The Behavior of 90Sr in Macrophytes Inhibiting Water Reservoirs in the Belarussian Sector of the Chernobyl NPP Exclusion Zone

  • Sergey A. Kalinichenko
  • Aleksander N. NikitinEmail author
  • Ihar A. Cheshyk
  • Olga A. Shurankova


Closed and weakly flowing water bodies in the Belarusian sector of the exclusion zone of Chernobyl accident contain high concentrations of radioisotopes. Macrophytes often are the main components of the water ecosystem in terms of biomass and can actively accumulate radioisotopes, playing an important role in the redistribution of radioactive isotopes between the elements of the reservoir. The main objects of the investigation in the exclusion zone of Chernobyl accident was floodplain Lake Prestok, the oxbow of River Pripyat and the Pogonyansky Canal—the channel of the former meliorative canal. The activity concentration of 90Sr in macrophytes depends on the degree of contamination of the reservoir (primarily bottom sediments), the absorptive capacity of the species, season, and growth conditions. It is established that Hidrocharis morsus-ranae L. and Stratiotes aloides L. have an affinity for 90Sr accumulation, irrespective to the ecosystem. Macrophytes rooted at the depth of 1.0–1.5 m (e.g., Phragmites australis Cav., Typha angustifolia L., and Carex sp.) absorb the lowest concentration of radioisotopes. Over the years, the activity concentrations of 137Cs and 90Sr have significant ranges of intraspecific fluctuations and do not follow the general trend towards a decrease in the accumulation of radioisotopes in macrophytes. In most cases, activity concentration of 90Sr in aquatic plants has increased by a little in recent years.


Strontium-90 Cesium-137 Macrophytes Aquatic ecosystems Accumulation of radioisotopes Concentration factor 


