phytoremediation of mine tailings and bio-ore production: … · 2014-06-09 · phytoremediation of...

PHYTOREMEDIATION OF MINE TAILINGS AND BIO-ORE PRODUCTION: RESULTSFROM A STUDY ON PLANT SURVIVAL AT THE CENTRAL MANITOBA (AU) MINESITE

(NTS 52L/13)by S. Renault1, E. Sailerova2 and M.A.F. Fedikow

Renault, S., Sailerova, E. and Fedikow, M.A.F. 2001: Phytoremediation of mine tailings and bio-ore production: results froma study on plant survival at the Central Manitoba (Au) minesite (NTS 52L/13); in Report of Activities 2001, ManitobaIndustry, Trade and Mines, Manitoba Geological Survey, p. 138-149.

SUMMARYA new project to determine the potential for phytoremediation of mine tailings and production

of bio-ores, through the identification of plant species that can accumulate heavy metals, was initi-ated in 2000 at the Central Manitoba (Au) minesite in southeastern Manitoba (Fig. GS-21-1). The first phase of the projectinvolved planting seeds and/or seedlings of 14 plant species on three experimental sites on mine tailings. Preliminary resultshave shown that several plant species were able to survive and grow for two growing seasons on two of the three selected siteswithout any remediation of the soil. Capping of tailings with peat allowed survival of all seedlings for at least one growingseason on all experimental sites, including one site with very high Cu and Au contents. The growth and survival of Indianmustard in this environment indicates high potential for phytoremediation and possibly phytomining for this species. Theamount of extracted base and precious metals from plants growing on tailing sites for two growing seasons should identifyplant species that are suitable for phytoremediation and the production of a bio-ore. Preliminary results from analyses of plantsgrowing on tailings for one growing season indicate substantial enrichment in Au in pine and spruce seedlings and enrichmentin Zn in willow.

INTRODUCTIONMining and mineral-processing activities contribute significant quantities of heavy metals to the environment and affect

surrounding land, air and water quality. These effects cannot be reversed by nature and require aggressive application ofplanned reclamation programs.

Metal mines across Canada produce large amounts of tailings that represent the waste products of mine operations. Thedecreased pH of the tailings, caused by oxidation in air under moist conditions, leads to increased solubility of most heavymetals. Metal mobilization from tailings can often be traced into watersheds downstream from active minesites. Low pH,presence of metals in toxic quantities and the lack of vegetative cover and organic nutrients prevent seed germination and plantgrowth. Tailings thus form large areas without vegetation cover (Fig. GS-21-2) and are a source of enormous dust production.This dust in turn pollutes vast areas adjacent to the tailings creating additional environmental and possible health hazards.Affected soil cannot be used for agricultural purposes because of the high metal content and other land uses are limited.Today’s practices of removing contaminated soil (excavation) are very expensive (Giasson and Jaouich, 1998).

Oxidation of the tailings can be controlled by covering the surface with soil and then usually revegetating the site.Establishment of a self-sustaining mat of vegetation is usually an important element in a rehabilitation program for waste-disposal areas. Vegetation stabilizes the soil, prevents new acid-generating material from being exposed, and decreases theamount of water available for deep percolation through transpirational water movement. Vegetation is established by control-ling pH near the surface with addition of lime or limestone and by adding peat and fertilizers where necessary. This treatmentcan increase initial plant survival rate and help to induce adaptation processes. Plant species are usually selected from well-adapted species growing in the region (Bradshaw, 1952). Nevertheless, revegetation alone does not stop acid drainageand does not necessarily remove heavy metals from the contaminated site. Plant species and techniques successfully used intailings remediation could be used to successfully remediate other contaminated soil sites.

Phytoremediation of soils contaminated with heavy metals is being developed as a potential cost-effective remediationsolution for thousands of contaminated sites in the United States and abroad (Salt et al., 1995, 1998; Cunningham et al., 1995;Comis, 1996). Phytoremediation of tailings, however, is a problem that remains to be addressed on a case-specific basis.

A relatively new approach to phytoremediation involves the introduction of highly tolerant species with high biomass production capable of accumulating 0.5 to 1% of their dry weight in metals. Anderson et al. (1999) provides a list of hyperaccumulators under investigation. The shoots of these plants are harvested at the end of the growing season and burned,forming a metal-rich bio-ore (Nicks and Chambers, 1998). Up to 57 mg/kg Au (dry mass) could be accumulated by Indianmustard (Brassica juncea) (Anderson et al., 1998) using induced hyperaccumulation by ammonium thiocyanate, which isbiodegraded to ammonia, bicarbonate and sulphate. The choice of hyperaccumulators species must also be climate and sitespecific, and sensitive to regulations restricting the introduction of foreign species.

