Direct and indirect effects of microplastics from agricultural mulch films on terrestrial isopods Porcellionides pruinosus (Crustacea, Isopoda): A comparative exposure study
Open accessAbstract
Microplastic (MPs) contamination in terrestrial ecosystems is an emerging concern, with indirect impacts on soil biota often exceeding direct toxicity. This study examined direct and indirect effects of MPs from agricultural mulch films-low-density polyethylene (LDPE), polybutylene adipate terephthalate (PBAT) and starch bioplastics (starch-based)-on the soil isopod Porcellionides pruinosus. We conducted comparative feeding and mesocosm experiments under environmentally realistic conditions. We analysed toxicological endpoints like survival and weight change, and stress-related markers like total haemocyte count, differential haemocyte count, phenoloxidase PO-like activity, enzymatic assays of acetylcholinesterase, glutathione S-transferase, and electron transport system activity. No acute toxicity was observed; however, soil exposure had a more pronounced effect on P. pruinosus, confirming that indirect impacts via altered soil conditions are stronger than direct dietary exposure. Notably, only bio-based MPs triggered changes in cellular and biochemical stress parameters, while fossil-based MPs had no observable effect. The stress response of P. pruinosus in mesocosm experiments aligned with shifts in microbial respiration, suggesting that soil-mediated effects play a dominant role in organismal stress. These findings underscore the importance of considering indirect pathways in MP toxicity assessments and highlight the suitability of terrestrial isopods for integrating diverse toxicological endpoints and stress markers in both laboratory and mesocosm settings.
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
The citation lists haven’t been fetched yet
References 72 · Cited by 2
- Authors
- Železnikar, Š., Dolar, A., Danevčič, T., Pintar, M., & Drobne, D.
- Affiliations
- University of Ljubljana (SI)
- Venue
- Ecotoxicology and Environmental Safety
- Publisher
- Elsevier BV
- Published
- 2026-01
- Volume
- 309
- Pages
- 119741
- ISSN
- 0147-6513 (ISSN-L)
- OpenAlex
- W7123888430
- Cited by
- 2
- References
- 72
- Citations by year
- 2026: 2
- FWCI
- 3.71
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- gold
- doi.org
- Licence
- Locations
- Ecotoxicology and Environmental Safety (publishedVersion, cc-by)
- PubMed (publishedVersion)
- Funders
- Slovenian Research and Innovation Agency (J4\u20134550, J4\u201370172)
- Horizon 2020 Framework Programme
- Horizon 2020 (101000407)
- Topics
- Physical Sciences › Environmental Science › Pollution › Microplastics and Plastic Pollution
- Physical Sciences › Environmental Science › Health, Toxicology and Mutagenesis › Environmental Toxicology and Ecotoxicology
- Physical Sciences › Environmental Science › Pollution › Pharmaceutical and Antibiotic Environmental Impacts
- Keywords
- microplastics, agricultural mulch films, Porcellionides pruinosus, terrestrial isopods, low-density polyethylene, poly(butylene adipate-co-terephthalate), bio-based plastics, indirect effects, stress symptoms, hemocyte count, phenoloxidase activity, acetylcholinesterase, glutathione S-transferase, electron transport chain, microbial respiration, soil organisms, mesocosm experiment
- MeSH terms
- Microplastics, Agriculture, Animals, Soil Pollutants, Biomarkers, Polyethylene, Isopoda
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review