The management of large volumes of organic residues generated in different livestock, urban, agricultural and industrial activities is a topic of environmental and social interest. The high organic matter content of these residues means that their application as soil organic amendments in agriculture is considered one of the more sustainable options, as it could solve the problem of the accumulation of uncontrolled wastes while improving soil quality and avoiding its irreversible degradation. However, the behavior of pesticides applied to increase crop yields could be modified in the presence of these amendments in the soil.
The use of large quantities of pesticides in today’s intensive agricultural systems is a widespread practice for controlling pests, diseases and weeds. This increases the yield per hectare, ensuring the food supply for the world’s ever-growing population [1][2], which currently stands at over 7.7 billion people, and is estimated to rise above 9.6 billion by 2050, and reach nearly 11 billion around 2100 [3]. The application of a wide range of pesticides is considered a regular and required practice in agriculture, as almost 45% of annual food production is lost due to pest infestation or the competition between crops and weeds for soil nutrients [4]. In fact, 3.5 million tons of pesticides are being used, of which 47.5% are herbicides, 29.5% are insecticides, 17.5% are fungicides, and 5.5% are other pesticides [5]. The global pesticide market recorded a value of nearly USD 84.5 billion in 2019, increasing at an annual growth rate of 4.2% since 2015, and it is likely to reach 11.5% with a value of nearly USD 130.7 billion by 2023 [6]. The ten countries consuming the most pesticide in the world are China, USA, Argentina, Thailand, Brazil, Italy, France, Canada, Japan, and India [7].
However, this extensive use of pesticides over recent decades is now of considerable environmental concern because of the release of mobile and/or persistent pollutants into the environment, and the potential accumulation of these toxic substances in soils and/or waters [8][9][10]. The fate of pesticides and their degradation products determines the contamination of the soil, water and air ecosystems over time. Moreover, if agrochemicals remain in the crops, they could finally enter the food chain, posing a threat to human, animal, and plant welfare [11][12][13][14].
The contamination of agricultural soils with pesticides could lead to changes in their chemical and biological properties, affecting their quality and causing a negative impact on crop yields [15]. They may impair soil microbial biodiversity and enzymatic activity (a vital indicator of soil tolerance to pollutants), and the associated degradation of soil organic matter (OM) [16][17]. Many reports are available on these negative effects on soil microbial communities [17][18], and on the processes associated with microbial activities [19].
A recent study involving 317 agricultural topsoil samples from the European Union and 76 pesticide residues as target compounds has revealed that 83% of the soils have been contaminated by one or more residues [9]. The contamination of surface and ground waters by pesticides has also been detected in recent years, probably due to deficient pesticide management, and increased by precipitation and/or irrigation that give rise to the runoff or leaching process of these compounds through the soil [20][21][22][23]. In fact, the contamination of water by pesticides is increasing in agricultural areas across different countries, and a broad range of pesticide concentrations has been found, in some cases exceeding the limit established for drinking water by European Union (EU) legislation (0.1 µg·L
These environmental contamination data highlight the need to roll out strategies to optimize agricultural sustainability by maximizing crop productivity and reducing or preventing soil and water contamination by pesticides. This has been widely addressed in recent years due to the requirement to meet European Community regulations [27]. One of these strategies is based on the in-situ application of organic residues as organic amendments [28]. This method is a common agricultural practice which allows increasing soil OM content, and it can be used to control soil and water contamination by pesticides: (i) promoting the immobilization of pesticides in soil OM, enhancing their subsequent biodegradation, and preventing or reducing their potential mobility into water resources [28][29][30], and (ii) delivering nutrients to the soil by increasing OM content to promote soil fertility and plant growth and stimulate ecological restoration with concomitant benefits for the health of the soil ecosystem [11]. In addition, organic materials require minimal pre-treatment before their application to the soil because of their biological origin [31].
