Publications
NIBIOs employees contribute to several hundred scientific articles and research reports every year. You can browse or search in our collection which contains references and links to these publications as well as other research and dissemination activities. The collection is continously updated with new and historical material.
2025
Authors
Chi Wu Yuzhu Wang Jihong Liu Clarke Hang Su Liang Wang Olga A. Glazunova Konstantin V. Moiseenko Lan Zhang Liangang Mao Lizhen Zhu Xingang LiuAbstract
Owing to wide application and persistence, fluridone has demonstrated side-effects on non-target plants and aquatic organisms. This study investigated the potential of biochar as remediation in soil using rice hull biochar (BCR) produced at different temperatures and in four types of soil. The results indicated that, with increasing pyrolytic temperature from 300 to 700 ºC, biochar properties changed, for example, specific surface area values increased from 38.21 to 126.12 m2 g−1. Sorption affinity (Kf) of BCR ranged from 409 to 1352 and 1301 to 6666 (μg/g)/(mg/L)n for fluridone and its metabolite fluridone acid respectively. After amendment with 2% BCR500, fluridone and fluridone acid could easily be adsorbed in different types of soils, and Kf values were 1.30–3.73 times higher than those in pure soil. Half-lives values varied between different soils and fluridone acid (179–306 days) persisted significantly longer than fluridone (39–179 days) in soil. After amendment with 2% BCR500, fluridone and fluridone acid were degraded faster. Experiments under sterilized conditions demonstrated biodegradation to be the dominant process in unamended (61.59%–64.70%) and amended (67.71%–77.67%) soil. Bioinformatic analysis showed that fluridone reduced the diversity of the soil microbial community, but the abundance of microorganisms with degradation function increased and these became dominant species after BCR was added, particularly with higher numbers of degrading bacteria like Lysobacter, Pseudonocardia and Sphingomonas. Co-occurrences also revealed that BCR tightened bacterial connection and relieved fluridone stress. This work helps us better understand these processes and optimize the application of biochar for reducing pesticide contamination in agricultural soils.
Abstract
No abstract has been registered
Abstract
No abstract has been registered
Abstract
No abstract has been registered
Abstract
No abstract has been registered
Abstract
No abstract has been registered
Authors
Matti Koivula Adam Felton Mari Jönsson Therese Löfroth Fride Høistad Schei Juha Siitonen Jörgen SjögrenAbstract
• This chapter summarises biodiversity responses to continuous cover forestry (CCF). The comparator throughout this chapter is rotation forestry (RF) and its main harvesting method—clearcutting—unless otherwise stated. • Research on the biodiversity effects of logging methods applied in CCF (mostly selection or gap cutting) mainly concerns the short-term effects of measures taken in mature, originally fairly even-aged forests, at best 10–15 years after cutting. Thus far, no surveys or chronosequences cover the whole rotation period (60–100 years). • Continuous cover forestry is likely to beneft species that suffer when the tree cover is removed, such as bilberry and its associated species. Species requiring spatial continuity in host trees or canopy cover may also benefit. • Selection cutting may preserve the majority of species in the mature forest, but the most sensitive species may decline or even disappear. Gap cutting (diameter 20–50 m) affects forest-interior species relatively little, but species’ abundances in gaps change with increasing gap size. Shelterwood cutting seems to closely resemble selection cutting in terms of species responses. In the long term, however, shelterwood cutting results in an even-aged and sparse overstorey, which does not produce the biodiversity benefits of CCF. • Species that have declined due to forestry mostly require large living and dead trees. The preservation of these species is not ensured by CCF alone, but requires deliberately maintaining these structural features. • A mosaic of different forest-management practices within landscapes may provide complementary ways to maintain rich biodiversity.
Abstract
No abstract has been registered
Authors
Erik J. JonerAbstract
No abstract has been registered
Abstract
No abstract has been registered