/ • _ Management

G~ Crop Production - Management

Initial growth of sunflower in soils with high concentrations of boron and heavy metais

Adriana M. Moreno Pires', Cleide A. Abreu', Aline Renee Coscione', Vinicius Alberti da Silva', Nilza Patrícia Ramos'

I Embrapa Meio Ambiente, Rod. SP340,krn 127.5, 13800-000, JaguariúnaJSP, Brazil, E-mai l : . adriana@c~pma.embrapa . br.vinicius@cnpma .embrapa.br. npramos@cnpma.embrapa.br

' Instituto Agronômico de Campinas, Barão de ltapura, 148 1, 1392-970, Campinas/SP, Brazil, E-mail: cleide@iac.sp .gov.br.aline@iac.sp.gov.br

ABSTRÀCT Phytoremediation studies have been conducted in an area contaminated by heavy metais, located in Piracicaba - SP, Brazil. This area was contaminated accidentally bythe addition of auto scrap shredding to the soil and was limed later to reduce heavy metal mobility in the environrnent. Previous characterization showed that it also presents high concentration of boron, which has limited the initial plant developmenl of some species. As sunflower plants require a high boron supply and the literature describes its use in the phytoremediation of soi ls contaminated with heavy metais under some conditions, the aim of this work was to evaluale its pOlential for the remediation of lhis area. In the present study, the results of prelirninary lests are presented, aiming at the evaluation of sunflower plant germination and its initial development when cultivated in the c0'ltaminated soil' described. Two sunflower hybrids were

- sown in soils trealed with different rales ofboron and in lhe soil from the contaminated area in study. The results showed thal sunflower plaots had a nonnal initial development, even in the soil from lhe contaminated area. Therefore, sunflower is a promising crop and further studies wi ll be developed lo evaluale the sunflower effi ciency in phytoextraction or phytostabilization of heavy metais in areas where boron co ntamination also occurs, as is the case in the study arca.

Key words: boron - contamination - Helianlhus annuus L. - phytoremcdiation - phytotoxicity.

LI'IITRODUCTlON Boron is an important micronutrienl, but when found in soils at bigh phyloavailable concentrations it can cause phytotoxic ity. Many crops are very sensiti ve to boron toxici ty, showing se vere symptoms , such as ye llowing of the lea f tips and stunted growth . H igh concentrati ons oF B may occur naturally in the so il or in ground\Vater, or can be added to the so il from mining, fertili sers, OI' irrigation water (Nable et al. , 1997). Another anthropogenic source of boron in so il s is the use of wastes as Fertili zers. Some indust ri a l res idues, such as from steelmak ing, should bc hi ghli ghted, once they frequcntl y contain boron and heavy meta is in thei r composi ti on.

Na ble eL a I. ( 1997) consider that II concentra tiOl;s in so il hi gher tltan 5 mg dn'- ' are toxic to the pl ants. However, Lhi s va lue cou ld vary as a fl lll ClJOn o f piam species, samp ling Lime, so il charac Leri stics, alllong others. Studi es calTied out in Brazil , tesling differe nL so il s and spee ies , sholVed thaL loxics leve is of Boron va ry fro1l1 I .B to 8.3 mg kg" (Mariano ct aI.. 2000; Fageria, 2000; Lima et aI. , 2007) .

In Piracicaba city , located in São Pal.lln state. Brazi!. lhere is an arca which was contamin'3ted accicknLally b,' lhe addi ti on o f aula scrap ,hredcl ing \O the soi l and \\"as lillled later to reduce heavy me tal Illobilll~' til lhe CI1\' trOJ1mc nl. Thc ell\'ironmc:nta! prOlCC tlOI1 agency ar lhe ~ tal~ isolated lhe arca duc to its 11I gh h~a\ ' ~ !lJ~tal Lv ll centrat ion, and (lllo\\ (:J re";t..'archers lO rUIl rcmcdiatioll stuJics using lhe so il fr(l!ll ti"" area. fh,' ,oil prescn" the follolV ing ClInce llLrallons o f Itea"y meLa" (mg kg '): X af CcI ; 268 of rI"> : 1(,0 (lf Cu: 1111 c.r ('r: 4 7 of "i and 2.J:i.J 'ur Zn . Sa. IVe are ' conccnLraling Qllr elTons in lhe phytorCJllL'dl~ltlUIl oI' 111 anJ Pb. HO\\'L'\\.T, PI"('\ lOllS ~;!- lldiL' ~ "ho\\'cd Iha1 l he high conccntration :-; 01' a\ ailahk b{lro!1 tnu nJ (-l to t 4 mg kg ' 1 \v(: rc IJllllllng plan! de"c lopment and OI' Glu ~ in g lhe ul:!a th 01' SOlllC

