A review of plant–pharmaceutical interactions: from uptake and effects in crop plants to phytoremediation in constructed wetlands

Abstract

Pharmaceuticals are commonly found both in the aquatic and the agricultural environments as a consequence of the human activities and associated discharge of wastewater effluents to the environment. The utilization of treated effluent for crop irrigation, along with land application of manure and biosolids, accelerates the introduction of these compounds into arable lands and crops. Despite the low concentrations of pharmaceuticals usually found, the continuous introduction into the environment from different pathways makes them 'pseudo-persistent'. Several reviews have been published regarding the potential impact of veterinary and human pharmaceuticals on arable land. However, plant uptake as well as phytotoxicity data are scarcely studied. Simultaneously, phytoremediation as a tool for pharmaceutical removal from soils, sediments and water is starting to be researched, with promising results. This review gives an in-depth overview of the phytotoxicity of pharmaceuticals, their uptake and their removal by plants. The aim of the current work was to map the present knowledge concerning pharmaceutical interactions with plants in terms of uptake and the use of plant-based systems for phytoremediation purposes.

Removal of antibiotics and antibiotic resistance genes from domestic sewage by constructed wetlands: Effect of flow configuration and plant species

“…With regard to COD, TN and TOC, it was found that the CW1 (SF-CW) and CW6 (HSSF-CW without plants) performed worse than the other four CWs including two HSSF-CWs and two VSSF-CWs. Subsurface flow and planting were beneficial to the removal of nutrients, which is consistent to some previous studies (Brix, 1994;Lin et al, 2002b;Wen et al, 2010;Vymazal, 2011;Carvalho et al, 2014). For 8 detected antibiotics, CW4 and CW5 (HSSF-CWs with different plants) performed better than the other four CWs, with CW1 being the worst (Fig.…”

“…2) implies that plant uptake is another process for some antibiotics. Previous studies documented that substrate adsorption and plant uptake were the important ways to reduce the nutrient loadings and other environmental pollutants such as antibiotics and ARGs by constructed wetlands (Truu et al, 2009;Vymazal, 2011;Carvalho et al, 2014). Although the mass removal percentages by substrate adsorption and plant uptake were relatively low in comparison to the degradation losses (Table 4), these two processes could be important for the biodegradation process by providing retention sites and increasing microbial activities in CWs.…”

Performance of a pilot demonstration-scale hybrid constructed wetland system for on-site treatment of polluted urban river water in Northwestern China

“…This could be explained by the fact that P. australis has much higher gas space (Březinová and Vymazal 2014) in rhizomes, much stronger growing capability, and competitive potential (Fu et al 2011). It is well known that the amount of nutrient removal by harvesting mainly depend on the biomass rather than nutrient concentrations in the plant tissues (Březinová and Vymazal 2014;Carvalho et al 2014). Thus, the nutrient uptake by P. australis was higher than T. orientalis, despite the phosphorus content in T. orientalis tissues being higher than that of P. australis (Table 4).…”

Dissipation of Micropollutants in a Rewetted Fen Peatland: A Field Study Using Treated Wastewater

“…The interaction between the plants, substrate and associated microbial communities, as well as the mixture of micropollutants, triggers the removal and transformation processes [14,15]. Wetland plant communities (e.g., Phragmites australis and Typha latifolia) contribute to the removal of micropollutants either by direct uptake or by Hypothetical scheme for the improved elimination of micropollutants present in treated wastewater used to rewet peatlands that serve as buffer zones for surface water (instead of directly discharging treated wastewater from the WWTP into the receiving surface water).…”

“…The interaction between the plants, substrate and associated microbial communities, as well as the mixture of micropollutants, triggers the removal and transformation processes [14,15]. Wetland plant communities (e.g., Phragmites australis and Typha latifolia) contribute to the removal of micropollutants either by direct uptake or by enabling aerobic degradation by pumping oxygen into the wet ground via their aerenchym [16].…”