Next Article in Journal
High-Rise Residential Outdoor Space Value System: A Case Study of Yangtze River Delta Area
Previous Article in Journal
Being a Parent of Children with Disabilities during the COVID-19 Pandemic: Multi-Method Study of Health, Social Life, and Occupational Situation
Previous Article in Special Issue
Synthesis, Characterization and Decomposition of Potassium Jarosite for Adsorptive As(V) Removal in Contaminated Water: Preliminary Study
 
 
Search for Articles:
Title / Keyword
Author / Affiliation / Email
Journal
Article Type
 
 
Advanced Search
 
Section
Special Issue
Volume
Issue
Number
Page
 
Journals
IJERPH
Volume 20
Issue 4
10.3390/ijerph20043106
ijerph-logo
Submit to this Journal Review for this Journal Propose a Special Issue
► Article Menu

Article Menu

share Share announcement Help format_quote Cite question_answer Discuss in SciProfiles thumb_up
...
Endorse textsms
...
Comment
first_page
settings
Order Article Reprints
Font Type:
Arial Georgia Verdana
Font Size:
Aa Aa Aa
Line Spacing:
Column Width:
Background:
Article

Metal Release from Microplastics to Soil: Effects on Soil Enzymatic Activities and Spinach Production

by
Giorgia Santini
1,
Valeria Memoli
1,*,
Ermenegilda Vitale
1,
Gabriella Di Natale
2,
Marco Trifuoggi
3,
Giulia Maisto
1,4 and
Lucia Santorufo
1,4
1
Department of Biology, University of Naples Federico II, Via Cinthia, 80126 Naples, Italy
2
CeSMA—Centre of Meteorologic and Avanced Thecnology Services, University of Naples Federico II, Nicolangelo Protopisani Course, San Giovanni a Teduccio, 80146 Naples, Italy
3
Department of Chemistry, University of Naples Federico II, Via Cinthia, 80126 Naples, Italy
4
BAT Center—Center for Studies on Bioinspired Agro-Environmental Technology, 80100 Naples, Italy
*
Author to whom correspondence should be addressed.
Int. J. Environ. Res. Public Health 2023, 20(4), 3106; https://doi.org/10.3390/ijerph20043106
Submission received: 26 January 2023 / Revised: 8 February 2023 / Accepted: 9 February 2023 / Published: 10 February 2023
(This article belongs to the Special Issue Toxic Metal in Soil, Water and Biota Compartments: Contamination and Remediation)
Browse Figures
Versions Notes

Abstract

:
Microplastics (MPs) represent emergent pollutants in terrestrial ecosystems. Microplastics can cause the release of metal and damage to crop quality. The present research aimed to evaluate the effects of Mater-bi (Bio-MPs) and polyethylene (PE-MPs) MPs at different concentrations on soil properties and on the growth of Spinacia oleracea L. Plants were grown in 30 pots filled with soil mixed with 0.5, 1 and 2% d.w. of Bio-MPs and PE-MPs and in 5 pots filled only with soil, considered as controls (K). At the end of the vegetative cycle, the spinach plants were evaluated for the epigeal (EPI) and hypogeal (HYPO) biomasses and the ratio of HYPO/EPI was calculated. In the soil, the total and the available fractions of Cr, Cu, Ni and Pb and the hydrolase (HA), β-glucosidase (β-glu), dehydrogenase (DHA) and urease (U) activities were evaluated. The results revealed that the addition of Bio-MPs increased soil total Cr, Cu and Pb and available Cu concentrations, and the addition of PE-MPs increased Pb availability. In soil contaminated by both Bio-MPs and PE-MPs, HA and β-glu activities were stimulated, whereas DHA activity was reduced. The HYPO and HYPO/EPI biomasses were reduced only in soils contaminated by the 2% Bio-MPs.

1. Introduction

Vegetables are at the base of the human diet as they contain healthy compounds and guarantee human wellbeing [1]. Among the most consumed leafy vegetables worldwide, spinach (Spinacia oleracea L.) is easy to grow, has a short growing period and is rich in bioactive compounds that work as reactive-oxygen species scavengers, modulate the expression of genes involved in human metabolism, inflammation, proliferation and provide antioxidant defense [2]. To provide the human population with sufficient vegetables all year round, it is necessary to apply agricultural management promoting and maximizing vegetable production [3].
Plastic mulching is a widespread application in agriculture because it creates soil conditions that favor vegetable growth [4]. For this reason, recently, the use of plastic mulches has increased rapidly worldwide in order to meet the growing demand for food [5]. Unfortunately, plastic mulches are very often left on soil for decades and their improper management causes their degradation [6] in small fragments: microplastics (MPs). Microplastic fragments, especially those that are very tiny, can be absorbed by microorganisms and by plant roots, entering into the food web [7].
Polyethylene (PE), because of its durability, is the most common type of plastic mulch used in agriculture. Recently, in order to mitigate the adverse effects of conventional MPs, biodegradable plastic mulches have been used as they degrade more rapidly than conventional PE film [8], guaranteeing comparable agricultural benefits [9].
Moreover, both conventional and biodegradable MPs can serve as carriers of heavy metals that are added during the production processes to improve the specific performance, functionality and aging properties of the end products [10]. During the weathering and fragmentation processes of plastic sheets, metals can be released leading to the contamination of the soil system [11].
Intensive cultivation and agricultural management have resulted in certain soil problems, among which is soil metal accumulation [12]. Total metal concentration does not reflect metal bioavailability and can exert adverse effects on soil microbial activity [13] and plant growth [14]. In fact, metals present in bioavailable form directly affect plant growth, physiology and development, as plants can easily absorb these elements from soil [15]. Previous research highlighted that in soils contaminated by Cu and Pb an inhibition of seed germination, root proliferation and plant biomass occurred [16].
As with plants, soil microorganisms are also vulnerable to the available fraction of heavy metals that affect their growth and activities [17]. In particular, many soil enzymes (such as hydrolase, dehydrogenase, β-glucosidase and urease) are used as indicators of heavy metal contamination since they quickly respond to changes of soil condition [18]. For example, Hu et al. [19] proposed the use of dehydrogenase as an indicator of microbial activity in soils contaminated by heavy metals.
The effects of heavy metals on soil functioning and plant growth have been recognized [14,20], but the combined effects of metal and MP pollution on microbial activity and plant development are scarcely known. Therefore, the present research aimed to fill the current gap about the impact of MPs and metals on soil activities and on plant growth. Moreover, a comparison of these impacts between soil contaminated by conventional (PE-MPs) and biodegradable microplastics (Bio-MPs) was assessed. To achieve the aims, the research was performed in pots filled with horticultural soils contaminated by PE-MPs and Bio-MPs at three different percentages (0.5%, 1% and 2% v/v) where individual spinach plants were grown.

