4.8 Article

New Perspective on the Nanoplastics Disrupting the Reproduction of an Endangered Fern in Artificial Freshwater

期刊

ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCE & TECHNOLOGY
卷 53, 期 21, 页码 12715-12724

出版社

AMER CHEMICAL SOC
DOI: 10.1021/acs.est.9b02882

关键词

-

资金

  1. National Key Research and Development Program of China [2018YFD0900604]
  2. Guangdong Province Universities and Colleges Pearl River Scholar Funded Scheme (2018)
  3. Sino-Africa Joint Research Center, Chinese Academy of Sciences [Y623321K01]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

The potential risks of micro/nanoplastics on the ecological environment, particularly aquatic fauna, have been realized in recent years. However, information about its potential effects on aquatic plants is scarce. In this study, a four-week exposure experiment was conducted to investigate the effects of varying polystyrene nanoplastics concentration (PS-NPs, 0-100 mu g/mL) on the early development of an endangered aquatic plant, Ceratopteris pteridoides. Fluorescent observations demonstrated that PS-NPs were adsorbed and accumulated on the spore surface of C. pteridoides rapidly and massively with increasing exposure concentration and time. The adsorption and accumulation of PS-NPs on the spore surface posed a negative effect on spore imbibition, causing 2.3-22.4% reduction in final spore size. Spore germination and gametophyte sex differentiation were both negatively affected by PS-NP exposure, resulting in 10.4-88.0% inhibition in germination ratio and 2.9-53.4% reduction in hermaphroditic gametophyte ratio. Additionally, PS-NPs were observed to penetrate into the roots of gametophytes. Higher concentration of PS -NPs (100 mu g/mL) can even induce pathological changes on gametophytes, although with a low incidence (4.9%). The results above indicated that exposure to PS-NPs caused a series of disruptions from the spore imbibition to germination and gametophyte stages, and are likely to pose an eco-physiological risk on the reproductive success of endangered ferns.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.8
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据