The use of sewage sludge as soil amendment. The need for an ecotoxicological evaluation

  • Tiago Natal-da-Luz
  • Serena Tidona
  • Bruno Jesus
  • Paula V. Morais
  • José P. Sousa
SOILS, SEC 4 • ECOTOXICOLOGY • RESEARCH ARTICLE

Abstract

Background, aim, and scope

Sewage sludge use in agriculture should be limited by the presence of metals and other persistent environmental pollutants. The present study aims to contribute for the definition of a test battery of ecotoxicological assays that allows a proper ecotoxicological characterization of sludges, providing information on their potential hazard and identified “safe” application levels.

Materials and methods

Three sludges from distinct sources (urban, olive-processing, and electroplating industries) were tested using avoidance and reproduction tests with earthworms (Eisenia andrei) and springtails (Folsomia candida) and plant growth tests with turnips (Brassica rapa) and oats (Avena sativa). Different soil–sludge mixture concentrations mimicking recommended/realistic field dosages were tested.

Results

Only the sludge from the electroplating industry induced an avoidance response from the earthworms (EC50 = 0.4 t/ha) and collembolans (no observed effect concentration (NOEC) = 15 t/ha). This sludge was the only sludge responsible for any effect on the reproductive output of the earthworms (EC50 = 7.74 t/ha). Regarding collembolans, none of the sludges tested caused any significant decrease in reproduction. In higher plant tests, the two industrial sludges were toxic, causing a decrease growth in both species. The EC20 values determined for B. rapa were 20.3 and 24.2 t/ha and for A. sativa 14.7 and 16.2 t/ha for sludges from olive-processing and electroplating industries, respectively.

Discussion

The metal loadings of the different test sludges could partially explain the results obtained. The toxicity of the test sludge from electroplating industry observed on the tested invertebrates and plants could be explained by the high amount of total chromium from which 22.3% was in the most toxic oxidation state—Cr(VI). However, the toxicity caused by the sludge from the olive-processing industry in the test plants could be attributed to the presence of other compounds (not measured in this study) since the metal content was not high enough to induce such an effect. The absence of toxicity showed by the urban test sludge was in agreement with its low levels of metals.

Conclusions

The response of the different test organisms and end points varied according to the sludge type. The urban sludge was non-toxic whereas the sludge from the electroplating industry caused a toxic effect on almost all parameters measured (avoidance behavior of both test organisms, reproduction of earthworms, and growth of both plant species). Sludge from the olive-processing industry only caused a toxic effect on growth of both plant species. By analyzing the sensitivity of the different parameters for the most toxic sludge, it was found that avoidance and reproduction were more sensitive than plant growth, whereas plant seed germination was not sensitive at all.

Recommendations and perspectives

The ecotoxicological evaluation of wastes can be used as an environmental safety control of sludge use in agriculture. A tiered approach could be adopted for this purpose, incorporating avoidance tests in the first tier (screening level) and reproduction and plant growth tests in a second tier. But more evidence aiming to define the most suitable ecotoxicological test battery for specific sludges with a different contamination profile is still needed.

Keywords

Avoidance tests Higher plant growth tests Reproduction tests Sludge characterization Test battery 