2. Materials and Methods

2.1. Experimental Design

A total of 35 pots with a diameter of 15 cm were set up, each filled with approximately 350 g of horticultural soil (EUROTERRIFLORA s.r.l., Bucine, Italy) (Table 1).
Five pots were filled only with horticultural soil and used as controls (K), fifteen were treated with microplastics (MPs) from polyethylene (PE-MPs) at different percentages, 0.5, 1 and 2% of soil dry weight (for 5 pots each), and fifteen were treated with MPs from Mater-bì® (Bio-MPs) at the same percentages of PE-MPs (Figure 1). The chosen percentages are reported in the literature as the most used to highlight the impacts of MPs on soil properties and plants [7,21].
Fragments of PE and Mater-bì® were generated in the laboratory from agricultural mulch sheets using a liquid nitrogen grinder. Grinding cycles were performed from 5 to 10 times to achieve microplastic sizes ranging from 20 μm to 5 mm in diameter (Figure 2A,B).
Previously, forty seeds of Spinacia oleracea L. (spinach) of the “matador” variety were germinated in the dark at a room temperature of 24 ± 1 °C. Then, the seedlings were transplanted in pots as described above and grown in a greenhouse at the same environmental conditions: PPFD of 900 ± 100 µmol (photons) m−2 s−1 at the top of the canopy, photoperiod of 12 h, temperature of 26 ± 1 °C, relative humidity of 55–60%. Plants were regularly watered and followed until the end of the vegetative cycle. Spinach was chosen for its importance at social and economic levels. In fact, it is widely cultivated in southern Italy as it is at the base of the human Mediterranean diet.

2.2. Sampling and Analyses

The soil and plant sampling were carried out at the end of plant vegetative cycle. In each pot, the spinach plants were collected removing the soil from the roots and separating the epigeal (EPI) from the hypogeal (HYPO) portions. Contextually, soil samples (0–10 cm) were collected from each pot.
The total concentrations and available fractions of Cr, Cu, Ni and Pb were measured according to Memoli et al. (2017) [22] and measured by inductively coupled plasma mass spectrometry (ICP-MS Aurora M90, Bruker, Billerica, MA, USA).
Hydrolase activity (HA) was determined by adding 7.5 mL of 60 mM potassium phosphate (pH 7.6) and 0.100 mL of fluorescein diacetate (FDA) to 3 g of fresh soil. The details of the method were reported in Adam and Duncan (2001) [23].
Dehydrogenase activity (DHA) was determined by adding 1 mL of 1.5% 2,3,5-triphenyltetrazolium chloride (TTC) dissolved in 0.1 M Tris-HCl buffer (pH 7.5) to 1 g of fresh soil according to Memoli et al. (2018) [17].
β-glucosidase activity (β-glu) was determined by adding 4 mL of modified universal buffer (MUB) pH 6 and 1 mL of 0.025M p-nitrophenyl β-D-glucopiranoside (PNP) to 1 g of soil according to Tabatabai and Bremner (1969) and Tabatabai (1988) [24,25].
Urease activity (U) was determined by adding 0.5 mL of urea (0.1 M) and 4 mL of borate buffer (0.1 M pH 8.8) to 1 g of fresh soil according to Kendeler (1988) and Alef and Nannipieri (1995) [26,27].
The biomass of EPI and HYPO portions was determined on oven-dried plant samples at 75 °C for 48 h and expressed in grams of dry weight (d.w.) per plant. The ratio of HYPO/EPI for all experimental conditions was also calculated.

2.3. Statistical Analyses

In order to verify the normal data distribution and homogeneity of variance, the Shapiro–Wilks and Levene Median tests were assessed, respectively.
The differences in soil element concentrations (total and available), in soil enzymatic activities (HA, DHA, β-glu and U) and in plant biomasses (EPI, HYPO, HYPO/EPI), between K and the different percentages (0.5, 1 and 2% d.w.) of PE-MPs and Bio-MPs were assessed through one-way analysis of variance (ANOVA) combined with post hoc comparison tests (pairwise Student–Newman–Keuls test or Fisher LSD method).
The differences in soil element concentrations (total and available), in soil enzymatic activities (HA, DHA, β-glu and U) and in plant biomasses (EPI, HYPO, HYPO/EPI), among the percentages (0.5, 1 and 2% d.w.) inside the same treatment (PE-MPs or Bio-MPs) were assessed through one-way analysis of variance (ANOVA) combined with post hoc comparison tests (pairwise Student–Newman–Keuls test or Fisher LSD method).
The differences in soil element concentrations (total and available), in soil enzymatic activities (HA, DHA, β-glu and U) and in plant biomasses (EPI, HYPO, HYPO/EPI), between the same percentage (0.5, 1 and 2% d.w.) of PE-MPs and Bio-MPs were assessed through the t-test.
A Principal Components Analysis (PCA) was performed on soil and plant properties to evaluate the treatment distribution (K, PE-MPs and Bio-MPs) and to identify the main properties driving the distribution. The PCA was conducted using the Past 4.0 software. The PERMANOVA analyses (Vegan package, Adonis function—pairwise.perm.manova test for p < 0.05) were carried out on the selected soil and plant properties to highlight the significant differences among treatments (K, PE-MPs and Bio-MPs).
The statistical analyses and the PERMANOVA analyses were performed using the R 4.0.3 programming environment and graphical displays with Sigma-Plot 9.0 software (Jandel Scientific, San Rafael, CA, USA).

