Key Laboratory of Forest Ecology and Management, Institute of Applied Ecology, Chinese Academy of Sciences, Shenyang 110016, China.
Key Laboratory of Forest Ecology and Management, Institute of Applied Ecology, Chinese Academy of Sciences, Shenyang 110016, China; CAS Engineering Laboratory for Green Fertilizers, Institute of Applied Ecology, Chinese Academy of Sciences, Shenyang 110016, China.
Environ Pollut. 2023 Jun 1;326:121512. doi: 10.1016/j.envpol.2023.121512. Epub 2023 Mar 24.
Microplastic residues pose one of the most serious environmental problems in areas where plastic mulch is used extensively. Microplastic pollution has potentially serious consequences for ecosystems and human health. Several studies have analyzed microplastics in greenhouses or laboratory climate-controlled chambers; however, field studies evaluating the effects of different microplastics on different crops in extensive farming are limited. Therefore, we selected three major crops, Zea mays (ZM, monocotyledon), Glycine max (GM, dicotyledon, aboveground-bearing), and Arachis hypogaea (AH, dicotyledon, belowground-bearing) and investigated the effect of adding polyester microplastics (PES-MPs) and polypropylene microplastics (PP-MPs). Our results demonstrate that PP-MPs and PES-MPs decreased the soil bulk density of ZM, GM, and AH. Regarding soil pH, PES-MPs increased the soil pH of AH and ZM, whereas PP-MPs decreased the soil pH of ZM, GM, and AH compared to controls. Intriguingly, different coordinated trait responses to PP-MPs and PES-MPs were observed in all crops. In general, commonly measured parameters of AH, such as plant height, culm diameter, total biomass, root biomass, PSII maximum photochemical quantum yield (Fv/Fm), hundred-gain weight, and soluble sugar tended to decrease under PP-MPs exposure; however, some indicators of ZM and GM increased under PP-MPs exposure. PES-MPs had no obviously adverse influence on the three crops, except for the biomass of GM, and even significantly increased the chlorophyll content of AH, specific leaf area, and soluble sugar of GM. Compared with PES-MPs, PP-MPs have serious negative effects on crop growth and quality, especially AH. The findings of the present study provides evidence for evaluating the impact of soil microplastic pollution on crop yield and quality in farmland and lay a foundation for future investigations on the exploration of MP toxicity mechanisms and adaptability of different crops to microplastics.
微塑料残留是广泛使用塑料地膜地区面临的最严重环境问题之一。微塑料污染对生态系统和人类健康可能造成严重后果。已有几项研究分析了温室或实验室控温控湿环境中的微塑料,但在广泛种植农田中评估不同微塑料对不同作物影响的田间研究有限。因此,我们选择了三种主要作物,玉米(单子叶植物)、大豆(双子叶植物,地上部分承载)和花生(双子叶植物,地下部分承载),并研究了添加聚酯微塑料(PES-MPs)和聚丙烯微塑料(PP-MPs)的影响。我们的结果表明,PP-MPs 和 PES-MPs 降低了 ZM、GM 和 AH 的土壤容重。关于土壤 pH 值,PES-MPs 增加了 AH 和 ZM 的土壤 pH 值,而 PP-MPs 则降低了 ZM、GM 和 AH 的土壤 pH 值,与对照相比。有趣的是,在所有作物中都观察到了对 PP-MPs 和 PES-MPs 的不同协调特征响应。一般来说,AH 的常用参数,如株高、茎粗、总生物量、根生物量、PSII 最大光化学量子产量(Fv/Fm)、百克增重和可溶性糖,在 PP-MPs 暴露下趋于降低;然而,ZM 和 GM 的一些指标在 PP-MPs 暴露下增加。PES-MPs 对三种作物没有明显的不良影响,除了 GM 的生物量,甚至显著增加了 AH 的叶绿素含量、比叶面积和 GM 的可溶性糖。与 PES-MPs 相比,PP-MPs 对作物生长和品质有严重的负面影响,尤其是对 AH。本研究结果为评估农田土壤微塑料污染对作物产量和品质的影响提供了证据,并为未来研究微塑料毒性机制和不同作物对微塑料的适应性奠定了基础。