Final SPH -JHS Coverpage 16-2 Jan 2021 single C O N T E N T S JOURNAL OF HORTICULTURAL SCIENCES Volume 16 Issue 2 June 2021 In this Issue i-ii Review Phytoremediation of indoor air pollutants: Harnessing the potential of 131-143 plants beyond aesthetics Shalini Jhanji and U.K.Dhatt Research Articles Response of fruit yield and quality to foliar application of micro-nutrients in 144-151 lemon [Citrus limon (L.) Burm.] cv. Assam lemon Sheikh K.H.A., Singh B., Haokip S.W., Shankar K., Debbarma R. Studies on high density planting and nutrient requirement of banana in 152-163 different states of India Debnath Sanjit Bauri F.K., Swain S., Patel A.N., Patel A.R., Shaikh N.B., Bhalerao V.P., Baruah K., Manju P.R., Suma A., Menon R., Gutam S. and P. Patil Mineral nutrient composition in leaf and root tissues of fifteen polyembryonic 164-176 mango genotypes grown under varying levels of salinity Nimbolkar P.K., Kurian R.M., Varalakshmi L.R., Upreti K.K., Laxman R.H. and D. Kalaivanan Optimization of GA3 concentration for improved bunch and berry quality in 177-184 grape cv. Crimson Seedless (Vitis vinifera L) Satisha J., Kumar Sampath P. and Upreti K.K. RGAP molecular marker for resistance against yellow mosaic disease in 185-192 ridge gourd [Luffa acutangula (L.) Roxb.] Kaur M., Varalakshmi B., Kumar M., Lakshmana Reddy D.C., Mahesha B. and Pitchaimuthu M. Genetic divergence study in bitter gourd (Momordica charantia L.) 193-198 Nithinkumar K.R., Kumar J.S.A., Varalakshmi B, Mushrif S.K., Ramachandra R.K. , Prashanth S.J. Combining ability studies to develop superior hybrids in bell pepper 199-205 (Capsicum annuum var. grossum L.) Varsha V., Smaranika Mishra, Lingaiah H.B., Venugopalan R., Rao K.V. Kattegoudar J. and Madhavi Reddy K. SSR marker development in Abelmoschus esculentus (L.) Moench 206-214 using transcriptome sequencing and genetic diversity studies Gayathri M., Pitchaimuthu M. and K.V. Ravishankar Generation mean analysis of important yield traits in Bitter gourd 215-221 (Momordica charantia) Swamini Bhoi, Varalakshmi B., Rao E.S., Pitchaimuthu M. and Hima Bindu K. Influence of phenophase based irrigation and fertigation schedule on vegetative 222-233 performance of chrysanthemum (Dendranthema grandiflora Tzelev.) var. Marigold Vijayakumar S., Sujatha A. Nair, Nair A.K., Laxman R.H. and Kalaivanan D. Performance evaluation of double type tuberose IIHR-4 (IC-0633777) for 234-240 flower yield, quality and biotic stress response Bharathi T.U., Meenakshi Srinivas, Umamaheswari R. and Sonavane, P. Anti-fungal activity of Trichoderma atroviride against Fusarium oxysporum f. sp. 241-250 Lycopersici causing wilt disease of tomato Yogalakshmi S., Thiruvudainambi S., Kalpana K., Thamizh Vendan R. and Oviya R. Seed transmission of bean common mosaic virus-blackeye cowpea mosaic strain 251-260 (BCMV-BlCM) threaten cowpea seed health in the Ashanti and Brong-Ahafo regions of Ghana Adams F.K., Kumar P.L., Kwoseh C., Ogunsanya P., Akromah R. and Tetteh R. Effect of container size and types on the root phenotypic characters of Capsicum 261-270 Raviteja M.S.V., Laxman R.H., Rashmi K., Kannan S., Namratha M.R. and Madhavi Reddy K. Physio-morphological and mechanical properties of chillies for 271-279 mechanical harvesting Yella Swami C., Senthil Kumaran G., Naik R.K., Reddy B.S. and Rathina Kumari A.C. Assessment of soil and water quality status of rose growing areas of 280-286 Rajasthan and Uttar Pradesh in India Varalakshmi LR., Tejaswini P., Rajendiran S. and K.K. Upreti Qualitative and organoleptic evaluation of immature cashew kernels under storage 287-291 Sharon Jacob and Sobhana A. Physical quality of coffee bean (Coffea arabica L.) as affected by harvesting and 292-300 drying methods Chala T., Lamessa K. and Jalata Z Vegetative vigour, yield and field tolerance to leaf rust in four F1 hybrids of 301-308 coffee (Coffea arabica L.) in India Divya K. Das, Shivanna M.B. and Prakash N.S. Limonene extraction from the zest of Citrus sinensis, Citrus limon, Vitis vinifera 309-314 and evaluation of its antimicrobial activity Wani A.K., Singh R., Mir T.G. and Akhtar N. Event Report 315-318 National Horticultural Fair 2021 - A Success Story Dhananjaya M.V., Upreti K.K. and Dinesh M.R. Subject index 319-321 Author index 