4.6 Article

Biotoxicity Evaluations of Three Typical Biochars Using a Simulated System of Fast Pyrolytic Biochar Extracts on Organisms of Three Kingdoms

Journal

ACS SUSTAINABLE CHEMISTRY & ENGINEERING
Volume 5, Issue 1, Pages 481-488

Publisher

AMER CHEMICAL SOC
DOI: 10.1021/acssuschemeng.6b01859

Keywords

Pyrolytic biochar; Biotoxicity; Pseudomonas aeruginosa; Triticum spp.; Caenorhabditis elegans; UV254 value; Gel permeation chromatography

Funding

  1. National Natural Science Foundation of China [21677138]
  2. Fundamental Research Funds for the Central Universities [WK2060190063]

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Biochar is a solid material obtained from thermochemical conversion of biomass in an oxygen -limited environment. It is widely used as a soil remediator and carbon sequestrator. However, its biotoxicity to the ecosystem remains unclear. In this study, we assess the toxic effects of three fast Pyrolytic biochar extract solutions (rice husk, saw dust, Acorus calamus) on a miocroorganism (Pseudomonas aeruginosa), a plant (Triticum spp.), and an animal (Caenorhabditis elegans). Systematic toxicity tests indicate that the biotoxicity of biochars varies with their biomass sources. Biochars derived from rice husk and sawdust have negligible toxic effects on all the tested organisms, suggesting that biochars obtained from agricultural waste are safe for soil application. By contrast, biochar derived from Acorus calamus shows significant toxicity on all tested organisms at relative high dosage, indicating that risk assessment is necessary before its environmental use. Furthermore, this study found that use of the UV254 value is more practical than the SUV254 value for evaluation of biochar biotoxicity. Finally, gel permeation chromatography (GPC) suggests that certain small aromatic molecules may be responsible for the toxicity of biochar derived from Acorus calamus.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.6
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available