Effects of Bacillus spp. on non-target organisms in the terrestrial ecosystem
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.18800/kawsaypacha.202401.A008Keywords:
Toxicology, Bioproduct, Eisenia fetida, Terrestrial plantsAbstract
The increase in the world population brings with it the need for food production and therefore the search for technological alternatives to satisfy this demand. According to the Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations (FAO), it is necessary to evaluate both the effectiveness and the safety of all products used in agriculture. The Institute of Plant Biotechnology of the province of Villa Clara, Cuba, immersed in the solution of this problem, has shown that two biopreparations CCIBP-C5 (Bacillus pumilus) and CCIBP-A5 (Bacillus amyloliquefaciens) have an effect on plant growth and activity against phytopathogenic fungi. However, there is no evidence of its safety on non-target organisms in the ecosystem. Terrestrial ecotoxicology is the branch of science devoted to predicting said impact on representative organisms. Four tests were carried out to evaluate the acute toxicity of Bacillus species at concentrations of 108 UFC.g-1 of soil, according to the regulations of the United States Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) in the biomodels of Eisenia fetida and different species of terrestrial plants. Mortality/germination inhibition, weight, vegetative vigor and other clinical findings were investigated for 30 days. There was no mortality in any of the biomodels and the observed effects did not show significant statistical differences with the corresponding control group. We can conclude that the CCIBP-C5 and CCIBP-A5 biopreparations are not toxic to the species studied in the terrestrial ecosystem.
Downloads
References
Aderjan, E.; Wagenhoff, E.; Kandeler, E. & Moser, T. (2023). Natural soils in OECD 222 testing — influence of soil water and soil properties on earthworm reproduction toxicity of carbendazim. Ecotoxicology, 32, pp. 403-415. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10646-023-02636-9
Agencia medioambiental de Canadá (2016). 13.3.2 Earthworms. En Guidance Document for Testing the Pathogenicity and Toxicity of New Microbial Substances to Aquatic and Terrestrial Organisms (pp. 138-139). Report EPS 1/RM/44. Second Edition. https://publications.gc.ca/site/eng/9.827958/publication.html
Albert, S. & Bloem, E. (2023). Ecotoxicological methods to evaluate the toxicity of bio-based fertilizerapplication to agricultural soils – A review. Science of the Total Environment, 879, pp. 2-11. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.scitotenv.2023.163076
Alvarez-Alfageme, F.; Anastassiadou, M.; Arena, M.; Auteri, D.; Brancato, A.; Bura, L.; Carrasco, L.; Castoldi, A.; Chaideftou, E.; Chiusolo, A.; Colagiorgi, A.; Crivellente, F.; Lentdecker, C.; Egsmose, M.; Fait, G.; Greco, L.; Ippolito, A.; Istace, F.; Jarrah, S. & Villamar L. (2021). Peer review of the pesticide risk assessment of the active substance Bacillus amyloliquefaciens strain IT‐45. EFSA Journal, 19(5), pp.2-20. https://doi.org/10.2903/j.efsa.2021.6594
Bisht, N. & Singh, P. (2021). Excessive and Disproportionate Use of Chemicals Cause Soil Contamination and Nutritional Stress [Internet]. In Soil Contamination - Threats and Sustainable Solutions (Chapter 6). IntechOpen. http://dx.doi.org/10.5772/intechopen.94593
Castañedo, Z. A.; Meneses-Marcel, A.; Aguila, E.; Seijo, M. & Díaz, M. (2022). Evaluación de la toxicidad aguda del IHPLUS® sobre Eisenia fetida. Ciencias Agronómicas, (39). https://doi.org/10.35305/agro39.e019
Dickson, A.; Leaf, A. L. & Hosner, J. F. (1960). Quality appraisal of white spruce and white pine seedling stock in nurseries. The Forestry Chronicle, 36, pp.10-13.
Fonseca, F.; Diogo, R. & Elisa, J. (2023) Bacillus spp. as a strategy to control fungi and mycotoxins in food. Current Opinion in Food Science, 52, pp.101068. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cofs.2023.101068
Luna, J. (2020). Métodos analíticos de microbiología general y aplicada. Editorial Unimagdalena: Colombia.
