2001
DOI: 10.1016/s0048-9697(01)00649-0
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Interception, retention and translocation under greenhouse conditions of radiocaesium and radiostrontium from a simulated accidental source

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
3
2

Citation Types

7
31
2

Year Published

2008
2008
2018
2018

Publication Types

Select...
6
2

Relationship

0
8

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 37 publications
(42 citation statements)
references
References 21 publications
7
31
2
Order By: Relevance
“…1A and B). A similar relationship between f and above ground biomass was found by Vandecasteele et al (2001) for wheat, although their values for this crop were higher (0.84 for 134 Cs and 0.88 for 85 Sr). The relationship between the intercepted fraction of each radionuclide and the LAI in both years was also significant (Figs.…”
Section: Calculations Of Interception and Transfersupporting
confidence: 76%
See 1 more Smart Citation
“…1A and B). A similar relationship between f and above ground biomass was found by Vandecasteele et al (2001) for wheat, although their values for this crop were higher (0.84 for 134 Cs and 0.88 for 85 Sr). The relationship between the intercepted fraction of each radionuclide and the LAI in both years was also significant (Figs.…”
Section: Calculations Of Interception and Transfersupporting
confidence: 76%
“…Higher interception values for radiostrontium than for radiocaesium were also observed for spring wheat by Bengtsson et al (2012) and Vandecasteele et al (2001). Divalent ions, like 85 Sr, are expected to be more efficiently adsorbed on plant surfaces than monovalent ions, like 134 Cs (Aarkrog, 1969;Bréchignac et al, 2000;Vandecasteele et al, 2001). This effect might be more pronounced when sampling occurs shortly after deposition; as in this short time-lag, negligible amounts of radionuclides were washed-off.…”
Section: Calculations Of Interception and Transfermentioning
confidence: 91%
“…The rate of uptake and redistribution of radionuclides depends on growth stage of the crop, weather conditions and the type of radionuclide (IAEA, 2010;Kinnersley et al, 1997;Pröhl, 2009), and radionuclide uptake is through either foliage (foliar uptake) or roots (root uptake). Foliar uptake is assumed the dominant pathway when deposition occurs during the growing season (Pröhl, 2009); as a well-developed crop with its large leaf area intercepts a majority of the deposited radionuclides (Bengtsson et al, 2012;Vandecasteele et al, 2001). The cuticle layer of the leaf epidermis is assumed to be impermeable; however, it contains cracks and defects where radionuclides can enter (Handley and Babcock, 1972;Hossain and Ryu, 2009;Tukey et al, 1961).…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…There is limited information on the direct uptake rate of radionuclides and as well the rate of intercepted radionuclides by plants, directly after the occurrence of wet deposition in a growing crop [3]. The level of interception by plant parts depends on climate conditions like precipitation, wind speed, physico-chemical form of the radionuclides, plant morphology and biomass density [3][4][5]. The proportion of precipitation that can be held by the plant canopy is quickly declining after that the maximum holding capacity of leaves have been reached, which is related to the amount and intensity of the precipitation as well as the plant morphology i.e.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…After the maximum water retention capacity of the leaves is reached, the concentration of radioactive particles may continue to increase due to their physico-chemical properties, e.g. valence; the divalent radiostrontium ion is easily fixe to the surface of leaves [2,4]. The time between depositions and harvest also has an effect on the total uptake of radionuclides in plants.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%