Large amounts of organic residues are generated from livestock, urban, agricultural and industrial activities, and their management is a topic of environmental and social interest in many countries today due to the problems surrounding their disposal [32][33]. In general, these wastes have a high OM content, and they could be used as organic amendments in agriculture, with this being one of the most sustainable options and with greater environmental advantages. Moreover, numerous organic residues could perform as possible sorbents for pesticides [34][35][36]. These studies have assessed the effects that organic carbon (OC) from exogenous sources have on the behavior and environmental fate of pesticides in soils due to the affinity of pesticides, which are generally hydrophobic substances, by these organic materials. The OC of the amendments, depending on their nature, composition and content, can modify the main physicochemical processes of pesticides (adsorption–desorption, dissipation and leaching) in soils. These processes determine their efficiency as well as the dissipation or persistence of these compounds in the soil and their effects as potential environmental contaminants of the soil and surface or ground waters [37].

| Pesticide | Soil Characteristics | Organic Amendment/Dose | Experimental Design | Results | Reference | |||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Metalaxyl-M | Silt loam soil (pH 6.70, OC 2.90%) |
Biochar from grape vine pruning residues (BC–G) (pH 9.9, OC 75.1%) and spruce wood (BC–S) (pH 9.1, OC 83.8%). Vermicomposts (VC) from manure and olive mill wastewater (VC–M) (pH 7.9, OC 31.6%) and buffalo manure (VC–B) (pH 7.8, OC 36.6%) Biochar/soil: 2% (w w | –1 | ) | Sorbent/Solution: 25 mg biochar/5 mL or 3 g soil/8 mL water solution Herbicide concentration: 1–20 mg L | −1 | Shaken: 24 h, T: 20 °C Analytical determination: HPLC |
Metalaxyl sorption order: non–amended soil < soil–VC–M ≤ soil–VC–B < soil–BC–S < soil–BC–G Much higher sorption efficiency by BC than by VC and a lower extent of metalaxyl desorption due to composition and structural differences of the organic matter of BC. |
Parlavecchia et al. [103] | |||||
| Oxyfluorfen | Loamy clay soil (pH 4.85, OC 0.84%) Sandy loam soil (pH 7.55, OC 0.98%) Clay loam soil (pH 6.59, OC 2.23%) |
Biochar from peanut (BCP) (pH, 7.05, C 49.17%), chestnut (BCC) (pH 6.08, C 58.07%), bamboo (BCB) (pH 7.45, C 63.25%), maize straw (BCM) (pH 6.83, C 43.36%), rice hull (BCR) (pH 6.96, C 33.60%) BCR/soil: 0.5%, 1%, or 2% (w w | –1 | ) | Sorbent/Solution: 0.1 g biochar/40 mL or 2 g soil/200 mL 0.01 M CaCl2 Herbicide concentration: 0.05–10 mg L−1 Shaken: 6 days, T: 25 °C Aging time of BCR-soil: 1, 3, 6 months Analytical determination: GC/MS |
BC sorption capacities followed the order: BCR > BCB > BCM > BCC > BCP owing to differences in physicochemical properties. BCR sorption capacity decreased with aging time. |
Wu et al. [89] | |||||||
| Atrazine | Krasnozem soil (pH 7.05, OC 0.89%, clay 28.2%, silt 37.8%) |
Biochar from cassava wastes (pH 9.55, C 62.38%) obtained at 750 °C (MS750). SSA: 430.4 m2/g, MP: 0.144 m3/g Biochar/soil: 0%, 0.1%, 0.5%, 1%, 3% and 5% (w w–1) |
Sorbent/Solution: 0.2–2 g/10 mL 0.01 M CaCl2 Herbicide concentration: 0.5–20 mg L−1 Shaken: 24 h T: 15, 25, 35 °C, pH: 3,5, 7, 9 Analytical determination: HPLC |
