Are Biobased Microfibers Less Harmful than Conventional Plastic Microfibers: Evidence from Earthworms

IF 11.3 1区 环境科学与生态学 Q1 ENGINEERING, ENVIRONMENTAL
W. Courtene-Jones*, F. De Falco, F. Burgevin, R. D. Handy and R. C. Thompson, 
{"title":"Are Biobased Microfibers Less Harmful than Conventional Plastic Microfibers: Evidence from Earthworms","authors":"W. Courtene-Jones*,&nbsp;F. De Falco,&nbsp;F. Burgevin,&nbsp;R. D. Handy and R. C. Thompson,&nbsp;","doi":"10.1021/acs.est.4c0585610.1021/acs.est.4c05856","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p >Biobased plastics are sometimes promoted as “environmentally friendly” compared to their conventional petrochemical-based counterparts, but their ecotoxicity is only partially understood. Biobased fibers are widely used in clothing and wet wipes and can accumulate in soils through the application of biosolid fertilizers. This study examined the lethal thresholds and sublethal toxicity of chemically characterized, additive-free, biobased (viscose and lyocell) compared to petrochemical-based (polyester) fibers on the key ecosystem engineer, <i>Esenia fetida</i>. Viscose and lyocell had LC<sub>20</sub> values of 14.00 and 22.66 mg·L<sup>–1</sup>, respectively, and no observed effect concentrations (NOEC) of 0–2.8 mg·L<sup>–1</sup> (72 h, OECD TG207 filter paper method), while for polyester these were LC<sub>20</sub> 15.6–31.3 mg·L<sup>–1</sup> and NOEC 0–15.6 mg·L<sup>–1</sup>. Following 28 days of exposure to soils (OECD TG222) contaminated with environmentally relevant concentrations (100 mg kg<sup>–1</sup>), viscose significantly reduced the mass of progeny compared to polyester. Earthworms exposed to lyocell had a marginal growth reduction (−18%; compared to −11% to −13% in other treatments) linked to increased bioturbation activity. The biobased fibers examined here have greater acute toxicity at high concentrations and broadly similar sublethal effects on <i>E. fetida</i> compared to polyester. Our study highlights the importance of detailed testing before advocating specific materials as plastic alternatives/substitutes to conventional plastics.</p><p >Plastic fibers are known to have detrimental impacts on organisms; here, we show that biobased fibers have the potential to induce greater ecotoxicological effects than traditional plastics with implications for population dynamics.</p>","PeriodicalId":36,"journal":{"name":"环境科学与技术","volume":"58 46","pages":"20366–20377 20366–20377"},"PeriodicalIF":11.3000,"publicationDate":"2024-11-05","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://pubs.acs.org/doi/epdf/10.1021/acs.est.4c05856","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"环境科学与技术","FirstCategoryId":"1","ListUrlMain":"https://pubs.acs.org/doi/10.1021/acs.est.4c05856","RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"环境科学与生态学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"ENGINEERING, ENVIRONMENTAL","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Biobased plastics are sometimes promoted as “environmentally friendly” compared to their conventional petrochemical-based counterparts, but their ecotoxicity is only partially understood. Biobased fibers are widely used in clothing and wet wipes and can accumulate in soils through the application of biosolid fertilizers. This study examined the lethal thresholds and sublethal toxicity of chemically characterized, additive-free, biobased (viscose and lyocell) compared to petrochemical-based (polyester) fibers on the key ecosystem engineer, Esenia fetida. Viscose and lyocell had LC20 values of 14.00 and 22.66 mg·L–1, respectively, and no observed effect concentrations (NOEC) of 0–2.8 mg·L–1 (72 h, OECD TG207 filter paper method), while for polyester these were LC20 15.6–31.3 mg·L–1 and NOEC 0–15.6 mg·L–1. Following 28 days of exposure to soils (OECD TG222) contaminated with environmentally relevant concentrations (100 mg kg–1), viscose significantly reduced the mass of progeny compared to polyester. Earthworms exposed to lyocell had a marginal growth reduction (−18%; compared to −11% to −13% in other treatments) linked to increased bioturbation activity. The biobased fibers examined here have greater acute toxicity at high concentrations and broadly similar sublethal effects on E. fetida compared to polyester. Our study highlights the importance of detailed testing before advocating specific materials as plastic alternatives/substitutes to conventional plastics.

Plastic fibers are known to have detrimental impacts on organisms; here, we show that biobased fibers have the potential to induce greater ecotoxicological effects than traditional plastics with implications for population dynamics.

生物基超细纤维的危害是否小于传统塑料超细纤维?来自蚯蚓的证据
与传统的石化塑料相比,生物基塑料有时被宣传为 "环保 "塑料,但人们对其生态毒性仅有部分了解。生物基纤维被广泛应用于服装和湿巾中,并可通过施用生物固体肥料在土壤中积累。本研究考察了无添加剂的化学特征生物基纤维(粘胶纤维和莱赛尔纤维)与石化基纤维(聚酯纤维)相比,对关键生态系统工程师 Esenia fetida 的致死阈值和亚致死毒性。粘胶和莱赛尔的 LC20 值分别为 14.00 和 22.66 mg-L-1,无观测效应浓度 (NOEC) 为 0-2.8 mg-L-1(72 小时,OECD TG207 滤纸法),而聚酯的 LC20 值为 15.6-31.3 mg-L-1,无观测效应浓度为 0-15.6 mg-L-1。与聚酯相比,在受到环境相关浓度(100 毫克/千克)污染的土壤(OECD TG222)中暴露 28 天后,粘胶会显著降低后代的质量。接触莱赛尔纤维的蚯蚓的生长量略有减少(-18%;而其他处理为-11%至-13%),这与生物扰动活动增加有关。与聚酯相比,本文研究的生物基纤维在高浓度下对蚯蚓的急性毒性更大,亚致死效应大致相似。众所周知,塑料纤维会对生物产生有害影响;在此,我们发现生物基纤维有可能比传统塑料产生更大的生态毒理效应,从而对种群动态产生影响。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
环境科学与技术
环境科学与技术 环境科学-工程:环境
CiteScore
17.50
自引率
9.60%
发文量
12359
审稿时长
2.8 months
期刊介绍: Environmental Science & Technology (ES&T) is a co-sponsored academic and technical magazine by the Hubei Provincial Environmental Protection Bureau and the Hubei Provincial Academy of Environmental Sciences. Environmental Science & Technology (ES&T) holds the status of Chinese core journals, scientific papers source journals of China, Chinese Science Citation Database source journals, and Chinese Academic Journal Comprehensive Evaluation Database source journals. This publication focuses on the academic field of environmental protection, featuring articles related to environmental protection and technical advancements.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信