138

GS-21

1 Department of Botany, University of Manitoba, Winnipeg, Manitoba, R3T 2N22 M.E.S.S. Consultants, 683 Borebank Street, Winnipeg, Manitoba, R3N 1G1

139

Figure GS-21-1: Location of the phytoremediation and phytomining study area, Central Manitoba gold mine, Bissett area, south-eastern Manitoba.

140

Figure GS-21-2: Central Manitoba gold mine tailings.

Phytomining technology offers the possibility of exploiting ores or mineralized soils that are uneconomic by conventionalmining methods. Bio-ores are virtually sulphur-free and their smelting requires less energy than sulphide ores. The metal content of a bio-ore is usually much greater than that of a conventional ore and therefore requires less storage space, despitelower density. Moreover, phytomining is an environmentally responsible approach to site remediation.

OBJECTIVESThe long-term goal of this study is to define limiting factors for phytoremediation of mine tailings and other sites

contaminated with heavy metals. This study will establish the scientific basis for the remediation of mine tailings and extrac-tion of heavy metals by phytomining techniques. Practical experience would be gained in the routine remediation of mine tailings and possibly in the extraction of heavy metals. Plant species selected for the study will include plants native to thesurrounding environment and seeds of plants acclimated on-site will also be tested. The suitability of selected species for phytomining for base metals and gold will be tested in terms of the quality and costs of bio-ore production and economiceffectiveness.

SIGNIFICANCE OF THE WORKSoil contamination by heavy metals, and metal leakage and dust production from sulphide tailings represents a signifi-

cant and widely recognized ecological hazard. Phytoremediation offers the possibility of an ecologically acceptable and cost-effective solution. Phytomining, a new technique for extracting metals from low-grade ore or sulphide tailings, is a prom-ising technique currently being developed for commercialization in the United States. Field experiments in phytomining inManitoba could provide valuable information regarding the potential of this method to remediate sites contaminated withheavy metals.

GEOLOGICAL SETTING OF THE CENTRAL MANITOBA (AU) DEPOSITTailings associated with the Central Manitoba gold deposit were selected for initial phytoremediation and phytomining

studies. The deposit occurs within the Archean Rice Lake greenstone belt, in the Uchi Subprovince of the Superior Provincein southeastern Manitoba (Fig. GS-21-1). The belt is flanked to the north by the Wanipigow River plutonic complex (Marr,

141

1971; Weber, 1971) and, to the south, is transitional with the Manigotagan gneissic belt (McRitchie and Weber, 1971; Weber,1971). The Rice Lake belt is fault bounded by the Wanipigow Fault on the north and on the south by the Manigotagan Fault.

Host rocks to the deposit occur within the Bidou Lake subgroup (Poulsen et al., 1996) and comprise arkose, tuff and chertof the Dove Lake Formation. These sedimentary rocks have been intruded by gabbro sills. Gold-bearing quartz veins at thedeposit are situated within en échelon shear zones at or close to the contact between the Dove Lake sedimentary rocks and aneast-southeast-trending gabbro sill (Stockwell and Lord, 1939). Five veins contributed the bulk of production at the deposit.These were the Kitchener, Eclipse, No.1 Branch, Tene 6 and Hope veins. The quartz veins were mineralized with chalcopy-rite, pyrite, pyrrhotite and free gold. Between 1928 and 1938, a total of 347 801 t of ore was milled and 4287 kg of gold produced.

GEOCHEMICAL CHARACTERIZATION OF THE TAILINGS AND DESCRIPTION OF EXPERIMENTAL SITESThree experimental sites were chosen based on the proximity to the tailings edge and vegetation cover, exposure to sun

and wind and drainage conditions (Sailerova, 2000). Site 1 was positioned relatively far from the tailings edge, partially sheltered by sporadic vegetation cover and poorly drained. Site 2 was located in the middle of the tailings mass with no vegetation cover, fully exposed to the wind and sun, and well drained. Site 3 was located close to the tailings edge, relativelywell sheltered and drained. The pH values measured at the three experimental sites were 4 to 5 at site 1, 4 at site 2 and 5 to 7at site 3.