3. Results

3.1. Soil Metal Total Concentrations

Total concentrations of Cr, Cu, Ni and Pb in control (K) and in soils contaminated with different percentages (0.5, 1 and 2% d.w.) of conventional microplastics (PE-MPs) and biodegradable microplastics (Bio-MPs) are reported in Figure 3. Soil total Ni concentrations in both PE-MPs and Bio-MPs did not statistically vary as compared to K (Figure 3). Instead, soil total concentrations of Cr, Cu and Pb in 2% Bio-MPs (Cr: 28.7 μg g−1 d.w.; Cu: 46.9 μg g−1 d.w.; Pb: 21.6 μg g−1 d.w.) were significantly (p < 0.05) higher than in K (Cr: 19.9 μg g−1 d.w.; Cu: 35.6 μg g−1 d.w.; Pb: 16.2 μg g−1 d.w.) and also soil total concentrations of Cu in 0.5 % Bio-MPs (51.5 μg g−1 d.w.) were significantly (p < 0.01) higher than in K (Figure 3).
Total concentrations of the investigated metals did not statistically vary among the different percentages within the same treatment (PE-MPs or Bio-MPs).
Yet, the total concentrations of the investigated metals in soils contaminated with the same percentage did not statistically vary between the two treatments (PE-MPs vs. Bio-MPs), except for Pb, which was significantly (p < 0.05) higher in 2% PE-MPs than 2% Bio-MPs (Table 2).

3.2. Soil Available Fractions

The available fractions of Cr, Cu, Ni and Pb in control (K) and in soils contaminated with different percentages (0.5, 1 and 2% d.w.) of conventional microplastics (PE-MPs) and biodegradable microplastics (Bio-MPs) are reported in Figure 4. Soil Cr and Ni availabilities in both PE-MPs and Bio-MPs did not significantly vary as compared to K (Figure 4). Instead, soil Cu availabilities were significantly (p < 0.001) higher in all Bio-MP treatments (0.5%: 12.5 μg g−1 d.w.; 1%: 14.2 μg g−1 d.w.; 2%: 15.9 μg g−1 d.w.) than in K (1.39 μg g−1 d.w.) (Figure 4) and also soil Pb availabilities were significantly (p < 0.05) higher in 2% PE-MPs (3.23 μg g−1 d.w.) than in K (2.18 μg g−1 d.w.) (Figure 4).
Metal availabilities did not significantly vary among the different percentages within the same treatment (PE-MPs or Bio-MPs).
The comparison of metal availabilities in soils contaminated with the same percentage of PE-MPs and Bio-MPs highlighted that Cr did not significantly vary (Table 2). Instead, Cu availabilities in all the percentage Bio-MPs were significantly (p < 0.001 for 0.5% and 1% and p < 0.01 for 2%) higher than in PE-MPs (Table 2); Ni availabilities in 0.5% and 1% Bio-MPs were significantly (p < 0.001 and p < 0.05, respectively) higher than in PE-MPs (Table 2). By contrast, Pb availabilities in 1% and 2% PE-MPs were significantly (p < 0.05) higher than in Bio-MPs (Table 2).

3.3. Ratio of Metal Availability with Respect to Total Concentration

The ratios between the availability and the total concentration for Cr, Cu, Ni and Pb are reported in Table 3. The ratios of all the metals for PE-MPs as well as those of Cr and Ni for Bio-MPs did not significantly vary as compared to K (Table 3). Instead, the ratios of Cu for all the percentage Bio-MPs were significantly (p < 0.05) higher than in K (Table 3), those of Pb for 0.5% and 2% Bio-MPs were significantly (p < 0.05) lower than in K and those of Pb for 2% PE-MPs were significantly (p < 0.05) higher than in K (Table 3).
The ratios between the availability and the total concentration for the investigated metals did not significantly vary among the different percentages within the same treatment (PE-MPs or Bio-MPs).
The ratios in soils contaminated with the same percentage did not significantly vary between the two treatments (PE-MPs vs. Bio-MPs) for Cr and Ni (Table 4). Instead, the ratios for Cu were significantly higher in Bio-MPs than in PE-MPs for all the percentages (p < 0.01 for 0.5% and p < 0.001 for 1% and 2%), whereas the ratios for Pb were significantly higher in PE-MPs than in Bio-MPs for 1% and 2% (p < 0.01) (Table 4).

3.4. Enzymatic Activities in Soil Contaminated with PE-MPs and Bio-MPs at Different Percentages

The soil enzymatic activities, hydrolase (HA), dehydrogenase (DHA), β-glucosidase (β-glu) and urease (U), are reported in Figure 5.
Urease in both PE-MPs and Bio-MPs did not significantly vary as compared to K (Figure 5). Instead, HA and β-glu in 2% PE-MPs (HA: 10.5 mmol FDA min−1g−1 d.w. and β-glu: 23.8 mmol PNP min−1g−1 d.w.) were significantly (p < 0.05) higher than in K (HA: 8.84 mmol FDA min−1g−1 d.w. and β-glu: 17.8 mmol PNP min−1g−1 d.w) (Figure 5); by contrast, DHA in all the percentage PE-MPs (0.5%: 0.06 mmol TPF min−1g−1 d.w.; 1%: 0.06 mmol TPF min−1g−1 d.w.; 2%: 0.05 mmol TPF min−1g−1 d.w.) was significantly (p < 0.01) lower than in K (0.139 mmol TPF min−1g−1 d.w.) (Figure 5). Moreover, HA in 0.5% and 2% Bio-MPs (0.5%: 10.9; 2%: 10.4) was significantly (p < 0.05) higher than in K (Figure 5); β-glu in 1% and 2% Bio-MPs (1%: 21.6 mmol PNP min−1g−1 d.w.; 2%: 25.6 mmol PNP min−1g−1 d.w.) was significantly (p < 0.05 and p < 0.001, respectively) higher than in K (Figure 5); DHA in all the percentage Bio-MPs (0.5%: 0.10 mmol TPF min−1g−1 d.w.; 1%: 0.07 mmol TPF min−1g−1 d.w.; 2%: 0.10 mmol TPF min−1g−1 d.w.) was significantly (p < 0.05) lower than in K.
The enzymatic activities of DHA and U in soils did not significantly vary among the different percentages within the same treatment (PE-MPs or Bio-MPs) except for HA for PE-MPs and β-glu for Bio-MPs that were higher at the increase in the percentage of MPs (Figure 5).
The enzymatic activities in soils contaminated with the same percentage did not significantly vary between the two treatments (PE-MPs vs. Bio-MPs).

