Water, Air, and Soil Pollution

, Volume 155, Issue 1–4, pp 173–187 | Cite as

Capture of Particulate Pollution by Trees: A Comparison of Species Typical of Semi-Arid Areas (Ficus Nitida and Eucalyptus Globulus) with European and North American Species

  • P. H. Freer-Smith
  • A. A. El-Khatib
  • Gail Taylor


Particulate pollution is a serious concern in developed countries especially in urban and suburban areas where it has adverse effects on human health, exacerbating a wide range of respiratory and vascular illnesses. Data are now available which indicate that similar problems probably occur in countries in transition and may indeed be worse where national air quality standards have been neither set nor monitored. Recently a variety of approaches using both wind tunnel and field measurements have suggested that trees can significantly reduce such adverse effects through their ability to capture pollutant particles. It is clear that species choice, planting design and location relative to pollution source are critical in determining the effectiveness of particle capture by trees. Here we present relative deposition velocities and capture efficiencies of five species used widely in woodland of urban and periurban areas of Europe (Quercus petraea (oak), Alnus glutinosa (alder), Fraxinus excelsior (ash), Acer pseudo-platanus (sycamore) and Pseudotsuga menziesii (Douglas fir)), and for two species being used increasingly in semi-arid regions, (Ficus nitida (weeping fig) and Eucalyptus. globulus (Eucalyptus)). These data are for species not previously worked on and measurements were made at three windspeeds. Deposition velocities and capture efficiencies are compared with those published for other tree species, with the values of deposition velocity ranging from 0.1 to 0.3 cm s-1 at a windspeed of 3 m s-1 to maximum values 2.9 cm s-1 at 9 m s-1 windspeed. Species with more complex stem structure and smaller leaves had greater relative deposition velocities. The use of such data in models to guide species choice and planting design in order to maximise particle removal from urban air are considered.

air pollution capture efficiencies deposition velocities particulates (PM10)  trees 


Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.