Results of geochemical analyses of 20 tailings samples collected from three hand-augered profiles, each approximately1 m in depth, were presented in Renault et al. (2000). The instrumental neutron activation analysis (INAA) total data indicatethe relative base- and precious-metal enrichment in tailings at the minesite. In particular, Au was elevated in the upper 15 cmof the tailings profile at site 1 (3450 ppb), is consistently enriched throughout the profile at site 2 (1110–2640 ppb) and issomewhat lower but elevated at site 3 (265–958 ppb). Exceptional concentrations of Cu are documented from all three sites(834–5740 ppm at site 1, 1710–10 500 ppm at site 2 and 3150–4510 ppm at site 3). Additional enrichments of Ag (up to 6ppm) and Bi (up to 127 ppm) are documented at site 1. Arsenic is low (<2-20 ppm) at all three sites.

RESULTS

Field Study: Plant Species SurvivalSeedlings of native plant species of the boreal forest were selected for the study. In July 2000, the following tree species

were planted on the three different sites described above: red-osier dogwood (Cornus stolonifera), yellow willow (Salix lutea),white spruce (Picea glauca), jack pine (Pinus banksiana), tamarack (Larix laricina) and bog birch (Betula glandulosa). InJune 2001, additional red-osier dogwood (Cornus stolonifera), yellow willow (Salix lutea), white spruce (Picea glauca) andjack pine (Pinus banksiana) seedlings were planted on the three sites. Prior to planting in June 2001, a layer of peat (5 cmdeep) was added on the top of the tailings on site 2. Seeds of the following species were also planted directly on tailings orafter addition of peat at the three sites: Indian mustard (Brassica juncea), white mustard (Sinapis alba), slender wheatgrass(Agropyron trachycaulum), altai wildrye (Elymus angustus), reed canary grass (Phalaris arundinacea), creeping foxtail(Alopecurus arundinaceus), streambank wheatgrass (Agropyron riparium) and tall fescue (Festuca alatior).

Results showed that most tree seedlings were able to survive on sites 1 and 3 (Figs. GS-21-3 and -4), while they rapidlydied on the untreated site 2 (Table GS-21-1). However, when peat was added on the top of the tailings or mixed with the

Figure GS-21-3: Seedlings growing on site1 for two growing seasons.

142

Figure GS-21-4: Seedlings growing on site3 for two growing seasons.

tailings matter at site 2, the seedlings were still alive after three months (Table GS-21-1; Fig. GS-21-5). However, new rootgrowth, a sensitive indicator of successful plant adaptation, was observed only on sites where the peat was not mixed with theheavy metal-rich tailings. Among the seedlings planted in 2000 at site 1, tamarack (Fig. GS-21-6) had the highest survivalrate followed by red-osier dogwood, bog birch, white spruce, jack pine and willow (Table GS-21-1). Transpiration rates weremeasured in red-osier dogwood seedlings to estimate their level of stress (Fig. GS-21-7). Results indicated the importance ofdrainage conditions and sheltering effects of vegetation at the site, as well as the stress-inducing effect of very high metal contents in the soil.

Indian mustard and white mustard seeds germinated and survived in the field when peat was added on the top of the tailings (Table GS-21-2; Fig. GS-21-8). This is an important finding in light of the suitability of these species for phytoreme-diation and phytomining. Among the grass seeds tested, tall fescue, streambank wheatgrass and slender wheatgrass had thehighest survival rates on the untreated sites (Table GS-21-2).

Several native plant species including manna grass (Glyceria striata) and horsetail (Equisetum sp.) were identified growing on the tailings. In addition, some fireweed (Epilobium angustifolium) plants were found growing on the tailingsamended with peat. The metal-accumulating ability and suitability of these species for phytoremediation and phytominingpurposes will be tested in future studies.

Greenhouse StudySeeds of the following species were also planted in the greenhouse: Indian mustard (Brassica juncea), white mustard

(Sinapis alba), slender wheatgrass (Agropyron trachycaulum), altai wildrye (Elymus angustus), reed canary grass (Phalarisarundinacea), creeping foxtail (Alopecurus arundinaceus), streambank wheatgrass (Agropyron riparium) and tall fescue(Festuca alatior). Seeds were planted in trays on tailings collected from the top 15 cm of the three selected sites. The trayswere sprayed with distilled water regularly to keep moisture level relatively constant. Seeds of the selected species were alsoplanted on tailings mixed with peat at a ratio of one to one.

Table GS-21-1: Survival of seedlings planted on the tailings inJuly 2000 and June 2001. Measurements were done in

September 2001.