  1. Gigevich GS, Vlasov BP, Vynaev GV (2001) Macrophytes in Belarus: ecological-biological characterization, using, protection. Belarussian State University, MinskGoogle Scholar
  2. Gudkov DI, Kuzmenko MI, Kireev SI, Nazarov AB, Klenus VG, Kaglyan AE, Kulachinsky AV, Zub LN (2006) Radioisotopes in components of aquatic ecosystems of the Chernobyl accident restriction zone. In: Burlakova EB, Naidich VI (eds) 20 Years after the Chernobyl accident: past, present and future. Nova Science, New York, p 265–285Google Scholar
  3. Gudkov DI, Kuzmenko MI, Kireev SI, Nazarov AB, Shevtsova NL, Dziubenko EV, Kaglian AE (2009) Radioecological problems of aquatic ecosystems in the Chernobyl exclusion zone. Radiats Biol Radioecol 49:192–202Google Scholar
  4. Hatchinson D (1969) Limnologiya (lymnology). Nauka, MoscowGoogle Scholar
  5. Kalinichenko SA (2010) Accumulation of radioisotopes (137Cs, 90Sr) by macrophytes in the zone of accident on ChNPP. Proc Natl Acad Sci Belarus Ser Biol Sci 3:29–34Google Scholar
  6. Kalinichenko SA (2013) Patterns of 137Cs, 90Sr accumulation by macrophites from different water bodies in the exclusion zone of Chernobyl NPP. In: Bondar YI (ed) Ecosystems and radiation: aspects of existence and development. Institute of Radiology, Minsk, p 79–93Google Scholar
  7. Kalinichenko SA, Nenashev RA (2012) Peculiarities of macrophytes contamination by 137Cs, 90Sr in different types of water basins situated in exclusion zone of Chernobyl NPP. Proc Natl Acad Sci Belarus Ser Biol Sci 1:36–44Google Scholar
  8. Kazakov SV, Utkin SS (2009) To the question of assessing radiation quality of bottom sediments in aquatic objects. Radiats Biol Radioecol 49:219–227Google Scholar
  9. Kondo K, Kawabata H, Ueda S, Hasegawa H, Inaba J, Mitamura O, Seike Y, Ohmomo Y (2003) Distribution of aquatic plants and leaf surface in brackish lake Obuchi, Japan, bordered by nuclear fuel cycle facilities. J Radioanal Nucl Chem 257:305–312CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Konoplya EF, Rolevich IV (1998) Chernobyl catastrophe: consequences and their overcoming. National report, 2nd edn. Ministry of Emergency, National Academy of Sciences of Belarus, MinskGoogle Scholar
  11. Kulikov NV, Chebotina MY (1988) Radioecology of freshwater biosystems. Ural Branch of the Academy of Sciences of USSR, SverdlovskGoogle Scholar
  12. Kuzmenko MI (1990) Radioecological investigations of water bodies in Ukrainian SSR. Gidrobiol J 26:86–99Google Scholar
  13. Lakin GF (1980) Biological statistics, 3rd edn. High School, MoscowGoogle Scholar
  14. Levina SG (2008) Lows of 90Sr and 137Cs behavior in lake ecosystems on the territory of East-Ural radioactive footprint in the long term period after the accident. Dissertation, Moscow State University, RussiaGoogle Scholar
  15. Levina SG, Zemerova ZP, Shibkova DZ, Deryagin VV, Popova IY (2006) 90Sr and 137Cs in macrophytes from some water bodies of Eastern Ural radioactive footprint: species specify of concentrating. Radiats Biol Radioecol 46:597–604Google Scholar
  16. Parfenov VI, Maslovskiy OM, Valetov VV, Skuratovich AN (2002) Flora and vegetation in the Polessie state radiation ecological reserve. Belyj Veter, MozyrGoogle Scholar
  17. Pavlutin AP, Makarevich TA (1998) Accumulation of 137Cs by macrophytes in non-flow lake. In: Abstracts of international conference fundamental and applied aspects of radiation biology: biological effects of small doses and radioactive contamination of the environment, Minsk, 16–17 April 1998Google Scholar
  18. Rovinskij FY (1976) Distribution of strontium-90 and some another fission products between components of non-flow reservoirs. In: Proceedings of the Institute of Applied Geophysics. Global pollution of the environment by radioactive products of nuclear explosions, vol 8. Gidrometeoizdat, Moscow, p 58Google Scholar
  19. Shyrokaya Z, Volkova Y, Beliayev V, Karapish V, Ivanova I (2005) Role of higher plants in the redistribution of radioisotopes in water ecosystems. In: Equidosimetry – ecological standardization and equidosimetry for radioecology and environmental ecology. NATO Security Through Science Series. Netherlands, p 343–345Google Scholar
  20. Shyrokaya ZO, Klenus VG, Kaglyan AE, Gudkov DI, Yurchuk LP (2008) Features of radioisotope contamination of plants in the upper part of the right bank of the Kiev Reservoir. In: Konoplya EF (ed) Proceedings of international scientific conference Radiation end ecosystems, Gomel, October 2008. Institute of Radiology, Gomel, p 112–115Google Scholar
  21. Tryapitsyna GA (2011) Reaction of biotic components in aquatic ecosystems on long-term impact of radiation. Dissertation, Moscow State University, RussiaGoogle Scholar
  22. Vakulovskij SM, Kolesnikova LV, Tertyshnik EG, Uvarov AD (2009) Dynamics of contamination lake Kozanovskoje by 137Cs after the Chernobyl accident. Radiats Biol Radioecol 49:203–206Google Scholar
  23. Volkova EN, Belayev VV, Zarubin OL, Gudkov DI (2009) Indexes of decreasing specific activity of 137Cs in hydrobionts that inhabit basins of different types. Radiats Biol Radioecol 49:207–211Google Scholar
  24. Worner F, Harrison R (1999) Ways of radioactive substances migration in the environment. Radioecology after the Chernobyl (trans: DV Grichuk). Mir, Moscow p 244–257Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer International Publishing AG 2018

Authors and Affiliations

  • Sergey A. Kalinichenko
    • 1
  • Aleksander N. Nikitin
    • 2
    Email author
  • Ihar A. Cheshyk
    • 2
  • Olga A. Shurankova
    • 2
  1. 1.State Environmental Research InstitutionPolesye State Radiation-Ecological ReserveKhoinikiBelarus
  2. 2.State Scientific InstitutionInstitute of Radiobiology of the National Academy of Sciences of BelarusGomelBelarus

Personalised recommendations