Next Article in Journal
Effect of Lithium Slag Application on Saline–Alkali Soil Amelioration and Vegetable Growth
Previous Article in Journal
New Life in the Countryside: Conservation and Sustainability of Vernacular Architectural Facade Characteristics in the Jiangnan Region, China
 
 
Search for Articles:
Title / Keyword
Author / Affiliation / Email
Journal
Article Type
 
 
Advanced Search
 
Section
Special Issue
Volume
Issue
Number
Page
 
Journals
Sustainability
Volume 16
Issue 8
10.3390/su16083427
sustainability-logo
Submit to this Journal Review for this Journal Propose a Special Issue
► Article Menu

Article Menu

share Share announcement Help format_quote Cite question_answer Discuss in SciProfiles
first_page
settings
Order Article Reprints
Font Type:
Arial Georgia Verdana
Font Size:
Aa Aa Aa
Line Spacing:
Column Width:
Background:
Review

Effects of Air Pollution on Morphological, Biochemical, DNA, and Tolerance Ability of Roadside Plant Species

by
Zahid Mehmood
1,2,
Hsi-Hsien Yang
1,*,
Muhammad Umer Farooq Awan
3,*,
Usman Ahmed
4,
Ali Hasnain
3,
Muhammad Luqman
5,
Sohaib Muhammad
3,
Andleeb Anwar Sardar
3,
Tsai-Yu Chan
1 and
Aleeha Sharjeel
1
1
Department of Environmental Engineering and Management, Chaoyang University of Technology, Taichung 413310, Taiwan
2
Department of Applied Chemistry, Chaoyang University of Technology, Taichung 413310, Taiwan
3
Department of Botany, Government College University, Lahore 54000, Pakistan
4
Institute of Molecular Biology and Biotechnology, University of Lahore, Lahore 54000, Pakistan
5
Department of Environmental Sciences, University of Veterinary and Animal Sciences (UVAS), Lahore 54000, Pakistan
*
Authors to whom correspondence should be addressed.
Sustainability 2024, 16(8), 3427; https://doi.org/10.3390/su16083427
Submission received: 14 March 2024 / Revised: 12 April 2024 / Accepted: 17 April 2024 / Published: 19 April 2024
Browse Figures
Versions Notes

Abstract

:
Air pollution is a severe problem in the modern world. Urbanization, industrialization, and traffic emit air pollutants such as carbon monoxide (CO), nitrous oxides (NOx), hydrocarbons (HCs), and particulate matter into the environment. Plants can absorb air pollutants through stomata. They adversely affect the various metabolic and physiological processes of plant species. This review describes the impact of air pollution on plant health, morphologically, physiologically, and genetically, and the tolerance ability of plants located along roadside areas. Many morphological effects, like chlorosis, necrosis, leaf area, stomatal clogging, plant productivity, leaf falling, and reduction in flower yield, are observed due to the influence of air pollution. Air pollutants also damage the DNA and affect the biochemicals of the plants, as well as pH, relative water content (RWC), simple sugar, ascorbic acid (AA), total chlorophyll content (TCH), proline, and polyamines. Some plants located under pollution stress can mitigate air pollution. Plants with higher APTI values are more tolerant of air pollution, while those with the lowest APTI values can be used as an indicator of the rate of air pollution. There is much morphological, biochemical, and DNA damage noted in this review. Different strategies can be used to diagnose the effects of air pollution in the future and develop green belts to mitigate air pollution in pollution-stressed areas.

1. Introduction

Air pollution is one of the most severe issues globally. Burning fossil fuels, urbanization, vehicular emission, and industrialization increase the emissions of air pollutants like carbon monoxide (CO), nitrous oxides (NOx), hydrocarbons (HCs), and particulate matter (PM). These pollutants enter the environment from different sources, significantly impacting plants and animals [1]. As a result of this environmental pollution, the chemical composition of the environment has been changed due to the increasing amount of toxic pollutants, which pose a significant threat to biodiversity [2]. PM adversely affects humans and plants and causes 3.3 million deaths yearly, especially in Asia [3].
Highly populated urban areas are sources of air pollution due to heavy traffic loads and anthropogenic activities [4]. Large particles, including sand, grains, and water droplets, deposit quickly, but small dust particles stay in the environment longer [5]. These pollutants affect physiological (photosynthesis and respiration), morphological (stomatal function and leaf area), biochemical (chlorophyll and amino acid), and developmental processes in plants [6]. The influence of PM and its attributes (heavy metals and poly-hydroaromatic hydrocarbons) has been noticed in morphological, biochemical, and physiological respects [7]. Due to air pollution, many effects have been observed in plants, including a reduction in the yield of flowers, number of branches, leaf area, leaf pedicles, seed germination, and seedling growth [8]. Air pollutants directly disturb plants through aerial routes and indirectly through the soil. Most florae are exposed to air pollutants, which cause anatomical changes before leaf injury [9]. Dust particles are absorbed by the leaf surface, which affects plants’ physiological and biological processes. Leaf petioles trap pollutants through absorption and diffusion [10] and affect plants’ morphological, biochemical, and physiological processes [11].
In the literature, different researchers report that environmental pollutions affect plants in terms of anatomical, genetic, morphological, physiological, biochemical, and tolerance abilities (Figure 1). Air pollution tolerance indices evaluate different plant species for tolerance using various parameters, such as total chlorophyll content (TCH), relative water content (RWC), ascorbic acid (AA), and pH. Similarly, the ability of plants to tolerate heavy metal toxicity help plantations that survive in air-polluted areas [12]. Plants are essential for reducing air pollution in urban environments. Mishra et al. [13] found that Ficus benghalensis showed more tolerance at polluted sites and Alchornea cordifolia showed less. Therefore, Ficus benghalensis is the most active tree for absorbing and mitigating air pollution. Biomonitoring studies of different plants are an essential concern for restoring an ecosystem because these pollutants released into the atmosphere adversely affect flora and fauna. It is necessary to recognize that different plants mitigate the air pollution reported by other researchers [14].
The goal of this review is to understand the relationship between air pollution and plants located in pollution-stressed areas. This study also focuses on morphological, physiological, genetic, and biochemical changes in plants due to air pollution. Different strategies can be used to cure the morphological, physiological, and genetic damage in plants under air-polluted environments in the future. This will help screen plant species that can mitigate air pollution from the roadside, industries, and highly stressed pollution areas.
Air pollutants are emitted from various sources like vehicles, thermal power plants, fossil fuels, burning of garbage waste, construction, and agricultural activities [15]. Many air pollutants, such as CO, NOx, HCs, and PM, are released from vehicles. PM is an essential constituent in all emissions. PM contains heavy metals, including lead, chromium, copper, cadmium, nickel, etc., which are directly released from vehicular emissions [16]. Many natural sources of air pollutants include forest fire, dust, lightning, and volcanic and soil gases [17]. Different air pollutants released from various sources have adverse effects on plants, as shown in Table 1.

2. Effects of Air Pollution on the Morphology of Plants

Plants grown under air pollution respond to many changes—structural, functional, and morphological. Air pollutants reduce leaf area, yield of flowers, leaf length, and seed germination. Air pollution predominantly affects plant morphology and physiology [8].

2.1. Morphological Effects Related to Root, Seed, and Productivity

Zafar et al. [31] examined the impact of vehicle pollutants from diesel generators on Vinca rosea and Rue tuberose growth. After exposure to exhaust, pollutants significantly affected the root length, seed germination, seedling growth, and dry weight of seedlings of both species. Khalid et al. [32] studied the effect of air pollution on Calotropis procera characteristics. The inhibitory effect measured was related to photosynthetic pigments, stomatal conductance, and transpiration rate. Bell and Power [33] examined the impact of air pollution released from vehicle emissions on urban wild species. NO2 is a toxic element that has a drastic effect on plant functions. NOx and ozone O3 adversely affect seed germination, radicle length, and stomatal conductance. Urban road dust consists of different types of heavy metals that affect many processes like transpiration, root, biomass, plant productivity, and total soluble protein of plants.