Plant species (planted in 2000)Jack pine White spruce Tamarack Red-osier dogwood Yellow willow Bog birch

Plant species (planted in 2001)

Jack pine White spruce Red-osier dogwood Yellow willow

Site 18083

100933886

Site 1

5569

10069

Survival (%)Site 2

000000

Site 2(with peat)

87758750

Site 387

100100806986

Site 3

951009092

Germination and survival rates of seeds planted in thegreenhouse on the collected tailing material showed similartrends as the field experiments (Table GS-21-3). However,survival rates in the greenhouse were higher, indicating theimportant role of climatic factors, such as water supply.

Elemental Analyses of Plant TissuesTable GS-21-4 shows the elemental analyses of plant

tissues. The results of the analyses of plant shoots harvested atsites 1 and 3 after one growing season, both in the field andgreenhouse, are promising in terms of high metal accumula-tion by selected plant species. Results from analyses of spruceand pine shoots growing in the field and in the greenhouseindicate a relatively high accumulation rate of gold. Willowseedlings seem to be tolerant to the large amounts of zinc theyaccumulated during one growing season (Table GS-21-4).Available data also suggest high accumulation rates of Ni, Asand Se by all tested species. However, only a few species anda limited number of samples were tested and more detailedstudy is necessary before any conclusion can be made regard-ing plant ability to accumulate metals of interest.

FUTURE WORKThe focus of field experiments in the coming growing

season will be the determination of the best combination ofdifferent amendments to the tailings surface layer to increasethe long-term survival rate of selected plant species. Newlyidentified plant species native to the environment and specieswith traits induced by adaptation processes derived from seedscollected near tailings will be used for further study. Metalcontent in plants surviving two growing seasons will be meas-ured to determine the most promising species for phytoremediation purposes. Furthermore, different soil treatment that wouldenhance the biomass growth of Indian mustard (Brassica juncea) – a promising plant species for bio-ore formation – will beinvestigated. The native fast-growing species, such as horsetail, manna grass and fireweed will be studied for their ability toform a cost-effective bio-ore.

ACKNOWLEDGMENTSWe would like to thank Jennifer Mustard, Mila and Tony Sailer for fieldwork assistance.

143

Figure GS-21-6: Tamarack growing on site 1 for two growingseasons.

Figure GS-21-5: Seedlings growing on site2 after peat addition.

144

Figure GS-21-7: Transpiration rate meas-urement at site 1.

Table GS-21-2: Survival of plants three months after seeding on tailings inthe field.

Plant species

Indian mustardWhite mustardAltai wildryeSlender wheatgrassReed canary grassCreeping foxtailStreambank wheatgrassTall fescue

Note: n.a. - not available

Site 1

00

2644n.a.0

29n.a.

Survival (%)Site 2

0000

n.a.n.a.n.a.n.a.

Site 3

00

163827214750

Site 1(with peat)

2549

n.a.n.a.n.a.n.a.n.a.n.a.

Site 2(with peat)

8681

n.a.n.a.n.a.n.a.

Site 3(with peat)

4965


REFERENCESAnderson, C.W.N., Brooks, R.R., Chiarucci, A., LaCoste, C.J., Leblanc, M., Robinson, B.H., Simcock, R. and Stewart, R.B.

1999: Phytomining for nickel, thallium and gold; Journal of Geochemical Exploration, v. 67, p. 407–415.Anderson, C.W.N., Brooks, R.R., Stewart, R.B. and Simcock, R. 1998: Harvesting a crop of gold in plants; Nature, v. 395,

p 55–56.Bradshaw, A.D. 1952: Population of Agrostis tenuis resistant to lead and zinc poisoning; Nature, v. 169, p. 1068.

Figure GS-21-8: Indian mustard seedlinggrowing on site 3 for one growing season.

Comis, D. 1996: Green remediation: using plants to clean the soil; Journal of Soil and Water Conservation, v. 51, no. 3, p. 184–192.

Cunningham, C.D., Berti, W.R. and Huang, J.W. 1995: Phytoremediation of contaminated soils; Trends in Biotechnology, v. 13, p. 393–397.

Giasson, P. and Jaouich, A. 1998: Phytorestoration of contaminated soils in Quebec; Vecteur-Environnement, v. 31, no. 4, p. 40–53.

