Next Article in Journal
Effects of Carbon Amendments, Tillage and Cover Cropping on Arbuscular Mycorrhizal Fungi Association and Root Architecture in Corn and Cotton Crop Sequence
Next Article in Special Issue
Spatio-Temporal Analysis of the Universal Thermal Climate Index (UTCI) for the Summertime in the Period 2000–2021 in Slovenia: The Implication of Heat Stress for Agricultural Workers
Previous Article in Journal
Effects of Zinc Fertilization on Grain Cadmium Accumulation, Gene Expression, and Essential Mineral Partitioning in Rice
Previous Article in Special Issue
Dust Particles as a Pesticide’s Carrier in Agro-Ecosystems; Qualitative and Quantitative Analysis
 
 
Font Type:
Arial Georgia Verdana
Font Size:
Aa Aa Aa
Line Spacing:
Column Width:
Background:
Article

Estimation of the Enzymatic Activity of Haplic Chernozem under Contamination with Oxides and Nitrates of Ag, Bi, Te and Tl

Academy of Biology and Biotechnology Named D.I. Ivanovsky, Southern Federal University, 344090 Rostov-on-Don, Russia
*
Author to whom correspondence should be addressed.
Agronomy 2022, 12(9), 2183; https://doi.org/10.3390/agronomy12092183
Submission received: 21 July 2022 / Revised: 1 September 2022 / Accepted: 13 September 2022 / Published: 14 September 2022
(This article belongs to the Special Issue Advances in Agroecology: The Agriculture-Nature Interface)

Abstract

:
Sustainable agriculture is only possible if the agroecological services of the soil are preserved. Soil contamination with rare elements such as silver (Ag), bismuth (Bi), tellurium (Te), and thallium (Tl) is less studied, but their toxicity is no less high than in other heavy metals. Activity of soil enzymes is of great importance for the healthy functioning of soils, agroecosystem services, and their fertility. It is necessary to assess the ecological state of black soil using the most sensitive and informative indicators of the state of soils—their enzymatic activity. The objective of this research was to evaluate changes in activity of five priority soil enzymes (catalase, dehydrogenases, invertase, phosphatase, and urease) when contaminated with oxides and nitrates of Ag, Bi, Te, and Tl in a laboratory model experiment. The integral toxicity of nitrates and oxides of Ag, Bi, Te, and Tl was assessed by the integrated index of soil enzymatic activity. A comparison of the toxicity of oxides and nitrates of each element, according to the integrated index of soil enzymatic activity, allowed us to establish that Ag oxide is more toxic than Ag nitrate; Bi oxide is equivalent in its toxicity to Bi nitrate; and Tl and Te oxides are less toxic than Tl and Te nitrates. When contaminated with oxides, the most informative indicators are activity of invertase (Ag), urease (Bi, Tl), and phosphatase (Te). When contaminated with nitrates, the most informative indicators are activity of phosphatase (Ag) and invertase (Bi, Tl, and Te). Activity of phosphatase and catalase are the most sensitive to contamination by oxides and nitrates of Ag, Bi, Tl, and Te, and dehydrogenases, invertase, and urease are the least sensitive.

1. Introduction

Sustainable agriculture is only possible if the agro-ecological services of the soil are preserved. More than 90% of human food is obtained from soils [1]. At the same time, the anthropogenic load on soils is growing exponentially and causes economic, environmental, and social damage from reduced soil health, poor crop quality, soil and agricultural product pollution, and increased morbidity and mortality [2,3,4,5,6]. The problems of soil pollution with heavy metals and metalloids have recently become highly relevant. The study of 30 priority chemical elements allowed the establishment of a low degree of knowledge of the ecotoxicity parameters of soil contamination with rare elements (REs): Ag, Bi, Te, and Tl [7]. At the same time, the effects of soil pollution with Ag, Bi, Te, and Tl have been studied to a small extent. However, soil contamination of the Earth’s crust with REs is widespread. Such elements include silver, bismuth, selenium, thallium, indium, cadmium, tellurium, and thallium, which are called chalcophile elements [8,9,10,11].
The ways of self-contamination are also specific for each RE, but they have common sources. The main anthropogenic sources of soil contamination with silver, tellurium, and thallium are the presence of these REs in aerosol impurities of thermal power plants during the combustion of coal and because of the activities of non-ferrous and ferrous metallurgy enterprises [12,13,14,15,16,17,18]. The highest concentrations of thallium in soil were observed near coal mines, including up to 20,000 ppm or 2% of soil mass, which is 100,000 times higher than the average thallium content in soil [19]. In addition, the content of thallium and tellurium in coals is 10–100 times less than other heavy metals and metalloids [14]. Other sources of RE pollution include landfills of solid household waste, production of photographic and electrical materials, use of pesticides, use of sewage sludge as fertilizers, mining, industrial production of glass, ceramics and rubber, and nuclear power [20,21,22,23].
Soil contamination with Ag, Bi, Te, and Tl is very toxic to animals, plants, and humans. By accumulating in the soil in large quantities, silver inhibits the total number of microorganisms and enzymatic activity [24,25,26,27,28,29,30]. The increased content of bismuth in the soil leads to its accumulation in plants [23,31,32,33,34,35]. By transmitting through food chains, bismuth enters the human body, causing numerous pathologies [36,37,38,39,40]. The scale and degree of tellurium contamination of soils and agricultural plants are increasing every year [17,41,42,43,44,45,46]. Soil contamination with thallium creates a high risk of thallium entering agricultural crops and further along food chains [47,48,49].
In this regard, it is relevant to determine the system of biological indicators of soil condition that allow assessing the pollution degree and restoration degree of the soil’s ecological state. According to studies of soil toxicity caused by heavy metal pollution, enzymatic activity is considered one of the most effective and fastest biological indicators, as the first to react to soil pollution compared to other biological indicators [50,51,52]. The aim is to evaluate the change in the enzymatic activity of haplic chernozem when contaminated with oxides and nitrates of Ag, Bi, Te, and Tl.
The novelty of the work lies in the fact that, previously, the state of soils contaminated with rare elements (heavy metals) such as Ag, Bi, Te, Tl was not assessed by changes in the activity of enzymes of the classes of oxidoreductases and hydrolases. The application of this approach to the biomonitoring of heavy metal contaminated soils contributes to sustainable agriculture and control for restoration of agroecosystem services.
According to this aim, the objectives of the study included: (1) to evaluate the change in activity of each enzyme of classes of oxidoreductases (catalase and dehydrogenases) and hydrolases (invertase, phosphatase, and urease) when contaminated with oxides and nitrates of Ag, Bi, Te, and Tl; (2) to compare the ecotoxicity of oxides and nitrates of Ag, Bi, Te, and Tl; (3) to determine the most sensitive and informative enzyme by soil contamination by oxides and nitrates of Ag, Bi, Te, and Tl; (4) to measure the highest permissible concentration of Ag, Bi, Te, and Tl in haplic chernozem.

2. Materials and Methods

2.1. Soil Selection

Samples of haplic chernozem were taken from the topsoil of 0–20 cm on the arable land of the Botanical Garden of the Southern Federal University. The Botanical Garden is in the center of Rostov-on-Don (Rostov Region, Russia) and is characterized by a minimal anthropogenic impact on the soil cover. Haplic chernozems are among the most fertile soils in Russia and the world [53]. Studying the effects of pollution with Res on haplic chernozem allows us to predict the consequences of pollution for other fertile soils in the world.

