Plant and Soil

, Volume 198, Issue 1, pp 33–43 | Cite as

The influence of arsenic chemical form and concentration on Spartina patens and Spartina alterniflora growth and tissue arsenic concentration

  • A.A. Carbonell-Barrachina
  • M.A. Aarabi
  • R.D. DeLaune
  • R.P. Gambrell
  • W.H. PatrickJr.


Arsenic (As) uptake by two perennial coastal marsh grasses growing in hydroponic conditions was studied in relation to the chemical form and concentration of As added to nutrient solution. A 4×3×2 factorial experiment was conducted with treatments consisting of four As chemical forms [arsenite, As(III); arsenate, As(V); monomethyl arsonic acid, MMAA; and dimethyl arsinic acid, DMAA], three As concentrations (0.2, 0.8, and 2.0 mg As L-1) and two plant species (Spartina patens and Spartina alterniflora). Arsenic phytoavailability and phytotoxicity were primarily determined by the As chemical form present in the nutrient solution, though As concentration also influenced both As availability and toxicity. Application of As(V) increased root, shoot and total dry matter production; this positive plant growth response may be linked with P nutrition. Organic arsenicals and As(III) were the most phytotoxic species to both marsh grasses when plant growth was considered. Arsenic uptake and transport in plant were species-specific. Phytoavailability of As followed the trend DMAA ≪MMAA ≅ As(V) < As(III). Root and shoot As concentrations significantly increased with increasing As application rates to the rooting medium, regardless of the As chemical form. Upon absorption, inorganic arsenicals and MMAA were mainly accumulated in the root system, while DMAA was readily translocated to the shoot.

arsenic phytoavailability phytotoxicity Spartina alterniflora Spartina patens wetland 


Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.