Marr, J. 1971: Petrology of the Wanipigow River suite, Manitoba; in Geology and Geophysics of the Rice Lake region,Southeastern Manitoba (Project Pioneer), (ed.) W.D. McRitchie and W. Weber; Manitoba Department of Mines andNatural Resources, Mines Branch, Publication 71-1, p. 203–214.

McRitchie, W.D. and Weber, W. 1971: Metamorphism and deformation of the Manigotagan gneissic belt, southeasternManitoba; in Geology and Geophysics of the Rice Lake region, Southeastern Manitoba (Project Pioneer), (ed.) W.D.McRitchie and W. Weber; Manitoba Department of Mines and Natural Resources, Mines Branch, Publication 71-1,p. 235–284.

Nicks, L.J. and Chambers, M.F. 1998: A pioneering study of the potential of phytomining for nickel; in Plants ThatHyperaccumulate Heavy Metals, Their Role in Phytoremediation, Microbiology, Archeology, Mineral Explorationand Phytomining; CAB International, New York, p. 313–325.

Poulsen, K.H., Weber, W., Brommecker, R. and Seneshen, D.N. 1996: Lithostratigraphic assembly and structural setting ofgold mineralization in the eastern Rice Lake greenstone belt, Manitoba; Geological Association ofCanada–Mineralogical Association of Canada, Annual Meeting, Fieldtrip Guidebook A4, Winnipeg, Manitoba, May27-29, 1996, 106 p.

Renault, S., Sailerova, E. and Fedikow, M.A.F. 2000: Phytoremediation and phytomining in Manitoba: preliminary observa-tion from an orientation survey at the Central Manitoba (Au) minesite (NTS 52L/13); in Report of Activities 2000,Manitoba Industry, Trade and Mines, Manitoba Geological Survey, p. 179–188.

Sailerova, E. 2000 Geochemical flux in black spruce (Picea mariana) crowns and the correlation with root water uptake:effects of sample site drainage and tree crown morphology on crown twig and outer bark concentrations; ManitobaIndustry, Trade and Mines, Manitoba Geological Survey, Open File Report OF2000-4, 25 p.

Salt, D.E., Blaylock, M., Kumar, N.P.B.A., Dushenkov, V., Ensley, B.D. and Chet, I. 1995: Phytoremediation: a novel strate-gy for the removal of toxic metals from the environment using plants; Biotechnology, v. 13, p. 468–474.

Salt, D.E., Smith, R.D. and Raskin, I. 1998: Phytoremediation; Annual Reviews of Plant Physiology and Plant MolecularBiology, v. 49, p. 643–668.

Stockwell, C.H. and Lord, C.S. 1939: Halfway Lake–Beresford Lake area, Manitoba; Geological Survey of Canada, Memoir219, 66 p.

Weber, W. 1971: Geology of the Wanipigow River–Manitotagan River region, Winnipeg Mining District; in Geology andGeophysics of the Rice Lake Region, Southeastern Manitoba (Project Pioneer), (ed.) W.D. McRitchie and W. Weber;Manitoba Department of Mines and Natural Resources, Mines Branch, Publication 71-1, p. 203–214 and Map 71-1/4, scale 1:63 360.

145

Table GS-21-3: Survival of plants three months after seeding on tailings inthe greenhouse.

Plant species

Indian mustardWhite mustardAltai wildryeSlender wheatgrassReed canary grassCreeping foxtailStreambank wheatgrassTall fescue

Note: n.a. - not available

Site 1

00

9689387794100

Survival (%)Site 2

0000

n.a.n.a.n.a.n.a.

Site 3

00

6740878891

100

Site 1(with peat)

96100n.a.n.a.n.a.n.a.n.a.n.a.

Site 2(with peat)

405058

100n.a.n.a.n.a.n.a.

Site 3(with peat)

9898


146

Sample ID

Plants growing in the fieldD-site 1, plantedS-site 1, wildS-site 1, plantedA-site 1, wildW-site 1, plantedW-site 1, wildD-site 3, plantedP-site 3, plantedW-site 3, plantedPlants growing in the greenhouseD-site 1D-site 1D-site 1D-site 1Wildrye-site 1Slender Wheatgrass-site 1P-site 1S-site 1

D-site 3D-site 3D-site 3D-site 3Wildrye-site 3Slender Wheatgrass-site 3P-site 3S-site 3

Control material V7A

Standard reference data V7A+/-

Pre-ash wt(g)

0.2730.9460.54

0.9240.3720.3300.2740.9690.394

1.1570.9611.2220.9601.0120.7860.6980.191

1.0310.9570.9961.0091.0300.8960.7250.099

Na(%)