3.5. Biomasses of Plants

The values of plant epigeal (EPI) and hypogeal (HYPO) biomasses and their ratios (HYPO/EPI) measured at the end of the vegetative cycle of plants grown on control soils and in soils contaminated with different percentages of conventional microplastics and biodegradable microplastics are reported in Figure 6.
The comparison of the biomasses of plants grown on K, PE-MP and Bio-MP soils highlighted that both EPI and HYPO biomasses as well as the HYPO/EPI of plants grown on soils contaminated by PE-MPs did not significantly vary as compared to those of plants grown on K (Figure 6); instead, they were significantly (p < 0.05) lower in plants grown on 2% Bio-MPs (EPI: 15.0 g; HYPO: 1.2 g; HYPO/EPI: 0.1 g) than in K (EPI: 26.1 g; HYPO: 5.1 g; HYPO/EPI: 0.2 g) (Figure 6).
The comparison of the biomasses of plants grown on soils at different percentages of PE-MPs highlighted that no statistical differences were found. Instead, EPI, HYPO and HYPO/EPI were significantly lower at the increase in the percentage of Bio-MPs (Figure 6).
The comparison of EPI and HYPO biomasses and the HYPO/EPI ratio of plants grown at the same percentage between the two treatments (PE-MPs vs. Bio-MPs) highlighted that no significant differences were found (Figure 6).

3.6. Correlations between Soil Abiotic and Biotic Parameters in Soil Contaminated with PE-MPs and Bio-MPs

The correlations performed to evaluate the significance of the relationships between the enzymatic activities in soils or the plant biomasses and the soil metal concentrations highlighted that, for soils contaminated with PE-MPs, both β-glu and plant epigeal biomass (EPI) were positively correlated to Ni availability (Figure 7).

3.7. Principal Component Analyses on Soil Parameters

The PCA, performed on all the investigated soil and plant properties, highlighted that the first two axes accounted, respectively, for 20% and 17% of the total variance (Figure 8). The available fraction of Cu, EPI, HYPO and the HYPO/EPI ratio explained the major part of the variance of the first axis (Figure 8), whereas the available fractions of Ni and Pb and the total metal concentration of Cr, DHA and β-glu explained the major part of the variance of the second axis (Figure 8). The first axis clearly separated PE-MPs and Bio-MPs, as the former located along the negative part of the axis and the latter along the positive one (Figure 8). The second axis clearly separated K soils as they located along the negative part of the second axis (Figure 8). The PERMANOVA analyses highlighted that soil treated with Bio-MPs was significantly different (p < 0.05) from K and PE-MP soils.

4. Discussion

The present research highlighted that the addition of conventional microplastics (PE-MPs) and biodegradable microplastics (Bio-MPs) to soils caused variations in the total and available fraction of the investigated metals (Cu, Cr, Ni and Pb) that often were also significant. The findings agree with those reported by several researchers [28,29,30] who found that MPs can affect the speciation, transformation and bioavailability of heavy metals such as Zn, Cu, Ni, Cd, Cr, As and Pb.
Contrarily from what happened in soils contaminated by PE-MPs, those highly (2%) contaminated by Bio-MPs caused significant increases in total concentrations of Cu, Cr and Pb. This could be due to the release in soils of harmful additives, containing metals used during the production of bioplastic films [31,32,33]. Bioplastics have stronger metal adsorption capacities than conventional plastics, due to their crystallization and carrier adsorption characteristics [11]. In addition, this phenomenon becomes more marked at the highest concentrations of biodegradable microplastics, because of the high contents of fragments that increase the contact surface area between soil and biodegradable microplastics. Finally, the phenomenon of metal adsorption to soil particles cannot be neglected.
Although the soils contaminated by Bio-MPs showed higher total concentrations of Cr, Cu and Pb, as compared to K, only the Cu availability significantly increased. In fact, Cu can lead to chemical speciation through physical, chemical and biological interactions with soil components [34]. By contrast, although the soils contaminated by PE-MPs did not show significant differences in total concentrations of the investigated metals, as compared to K, an increase in Pb availability was observed. It can be supposed there is a release of petroleum-based compounds containing Pb by conventional plastic films [30]. The different behaviors of Cu and Pb were confirmed by the calculated ratios between the availability and the total concentration of these metals that were, respectively, higher in soils contaminated by Bio-MPs and PE-MPs.
Among the investigated soil enzymatic activities, only U did not appear to be affected by MPs, whereas HA and β-glu were stimulated and DHA reduced by the presence of both PE-MPs and Bio-MPs (although not at all the tested percentages). The effects of microplastics on microbial activity are highly variable and dependent on the kind and concentration of microplastic [35]. The observed stimulation of HA and β-glu agrees with several pieces of research [36,37] and could be due to the possible release of dissolved carbon from plastic films in soil [38]. This hypothesis is corroborated by the increase in β-glu, using carbon compounds as a substrate [39], already at 1% Bio-MPs. Instead, the reduction of the intracellular enzyme DHA in both PE-MP- and Bio-MP-contaminated soils suggests an overall stress condition for microbial metabolism [40,41].
The effect of MPs on the investigated crop was limited to highest percentages of Bio-MPs that inhibited plant growth, as significant reductions of both HYPO and EPI biomasses were observed. The findings agree with those reported by various researchers who found negative dose-effect impacts on plant growth [7,42,43] due to MPs. Also, Qi et al. [44] found that starch-based Bio-MPs had a negative effect on wheat biomass compared to PE-MPs. The decrease in HYPO biomass and the HYPO/EPI ratio at the increase in percentage of Bio-MPs suggests that these plastics hinder the movement of water and nutrients in soil, limiting their absorption and utilization, with a negative consequence on plant root growth [45,46].
In PE-MP-contaminated soils a key role was played by Ni availability, which enhanced EPI biomass and β-glu activity. The lowest Ni availability, compared to those measured in Bio-MP-contaminated soils, suggests that this metal is present in concentrations essential for crop growth and for maintaining its health [47].
An overall evaluation, considering the investigated soil properties and the crop biomasses, highlighted a clear separation of Bio-MP-contaminated soils from both PE-MPs and K. Bio-MP-contaminated soils, especially at 2%, were characterized by high Cu availability and reduced crop production, indicating its role in metal contamination increase and the inhibition of plant biomasses.

5. Conclusions

The findings contributed to highlight differences in soil properties and crop production after soil MP contamination. In particular, the addition of PE-MPs did not cause variations in soil total metal concentrations as compared to K, whereas the addition of Bio-MPs caused the increase in total Cr, Cu and Pb concentrations. Notwithstanding, in soils contaminated by PE-MPs higher Pb availability was observed, and in soils contaminated by Bio-MPs only the Cu availability significantly increased as compared to K.
Extracellular enzymatic (HA and β-glu) activities were stimulated in MP-contaminated soils, especially at 2%, whereas the intracellular one (DHA) was reduced. Finally, the HYPO and HYPO/EPI biomasses were reduced only in soils contaminated by the highest percentage Bio-MPs.
Based on the obtained data, it can be concluded that Bio-MPs more than PE-MPs contribute to a major metal release in soils and have a negative impact on spinach biomass.
The present research highlighted a negative role of Bio-MP presence in soils, but further studies in open fields are required to clarify the effects of Bio-MPs on soil properties and plant growth.