2.2. Experiment Simulation

Ag, Bi, Tl, and Te were introduced in the form of oxides and nitrates (in terms of element): Silver oxide—Ag2O, CAS No.: 20667-12-3 (Sigma-Aldrich, St. Louis, MO, USA), bismuth(III) oxide—Bi2O3 (CAS No.: 1304-76-3, Sigma-Aldrich), thallium(III) oxide—Tl2O3 (CAS No.: 1314-32-5, Sigma-Aldrich), tellurium dioxide—TeO2 (CAS No.:7446-07-3, Sigma-Aldrich), silver nitrate—AgNO3 (CAS No.: 7761-88-8, Sigma-Aldrich), bismuth(III) nitrate—Bi(NO3)3 (CAS No.: 10035-06-0, Sigma-Aldrich), thallium(III) nitrate—Tl(NO3)3 (CAS No.: 10102-45-1, Sigma-Aldrich), and tellurium(IV) nitrate basic—Te2O3(OH)NO3 (CAS No.: 64535-94-0, Sigma-Aldrich).
Soil pollution was expressed in approximate permissible concentrations (APC): 0.5, 1, 3, 10, and 30. Oxides of Ag, Bi, Tl, and Te are the most common form of metal compounds found in soil. Oxides are the insoluble form of the compound. Nitrates of Ag, Bi, Tl, and Te are the soluble form of the metal compound in soil also commonly found in soil. The scheme and stages of the experiment are shown in Figure 1. This range of concentrations was chosen to approximate the response of the soil enzyme pool at higher levels of contamination and to calculate the recommended concentrations of metals in each form (oxide and nitrate).
In the prepared soil, dried and freed from roots and other foreign inclusions, sifted through a 2 mm sieve, oxides (in dry form) and nitrate solutions (in terms of an element) of Ag, Bi, Tl, and Te were added. After the introduction of metals, the soil was moistened and incubated for 10 days at 24–25 °C and a soil moisture level of 25–30%. After the end of incubation, the soil was dried and ground through a 1 mm sieve. Soil samples were used to determine the enzymatic activity of soils: activity of catalase, dehydrogenases, phosphatase, invertase, and urease.

2.3. Methods for Assessing Enzymatic Activity

To assess the ecological state of soils after the contamination by Ag, Bi, Tl, and Te, the activity of catalase, dehydrogenases, phosphatase, invertase, and urease was analyzed (Table 1) [54].
The informational value was calculated by the correlation coefficient (R) between the content of Ag, Bi, Tl, and Te in the soil and the value of the indicators of enzymatic activity.
The degree of sensitivity of the indicators of enzymatic activity was judged by the degree of decrease in its values in the options with contamination of Ag, Bi, Tl, and Te compared with the control.

2.4. Measurement

The integral index of enzymatic activity (IIEA) of the soil was used to give an integral assessment of the condition of soils after any chemical pollution. For the calculation of the IIEA, the value of each of the above indicators on the control (in unpolluted soil) was taken as 100%. The percentages in other experimental variants (in polluted soil) were expressed as a percentage relative to the control. For the IIEA condition, a maximum value of each index (100%) was chosen from the array data, and in reference to the value of this index, was expressed for other variants of experiments by Equation (1):
E 1   = E x E cont × 100 %
where E1 is the relative score of the enzyme activity; Ex is the actual value of the enzyme activity; and Eref is the reference value of the enzyme activity.
The relative values of several indicators, activity of catalase, dehydrogenases, invertase, phosphatase, and urease, were summed.
Thereafter, the average assessment point of the studied enzymes was calculated for each variant by Equation (2):
E a v = E 1 + E 2 + + E n N
where Eav is the average estimated score of enzyme activity; E1En is the relative score of the enzyme activity; and N is the amount of enzyme activity.
The integral index of enzymatic activity (IIEA) of the soil is calculated by Equation (3):
IIEA = E E ref × 100 %
where E is the average estimated score of enzyme activity and Eref is the reference score of enzyme activity.

2.5. Statistical Processing

An analysis of the rate of variation (standard deviation) at p ≤ 0.05 was carried out to determine the reliability of the results. Data were means of triplicate. Statistical data processing was carried out using Statistica 12.0 and the Python 3.6.5 Matplotlib package. The correlation nonparametric Spearman’s coefficient was calculated between the concentration of AgNPs and the average of the biological indicators. These statistical methods make it possible to evaluate the activity of enzymes in comparison with the control, as well as to evaluate the information content and sensitivity of enzymes of different classes after contamination by Ag, Bi, Tl, and Te.

3. Results

3.1. Changes in Activity of Oxidoreductases

Activity of oxidoreductases is an informative and sensitive indicator for soil contamination with heavy metals, petroleum hydrocarbons, and other xenobiotics [4,55,56,57,58,59]. Activity of catalase in haplic chernozem when contaminated with oxides and nitrates of Ag, Bi, Tl, and Te is shown in Figure 2.
With an increase in the concentration from 1, 3, 10, and 30 APC of Ag oxide, a decrease in catalase activity was observed by 10, 26, 42, and 45% relative to the control, respectively. At the lowest concentration of 0.5 APC, no significant differences from the control were observed. However, when contaminated with Ag nitrates, the toxic effect was already detected at 0.5 APC; the inhibition of catalase activity was 21% lower than in the control. A more significant inhibition than with oxide contamination was also found with an increase in the concentration of Ag nitrate from 1 to 30 APC, by 34–50% lower than in the control.
Bi oxide at doses of 0.5, 1, and 3 APC did not affect enzyme activity. At maximum concentrations of Bi 10 and 30 APC, activity inhibition was observed by 37 and 43% relative to the control, respectively. Bi nitrate, as well as Ag nitrate, already had a toxic effect at a dose of 0.5 APC, 27% below the control. With an increase in the dose (from 1 to 30 APC), the inhibition was significant—32–40% relative to the control.
At a minimum concentration of 0.5 APC of Tl and Te oxides, inhibition was 16 and 13%, respectively. With an increase in the concentration from 1 to 30 APC Tl, inhibition was 39–53% relative to the control. Te oxide at concentrations of 1 and 3 APC is less toxic, by inhibiting catalase activity by 19 and 23% relative to the control. When the dose was increased, a similarity with Tl was observed. Tl and Te nitrates had a significant inhibition of activity at 0.5 APC, by 30 and 24%. With an increase in the concentration to 30 UDC, inhibition was 36–75% (Tl nitrate) and 25–75% (Te nitrate).
Activity of dehydrogenases in soil contaminated with Ag oxide at 0.5 APC, compared with catalase, allowed the stimulation of enzyme activity to be 7% higher than in the control, as a manifestation of hormesis (Figure 3). Hormesis is the phenomenon of activity stimulation of a biological indicator by small doses of pollutants in the soil [60].
With an increase in the concentration of Ag oxide to 1.3 and 10 APC, activity inhibition was 7, 13, and 15%, respectively. The maximum inhibition was observed at a concentration of 30 APC—32% lower than in the control. Ag nitrate had a more toxic effect on dehydrogenase activity: already at 0.5 APC, inhibition was 13% lower than the control, and with an increase in concentration from 1 to 30 APC, the change in activity was 18–32% lower than in the control.
Bi nitrate and oxide had almost the same effect on activity of dehydrogenases in haplic chernozem. The difference between the effects of different forms of chemical compounds was observed only at a dose of 0.5 and 1 APC: Bi oxide inhibited the dehydrogenase activity by 9 and 16%, and nitrate by 19 and 21%, relative to the control. With an increase in the concentration from 1 to 30 UDC, inhibition was the same for both oxide and nitrate, decreased by an increase in concentration by 20–30% than in the control.
Tl oxide inhibited enzyme activity at 0.5 and 1 APC by 14 and 24%, and nitrate by 21 and 27%, respectively. With an increase in the concentration from 1 to 20 APC, activity inhibition in haplic chernozem when contaminated with Tl oxide decreased by 24–39% relative to the control, and nitrate by 27–65%.
Tellurium affected activity of dehydrogenases similarly to Te. In small doses (0.5 APC) of Te oxide, a 9% decrease in activity was observed, and ofTe nitrate, F 24%. With an increase in the concentration from 1 to 30 APC, a significant inhibition of activity was observed with the addition of Te oxide by 14–28% and of Te nitrate by 27–65%.
Activity of oxidoreductases was quite sensitive to the introduction of oxides and nitrates of Ag, Bi, Tl, and Te. According to the data obtained above and the assessment of the correlation with the dose of each element, the series of informativeness of each biological indicator in relation to metal oxides and nitrates were compiled.
The close correlation of activity of oxidoreductases in haplic chernozem with the dose of the introduced oxide and nitrate of Ag, Bi, Tl, and Te was estimated by the correlation coefficients (r) and presented as series 4 and 5 (catalase), and series 6 and 7 (dehydrogenases):
Activity of catalase:
Tl (−0.65) < Ag (−0.81) < Bi (−0.88) = Te (−0.88)
Bi (−0.51) < Ag (−0.67) <Te (−0.76) (2) < Tl (−0.81)
Activity of dehydrogenases:
Bi (−0.67) < Tl (−0.73) < Te (−0.82) < Ag (−0.89)
Te (−0.62) < Bi (−0.64) < Tl (−0.70) < Ag (−0.72)
According to these series, Bi and Te oxides and Tl nitrate have the greatest toxic effect on catalase activity; nitrate and Ag oxide have the greatest toxic effect on dehydrogenase activity.