pIam ' 1h.: Lh:~

SU !lll ()\\~ !" pbllh (lfe!ial7fhus 0I11I/{l/1 I f. \\ h l' ll c{l r llpar~d wilh o lhe!" -.pL'cre'-. requrrc a largl! suppl y uI bUrdll. I h ~ l t h \\ 11) this ~ pl' l'ies i" frcquclltly u",cd a:-- all Indlca ror planl lür horon defi ciL:llcy (Schus tc! c.llld \tLl'hcll",uJI. ! 9-H)J In add iuon. SUllflo\\cr r" ~Ihle 10 3hsorh 11<::a\: 1l11.·t ,d .... ";L'leclivC'ly (Tall. 200U ), Il f l..: '> l·!lllll i; rpll't1IJ:d (l) bl' lhCd lo ph yln rl..'II lo.:d ld tc ( I~h ~ li)\..' '\lraC I anti t I!" 1'11:'11 I..,t<:lhll 111..') cOl1taJll!!l~ItLd a n.:~;h .

Hd, \.'d lI l \ lhe t"ullo\\' lng :.la tCllh.!lIb . (l i '>ullilo\\-c r planh reC] wrl' lar~L horon ",upply; (i iJ lhe m ajor

taL'lilr rllat 1l1l1lh illlll~ ll pIam tk\t:lupm c lll In lhe L\lIll<tllllll (ltl'J arca \\;1:"; lhe I1l gh C(} !IL ~ ntra ! 10J1 ofboroll

Crop Production - Managemenl

in the sai l; (i ii) sunflower plants present potcn tial to phytorc111cdialc (lr(:(l s cn lll;Iml1lél1L'd \\'llh hl·.I\ ' ~'

metais ; we decided 10 eva luale lhe initia l devclopmcnl of two , "nn owcr hyhnds culll\ :t l,'d "' " ILSI 'oil with increasing rates of boron and in the sail from the COlllfltninatcd é\re~, in Plracicaha l'lly

MATERIALS AND Mt~TI/()()S Two hybrids of sunflower, Helio 250 and Helio 358, were sown in pOIS co nl"inln ~ "f)O g "I' ",li , In " greenhouse located in Embrapa Environmenl Unit, Jagua riúnn cily. SP. I h~I/, II . Til L' ~ o1i ..; :-tIIl11k' ...; 11. .... L:d eorresponded to subsurfaee soil sam ples (B horizon) Df a Iypica l oXlSol "nel Sur!:l(T ""I ",,"pll', (,\ horizon) ofthe are a contaminateel (CA) with heavy melais anel bo ron, localcd In riracicah;1 (('"mhlsol) . The experimenlal design was eomplele ly randomizeel wilh Ihrec repliealcs, :mel Ih,' Ire" lme,," \\'l'I'C

arranged in a 2x6 factoria l design, [ha[ is, two sunflowcr hybriels anel six hnron rales. The evaluated variab les were planl heighl, dry maner, shool boron CUnCenlrHllI"l and soil hm"n

concentration (extractecl by hOI walcr) . The data were subminecl lo varia ncc ill1"lys is hy Ih,' SIS\',\I{ software and the means of the treatments were compareci bl' Tukel' ICS! (5%).

The' experimcnt was performed based on lhe fo llowing Irea[mems, eorrc'ponding lo A ral es addeel 10

the oxisol, for each hybrid eva luated: Control - Co (oxiso l, 11 0 fertili za lion): !3own I) - no (ox isol ' mineral fertilization , no boron added); Boron 2 - B2 (oxiso l + mineral ferlilizaliol1 ' 2 kg ha I "I' A) : Boron 4 - B4 (oxiso l + mineral fertili zation + 4 kg ha- I of B);'Aoron R - AR (oxisol " mineral tl'rtll izali,)n + 8 kg ha l ofB) and Contaminaled Arca - AC (soi l fram conl amina led arca, no lCi'lili/.all on) . Iloron \Vas added in the forrn of boric acid .