2.100.230.460.230.830.500.780.540.68

0.440.490.040.550.820.351.052.08

0.250.330.310.541.140.470.884.2

0.10

0.100.02

Ash wt(g)

0.0080.0680.0380.0750.0230.0260.0150.0380.020

0.0390.030

0.02760.0350.0710.0680.0300.006

0.0370.0360.0450.0290.0640.0700.0240.002

Al

4,4306,0004,0201,9302,5301,2104,7009,2703,550

61641232.9271664

1,0501,2501,990

196171294279999

1,4001,5303,310

4,790

5,1251,170

Si

10,9002,5303,7802,2304,6902,8406,6004,5104,200

1,9402,030300

1,8303,0802,9003,2607,610

1,3101,2801,4602,1802,4402,3603,340

16,200

4,020

553386

Ca(%)

28.723.116.929.819.437.826.47.9626.9

36.533.06.3131.912.514.620.626.0

30.433.529.631.611.014.021.644.1

19.3

21.24.37

K(%)

19.08.3712.77.7713.27.305.0313.610.4

11.515.01.913.9

99999915.823.126.9

13.211.414.414.9

99999921.418.930.3

11.3

10.11.94

Sc

6.24.03.92.13.01.84.35.52.9

1.31.10.31.32.12.11.83.3

1.01.01.11.21.91.81.88

2.8

2.31.7

Ti

16414212956984211414385

272952229356584

23263335534976

172

234

36269

V

-66.2-11.1-26131710

16282.821

12.16.916

102

23272130

11.16.620

351

4.3

8.32.8

Cr

-61.1-1

-0.7-28

192314

23384.029

16.79.523152

33373142

15.08.629503

4.3

10.55.5

Mn

1,3302,5202,980379

2,860376425

1,4301,000

19212239.1108250236

1,4101,360

196200280269318328

1,8603,110

11,300

10,0771,799

Ash(%)

2.937.197.048.126.187.885.473.925.08

3.373.122.263.657.028.654.303.14

3.593.764.522.876.217.813.312.02

Li

1215.015.35.1813

16.94

9.622.94.8

17.844.216.995.6109

1.01.21.42.25.33.51024

4.4

4.62.0

B

898432262411506464204169195

438730142504768814

3,0302,430

26929028037592

105359616

254

19893

Be

0.0580.0460.0320.0110.0240.0100.0200.0240.012

0.0060.006-0.0020.0040.0060.0080.0100.013

0.0020.0040.0060.0070.0110.0100.0110.06

0.454

0.520.16

Mg(%)

5.220.8684.290.9373.910.6542.233.183.21

1.081.390.3141.252.261.183.042.85

1.421.311.861.421.430.8692.153.90

3.50

4.070.949

Table GS-21-4: Vegetation geochemical data for ashed samples collected from sites 1 and 3 at the study site and in the greenhouse. All values in ppm unless otherwise noted. A value of 999999 indicates a concentration greater than the range of the instrument. A negative value indicates a concentration less than the lower limit

of determination.

Fe(%)

1.922.461.600.9651.130.7071.913.181.49

0.3160.2990.0590.2660.3170.5090.5710.664

0.2720.2770.3030.2600.3810.6550.6640.95

3.09

1.460.321

Co

67.019.125.256.829.341.216.935.518.1

2.762.35

0.6442.303.436.008.9410.0

2.082.012.512.244.426.525.6810.2

54.3

48.85.67

Ni

13194.635.741.140.872.754.662.960.1

32.926.96.0329.613.021.737.175.4

31.527.425.843.917.217.635.2168

1,680

1,451201

D-dogwood, S-white spruce, A-aspen, W-willow, P-jack pine

147

Sample ID





Cu

8,2708,4305,9103,8202,9001,3301,7803,7001,500

20015545.6169519733871

1,280

137116222181702967

1,230995

457

39468

Rb

53.620.078.313.343.25.7116.134374.9

15.714.42.8215.143.217.631.438.8

18.823.421.418.367.737.139.959.9

435

42174.3

Zn

620501938693

1,5701,780426421980

28124546.3305388320

1,180798

363176265437276259583

1,090

2,340

1,709368

Y

9.939.036.291.623.911.801.372.311.13

0.1640.1270.0060.1240.3150.5260.4780.875

0.0940.0780.1860.1170.7310.9010.8081.50

4.71

4.860.383

Zr

28.44.786.704.7513.112.813.95.6212.0

7.276.32

0.70010.77.383.9718.759.6

7.338.907.3111.39.427.0821.5157

1.58

0.4880.436

Mo

8.004.1811.02.773.112.846.536.384.00

2.532.35

0.3032.792.907.1710.217.9

4.735.646.354.717.7414.245.0192

2.17

1.520.143

Nb

0.7840.9170.6950.7970.5090.9540.7120.7310.738

1.080.8980.0840.8990.4120.4210.6160.499

0.9361.05

0.9150.8900.4260.4560.6380.78

1.42

0.6000.074

Pd (ppb)