3.2. Changes in Hydrolase Activity

Hydrolases are soil enzymes involved in carbon, nitrogen, and phosphorus cycles [61]. Phosphatase activity during contamination with oxides and nitrates of Ag, Bi, Tl, and Te is shown in Figure 4. Ag oxide at a dose of 0.5 and 1 APC inhibited phosphatase activity by 26 and 38% relative to the control. With an increase in concentration, this trend persisted: from 3 to 30 APC, the decrease in enzyme activity was the same for all doses and was 40–42% lower than the control.
Ag nitrate had a less toxic effect on activity of phosphatase in haplic chernozem. At 0.5, 1, and 3 APC of Ag nitrate, no significant decrease in activity relative to the control was observed. A decrease in enzyme activity was observed at 10 and 30 APC of Ag nitrate by 12 and 20% below the control.
Bi oxide at a minimum concentration (0.5 APC) had no effect on activity of the enzyme. With an increase in the concentration from 1 to 30 APC of Bi oxide, activity inhibition was observed by 12–32% below the control. Bismuth nitrate in 0.5 APC also did not significantly affect enzyme activity. At the same time, when the concentration of 1 APC was reached, activity inhibition was 38%, and with an increase in the concentration of Bi nitrate from 3 to 30 APC, 44–58% below the control.
Tl and Te oxides at doses of 0.5, 1, 3, and 10 APC had no significant effect on phosphatase activity. Only at a concentration of 30 APC, activity inhibition was observed by 13 and 12%, respectively, for Tl and Te oxides.
Invertase activity under the influence of small doses of Ag oxide (0.5, 1 APC) did not significantly differ from the control (Figure 5). With an increase in concentration to 3, 10, and 30 APC, activity inhibition was observed by 11, 24, and 45% relative to the control.
Ag nitrate at low doses (0.5 and 1 APC), as well as Ag oxide, did not affect invertase activity. With an increase in the concentration of Ag nitrate to 3, 10, and 30 APC, activity inhibition was 12, 13, and 24% relative to the control.
Bi oxide did not significantly affect invertase activity at a dose of 0.5 UDC. At a dose of 1 to 30 APC, the decrease in activity was 9–20% relative to the control. Bi nitrate did not significantly affect invertase activity at low doses of 0.5, 1, and 3 APC. At the same time, Bi nitrate at concentrations of 10 and 30 APC inhibited enzyme activity by 28 and 72% relative to the control.
Tl oxide already inhibited invertase activity by 13 and 15% at 0.5 and 1 APC. With an increase in the concentration of Tl oxide from 3 to 30 APC, inhibition was 17–22%. In contrast, Tl nitrate at low doses of 0.5, 1, and 3 UDC had no significant effect on invertase activity. Only at 10 and 30 APC was a decrease in enzyme activity observed by 22 and 60% relative to the control, respectively.
Tellurium oxide at 0.5 APC had no significant effect on soil enzyme activity. By starting with doses of 1, 3, 10, and 30 APC, the activity decrease was 8, 13, 17, and 23% relative to the control. Tellurium nitrate had no effect on invertase activity at low doses of 0.5, 1, and 3 APC. When the concentration was increased to 10 and 30 APC, activity inhibition was 54 and 77% relative to the control.
Influence of contamination with oxides and nitrates of Ag, Bi, Tl, and Te urease activity in haplic chernozem is shown in Figure 6. Silver oxide inhibited urease activity from a low dose of 0.5 APC to a maximum dose of 30 APC in this study—11–28% lower than in the control. At the same time, Ag nitrate was less toxic judging by the activity of urease in haplic chernozem. At a low dose of Ag nitrate (0.5 APC), the effect of hormesis was observed, with stimulation by 10% relative to the control. At 1, 3, and 10 APC, there were no significant differences from the control.
Only at a maximum concentration of Ag nitrate—30 APC—was the decrease in activity 11% relative to the control.
Bi oxide at a dose of 0.5 and 1 APC had no effect on urease activity. Only when the dose was increased to 3, 10, and 30 UDC, a decrease in enzyme activity was observed by 12.23 and 32% relative to the control. Bi nitrate, as well as Ag nitrate, at a dose of 0.5 APC stimulated urease activity up to 13% relative to the control. At 1 APC of Bi nitrate, no significant differences from the control were found. At a Bi nitrate dose of 3, 10, and 30 APC, inhibition was 11, 13, and 16% relative to the control.
Tl oxide had no significant effect on urease activity at doses of 0.5, 1, 3, and 10 APC. Activity inhibition by 17% was observed only at 30 APC. Tl nitrate had no effect at doses of 0.5, 1, and 3 APC. Only at concentrations of 10 and 30 APC, a decrease in activity was observed by 12 and 18% relative to the control.
Te oxide at low doses caused stimulation of urease activity by 14 and 12% relative to the control. At 3, 10, and 30 APC, no significant differences from the control were observed. Tellurium nitrate at 0.5 and 1 APC stimulated urease activity by 6 and 3%. At 3 UDC, no significant differences from the control were found. Urease activity inhibition was detected at concentrations of Te nitrate 10 and 30 APC—12 and 16%, respectively.
The close correlation of activity of hydrolases in haplic chernozem with the dose of the introduced oxide and nitrate of Ag, Bi, Tl, and Te was estimated by the correlation coefficients (r) and presented as series 8 and 9 (phosphatase), series 10 and 11 (invertase), and series 12 and 13 (urease).
Activity of phosphatase:
Ag (−0.45) < Bi (−0.67) < Tl (−0.73) < Te (−0.82)
Bi (−0.68) < Te (−0.73) (2) < Tl (−0.79) <Ag (−0.95)
Activity of invertase:
Tl (−0.62) < Bi (−0.80 < Te (−0.84) < Ag (−0.98)
Ag (−0.90) < Te (−0.93) < Tl (−1.00) = Bi (−1.00)
Activity of urease:
Te (−0.62) < Ag (−0.82) < Bi (−0.90) < Tl (−0.95)
Bi (−0.71) < Ag (−0.79) < Tl (−0.89) = Te (−0.89)
According to these series, the greatest toxic effect on phosphatase activity is exerted by Te oxide and Ag nitrate; on invertase activity, Ag oxide and Tl and Bi nitrates; and on ureases, Tl oxide and Tl and Te nitrates.

3.3. Changes in the Integral Index of Soil Enzymatic Activity (IIEA)

According to the obtained indicators of enzymatic activity, an integrated index of soil enzymatic activity (IIEA) was calculated (Figure 7). At Ag concentrations from 0.5 to 1 APC, no differences in oxides and nitrates in their toxicity (in enzymatic activity) were revealed. However, with an increase in the concentration from 3 to 30 APC, the difference between the toxicity of oxide and nitrate was 7, 6 and 11% for 3, 10, and 30 APC, respectively. Bi nitrate was more toxic than oxide starting from a dose of 1 APC by 8%. With an increase in concentration, greater toxicity was found for nitrate contamination—9 and 13% for 3 and 30 APC, respectively. At 10 APC, Bi nitrate and oxide have the same toxicity.
Tl nitrate toxicity compared to its oxide was detected already with 0.5 APC—8%; with an increase in concentration, an increase in the toxicity of nitrate was observed by 9, 15, 22, and 32% for 1, 3, 10, and 30 APC, respectively. By analogy with Tl, Te nitrate toxicity was already detected with 0.5 APC—16%; with an increase in concentration, an increase in nitrate toxicity was observed by 17, 23, 41, and 42% for 1, 3, 10, and 30 APC, respectively.
The toxicity series of oxides and nitrates were calculated according to IIEA data (series 14 and 15).
Toxicity of oxide of Ag, Bi, Tl, and Te, according to the IIEA presented as series 14:
Tl (88) < Bi (82) = Te (82) < Ag (78)
Toxicity of nitrate of Ag, Bi, Tl, and Te, according to the IIEA presented as series 15:
Ag (83) < Bi (75) < Tl (65) < Te (60)
For Bi, the difference in toxicity between oxides and nitrates was not revealed, while for Ag, the oxide is more toxic, especially at a high concentration of 30 APC, and for Tl and Te, the nitrate (15–42%) relative to the control. A comparison of the toxicity in oxides and nitrates of each element allowed us to establish that Ag oxide is more toxic than Ag nitrate; Bi oxide is equivalent in its toxicity to Bi nitrate; and Tl and Te oxides are less toxic than Tl and Te nitrates.