Great sorption capacity for atrazine of MS750 in soil due to high surface area and micropore volume. High degrees of aromaticity and hydrophobicity (H/C: 0.02, N + O/C: 0.09) of MS750 supplied numerous sorption sites. | Deng et al. [104] | |||||||||
| Hexazinone Metribuzin Quinclorac |
Sandy loam soil (pH 6.9, OC 0.52%, clay 15.1%, silt 3.3%) |
Bone char (BC) (pH 9.72, C 11%) BC/soil: 5% (w w | –1 | ) or 60 t ha | −1 | Sorbent/Solution: 10 g/10 mL 0.01 M CaCl2 Herbicide concentration: 0.63–3.13 mgL−1, 1.60–8 mgL | Sorbent/Solution: 10 g/10 mL 0.01 M CaCl2 Herbicide concentration: 0.63–3.13 mgL | −1, 0.31–1.56 mgL | , 1.60–8 mgL | −1 Shaken: 24 h, T: 20 °C Analytical determination: Liquid scintillation | , 0.31–1.56 mgL−1 Shaken: 24 h, T: 20 °C Analytical determination: Liquid scintillation |
High sorption of herbicides by BC, regardless of the application form of the material (topsoil or incorporated in the surface layer in leaching columns). | Mendes et al. [105] | |
| Aminocyclopyrachlor Mesotrione |
Clay soil (pH 6.44, OC 2.73%), clay 50.9%, silt 19.6%) |
Bone Char (BC) (pH 9.72, C 11%) BC/soil: 0%, 1%, 5%, 10%, and 100% (w w | −1 | ) or 0, 12, 60, 120, and 1200 t ha | −1 | BC particle size groups: 0.3–0.6 and 0.15–0.3 mm |
Sorbent/Solution: 10 g/10 mL 0.01 M CaCl2 Herbicide concentration: 0.051 mg L−1 (0.32 Bq L | Sorbent/Solution: 10 g/10 mL 0.01 M CaCl2 Herbicide concentration: 0.051 mg L | −1) aminocyclopyrachlor 5.0 mg L−1 (1.13 Bq L | (0.32 Bq L−1) aminocyclopyrachlor 5.0 mg L | −1) mesotrione Shaken: 24 h, T: 20 °C Analytical determination: Liquid scintillation | (1.13 Bq L−1) mesotrione Shaken: 24 h, T: 20 °C Analytical determination: Liquid scintillation |
Higher BC rates (regardless of the particle size) increased both herbicides adsorption and decreased their desorption. | Mendes et al. [106] |
| Linuron Alachlor Metalaxyl |
Sandy loam soil (pH 6.3, OC 0.51%, clay 11.8, silt 13.6%), Sandy clay soil (pH 6.9, OC 1.04%, clay 38.1%, silt 5.8%) |
Pine Wood (OC 41.6%, DOM 1.62%, lignin 24.4%), oak wood (OC 38.5%, DOM 6.86%, lignin 18.2%) Wood/soil: 5% and 50% (w w | –1 | ) (40 and 400 t C ha | –1 | ) | Sorbent/Solution: 5 g/10 mL water solution Herbicide concentration: 1–25 mg L | −1 | (100 kBq L | −1 | ) Shaken: 24 h, T: 20 °C Incubation times: 0, 5 and 12 months Analytical determination: Liquid scintillation |
Pesticide adsorption increased with high wood dose but OC nature was not relevant. Adsorption did not change after incubation times. The adsorption irreversibility decreased in presence of wood for alachlor and increased that of linuron and metalaxyl. | Marín–Benito et al. [107] | |
| Aminocyclopyrachlor Mesotrione |
Clay soil (pH 6.0, OC 2.21%, clay 60.5%, silt 11.3%) |
Sewage sludge (SS) (pH 6.8, OC 16.64%) SS/soil: 0.1%, 1%, and 10% (w∙w | –1 | ) or 1.2, 12, and 120 t∙ha | –1 | Sorbent/Solution: 10 g/10 mL 0.01 M CaCl2 Herbicide concentration: 0.08–0.64 Bq·L−1 (aminocyclopyrachlor) 0.28–2.27 Bq·L−1 (mesotrione) Shaken: 24 h, T: 20 °C Analytical determination: Liquid scintillation |
SS slightly affected sorption–desorption of both herbicides (lowest Kd at soil-SS1%). Kd for mesotrione was ~3.5–fold higher than for aminocyclopyrachlor (higher water solubility). | Mendes et al. [108] | ||||||
