Skip to content
Licensed Unlicensed Requires Authentication Published by De Gruyter August 24, 2019

The ecological risk assessment of soil contamination with Ti and Fe at military sites in Ukraine: avoidance and reproduction tests with Folsomia candida

Iwona Gruss ORCID logo, Tatyana Stefanovska, Jacek Twardowski, Valentina Pidlisnyuk and Pavlo Shapoval

Abstract

The aim of this research was to assess the effect of soil contamination with titanium (Ti) and iron (Fe) at military sites in Ukraine using the avoidance and reproduction tests with Folsomia candida (springtail). The soil used for the tests was sampled in 2017 from Dolyna, Ivano-Frankivsk region, Ukraine from two plots, namely a contaminated and a control site. The sample site is a former military site previously used for tank training. At the control site mainly the concentrations of Ti and Fe were exceeded. The control soil was free from contamination. The avoidance test and reproduction test were conducted with the use of springtail species F. candida. The following nine levels of contamination with heavy metals were established: 1%, 1.5%, 5%, 10%, 15%, 25%, 50%, 75% and 100%. The duration of the avoidance test was 7 days, and that of the reproduction test was 28 days. Overall, the results show that the avoidance and reproduction tests with collembolans have the potential to be used as screening tools in an ecological risk assessment of heavy metals. In the avoidance test, the concentrations from 1.5 to 100% significantly decreased the number of F. candida in the contamination site in comparison to the control site. At the same time, avoidance was not observed in the first concentration (1%). According to the reproduction test, the negative effect on the number of F. candida juveniles was observed beginning at the 10% dose. The half maximal effective concentration (EC50) for the avoidance test was 50.12%, while that for the reproduction test was 22.39%. The contamination with heavy metals at the military areas indicated the short- and long-term toxicity risk on the springtail F. candida.

  1. Research funding: The research was partially supported by the NATO program “New Phytotechnology for Cleaning Contaminated Military Sites”.

  2. Conflict of interest: None declared.

  3. Informed consent: Not applicable.

  4. Ethical approval: Not applicable.

References

1. Cristaldi M, Foschi C, Szpunar G, Brini C, Marinelli F, Triolo L. Toxic emissions from a military test site in the territory of Sardinia, Italy. Int J Environ Res Public Health 2013;10(4):1631–46.10.3390/ijerph10041631Search in Google Scholar

2. Tchounwou PB, Yedjou CG, Patlolla AK, Sutton DJ. Heavy metals toxicity and the environment. EXS 2012;101:133–64.10.1007/978-3-7643-8340-4_6Search in Google Scholar

3. Jiang X, Lu WX, Zhao HQ, Yang QC, Yang ZP. Potential ecological risk assessment and prediction of soil heavy-metal pollution around coal gangue dump. Nat Hazards Earth Syst Sci 2014;14:1599–610.10.5194/nhess-14-1599-2014Search in Google Scholar

4. Chen Y, Jiang X, Wang Y, Zhuang D. Spatial characteristics of heavy metal pollution and the potential ecological risk of a typical mining area: a case study in China. PSEP 2017;112:204–19.10.1016/j.psep.2017.10.008Search in Google Scholar

5. Xu J, Ke J, Krogh PH, Luo YM, Song J. Evaluation of growth and reproduction as indicators of soil metal toxicity to the Collembolan, Sinella curviseta. Insect Sci 2009;16:57–63.10.1111/j.1744-7917.2009.00254.xSearch in Google Scholar

6. Fei JC, Min XB, Wang ZX, Pang ZH, Liang YJ, Ke Y. Health and ecological risk assessment of heavy metals pollution in an antimony mining region: a case study from South China. Environ Sci Pollut Res Int 2017;24(35):27573–86.10.1007/s11356-017-0310-xSearch in Google Scholar

7. Römbke J, Jänsch S, Junker T, Pohl B, Scheffczyk A, Schallnass HJ. Improvement of the applicability of ecotoxicological tests with earthworms, springtails, and plants for the assessment of metals in natural soils. Environ Toxicol Chem 2006;25(3):7760–87.10.1897/04-584R.1Search in Google Scholar

8. Holland JM, Winder L, Perry JN. The impact of dimethoate on the spatial distribution of beneficial arthropods in winter wheat. Ann Appl Biol 2000;136:93–105.10.1111/j.1744-7348.2000.tb00013.xSearch in Google Scholar

9. Bressan M, Paoletti MG. Leaf litter decomposition and soil microarthropods affected by sulphur dioxide fallout. Land Degrad Dev 1997;8:189–99.10.1002/(SICI)1099-145X(199709)8:3<189::AID-LDR251>3.0.CO;2-7Search in Google Scholar