322-323 131 J. Hortl. Sci. Vol. 16(2) : 131-143, 2021 This is an open access article d istributed under the terms of Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommer cial-ShareAl ike 4.0 International License, which permits unrestricted non-commercial use, d istribution, and reproduction in any med ium, provide d the original author and source are credited. Phytoremediation of indoor air pollutants: Harnessing the potential of plants beyond aesthetics Shalini Jhanji* and Dhatt U.K. Punjab Agricultural University, Ludhiana, Punjab - 141004 *Corresponding author Email : shalinijhanji@pau.edu ABSTRACT Indoor air pollution has emerged as a major threat to human health worldwide that needs to be dealt urgently. The present review is an effort to overview the different indoor air pollutants (CO2, volatile organic compounds (VOCs) like formaldehyde, benzene, nitrous oxide, trichloro- ethylene, fluorine, ammonia, radon, aldehyde, hydrocarbons etc.) their hazardous effects on human health, potential of indoor plants in their remediation and their practical utility. Besides providing oxygen to breathe, multifaceted roles of indoor plants have been well documented. Plants were used since decades for indoor decorations based on their aesthetic value, but now studies are focused on screening plant species for their efficiency in absorption of indoor air pollutants. The basis for phytoremediation is the potent efficiency of some plants to assimilate, degrade, or modify toxic pollutants into non-toxic ones. Phytoremediation seems to be the key solution to improve indoor air quality as it has many potential advantages (simple, potentially cheap, and easily implemented) in comparison to other traditional or latest methods. Breathing walls, portable air filters for rooms or whole house filtration through heating, ventilation and air conditioning systems are some of the technologies developed, to reduce indoor air pollution and improve indoor air quality but all these are costly, resource consuming and still there is question on their efficiency. Detailed account of morphological, anatomical and molecular mechanisms underlying plant leaves and leaf associated microbes in reduction of pollutants have been reviewed that could help in developing cost effective and eco friendly remediation technologies. This review gives a brief discussion about air phytoremediation to improve effectiveness of this technology in practical use. Keywords: Indoor air pollutants, herbs, phytoremediation and plants Review INTRODUCTION Degradation in air quality has become the biggest concern and awareness regarding its maintenance and protection is increasing all over the world. There are numerous anthropogenic causes of outdoor and indoor air quality degradation viz., volcanic eruption, fossil fuel burning, forest fires, motor vehicle pollution, controlled burning in agriculture, fumes from paints or air sprays, waste deposits in landfills military resources such as nuclear weapons and toxic germ warfare, fertilizers, furnitures, coolants etc that leads to numerous respiratory, heart diseases and could even be carcinogenic. Major air pollutants include particulate matters (PMs), carbon monoxide, oxides of sulphur and nitrogen, gr ound-level ozone (O 3) a nd vola t ile orga nic compounds (VOCs) tha t ca n ca use dozens of diseases and threaten human health (Archibald et al., 2017; Burns et al., 2020). According  to a WHO report, nearly 91% of the world’s population lives in areas where the level of airborne pollutants exceeds WHO permissible limits (Health Effects Institute, 2018). The changing lifestyle is further adding to the problem as it has limited the activities of people to indoors which forces large percent of urban population to spend most of their times, indoors. Ventilation plays a crucial role in promoting the comfort and health of occupants (Rackes and Waring, 2014). The world has 132 Jhanji and Dhatt J. Hortl. Sci. Vol. 16(2) : 131-143, 2021 experienced unprecedented urban growth during the last three decades. Urban population is expected to incr ea se fr om 55% in 2018 to 68% by 2050. Projections show that urbanization, the gradual shift in residence of the human population from rural to urban areas, combined with the overall growth