-195710357-7-6

-1091-8

95-511

128784768-25

9011186-5

1339498-75

85

8215

Ag

26.29.759.623.229.405.6515.69.558.38

5.053.71-0.045.731.413.437.3728.5

3.254.103.833.232.902.935.8072.8

1.79

1.810.09

Cd

3.381.891.5115.220.157.01.864.3422.0

0.4450.5180.1460.5627.363.819.843.29

0.3240.3520.3170.6183.542.475.863.8

1.62

1.500.189

In(ppb)

13213183.233.758.625.458.211644.8

9.434.153.047.6915.415.115.828.6

6.316.498.161.1020.821.322.557.7

14.6

14.92.12

Sn

-62-1-1-2-2-3-1-3

-1-2-2-1-1-1-2-8

-1-1-1-2-1-1-2

-25

2

-1-

Ga

0.6022.301.75

0.6890.8150.0930.8002.50

0.814

0.5120.1430.0670.3640.4810.4340.4710.361

0.4820.5130.4950.1650.6470.6520.5481.95

3.23

2.701.22

Ge

-0.0060.1720.0600.084-0.002-0.002-0.0030.438-0.003

0.3660.1140.0610.3730.4660.268-0.002-0.008

0.6500.6400.4440.1460.5000.298-0.002-0.03

0.586

0.1430.116

Se

-624.6

557.7

8103691777

14017227.214268.151.197302

14117914615861.251.9110945

29.4

39.914.4

As

7611.7

516.8

42817517

41497.642

19.215.22679

40484047

16.814.128

264

9.6

11.94.80

Sr

755565781193391189436118397

31325537.3264290179136844

278355251269135115118965

1,860

1,735304


of determination. (continued)