2.2. Morphological Effects on Leaf

Gaseous pollutants and PM absorbed by the plant leaf may clog the stomata. Air pollution also disturbs the seed germination rate, stomata, and pedicle length and affects plant growth [34]. Automobile pollution absorbed by the leaf surface causes necrosis and chlorosis in morphological regions and decreases the anatomical layer thickening by surviving under traffic stress [35]. Roadside plants exposed to air pollutants from vehicles can show reduced leaf area, stomatal function, and leaf numbers and increased epidermal cell numbers, branch length, and trichome length in plants [36]. Plant morphological damage is shown in the form of different diseases containing chlorosis, necrosis, and leaf burning in the plants at highly polluted stress areas. Significant reductions were demonstrated in leaf length, leaf width, leaf area, petiole length, and leaf attributes at polluted sites [37]. Many other effects, like reduction in leaf size, thinness in the cuticle of the leaf, and decreased stomatal density of Platanus orientalis due to air pollution, have been observed [38]. Plants’ exposure to ozone causes leaf injury and white spots on the leaves, converting into brown necrosis spots. There are many symptoms shown by ozone absorption, including wilting, bleaching, and bronzing patterns in interveinal patches and the development of exceptional patterns on leaves [39]. Gaseous pollutants and PM affect the morphology of plants. Both leaf length and breadth were reduced under air pollution compared to non-polluted areas [38]. Morphological traits like leaf length, leaf area, stem length, branch number, stomatal damage, leaf injury, and leaf width were decreased in Malva parviflora at polluted sites compared to healthy environments. A reduction in leaf area was observed in plants located in unclean areas [40]. Shafiq et al. [41] examined the status of air pollutants on the productivity of trees. Some internal injuries and changes in physiological processes might alter plants at anatomical and morphological levels. Dry weight of leaves of Alstonia scholaris, Paullinia pinnate, Senna saimea, and Peltophorum ptrocaprum was reduced in a polluted environment. There are many morphological changes due to air pollution, as shown in Figure 2.

2.3. Effects of Air Pollution on Stomata Structure

Stomata are an essential factor in maintaining plants’ development and growth process. Stomata comprise two guard cells that maintain stomatal function [42]. Stomatal density and width of stomata decrease due to high concentrations of CO and SO2. Wagoner et al. [43] investigated the leaf cuticle and leaf variation in Plantago lanceolata at polluted and nonpolluted sites. Stomatal frequency is higher on the leaf’s upper surface at contaminated sites than at nonpolluted sites. Modifying the size and frequency of stomata is essential for absorbing pollutants in a pollution-stress condition. Decreased stomatal size was observed in Lotus corniculatus, Trifolium montanum, Trifolium pratense, and Trifolium repens at the contaminated sites. Changes in the inner wall of the stomata have been observed due to air pollution [44]. Different concentrations of heavy metals released by vehicles and industries drastically affect plants. These heavy metals reduced the stomatal conductance, pore size, stomatal density, and stomatal closure of plants including Bacopa monniera, Nicotiana tabacum, Arachis hypogaea, and Eichhornia crassipes [45]. There are many process effects on stomata structure due to air pollutants, as shown in Figure 3.

3. Effects of Air Pollution on Biochemical and Physiological Parameters

3.1. pH

The biochemical parameter pH helps indicate the stress of air pollution in plants due to acidity. Plant extracts from roadsides showed acidic pH due to air pollution [46]. The pH value is strongly associated with stomatal functions like photosynthesis, enzymatic activity, and cell development [47]. Degradation of chlorophyll has been observed due to pH reduction by displacing the Mg2+-producing nonfunctional phaeophytin. Alterations in the pH might affect the stomatal conductance, so the acidic pH of leaf extract is due to the occurrence of oxide of sulfur and nitrogen in the air. The lower pH in guard cells causes stomatal conductance, destroys stomata’s shape, decreases photosynthesis, and affects chlorophyll content [48]. The leaf extract of plants was observed to be more acidic due to the presence of various molecules. Plants located near industry or roadside areas experienced a low level of pH [46]. Higher pH in plant extract indicates increased synthesis of AA by hexose sugar for tolerance against air pollution. Alkaline pH helps plants attain tolerance against air pollution by adopting a detoxification mechanism [49]. Plants that have lowered pH are more susceptible, while those plants that have a pH of around 7 are tolerant [50].

3.2. Ascorbic Acid (AA)

AA acts as an antioxidant and free radical scavenger, plays a vital role in tolerance, is important in light reactions, and activates the defense mechanism under stress conditions. Most plant species produce AA during stressful environmental conditions [51]. AA is a non-enzymatic free radical scavenger system that reduces the byproduct mechanism of free radicals and removes air pollution, helping plants tolerate air pollution [52]. AA is high in all plant species located at polluted sites. More AA was observed at higher PM concentrations less at lower concentrations [53]. Higher concentrations of AA provide constancy to a plant with free radicals under stress conditions [54]. AA scavenges for free radicals in any adverse condition, especially air pollution. AA content decreases in plants after reducing free radicals. Plants that have lower concentrations of AA content pose a great threat to air pollution [55].

3.3. Total Chlorophyll Content

Air pollutants decrease the chlorophyll concentration and increased the proline and malondialdehyde concentration of plants [56]. Plants exposed to low-level air pollution suffer destructive effects without visible injury. Leaves absorb different pollutants from the air caused by the reduction in photosynthetic green pigments, which affects the pedicle length, seed germination, and flower numbers [57]. Chlorophyll a and b and carotenoid ratios are lower at polluted sites than at healthy sites. PM also affects the absorption of leaf light capacity and photosynthetic active radiation. As a result, secondary stress affects plant physiology processes like photosynthesis, and reduced chlorophyll content disturbs plant growth [58]. Exhaust pollution adversely affects the chlorophyll content in trees planted in polluted sites [12]. Previous research has indicated that air pollution affects leaf pH, TCH, and RWC. The concentration of TCH change may affect plants’ biochemical, morphological, and physiological properties [51].

3.4. Relative Water Content

Air pollution affects plants’ RWC and disturbs the transpiration rate. RWC is reduced under stressful air pollution, indicating that the lower RWC in plants located in polluted sites is dangerous for them [59]. Plants have less water, causing expansion of the leaf area, increased cell permeability, and reduction in transpiration rate due to the breaking of the water column for the uptake of water from root to aerial parts due to air pollution. High RWC helps maintain physiological processes when the transpiration is high [60]. RWC in plants was more dominant at polluted sites than at healthy sites due to maintaining physiological balance [61]. High RWC aids in tolerance to air pollution, but RWC was higher at higher PM concentrations and lower at lower PM concentrations [62]. RWC loss from leaves is due to the accumulation of PM on the surface of the leaves and dissolved nutrients [63]. Zhang et al. [4] analyzed the impact of automobile exhaust-induced pollution along roadside plantations. Air pollutants affect the respiratory activities, enzymatic activities, and uptake of water.