Afier fi ll ing the pOIS with soil , lime was added to ihe ox isol lrcalmenls, in ord er lo raisc lhe b",c saturation to 70%, as indicated by Ambrosano e[ aI. (199ó). The soil f!'Om lhe conlam llHlled arca presented a pH of7.4, 50 il was nOI necessary to lime it. Then, ali Ihc pOiS \Vere il1cllhaled Co r lincen da ys, and soil humidi ty was maintained aI 70% ofthe soi l water rel cnlion capacit)' ,

The mineral fertili zation consisted of 63 mg dm-) oI' N (N II,NO,), I so m~ dm ; oi' I' (Na,HP04 .2H,O), 120 mg dm-) of K (KCI), 30 mg dm -) of S (MgSO, .7II ,O), I mg dm ) oi' ClI «('IIS() I i. rng dm-) ofZn (ZnSO,,7H,O) and 5 mg dm-3 of Mn (MnCl 2.4 I1 ,O).

Afier the ineubalion period, mineral fertilizalion and boron addilion \Vere perf"rmed ilcelH'e1ing I'> each treatment and ten sceds were SOWI1 per pot. Du ri ng ~ermina l ion and lhe inlli,,1 dcvclnplllelll oi' lhe sunflower plants, soil hllmidity was also main[ained aI 70'1.\ 01' lhe soi l will er rClcnllon capacil v

Twenty tive dal's after sowing, pl an l shools were harvcSl, washed_ an<l dncd (r,f) ( ·i . Ilr~ nmll,'r "a' quantitied, and the samples were grollnd (2 mm) and anall'zeel lilr hor"n concenlrali,'n (l IS- I- I' /\, S\\'-846, method '3050B, with eleterminalion by lCP-AES). So il samplc, I'rom C;lct, 1'''1 W'er,: co llcCiCd . <ln,'d (60 ·C), ground (2 mm) anel homogenized lO bc analyzc<l for cnncenll'Hlion nl' horon eXlraClcd h\ h" l water (Berger and Truog, 1939).

RESULTS AND DISCUSSION For the evalualed variables (planl height, dry malter, shools A concenlralion :111<1 soll H concelll.rali nnl. on ly dry matter produclion was s[ali sti ca ll y differenl when consi derin~ lhe sllnllo\Ver hyhri(1", Ilcllo ,,~~

was more emcien[ (24.02 g per paI) than Hel io 250 (20,09 g pe r 1'01) in dry m~ltcr I'rnducllnn . I' "r Ih" other variables, differcnces were an il' observed for boron rales faclo!'. rlal1l s clllll\'alCd in lhe "" I Ih"ll the conlaminated are a presented lhe highesl dry mass rroeluelion in lhe Sllldy. Pl anl he l ~ hl \\':ls 11<'1

different fo r the treatments conlaining increasing B rales, excerl for IrealmenlS \\llh n" h"l'Iln :"ltbl. which were lower Ihan the others (F ig, 1).

Fertilizer recommendation 01' Boron in sunflower clI lt ivalion for lhe S:in ralll" SI"le " I kg h:l I "r Il when the so il presents o to 0.20 mg dn'- ' of B cXlracled with hOl waler anel O . ~ k)2 ha I ,,1 ' 1\ ",I,en Ih,' .",,1 presents 0.21 to 0,60 mg dm" (Ambrosano el aI. , 1996). Thc original concen lr:lli on oI'h" ron III Ih,' o\l s<l l soi l used in the experimenl was 0.30 mg dm" The rales 01' B aclded lo lhe sn tl (2, 4 :111<1 X kg h:l ' ) lI'ere deliberately hi,gher [han lhe reeommcndation, sinee lhe aim was 10 eva luatc ' "l1llo",cr 1(,lerancc lo lhe excess ofboron in the soil. Despile thi s, the avai lable Boron COl1ecnl rallOI1 in lhe s" il \Vas nol a' high :I' expected, even for the highcst rale added (B8), whieh was 1.9 1 mg kg-' (f'i~ . 2). I\nron aV:í tlahillty depends on differenl anributes of the soi l, such as pH, organie ma[ler conlel1\' parem malcrial. lllllllTalngy (Gupta, 1993); and , consequently, it depends on its aelsorplioll on soi l co ll oids «;ol<lherg, I')fll ) Therefore, the low coneentration of available boron observed coulel he th e resu ll nf hi gh aclsorplion of Ihi s element on the oxiso l stud ied,

316 Proc. 171h Intemational Sun nowcr (onlcrcncc. C(\rdnha. SrílH1 (20()X ~

•

Crop Prod UClion - Managemenl

Dry Mass Plant helghl (em )

' 50 (9 por') '20

~ 25 , b b b

d 20 I . U U~~[

90 cd

~ . bc ' 5 . o 60 ab

Il n 10 o 30 1-1 n A B 5 • •

o' ",0 ",' ",' ",- ,,~ ,,- ,,- Control . 0 . 2 •• . 8 CA ~' ,,0 "o "o .... ....