References

  1. Al-Assiuty AIM, Khalil MA, Abdel-Lateif HM (2000) Effects of dry sludge application on soil microarthropod communities in a reclaimed desert ecosystem. Pedobiologia 44:567–578CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Andrés P, Domene X (2005) Ecotoxicological and fertilizing effects of dewatered, composted and dry sewage sludge on soil mesofauna: a TME experiment. Ecotoxicology 14:545–557CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Benitez E, Sainz H, Melgar R, Nogales R (2002) Vermicomposting of a lignocellulosic waste from olive oil industry: a pilot scale study. Waste Manage Res 20(2):134–142CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Branco R, Chung AP, Veríssimo A, Morais PV (2005) Impact of chromium-contaminated on the microbial community of a river. FEMS Microbiol Ecol 54:35–46CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Bruce L, McCracken DI, Foster GN, Aitken MN (1999) The effect of sewage sludge on grassland euedaphic and hemiedaphic collembolan populations. Pedobiologia 43:209–220Google Scholar
  6. Crouau Y, Gisclard C, Perotti P (2002) The use of Folsomia candida (Collembola; Isotomidae) in bioassays of waste. Appl Soil Ecol 19:65–70CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Domene X, Alcañiz JM, Andrés P (2007a) Ecotoxicological assessment of organic wastes using the soil collembolan Folsomia candida. Appl Soil Ecol 35:461–472CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Domene X, Natal-da-Luz T, Alcañiz JM, Andrés P, Sousa JP (2007b) Feeding inhibition in the soil Collembolana Folsomia candida as an endpoint for the estimation of organic waste ecotoxicity. Environ Toxicol Chem 26:1538–1544CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Domene X, Ramírez W, Mattana S, Alcañiz JS, Andrés P (2008) Ecological risk assessment of organic waste amendments using the species sensitivity distribution from a soil organisms test battery. Environ Pollut 155:227–236CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Düring RA, Gath S (2002) Utilization of municipal organic wastes in agriculture: where do we stand, where will we go. J Plant Nutr Soil Sci 165:544–556CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Elvira C, Sampedro L, Nogales R (1999) Suitability of sludges from dairy and paper industries for growth and reproduction of Eisenia andrei. Pedobiologia 43:766–770Google Scholar
  12. Environmental Canada (2002) Biological test methods for measuring the toxicity of contaminated soil to earthworms (Eisenia sp. or Lumbricus terrestris) (December 2002 Draft). Environmental Protection Series Biological Test Methods. Method Development and Applications Section. Reports EPS 1/RM/. Environmental Technology Centre, Environment Canada, Ottawa, OntarioGoogle Scholar
  13. Environmental Canada (2004) Biological Test Methods for Measuring the Survival and Reproduction of Springtails Exposed to Contaminants in Soil. (June 2004 Draft). Environmental Protection Series Biological Test Methods. Method Development and Applications Section. Reports EPS 1/RM/47. Environmental Technology Centre, Environment Canada, Ottawa, OntarioGoogle Scholar
  14. European Community (1986) Directive 86/278/EEC: Council Directive of 12 June 1986 on the protection of the environment, and in particular of the soil, when sewage sludge is used in agricultureGoogle Scholar
  15. European Community (1991) Council Directive 91/689/EEC of 12 December 1991 on hazardous waste. Off. J. Eur. Communities. L. Legis 1991; 377, 0020–0027 [31/12/1991]Google Scholar
  16. European Community (2001) Commission Decision 2001/118/EC of 16 January 2001 amending Decision 2000/532/EC as regards the list of wastes. Off. J. Eur. Communities. L. Legis. 2001a; 47, 0001-31 [16/2/2001]Google Scholar
