Answers are grounded in this paper and cite their sources.
Review examines microbiomes to restore war-affected soils and enhance crop resilience, indicating promising bioremediation methods.
This review presents the current understanding of the rhizosphere microbiome and its potential application for the regeneration of damaged soils. The aim was to examine the issues of soil degradation associated with military actions and the latest developments in microbiome engineering for their application in the bioremediation of damaged lands. The review analyses recent developments and achievements in the study of the microbiome, its role in soil fertility, and plant protection against stress. Various directions and approaches to microbial profiling and addressing relevant pollution issues using developed bioengineered models and constructs have been examined. It has been shown that the most common explosive organic compounds — TNT, hexogen, and octahydro-1,3,5,7-tetranitro-1,3,5,7-tetrazocine — and heavy metals — lead, cadmium, zinc, and antimony — account for the greatest soil contamination. The restoration of soils damaged as a result of military actions is feasible through the engineering of a specific soil microbiome (including genera Bacillus , Pseudomonas , and Arthrobackter , as well as arbuscular mycorrhiza). Military-related stress on soil is exerted by a mixture of organic pollutants and heavy metals, and the use of microbial consortia is a promising approach for mitigating their impact. The main economic advantage of such associations is that a consortium not only degrades toxic contaminants but also contains strains capable of nitrogen fixation and phosphorus mobilisation. The economic feasibility of applying synthetic microbial consortia and microbial engineering in war-affected regions is based on balancing the initial costs of research and development against substantial savings in capital investments compared with conventional land remediation methods.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Shulga et al. (2026) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: