4.7 Article

Effects of silver nanoparticles on survival, biomass change and avoidance behaviour of the endogeic earthworm Allolobophora chlorotica

期刊

ECOTOXICOLOGY AND ENVIRONMENTAL SAFETY
卷 141, 期 -, 页码 64-69

出版社

ACADEMIC PRESS INC ELSEVIER SCIENCE
DOI: 10.1016/j.ecoenv.2017.03.015

关键词

Allolobophora chlorotica; Avoidance behaviour; Ecotoxicology; Linear gradient; Silver nanoparticles

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Increasing commercial application of silver nanoparticles (Ag NP) and subsequent presence in wastewater and sewage sludge has raised concerns regarding their effects in the aquatic and terrestrial environment. Several studies have employed standardised acute and chronic earthworm-based tests to establish the toxicological. effects of Ag NP within soil. These studies have relied heavily on the use of epigiec earthworm species which may have limited ecological relevance in mineral soil. This study assessed the influence of Ag NP (uncoated 80 nm powder) and AgNO3 on survival, change in biomass and avoidance behaviour in a soil dwelling (endogiec) species, Allolobophora chlorotica. Earthworms were exposed for 14 days to soils spiked with Ag NP or AgNO3 at 0, 12.5, 25, 50 and 100 mg kg(-1) either separately for survival and biomass measurement, or combined within a linear gradient to assess avoidance. Avoidance behaviour was shown to provide the most sensitive endpoint with an observable effect at an Ag NP/AgNO3 concentration of 12.5 mg kg(-1) compared with 50 mg kg(-1) for biomass change and 100 mg kg(-1) for survival. Greater mortality was observed in AgNO3 (66.7%) compared with Ag NP spiked soils (12.5%) at 100 mg kg(-1), attributed to increased presence of silver ions. Although comparison of results with studies employing Eisenia fetida and Eisenia andrei suggest that the A. chlorotica response to Ag NP is more sensitive, further research employing both epigeic and endogeic earthworms under similar experimental conditions is required to confirm this observation.

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