Sb

0.4160.4760.3360.2230.3550.1400.2490.2830.193

0.1030.1310.0180.2340.1570.1540.2750.405

0.0770.0980.1070.0950.1480.1570.27713.2

0.590

0.2400.044

Te

15.719.913.96.438.794.378.348.946.50

3.463.01

0.5072.564.254.713.7411.3

3.243.543.473.005.007.917.4823.1

0.762

1.260.459

Cs

0.2670.2360.3390.0580.2300.0490.1520.3950.300

0.0730.0440.0100.0360.0610.0410.0510.073

0.0490.0810.0930.0620.1520.1400.1150.12

1.30

1.390.111


148

Sample ID





Ba

84113986077.8418244468198415

22216519.1297349270564

1,290

224280216384513388522

2,690

242

423467

Eu

1.220.8780.6650.1030.3970.1980.1090.1060.092

0.0420.0340.0030.0500.0630.0570.1060.176

0.0390.0470.0410.0640.1090.1000.1100.37

0.248

0.2950.051

La

19.317.710.11.907.503.540.7540.9830.815

0.2980.1700.0210.1610.2900.4170.7120.883

0.1220.1140.2150.1510.6600.8760.9682.02

24.2

25.83.81

Tb

0.5950.4850.3080.0610.1950.0970.0420.0640.037

0.0110.008-0.0020.0100.0140.0190.0300.044

0.0070.0070.0090.0100.0300.0360.0380.09

0.149

0.1610.014

Dy

2.562.081.390.2880.8540.4190.2330.3990.197

0.0400.0240.0030.0240.0530.0820.0890.152

0.0140.0130.0310.0170.1240.1620.1450.26

0.693

0.7120.052

Er

1.040.8670.6070.1430.3600.1820.1390.2320.113

0.0180.0120.0020.0110.0320.0480.0500.084

0.0080.0070.0190.0120.0690.0870.0790.14

0.330

0.3490.028

Ho

0.4190.3460.2340.0520.1430.0690.0480.0800.037

0.0060.004-0.0020.0040.0110.0170.0170.028

0.0030.0030.0060.0030.0240.0300.0270.04

0.124

0.1270.010

Tm

0.1190.0930.0770.0190.0420.0220.0230.0350.017

0.0040.003-0.0020.0050.0090.0100.0120.020

0.0040.0040.0050.0050.0160.0160.0150.04

0.039

0.0390.003

Yb

0.8070.5990.6550.1460.3090.1770.2040.2720.179

0.0870.0550.0080.0970.1410.1290.2030.319

0.0860.1030.0940.1200.2410.2070.1910.69

0.282

0.2280.020

Lu

0.1740.1100.1690.0360.0750.0570.0650.0620.058

0.0420.0260.0040.0510.0590.0460.0990.150

0.0380.0500.0410.0580.0940.0730.0840.37

0.042

0.0330.004

Hf

0.6510.1750.1820.1200.2900.3040.2900.1240.246

0.1560.1400.0170.2160.1690.0850.4361.35

0.1540.1820.1560.2480.2130.1700.4753.54

0.046

0.0260.018

Ta

0.0070.0080.0070.0020.003-0.002-0.0030.002-0.003

-0.001-0.002-0.0020.0020.0020.001-0.002-0.008

0.0020.0020.001-0.0020.0030.002-0.002-0.03

0.024

0.0070.006

Ce

97.242.132.79.4141.433.433.912.930.9

15.811.81.6024.317.612.669.2141

15.318.815.629.330.418.966.3320

28.5

30.36.94

Pr

6.415.082.990.4822.161.070.2730.2920.279

0.1130.0670.0110.1090.1160.1350.3540.606

0.0690.0770.0870.1200.2510.2700.4081.34

2.51

2.640.189

Sm

5.444.202.550.3981.740.8560.1840.2900.186

0.0550.0380.0050.0320.0600.1020.1340.189

0.0250.0190.0400.0250.1500.1980.2040.40

1.05

1.200.101

Nd

26.521.612.72.028.714.290.8151.190.824

0.2590.1640.0270.1570.2910.4300.6750.846

0.1040.0860.1850.1340.6870.9691.011.96

7.57

7.980.541

Gd

5.074.102.710.4831.780.9930.4260.4740.406

0.2070.1550.0210.2940.2300.2230.6981.08

0.1940.2280.2040.3140.4640.3970.6422.68

1.31

1.480.196


of determination. (continued)

W

-0.61.00.70.40.4-0.20.52.10.6

0.3-0.2-0.20.40.30.3-0.2-0.8

0.50.30.3-0.20.40.50.33

0.2

0.30.1

Re(ppt)

26,60044,20010,10023,50014,10011,20012,90017,7002,970

12,3006,350

-25,560

255,000179,000190,000186,000

7,6604,79010,7009,720

498,000447,000463,000593,000

6,660

7,650901


149

Sample ID





Pt(ppb)

-13954-4-4-78-5

5-3-443-25

-17

-345-33-2-470

44

4016

U

0.3740.3360.6570.3870.1160.0650.0950.0770.162

0.0330.0200.0060.0300.1270.2740.2200.414

0.0160.0580.0900.0270.2770.3530.1860.40

0.411

0.3940.031

Au(ppb)

64297131048434317491

12393

141658

12550

123253

1,580

-34653034

122232

8

118

Tl

0.2770.2760.3490.1610.1230.0090.0820.4120.125

0.0200.0310.0050.0570.0350.0310.0380.073

0.0410.0240.0340.0680.0560.0660.0890.31

0.023

0.0230.009

Pb

29.429.318.110.110.77.0132.144.126.9

2.683.280.328.234.925.058.7916.9

4.273.134.224.3714.517.523.4224

23.0

22.92.1

Th

0.4540.4500.3530.1540.2290.1250.0950.1370.122

0.0600.0360.0040.0340.0560.0950.0880.139

0.0260.0220.0470.0260.1560.2180.1760.37

0.517

0.5220.048

Bi

39.746.027.913.523.38.6632.444.821.4

1.131.430.081.125.006.077.4814.7

0.800.551.510.886.138.1110.223.1

0.06

0.180.14

Table GS-21-4: Vegetation geochemical data for ashed samples collected from sites 1 and 3 at the study site and in thegreenhouse. All values in ppm unless otherwise noted. A value of 999999 indicates a concentration greater than the range of

the instrument. A negative value indicates a concentration less than the lower limit of determination. (continued)


phytoremediation of mine tailings and bio-ore production: … · 2014-06-09 · phytoremediation of...

Documents