of the world’s population could add another 2.5 billion people to urban areas by 2050, with close to 90% of this increase taking place in Asia and Africa, according to a new United Nations data set launched (Anon., 2018b). With increasing urbanization and rising migration of people from rural to urban areas, space is the major concern. Buildings generate almost 40% of global greenhouse gases (GHG’s) annually as compared to transport (23%) and industries (32%). Closed working spaces and lack of ventilation leads to accumulation of pollutants - excess amounts. Human beings spend 80-90% of their time in enclosed spaces, such as houses, office buildings, and schools with restricted air circulation (Yrieix et al., 2010). In closed buildings, besides pollutants, occupa nts themselves a r e a ma jor sour ce of indoor a ir contamination. The occupants are the major source of carbon dioxide (CO2) that poses threat to health at higher concentrations (Siskos et al., 2001).Therefore, indoor air quality (IAQ) may be worse than outdoor air quality (Watson, 2013). According to the studies conducted, indoor air has been reported to be 12 times more polluted than outdoor air (Zabiegala, 2006). So, urban IAQ has emerged as an important international health issue that needs to be reviewed and resolved at earliest possible. Further, it demands for greener indoors with good IAQ to cater the health issues of occupants. The current article gives an overview of degrading IAQ and its effect on human health; criteria for selection of indoor plants with high phytoremediation efficacy and mechanism underlying their efficacy that could stimulate more research in this area and improve its effectiveness in practical use. MAJOR INDOOR POLLUTANTS Carbon dioxide is one of the major indoor pollutants that pose threat to human life. The average breath of an adult contains 35,000-50,000 ppm of CO2 that gets accumulated in closed buildings (Prill, 2000). The outdoor CO2 level is in a range of 350-450 ppm but the indoor CO2 level is 100 times greater than outdoor CO2 level, even in buildings where complaints with rega rd to indoor air qua lity ar e few. The CO 2 concentration indicates air exchange rate in buildings as CO2 levels more than 1000 ppm indicate inadequate ventila tion a nd occupants ha ve pr oblems like headaches, nose and throat ailments, tiredness, lack of concentration and fatigue (Bulinska et al., 2014). This does not mean that low CO2 levels are indicators of good indoor air quality (IAQ) as IAQ is dependent upon several other pollutants. Besides CO2, the other indoor pollutants are volatile orga nic compounds (VOCs) like formaldehyde, benzene, nitrous oxide, trichloro-ethylene, fluorine, a mmonia , r a don, a ldehyde, hydr oca r bons etc. Exposure to such chemicals leads to severe diseases like multiple chemical sensitivity, sick building syndrome allergies, asthma, headache, stroke, ischemic heart disease, chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) and lung cancer (Shinohara et al., 2004).The effects of some of these air pollutants ranging from respiratory illness, cardiovascular disease to bladder and lung cancer affecting human health have been summarized by Kampa and Castanas (2008). Some indoor air pollutants, their source and health effects have been summarized in Table 1. According to the survey of World Health Organization (WHO) around 3.8 million people in a year die from the exposure to household air pollution (Anon., 2018a). Among various VOCs, formaldehyde is a main contaminant in terms of indoor air which originates from various paper products, curtains, adhesives, carpets, varnishes, permanent press-fabrics. Its concentration in new houses is often several times higher than that in older homes (Marco et al., 1995). The key solution to this problem is planting indoor plants that can survive under such adverse conditions with least maintenance and inputs. Besides acting as potential sinks of indoor pollutants, indoor plants add to the beauty and liveliness to our homes and offices and thus improve IAQ. Indoor plants means the plants that can grow indoor i.e. their light, temperature and water requirements are low. They may be either flowering plants (Peace lily, Kalanchoe, Amaryllis, Hydrangeas, Poinsettia) or