3.5. Simple Sugar

Simple sugar is essential for plants because it acts as an osmoprotectant and cryoprotectant and protects the integrity of the plasma membrane. It is vital for all organisms because it is the energy source [64]. Accumulating simple sugar in different plant parts increases the ability to tolerate air pollution. Sugar content reduction in crops near a cement factory caused an increase in the transpiration rate and decreased CO2 fixation due to chlorophyll imbalance [65]. Soluble sugar is reduced in plant leaves at polluted sites [66]. Air pollutants released under stressful environmental conditions depleted the soluble sugar in the leaves of plants [67]. Sulfite reaction with sugar aldehydes and ketones also reduced the sugar content in leaves [65]. Soluble sugar decreased in those plants, which was not tolerant of pollution. In damaged Quercus cerris leaves, soluble sugar is reduced, probably due to photosynthetic inhibition and stimulation of the transpiration rate [68].

3.6. Proline and Polyamines

Proline is an amino acid reported during environmental stress conditions [69]. Proline is found in those species planted at polluted environmental sites [70]. Proline is an integral part of enzymes and is a source of energy during stress conditions. Reduction in proline production during stress conditions degrades other proteins [71]. Accumulation of proline under stress conditions activates the synthesis of enzymes and suppresses proline degradation. Proline content increased in Albizia lebbeck growing near an industrial area. Proline concentrations were increased in Callistemon citrinus at a petrochemical site [72]. Polyamines are essential in plant physiology, growth, and expansion processes. The exogenous activities of polyamines protect the plants against ozone damage under stressful air pollution conditions [73].

4. Effects of Air Pollutants on the DNA of Plants

The concentrations of pollutants released from vehicle emissions along the roadside can cause DNA damage to plants [74]. Plants need heavy metals for development and growth, but extreme concentrations are dangerous for their health. Heavy metals and air pollutants released from vehicle emissions are absorbed by plants from stomata. Heavy metals and air pollutants cause genotoxicity, directly affecting plant morphology and development.

4.1. Effects of Different Pollutants on DNA

The genotoxic effects of air pollution on flora are used for the quantitative and qualitative evaluation of air pollution [75]. PM interrelates with a plant’s internal system and generates ROS, which causes oxidative stress. Oxidative stress causes an imbalance between free radical creation and antioxidant mechanisms, resulting in DNA damage [76]. Researchers investigated the genotoxicity induced by PM, heavy metals, and halogenated aliphatic hydrocarbons, and heavy metals resulted in plant cytotoxicity. Diesel exhaust PM contains organic compounds, sulfate, nitrogen derivatives, and metals absorbed by plants, causing genotoxicity. Numerous studies have been conducted on plants of the Tradescantia genus to assess the genotoxic effects of air pollutants in an urban atmosphere [77]. Air pollution due to higher traffic flow in urban areas damages the DNA and alters the leaf structure of Tradescantia pallida. DNA damage in plants is associated being exposed to air pollutants on busy roads. Air pollutants interact with ultraviolet radiation, causing DNA damage, such as base oxidation and DNA–DNA reactions [78]. The results of Sriussadaporn et al. [79] showed that increased concentrations of air pollutants during rainy and dry seasons induced genotoxicity in Taraxacum officinale and Robinsonecio gerberifolius.

4.2. Effects of Heavy Metals on DNA

Heavy metal toxicity also produces ROS, which cause protein oxidation, inactivation of enzymes, and DNA damage [80]. DNA damage in Pisum sativum root and leaves was observed by applying cadmium chloride and copper chloride. Roots showed greater sensitivity to cadmium than copper, while genotoxicity was higher in leaf cells exposed to higher cadmium concentrations [81]. DNA damage in a roadside sample of Euonymus japonicus leaves was higher than in a non-roadside sample [82]. Genotoxicity in tobacco plants at higher lead concentrations reduced the mitotic stage and extended the interphase in Vicia faba roots [83]. A previous study investigated the mitotic index increasing at low concentrations of lead while decreasing at high concentrations of lead. Many factors were investigated, such as weakening the DNA and RNA contents, weakening the protection of DNA from damage to the histone protein, and increased DNase and RNase activities under heavy metal stress [84].

5. Biomonitoring and Tolerance Ability of Plants against Air Pollution

Trees are essential constituents of the environment, and improve air quality by absorbing air pollutants in direct and indirect ways. Firstly, they directly absorb the contaminants from the air and are considered the lungs of the ecosystem. Secondly, they behave as the liver of the ecosystem because they filter pollutants through leaves [85]. Some plants adapt to environmental conditions by changing their biochemical concentrations to compete with the stress caused by air pollution. TCH, pH, AA, and RWC are used to calculate the APTI, which helps to categorize plant species’ sensitivity and tolerance levels (Figure 4). Various plants that absorbed the air pollutants through the leaf and showed signs of response to air pollution stress were used as bioindicators for screening [13]. Standard values for the tolerance abilities of different plant species are shown in Table 2. The influence of air pollution on plants and their tolerance ability was calculated using four biochemical parameters—TCH, pH, RWC, and AA content—with the help of Equation (1) [86]:
A P T I = A T + P + R 10
where A is ascorbic acid content (mg/g), P is pH of leaf extract, R is relative water content (%), and T is total chlorophyll content (mg/g).

APTI Values for Different Plant Species

Plant species like Pinus strobus showed the maximum APTI value, while Callosobruchus chinensis showed the lowest value [87]. Ghafari et al. [88] evaluated the status of 18 decorative woody plant species grown in moderately moist areas of Iran. Among all species, Yucca flamentosa and Berberis thunbergii showed the highest APTI values recommended by these species planted in the park. Fatima et al. [89] evaluated APTI values for plants located at the Anwarul campus of Hyderabad, which helped in screening the plant species. APTI and API of Azadirachta indica, Cassia siamea, and Ficus benghalensis showed tolerance against polluted environments. This study aimed to determine the plants that have overcome air pollution stress [90]. Muhammad et al. [91] determined the effects of air pollution on some tree species. The results showed that Ficus religiosa was the most tolerant because of higher APTI values, while Callistemon citrinus was susceptible to air pollution due to the lowest APTI values. Swami and Chauhan [92] found that the highest APTI value was observed in Sal (11.27), while the lowermost (7.19) was observed in Eulyptus. Three species—Annona squamosa, Ficus racemosa, and Santalum album—growing in the Madri industrial area had higher APTI values, prompting an initiative to plant more of them in the area to reduce the air pollution effect and maintain a healthy environment [93]. APTI values for Acacia auriculiformis (10.89), Alstonia scholaris (10.08), Chukrasia tabularis (8.43), Cassia fistula (11.77), Cassia siamea (8.98), Dalbergia sissoo (10.12) were higher at polluted sites than controls [94]. Correa-Ochoa et al. [95] investigated 54 plant species, among which was Mangifera indica. This showed APTI values greater than 16, indicating intermediate tolerance of air pollution, while Tabebuia chrysantharosea, Erythrina fusca, and Spathodea campanulata showed APTI values lower than 11, indicating sensitivity to a polluted environment. Bui et al. [96] investigated APTI values of 12 plant species along the roadside. Among these 12 species, Acer palmatum, Acer buergerianum, and Pinus densiflora showed higher air pollution tolerance (7.75–9.94) ability than others. Bala et al. [97] found that Polyalthia longifolia, Bauhinia variegata, Ficus religiosa, and Nerium oleander showed the highest APTI values, indicating tolerance of air pollution. In contrast, Acacia nilotica, Morus alba, and Ziziphus mauritiana showed the lowest APTI values and were considered moderate species. Cannabis sativa is considered sensitive to stressful environmental conditions. Sawarkar et al. [98] explored APTI values for 10 species, among which Ficus benghalensis, Mimusops elengi, Ficus religiosa, Azadirachta indica, and Ficus racemose showed tolerance in a polluted environment. APTI values for Dracaena deremensis (13.03) and Ficus benjamina (12.19) indicated intermediate tolerance, eight species showed APTI values of 11.40–10.70, indicating sensitivity, and four showed APTI values of 8.58–6.76, indicating greater sensitivity [99]. APTI values for different plant species located in different dirty environments are shown in Table 3.