  17. Filser J, Wittmann R, Lang A (2000) Response types in Collembola towards copper in the microenvironment. Environ Pollut 107:71–78CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Fjällborg B, Dave G (2004) Toxicity of Sb and Cu in sewage sludge to terrestrial plants (lettuce, oat radish), and of sludge elutriate to aquatic organisms (Daphnia and Lemna) and its interaction. Water Air Soil Poll 155:3–20CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Gejlsbjerg B, Klinge C, Samsøe-Petersen L, Madsen T (2001) Toxicity of linear alkylbenzene sulfonates and nonylphenol in sludge-amended soil. Environ Toxicol Chem 20:2709–2716CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Gong P, Wilk BM, Strozzi E, Fleischmann S (2001) Evaluation and refinement of continuous seed germination and early seedling growth test for the use in the ecotoxicological assessment of soils. Chemosphere 44:491–500CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Greenslade P, Vaughan GT (2003) A comparison of Collembola species for toxicity testing of Australian soils. Pedobiologia 47:171–179CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Hund-Rinke K, Wiechering H (2001) Earthworm avoidance test for soil assessment. J Soils Sediments 1:15–20CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. ISO (1994a) Soil quality—determination of effective cation exchange capacity and base saturation level using barium chloride solution. ISO 11260. International Organization for Standardization, GenevaGoogle Scholar
  24. ISO (1994b) Soil quality—determination of the effects of pollutants on soil flora. Effects of chemicals on the emergence and growth of higher plants. ISO 11269-2. International Organization for Standardization, GenevaGoogle Scholar
  25. ISO (1996) Soil quality—effects of pollutants on earthworms (Eisenia fetida), part 2–determination of effects on reproduction. ISO 11268-2. International Organization for Standardization, GenevaGoogle Scholar
  26. ISO (1999) Soil quality—inhibition of reproduction of Collembola (Folsomia candida) by soil pollutants. ISO 11267. International Organization for Standardization, GenevaGoogle Scholar
  27. ISO (2007a) Soil quality—avoidance test for testing the quality of soils and effects of chemicals on behaviour—test with earthworms (Eisenia fetida and Eisenia andrei). ISO Draft 17512-1. International Organization for Standardization, GenevaGoogle Scholar
  28. ISO (2007b) Soil quality — avoidance test for testing the quality of soils and effects of chemicals—part 2: test with collembolans (Folsomia candida). ISO Draft 17512-1. International Organization for Standardization, GenevaGoogle Scholar
  29. LNEC (1970) Solos—Análise granulométrica por peneiração húmida. LNEC-E 239. Laboratório Nacional de Enmgenharia Civil, LisbonGoogle Scholar
  30. Lock K, Janssen CR (2001) Modeling zinc toxicity for terrestrial invertebrates. Environ Toxicol Chem 20:1901–1908CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Lock K, Janssen CR (2002) Ecotoxicity of chromium (III) to Eisenia fetida, Enchytraeus albidus, and Folsomia candida. Ecotox Environ Safe 51:203–205CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Lubben B (1989) Influence of sewage sludge and heavy metals on the abundance of Collembola on two agricultural soils. In 3rd International Seminar on Apterygota 419–428Google Scholar
  33. Molnár L, Fischer E, Kállay M (1989) Laboratory studies on the effect, uptake and distribution of chromium in Eisenia fetida (Annelida, Oligochaeta). Zoo Anz 223:57–66Google Scholar
  34. Moreira R, Sousa JP, Canhoto C (2008) Biological testing of a digested sewage sludge and derived composts. Bioresour Technol 99:8382–8389CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. Natal-da-Luz T, Ribeiro R, Sousa JP (2004) Avoidance tests with Collembola and earthworms as early screening tools for site specific assessment of polluted soils. Environ Toxicol Chem 23:2188–2193CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. Natal-da-Luz T, Amorim MJB, Römbke J, Sousa JP (2008a) Avoidance tests with earthworms and springtails: defining the minimum exposure time to observe a significant response. Ecotox Environ Safe 71:545–551CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. Natal-da-Luz T, Römbke J, Sousa JP (2008b) Avoidance tests in site-specific risk assessment—influence of soil properties on the avoidance response of Collembola and earthworms. Environ Toxicol Chem 27:1112–1117CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. Pandard P, Devillers J, Charissou AM, Poulsen V, Jourdain MJ, Férard JF, Grand C, Bispo A (2006) Selecting a battery for ecotoxicological characterization of wastes. Sci Total Environ 363:114–125CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. Petersen SO, Petersen J, Rubaek GH (2003) Dynamics and plant uptake of nitrogen and phosphorus in soil amended with sewage sludge. Appl Soil Ecol 24:187–195CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. Ramírez WA, Domene X, Ortiz O, Alcañiz JM (2008) Toxic effects of digested, composted and thermally-dried sewage sludge on three plants. Bioresource Technol 99:7168–7175CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. Redborg KE, Hinesly TD, Ziegler EL (1983) Rearing Psychoda alternata (Diptera: Psychodidae) in the laboratory on digested sewage sludge with some observations on its biology. Environ Entomol 12:412–415Google Scholar
