IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jagris/v13y2023i10p1964-d1255602.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Is Rockwool Potentially Harmful to the Soil Environment as a Nursery Substrate? Taking Eisenia fetida as an Example for Toxicological Analysis

Author

Listed:
  • Shengyang Zheng

    (College of Environmental Science and Engineering, Yangzhou University, Yangzhou 225127, China)

  • Chenzhe Wang

    (College of Environmental Science and Engineering, Yangzhou University, Yangzhou 225127, China)

  • Jing Ju

    (College of Environmental Science and Engineering, Yangzhou University, Yangzhou 225127, China)

  • Qigen Dai

    (Joint International Research Laboratory Agricultural & Agricultural Product Safety, Ministry Education China, Yangzhou University, Yangzhou 225009, China)

  • Haitao Zhao

    (College of Environmental Science and Engineering, Yangzhou University, Yangzhou 225127, China)

  • Ping Liu

    (College of Environmental Science and Engineering, Yangzhou University, Yangzhou 225127, China)

  • Xin Wang

    (College of Environmental Science and Engineering, Yangzhou University, Yangzhou 225127, China)

Abstract

We studied the effect of rockwool matrix on the conventional physical and chemical properties of soil and analyzed its toxicological effect on Eisenia fetida . The physical and chemical properties of rockwool were studied with characterization tests. By measuring earthworm enzymes and earthworm intestinal microorganisms, the effects of different rockwool particle sizes and additive amount on Eisenia fetida were analyzed. The results indicate that a low concentration of rockwool (<30 g/kg) had little effect on the soil physicochemical properties and the activity of Eisenia fetida , and played a positive role in improving the soil porosity. A high concentration of rockwool (>100 g/kg) reduced the exchangeable Ca and Mg content in the soil, and had a significant impact on the enzyme activity of Eisenia fetida . Mechanism studies have shown that high concentrations of rockwool (>200 g/kg) can have a significant impact on the nervous system of earthworm tissue. In addition, small particle size and low concentration of rockwool is conducive to the increase in intestinal microbial species of Eisenia fetida . This study clarifies the effects of emerging rockwool substrates on soil and soil organisms and provides theoretical support for the safe and reliable application of rockwool substrates in agricultural production.

Suggested Citation

  • Shengyang Zheng & Chenzhe Wang & Jing Ju & Qigen Dai & Haitao Zhao & Ping Liu & Xin Wang, 2023. "Is Rockwool Potentially Harmful to the Soil Environment as a Nursery Substrate? Taking Eisenia fetida as an Example for Toxicological Analysis," Agriculture, MDPI, vol. 13(10), pages 1-19, October.
    • Handle: RePEc:gam:jagris:v:13:y:2023:i:10:p:1964-:d:1255602
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2077-0472/13/10/1964/pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2077-0472/13/10/1964/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Sandra Ečimović & Mirna Velki & Alma Mikuška & Jelena Bažon & Lucija Sara Kovačić & Suzana Kristek & Jurica Jović & Franjo Nemet & Katarina Perić & Zdenko Lončarić, 2022. "How the Composition of Substrates for Seedling Production Affects Earthworm Behavior," Agriculture, MDPI, vol. 12(12), pages 1-14, December.
    2. M. Dubský & F. Šrámek, 2009. "The effect of rockwool on physical properties of growing substrates for perennials 38," Horticultural Science, Czech Academy of Agricultural Sciences, vol. 36(1), pages 38-43.
    3. Carmassi, G. & Incrocci, L. & Maggini, R. & Malorgio, F. & Tognoni, F. & Pardossi, A., 2007. "An aggregated model for water requirements of greenhouse tomato grown in closed rockwool culture with saline water," Agricultural Water Management, Elsevier, vol. 88(1-3), pages 73-82, March.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Pankaj Kumar & Vinod Kumar, 2024. "Preface to the Special Issue “Agricultural Environmental Pollution, Risk Assessment, and Control”," Agriculture, MDPI, vol. 14(1), pages 1-3, January.

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Varlagas, H. & Savvas, D. & Mouzakis, G. & Liotsos, C. & Karapanos, I. & Sigrimis, N., 2010. "Modelling uptake of Na+ and Cl- by tomato in closed-cycle cultivation systems as influenced by irrigation water salinity," Agricultural Water Management, Elsevier, vol. 97(9), pages 1242-1250, September.
    2. Massa, Daniele & Magán, Juan José & Montesano, Francesco Fabiano & Tzortzakis, Nikolaos, 2020. "Minimizing water and nutrient losses from soilless cropping in southern Europe," Agricultural Water Management, Elsevier, vol. 241(C).
    3. Incrocci, Luca & Thompson, Rodney B. & Fernandez-Fernandez, María Dolores & De Pascale, Stefania & Pardossi, Alberto & Stanghellini, Cecilia & Rouphael, Youssef & Gallardo, Marisa, 2020. "Irrigation management of European greenhouse vegetable crops," Agricultural Water Management, Elsevier, vol. 242(C).
    4. Puccinelli, Martina & Carmassi, Giulia & Pardossi, Alberto & Incrocci, Luca, 2023. "Wild edible plant species grown hydroponically with crop drainage water in a Mediterranean climate: Crop yield, leaf quality, and use of water and nutrients," Agricultural Water Management, Elsevier, vol. 282(C).
    5. Massa, D. & Incrocci, L. & Maggini, R. & Carmassi, G. & Campiotti, C.A. & Pardossi, A., 2010. "Strategies to decrease water drainage and nitrate emission from soilless cultures of greenhouse tomato," Agricultural Water Management, Elsevier, vol. 97(7), pages 971-980, July.
    6. Milon Chowdhury & Alexandra Espinoza-Ayala & Uttara C. Samarakoon & James E. Altland & Teng Yang, 2024. "Substrate Comparison for Tomato Propagation under Different Fertigation Protocols," Agriculture, MDPI, vol. 14(3), pages 1-14, February.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:gam:jagris:v:13:y:2023:i:10:p:1964-:d:1255602. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: MDPI Indexing Manager (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.mdpi.com .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.