Meneses-Marcel, A.; Castañedo, Z.; Águila, E; Sotolongo, K.; Wilford, F. & Meneses-Gómez, M. (2022). Carta de control de Physella acuta usando tóxico de referencia. Intervalo de tolerancia comparado con el intervalo de confianza. Revista de Toxicología, 39, pp. 41-45.
OECD (2012). Series on Pesticides N.º 67: OECD Guidance to the Environmental Safety Evaluation of Microbial Biocontrol Agents, Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development. Paris, pp.
Penha, R.O.; Vandenberghe, P.S.; Faulds, C.; Soccol, V. & Soccol, C. (2020). Bacillus lipopeptides as powerful pest control agents for a more sustainable and healthy agriculture: recent studies and innovations. Planta, 251, pp. 70. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00425-020-03357-7
Ramos-Huapaya, A. & Lombardi-Indacoche, I. (2020). Calidad de plantas en un vivero de tecnología intermedia en Huánuco: Estudio de caso con «Eucalipto urograndis». Revista Forestal del Perú, 35 (2), pp.132-145. http://dx.doi.org/10.21704/rfp.v35i2.1581
Sheskin, D. J. (2011). Handbook Of Parametric And Nonparametric Statistical Procedures. New York: Chapman and Hall/CRC.
Singh, R. P.; Abhik, P.; Durga, P.; Gagan, K. & Singh, B. K. (2023). Entomopathogenic bacteria: a potential biological weapon against insect-pests management. Just Agriculture, 3(10), pp.190-99.
Soares, K.; Mariano, W. & Paulino, M. (2020). Avoidance test with earthworms (Eisenia andrei) in natural soil treated with a Bacillus thuringiensis-based biopesticide to soil quality evaluation. Research, Society and Development, 9(8), pp. e423985774. DOI: 10.33448/rsd-v9i8.5774.
TAEGRO (2023). Registration Report. Product code: NZBBA1106. Part A. Risk Management. NATIONAL ASSESSMENT Germany (extension of use). Disponible en: https://www.bvl.bund.de/SharedDocs/Downloads/04_Pflanzenschutzmittel/01_zulassungsberichte/00A461-00-05.pdf?__blob=publicationFile&v=2
Timmis, K. a& Ramos, J. L. (2021). The soil crisis: the need to treat as a global health problem and the pivotal role of microbes in prophylaxis and therapy. Journal of Microbiology and Biotechnology, 14(3), pp. 769-797. https://doi.org/10.1111/1751-7915.13771
US-EPA (1996a). Microbial Pesticide Test Guidelines. OPPTS 885.0001 Overview for Microbial Pest Control Agents. https://www.regulations.gov/document/EPA-HQ-OPPT-2009-0159-0002
US-EPA (1996b). Microbial Pesticide Test Guidelines. OPPTS 885.4000 Background for Nontarget Organism Testing of Microbial Pest Control Agents. https://www.regulations.gov/document/EPA-HQ-OPPT-2009-0159-0028
US-EPA (1996c). Microbial Pesticide Test Guidelines. OPPTS 885.4300 Nontarget Plant Studies, Tier I. https://www.regulations.gov/document/EPA-HQ-OPPT-2009-0159-0035
US-EPA (2012). Ecological Effects Test Guidelines. OCSPP 850.3100: Earthworm Subchronic Toxicity Test. https://www.regulations.gov/document/EPA-HQ-OPPT-2009-0154-0019
Villarreal-Delgado, M. F.; Villa-Rodríguez, E. D.; Cira-Chávez, L. A.; Estrada-Alvarado, M. I.; Parra-Cota, F. I. & Santos-Villalobos, S. D. (2018). El género Bacillus como agente de control biológico y sus implicaciones en la bioseguridad agrícola. Revista mexicana de fitopatología, 36(1), pp.95-130. https://doi.org/10.18781/r.mex.fit.1706-5
Zhu, L.; Li, B.; Wu, R.; Li, W.; Wang, J.; Wang, J.; Du, Z.; Juhasz, A. & Zhu, L. (2020). Acute toxicity, oxidative stress and DNA damage of chlorpyrifos to earthworms (Eisenia fetida): The difference between artificial and natural soils. Chemosphere, 255, pp.126982. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chemosphere.2020.126982
