Sewage sludge amendment of rice as a potential alternative to mineral fertilizer: Analyses of physiological, biochemical and molecular mechanisms of plant response.

Sewage sludge (SS) disposal poses environmental concerns, yet its organic matter, macro- and micronutrients, make it potentially beneficial for enhancing soil quality and crop yield. This study focuses on three types of SS: "R10" (SS1), which is commonly used in agricultural practices, and two environmentally friendlier options (SS2 and SS3), as alternatives to mineral fertilizer (urea) for rice cultivation. A pot experiment was conducted to investigate the ecophysiological, biochemical, and molecular responses of rice at three different growth stages. SS application led to a significant increase in biomass production (particularly SS3), along with increased nitrogen (N) levels. Enhanced chlorophyll content was observed in SS-treated plants, especially during inflorescence emergence (with the highest content in SS3 plants). At the ecophysiological and biochemical levels, SS treatments did not adversely affect plant health, as evidenced by unchanged values of maximal PSII photochemical efficiency and malondialdehyde by-products. At biochemical and gene expression levels, antioxidant enzyme activities showed transient variations, likely related to physiological adjustments rather than oxidative stress. Ascorbic acid and glutathione did not significantly vary. This study concludes that the use of SS in soil can be a viable alternative fertilizer for rice plants, with positive effects on biomass, chlorophyll content, and no adverse effects on plant health. Among the tested SSs, SS3 showed the most positive effect, even compared to commercial fertilizer. These results suggest that SS application could improve rice yield while addressing environmental concerns surrounding SS disposal.

Informations de copyright

Copyright © 2024 Elsevier Masson SAS. All rights reserved.

Déclaration de conflit d'intérêts

Declaration of competing interest The authors declare that they have no known competing financial interests or personal relationships that could have appeared to influence the work reported in this paper.