4.5 Article

Germination, cytotoxicity, and mutagenicity in Lactuca sativa L. and Passiflora alata Curtis in response to sewage sludge application

期刊

ECOTOXICOLOGY
卷 32, 期 5, 页码 628-637

出版社

SPRINGER
DOI: 10.1007/s10646-023-02673-4

关键词

Biosolids; Chromosomal aberrations; Initial growth; Toxicity; Sewage sludge

向作者/读者索取更多资源

The aim of this study was to investigate the effect of sewage sludge (SS) dosage on the cell cycle and growth of Lactuca sativa and Passiflora alata. The results showed that SS concentrations above 120 t ha(-1) adversely affected the germination and early growth of L. sativa and P. alata, with high concentrations inducing genetic damage and chromosomal and nuclear changes in L. sativa.
The physical and chemical characteristics of the soil can influence plant growth. When sewage sludge (SS) is applied as a soil fertilizer, the accumulation of non-essential elements contained in it can be toxic for plants. The aim of this study was to understand the effect of SS dosage on the cell cycle of Lactuca sativa L. meristematic cells and on the initial growth of L. sativa and Passiflora alata Curtis. Nine concentrations of SS + distilled water (mg dm(-3)) corresponding to 0, 20, 40, 60, 80, 120, 160, 320, and 520 t ha(-1) were tested in four replicates of 25 seeds. Chemical analysis showed an increase in pH of the sludge from 0 to 80 t ha(-1) SS followed by its stabilization thereafter. The highest electrical conductivity was observed at 520 t ha(-1) SS. SS negatively affected the germination and initial growth of seedlings from P. alata and L. sativa. Cytogenetic analysis on 6000 L. sativa meristematic cells for each treatment revealed that SS could adversely affect the genetic stability of this species. SS concentrations above 120 t ha(-1) adversely affected the germination and early seedling growth of L. sativa and P. alata. At high concentrations (120 t ha(-1)), SS induced genetic lesions in L. sativa, along with chromosomal and nuclear alterations.

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

4.5
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