Author Contributions

Conceptualization, G.S., V.M., L.S. and G.M.; methodology, G.S., E.V., G.D.N. and M.T.; software, L.S.; validation, G.S., V.M., E.V., G.D.N., M.T., G.M. and L.S.; formal analysis, G.S.; investigation, G.S., E.V., G.D.N. and M.T.; resources, G.M. and L.S.; data curation, G.S., V.M. and L.S.; writing—original draft preparation, G.S., V.M. and L.S.; writing—review and editing, G.S., V.M., L.S. and G.M.; visualization, G.S., V.M., E.V., L.S., G.D.N., M.T. and G.M.; supervision, G.M. and L.S.; project administration, G.M.; funding acquisition, G.M. and L.S. All authors have read and agreed to the published version of the manuscript.

Funding

This research was funded by the collaboration of the Biology Department of the University of Federico II of Naples: Italy.

Institutional Review Board Statement

Not applicable.

Informed Consent Statement

Not applicable.

Data Availability Statement

The data that have been used are confidential.

Acknowledgments

The authors wish to thank Rocco Di Girolamo for microplastic production.

Conflicts of Interest

The authors declare no conflict of interest.

References

  1. Slavin, J.L.; Lloyd, B. Health benefits of fruits and vegetables. Adv. Nutr. 2012, 3, 506–516. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  2. Bantis, F.; Fotelli, M.; Ilić, Z.S.; Koukounaras, A. Physiological and Phytochemical Responses of Spinach Baby Leaves Grown in a PFAL System with LEDs and Saline Nutrient Solution. Agriculture 2020, 10, 574. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  3. Lamont, W.J. Overview of the use of high tunnels worldwide. HortTechnology 2009, 19, 25–29. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  4. Steinmetz, Z.; Wollmann, C.; Schaefer, M.; Buchmann, C.; David, J.; Tröger, J.; Muñoz, K.; Frör, O.; Schaumann, G.E. Plastic mulching in agriculture. Trading short-term agronomic benefits for long-term soil degradation? Sci. Total Environ. 2016, 550, 690–705. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  5. Rochman, C.M.; Hoellein, T. The global odyssey of plastic pollution. Science 2020, 368, 1184–1185. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  6. Thompson, R.C.; Olsen, Y.; Mitchell, R.P.; Davis, A.; Rowland, S.J.; John, A.W.; McGonigle, D.; Russell, A.E. Lost at sea: Where is all the plastic? Science 2004, 304, 838. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  7. de Souza Machado, A.A.; Lau, C.W.; Kloas, W.; Bergmann, J.; Bacheher, J.B.; Faltin, E.; Becker, R.; Gorlich, A.S.; Rillig, M.C. Microplastics can change soil properties and affect plant performance. Environ. Sci. Technol. 2019, 53, 6044–6052. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  8. Chamas, A.; Moon, H.; Zheng, J.; Qiu, Y.; Tabassum, T.; Jang, J.H.; Abu-Omar, M.; Scott, S.L.; Suh, S. Degradation rates of plastics in the environment. Sustain. Chem. Eng. 2020, 8, 3494–3511. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  9. Yin, M.; Li, Y.; Fang, H.; Chen, P. Biodegradable mulching film with an optimum degradation rate improves soil environment and enhances maize growth. Agric. Water Manag. 2019, 216, 127–137. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  10. Iqbal, B.; Zhao, T.; Yin, W.; Zhao, X.; Xie, Q.; Khan, K.Y.; Zhao, X.; Nazar, M.; Li, G.; Du, D. Impacts of soil microplastics on crops: A review. Appl. Soil Ecol. 2023, 181, 104680. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  11. Santini, G.; Maisto, G.; Memoli, V.; Di Natale, G.; Trifuoggi, M.; Santorufo, L. Does the element availability change in soils exposed to bioplastics and plastics for six months? Int. J. Environ. Res. Public Health 2022, 19, 9610. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  12. Huang, Y.; Deng, M.; Wu, S.; Japenga, J.; Li, T.; Yang, X.; He, Z. A modified receptor model for source apportionment of heavy metal pollution in soil. J. Hazard. Mater. 2018, 354, 161–169. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  13. Memoli, V.; Panico, S.C.; Santorufo, L.; Barile, R.; Di Natale, G.; Di Nunzio, A.; Toscanesi, M.; Trifuoggi, M.; De Marco, A.; Maisto, G. Do wildfires cause changes in soil quality in the short term? Int. J. Environ. Res. Public Health 2020, 17, 5343. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  14. Khan, Z.; Fan, X.; Khan, M.N.; Khan, M.A.; Zhang, K.; Fu, Y.; Shen, H. The toxicity of heavy metals and plant signaling facilitated by biochar application: Implications for stress mitigation and crop production. Chemosphere 2022, 308, 136466. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  15. Natasha, N.; Shahid, M.; Khalid, S.; Bibi, I.; Naeem, M.A.; Niazi, N.K.; Tack, F.M.G.; Ippolito, J.A.; Rinklebe, J. Influence of biochar on trace element uptake, toxicity and detoxification in plants and associated health risks: A critical review. Crit. Rev. Environ. Sci. Technol. 2022, 52, 2803–2843. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  16. Peng, J.S.; Gong, J.M. Vacuolar sequestration capacity and long-distance metal transport in plants. Front. Plant Sci. 2014, 5, 19. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  17. Memoli, V.; Eymar, E.; García-Delgado, C.; Esposito, F.; Panico, S.C.; De Marco, A.; Barile, R.; Maisto, G. Soil element fractions affect phytotoxicity, microbial biomass and activity in volcanic areas. Sci. Total Environ. 2018, 636, 1099–1108. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  18. Memoli, V.; Santorufo, L.; Santini, G.; Musella, P.; Barile, R.; De Marco, A.; Di Natale, G.; Trifuoggi, M.; Maisto, G. Role of seasonality and fire in regulating the enzymatic activities in soils covered by different vegetation in a mediterranean area. Appl. Sci. 2021, 11, 8342. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  19. Hu, X.F.; Jiang, Y.; Shu, Y.; Hu, X.; Liu, L.; Luo, F. effects of mining waste water discharges on heavy metal pollution and soil enzyme activity of the puddy fields. J. Geochem. Explor. 2014, 147, 139–150. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  20. Marzaioli, R.; D’Ascoli, R.; De Pascale, R.A.; Rutigliano, F.A. Soil microbial community as affected by heavy metal pollution in a Mediterranean area of southern Italy. Fresen. Environ. Bull. 2010, 19, 2411–2419. [Google Scholar]