  1. Agrawal Madhoolika and Sing Jyoti: 2000, ‘Impact of coal power plant emission on the foliar elemental concentrations in plants in a low rainfall tropical region’, Envir. Monit. Assess. 60(3), 261–282.Google Scholar
  2. Arnold, H. F.: 1980, Trees in Urban Design, Van Nostrand Reinhold Co., NY.Google Scholar
  3. Bounessah, M., Al-Shayeb, S. M., Al-Ghefaili, K. M. and Abdulfatah, B.: 2001, ‘Assessment of lead levels in dust and date palm (Phoenix dactylifera L.) in 6–10 year-old school children environment in Riyadh City, Saudi-Arabia’, Asian J. Chem. 13(4), 1435–1442.Google Scholar
  4. Becker, J. S., Bellis, D., Staton, I., Mcleod, C. W. and Dombovari, J.: 2000, ‘Determination of trace elements including platinum in tree bark by ICP mass spectrometry. Fresenius’, J. Analyt. Chem. 368(5), 490–495.Google Scholar
  5. Beckett, K. P., Freer-Smith, P. H. and Taylor, G.: 2000a, ‘Effective tree species for local air-quality management’, J. Arboricult. 26(1), 12–19.Google Scholar
  6. Beckett, K. P., Freer-Smith, P. H. and Taylor, G.: 2000b, ‘The capture of particulate pollution by trees at five contrasting urban sites’, Arboricult. J. 24, 1–21.Google Scholar
  7. Beckett, K. P., Freer-Smith, P. H. and Taylor, G.: 2000c, ‘Particulate pollution capture by urban trees: effect of species and windspeed’, Glob. Change Biol. 6, 995–1003.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Belot, Y., Camus, H., Gauthier, D. and Caput, C.: 1994, ‘Uptake of small particles by tree canopies’, Sci. Tot. Envir. 157, 1–6.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Chamberain, A. C.: 1975, ‘The movement of particles in plant communities’, in J. L. Monteith (ed.), Vegetation and the Atmosphere, Vol. 1, Academic Press, London, pp. 155–203.Google Scholar
  10. Clouston, B. and Stansfield, K.: 1981, Trees in Towns, The Architectural Press, London.Google Scholar
  11. Derwent, D. G., Metcalfe, S. E. and Whyatt, J. D.: 2002, ‘Environmental Benefits of NOx control in Northwestern Europe’, Ambio 27(7), 518–527.Google Scholar
  12. Emberson, L. D., Ashmore, M. R., Murray, F., Kylenstierna, J. C. I., Percy, K. E., Izuta, T., Zheng, Y., Shimizu, H., Sheu, B. H., Liu, C. P., Agrawal, M., Wahid, A., Abdel-Latif, N. M., van Tienhoven, M., de Bauer, L. I. and Domingos, M.: 2002, ‘Impacts of air pollutants on vegetation in developing countries’, Water, Air, Soil Pollut. 130(4), 107–118.Google Scholar
  13. El-Khatib, A. A.: 1999, ‘Environmental management and impact assessment of Al-Kawther industrial zone of the flora within and enclosed surrounding areas’, in Proceeding of the International Conference on Environmental Management, Health and Sustainable Development, Alex. Egypt 22–25 March.Google Scholar
  14. El-Khatib, A. A. and El-Swaf, N.: 2001, ‘Physiotoxicity of atmospheric particulate pollutant (dust) and the growth of urban tree Ficus nitida, Bulletin of Faculty of Science, Assiut University, Egypt 8, 78–85.Google Scholar
  15. El-Khatib, A. A.: 2002, ‘Trapping of atmospheric heavy metal pollutants by leaves of urban trees in arid environments’, submitted to Science of the Total Environment.Google Scholar
  16. Fowler, D., Cape, J. N. and Unsworth, M. H.: 1989, ‘Deposition of atmospheric pollutants on Forests’, Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society of London. 324 B, 247–265.Google Scholar
  17. Gallagher, M. W., Beswick, K. M., Duyzer, J., Westrate, H., Choularton, T. W. and Hummelshoj, P.: 1997, ‘Measurements of aerosol fluxes to Speulder Forest using a micrometeorological technique’, Atmos. Envir. 31(3), 359–373.Google Scholar
  18. Gregory, P. H.: 1973, The Microbiology of the Atmosphere, Clarke, Doble and Brendon, Plymouth.Google Scholar
  19. Hewittt, N.: 2003, Trees are City Cleaners, Sylva 1–2.Google Scholar
  20. Kwiecien, M.: 1997, ‘Deposition of inorganic particulate aerosols to vegetation — a new method of estimating’, Envir. Monit. Assess. 46(3), 191–207.Google Scholar
  21. McPherson, E. G., Nowak, D. J. and Rowntree, R. E.: 1994, Chicago's Urban Forest Ecosystem: Results of the Chicago Urban Forest Climate Project, USDA General Technical Report NE-186.Google Scholar
  22. Moolgavkar, S. and Hutchinson, F.: 2000, ‘Air pollution, pollens, and admissions for chronic respiratory disease in King County’, Third Colloquium on Particulate Air Pollution and Human Health, Durham, NC, 5–33(15), 1999.Google Scholar
  23. Slinn, W. G. N.: 1982, Predictions for particle deposition to vegetation canopies, Atmos. Envir. 16, 1785–1794.Google Scholar
  24. White, E. J. and Turner, J.: 1970, ‘A method for estimating income of nutrients in a catch of airborne particles by a woodland canopy’, J. Appl. Ecol. 7, 441–461.Google Scholar
  25. World Bank: 1997, Urban Air Quality Management Strategy in Asia: Guidebook, in Jm. J. Shah et al. (eds), World Bank Publications, South Asia.Google Scholar
  26. World Health Organisation (WHO): 1999, Health Costs Due to Road Traffic-Related Air Pollution, WHO, Copenhagen.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Kluwer Academic Publishers 2004

Authors and Affiliations

  • P. H. Freer-Smith
    • 1
  • A. A. El-Khatib
    • 2
  • Gail Taylor
    • 3
  1. 1.Forest Research, Alice Holt LodgeSurreyUK
  2. 2.Department of Botany, Faculty of ScienceSohagEgypt
  3. 3.School of Biological Sciences, Bassett Crescent EastUniversity of SouthamptonSouthamptonUK

Personalised recommendations