6. Future Direction

There is a need for more studies that will enable people to develop a sustainable environment, such as sustainable green urban development, maintainable urbanization and transport, and phytoremediation techniques used to mitigate air pollution. It is necessary to investigate the air pollution tolerance ability of different plant species to reduce air pollution. This study helps scientists categorize healthy plants to develop urban green belts. It is necessary to know the impacts of air pollution on crops along roadsides. The study of plant species that have the ability to tolerate air pollution and can also be used for urban green planning is encouraged.

7. Conclusions

This study showed that air pollution can cause morphological, physiological, biochemical, and genetic effects in plants. The tolerance ability of different plant species depends upon their biochemical processes. Air pollution absorbed by plants through leaves and soil predominantly affects these biochemical processes, and is reflected in plant morphology. Many biochemical, morphological, and genetic effects in plants have been noted in this review. Some plants can endure stress-polluted conditions. This review provides APTI values for plant species in air-polluted environments. The different plant species that have tolerance based on their APTI values are used to develop green belts in urban areas and mitigate air pollution. This study also contributes to our knowledge of the effects of pollution on plants and curing plant species using different strategies in the future (Figure 5).

Author Contributions

Z.M.: Conceptualization and writing; H.-H.Y.: writing and editing; M.U.F.A., S.M. and A.A.S.: formal analysis; U.A., T.-Y.C., A.H., M.L. and A.S.: investigation. All authors have read and agreed to the published version of the manuscript.

Funding

This research received no external funding.

Institutional Review Board Statement

Not applicable.

Informed Consent Statement

Not applicable.

Data Availability Statement

The data are available upon request.

Acknowledgments

We thank Mohanraj Kumar for his assistance and help with this review paper.

Conflicts of Interest

The authors declare no conflicts of interest.