  1. Brannon J M and Patrick W H Jr 1987 Fixation, transformation, and mobilization of arsenic in sediments. Environ. Sci. Technol. 21, 450–459.Google Scholar
  2. Buresh R J, DeLaune R D and Patrick W H Jr 1980 Nitrogen and phosphorus distribution and utilization by Spartina alterniflora in a Louisiana Gulf coast marsh. Estuaries 3, 111–121.Google Scholar
  3. Carbonell-Barrachina A A 1995 Estudio de la dinamica en el suelo y del comportamiento agroquimico del metaarsenito como fungicida. Ph.D. Thesis, Universidad de Alicante, Alicante, Spain.Google Scholar
  4. Carbonell-Barrachina A A, Burló-Carbonell F and Mataix-Beneyto J 1995 Arsenic uptake, distribution and accumulation in tomato plants: Effect of arsenite on plant growth and yield. J. Plant Nutr. 18, 1237–1250.Google Scholar
  5. Chabreck R H 1972 Vegetation, water, and soil characteristics of the Louisiana coastal region. Louisiana Agric. Expt. Sta. Bull. 664, 72.Google Scholar
  6. Cooper H P, Paden W R, Hall E E, Albert W B, Rogers W B and Riley J A 1932 Soils differ markedly in their response to additions of calcium arsenate. pp 432–444. South Carolina Agr. Exp. Sta. 45th Ann. Rep.Google Scholar
  7. Cox M C 1995 Arsenic characterization in soil and arsenic effects on canola growth. Ph.D. Thesis, Louisiana State University, Baton Rouge, LA, USA.Google Scholar
  8. DeLaune R D, Buresh R J and Patrick W H Jr 1979 Relationship of soil properties to standing crop biomass of Spartina alterniflora in a Louisiana marsh. Estuar. Coast. Mar. Sci. 8, 477–487.Google Scholar
  9. DeLaune R D and Pezeshki S R 1988 Relationship of mineral nutrients to growth of Spartina alterniflora in Louisiana salt marshes. Northeast Gulf Science 10, 55–60.Google Scholar
  10. Ferguson J F and Gavis J 1972 A review of the arsenic cycle in natural waters. Water Res. 6, 1259–1274.Google Scholar
  11. Gambrel R P, DeLaune R D and Patrick W H Jr 1991 Redox processes in soils following oxygen depletion. pp 101–117. SPB Academic Publishing bv, The Hague, The Netherlands.Google Scholar
  12. Hester M W, Mendelssohn I A and McKee K L 1996 Intraspecific variation in salt tolerance and morphology in the coastal grass Spartina paten (Poaceae). Am. J. Bot. 83, 1521–1527.Google Scholar
  13. Hoagland D R and Arnon D I 1950 The water-culture method for growing plants without soil. California Agricultural Experiment Station, Circular 347.Google Scholar
  14. Jacobs L W, Keeney D R and Walsh L M 1970 Arsenic residue toxicity to vegetable crops grown on plainfield sand. Agron. J. 62, 588–591.Google Scholar
  15. Khalid R A, Patrick W H and F J Peterson 1979 Relationship between rice yield and soil phosphorus evaluated under aerobic and anaerobic conditions. Soil Sci. Plant Nutr. 25, 155–164.Google Scholar
  16. Khattak R A, Page A L, Parker D R and Bakhtar D 1991 Accumulation and interactions of arsenic, selenium, molybdenum and phosphorus in alfalfa. J. Environ. Qual. 20, 165–168.Google Scholar
  17. Lepp N W 1981 Effect of heavy metal pollution on plants. Vol. 1. Effects of Trace Metal on Plant Function. Applied Science Publishers, London, UK.Google Scholar
  18. Machlis L 1941 Accumulation of arsenic in the shoots of sudan grass and bush beans. Plant Physiol. 16, 521–544.Google Scholar
  19. Marin A R, Masscheleyn P H and Patrick WH Jr 1992 The influence of chemical form and concentration of arsenic in rice growth and tissue arsenic concentration. Plant Soil 139, 175–183.Google Scholar
  20. Marin A R, Pezeshki S R, Masscheleyn P H and Choi H S 1993 Effect of dimethylarsenic acid (DMAA) on growth, tissue arsenic, and photosynthesis of rice plants. J. Plant Nutr. 16, 865–880.Google Scholar
  21. Masscheleyn P H, DeLaune R D and Patrick W H Jr 1991a Effect of redox potential and pH on arsenic speciation and solubility in a contaminated soil. Environ. Sci. Technol. 25, 1414–1419.Google Scholar
  22. Masscheleyn P H, DeLaune R D and Patrick W H Jr 1991b. A hydride generation atomic absorption technique for arsenic speciation. J. Environ. Qual. 20, 96–100.Google Scholar
  23. McKee K L 1996 Growth and physiological responses of neotropical mangrove seedlings to root zone hypoxia. Tree Physiology 16, 883–889.Google Scholar
  24. McLean H C, Weber A L and Jaffe J S 1944 Arsenic content of vegetables grown in soils treated with lead arsenate. J. Econ. Entomol. 37, 315–316.Google Scholar
  25. Meharg A A 1994 Integrated tolerance mechanisms: constitutive and adaptative plant responses to elevated metal concentrations in the environment. Plant Cell Environ. 17, 989–993.Google Scholar