folia ge pla nts (ca ctus, pa lm pla nts, fer n a nd succulents). Besides oxygen producing ability another comprehensive research conducted by the National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA) has found that common household plants work as natural 133 Phytoremediation of indoor air pollutants J. Hortl. Sci. Vol. 16(2) : 131-143, 2021 air purifiers. Interestingly indoor plants can remove a notable amount of at least 87% of VOC’s in 24 hours. VOC’s are present in many household products, including paints, paint strippers and other solvents, wood preservatives, aerosol sprays, cleansers and disinfectants, moth repellents, hobby supplies, pesticides, dry-cleaned clothing, building materials and furnishing, office equipment including glues and adhesives, permanent markers and photographic solutions (Anon., 2021). Succulents and many indoor house plants are further advantageous as they are of small size and add continuous flush of fresh oxygen day and night. Studies have shown that people in buildings with plants like Money plant, Mother- In- Law’s Tongue and Areca palm have 34% fewer respiratory problems, 54% less eye irritation and 24% fewer headaches (Anon., 2016). ASSESSMENT OF UTILITY OF INDOOR PLANTS Indoor plants absorb carbon dioxide, keep the oxygen flowing and remove harmful toxins like VOCs which help to deter the illness, lower the stress levels and create a relaxed and happy ambience. This further helps in improving concentration, enhancing creativity and increasing productivity that fulfills overall well- being. The air purifying qualities of indoor plants ultima tely stimula te a ha ppier a nd hea lthier environment. It may seem far-fetched and unconvincing that having greenery indoor can have such important effects but the scientific results and findings have proved it. Numerous indoor plants have huge capability of removing various categories of toxins from indoor air; hence foster the indoor air quality. Based on study conducted by NASA, toxins like benzene, formaldehyde, trichloroethylene, xylene, toluene and ammonia were considered and houseplants were selected to test their pollutant removal efficiency and it was found that they removed these pollutants in significant amounts (Table 2). Parallel to this, there are several other benefits of indoor plants which can be discussed under following headings: Air purifiers: Succulents such as aloe vera and snake plant have excellent air purifying and toxins removal properties. The plants emit the water vapour and that in return generates the pumping action which pulls the conta minated air down to roots of pla nts. T he succulents convert the contaminants to plant food and thus purify the air. The studies showed that many common foliage plants reduced levels of some indoor polluta nts, including forma ldehyde and carbon monoxide, from small, sealed test chambers. The pollution reduction was largely due to bacteria growing on the plant roots (Wolverton et al., 1989). Plants grown in potting soil have been rated for their relative removal rate of toxins, such as formaldehyde. For this compound, Boston fern can remove 1863 µg/ h, Bamboo palm 1350 µg/h, Janet Craig dracaena 1328 µg/h, English ivy 1120 µg/h, peace lily 939µg/ h, areca palm and corn plant 938 µg/h. All the details of how plants clean such air, and how to use them, are in the classic paperback book “How to Grow Fresh Air” by the researcher B.C. Wolverton. Living walls of plants have become more common in buildings, including modular units that one can even install in a home. A new technology of breathing walls introduces a method for improving the indoor air quality, and this technology is called breathing walls. The concept of a breathing wall is to purify the internal air flowing out through the walls and to reduce the concentration of indoor air pollutants. This draws a steady stream of filtered air through the walls and into the buildings all the times, providing exceptionally clean ventilation to occupants (Zhai, 2016). A company in Sydney (Australia) has partnered with the University of Technology to quantify the positive effects of what they term “breathing walls” to remove carbon dioxide and volatile organic compounds from interior air. The U.S. researchers