4. Discussion

4.1. Informative Value of Biological Indicators

The informative value of each enzyme was evaluated by correlation coefficients with the content of each heavy metal (Table 2). This indicator allows the assessment of the closeness of the relationship of changes in enzyme activity with an increase in the concentration of Ag, Bi, Tl, and Te [62]. The higher the value of the correlation coefficient (r) and the closer to (→−1.00), the more informative the enzyme is.
The series of biological indicators according to the degree of informative value in the case of contamination with oxides of Ag, Bi, Tl, and Te are presented below.
Ag oxide: invertase (−0.98) > dehydrogenases (−0.89) > urease (−0.82) > catalase (−0.82) > phosphatase (−0.45)
Bi oxide: urease (−0.90) > catalase (−0.89) > invertase (−0.80) > phosphatase (−0.71) > dehydrogenases (−0.67)
Tl oxide: urease (−0.95) > phosphatase (−0.83) > dehydrogenases (−0.73) > catalase (−0.65) > invertase (−0.62)
Te oxide: phosphatase (−0.96) > catalase (−0.88) > invertase (−0.84) > dehydrogenases (−0.82) > urease (−0.60)
When contaminated with oxides of Ag, Bi, Tl, and Te, the most informative indicators are activity of invertase (Ag), urease (Bi, Tl), and phosphatase (Te), and the least are phosphatase (Ag), dehydrogenase (Bi), invertase (Tl), and urease (Te).
The series of biological indicators according to the degree of informative value in the case of nitrate contamination are presented below.
Ag nitrate: phosphatase (−0.95) > invertase (−0.90) > urease (−0.79) > dehydrogenases (−0.72) > catalase (−0.67)
Nitrate Bi: invertase (−1.00) > urease (−0.71) > phosphatase (−0.68) > dehydrogenases (−0.64) > catalase (−0.51)
Tl nitrate: invertase (−0.99) > urease (−0.89) > catalase (−0.81) > phosphatase (−0.79) > dehydrogenases (−0.70)
Te nitrate: invertase (−0.93) > urease (−0.89) > catalase (−0.76) > phosphatase (−0.73) > dehydrogenases (−0.62)
When contaminated with Ag, Bi, Tl, and Te nitrates, the most informative indicators are activity of phosphatase (Ag) and invertase (Bi, Tl, and Te), and the least informative are activity of catalase (Ag, Bi) and dehydrogenases (Tl, Te).

4.2. Sensitivity of Biological Indicators

The enzymatic activity of soils during soil contamination with heavy metals, along with microbiological properties, is a sensitive biological indicator [63]. The degree of indicator sensitivity was judged by the degree of decrease in its values in the options with contamination compared to the control. Table 3 shows the values of the enzyme sensitivity assessment.
According to the results of this study, when contaminated with oxides of Ag, Bi, Tl, and Te, the sensitivity of enzymes is presented in the form of series.
Ag oxide: dehydrogenases (88) < invertase (82) = urease (82) < catalase (74) < phosphatase (63)
Bi oxide: invertase (87) < urease (85) < dehydrogenases (81) = catalase (81) < phosphatase (80)
Tl oxide: phosphatase (98) = urease (98) < invertase (83) < dehydrogenases (82) = catalase (60)
Te oxide: urease (103) < phosphatase (97) < invertase (87) < dehydrogenases (73) = catalase (70)
Phosphatase (Ag, Bi) and catalase (Tl, Te) have the highest sensitivity to oxide contamination, while dehydrogenases (Ag), invertase (Bi), phosphatase (Tl), and urease (Te) have the lowest sensitivity.
The sensitivity of enzymatic activity in the case of contamination with nitrates of Ag, Bi, Tl, and Te is presented in the form of series:
Ag nitrate: urease (99) < phosphatase (91) < invertase (88) < dehydrogenases (77) < catalase (62)
Bi oxide: urease (96) < invertase (77) < dehydrogenases (76) < catalase (65) < phosphatase (62)
Tl oxide: urease (91) < invertase (83) < dehydrogenases (54) < catalase (51) < phosphatase (47)
Te oxide: urease (96) < invertase (76) < catalase (50) < dehydrogenases (47) < phosphatase (33)
The greatest sensitivity to nitrate contamination was found in catalase (Ag) and phosphatase (Bi, Tl, Te), and the least in urease (Ag, Bi, Tl, and Te). The high sensitivity of catalase, along with phosphatase, was found when contaminated with nitrates of Bi and Tl.
The high sensitivity of catalase in the case of soil contamination with oxides and nitrates of Ag, Bi, Tl, and Te is associated with the active course of biochemical processes in the soil, in particular, the carbon cycle [64,65]. Catalase is a stable enzyme in the soil and for the enzyme activity to be inhibited, it is necessary that the toxicant affects the microbiological component of the soil.
Phosphatase is a sensitive enzyme in the case of soil contamination with a wide range of heavy metals [66,67,68]. Phosphatase, along with dehydrogenases and microbial biomass, is considered a marker of soil contamination with heavy metals [69,70]. Such indicators can reflect the direction and degree of biochemical reactions in the soil and serve as potential biological indicators for the diagnosis of soil health [52].
The most informative enzymes in the case of contamination with Ag, Bi, Tl, and Te include the enzymes of the hydrolase class, and the most sensitive, the enzymes of the oxidoreductase class. In this regard, all biological indicators used in the work have confirmed their compliance with the requirements for indicators used for monitoring, diagnostics, and normalization of chemical contamination of soils [4].
A comparison of the greater sensitivity of silver oxides and nitrates made it possible to reproduce the previously presented small studies assessing the toxicity of various chemical forms of Ag [71,72,73]. Quite a lot of studies have been conducted to assess the toxicity of Ag nitrate, and the toxicity of Ag oxide has been studied to a lesser extent [74,75].
Bismuth, compared to Ag, Tl, and Te, was equally toxic both in the form of oxide and in the form of nitrate. Previously, an analysis of the ecotoxicity of Bi chemical compounds made it possible to establish a greater toxicity of nitrate than oxide [58,76]. This is because nitrate has good solubility and greater mobility in the soil solution of Bi3+ cations, and the water-insoluble bismuth oxide showed a slightly less negative effect.
The toxicity of Tl and Te in haplic chernozem was previously assessed only in the form of oxides [57,77]. Even at a minimum concentration in the soil (less than 1 ppm), Tl oxide has a toxic effect on living organisms and soils [14,48,78]. The high informative value of enzymes of the oxidoreductase class (catalases and dehydrogenases) and the sensitivity of microbiological parameters when contaminated with Te oxide were established [57]. The toxicity of Te, as well as Tl, is assessed as high already at a minimum concentration in soil, water, and other environmental objects [17,45,79].
Based on the results of the study, regression equations were constructed that characterize ecosystem and agroecosystem services of contaminated soil. With their help, the concentrations of Ag, Bi, Tl, and Te leading to the violation of certain ecological functions of soils were calculated (Table 4).
To calculate the environmentally safe concentration of each metal in the soil, its most toxic form was used: for Ag—oxide, and for Bi, Tl, and Te—nitrate. The breakdown of the ecological functions of the soil occurs in a certain order, and it is advisable to use the soil as an indicator of the violation of ecosystem and agro-ecosystem services according to IPFA [4]. With a decrease in IPFA by less than 5%, soil functions are not disturbed. A decrease in the values of IPBS by 5–10% diagnoses a violation of information functions: by 10–25%—biochemical, physico-chemical, chemical and holistic functions; more than 25%—physical functions. As can be seen from Table 4, if the Ag content does not exceed 0.197 mg/kg, then the soil is functioning normally. If the concentration of Ag is from 0.197 to 0.395 mg/kg, there is a violation of the informational ecological functions of the soil; from 0.395 to 3.206 mg/kg, in addition to information, chemical, physico-chemical, biochemical, and integral functions are violated; more than 3.206 mg/kg, there is also a disruption of the physical functions of the soil. Obviously, it is impossible to allow violations of the chemical, physicochemical, biochemical, and, most importantly, integral functions of the soil, which ensure soil fertility. Therefore, an Ag concentration of 0.395 mg/kg should be considered the maximum allowable concentration (MAC) of Ag. The most effective methods of rehabilitation of ordinary chernozem with Ag, Bi, Tl, and Te are presented. The higher the concentration of HMs in the soil, the more “radical” the rehabilitation method should be. If the content of Ag does not exceed 0.197 mg/kg and there is no violation of its ecological functions, then sanitation of the soil in this case is not required. If the concentration of Ag is from 0.197 to 0.395 mg/kg, then to reduce its concentration to 0.197 mg/kg or less, phytomelioration is sufficient to remove Ag from the soil. If the concentration of Ag reaches 0.395 to 3.206 mg/kg, then chemical reclamation is required, for example, the use of zeolites to bind Ag and prevent its entry into the food chain. If the Ag content exceeds 3.206 mg/kg, reclamation measures are less effective than the removal of the top layer of contaminated soil.
According to the degree of toxicity of the content of elements in the soil, heavy metals are arranged in the following order (from the lowest to the highest permissible concentration), mg/kg:
Ag (0.396) < Tl (0.601) < Bi (0.968) < Te (1.475)
Thus, the IIEA can be used to assess the degree of disruption of agro-ecosystem services. A similar approach has been tested in several studies [4], including silver [56] and bismuth [58]. The application of this approach contributes to the sustainable development of agricultural land. The use of the results of the study contributes to the transition to highly productive and environmentally friendly agriculture, obtaining competitive, environmentally friendly agricultural products, ensuring food and environmental security in the world.