  21. Ju, H.; Zhu, D.; Qiao, M. Effects of polyethylene microplastics on the gut microbial community, reproduction and avoidance behaviors of the soil springtail, Folsomia candida. Environ. Pollut. 2019, 247, 890–897. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  22. Memoli, V.; De Marco, A.; Baldantoni, D.; De Nicola, F.; Maisto, G. Short- and long-term effects of a single application of two organic amendments. Ecosphere 2017, 8, e02009. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  23. Adam, G.; Duncan, H. Development of a sensitive and rapid method for the measurement of total microbial activity using Fluorescein Diacetate (FDA) in a range of soils. Soil Biol. Biochem. 2001, 33, 943–951. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  24. Tabatabai, M.A.; Bremner, J.M. Use of p-nitrophenyl phosphate for assay of soil phosphatase activity. Soil Biol. Biochem. 1969, 1, 301–307. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  25. Tabatabai, A. Soil Enzymes. In Methods of Soil Analysis; Page, A.L., Miller, R.H., Keeney, D.R., Eds.; E-Publishing Inc.: Madison, WI, USA, 1982; pp. 903–947. [Google Scholar]
  26. Kandeler, E.; Gerber, H. Short-term assay of soil urease activity using colorimetric determination of ammonium. Biol. Fertil. Soils 1988, 6, 68–72. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  27. Alef, K.; Nannipieri, P. Enzyme Activities. In Methods in Applied Soil Microbiology and Biochemistry; Academic Press: Cambridge, MA, USA, 1995; pp. 311–373. [Google Scholar]
  28. Zhou, Y.; Liu, X.; Wang, J. Ecotoxicological effects of microplastics and cadmium on the earthworm Eisenia foetida. J. Hazard. Mater. 2020, 392, 122273. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  29. Dong, Y.; Gao, M.; Qiu, W.; Song, Z. Effect of microplastics and arsenic on nutrients and microorganisms in rice rhizosphere soil. Ecotox. Environ. Safe 2021, 211, 111899. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  30. Li, M.; Wu, D.; Wu, D.; Guo, H.; Han, S. Influence of polyethylene-microplastic on environmental behaviors of metals in soil. Environ. Sci. Pollut. R. 2021, 28, 28329–28336. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  31. Hahladakis, J.N.; Velis, C.A.; Weber, R.; Iacovidou, E.; Purnell, P. An overview of chemical additives present in plastics: Migration, release, fate and environmental impact during their use, disposal and recycling. J. Hazard Mater. 2018, 344, 179–199. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  32. Hermabessiere, L.; Dehaut, A.; Paul-Pont, I.; Lacroix, C.; Jezequel, R.; Soudant, P.; Dufloss, G. Occurrence and effects of plastic additives on marine environments and organisms: A review. Chemosphere 2017, 182, 781–793. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  33. Wang, J.; Luo, Y.; Teng, Y.; Ma, W.; Christie, P.; Li, Z. Soil contamination by phthalate esters in Chinese intensive vegetable production systems with different modes of use of plastic film. Environ. Pollut. 2013, 180, 265–273. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  34. Yu, H.; Zhang, Z.; Zhang, Y.; Fan, P.; Xi, B.; Tan, W. Metal type and aggregate microenvironment govern the response sequence of speciation transformation of different heavy metals to microplastics in soil. Sci. Total Environ. 2021, 752, 141956. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  35. Lozano, Y.M.; Lehnert, T.; Linck, L.T.; Lehmann, A.; Rillig, M.C. Microplastic shape, polymer type, and concentration affect soil properties and plant biomass. Front. Plant Sci. 2021, 12, 1. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  36. Liu, H.; Yang, X.; Liu, G.; Liang, C.; Xue, S.; Chen, H.; Ritsema, C.J.; Geissen, V. Response of soil dissolved organic matter to microplastic addition in chinese loess soil. Chemosphere 2017, 185, 907–917. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  37. Yu, H.; Hou, J.; Dang, Q.; Cui, D.; Xi, B.; Tan, W. Decrease in bioavailability of soil heavy metals caused by the presence of microplastics varies across aggregate levels. J. Hazard. Mater. 2020, 395, 122690. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  38. Romera-Castillo, C.; Pinto, M.; Langer, T.M.; Álvarez-Salgado, X.A.; Herndl, G.J. Dissolved organic carbon leaching from plastics stimulates microbial activity in the ocean. Nat. Commun. 2018, 9, 1430. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  39. Zhou, C.; Lu, C.; Mai, L.; Bao, L.; Liu, L.; Zeng, E. Response of rice (Oryza sativa L.) roots to nanoplastic treatment at seedling stage. J. Hazard. Mater. 2021, 401, 123412. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  40. Wang, J.; Lv, S.; Zhang, M.; Chen, G.; Zhu, T.; Zhang, S.; Teng, Y.; Christie, P.; Luo, Y. Effects of plastic film residues on occurrence of phthalates and microbial activity in soils. Chemosphere 2016, 151, 171–177. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  41. Wang, F.; Wang, Q.; Adams, C.A.; Sun, Y.; Zhang, S. Effects of microplastics on soil properties: Current knowledge and future perspectives. J. Hazard. Mater. 2022, 424, 127531. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  42. Boots, B.; Russell, C.W.; Green, D.S. Effects of microplastics in soil ecosystems: Above and belowground. Environ. Sci. Technol. 2019, 53, 11496–11506. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  43. Qi, Y.; Beriot, N.; Gort, G.; Lwanga, E.H.; Gooren, H.; Yang, X.; Geissen, V. Impact of plastic mulch film debris on soil physicochemical and hydrological properties. Env. Pol. 2020, 266, 115097. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  44. Qi, Y.; Yang, X.; Mejia Pelaez, A.; Huerta Lwanga, E.; Beriot, N.; Gertsen, H.; Garbeva, P.; Geissen, V. Macro- and micro-plastics in soil-plant system: Effects of plastic mulch film residues on wheat (Triticum aestivum) growth. Sci. Total Environ. 2018, 645, 1048–1056. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  45. Dong, H.; Liu, T.; Han, Z.; Sun, Q.; Li, R. Determining time limits of continuous film mulching and examining residual effects on cotton yield and soil properties. J. Environ. Biol. 2015, 36, 677–684. [Google Scholar]