| Imazapic Atrazine Hexazinone Diuron Metribuzin |
Red Ferrusol (pH 7.1, OC 2.1%, clay 41%, silt 23%), Grey Dermosol (pH 5.7, OC 0.9%, clay 30%, silt 22%), Red Kandosol (pH 6.5, OC 3.5%, clay 22%, silt 8%) |
Eleven mill muds/ash from different sugar mills (pH 6.04–7.26, OC 27.7–37.8%) Mill muds/soil: 5–25% (w w | –1 | ) | Sorbent/Solution: 1 g/5 mL 0.01 M CaCl2 Herbicide concentration: 0.5 mg L−1 Shaken: 24 h, T: 25 °C Analytical determination: Q-TOF |
Sorption order: diuron > atrazine = metribuzin > hexazinone = imazapic (consistent with herbicide properties). Mill muds at 5% dose increased herbicide retention up to tenfold. Amendments reduced desorption of mobile herbicides in low OC soils. | Duhan et al. [109] | |||||||
| MCPA Diuron Clomazone Terbuthylazine |
Sandy loam soil (pH 7.93, OC 0. 54%, clay 6.7%, silt 16.8%) Loam soil (pH 6.77, OC 1.77%, clay 22.1%, silt 34.2%) Clay loam soil (pH 8.14, OC 1.38%, clay 31.1%, silt 26.8%) |
Mucilage extracted from chia seeds (Salvia hispanica L.) Organic residue/soil: 10% (w w–1) |
Sorbent/Solution: 0.5 g unamended or amended soil/8 mL water solution Herbicide concentration: 1 mg L | −1 | Shaken: 24 h, T: 20 °C Analytical determination: HPLC |
Soil porosity decreased by mucilage amendment. Sorption of herbicides increased in amended soils (sandy–loam < loam < clay–loam). Diuron recorded the highest Kd value and desorption was observed only for terbuthylazine. | Marsico et al. [110] | |||||||
| Dichlorvos Chlorpyrifos |
Sandy soil (pH 8.52, OC 0.7%, clay + silt 9.3%) | Compost (C) from mixed wastes (pH 6.61, OC 29.5%, DOM 354 mg L | −1 | ), and dried goat organic manure (OM) (pH 8.67, OC 14.4%, DOM 620 mg L | −1 | ) Organic residues/soil: 2.5 and 5% (w w | –1 | ) | Sorbent/Solution: 5 g soil/100 mL in C-DOM or 0.01 M CaCl2 Herbicide concentration: 0.1–10 mg L−1 (chlorpyrifos) 0.25–100 mg L−1 (dichlorvos) Shaken: 24 h, T: 25 °C Analytical determination: GC |
C–and OM–DOM increased dichlorvos sorption (S < S–OM–DOM< S–C–DOM) and decreased chlorpyrifos sorption (S > S–C–DOM> S–OM–DOM). Humified and aromatic nature of DOM determines the interactions with pesticides with different hydrophobic character. | Gaonkar et al. [111] | Gaonkar et al. [112] | ||
| Triasulfuron Prosulfocarb Chlorotoluron Flufenacet |
Sandy loam soil (pH 7.36, OC 1.20%, clay 17%, silt 25%) Loamy sand soil (pH 7.61, OC 0.9%, clay 13%, silt 6%) |
Spent mushroom substrate (pH 7.9, C 26.4%, DOM 1.29%), green compost (pH 7.2, C 23.6%, DOM 0.69%), manure (C 18.5%, DOM 1.32%), sewage sludge (pH 7.6, C 28.9%, DOM 1.18%) Organic residues/soils: 10% (w w | –1 | ) | Sorbent/Solution: 5 g soil or 0.1 g organic residues/10 mL 0.01 M CaCl2 Herbicide concentration: 1–25 mg L−1 (TSF, CTL, FNC) 0.25–10 mg L−1 (100 Bq mL | Sorbent/Solution: 5 g soil or 0.1 g organic residues/10 mL 0.01 M CaCl2 Herbicide concentration: 1–25 mg L−1 (TSF, CTL, FNC) 0.25–10 mg L | −1) (PSC) Shaken: 24 h, T: 20 °C Analytical determination: HPLC/MS and Liquid scintillation | (100 Bq mL−1) (PSC) Shaken: 24 h, T: 20 °C Analytical determination: HPLC/MS and Liquid scintillation |
Highest adsorption for prosulfocarb (lowest water solubility and highest Kow) in all materials. Aliphatic and aromatic structures optimize adsorption and O-alkyl and N-alkyl groups enhance desorption hysteresis. |