Fi:.:. I. Dry Illal lcr prOUlIel lOIl anti piam h",gh l of sun fl ower hyb nds cul llvawd 111 so tls trealed wlth di fTcrent boron rales ' .

ICl!llllnl (O:\ ISU[ wlll1 110 ti:ndll.allOlI): !iO (oXÍ'wl T Illln~ral rcrtilization, no boron added); B2 (oxisol + mineral fert ilizalion + 2 kg lia I II I H I, H4 (ox l ~tl l " llIlII..:wl h.:rulll.illlun ~ 4 kg ha ' 0 1' 8) , 138 (oxisol + mineml fertili zation + 8 kg ha" af 8); CA (soif from the "':Ull l<illllfl<l lt.:d ~Ir\.:a. JIU ft:rlJh/.dlJUn) Wil hlll t.:ô.H.:h figurt:, valucs rullowed by the same lt:tter ( lowcr case: boron treatments; upper \. :I=-I.: ,>ulllhl\\o.:r h~hlllb) .In':: 1Iul ,laUSI u,;;dl y tlLffcn.:nt (Tukey, 5%) .

---------------------------.-------------------------------, B conce ntration in the soll

Im g kg" 1

" o D Control 80 B2 B4 B8

---------CA

150 I

B concentra tion in su nflowe r shoot

(mg kg"1

ab

D Control BO B2 B4 B8 CA

Fi l( . 2. Soi l bu ron eX lrae l ~d \V ll h hot waler and Boron concentrallon 111 lhe ShOOIS of sunflower hybnds CU llivulecl in so ils wilh diffe renl boron rates ' .

l VIlIIOI \ \1, .... 01 \\rllln~1 h:nllll.altUn). BO (mu~ul t IIlIlH:ral rCl1ilizatlon, no boran added); 132 (oxisol -t mineral fertilizatian + 2 kg h.1 \I! H), B-t ( tlxl~1J1 . rrlmo.:ral ti.:ndll.'rllOll ! 4 kg Iw I uI' U), 138 (uxisol + mi neral ferlilization + g kg ha-' of B); CA (soil from lhe l ·tHtI . IIIIIII:lh:J arCi!, tltl tcrtrll/;ltHIIl ) V:tlnc:!'I to llu \\cd by lhe same Iclh:r are nOI slalislically different (Tuke y, 5%).

In Ih" Irealmelll \\ Ilh ,,,11 rrum lhe cunlalllinalcd arca, ava il ablc boron concenlration was 3.90 mg kg- I

(Fig . 2). i\lihollgh Ih" cOllecn lra li un could be conside red high, il was expecled 10 be even higber, since olheI' del~,.,nillall()ll' perlvrlllcu wilh so il samples from lhe sallle area found lloron concentrations eXlrae led ","h hUI \Valer up lO 14.H7 mg kg ' (Gonçalves el a I. , 2007a, b). This result reflects the high 11I.:tL'rugelll.'lty u rth~ soi l frúlll the l:ontami nated arca.

!Jurull cO ll eClllra liuns ill lhe !caves rrom 15 10 20 Illg kg" are considered adequale for p lant nutrition (:'vlalavulla _ 2011(,). Speeilieally Ivr slIllflo\Vcr, Srrcdo el a I. ( 1984) sllggesled lhal lhe suitable boron levei " ' lhe !ca ves shulIlu De 4U I11g kg I, baseei on sllldies carricd oul in the so ulh region of 8 razil (Paraná "ale') . In lhe presen l sllldy, buron leve is in lhe ShOOlS varicd fro l11 36 lO 130 I11g kg" (Fig. 2). Even for lhe pl~lIll s cu111\ a ll.:d III llll' ~l)i l s Ihal rl!cl!ived the highes t amounl of boron, no tox icity symptoms were ub,en ed. neilhe r was Ihe re ally ill ilia l de ve lupmcnl r~d llc tion . This indicales lhal sll nflower plants have a pUlellllal Illl' being clIliival~u in soils eOlllaminalcd \Vilh 80ron, which is ti'eqllently found in soils cUllt ~llllln"h.:d \\ Ith hea\ y mL'tab. .

1I eall be CU IlCllltlcd Ihal sllntluwer planls prcsenl a norma l inilial develo pment when cultivaled in , uil, 1""1 reeci v~ high all",,"Hs 01' boron. Thcrefore, sun fl ower is promising and should be lested as a ph ) IUl'xtraclalll anti/uI' ph ytustabi liLcr ur heavy metais in arcas where boron contamination al50 occurs, as I~ thl.' GI:-t\.' uI' th!! study area .

ACKNOWLE DGEMENTS 'ru I-!\I'ES I' I,,, Ihelr linallcial ,"ppOrl Oflhis study. ru I IcI Y'"lIhll' do LI,.a,iI '-ida. liJl' do nalillg lhe secds lIsed in the experi llle nl.

Prul.·. I i h Intc.:rnal1umrl Sun llu \Vcr COll fr:rcncc. Córdoba, Spain (2008) 3 17

Crop Productio11 - Managcmcnt

REFERENCES Ambrosano, l .A .. R.T. Ta11aka, H.A.A. Mascarci'ia s. B. Van Raij . . 1.1\ . QlIaggul. and 11. ( ·all lar,·lla I')'i(,

Leguminosas e Oleaginosas. p. 198. 111 : Raij B. va n. Canlarclla. 11. ()""gg'o . .I i\ .. I-IIr1a,". I\ . ~ I Ci Recomendações de adubação e calagem para o ESlano de Süo Pmllo (Bolellm InO). 2,·d . I,\C. Campinas/Sp, Brazi!.

Berger, K.C., and K. Truog. 1939. Bor011 delerm i11al ion in so il s and 1' 1"'1115 IIseng lhe quinali/arin rc:ac li,, ". Ind. Eng. Chem. Ii :540-545.

Fageria, N.K. 2000. Níveis adequados e tóxicos de boro 11 a produção de arro/. fi:ljiio. mrl ho. "'.i" " Irigo em solo de celTado. R. Bras. Eng. Agr. Amb. 4:57-62.

Goldbach, H.E., Q. Yu, R. Wingender, M. Schulz, M . Wimmcr. P. Findckkc. anel R. Ilalllska. 200 I Rapid response reactions of roots to boron depriva tion . .I . Plal1l NII !. Soil Sci . 1(,4 : 17:1- 1 R I ,

Goldberg, S. 1993. Chemistry and Mi11era logy ofBoro11 in so il s. 1' .3 -44. In: CilJPTi\ . l i.< . (h!.) llo (,(\ 1I

and its role in crop production. CRC Press, Boca Raron , FL, US A. Gonçalves, F.A ., A.R. Coscione, and R.S. Berton . 2007a. Efe ito 110 cu lti vo de milho cm sol" conlamrnado

com resíduo de sucata automobilística . CD-Rom. In : Prae. XX X I Cong. lira, . Ci0n. Sol". Gramado/RS, Brazi!.

Gonçalves, F.A., A.R. Coseione, and R.S. Berto11. 2007h. Efe ito no culli vo de mil ho C:1n soln contaminado com resíduo de sucata automobilistica. CD-Rorn . In : Proc. XXXI Cnrrg. Rr:" . CiclI . Solo, Gramado/RS , Brazi!.

Gupta, U.c. 1993. BOro11 and its Role in Crop Production . 'CR C Pres~. Boca Raton. FI .. I ·S.". Lima, J.C.P.S ., C.W.A. Nascimento. J.G .c. Lima, and M.A. I.ira .lr 2007. Crilical and I",ie horon ic'\ 'd,

in com plants and soi ls of Pernambuco. Brazí!. Rcv. Bras. Ciêne. Solo .' I 7.1-79 Malavolta, E. 2006. Manual de nutrição mineral de rlal1!as. Ccrcs. Silo 1''1111". I h 'lII I Mariano,'E.D., V. Faq uin, A.E.F. Neto, A.T. And rade. "nd 1.0. Mariano.21100 Ni\'c: ,~ crilr"'" de h"r" L'm

solos de várzea para o cu ltivo do feijoeiro. Pesq. Agropec. 11ras . .1~ : I (\.1 7. 1 6~-l Nable, R.O., G.S. Banuelos, and .I .G. Paul!. 1997. Boron loxicity. Plal1l Soil I ')]: I X I ·1 'iN . Sfredo, G.J ., R.J. Campo, and J.R. Sarruge. 1984. Girasso l: nUlri ção mineral ~ aduhaç;;n (C 'irell!"r r cCll,ca

8). EMBRAPA-CNPSo: Londrina, PR, Brazi!. Schuster, C.E., and R.E. Stephenson, R.E. 1941). SUl1 nower a~ al1 ind icalo r planl nf horol1 cJe li e lL' llcy in

soil. J. An. Soe. Agron. 32:607-621.

3 18 Proc. J 71h

In lcrnal ional Sunllowcr Con rcn.::nc\,;. ( ·úrc!JI!l a. ')palll (2onx)