildup of Fe and the loss of essential elements like Mg and K.

    “The permeability of cell membranes and the number of palisades may be reduced in the presence of Hg, resulting in the buildup of Fe and the loss of essential elements like Mgand K (Shiyab et al., 2009; Tangahu et al., 2011; Azevedo and Rodriguez, 2012).”

    From Plant hyperaccumulators: a state-of-the-art review on mechanism of heavy metal transport and sequestration (2025) · cites this paper as Tangahu et al., 2011

    Section 2.3, “Mercury (Hg)” (page not provided), says mercury inhibits aquaporins and reduces plant water uptake, which supports a narrower claim about impaired water transport. It does not report reduced palisade numbers, Fe buildup, or loss of Mg and K, and it does not directly state that cell-membrane permeability is reduced. (LLM, conf=0.82)

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured
  • Mercury is adsorbed from the soil as a soluble complex and precipitated as phosphate, carbonate, sulphide, and hydroxide.

    “It is adsorbed from the soil as a soluble complex and precipitated as phosphate, carbonate, sulphide, and hydroxide (Tangahu et al., 2011).”

    From Plant hyperaccumulators: a state-of-the-art review on mechanism of heavy metal transport and sequestration (2025) · cites this paper as Tangahu et al., 2011

    Section 2.3 (Mercury) says mercury in soil can dissolve as a soluble complex, be nonspecifically adsorbed, and precipitate as sulphide, carbonate, hydroxide, or phosphate. It treats dissolution as a soluble complex and adsorption as distinct processes, rather than saying mercury is adsorbed from soil as a soluble complex. (LLM, conf=0.86)

    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

Research works printed but not linked: 8

  1. E. Pehlivan, A. M. Özkan, S. Dinc ¸, and S. Parlayici, "Adsorp- tion of Cu 2+ and Pb 2+ ion on dolomite powder," Journal of Hazardous Materials, vol. 167, no. 1-3, pp. 1044-1049, 2009.
  2. R. J. Ampiah-Bonney, J. F. Tyson, and G. R. Lanza, "Phytoex- traction of arsenic from soil by Leersia oryzoides," International Journal of Phytoremediation, vol. 9, no. 1, pp. 31-40, 2007.
  3. M. N. V. Prasad and H. M. De Oliveira Freitas, "Metal hyper- accumulation in plants-biodiversity prospecting forphytore- mediation technology," Electronic Journal of Biotechnology, vol. 6, no. 3, pp. 110-146, 2003.
  4. U. S. Department of Energy, "Plume Focus Area, December. Mechanisms of plant uptake, translocation, and storage of toxic elements. Summary Report of a workshop on phytoremediation research needs," 1994, http://www.osti.gov/ bridge/purl.cover.jsp;jsessionid=D72C8DD9003DCF51984E E254A6ED8BCB?purl=/10109412-BckU4U/webviewable/.
  5. L. Erdei, G. Mezôsi, I. Mécs, I. Vass, F. F ôglein, and L. Bulik, "Phytoremediation as a program for decontamination of heavy-metal polluted environment," Acta Biologica Szegedi- ensis, vol. 49, no. 1-2, pp. 75-76, 2005.
  6. T. Vamerali, M. Bandiera, L. Coletto, F. Zanetti, N. M. Dickinson, and G. Mosca, "Phytoremediation trials on metal- and arsenic-contaminated pyrite wastes (Torviscosa, Italy)," Environmental Pollution, vol. 157, no. 3, pp. 887-894, 2009.
  7. M. Vyslouzilova, P. Tlustos, J. Szakova, and D. Pavlikova, "As, Cd, Pb and Zn uptake by Salix spp.clones grown in soil enrich by high load of this elements," Plant Soil Environment, vol. 49, no. 5, pp. 191-196, 2003.
  8. US Department of Energy, "Plume Focus Area. Summary Report of a Workshop on Phytoremediation Research Needs, Office of Technology Development, Office of Environmental Management and Division of Energy Biosciences, Office of Basic Energy Sciences, Office of Energy Research," 1994, http://www.law.csuohio.edu/law- library-oldsite/info services/acquisitions/acq-0104.html.

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Tangahu, B. V., Sheikh Abdullah, S. R., Basri, H., Idris, M., Anuar, N., & Mukhlisin, M.
Affiliations
National University of Malaysia (MY)
Corresponding author
Tangahu, Bieby Voijant
Venue
International Journal of Chemical Engineering
Publisher
Wiley
Published
2011-01
Volume
2011
Issue
1
ISSN
  • 1687-806X (ISSN-L)
  • 1687-8078
OpenAlex
W2025809070
Cited by
1,684
References
62
Citations by year
2026: 45 · 2025: 77 · 2024: 111 · 2023: 158 · 2022: 199 · 2021: 239 · 2020: 207 · 2019: 157 · 2018: 136 · 2017: 111 · 2016: 81 · 2015: 61 · 2014: 50 · 2013: 34 · 2012: 13
FWCI
29.27
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • International Journal of Chemical Engineering (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • 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 › Heavy Metal Pollution Remediation
  • Physical Sciences › Environmental Science › Water Science and Technology › Environmental and Analytical Chemistry Studies
Keywords
phytoremediation, heavy metal uptake, arsenic, lead, mercury, contaminated soil, contaminated water, heavy metal pollution sources, heavy metal toxicity, hyperaccumulator plants

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