Scholarlink

<p>Heavy metal (HM) contamination of soils is a global environmental challenge, with concentrations frequently exceeding regulatory thresholds by 5–100 fold depending on industrial activity and land-use history. This review critically evaluates the mechanistic basis, comparative efficacy, and scalability limitations of biological and amendment-based remediation strategies, synthesising over 80 peer-reviewed studies published between 2010 and 2025, with particular emphasis on 2020–2025 literature. Engineering-based methods achieve 50–95% removal efficiency but at high economic and ecological cost. Phytoextraction delivers 30–65% removal over 3–5 growing seasons under field conditions, consistently below laboratory estimates due to soil heterogeneity and multi-metal interactions. Biochar reduces extractable HM fractions by 40–70% but lacks field validation beyond five years. Integrated plant–microbe–amendment systems show 20–50% performance improvements over single-strategy baselines in pilot studies. We propose a unified plant–microbe–amendment framework that treats soil amendments, microbial community function, and plant physiology as interacting components rather than independent strategies. Key evidence gaps include the absence of standardised performance metrics, limited multi-metal contamination data, inadequate full-cost economic analyses, and insufficient field-scale validation of integrated systems. Addressing these gaps is essential for translating bioremediation science from proof-of-concept to policy-relevant practice.</p>

错误：搜索内容不能为空，请输入英文关键词
错误：关键词超出字数限制，请精简
高级检索

Phytoremediation and Microbial Approaches for Heavy Metal Detoxification in Soil Ecosystems

  • 期刊论文

  • 发表日期：

    2026年5月16日

查看全文
  • Yogesh K. Ahlawat,
  • Maryam Samani,
  • Manju Jakhar,
  • Shaily Mishra,
  • Ashutosh Pandey,
  • Avni Vij,
  • Sachin Gupta,
  • Anurag Malik

摘要

Heavy metal (HM) contamination of soils is a global environmental challenge, with concentrations frequently exceeding regulatory thresholds by 5–100 fold depending on industrial activity and land-use history. This review critically evaluates the mechanistic basis, comparative efficacy, and scalability limitations of biological and amendment-based remediation strategies, synthesising over 80 peer-reviewed studies published between 2010 and 2025, with particular emphasis on 2020–2025 literature. Engineering-based methods achieve 50–95% removal efficiency but at high economic and ecological cost. Phytoextraction delivers 30–65% removal over 3–5 growing seasons under field conditions, consistently below laboratory estimates due to soil heterogeneity and multi-metal interactions. Biochar reduces extractable HM fractions by 40–70% but lacks field validation beyond five years. Integrated plant–microbe–amendment systems show 20–50% performance improvements over single-strategy baselines in pilot studies. We propose a unified plant–microbe–amendment framework that treats soil amendments, microbial community function, and plant physiology as interacting components rather than independent strategies. Key evidence gaps include the absence of standardised performance metrics, limited multi-metal contamination data, inadequate full-cost economic analyses, and insufficient field-scale validation of integrated systems. Addressing these gaps is essential for translating bioremediation science from proof-of-concept to policy-relevant practice.