  46. Zhao, Z.; Wang, P.; Wang, Y.; Zhou, R.; Koskei, K.; Munyasya, A.N.; Liu, S.; Wang, W.; Su, Y.; Xiong, Y. Fate of plastic film residues in agro-ecosystem and its effects on aggregate-associated soil carbon and nitrogen stocks. J. Hazard. Mater. 2021, 416, 125954. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  47. Dhaliwal, S.S.; Naresh, R.K.; Mandal, A.; Singh, R.; Dhaliwal, M.K. Dynamics and transformations of micronutrients in agricultural soils as influenced by organic matter build-up: A review. Environ. Sustain. Indic. 2019, 1–2, 100007. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
Ijerph 20 03106 g001 550
Figure 1. Experimental set-up performed with horticultural soil used as control (K), mixed with conventional microplastics (PE-MPs) and with Mater-bì® microplastics (Bio-MPs) at different percentages (0.5, 1 and 2% of soil dry weight).
Figure 1. Experimental set-up performed with horticultural soil used as control (K), mixed with conventional microplastics (PE-MPs) and with Mater-bì® microplastics (Bio-MPs) at different percentages (0.5, 1 and 2% of soil dry weight).
Ijerph 20 03106 g001
Ijerph 20 03106 g002 550
Figure 2. Images showing (A) conventional (PE) and (B) Mater-bì® (Bio) microplastic (MP) fragments, obtained to perform the experiment.
Figure 2. Images showing (A) conventional (PE) and (B) Mater-bì® (Bio) microplastic (MP) fragments, obtained to perform the experiment.
Ijerph 20 03106 g002
Ijerph 20 03106 g003 550
Figure 3. Mean values (±s.e.) of total concentrations of Cr (a), Cu (b), Ni (c) and Pb (d) measured in soils without microplastics (K), mixed with Polyethylene (PE-MPs) and Mater-bì® (Bio-MPs) microplastics at different percentages (0.5, 1 and 2% d.w.). Asterisks indicate significant differences between soils mixed with microplastics and control (one-way ANOVA; p < 0.05).
Figure 3. Mean values (±s.e.) of total concentrations of Cr (a), Cu (b), Ni (c) and Pb (d) measured in soils without microplastics (K), mixed with Polyethylene (PE-MPs) and Mater-bì® (Bio-MPs) microplastics at different percentages (0.5, 1 and 2% d.w.). Asterisks indicate significant differences between soils mixed with microplastics and control (one-way ANOVA; p < 0.05).
Ijerph 20 03106 g003
Ijerph 20 03106 g004 550
Figure 4. Mean values (±s.e.) of availability of Cr (a), Cu (b), Ni (c) and Pb (d) measured in soils without microplastics (K), mixed with Polyethylene (PE-MPs) and Mater-bì® (Bio-MPs) microplastics at different percentages (0.5, 1 and 2% d.w.). Asterisks indicate significant differences between soils mixed with microplastics and control (one-way ANOVA; p < 0.05).
Figure 4. Mean values (±s.e.) of availability of Cr (a), Cu (b), Ni (c) and Pb (d) measured in soils without microplastics (K), mixed with Polyethylene (PE-MPs) and Mater-bì® (Bio-MPs) microplastics at different percentages (0.5, 1 and 2% d.w.). Asterisks indicate significant differences between soils mixed with microplastics and control (one-way ANOVA; p < 0.05).
Ijerph 20 03106 g004
Ijerph 20 03106 g005 550
Figure 5. Mean values (±s.e.) of hydrolase (HA, (a)), dehydrogenase (DHA, (b)), β-glucosidase (β-glu, (c)) and Urease (U, (d)) activities measured in soil without microplastics (K), mixed with Polyethylene (PE) and Mater-bì® (Bio) microplastics at different concentrations (0.5, 1 and 2% d.w.). Asterisks indicate significant differences between soils mixed with microplastics and control, respectively (one-way ANOVA; p < 0.05). Different small letters indicate significant differences among the percentages of the same treatment (one-way ANOVA; p < 0.05).
Figure 5. Mean values (±s.e.) of hydrolase (HA, (a)), dehydrogenase (DHA, (b)), β-glucosidase (β-glu, (c)) and Urease (U, (d)) activities measured in soil without microplastics (K), mixed with Polyethylene (PE) and Mater-bì® (Bio) microplastics at different concentrations (0.5, 1 and 2% d.w.). Asterisks indicate significant differences between soils mixed with microplastics and control, respectively (one-way ANOVA; p < 0.05). Different small letters indicate significant differences among the percentages of the same treatment (one-way ANOVA; p < 0.05).
Ijerph 20 03106 g005
Ijerph 20 03106 g006 550
Figure 6. Mean values (±s.e.) of (a) epigeal (EPI), (b) hypogeal (HYPO) and (c) hypogeal and epigeal ratio (HYPO/EPI) of spinach plants grown in soil without microplastics (K), mixed with Polyethylene (PE) and Mater-bì® (Bio) microplastics at different concentrations (0.5, 1 and 2% d.w.). Asterisks indicate significant differences between soils mixed with microplastics and control, respectively (one-way ANOVA; p < 0.05). Different small letters indicate significant differences among the percentages of the same treatment (one-way ANOVA; p < 0.05).
Figure 6. Mean values (±s.e.) of (a) epigeal (EPI), (b) hypogeal (HYPO) and (c) hypogeal and epigeal ratio (HYPO/EPI) of spinach plants grown in soil without microplastics (K), mixed with Polyethylene (PE) and Mater-bì® (Bio) microplastics at different concentrations (0.5, 1 and 2% d.w.). Asterisks indicate significant differences between soils mixed with microplastics and control, respectively (one-way ANOVA; p < 0.05). Different small letters indicate significant differences among the percentages of the same treatment (one-way ANOVA; p < 0.05).