References

  1. Enitan, I.T.; Durowoju, O.S.; Edokpayi, J.N.; Odiyo, J.O. A review of air pollution mitigation approach using air pollution tolerance index (APTI) and anticipated performance index (API). Atmosphere 2022, 13, 374. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  2. Husen, A. Harsh Environment and Plant Resilience: Molecular and Functional Aspects; Springer Nature: Cham, Switzerland, 2021; pp. 1–158. [Google Scholar]
  3. Bachheti, A.J.; Bhalla, P.; Bachheti, R.K.; Husen, A. Growth and development of medicinal plants and production of secondary metabolites under ozone pollution. In Environmental Pollution and Medicinal Plants; CRC Press: Boca Raton, FL, USA, 2022; pp. 25–38. [Google Scholar]
  4. Zhang, A.; Ye, X.; Yang, X.; Li, J.; Zhu, H.; Xu, H. Elevated urbanization-driven plant accumulation and human intake risks of polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons in crops of peri-urban farmlands. Environ. Sci. Pollut. Res. 2022, 29, 68143–68151. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  5. Swami, A. Impact of automobile induced air pollution on roadside vegetation: A review. ESSENCE Int. J. Environ. Rehabil. Conserv. 2018, 9, 101–116. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  6. Swislowski, P.; Rajfur, M.; Waclawek, M. Influence of heavy metal concentration on chlorophyll content in Pleurozium schreberi mosses. Ecol. Chem. Eng. S 2020, 27, 591–601. [Google Scholar]
  7. Rai, P.K. Impacts of particulate matter pollution on plants: Implications for environmental biomonitoring. Ecotoxicol. Environ. Saf. 2016, 129, 120–136. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  8. Iqbal, M.Z.; Shafiq, M.; Athar, M.; Kabir, M.; Farooqi, Z.U.R. Impact of auto exhaust pollution on trees. Adv. Agric. Environ. Sci. 2019, 2, 27–53. [Google Scholar]
  9. Abida, B.; Harikrishna, S. Evaluation of some tree species to absorb air pollutants in three industrial locations of South Bengaluru, India. J. Chem. 2010, 7, S151–S156. [Google Scholar]
  10. Pathak, V.; Tripathi, B.D.; Mishra, V.K. Evaluation of Anticipated Performance Index of some tree species for green belt development to mitigate traffic generated noise. Urban For. Urban Green. 2011, 10, 61–66. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  11. Karmakar, D.; Padhy, P.K. Air pollution tolerance, anticipated performance, and metal accumulation indices of plant species for greenbelt development in urban industrial area. Chemosphere 2019, 237, 124522. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  12. Mehmood, Z.; Hasnain, A.; Luqman, M.; Muhammad, S.; Dhital, N.B.; John, A.; Iqbal, M.; Ejaz, A.; Tufail, M.; Harma; et al. Assessment of Air Pollution Tolerance and Physicochemical Alterations of Alstonia scholaris along Roadsides of Lahore, Pakistan. Aerosol. Air. Qual. Res. 2023, 23, 230038. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  13. Mishra, A.; Lal, B.; Kumar, R. Air quality monitoring and its impact on local tree species in and around mining areas of Dhanbad District, Jharkhand, India. In Spatial Modeling of Environmental Pollution and Ecological Risk; Woodhead Publishing: Sawston, UK, 2024; pp. 9–40. [Google Scholar]
  14. Zilaie, N.M.; Arani, M.A.; Etesami, H. The importance of plant growth-promoting rhizobacteria to increase air pollution tolerance index (APTI) in the plants of green belt to control dust hazards. Front. Plant Sci. 2023, 14, 1098368. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  15. Richard, G.; Sawyer, E.W.; Izah, C.S. Outdoor air quality index of biomass combustion in the Niger Delta, Nigeria: A health impact perspective. J. Adv. Res. Med. Sci. Technol. 2021, 8, 19–28. [Google Scholar]
  16. Izah, S.C.; Uzoekwe, S.; Aigberua, A. Source, geochemical spreading and risks of trace metals in particulate matter 2.5 within a gas flaring area in Bayelsa State, Nigeria. Adv. Environ. Technol. 2021, 7, 101–118. [Google Scholar]
  17. Kundariya, N.; Mohanty, S.S.; Varjani, S.; Ngo, H.H.; Wong, J.W.; Taherzadeh, M.J.; Chang, J.S.; Ng, H.Y.; Kim, S.H.; Bui, X.T. A review on integrated approaches for municipal solid waste for environmental and economical relevance: Monitoring tools, technologies, and strategic innovations. Bioresour. Technol. 2021, 342, 125982. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  18. Popek, R.; Przybysz, A.; Gawrońska, H.; Klamkowski, K.; Gawroński, S.W. Impact of particulate matter accumulation on the photosynthetic apparatus of roadside woody plants growing in the urban conditions. Ecotoxicol. Environ. Saf. 2018, 163, 56–62. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  19. Lee, J.K.; Kim, D.Y.; Park, S.H.; Woo, S.Y.; Nie, H.; Kim, S.H. Particulate matter (PM) adsorption and leaf characteristics of ornamental sweet potato (Ipomoea batatas L.) cultivars and two common indoor plants (Hedera helix L. and Epipremnum aureum Lindl. & Andre). Horticturae 2021, 8, 26. [Google Scholar]
  20. Jochner, S.; Markevych, I.; Beck, I.; Traidl-Hoffmann, C.; Heinrich, J.; Menzel, A. The effects of short-and long-term air pollutants on plant phenology and leaf characteristics. Environ. Pollut. 2015, 206, 382–389. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  21. Kropff, M.J.; Smeets, W.L.M.; Meijer, E.M.J.; Van der Zalm, A.J.A.; Bakx, E.J. Effects of sulphur dioxide on leaf photosynthesis: The role of temperature and humidity. Physiol. Plant. 1990, 80, 655–661. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  22. Thompson, M.; Gamage, D.; Ratnasekera, D.; Perera, A.; Martin, A.; Seneweera, S. Effect of elevated carbon dioxide on plant biomass and grain protein concentration differs across bread, durum and synthetic hexaploid wheat genotypes. J. Cereal. Sci. 2019, 87, 103–110. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  23. Lamichaney, A.; Tewari, K.; Basu, P.S.; Katiyar, P.K.; Singh, N.P. Effect of elevated carbon-dioxide on plant growth, physiology, yield and seed quality of chickpea (Cicer arietinum L.) in Indo-Gangetic plains. Physiol. Mol. Biol. Plants. 2021, 27, 251–263. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  24. Mishra, L.C. Effect of environmental pollution on the morphology and leaf epidermis of Commelina bengalensis linn. Environ. Pollut. Ser. A. Ecolo. Biolog. 1982, 28, 281–284. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  25. Idso, S.B.; Kimball, B.A.; Anderson, M.G.; Mauney, J.R. Effects of atmospheric CO2 enrichment on plant growth: The interactive role of air temperature. Agric. Ecosyst. Environ. 1987, 20, 1–10. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  26. Montesinos-Pereira, D.; Barrameda-Medina, Y.; Baenas, N.; Moreno, D.A.; Sanchez-Rodriguez, E.; Blasco, B.; Ruiz, J.M. Evaluation of hydrogen sulfide supply to biostimulate the nutritive and phytochemical quality and the antioxidant capacity of Cabbage (Brassica oleracea L. ‘Bronco’). J. Appl. Bot. Food Qual. 2016, 89, 290–298. [Google Scholar]
  27. Ausma, T.; De Kok, L.J. Atmospheric H2S: Impact on plant functioning. Front. Plant Sci. 2019, 10, 743. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  28. Sheng, Q.; Zhu, Z. Effects of nitrogen dioxide on biochemical responses in 41 garden plants. Plants 2019, 8, 45. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  29. Mansfield, T.A.; Whitmore, M.E.; Law, R.M. Effects of nitrogen oxides on plants: Two case studies. Stud. Environ. Sci. 1982, 21, 511–520. [Google Scholar]
  30. Dai, A.; Liu, C.; Ji, Y.; Sheng, Q.; Zhu, Z. Effect of different plant communities on NO2 in an urban road greenbelt in Nanjing, China. Sci. Rep. 2023, 13, 3424. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  31. Zafar, N.; Athar, M.; Iqbal, M.Z.; Shafiq, M. Effect of diesel generator exhaust pollutants on growth of Vinca rosea and Ruellia tuberosa. J. Appl. Sci. Environ. Manag. 2016, 20, 1191–1197. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  32. Khalid, N.; Hussain, M.; Young, H.S.; Boyce, B.; Aqeel, M.; Noman, A. Effects of road proximity on heavy metal concentrations in soils and common roadside plants in Southern California. Environ. Sci. Pollut. Res. 2018, 25, 35257–35265. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  33. Bell, A.S.L.H.; Power, S.A. Effects of vehicle exhaust emissions on urban wild plant species. Environ. Pollut. 2011, 159, 1984–1990. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  34. Anake, W.U.; Bayode, F.O.; Jonathan, H.O.; Omonhinmin, C.A.; Odetunmibi, O.A.; Anake, T.A. Screening of plant species response and performance for green belt development: Implications for semi-urban ecosystem restoration. Sustainability 2022, 14, 3968. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  35. Cali, I.O.; Karavin, N. Auto-exhaust pollution effects on the leaf structure of Olea europea L. Ban. J. Bot. 2020, 49, 481–486. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  36. Belford, E.J. Response of roadside tree leaves in a tropical city to automobile pollution. Not. Sci. Biol. 2020, 12, 752–768. [Google Scholar]
  37. Nandy, A.; Talapatra, S.N.; Bhattacharjee, P.; Chaudhuri, P.; Mukhopadhyay, A. Assessment of morphological damages of leaves of selected plant species due to vehicular air pollution, Kolkata, India. Int. Lett. Nat. Sci. 2014, 4, 76–91. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  38. Pourkhabbaz, A.; Rastin, N.; Olbrich, A.; Langenfeld-Heyser, R.; Polle, A. Influence of environmental pollution on leaf properties of urban plane trees, Platanus orientalis L. Bull. Environ. Contam. Toxicol. 2010, 85, 251–255. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  39. Lee, J.K.; Kwak, M.J.; Jeong, S.G.; Woo, S.Y. Individual and interactive effects of elevated ozone and temperature on plant responses. Horticulturae 2022, 8, 211. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  40. Abu Ziada, M.E.A.; Haroun, S.A.; El-Sherbeny, G.A.; Najm, A.A. Effects of air pollution on morphological and physiological features of Malva parviflora. J. Plant Prod. 2015, 6, 1811–1817. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  41. Shafiq, M.; Iqbal, M.Z.; Athar, M.; Qayyum, M. Effect of auto exhaust emission on the phenology of Cassia siamea and Peltophorum pterocarpum growing in different areas of Karachi. Afr. J. Biotechnol. 2009, 8, 2469–2475. [Google Scholar]
  42. Chen, Z.H.; Chen, G.; Dai, F.; Wang, Y.; Hills, A.; Ruan, Y.L.; Zhang, G.; Franks, P.J.; Nevo, E.; Blatt, M.R. Molecular Evolution of Grass Stomata. Trends Plant Sci. 2017, 22, 124–139. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  43. Wagoner, S. Leaf cuticular and morphological variations in Plantago lanceolata as indicators of environmental pollution. J. Tenn. Acad. Sci. 1975, 50, 79–83. [Google Scholar]