10. Santorufo L, Carotenuto R, Rocco A, Picione FD, Maisto G. Orthonychiurus pseudostachianus (collembola) as a toxicity test organism and selection of an ecotoxicological test battery to assess soil quality. Appl Soil Ecol 2012;54:49–54.10.1016/j.apsoil.2011.12.007Search in Google Scholar

11. Hope BK. An examination of ecological risk assessment and management practices. Environ Int 2006;32(8):983–95.10.1016/j.envint.2006.06.005Search in Google Scholar PubMed

12. Niemeyer JC, Moreira-Santos M, Ribeiro R, Rutgers M, Nogueira MA, da Silva EM, et al. Ecological risk assessment of a metal-contaminated area in the tropics. Tier II: detailed assessment. PLoS One 2015;10(11):e0141772.10.1371/journal.pone.0141772Search in Google Scholar PubMed PubMed Central

13. Field portable x-ray fluorescence spectrometry for the determination of elemental concentrations in soil and sediment. https://www.epa.gov/sites/production/files/2015-12/documents/6200.pdf.Search in Google Scholar

14. National Standard of Ukraine DSTU ISO11464-2001. Soil quality – pretreatment of samples for physico-chemical analysis. Kyiv.; 2003, 13 pages (Ukr.).Search in Google Scholar

15. Pidlisnyuk V, Erickson L, Trogl J, Shapoval P, Davis L, Popelka J, et al. Metals uptake behaviour in Miscanthus x giganteus plant during growth at the contaminated soil from the military site in Sliač, Slovakia. Pol J Chem Technol 2018;20(2):1–7.10.2478/pjct-2018-0016Search in Google Scholar

16. Pidlisnyuk V, Erickson L, Stefanovska T, Popelka J, Hettiarachchi G, Davis L, et al. Potential phytomanagement of military polluted sites and biomass production using biofuel crop Miscanthus x giganteus. Environ Pollut 2019;249:330–7.10.1016/j.envpol.2019.03.018Search in Google Scholar PubMed

17. Ivaszhenko TG, Pushkarova ID. Determination of polluted substances in the soil at the territory of industrial zones and qualification of territories ecological hazards. Notes Poltav State Agrar Acad 2014:102–5 (Ukr.).Search in Google Scholar

18. Fesyuk VO, Pankevich SG. Ecological consequences of impact of Lutsk city waste water to the environment and ways of its minimization. Scientific papers of the Ukrainian Hydro Meteorological Institute 2007;256:286–92 (Ukr).Search in Google Scholar

19. Kuraeva IV, Roga IV, Sorokina LU, Golubcov AG. Determination of heavy metals content and conditions for their migration in the land of Ternopil region. Ukr Geograph J 2012;3:25–33.Search in Google Scholar

20. International Organization for Standardization (ISO) 2 419 011. Soil quality – avoidance test for determining the quality of soils and effects of chemicals on behavior – Part 2: Test with collembolans (Folsomia candida). Guideline 17512-2. International Standardization organization; 1999.Search in Google Scholar

21. Fountain MT, Hopkin SP. Continuous monitoring of Folsomia candida (Insecta: Collembola) in a metal exposure test. Ecotox Environ Safe 2001;48:275–86.10.1006/eesa.2000.2007Search in Google Scholar PubMed

22. International Organization for Standardization. Soil quality – Inhibition of reproduction of Collembola (Folsomia candida) by soil pollutants. Guideline 11267. Geneva, Switzerland: International Standardization organization; 1999.Search in Google Scholar

23. Bengtsson G, Berden M, Rudgren S. Influence of soil animals and metals on decomposition processes: a microcosm experiment. J Environ Qual 1988;17:113–9.10.2134/jeq1988.00472425001700010017xSearch in Google Scholar

24. Liu M, Xu J, Krogh PH, Song J, Wu L, Luo Y, et al. Assessment of toxicity of heavy metal-contaminated soils toward Collembola in the paddy fields supported by laboratory tests. Environ Sci Pollut Res 2018;25:16969–78.10.1007/s11356-018-1864-ySearch in Google Scholar PubMed

25. Fountain M, Hopkin SP. Biodiversity of Collembola in urban soils and the use of Folsomia candida to assess soil ‘quality’. Ecotoxicology 2004;13:555–72.10.1023/B:ECTX.0000037192.70167.00Search in Google Scholar

26. da Luz TN, Ribeiro R, Sousa JP. Avoidance tests with Collembola and earthworms as early screening tools for site-specific assessment of polluted soils. Environ Toxicol Chem 2004;23(9):2188–93.10.1897/03-445Search in Google Scholar PubMed

27. Filser J, Holscher G. Experimental studies on the reaction of Collembola on copper contamination. Pedobiologia 1997;41:173–8.Search in Google Scholar

Received: 2018-10-30
Accepted: 2019-07-26
Published Online: 2019-08-24
Published in Print: 2019-09-25

©2019 Walter de Gruyter GmbH, Berlin/Boston