Fisk and Rosenfeld of the Berkeley National Laboratory have quantified a $58 billion annual savings from sick-building illness with the use of plants (Anon., 2007). Improvement in indoor humidity level: The indoor plants r egula te the humidity level which is an important factor influencing indoor weather. The studies conducted by Agricultural University in Norway revealed that indoor plants at home regulate the humidity levels inside the house as plants release moisture in form of vapour, and this increased moisture improves the sore throat, allergies, cold and dry cough and even some skin diseases (Fjeld, 2000). The foliage plants can raise relative humidity to healthier and more comfortable levels in interior spaces. The relative humidity of the air inside buildings is often below the range of 30% to 60% recommended for human comfort, especially when buildings are 134 Jhanji and Dhatt J. Hortl. Sci. Vol. 16(2) : 131-143, 2021 being heated. When the indoor relative humidity is too low, colds are more frequent and wood dries and cracks. In this study, when plants were present, less than 2% of the space was occupied by the plants, the relative humidity was raised from 25% without plants to 30% with plants. The enhancing effect of indoor plants on relative humidity raised the concern that indoor plants might result in too much increase in relative humidity. But this is unlikely to occur as when the relative humidity rises, the rate of water loss from the plant slows due to decreased concentration gradient between plant tissue and atmosphere (Lohr, 2010) Continuous oxygen supply: Unlike most of the plants, succulents do not release carbon dioxide at night instead they have specialized built in mechanism which maintains the continuous supply of oxygen. Improve our focus: Number of studies has been conducted on both students as well the workers which have proved that attentiveness, concentration and brain capabilities increase when plants were kept in their room. The University of Michigan conducted a study which found memory retention is improved as much as 20% when plants are present in room (Anon., 2008). Increase pain tolerance: The plants in our vicinity have capability to decrease our sensitivity to pain. The Horticulture Therapy Research was conducted by University of Kansas which showed that patients needed less medication when they had plants in their room. One more study was conducted to examine people’s ability of perception to pain in presence or absence of plants. About 71% of subjects in room with plants had their overall physical health above excellent whereas this per cent decline to 56% in the conditions when there were no plants around (Lohr and Pearson- Mims, 2000). Increase working productivity: Mental fatigue has been shown to be reduced by plants. Indoor plants have potential to increase the productivity per working person. The studies conducted in Texas, Washington State and England revealed that the employees with pla nts in their envir onments wer e 12% mor e productive than those working in environment without exposure to interior plants. Students in dorm room with the view of nature and plants had better and increased productivity than those without it, assuring the role of plants in increasing the potential of the subject for performance. (Lohr, 2010) Improve memory: Another important aspect is memory which is influenced by plants. A study was conducted in the University of Michigan, which revealed that there are numerous benefits of interacting with nature. They reported that interaction for just an hour with nature could increase the memory retention (Berman et al., 2008). Help to prevent diseases: The positive effect of plants on health and disease prevention has been proved from several years. The presence of plants on working desk in office improved the health of subject as a study conducted in the University of Norway revealed that there was 60% decrease in sickness rates with plants in office (Fjeld, 2000). Speed up the healing process: Researchers who have assessed the impact of nature/plants on human health have suggested that people-plant interactions provide physiological stress reduction within minutes along with faster physical recovery from stress that further