Reduced soil fauna decomposition in a high background radiation area.
Journal
PloS one
ISSN: 1932-6203
Titre abrégé: PLoS One
Pays: United States
ID NLM: 101285081
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
2021
2021
Historique:
received:
11
12
2020
accepted:
12
02
2021
entrez:
17
3
2021
pubmed:
18
3
2021
medline:
14
10
2021
Statut:
epublish
Résumé
Decomposition of litter and organic matter is a very important soil ecosystem function where soil fauna play an important role. Knowledge of the responses in decomposition and soil fauna to different stressors is therefore crucial. However, the extent to which radioactivity may affect soil fauna is not so well known. There are some results showing effects on soil fauna at uranium mines and near Chernobyl from relatively high levels of anthropogenic radionuclides. We hypothesize that naturally occurring radionuclides affect soil fauna and thus litter decomposition, which will covary with radionuclide levels when accounting for important soil parameters. We have therefore used standardised litterbags with two different mesh sizes filled with birch leaves (Betula pubescens) to assess litter decomposition in an area with enhanced levels of naturally occurring radionuclides in the thorium (232Th) and uranium (238U) decay chains while controlling for variation in important soil parameters like pH, organic matter content, moisture and large grain size. We show that decomposition rate is higher in litterbags with large mesh size compared to litterbags with a fine mesh size that excludes soil fauna. We also find that litter dried at room temperature is decomposed at a faster rate than litter dried in oven (60⁰C). This was surprising given the associated denaturation of proteins and anticipated increased nutritional level but may be explained by the increased stiffness of oven-dried litter. This result is important since different studies often use either oven-dried or room temperature-dried litter. Taking the above into account, we explore statistical models to show large and expected effects of soil parameters but also significant effects on litter decomposition of the naturally occurring radionuclide levels. We use the ERICA tool to estimate total dose rate per coarse litterbag for four different model organisms, and in subsequent different statistical models we identify that the model including the dose rates of a small tube-shape is the best statistical model. In another statistical model including soil parameters and radionuclide distributions, 226Ra (or uranium precursory radionuclides) explain variation in litter decomposition while 228Ra (and precursors) do not. This may hint to chemical toxicity effects of uranium. However, when combining this model with the best model, the resulting simplified model is equal to the tube-shape dose-rate model. There is thus a need for more research on how naturally occurring radionuclides affect soil fauna, but the study at hand show the importance of an ecosystem approach and the ecosystem parameter soil decomposition.
Identifiants
pubmed: 33730078
doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0247793
pii: PONE-D-20-38999
pmc: PMC7968631
doi:
Substances chimiques
Radioisotopes
0
Soil
0
Waste Products
0
Types de publication
Journal Article
Research Support, Non-U.S. Gov't
Langues
eng
Sous-ensembles de citation
IM
Pagination
e0247793Déclaration de conflit d'intérêts
The authors have declared that no competing interests exist
Références
Bioresour Technol. 2010 Mar;101(6):2034-42
pubmed: 19932614
J Environ Radioact. 2016 Oct;162-163:23-32
pubmed: 27214284
Science. 2004 Jun 11;304(5677):1629-33
pubmed: 15192218
Sci Total Environ. 2003 Dec 30;317(1-3):207-33
pubmed: 14630423
Arch Environ Contam Toxicol. 2014 Nov;67(4):601-16
pubmed: 24823679
Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 2005 Feb 1;102(5):1519-24
pubmed: 15671172
J Environ Monit. 2011 Jun;13(6):1730-8
pubmed: 21556423
Biol Rev Camb Philos Soc. 2009 Aug;84(3):375-89
pubmed: 19485987
Health Phys. 1985 Apr;48(4):415-20
pubmed: 2984147
PLoS One. 2015 Apr 22;10(4):e0124605
pubmed: 25901894
J Environ Radioact. 2016 Mar;153:141-148
pubmed: 26773508
Environ Sci Process Impacts. 2014 May;16(5):1124-34
pubmed: 24699890
Trends Ecol Evol. 2005 Nov;20(11):625-33
pubmed: 16701446
J Environ Radioact. 2008 Sep;99(9):1371-83
pubmed: 18329765
Radiat Environ Biophys. 2001 Jun;40(2):93-104
pubmed: 11484790
Sci Total Environ. 2012 Jan 1;414:167-76
pubmed: 22115612
Environ Pollut. 2009 Aug-Sep;157(8-9):2368-77
pubmed: 19361901
J Environ Radioact. 2016 Aug;160:93-101
pubmed: 27156168
J Environ Radioact. 2008 Sep;99(9):1440-8
pubmed: 18329144
J Environ Monit. 2012 Jan;14(1):193-201
pubmed: 22105600
Sci Total Environ. 2016 Aug 15;562:596-603
pubmed: 27110974
Oecologia. 2014 May;175(1):429-37
pubmed: 24590204
Ecotoxicol Environ Saf. 2012 Jan;75(1):46-54
pubmed: 21955884
Environ Toxicol Chem. 2005 Apr;24(4):820-9
pubmed: 15839555
J Environ Radioact. 2009 Sep;100(9):697-703
pubmed: 19375832
Sci Total Environ. 2011 Dec 1;410-411:87-95
pubmed: 22018959
Trends Ecol Evol. 1995 Feb;10(2):63-6
pubmed: 21236954
J Environ Radioact. 2020 Aug;219:106273
pubmed: 32339145
Radiat Res. 2019 Aug;192(4):431-439
pubmed: 31390308
Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 2013 Aug 27;110(35):14296-301
pubmed: 23940339
Ann Occup Hyg. 1967 Jan;10(1):39-45
pubmed: 6043105
Sci Total Environ. 2020 May 20;718:134485
pubmed: 31839283