5. Conclusions

According to the results of this study, it was found that when the chernozem was contaminated with Ag, Bi, Tl, and Te by five enzymes (invertase, urease, phosphatase, dehydrogenases, catalase), the maximum decrease in activity was observed with the introduction of Tl and Te. A comparison of the ecotoxicity of oxides and nitrates of each element allowed us to establish that Ag oxide is more toxic than Ag nitrate; Bi oxide is equivalent in its toxicity to Bi nitrate; and Tl and Te oxides are less toxic than Tl and Te nitrates. The most informative enzymes in the case of contamination with Ag, Bi, Tl, and Te include the activity of phosphatase, invertase, and urease (hydrolase class), and the most sensitive of enzymes, activity of catalase (oxidoreductase class) and phosphatase (hydrolase class). The highest permissible concentrations of contamination in haplic chernozem by Ag, Bi, Tl, and Te differ by several times, which emphasizes the toxicity of each element, mg/kg: Ag (0.396 mg/kg) < Tl (0.601 mg/kg) < Bi (0.968 mg/kg) < Te (1.475 mg/kg). The results of this study confirm the expediency of using activity of soil enzymes in biomonitoring and diagnostics of the ecosystem and agroecosystem services of soils with contamination of Ag, Bi, Tl, and Te. The application of this approach to biomonitoring heavy metal-contaminated soils contributes to sustainable agriculture and control for restoration of agroecosystem services.

Author Contributions

Conceptualization, T.M. and S.K.; methodology, S.K.; software, T.M.; validation, T.M., S.K. and N.E.; formal analysis, S.K.; investigation, S.K.; resources, T.M.; data curation, A.T. and N.T.; writing—original draft preparation, T.M.; writing—review and editing, S.K.; visualization, T.M.; supervision, T.M.; project administration, S.K.; funding acquisition, S.K. All authors have read and agreed to the published version of the manuscript.

Funding

This research was funded by a grant from the Russian Science Foundation No. 22-24-01041 at the Southern Federal University.

Institutional Review Board Statement

Not applicable.

Informed Consent Statement

Not applicable.

Data Availability Statement

The data presented in this study is available upon request from the respective author.

Conflicts of Interest

The authors declare no conflict of interest.