improves emotional and cognitive health (Kaplan, 2001; Chang and Chen, 2005). The healing process through plants was also supported by Texas A & M University. They recommended that patients who interacted with plants, engaged in gardening have faster recovery rate and less downtime in post-surgery patients. The soothing effects of ornamental flowers and plants are so great that simply having daily views of flowers and other ornamental plants in landscaped areas outside patient recovery room can also significantly speed up recovery time (Hall and Dickson, 2011). Reduce stress: The study was conducted that stress reducing responses also occur when people are in a room with a few containerized interior plants, even when their attention is not drawn to the plants (Lohr et al., 1996). A study revealed that people given a task on computer had higher systolic blood pressure in a room without any plant as compared to people doing same task in a room with plants (Lohr, 2010). Reduce noise: The studies have shown that plants also reduce the indoor noise levels, making it a pleasant environment. For instance, a hedge of small indoor plant in workspace can reduce the noise levels up to five decibels. Plants absorb the sound and create a calming effect. A study from London South Bank University showed that there is a positive effect on noise reduction from large plants placed in corners of the rooms (Perry, 2018) 135 Phytoremediation of indoor air pollutants J. Hortl. Sci. Vol. 16(2) : 131-143, 2021 Ta bl e 1. C om m on in do or a ir p ol lu ta nt s an d th ei r ef fe ct s on h um an h ea lth 136 Jhanji and Dhatt J. Hortl. Sci. Vol. 16(2) : 131-143, 2021 Improves perception: Plants improve the rate of perception as revealed in a study of Opryland Hotel in Nashville. The occupancy rate of that hotel was higher than national average. A scientific study was conducted and the main factor accounting for this was their high investment over $1 million on interior plants, as a matter of fact it was the largest investment on indoor plants in country (Perry, 2018). AMELIORATIVE POTENTIAL OF INDOOR PLANTS TO IMPROVE INDOOR AIR QUALITY The studies conducted by NASA back in 1980s, demonstrated that plants have potential to ameliorate airborne pollutants. Susanto et al. (2021) provided evidence-based insight into usefulness of indoor plants as an alternative way for indoor air remediation. Sever a l studies demonstr a ted efficient phytoremediation of specific indoor air pollutants through the use of specific plants. The plants Osmunda japonica, Davalliamariesii, Selaginella tamariscina, Polypodium formosanum,Lavandula spp., Pteris dispar, Pteris multifida, Pelargonium spp., Aloe vera, and Epipremnum aureum were reported to be efficient in removing formaldehyde from indoor air (Kim et al., 2010). Liu et al. (2007) reported that Crassula portulacea, Hydrangea macrophylla, Cymbidium “Golden elf”, Syngonium podophyllum, Euphorbia milii, Sansevieria trifasciata, Chlorophytum comosum, Dracenas anderiana, Hedera helix, and Clitori aternatea, with Chlorophytum comosum have high benzene removal efficiency. Phytoremediation of toluene ma y be a chieved thr ough Schefflera elegantisima, Philodendron spp. “Sunlight,” and Hedera helix (Kim et al., 2011). Zamioculcas zamiifolia was potent in remediating xylene (Sriprapat et al., 2013) and ethylbenzene to some extent (Toabaita et al., 2016). Hoya carnosa, Hemigraphis alternata, Fittonia argyroneura and Asparagus densiflorus efficiently remove VOCs like benzene, toluene, octane, T CE, and a-pinene a nd Ficus benjaminaoctane and a-pinene. Wood et al. (2006) documented that the popular indoor pot plant Dracena deremenis “Janet Craig” as an excellent species for the removal of VOCs. Similar results for removal of VOCs viz., benzene, ethylbenzene, xylene, styrene, formaldehyde, acetaldehyde, and toluene was recorded for Ficus spp. (Hong et al., 2017). The efficiency of Nephrolepis obliterate in r educing indoor formaldehyde levels was found up to 100% (Teiri et al., 2018). Aydogan and Montoya (2011) revealed the effica cy of pla nts such a s Hedera helix, Chrysanthemum morifolium, Dieffenbachia compacta, and Epipremnum aureum in reducing formaldehyde levels up to 90% within 24 hours. Indoor plants are not