  44. Gostin, I.N. Air pollution effects on the leaf structure of some Fabaceae species. Not. Bot. Horti Agrobot. 2009, 37, 57–63. [Google Scholar]
  45. Guo, Z.; Gao, Y.; Yuan, X.; Yuan, M.; Huang, L.; Wang, S.; Duan, C. Effects of Heavy Metals on Stomata in Plants: A Review. Int. J. Mol. Med. 2023, 24, 9302. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  46. Rai, P.; Panda, L.S. Dust capturing potential and air pollution tolerance index (APTI) of some road side tree vegetation in Aizawl, Mizoram, India: An Indo-Burma hot spot region air quality. Air Qual. Atmos. Health 2014, 7, 93–101. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  47. Mukhopadhyay, S.; Dutta, R.; Dhara, A. Assessment of air pollution tolerance index of Murraya paniculata (L.) Jack in Kolkata metro city, West Bengal, India. Urban Clim. 2021, 39, 100977. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  48. Mandal, K.; Dhal, N.K. Pollution resistance assessment of plants around chromite mine based on anticipated performance index, dust capturing capacity and metal accumulation index. Environ. Sci. Pollut. Res. 2022, 29, 63357–63368. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  49. Bandara, W.A.R.T.W.; Dissanayake, C.T.M. Most tolerant roadside tree species for urban settings in humid tropics based on Air Pollution Tolerance Index. Urban Clim. 2021, 37, 100848. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  50. Subramani, S.; Devaanandan, S. Application of air pollution tolerance index in assessing the air quality. Int. J. Pharm. Sci. 2015, 7, 216–221. [Google Scholar]
  51. Singh, S.N.; Verma, A. Phytoremediation of air pollutants: A review. In Environmental Bioremediation Technologies; Springer: Berlin/Heidelberg, Germany, 2007; pp. 293–314. [Google Scholar]
  52. Bhattacharya, T.; Kriplani, L.; Chakraborty, S. Seasonal Variation in Air Pollution Tolerance Index of Various Plant Species of Baroda City. Univers. J. Environ. Res. Technol. 2013, 3, 199–208. [Google Scholar]
  53. Kalaipriya, P.; Vignesh, P.; Chakraborty, S.; Govindaraju, M. Assessment of Biochemical Characters and Development of Anticipated Performance Index for Air Pollution Stress Plants in Tiruchirappalli City. Adv. Biores. 2023, 14, 59–65. [Google Scholar]
  54. Govindaraju, M.; Ganeshkumar, R.S.; Muthukumaran, V.R.; Visvanathan, P. Identification and evaluation of airpollution-tolerant plants around lignite-based thermal power station for greenbelt development. Environ. Sci. Pollut. Res. 2012, 19, 1210–1223. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  55. Malav, L.C.; Kumar, S.; Islam, S.; Chaudhary, P.; Khan, S.A. Assessing the environmental impact of air pollution on crops by monitoring air pollution tolerance index (APTI) and anticipated performance index (API). Environ. Sci. Pollut. Res. 2022, 1, 16. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  56. Dorgan, M. Determining the Heavy Metal Concentrations in Plants Exposed to Exhaust Gases Alongside the Sanliurfa Highway. Ekoloji Dergisi 2013, 22, 40–48. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  57. Joshi, N.; Chauhan, A.; Joshi, P.C. Impact of industrial air pollutants on some biochemical parameters and yield in wheat and mustard plants. Environmentalist 2009, 29, 398–404. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  58. Agbaire, P.O.; Esiefarienhre, E. Air Pollution Tolerance Indices (APTI) of some plants around Otorogun gas plant in Delta region, Nigeria. J. Appl. Sci. Environ. Manag. 2009, 13, 11–14. [Google Scholar]
  59. Joshi, P.C.; Swami, A. Physiological responses of some tree species under roadside automobile pollution stress around city of Haridwar, India. Environmentalist 2007, 27, 365–374. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  60. Olanipon, D.G.; Ayandeyi, K.F.; Enochoghene, A.E.; Eludoyin, A.; Adanikin, B.; Awotoye, O. Tree Species as Biomonitors of Air Pollution around a Scrap Metal Recycling Factory in Southwest Nigeria: Implications for Greenbelt Development. bioRxiv 2024. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  61. Tanee, F.B.G.; Albert, E. Air pollution Tolerance Index of Plant growing Around Umuebulu Gas Flare Station in River State, Nigeria. Afr. J. Environ. Sci. Technol. 2012, 7, 1–8. [Google Scholar]
  62. Chandawat, D.K.; Verma, P.U.; Solanki, H.A. Air Pollution Tolerance Index (APTI) of three plant species across the road of Ahmedebed City. Life Sci. Leafl. 2011, 20, 935–943. [Google Scholar]
  63. Mei, P.; Malik, V.; Harper, R.W.; Jiménez, J.M. Air pollution, human health and the benefits of trees: A biomolecular and physiologic perspective. Arboric. J. 2021, 43, 19–40. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  64. Naya, L.; Ladrera, R.; Ramos, J.; González, E.M.; Arrese-Igor, C.; Minchin, F.R.; Becana, M. The response of carbon metabolism and antioxidant defenses of alfalfa nodules to drought stress and to the subsequent recovery of plants. Plant Physiol. 2007, 144, 1104–1114. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  65. Tripathi, A.K.; Gautam, M. Biochemical parameters of plants as indicators of air pollution. J. Environ. Biol. 2007, 28, 127. [Google Scholar]
  66. Giri, S.; Shrivastava, D.; Deshmukh, K.; Dubey, P. Effect of Air Pollution on Chlorophyll Content of Leaves. Curr. Agric. Res. J. 2015, 1, 93–98. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  67. Agbaire, O.P. Impact of air pollution on Proline and soluble sugar content of selected plant species. Chem. Mater. Res. 2016, 8, 72–76. [Google Scholar]
  68. Tzvetkova, N.; Kolarov, D. Effect of air pollution on carbohydrate and nutrients concentrations in some deciduous tree species. Bulg. J. Plant Physiol. 1996, 22, 53–63. [Google Scholar]
  69. Khedhar, D.D.; Gadge, V.D. Effect of air pollution on metabolic contents of some tress in Amravati (M.S.). J. Aqua. Biol. Fish. 2014, 2, 260–264. [Google Scholar]
  70. Jaleel, C.A.; Gopi, R.; Manivannan, P.; Panneerselvam, R. Responses of antioxidant defense system of Catharanthus roseus (L.) G. Don. to paclobutrazol treatment under salinity. Acta Physiol. Plant 2007, 29, 205–209. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  71. Fikriye, K.; Omer, M. Effects of some heavy metals on content of chlorophyll, Proline and some antioxidant chemicals in beans (Phaseolusvalgaris L) seedlings. Acta Biol. Cracov. 2005, 47, 157–164. [Google Scholar]
  72. Seyyednejad, S.M.; Niknejad, M.; Koochak, H. A review of some different effects of air pollution on plants. J. Environ. Sci. 2011, 5, 302–309. [Google Scholar]
  73. Hwang, H.M.; Fiala, M.J.; Park, D.; Wade, T.L. Review of pollutants in urban road dust and stormwater runoff: Part 1. Heavy metals released from vehicles. Int. J. Urban Sci. 2016, 20, 334–360. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  74. Risom, L.; Møller, P.; Loft, S. Oxidative stress-induced DNA damage by particulate air pollution. Mutat. Res. 2005, 592, 119–137. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  75. Misik, M.; Solenska, M.; Micieta, K.; Misikova, K.; Knasmüller, S. In situ monitoring of clastogenicity of ambient air in Bratislava, Slovakia using the Tradescantia micronucleus assay and pollen abortion assays. Mutat. Res./Genet. Toxicol. Environ. Mutagen. 2006, 605, 1–6. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  76. Hancock, J.T.; Desikan, R.; Neill, S.J. Role of reactive oxygen species in cell signaling pathways. Biochem. Soc. Trans. 2001, 29, 345–350. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  77. Rocha, A.D.N.; Candido, L.S.; Pereira, J.G.; Silva, C.A.M.; da Silva, S.V.; Mussury, R.M. Evaluation of vehicular pollution using the TRAD-MCN mutagenic bioassay with Tradescantia pallida (Commelinaceae). Environ. Pollut. 2018, 240, 440–447. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  78. Campos, C.F.; Cunha, M.C.; Santos, V.S.V.; de Campos, E.O., Jr.; Bonetti, A.M.; Pereira, B.B. Analysis of genotoxic effects on plants exposed to high traffic volume in urban crossing intersections. Chemosphere 2020, 259, 127511. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  79. Sriussadaporn, C.; Yamamoto, K.; Fukushi, K.; Simazaki, D. Comparison of DNA damage detected by plant comet assay in roadside and non-roadside environments. Mutat. Res./Genet. Toxicol. Environ. Mutagen. 2003, 541, 31–44. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  80. Hattab, S.; Chouba, L.; Kheder, M.B.; Mahouachi, T.; Boussetta, H. Cadmium- and copper-induced DNA damage in Pisum sativum, roots and leaves as determined by the Comet assay. Plant Biosyst. 2009, 143, 6–11. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  81. Gill, M. Heavy metal stress in plants: A review. Int. J. Adv. Res. 2014, 2, 1043–1055. [Google Scholar]
  82. Li, T.; Zhang, M.; Gu, K.; Herman, U.; Crittenden, J.; Lu, Z. DNA damage in Euonymus japonicus leaf cells caused by roadside pollution in Beijing. Int. J. Environ. Res. Public Health 2016, 13, 742. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  83. Gichner, T.; Znidar, I.; Szakova, J. Evaluation of DNA damage and mutagenicity induced by lead in tobacco plants. Mutat. Res./Genet. Toxicol. Environ. Mutagen. 2008, 652, 186–190. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  84. Kumar, M.; Nandini, N. Identification and evaluation of air pollution tolerance index of selected avenue tree species of urban Bangalore, India. Int. J. Emerg. Technol. Comput. Appl. Sci. 2013, 13, 388–390. [Google Scholar]
  85. Joshi, N.; Gupta, C.K.; Mangla, Y.; Chowdhuri, A. Green Plants as a Sustainable Solution to Air Pollution. Int. J. Plant Environ. 2023, 9, 102–112. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  86. Chauhan, A. Tree as bioindicator of automobile pollution in Dehradun City: A case study. N. Y. Sci. J. 2010, 3, 88–95. [Google Scholar]
  87. Bui, H.T.; Odsuren, U.; Kwon, K.J.; Kim, S.Y.; Yang, J.C.; Jeong, N.R.; Park, B.J. Assessment of air pollution tolerance and particulate matter accumulation of 11 woody plant species. Atmosphere 2021, 12, 1067. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  88. Ghafari, S.; Kaviani, B.; Sedaghathoor, S.; Allahyari, M.S. Assessment of air pollution tolerance index (APTI) for some ornamental woody species in green space of humid temperate region (Rasht, Iran). Environ. Dev. Sustain. 2021, 23, 1579–1600. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  89. Fatima, S.; Nazneen, S.; Azra, B.H. Air pollution tolerance index of plants of Anwarul Uloom Campus. Int. J. Res. Appl. Sci. Eng. Technol. 2020, 8, 1264–1267. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  90. Tak, A.A.; Kakde, U.B. Evaluation of air pollution tolerance and performance index of plants growing in industrial areas. Int. J. Environ. Sci. 2020, 2, 1–9. [Google Scholar]