  42. Renoux AY, Tyagi RD, Samson R (2001) Assessment of toxicity reduction after metal removal in bioleached sewage sludge. Wat Res 35:1415–1424CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  43. Robidoux PY, Choucri A, Bastlen C, Sunahara GI, López-Gastey J (2001) Interlaboratory study for the validation of an ecotoxicological procedure to monitor the quality of septic sludge received at a wastewater treatment plant. Environ Toxicol 16:158–171CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  44. Sachs L (2002) Angewandte Statistik: Anwendung statistischer Methoden. Springer, HeidelbergGoogle Scholar
  45. Smit CE, Van Gestel CAM (1998) Effects of soil type, prepercolation, and ageing on bioaccumulation and toxicity of zinc for the springtail Folsomia candida. Environ Toxicol Chem 17:1132–1141CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  46. Sørensen PB, Carlsen L, Vikelsøe J, Rasmussen AG (2001) Modelling analysis of sewage sludge amended soil. NERI technical report. no.361. National Environmental Research Institute, Roskilde, p 40Google Scholar
  47. Spurgeon DJ, Hopkin SP (1996) Effects of variations of the organic matter content and pH of soil on the availability and toxicity of zinc to the earthworm Eisenia fetida. Pedobiologia 40:80–96Google Scholar
  48. Spurgeon DJ, Hopkin SP, Jones DT (1994) Effects of cadmium, copper, lead and zinc on growth, reproduction and survival of the earthworms Eisenia fetida (Savigny): assessing the environmental impact of point-source metal contamination in terrestrial ecosystems. Environ Poll 84:12–130CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  49. USEPA (1986) Mercury in solid or semisolid waste (manual cold-vapor technique). Method 7471A. United States Environmental Protection Agency, SpringfieldGoogle Scholar
  50. USEPA (1994) Determination of trace elements in waters and wastes by inductively coupled plasma–mass spectrometry. Method 200.8. United States Environmental Protection Agency, CincinnatiGoogle Scholar
  51. USEPA (2001) Determination of metals and trace elements in water and wastes by inductively coupled plasma-atomic emission spectrometry. Method 200.7. United States Environmental Protection Agency, CincinnatiGoogle Scholar
  52. USEPA (2005) SW846. Test methods for evaluating solid waste, physical/chemical methods. Method 6020A. United States Environmental Protection Agency, SpringfieldGoogle Scholar
  53. Van Gestel CAM, Van Breemen EMD, Baerselman R, Emans HJB, Janssen JAM, Postuma R, Van Vliet PJM (1992) Comparison of sublethal and lethal criteria for nine different chemicals in standardized toxicity tests using the earthworm Eisenia andrei. Ecotox Environ Safe 23:206–220CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  54. Van Gestel CAM, Van Breemen EMD, Baerselman R (1993) Accumulation and elimination of cadmium, chromium and zinc and effects on growth and reproduction in Eisenia andrei (Oligochaeta, Annelida). Sci Total Environ (Suppl) 585–597Google Scholar
  55. Vikelsøe J, Thomsen M, Carlsen L, Johansen E (2002) Persistent organic pollutants in soil, sludge and sediment. A multianalytical field study of selected organic chlorinated and brominated compounds. NERI technical report no. 402. National Environmental Research Institute, Denmark, p 100Google Scholar
  56. Wong JWC, Li K, Fang M, Su DC (2001) Toxicity evaluation of sewage sludge in Hong Kong. Environ Int 27:373–380CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  57. Zar JH (1998) Biostatistical analysis. Hall International, LondonGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag 2009

Authors and Affiliations

  • Tiago Natal-da-Luz
    • 1
  • Serena Tidona
    • 2
  • Bruno Jesus
    • 3
  • Paula V. Morais
    • 1
    • 3
  • José P. Sousa
    • 1
  1. 1.IMAR—Coimbra Interdisciplinary Center, Department of ZoologyUniversity of CoimbraCoimbraPortugal
  2. 2.Facoltà di AgrariaUniversità degli Studi di TorinoGrugliascoItaly
  3. 3.Department of BiochemistryUniversity of CoimbraCoimbraPortugal

Personalised recommendations