References

  1. Montanarella, L.; Ed, V.; Yagi, K.; Krasilnikov, P.; Alavi, P.; Seyed, K.; Mendonça Santos, M.; McKenzie, N.; Ed, D.; Nachtergaele, F. The Status of the World’s Soil Resources. In FAO: Chapter 4 Soils and Humans Main Report; FAO: Rome, Italy, 2015; pp. 50–87. [Google Scholar]
  2. Science Communication Unit, University of the West of England. Bristol (Science for Environment Policy in-Depth Report: Soil Contamination: Impacts on Human Health; Report produced for the European Commission DG Environment; University of the West of England: Bristol, England, 2013; pp. 3–29. [Google Scholar]
  3. Steffan, J.J.; Brevik, E.C.; Burgess, L.C.; Cerdà, A. The effect of soil on human health: An overview. Eur. J. Soil. Sci. 2018, 69, 159–171. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  4. Kolesnikov, S.I.; Kazeev, K.S.; Akimenko, Y.V. Development of regional standards for pollutants in the soil using biological parameters. Environ. Monit. Assess. 2019, 191, 544. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  5. Husejnović, M.Š.; Janković, S.; Nikolić, D.; Antonijević, B. Human health risk assessment of lead, cadmium, and mercury co-exposure from agricultural soils in the Tuzla Canton (Bosnia and Herzegovina). Arh. Hig. Rada Toksikol. 2021, 72, 268–279. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  6. Mohammadi, A.; Mansour, S.N.; Najafi, M.L.; Toolabi, A.; Abdolahnejad, A.; Faraji, M.; Miri, M. Probabilistic risk assessment of soil contamination related to agricultural and industrial activities. Environ. Res. 2022, 203, 111837. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  7. Kolesnikov, S.; Minnikova, T.; Kazeev, K.; Akimenko, Y.; Evstegneeva, N. Assessment of the Ecotoxicity of Pollution by Potentially Toxic Elements by Biological Indicators of Haplic Chernozem of Southern Russia (Rostov region). Water Air Soil Pollut. 2022, 233, 18. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  8. Rogulina, L.I.; Kropotin, V.A.; Voropaeva, E.N. Distribution of rare elements, bismuth and silver in ores and concentrates of the Nikolaev skarn-polmetal deposit (Dalnegorsk, Primorye). Litosfera 2007, 3, 109–115. [Google Scholar]
  9. Marino, S. Horticultural Crop Response to Different Environmental and Nutritional Stress. Horticulturae 2021, 7, 240. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  10. Anisimova, G.S.; Kondratieva, L.A.; Kardashevskaya, V.N.; Mustafin, S.K. Features of gold-silver-bismuth-tellurium mineralization of the Allah-Yun metallogenic zone (North-East of Russia). Nat. Resour. Arct. Subarct. 2021, 26, 5–30. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  11. Wieser, P.E.; Jenner, F.E. Chalcophile Elements: Systematics and Relevance. In Encyclopedia of Geology, 2nd ed.; Elsevier: Amsterdam, The Netherlands, 2021; Volume 5, pp. 67–80. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  12. Xing, G.; Zhu, J.; Xiong, Z. Ag, Ta, Ru, and Ir enrichment in surface soil: Evidence for land pollution of heavy metal from atmospheric deposition. Global Biogeochem. Cycles. 2004, 18, 1–5. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  13. Matusiewicz, H.; Krawczyk, M. Determination of tellurium by hydride generation with in situ trapping flame atomic absorption spectrometry. Spectrochim. Acta 2007, 62, 309–316. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  14. Anton, M.A.L.; Spears, D.A.; Somoano, M.D.; Tarazona, M.R.M. Thallium in coal: Analysis and environmental implications. Fuel 2013, 105, 13–18. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  15. Karbowska, B.; Zembrzuski, W.; Jabukowska, M.; Wojtkowiak, T.; Pasieczna, A.; Lukaszewski, Z. Translocation and mobility of thallium from zinc-lead ores. J. Geochem. Explor. 2014, 143, 127–135. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  16. Krylov, D.A.; Sidorova, G.P. Ways to reduce the environmental impact of coal-fired thermal power plants. Min. Inf. Anal. Bull. 2015, 11, 277–286. [Google Scholar]
  17. Nelson, B.; Chen, Y.-W. Tellurium in the environment: A critical review focused on natural waters, soils, sediments and airborne particles. Appl. Geochem. 2015, 63, 83–92. [Google Scholar]
  18. Krylov, D.A. Negative impact of impurity elements from coal thermal power plants on the environment. Min. Inf. Anal. Bull. 2017, 12, 77–87. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  19. Baceva, K.; Stafilov, T.; Sajn, R.; Tanaselia, C.; Makerski, P. Distribution of chemical elements in soils and stream sediments in the area of abandoned Sb-As-Tl Allchar mine, Republic of Macedonia. Environ. Res. 2014, 133, 77–89. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  20. Bootjomchai, C.; Laopaiboon, J.; Yenchai, C.; Laopaiboon, R. Gamma-ray shielding and structural properties of barium-bismuth-borosilicate glasses. Radiat. Phys. Chem. 2012, 81, 785–790. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  21. Shcherbakova, E.V. Ecological state of soils and technogenic soils of the landfill of the city of Slavyansk-on-Kuban. In Ecological Problems of Industrial Cities: Coll. Scientific tr. Saratov; Saratov State Technical University: Saratov, Russia, 2013; pp. 106–107. Available online: https://www.elibrary.ru/item.asp?id=30576776 (accessed on 20 July 2022).
  22. Michels, C.; Perazzoli, S.; Soares, M. Inhibition of the enriched culture of ammonium-oxidizing bacteria by two different nanoparticles: Silver and magnetite. Common Environ. Sci. 2017, 586, 995–1002. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  23. Yurgenson, G.A.; Gorban, D.N. Features of the distribution of bismuth in soils, technozems and plants of the Sherlovogorsk ore region. Int. J. Appl. Fundam. Res. 2017, 7, 111–116. [Google Scholar]
  24. Calder, A.J.; Dimkpa, C.O.; McLean, J.E.; Britt, D.W.; Johnson, W.; Anderson, A.J. Soil components mitigate the antimicrobial effects of silver nanoparticles towards a beneficial soil bacterium, Pseudomonas chlororaphis O6. Sci. Total Environ. 2012, 429, 215–222. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  25. Beddow, J.; Stolpe, B.; Cole, P.; Lead, J.R.; Sapp, M.; Lyons, B.P.; Colbeck, I.; Whitby, C. Effects of engineered silver nanoparticles on the growth and activity of ecologically important microbes. Environ. Microbiol. Rep. 2014, 6, 448–458. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  26. Samarajeewa, A.D.; Velicogna, J.R.; Princz, J.I.; Subasinghe, R.M.; Scroggins, R.P.; Beaudette, L.A. Effect of silver nano-particles on soil microbial growth, activity and community diversity in a sandy loam soil. Environ. Pollut. 2017, 220, 504–513. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  27. Wang, J.; Shu, K.; Zhang, L.; Si, Y. Effects of Silver Nanoparticles on Soil Microbial Communities and Bacterial Nitrification in Suburban Vegetable Soils. Pedosphere 2017, 27, 482–490. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  28. Eivazi, F.; Afrasiabi, Z.; Jose, E. Pedosphere Effects of Silver Nanoparticles on the Activities of Soil Enzymes Involved in Carbon and Nutrient Cycling. Pedosphere 2018, 28, 209–214. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  29. Schlich, K.; Hoppe, M.; Kraas, M.; Schubert, J.; Chanana, M.; Hund-Rinke, K. Long-term effects of three different silver sulfide nanomaterials, silver nitrate and bulk silver sulfide on soil microorganisms and plants. Environ. Pollut. 2018, 242, 1850–1859. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  30. Singh, H.; Dua, J.; Singh, P.; Yi, T.H. Extracellular synthesis of silver nanoparticles by Pseudomonas sp. THG-LS1.4 and their antimicrobial application. J. Pharm. Anal. 2018, 8, 258–264. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  31. Wei, C.; Deng, Q.; Wu, F.; Fu, Z.; Xu, L. Arsenic, antimony, and bismuth uptake and accumulation by plants in an old antimony mine, China. Biol. Trace Elem. Res. 2011, 144, 1150–1158. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  32. Chernyakhov, V.B.; Kalinina, O.N.; Alekseev, M.I. Distribution of Heavy Metals in the Vegetation Cover of the Yaman-Kasinsky Deposit University Complex as a Regional Center of Education, Science and Culture; OGU: Orenburg, Russia, 2012; pp. 844–851. (In Russian) [Google Scholar]
  33. Shevchenko, V.P.; Starodymova, D.P.; Afanas’eva, A.A.; Bychkov, A.Y.; Bychkova, Y.V.; Koneva, V.V.; Savvichev, A.S. Features of the accumulation of heavy metals by fruticose epiphytic lichens in the Republics of Altai and Khakassia. Basic Res. Biol. Sci. 2014, 12, 2373–2377. [Google Scholar]
  34. Gorban, D.N. The content of bismuth in the Gmelin wormwood in the natural and technogenic landscape of the Sherlovogorsk ore region. In Proceedings of the International Scientific and Practical Conference Ecology, Health, Sport, Chita, Russia, 16 June 2015; pp. 16–21. (In Russian). [Google Scholar]
