4.7 Article

Hormesis induced by silver iodide, hydrocarbons, microplastics, pesticides, and pharmaceuticals: Implications for agroforestry ecosystems health

期刊

SCIENCE OF THE TOTAL ENVIRONMENT
卷 820, 期 -, 页码 -

出版社

ELSEVIER
DOI: 10.1016/j.scitotenv.2022.153116

关键词

Contaminant hormesis; Dose-response relationship; Environmental pollution; Forest restoration; Risk assessment

向作者/读者索取更多资源

The increasing presence of substances such as silver iodide in the environment due to weather modification programs and human activities can induce hormesis, which has both beneficial and toxic effects depending on the dosage. Lower doses of these substances can enhance defense physiology, growth, and reproduction, but also stimulate pathogenic microbes and pesticide-resistant pests.
Increasing amounts of silver iodide (AgI) in the environment are expected because of the recent massive expansion of weather modification programs. Concurrently, pharmaceuticals, microplastics, hydrocarbons, and pesticides in terrestrial ecosystems continue contaminating forests and agroforests. Our review supports that AgI induces hormesis, a biphasic dose response characterized by often beneficial low-dose responses and toxic high-dose effects, which adds to the evidence for pharmaceuticals, microplastics, hydrocarbons, and pesticides induced hormesis in numerous species. Doses smaller than the no-observed-adverse-effect-level (NOAEL) positively affect defense physiology, growth, biomass, yields, survival, lifespan, and reproduction. They also lead to negative or undesirable outcomes, including stimulation of pathogenic microbes, pest insects, and weeds with enhanced resistance to drugs and potential negative multi-or trans-generational effects. Such sub-NOAEL effects perplex terrestrial ecosystems managements and may compromise combating outbreaks of disease vectors that can threaten not only forest and agroforestry health but also sensitive human subpopulations living in remote forested areas.

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

4.7
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