  91. Muhammad, S.; Shakeel, F.; Khan, Z.; Hasnain, M.; Cheema, T.A. Assessment of air pollution sensitivity of some selected tree species of busiest roads of Lahore city. J. Biol. Environ. Sci. 2016, 9, 99–105. [Google Scholar]
  92. Swami, A.; Chauhan, D. Impact of air pollution induced by automobile exhaust pollution on air pollution tolerance index (APTI) on few species of plants. Science 2015, 4, 342–343. [Google Scholar]
  93. Mahecha, G.S.; Bamniya, B.R.; Nair, N.; Saini, D. Air pollution tolerance index of certain plant species-A study of Madri Industrial Area, Udaipur (Raj.), India. Int. J. Innov. Res. Sci. Eng. Technol. 2013, 2, 7927–7929. [Google Scholar]
  94. Verma, J.; Singh, P.; Sharma, R. Evaluation of air pollution tolerance index and anticipated performance index of selected roadside tree species in Ludhiana, India. Environ. Monit. Assess. 2023, 195, 240. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  95. Correa-Ochoa, M.; Mejia-Sepulveda, J.; Saldarriaga-Molina, J.; Castro-Jimenez, C.; Aguiar-Gil, D. Evaluation of air pollution tolerance index and anticipated performance index of six plant species, in an urban tropical valley: Medellin, Colombia. Environ. Sci. Pollut. Res. Int. 2022, 29, 7952–7971. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  96. Bui, H.T.; Odsuren, U.; Jeong, M.; Seo, J.W.; Kim, S.Y.; Park, B.J. Evaluation of the air pollution tolerance index of 12 plant species growing in environments with different air pollution levels. J. People Plants Environ. 2022, 25, 23–31. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  97. Bala, N.; Pakade, Y.B.; Katnoria, J.K. Assessment of air pollution tolerance index and anticipated performance index of a few local plant species available at the roadside for mitigation of air pollution and green belt development. Air. Qual. Atmos. Health 2022, 15, 2269–2281. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  98. Sawarkar, R.; Shakeel, A.; Kumar, T.; Ansari, S.A.; Agashe, A.; Singh, L. Evaluation of plant species for air pollution tolerance and phytoremediation potential in proximity to a coal thermal power station: Implications for smart green cities. Environ. Geochem. Health 2023, 45, 7303–7322. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  99. Chauhan, S.; Manisha, B.B.; Kandpal, K.C.; Kumar, A. Analyzing preferred indoor ornamental potted plants for their air pollution tolerance ability. Pol. J. Environ. Stud. 2022, 31, 2019–2027. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  100. Uka, U.N.; Belford, E.J.; Hogarh, J.N. Roadside air pollution in a tropical city: Physiological and biochemical response from trees. Bull. Natl. Res. Cent. 2019, 43, 90. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  101. Shrestha, S.; Baral, B.; Dhital, N.B.; Yang, H.H. Assessing air pollution tolerance of plant species in vegetation traffic barriers in Kathmandu Valley, Nepal. Sustain. Environ. Res. 2021, 31, 3. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  102. Timilsina, S.; Shakya, S.; Chaudhary, S.; Magar, G.T.; Narayan Munankarmi, N. Evaluation of air pollution tolerance index (APTI) of plants growing alongside inner ring road of Kathmandu, Nepal. Int. J. Environ. Sci. 2022, 79, 698–713. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  103. Akilan, M.; Nandhakumar, S. Air pollution tolerance index of selected plants in industrial and urban areas of Vellore district. Agri. Sci. Dig. A Res. J. 2016, 36, 66–68. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  104. Sharma, B.; Bhardwaj, S.K.; Kaur, L.; Sharma, A. Evaluation of air pollution tolerance index (APTI) as a tool to monitor pollution and green belt development: A review. J. Appl. Nat. Sci. 2017, 9, 1637–1643. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  105. Satpute, S.B.; Bhalerao, S.A. Assessment of air pollution tolerance index (APTI) and anticipated performance index (API) for designing green belt. Res. J. Environ. Sci. 2017, 5, 86–94. [Google Scholar]
  106. Zahid, A.; Ali, S.; Anwar, W.; Fatima, A.; Chattha, M.B.; Ayub, A.; Siddique, M. Assessing the air pollution tolerance index (APTI) of trees in residential and roadside sites of Lahore, Pakistan. SN Appl. Sci. 2023, 5, 294. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  107. Nayak, A.; Madan, S.; Matta, G. Evaluation of air pollution tolerance index (APTI) and anticipated performance index (API) of some plants species in Haridwar City. Int. J. Environ. Rehabil. Conserv. 2018, 9, 1–7. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  108. Alotaibi, M.D.; Alharbi, B.H.; Al-Shamsi, M.A.; Alshahrani, T.S.; Al-Namazi, A.A.; Alharbi, S.F.; Qian, Y. Assessing the response of five tree species to air pollution in Riyadh City, Saudi Arabia, for potential green belt application. Environ. Sci. Pollut. Res. 2020, 27, 29156–29170. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  109. Bharti, S.K.; Trivedi, A.; Kumar, N. Air pollution tolerance index of plants growing near an industrial site. Urban Clim. 2018, 24, 820–829. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  110. Sekhar, P.; Sekhar, P. Evaluation of selected plant species as bio-indicators of particulate automobile pollution using Air Pollution Tolerance Index (APTI) approach. Int. J. Res. Appl. Sci. Eng. Technol. 2019, 7, 57–67. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  111. Anil, M.D.; Pandey, K.; Krishna, V.; Kumar, M. Air pollution tolerance index (APTI) and expected performance index (EPI) of selected plants at RGSC, (BHU), Mirzapur, India. Pollution 2022, 8, 479–487. [Google Scholar]
Sustainability 16 03427 g001
Figure 1. Statistics of journal publications on air pollution effects on plants from 2010 to 2023 (Source: Dimensions https://www.dimensions.ai/ accessed on 1 March 2024.).
Figure 1. Statistics of journal publications on air pollution effects on plants from 2010 to 2023 (Source: Dimensions https://www.dimensions.ai/ accessed on 1 March 2024.).
Sustainability 16 03427 g001
Sustainability 16 03427 g002
Figure 2. Effects of air pollution on plant morphology.
Figure 2. Effects of air pollution on plant morphology.
Sustainability 16 03427 g002
Sustainability 16 03427 g003
Figure 3. Schematic diagram of air pollution effects on stomata.
Figure 3. Schematic diagram of air pollution effects on stomata.
Sustainability 16 03427 g003
Sustainability 16 03427 g004
Figure 4. Procedure for the assessment of the tolerance ability of plants.
Figure 4. Procedure for the assessment of the tolerance ability of plants.
Sustainability 16 03427 g004
Sustainability 16 03427 g005
Figure 5. Schematic diagram of mitigation and diagnosis of effects on plants due to air pollution.
Figure 5. Schematic diagram of mitigation and diagnosis of effects on plants due to air pollution.
Sustainability 16 03427 g005
Table 1. Effects of air pollutants on plants.
Table 1. Effects of air pollutants on plants.
Air PollutantsEffects on PlantsReferences
PMReduction in plant growth, reduced leaf area, and several physiological changes like photosynthesis, stomatal conductance, pigment content, enzyme, and transpiration.[7,18,19]
SO2Reduction in biomass growth, loss of chlorophyll, necrosis, wilting of leaves, defoliation, and production of reactive oxygen species (ROS).[20,21]
CO2High concentration decreases the variety of nutrients, including protein and vitamins, which affect chlorophyll and carotenoid concentrations, micro and macro elements in plants, stomata closure, and photorespiration suppressed in plants.[22,23]
O3Leaf injuries, chlorosis, and chlorophyll deficiency restrict respiration, obstruct stomata, bleaching, decrease floral yield, delay fruiting, increase the leaching, prevent photosynthesis, and stunt growth.[3,24,25]
H2SLeaf lesions, defoliation, tissue death, yellowish leaves, and dark brown bands on living and dead tissues. [26,27]
NO2It affects the photosynthetic pigments, damages the membrane and chloroplast, reduces the transpiration rate, reduces the growth and chlorosis, and even death of plants.[28,29,30]
Table 2. Response of plant species using APTI.
Table 2. Response of plant species using APTI.
Serial No.APTIResponse of Plant Species
130–100Tolerant
217–29Intermediate
31–16Sensitive
4<1Very sensitive
Table 3. Plant species have APTI values under different polluted environments.
Table 3. Plant species have APTI values under different polluted environments.
Plant Species and Their LocationAPTI ValuesReferences
(Roadside)
Terminalia catappa, Mangifera indica, Ficus platyphylla, Polyalthia longifolia, Cinnamomum camphora, Nerium oleander		20.52, 18.66, 19.24, 17.66, 36.0, 14.6[100,101]
(Roadside)
Mangifera indica, Pinus roxburghii, Thuja occidentalis, Cinnamomum camphora, Buddleia asiatica, Celtis australis, Callistemon lanceolatus, Ficus elastic, Grevillea robusta, Salix babylonica, Cryptomeria japonica, Prunus persica, Sambucus canadensis		10.62, 9.71, 8.47, 10.22, 6.92, 9.64, 10.23, 9.55, 9.32, 10.04, 7.05, 8.39, 9.29[102]
(Roadside)
Nerium oleander, Tamarindus indicus, Azardicta indicia, Pungamia pinnata, Ficus religiosa, Polyalthia longifolia, Tectona grandis		20.51, 16.55, 14.31, 15.55, 23.35, 22.88, 13.45[103,104]
(Industrial Area)
Azadiracht aindica, Mangiferai ndica, Neriumindi cum, Polyalthial ongifolia, Cassia fistula,		55.19, 66.64, 26.59, 58.01, 23.97[105]
(Roadside)
Saraca asoca, Melia azedarach, Morus alba, Alstonia scholaris, Bougainvillea glabra, Syzygium cumini, Ficus benghalensis, Azadirachta indica, Eucalyptus sp., Magnifera indicia, Ziziphus mauritiana, Pongamia pinnata, Nerium indicum, Polyalthia longifolia		8.45, 8.47, 7.7, 8.5, 5.75, 7.27, 8.03, 7.86, 8.76, 8.95, 7.57, 7.21, 11.51, 12.93[106,107]
(Industrial Area)
Mimusops elengi, Anacardium occidentale, Morinda coreia, Bambusa bambos, Lagerstroemia speciose, Millingtonia hortensis, Anacardium occidentale, Potentilla longifolia, Cassia fistola, Ficus benghalensis		19.03, 12.24, 14.88, 10.58, 8.95, 10.77, 11.13, 10.91, 16.82, 26.90[108,109]
(Roadside)
Jacaranda mimosifolia, Dovyalis abyssinica, Eucalyptus camaldulensis, Azadirachta indica, Cordia africana. Calistemon citrinus, Justicia schimperiana, Vernonia amygadalina, Gravillea robusta, Spathodeia nilotica, Schinus molle, Diospyros melanoxylon, Polyalthia longifolia, Ficus religiosa		35.28, 20.04, 15.04, 28.38, 16.49, 21.4 15.06, 20.41, 20.95, 15.85, 35.21, 12.47, 17.30, 15.75[110,111]
Disclaimer/Publisher’s Note: The statements, opinions and data contained in all publications are solely those of the individual author(s) and contributor(s) and not of MDPI and/or the editor(s). MDPI and/or the editor(s) disclaim responsibility for any injury to people or property resulting from any ideas, methods, instructions or products referred to in the content.

