Lead and zinc are often found together in mineral deposits, and the wastes from their extraction have left large areas of contaminated land worldwide. Rouhani (2025) reviewed phytoremediation strategies across these sites and found that the most reliable conclusion is the need for site-specific design.
Why lead-zinc sites are hard to generalise
Mine spoils vary in pH, organic matter, texture, metal speciation, and co-occurring contaminants such as cadmium and arsenic. A plant that performs well on one tailings pile may fail on another because lead bioavailability differs by an order of magnitude. The review emphasises that choosing a plant without characterising the soil is one of the common reasons phytoremediation trials underperform.
Assisted phytoremediation is the norm
Because lead is poorly bioavailable, most successful lead-zinc mine projects use assisted phytoremediation: chelators, organic amendments, microbes, or fertilisers that increase metal uptake or stabilise the soil. The review notes that these interventions must be selected together; a chelator that raises uptake in one soil may increase leaching in another.
Conservation and remediation together
Many lead-zinc mining regions also support metallophyte flora — plants adapted to naturally metal-rich soils. Some of these species are rare or endemic. Phytoremediation designs that use native metallophytes can combine contamination control with habitat conservation, an approach that is increasingly preferred over introducing non-native hyperaccumulators.
This analysis is grounded in the cited review source. See our methodology for how review evidence is handled.