  26. Meharg A A and Macnair M R 1990 An altered phosphate uptake system in arsenate-tolerant Holcus lanatus L. New Phytol. 116, 29–35.Google Scholar
  27. Meharg A A and Macnair M R 1991 Uptake, accumulation and translocation of arsenate in arsenate-tolerant and non-tolerant Holcus lanatus L. New Phytol. 117, 225–231.Google Scholar
  28. Meharg A A and Macnair M R 1992 Suppression of the high affinity phosphate uptake system: a mechanism of arsenate tolerance in Holcus lanatus L. J. Exp. Bot. 43, 519–524.Google Scholar
  29. N.A.S. (National Academy of Sciences) 1977 Arsenic. The national research council. Washington, DC, USA.Google Scholar
  30. Orwick P L, Schrieber M M and Hodges T K 1976 Adsorption and efflux of chloro-s-triazines by Osetaria roots. Weed Res. 16, 139–144.Google Scholar
  31. Otte ML 1991 Contamination of coastal wetlands with heavy metals: Factors affecting uptake of heavy metals by salt marsh plants. In Ecological Responses to Environmental Stresses. Eds. J Rozema and J A C Verkleij. pp 125–133. Kluwer Academic Publishers, Dordrecht, The Netherlands.Google Scholar
  32. Otte M L, Bestebroer S J, Van der Linden J M, Rozema J and Broekman R A 1991a A survey of zinc, copper and cadmium concentrations in salt marsh plants along the Dutch coast. Environ. Pollut. 72, 175–189.Google Scholar
  33. Otte M L, Dekkers M J, Rozema J and Broekman R A 1991b Uptake of arsenic by Aster tripolium in relation to rhizosphere oxidation. Can. J. Bot. 69, 2670–2677.Google Scholar
  34. Otte M L and Ernst W H O 1994 Arsenic in vegetation of wetlands. In Arsenic in the Environment. Ed. J O Nriagu. pp 365–380. John Wiley & Sons, Inc., New York.Google Scholar
  35. Sachs R M and Michael J L 1971 Comparative phytotoxicity among four arsenical herbicides. Weed Sci. 17, 421–427.Google Scholar
  36. Sargent JA and Blackman G R 1969 Studies on foliar penetration. IV. Mechanisms controlling the rate of penetration of 2,4-dichlorophynoxyacetic acid (2,4-D) into leaves of Phaseolus vulgaris. J. Exp. Bot. 20, 542–555.Google Scholar
  37. SAS (Statistical Analysis System) 1987 SAS/STAT User's Guide for Personal Computers. SAS Institute Inc., Cary, NC.Google Scholar
  38. Sckerl M M and Frans R E 1969 Translocation and metabolism of MAA-14C in johnsongrass and cotton. Weed Sci. 17, 421–427.Google Scholar
  39. Speer H L 1973 The effect of arsenate and other inhibitors on early events during the germination of lettuce seeds (Lactuca sativa L.). Plant Physiol. 52, 129–133.Google Scholar
  40. Terwelle H F and Slater E C 1967 Uncoupling of respiratory-chain phosphorylation by arsenate. Biochim. Biophys. Acta 143, 1–17.Google Scholar
  41. Tsutsumi M 1981 Arsenic pollution in arable land. In Heavy Metal Pollution in Soils of Japan, Part 3, Chapter 14. Eds. K Kitagishi and I Yamane. pp. 181–192. Japan Scientific Societies Press, Tokyo, Japan.Google Scholar
  42. Von Endt D W, Kearney P C and Kaufman D D 1968 Degradation of monosodium methanearsonic acid by soil microorganisms. J. Agr. Food. Chem. 16, 17–20.Google Scholar
  43. Walsh L M and Keeney D R 1975 Behaviour and phytotoxicity of inorganic arsenicals in soils. In Arsenical Pesticides. Ed. E A Woolson. pp 35–52. Am. Chem. Soc. Symp. Ser. 7.Google Scholar
  44. Wauchope R D 1983 Uptake, translocation and phytotoxicity of arsenic in plants. In Arsenic: Industrial, Biomedical, Environmental Perspectives. Eds. W H Lederer and R J Fensterheim. pp 348–374. Arsenic Symposium, Gaithersburg, Maryland. Van Nostrand Reinhold Company, New York.Google Scholar
  45. Woolson E A (Ed.) 1975 Arsenical Pesticides. ACS Symp. Ser. 7 American Chemical Society, Washington, DC.Google Scholar
  46. Woolson E A, Axley J H and Kearney P C 1971a Correlation between available soil arsenic, estimated by six methods, and response of corn (Zea mays L.). Soil Sci. Soc. Amer. Proc. 35, 101–105.Google Scholar
  47. Woolson E A, Axley J H and Kearney P C 1971b The chemistry and phytotoxicity of arsenic in soils. I. Contaminated field soils. Soil Sci. Soc. Amer. Proc. 35, 938–943.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Kluwer Academic Publishers 1998

Authors and Affiliations

  • A.A. Carbonell-Barrachina
    • 1
    • 1
  • M.A. Aarabi
    • 1
  • R.D. DeLaune
    • 1
  • R.P. Gambrell
    • 1
  • W.H. PatrickJr.
    • 1
  1. 1.Wetland Biogeochemistry InstituteLouisiana State UniversityBaton RougeU.S.A

Personalised recommendations