  35. Yurgenson, G.A.; Gorban, D.N. Plant Biogeochemistry and the Problem of Reclamation of Tailings. Evolution and Current State of Landscapes and Biota of Inner Asia; East Siberian State University of Technology and Management (Ulan-Ude): Ulan-Ude, Russia, 2016; pp. 284–291. [Google Scholar]
  36. Kudin, M.V. Trace element composition of hair and nails in children living in conditions of exposure to cement dust. Quest. Child. Dietol. 2010, 8, 47–50. [Google Scholar]
  37. Lyzhina, A.V.; Buzinov, R.V.; Unguryanu, T.N.; Gudkov, A.B. Chemical contamination of food products and its impact on the health of the population of the Arkhangelsk region. Hum. Ecology. Ser. Environ. 2012, 12, 3–9. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  38. Rybkin, V.S.; Bogdanov, A.N.; Chuikov, Y.S.; Teplaya, G.A. Heavy metals as a factor of possible environmentally caused diseases in the Astrakhan region. Hyg. Sanit. 2014, 2, 27–31. [Google Scholar]
  39. Li, Z.Y.; Ma, Z.W.; Van der Kuijp, T.J.; Yuan, Z.W.; Huang, L. A review of soil heavy metal pollution from mines in China: Pollution and health risk assessment. Sci. Total Environ. 2014, 468, 843–853. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  40. Klein, S.V.; Vekovshinina, S.A.; Balashov, S.Y.; Khoroshavin, V.A.; Ukhabov, V.M. Hygienic assessment of carcinogenic risk to the health of the population living in the zone of influence of waste storage sites of the mining and processing plant. Hyg. Sanit. 2018, 97, 10–14. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  41. Chasteen, T.G.; Bentley, R. Biomethylation of selenium and tellurium: Microorganisms and plants. Chem. Rev. 2003, 103, 1–25. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  42. Kabata-Pendias, A. Trace Elements in Soils and Plants, 4th ed.; Crc Presspp: Boca Raton, FL, USA, 2010; p. 548. [Google Scholar]
  43. Vodyanitskii, Y.N. Status and behavior of natural and technogenic forms of As, Sb, Se, and Te in ore tailings and contaminated soils: A review. Eurasian Soil Sci. 2010, 43, 30–38. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  44. Vodyanitskii, Y.N. Contamination of soils with heavy metals and metalloids and its ecological hazard (analytic review). Eurasian Soil Sci. 2013, 46, 793–801. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  45. Perkins, W.T. Extreme selenium and tellurium contamination in soils—An eighty year-old industrial legacy surrounding a Ni refinery in the Swansea Valley. Sci. Total Environ. 2011, 412–413, 162–169. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  46. Yang, G.; Zheng, J.; Tagami, K.; Uchida, S. Rapid and sensitive determination of tellurium in soil and plant samples by sector-field inductively coupled plasma mass spectrometry. Talanta 2013, 116, 181–187. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  47. Tremel, A.; Masson, P.; Sterckeman, T.; Baize, D.; Mench, M. Thallium in French agrosystems. Thallium contents in arable soils. Environ. Pollut. 1997, 95, 293–302. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  48. Xiao, T.; Yang, F.; Li, S.; Zheng, B.; Ning, Z. Thallium pollution in China: A geo-environmental perspective. Sci. Total Environ. 2012, 421, 51–58. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  49. He, L.B. An Environmental Geochemistry Study on Uptake of Thallium by Green Cabbage (Brassica oleracea L. var. capitata L.). Ph.D. Thesis, Chinese Academy of Sciences, Beijing, China, 2008; p. 103. [Google Scholar]
  50. Aponte, H.; Meli, P.; Butler, B.M.; Paolini, J.E.; Matus, F.; Merino, C.; Cornejo, P.; Kuzyakov, Y. Meta-analysis of heavy metal effects on soil enzyme activities. Sci. Total Environ. 2020, 737, 139744. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  51. Alengebawy, A.; Abdelkhalek, S.T.; Qureshi, S.R.; Wang, M.-Q. Heavy Metals and Pesticides Toxicity in Agricultural Soil and Plants: Ecological Risks and Human Health Implications. Toxics 2021, 9, 42. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  52. Li, C.; Quan, Q.; Gan, Y.; Dong, J.; Fang, J.; Wang, L.; Liu, J. Effects of heavy metals on microbial communities in sediments and establishment of bioindicators based on microbial taxa and function for environmental monitoring and management. Sci. Total Environ. 2020, 749, 141555. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  53. Tóth, G.; Montanarella, L.; Stolbovoy, V.; Máté, F.; Bódis, K.; Jones, A.; Panagos, P.; van Liedekerke, M. Soils of the European Union; Office for Official Publications of the European Communities: Luxembourg, 2008; p. 85. [Google Scholar]
  54. Kazeev, K.S.; Kolesnikov, S.I.; Akimenko, Y.V.; Dadenko, E.V. Methods for Biodiagnostics of Terrestrial Ecosystems; Southern Federal University: Rostov-on-Don, Russia, 2016; p. 356. [Google Scholar]
  55. Akimenko, Y. Influence of pollution by antibiotics on biological properties of soils (through the example of ordinary chernozem). Water Air Soil Pollut. 2021, 232, 6. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  56. Kolesnikov, S.; Tsepina, N.; Minnikova, T.; Kazeev, K.; Mandzhieva, S.; Sushkova, S.; Minkina, T.; Mazarji, M.; Singh, R.K.; Rajput, V.D. Influence of Silver Nanoparticles on the Biological Indicators of Haplic Chernozem. Plants 2021, 10, 1022. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  57. Kolesnikov, S.; Minnikova, T.; Minkina, T.; Rajput, V.D.; Tsepina, N.; Kazeev, K.; Zhadobin, A.; Nevedomaya, E.; Ter-Misakyants, T.; Akimenko, Y.; et al. Toxic Effects of Thallium on Biological Indicators of Haplic Chernozem Health: A Case Study. Environments 2021, 8, 119. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  58. Kolesnikov, S.I.; Sudina, L.V.; Kuzina, A.A.; Minnikova, T.V.; Tsepina, N.I.; Kazeev, K.S.; Akimenko, Y.V. The effect of bismuth contamination on the soil biological properties. Agric. Nat. Resour. 2022, 56, 205–216. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  59. Minnikova, T.; Kolesnikov, S.; Minkina, T.; Mandzhieva, S. Assessment of Ecological Condition of Haplic Chernozem Calcic Contaminated with Petroleum Hydrocarbons during Application of Bioremediation Agents of Various Natures. Land 2021, 10, 169. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  60. Wexler, P. Encyclopedia of Toxicology, 3rd ed.; Academic Press: Cambridge, MA, USA, 2014; p. 5220. [Google Scholar]
  61. Khaziev, F.K. Functional role of enzymes in soil processes. Bull. Acad. Sci. Repub. Bashkortostan 2015, 20, 14–24. [Google Scholar]
  62. Nannipieri, P.; Giagnoni, L.; Renella, G.; Puglisi, E.; Ceccanti, B.; Masciandaro, G.; Fornasier, F.; Moscatelli, M.C.; Marinari, S. Soil enzymology: Classical and molecular approaches. Biol. Fertil. Soils 2012, 48, 743–762. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  63. Terekhova, V.A. Biotesting of soil ecotoxicity under chemical pollution: Modern approaches to integration for assessing the ecological state (review). Eurasian Soil Sci. 2022, 5, 586–599. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  64. Titova, K.; Shvakova, E.; Popova, L.; Trofimova, A.; Nikitina, M.; Popov, S. Enzymatic activity as a diagnostic indicator of soil pollution in Solovetsky settlement. In Proceedings of the IOP Conference Series: Earth and Environmental Science, Arkhangelsk, Russian, 26–27 November 2019; Volume 263, p. 012026. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  65. Alef, K.; Nannipieri, P. Catalase activity. In Methods in Applied Soil Microbiology and Biochemistry; Academic Press: London, UK, 1995; pp. 362–363. [Google Scholar]
