№84-23
Assessment of the biocast potential for ecotechnologies of soil phytoremediation
O. Kovrov1, https://orcid.org/0000-0003-0782-7767
O. Mulyk1, https://orcid.org/0009-0001-0703-8437
Yu. Voronkova1, https://orcid.org/0000-0002-4079-8294
V. Tur1, https://orcid.org/0009-0001-4360-8441
V. Fedotov1 https://orcid.org/0000-0003-3521-815X
1Dnipro University of Technology, Dnipro, Ukraine
Coll.res.pap.nat.min.univ. 2026, 84:287–299
Full text (PDF)
https://doi.org/10.33271/crpnmu/84.287
ABSTRACT
Purpose. To investigate the diversity of biocrust microorganisms and assess their potential to enhance the effectiveness of eco-technologies for phytoremediation of degraded soils.
Methods. The methodology is based on an analytical review of contemporary biocrust research; collection of surface soil samples with visible biocrust from the campus area of Dnipro University of Technology; vegetation (growth) experiments using test phytoremediator plants, Brassica napus L., Sorghum bicolor L., Lupinus albus L., and Hordeum murinum L., which cultivated on sandy, soil, and biocrust substrates; and microscopic investigation of biocrust biodiversity.
Results. Vegetation tests demonstrated the advantage of the biocrust substrate for most of the studied plant species in terms of germination energy, seedling density, and aboveground biomass formation compared with sand and a standard soil mixture; the effect was most pronounced on days 14–21 of cultivation. Biocrust provided a more stable water regime and likely stimulated early root development due to microbial activity and the presence of organic matter. Microscopy confirmed a mixed biocrust microbiota dominated by filamentous cyanobacteria (Phormidium, Leptolyngbya, Microcoleus), with heterotrophic bacteria of a Bacillus-like morphotype, diatoms (Pinnularia), and green algae (Chlorella), which form a biofilm and an exopolysaccharide matrix that binds soil particles.
Scientific novelty. An applied approach is substantiated for using biocrust as a “natural bioinoculant” to support phytoremediation plant communities by integrating surface stabilization, phototrophic primary production, and a microbial matrix that improves plant establishment on compacted and disturbed soils.
Practical significance. The results provide a basis for developing eco-technologies for the rehabilitation of degraded and technogenically disturbed lands using biocrust inoculants to reduce erosion and increase the effectiveness of phytoremediation.
Keywords: biocrust, phytoremediation, degraded soils, cyanobacteria, vegetation test.
References
1. Weber, B., Büdel, B., & Belnap, J. (Eds.). (2016). Biological soil crusts: An organizing principle in drylands (Ecological Studies, Vol. 226). Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-30214-0
2. Belnap, J., Kaltenecker, J. H., Rosentreter, R., Williams, J., Leonard, S., & Eldridge, D. (2001). Biological soil crusts: Ecology and management (Technical Reference 1730-2). U.S. Department of the Interior, Bureau of Land Management.
3. Pushkareva, E., Elster, J., Holzinger, A., Niedzwiedz, S., & Becker, B. (2022). Biocrusts from Iceland and Svalbard: Does microbial community composition differ substantially? Frontiers in Microbiology, 13, 1048522. https://doi.org/10.3389/fmicb.2022.1048522
4. Pushkareva, E., Sommer, V., Barrantes, I., & Karsten, U. (2021). Diversity of microorganisms in biocrusts surrounding highly saline potash tailing piles in Germany. Microorganisms, 9(4), 714. https://doi.org/10.3390/microorganisms9040714
5. Belnap, J., Weber, B., & Büdel, B. (2016). Biological soil crusts as an organizing principle in drylands. In B. Weber, B. Büdel, & J. Belnap (Eds.), Biological soil crusts: An organizing principle in drylands (pp. 3–13). Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-30214-0_1
6. Lal, R. (2015). Restoring soil quality to mitigate soil degradation. Current Opinion in Environmental Sustainability, 15, 79–86. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cosust.2015.09.002
7. United Nations Convention to Combat Desertification. (2017). Global land outlook (1st ed.). UNCCD. https://www.unccd.int/sites/default/files/documents/2017-09/GLO_Full_Report_low_res.pdf
8. Cherlet, M., Hutchinson, C., Reynolds, J., Hill, J., Sommer, S., & von Maltitz, G. (2018). World atlas of desertification: Rethinking land degradation and sustainable land management (3rd ed.). Publications Office of the European Union. https://doi.org/10.2760/9205
9. Rodríguez-Caballero, E., Cantón, Y., Chamizo, S., Afana, A., & Solé-Benet, A. (2012). Biological soil crusts and their response to rainfall intensity in a semiarid environment: Effects on soil surface stability and runoff. Geomorphology, 145–146, 81–89. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.geomorph.2011.12.042
10. Elbert, W., Weber, B., Burrows, S., Steinkamp, J., Büdel, B., Andreae, M. O., & Pöschl, U. (2012). Contribution of cryptogamic covers to the global cycles of carbon and nitrogen. Nature Geoscience, 5(7), 459–462. https://doi.org/10.1038/ngeo1486
11. Antoninka, A. J., Faist, A. M., Rodriguez-Caballero, E., & Belnap, J. (2020). Biological soil crusts in ecological restoration: Emerging research and perspectives. Restoration Ecology, 28(S2), S3–S12. https://doi.org/10.1111/rec.13201
12. Chamizo, S., Rodríguez-Caballero, E., Román, J. R., & Cantón, Y. (2016). The role of biological soil crusts in soil moisture dynamics and erosion in drylands: A review. Ecohydrology, 9(8), 1524–1540. https://doi.org/10.1002/eco.1719
13. Gholamhosseinian, A., Sepehr, A., Asgari Lajayer, B., Delangiz, N., & Astatkie, T. (2021). Biological soil crusts to keep soil alive, rehabilitate degraded soil, and develop soil habitats. In A. Vaishnav & D. K. Choudhary (Eds.), Microbial polymers: Applications and ecological perspectives (pp. 289–309). Springer, Singapore. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-16-0045-6_13
14. Cheng, C., Li, Y., Long, M., Gao, M., Zhang, Y., Lin, J., & Li, X. (2020). Moss biocrusts buffer the negative effects of karst rocky desertification on soil properties and soil microbial richness. Plant and Soil, 475(1–2), 153–168. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11104-020-04602-4
15. Ripak (raps). Ahrarii Razom. https://agrarii-razom.com.ua/plants/ripak-%28raps%29
16. Sorho. Olis. 10.08.2016. https://olis.com.ua/press-centre/statii/st-sorgo/
17. Liupyn. LegumeHub. https://legumehub.eu/uk/crops/lupin/
18. Yachmin myshachyi. Ahrarii Razom. https://agrarii-razom.com.ua/plants/yachmin-mishachiy
date of first submission of the article to the publication – 01/10/2026
date of acceptance of the article for publication after review – 02/23/2026
date of publication – 03/31/2026