Ijerph 20 03106 g006
Ijerph 20 03106 g007 550
Figure 7. Regression lines (Spearman’s correlations) between β-glucosidase activity (β-glu, (a)) and plant epigeal biomass (EPI, (b)) of spinach plants with Ni available fractions in soil contaminated by PE-MPs (0.5%: light red bar; 1%: red bar and 2%: dark red bar).
Figure 7. Regression lines (Spearman’s correlations) between β-glucosidase activity (β-glu, (a)) and plant epigeal biomass (EPI, (b)) of spinach plants with Ni available fractions in soil contaminated by PE-MPs (0.5%: light red bar; 1%: red bar and 2%: dark red bar).
Ijerph 20 03106 g007
Ijerph 20 03106 g008 550
Figure 8. Graphical display of the first two axes of the Principal Component Analysis (PCA) on the soil total and available Cu, Cr, Ni and Pb concentrations, enzymatic activities (HA, DHA, β-glu and U) and plant biomasses in soil without microplastics (green dots), mixed with 0.5, 1 and 2% d.w. of Polyethylene (orange, red and dark red squares, respectively) and of Mater-bì® (cyan, blue and dark blue triangles, respectively) microplastics. Significant differences among the treatments were shown by confidence ellipses (PERMANOVA analysis p < 0.05).
Figure 8. Graphical display of the first two axes of the Principal Component Analysis (PCA) on the soil total and available Cu, Cr, Ni and Pb concentrations, enzymatic activities (HA, DHA, β-glu and U) and plant biomasses in soil without microplastics (green dots), mixed with 0.5, 1 and 2% d.w. of Polyethylene (orange, red and dark red squares, respectively) and of Mater-bì® (cyan, blue and dark blue triangles, respectively) microplastics. Significant differences among the treatments were shown by confidence ellipses (PERMANOVA analysis p < 0.05).
Ijerph 20 03106 g008
Table
Table 1. Properties of horticultural soil (EUROTERRIFLORA s.r.l.) used to perform the experiment with MPs and spinach (Spinacia oleracea L.).
Table 1. Properties of horticultural soil (EUROTERRIFLORA s.r.l.) used to perform the experiment with MPs and spinach (Spinacia oleracea L.).
Horticultural Soil Properties
pH7
Electrical conductivity0.8 dS/m
Carbon30%
Dry bulk density360 kg/m3
Total porosity80% (v/v)
Table
Table 2. Significant differences in total and available Cu, Cr, Ni and Pb concentrations within the pots with the same Polyethylene (PE) and Mater-bì® (Bio) microplastic concentrations (t-test; *** p < 0.001; ** p < 0.01; * p < 0.05).
Table 2. Significant differences in total and available Cu, Cr, Ni and Pb concentrations within the pots with the same Polyethylene (PE) and Mater-bì® (Bio) microplastic concentrations (t-test; *** p < 0.001; ** p < 0.01; * p < 0.05).
PE-MPs vs. Bio-MPs
0.5%1%2%
CrTotn.s.n.s.n.s.
CuTotn.s.n.s.n.s.
NiTotn.s.n.s.n.s.
PbTotn.s.n.s.*
CrAvn.s.n.s.n.s.
CuAv********
NiAv****n.s.
PbAvn.s.****
Table
Table 3. Mean values (±s.e.) of available fraction and total concentration ratios of Cu, Cr, Ni and Pb calculated in soil without microplastics (K), mixed with Polyethylene (PE) and Mater-bì® (Bio) microplastics at different concentrations (0.5, 1 and 2% d.w.). Asterisks indicate significant differences between soils mixed with microplastics and control, respectively (one-way ANOVA; p < 0.05).
Table 3. Mean values (±s.e.) of available fraction and total concentration ratios of Cu, Cr, Ni and Pb calculated in soil without microplastics (K), mixed with Polyethylene (PE) and Mater-bì® (Bio) microplastics at different concentrations (0.5, 1 and 2% d.w.). Asterisks indicate significant differences between soils mixed with microplastics and control, respectively (one-way ANOVA; p < 0.05).
KPE-MPsBio-MPs
0.5%1%2%0.5%1%2%
Cr0.100.040.070.030.040.040.03
Cu3.933.263.763.9224.7 *31.4 *34.2 *
Ni2.382.262.102.602.732.832.05
Pb13.714.515.820.9 *8.90 *9.958.99 *
Table
Table 4. Significant differences in available fraction and total concentration ratios of Cu, Cr, Ni and Pb within the pots with the same Polyethylene (PE) and Mater-bì® (Bio) microplastic concentrations (t-test; *** p < 0.001; ** p < 0.01).
Table 4. Significant differences in available fraction and total concentration ratios of Cu, Cr, Ni and Pb within the pots with the same Polyethylene (PE) and Mater-bì® (Bio) microplastic concentrations (t-test; *** p < 0.001; ** p < 0.01).
PE-MPs vs. Bio-MPs
0.5%1%2%
Crn.s.n.s.n.s.
Cu********
Nin.s.n.s.n.s.
Pbn.s.****
Disclaimer/Publisher’s Note: The statements, opinions and data contained in all publications are solely those of the individual author(s) and contributor(s) and not of MDPI and/or the editor(s). MDPI and/or the editor(s) disclaim responsibility for any injury to people or property resulting from any ideas, methods, instructions or products referred to in the content.

Share and Cite

MDPI and ACS Style

Santini, G.; Memoli, V.; Vitale, E.; Di Natale, G.; Trifuoggi, M.; Maisto, G.; Santorufo, L. Metal Release from Microplastics to Soil: Effects on Soil Enzymatic Activities and Spinach Production. Int. J. Environ. Res. Public Health 2023, 20, 3106. https://doi.org/10.3390/ijerph20043106

AMA Style

Santini G, Memoli V, Vitale E, Di Natale G, Trifuoggi M, Maisto G, Santorufo L. Metal Release from Microplastics to Soil: Effects on Soil Enzymatic Activities and Spinach Production. International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health. 2023; 20(4):3106. https://doi.org/10.3390/ijerph20043106

Chicago/Turabian Style

Santini, Giorgia, Valeria Memoli, Ermenegilda Vitale, Gabriella Di Natale, Marco Trifuoggi, Giulia Maisto, and Lucia Santorufo. 2023. "Metal Release from Microplastics to Soil: Effects on Soil Enzymatic Activities and Spinach Production" International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health 20, no. 4: 3106. https://doi.org/10.3390/ijerph20043106

Note that from the first issue of 2016, this journal uses article numbers instead of page numbers. See further details here.

Article Metrics

Back to TopTop