  66. Gong, W.-J.; Niu, Z.-F.; Wang, X.-R.; Zhao, H.-P. How the Soil Microbial Communities and Activities Respond to Long-Term Heavy Metal Contamination in Electroplating Contaminated Site. Microorganisms 2021, 9, 362. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  67. Tyler, G. Heavy metal pollution, phosphatase activity, and mineralization of organic phosphorus in forest soils. Soil Biol. Biochem. 1976, 8, 327–332. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  68. Singh, J.P.; Ojinnaka, E.U.; Krumins, J.A.; Goodey, N.M. Abiotic factors determine functional outcomes of microbial inoculation of soils from a metal contaminated brownfield. Ecotoxicol. Environ. Saf. 2019, 168, 450–456. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  69. Vaidya, B.P.; Hagmann, D.F.; Balacco, J.; Passchier, S.; Krumins, J.A.; Goodey, N.M. Plants mitigate restrictions to phosphatase activity in metal contaminated soils. Environ. Pollut. 2020, 265, 114801. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  70. Pan, J.; Yu, L. Effects of Cd or/and Pb on soil enzyme activities and microbial community structure. Ecol. Eng. 2011, 37, 1889–1894. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  71. Tang, J.; Zhang, J.; Ren, L.; Zhou, Y.; Gao, J.; Luo, L.; Yang, Y.; Peng, Q.; Huang, H.; Chen, A. Diagnosis of soil contamination using microbiological indices: A review on heavy metal pollution. J. Environ. Manag. 2019, 242, 121–130. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  72. Kolesnikov, S.I.; Tsepina, N.I.; Sudina, L.V.; Minnikova, T.V.; Kazeev, K.S.; Akimenko, Y.V. Silver ecotoxicity estimation by the soil state biological indicators. Appl. Environ. Soil Sci. 2020, 2020, 1207210. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  73. Tsepina, N.I.; Sudyina, L.V.; Minnikova, T.V.; Kolesnikov, S.I. The effect of silver pollution on catalase activity in chernozems, brown forest soils and seropes. Sci. Notes Crime. Fed. Univ. Vernadsky Biol. Chem. 2020, 6, 259–266. (In Russian) [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  74. Schlich, K.; Klawonn, T.; Terytze, K.; Hund-Rinke, K. Effects of silver nanoparticles and silver nitrate in the earthworm reproduction test. Environ. Toxicol. Chem. 2013, 32, 181–188. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  75. Langdon, K.A.; McLaughlin, M.J.; Kirby, J.K.; Merrington, G. The effect of soil properties on the toxicity of silver to the soil nitrification process. Environ. Toxicol. Chem. 2014, 33, 1170–1178. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  76. Sudina, L.; Kolesnikov, S.I.; Minnikova, T.V.; Kazeev, K.S.; Sushkova, S.N.; Minkina, T.M. Assessment of ecotoxicity of the bismuth by biological indicators of soil condition. Eurasian J. Soil Sci. 2021, 10, 236–242. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  77. Kolesnikov, S.I. Impact of contamination with tellurium on biological properties of ordinary chernozem. Soil Sediment Contam. 2019, 28, 792–800. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  78. Jia, Y.; Xiao, T.; Zhou, G.; Ning, Z. Thallium at the interface of soil and green cabbage (Brassica oleracea L. var. capitata L.): Soil-plant transfer and influencing factors. Sci. Total. Environ. 2013, 450, 140–147. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  79. Presentato, A.; Turner, R.J.; Vásquez, C.C.; Yurkov, V.; Zannoni, D. Tellurite-dependent blackening of bacteria emerges from the dark ages. Environ. Chem. 2019, 16, 266–288. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
Figure 1. Scheme of a model experiment.
Figure 1. Scheme of a model experiment.
Agronomy 12 02183 g001
Figure 2. Changes in activity of catalase in haplic chernozem by contamination with oxides and nitrates of Ag, Bi, Tl, and Te, mL O2/1 g of soil dry/1 min.
Figure 2. Changes in activity of catalase in haplic chernozem by contamination with oxides and nitrates of Ag, Bi, Tl, and Te, mL O2/1 g of soil dry/1 min.
Agronomy 12 02183 g002
Figure 3. Changes in activity of dehydrogenases in haplic chernozem by contamination with oxides and nitrates of Ag, Bi, Tl, and Te, mg TPF/10 g of soil dry/24 h.
Figure 3. Changes in activity of dehydrogenases in haplic chernozem by contamination with oxides and nitrates of Ag, Bi, Tl, and Te, mg TPF/10 g of soil dry/24 h.
Agronomy 12 02183 g003
Figure 4. Changes in activity of phosphatase in haplic chernozem under pollution with oxides and nitrates of Ag, Bi, Tl, and Te, µg p-nitrophenol/1 g of soil dry/1 h.
Figure 4. Changes in activity of phosphatase in haplic chernozem under pollution with oxides and nitrates of Ag, Bi, Tl, and Te, µg p-nitrophenol/1 g of soil dry/1 h.
Agronomy 12 02183 g004
Figure 5. Changes in activity of invertase in haplic chernozem under pollution with oxides and nitrates of Ag, Bi, Tl, and Te, mg glucose/10 g of soil dry/24 h.
Figure 5. Changes in activity of invertase in haplic chernozem under pollution with oxides and nitrates of Ag, Bi, Tl, and Te, mg glucose/10 g of soil dry/24 h.
Agronomy 12 02183 g005
Figure 6. Changes in activity of urease in haplic chernozem under pollution with oxides and nitrates of Ag, Bi, Tl, and Te, mg NH4+/10 g of soil dry/24 h.
Figure 6. Changes in activity of urease in haplic chernozem under pollution with oxides and nitrates of Ag, Bi, Tl, and Te, mg NH4+/10 g of soil dry/24 h.
Agronomy 12 02183 g006
Figure 7. Integral indicator of the enzymatic activity in chernozem when contaminated with oxides and nitrates of Ag, Bi, Tl, and Te, % of the control.
Figure 7. Integral indicator of the enzymatic activity in chernozem when contaminated with oxides and nitrates of Ag, Bi, Tl, and Te, % of the control.
Agronomy 12 02183 g007
Table 1. Methods for studying the enzymatic activity of soils.
Table 1. Methods for studying the enzymatic activity of soils.
List of Determined Enzymes ECMethods of Measurement
Class of oxidoreductases
1.activity of catalase EC 1.11.1.6.by the volume of decomposed oxygen during the decomposition of hydrogen peroxide, mL O2/1 g of soil dry/1 min
2.activity of dehydrogenases EC 1.1.1for the reduction of tetrazolium salts to formazan, mg triphenylformazan (TPF)/10 g of soil dry/24 h
Class of hydrolases
3.activity of invertase (β-fructofuranosidase)EC 3.2.1.26by the amount of glucose during the hydrolysis of sucrose, colorimetrically, using Felling’s reagent, mg glucose/10 g of soil dry/24 h
4.activity of urease (amidohydrolase) EC 3.5.1.5.by the amount of ammonia with Nessler’s reagent, with hydrolysis of carbamide, mg NH4+/10 g of soil dry/24 h
5.activity of phosphatase EC 3.1.3.1-2by the amount of inorganic phosphorus during hydrolysis of sodium nitrophenol phosphate, µg p-nitrophenol/1 g of soil dry/1 h
Table 2. Correlation coefficients (r) between the content of Ag, Bi, Tl, and Te in soil and enzymatic activity (α = 0.05).
Table 2. Correlation coefficients (r) between the content of Ag, Bi, Tl, and Te in soil and enzymatic activity (α = 0.05).
Biological IndicatorsAgBiTlTe
OxideNitrateOxideNitrateOxideNitrateOxideNitrate
Catalase activity−0.81 *−0.67 *−0.89 *−0.51−0.65−0.81 *−0.88 *−0.76 *
Dehydrogenase activity−0.89−0.70 *−0.67 *−0.64−0.73 *−0.70 *−0.82 *−0.62
Phosphatase activity−0.45−0.95 *−0.71 *−0.68−0.83 *−0.79−0.96 **−0.73 *
Invertase activity−0.98 *−0.90 **−0.80−1.00 **−0.62−0.99 **−0.84 *−0.93 **
Urease activity−0.82 *−0.79 *−0.90−0.71 *−0.95 **−0.89 *−0.60−0.89 **
IIEA−0.85 *−0.82 *−0.84 *−0.86 *−0.80 *−0.87 *−0.89 *−0.83 *
Note: * p < 0.05, ** p < 0.01.
Table 3. The degree of reduction of biological indicators in terms of sensitivity to pollution Ag, Bi, Tl, and Te, % of the control.
Table 3. The degree of reduction of biological indicators in terms of sensitivity to pollution Ag, Bi, Tl, and Te, % of the control.
Biological IndicatorsAgBiTlTe
OxideNitrateOxideNitrateOxideNitrateOxideNitrate
Catalase activity7462816560517050
Dehydrogenase activity8877817673548247
Phosphatase activity6391806298479733
Invertase activity8288877783838774
Urease activity82998596989110396
IIEA7883837582658860
Table 4. Scheme of ecological regulation of the content of Ag, Bi, Tl, and Te in ordinary chernozem according to the degree of violation of ecological functions and optimal methods of soil sanitation.
Table 4. Scheme of ecological regulation of the content of Ag, Bi, Tl, and Te in ordinary chernozem according to the degree of violation of ecological functions and optimal methods of soil sanitation.
MetalRare Metal’s Content in Soil, mg/kg
Ag<0.1970.197–0.3950.395–3.206>3.206
Bi <0.5130.513–0.9680.968–6.522>6.522
Tl <0.3760.376–0.6010.601–2.454>2.454
Te <0.9990.999–1.4751.475–4.753>4.753
Decrease in soil IIEA<5%5–10%10–25%>25%
Disturbed ecological functions of the soilInformationalChemical, physico-chemical, biochemical, holisticPhysical
Degree of soil pollutionNot pollutedWeakly pollutedMedium pollutedHeavily polluted
Soil sanitation methodNot requiredPhytoremediation, leaching Chemical melioration Removal of contaminated soil layer
Publisher’s Note: MDPI stays neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Share and Cite

MDPI and ACS Style

Minnikova, T.; Kolesnikov, S.; Evstegneeva, N.; Timoshenko, A.; Tsepina, N. Estimation of the Enzymatic Activity of Haplic Chernozem under Contamination with Oxides and Nitrates of Ag, Bi, Te and Tl. Agronomy 2022, 12, 2183. https://doi.org/10.3390/agronomy12092183

AMA Style

Minnikova T, Kolesnikov S, Evstegneeva N, Timoshenko A, Tsepina N. Estimation of the Enzymatic Activity of Haplic Chernozem under Contamination with Oxides and Nitrates of Ag, Bi, Te and Tl. Agronomy. 2022; 12(9):2183. https://doi.org/10.3390/agronomy12092183

Chicago/Turabian Style

Minnikova, Tatiana, Sergey Kolesnikov, Natalia Evstegneeva, Alena Timoshenko, and Natalia Tsepina. 2022. "Estimation of the Enzymatic Activity of Haplic Chernozem under Contamination with Oxides and Nitrates of Ag, Bi, Te and Tl" Agronomy 12, no. 9: 2183. https://doi.org/10.3390/agronomy12092183

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