Advances in Clinical Toxicology

Overview

This source page is a mechanical bulk-ingest record for a PDF in the research-pulls corpus. It preserves source-level identity, routeable product/analyte scope, and exact extracted numeric lines for later human or fresh-context audit. It does not derive HMTc thresholds, percentiles, or brand-by-brand comparisons.

Key numbers

The worker extracted the full PDF text with layout preservation twice and compared extraction hashes before commit. The following lines are copied from numeric/table-bearing regions of the PDF and retain the source units and wording where legible:

100%. Data analysis was performed with Spss 19 software, comparison of mean treatments with analysis of variance and
Duncan test at 1 % probability level and plotting of graphs with Excel software. The results showed that the uptake of heavy
metals by the plant, There is a significant difference at the 99% level. Also by increasing leachate treatment levels, Root and
shoot length, There is a significant difference at the 99% level. And with increasing levels of leachate treatment, the uptake of
heavy metals has increased. The highest root uptake was with an average of 200.21 mg/kg. And in the shoot, was 147.93 mg/
kg in a total of four treatments. The highest rate of heavy metal uptake was related to 100% treatment with a total of 225.25
mg/kg in roots and 178.87 mg/kg in shoots for four metals lead, cadmium, manganese and nickel. Among the heavy metals
manganese with an average of 123.88 mg, lead 91.08, nickel 79.69 and cadmium 53.49.27 mg/kg had the highest uptake by the
grass as a suitable natural tool for promoting a sustainable of concentrated nitric acid (65%) per each liter of leachate.
Also, there was no sewage or water stream in the path of the Sand (%) 65.58
requirement, 20 gallons of 25 liters of leachate was collected. Coarse sand (%) 26.02
Then, in order to stabilize it, 5 ml of concentrated 65% nitric Medium coarse sand(%) 31.21
acid was added per each liter of leachate which preserved Fine sand (%) 13.54
Concentration of Heavy Metals in the Leachate Water content (%) 5.72 ± 2.03
To determine the amount of heavy metals of leachate Saturation level (%) 13.97
in the laboratory, the amount of heavy metals in leachate are Porosity (%) 38.87 ± 4.39
presented in (Table 1) (58). Metal Contents (mg/kg)
Ni 209 31 TN (%) 0.225
Table 1: Heavy metal concentrations (μg/L) of leachate of OC (% 2.09
the site studied and the corresponding threshold limit values. Table 2: Physicochemical properties of selected soils.
with different concentrations were evaluated on Vetiver different leachate concentrations of 0, 30, 60 and 100% in
in 10 kg of contaminated landfill soil. Leachate was diluted difference in the level of 99%., and with the increase of waste
with concentrations of 0, 30, 60 and 100% compared to leachate treatment levels, the uptake of heavy metals in roots
(Table 2). of 200.21 mg/kg. That is, on average, the root was able to
analysis (HMs) adsorption is related to 100% treatment Among the
As accordance to Method laboratory instruction is related to 100% treatment with a total of 225.25 mg/
concentrated nitric acid (65%). Then using 1, 2, 3 ppm with an average of 70.70, lead 52.73, nickel 44.56 and
solution of each HMs from the prepared standard 1000 cadmium 32.22 mg/kg had the highest uptake by the plant.
created. and finally, The amount of uptake by plant organs 147.93 mg/kg, was for four treatments. In other words, on
was determined using the Perkin-Elmer PinAAcle 900TT average, the shoot was able to absorb 147.93 mg/kg of heavy
Dry weight of vetiver g/pot 100% treatment with a total of 178.87 mg/kg for the four
Leachate 30% 34.54 19.52 and cadmium, respectively. Manganese with an average of
Leachate 60% 38.01 25.11 53.18, lead 38.35, nickel 35.13 and cadmium 21.27 mg/kg,
Table 3: Dry weight of Vetiver. show that the plant significantly is able to absorb higher
treatments, including zero, 30, 60 and 100% leachate to heavy metals absorption in the roots and shoots (maximum
level of 5%, and graphs were made with Excel software. Based on Table 4, analysis of variance table with
has a significant difference at the level of 99%. In other
Table 4: Analysis of variance (mean squares) the effects of waste leachate treatments on the uptake of heavy metals (lead,
** Significant at the 99% probability level; * Significant at the 95% probability level; ns: not significant
Table 5: Analysis of variance (mean squares) the effects of waste leachate treatments on the uptake of heavy metals (lead,
** Significant at the 99% probability level; * Significant at the 95% probability level; ns: not significant
Based on Table 5, analysis of variance table with able to collect more heavy metals. This effect of leachate

Methods (brief)

bioaccumulation factors have been studied. This study collected from the location of the Saravan landfill, was
applied in terms of purpose. Data collection is collected Vetivers were irrigated and maintained for about 5
requirement, 20 gallons of 25 liters of leachate was collected. Coarse sand (%) 26.02
Rasht, 3 samples were taken and after analysis of samples
Soil samples were air dried and then ground. Heavy metals
were analyzed using an atomic absorption device; also, other The results showed that the highest rate of uptake
Preparation of samples, Acidic digestion, HMs used. Among the treatments used, the highest amount of
(I.R.I.DOE, 2010 Edition) After transferring the samples to the kg for the four studied metals (lead, cadmium, manganese
samples were prepared for the acid digestion process using lead, nickel and cadmium, respectively. And manganese
Atomic Absorption spectrophotometer (AAS) (59-62) metals from the 4 treatments used. Among the treatments
and baled municipal solid waste with high organic and from anaerobic digestion of municipal solid waste in
1. ASTM (2003) Standard practice for nitric acid digestion
1. Truong PD, Danh LT (2015) The Vetiver system for Nickel Alloys by Flame Atomic Absorption Spectrometry.
Atomic Absorption Spectroscopy.
Roberty) grown under different levels of red mud in Gasoline By Atomic Absorption Spectroscopy.

Implications

This page makes the source discoverable for category-level evidence routing. Values remain source-native and should be used only with the stated matrix, species, basis, geography, and censoring context from the paper. The page does not convert total mercury to methylmercury or use total arsenic as inorganic arsenic.

Wiki pages this source may touch

Verification notes

Identity check: DOI, raw handle, candidate cite-key, and SHA-256 were compared against existing wiki/sources/ pages before creation.
Full-PDF read: pdftotext -layout was run on the full PDF twice; extracted text hashes matched before the page was written.
Numeric verification: numeric/table-bearing lines were selected mechanically from the verified extraction and preserved without unit conversion or rounding.
Brand firewall: the worker skips PDFs when extracted numeric lines appear brand/manufacturer-sensitive; this page contains category-level or species-level evidence only.
HMTc firewall: no threshold, percentile, pass/fail, clean/dirty, or certification math is stated.

Update history

The five most recent substantive edits to this page, classified major (evidence or structure moved), correction (a published value or statement was wrong and has been fixed), or minor (narrative rewritten without changing the underlying evidence). Each description is derived from what the edit did to this page; the linked commit is the authoritative record, routine regeneration passes are excluded, and the full version history lives in git. When DOI minting comes online (see schema docs), each entry below will also link to a version-pinned DataCite DOI.

Commit	Date	Change	Description
b01ec52c	2026-08-04	major	2 sections added
d49e450f	2026-08-03	major	5 sections added; narrative text revised