Share and Cite

MDPI and ACS Style

Mehmood, Z.; Yang, H.-H.; Awan, M.U.F.; Ahmed, U.; Hasnain, A.; Luqman, M.; Muhammad, S.; Sardar, A.A.; Chan, T.-Y.; Sharjeel, A. Effects of Air Pollution on Morphological, Biochemical, DNA, and Tolerance Ability of Roadside Plant Species. Sustainability 2024, 16, 3427. https://doi.org/10.3390/su16083427

AMA Style

Mehmood Z, Yang H-H, Awan MUF, Ahmed U, Hasnain A, Luqman M, Muhammad S, Sardar AA, Chan T-Y, Sharjeel A. Effects of Air Pollution on Morphological, Biochemical, DNA, and Tolerance Ability of Roadside Plant Species. Sustainability. 2024; 16(8):3427. https://doi.org/10.3390/su16083427

Chicago/Turabian Style

Mehmood, Zahid, Hsi-Hsien Yang, Muhammad Umer Farooq Awan, Usman Ahmed, Ali Hasnain, Muhammad Luqman, Sohaib Muhammad, Andleeb Anwar Sardar, Tsai-Yu Chan, and Aleeha Sharjeel. 2024. "Effects of Air Pollution on Morphological, Biochemical, DNA, and Tolerance Ability of Roadside Plant Species" Sustainability 16, no. 8: 3427. https://doi.org/10.3390/su16083427

APA Style

Mehmood, Z., Yang, H.-H., Awan, M. U. F., Ahmed, U., Hasnain, A., Luqman, M., Muhammad, S., Sardar, A. A., Chan, T.-Y., & Sharjeel, A. (2024). Effects of Air Pollution on Morphological, Biochemical, DNA, and Tolerance Ability of Roadside Plant Species. Sustainability, 16(8), 3427. https://doi.org/10.3390/su16083427

Note that from the first issue of 2016, this journal uses article numbers instead of page numbers. See further details here.

Article Metrics

Back to TopTop