only potent to reduce VOCs, CO a nd CO 2 levels but a lso p a r ticula te ma tter (Panyametheekul et al., 2018). Several other studies also have shown the use of potted plants as a mechanical system for phytoremediation of several indoor air pollutants. Latest technologies have provided biofiltration walls or green walls or large filtration systems but potted plants are most effective in terms of phytoremediation capacity, maintenance and cost (Agarwal et al., 2019). Recent a dva ncements in indoor a ir phytor emedia tion technologies, botanical biofiltration systems could more efficiently reduce the concentrations of indoor air pollutants through action of active airflow in plant growing medium, along with vertically aligned plants that leads to higher leaf area density per unit of floor space. Despite of clear potential of these latest systems, still research needs to be focused on potential and cost effectiveness for proper selection of plants and their functional integration in buildings (Petit et al., 2018). The use of indoor plants as phytore- media tion technology in compa r ison to la test technologies is slow but envir onment friendly air-purification strategy i.e. financially affordable with minimal energy consumption (Susanto et al., 2021). STRATEGIES FOR SELECTION OF INDOOR PLANTS Selection of plants for indoors is based on criteria such a s a esthetic fea tur es, good sur viva l a nd low maintenance. Generally evergreen plant species with broad leaves and inhabitants of understorey of large canopies of tropical and sub-tropical climates have been selected as indoor foliage plants as they have been adapted to photosynthesize under low light intensities and grow profusely (Anderson et al., 1987). The plants that are adapted to shade have large leaf area and reduced stomatal aperture leading to removal of pollutants through adsorption rather than absorption (Gommer et al., 2013). This selection criteria of shade adaption for indoor plants need to be supplemented with mor phological (i.e. ,) leaf shape, size, and hairiness), anatomical (i.e.,) composition of epidermis 137 Phytoremediation of indoor air pollutants J. Hortl. Sci. Vol. 16(2) : 131-143, 2021 Table 2. Indoor Plants and their indoor pollutant removal efficacy 138 and mesophyll layers, and stomatal density and size) and physiological (CO2 assimilation rate and activity of detoxifying enzymes) properties that determine their air phytoremediation potential. Advanced omics technologies (genomics, pr oteomics, a nd metabolomics) could be used to understand the biochemical mechanism of indoor air pollutant degradation. The detailed unraveling of metabolic pathways, genes and enzymes involved in catabolism of pollutants will ena ble the deter mina tion of biomarkers for phenotyping appropriate plant species for improving IAQ. The selection of plants for indoor should be done very carefully with scientific approach as some plants may have negative impact on human health too. Some ornamental plants produce allergic pollens and/or release harmful VOCs; their surfaces may harbor pathogenic microbes and/or pests (Carinanos and Casares-Porcel, 2011). Thus, ornamental shade-loving plants with more foliage (leafy part), less pollen, and short blooming period could be selected to reduce indoor air pollution. Low grade plastic pots used for planting can also produce VOCs; hence, alternatives to plastic pots for indoor planting besides appropriate plants have to be considered. One of the best tools for selecting plants for indoor is the Air Pollution Tolerance Index (APTI). APTI considers biochemical properties of leaves such as ascorbic acid; relative water content, total chlorophyll and leaf extract pH. These properties affect the value of the plant’s tolerance to air pollutants. For example, under water stress, the content of chlorophyll induces reactive oxygen species in the chloroplast. The high value of ascorbic acid is one of the strategies to prevent oxidative damage to the thylakoid membranes under water stress conditions (Bandehali et al., 2021). HOW PLANTS REMEDIATE INDOOR AIR POLLUTANTS The plants during photosynthesis simultaneously take up CO2 and release O2 and during transpiration, release water vapour through stomata on their leaf surface (Smith and Pitt, 2011). Thus, the potential of plants to improve IAQ depends upon the capacity of leaves to exchange gases and pollutants from indoor air through stomata. Schreck et al. (2012) also reported that the points of entry of metal-enriched particles after their deposition on the leaf surface, could be the cuticle and stomata. This capacity is further limited by physical constraints pertaining to stomatal and mesophyll resistance. The size of stomatal pore varies with variation in environmental conditions viz., light, temperature, humidity -and cascades of signaling through plant hormones especially abscisic acid. Besides stomatal absorption, pollutants can get adsorbed on the external surfaces of plants or soil-root interface and thus get removed. The process of absorbing lipophilic semi volatile compounds is achieved through leaf surface adsorption, where atmospheric resistance serves as a major limiting factor (Wei et al., 2017). This type of removal depends upon the tota l sur fa ce a r ea a nd a na tomica l, morphological and chemical features of the plant surface along with characteristics of the soil substrate (Irga et al., 2013). The adsorption of pollutants especially lipophilic VOCs, such as benzene, on plant surfa ce is dependent upon type and density of trichomes (Li et al., 2018), cuticular wax deposition a nd lipid composition of epidermal membr ane (Gawronska and Bakera, 2015). The potential of plants to ameliorate indoor pollutants was earlier based on simplistic approaches but more accurate experimentation through simulation of foliage to indoor air pollutants not only confirmed the earlier reports (Fares et al., 2015) but also revealed that the amount of pollutants absorbed through stomata is 30- 100 times more than adsorbed on the plant surface or non-stomatal deposition (Tani et al., 2009). After entering into plant leaf either through absorption or adsorption, pollutants are translocated to shoots and roots for metabolic degradation through oxidases or hydrolases a nd then conjugation with different metabolic compounds (sugars, amino acid, organic acids, and peptides) to form bioproducts. These products are either re expelled (into air or as root exudates into soil) or used as carbon and energy sources (Oikawa and Lerdau, 2013). In addition to air phytoremediation through absorption and adsorption of pollutants by plant surface, another lea st explored aspect is phyllor emedia tion i.e. remediation through habituated microbes either on leaf surface or endophytes by biodegrading or transforming pollutants into less or nontoxic molecules (Sandhu et al., 2007). Leaves are the primary photosynthetic organs with dorsiventral symmetry and play pivotal roles in supporting phyllosphere microbes (Bringel and Couee, 2015). Several reports documented that both Jhanji and Dhatt J. Hortl. Sci. Vol. 16(2) : 131-143, 2021 139 plant leaves and leaf-associated microbes mitigated air pollutants, such a s azalea leaves and the lea f- associated Pseudomonas putida in reducing VOCs (De Kempeneer et al., 2004) and poplar leaves and the leaf-associated Methylobacterium sp. decreased xenobiotic compounds (Van Aken et al., 2004). Thus, the different mecha nisms underlying the phytoremediation potential of plants for indoor polluta nts a re micr obia l degr a dation thr ough rhizospheric microorganisms, phytoextraction i.e. plant-liquid extraction, plant-gas extraction i.e. stomatal uptake, enzymatic catalysis inside tissues and plant transpiration & evaporation from leaves (Sharma et al., 2019) CONCLUSIONS AND FUTURE PERSPECTIVE The complexities in the source, chemical nature, effects and stability of air pollutants pose a great challenge for standardizing technologies for their remediation. Further, different pollutants are prevailing at different rates in different microenvironments which dema nds for loca tion specific r emedia tion for pollutants individually or in groups. The selection of plants suitable for indoor phytoremediation should follow unambiguous scientific criteria that reflect their capacity to sequestrate air borne pollutants, instead of only taking into consideration their aesthetic features. The plant-soil-microbe system through metabolizing, sequestering or degrading air pollutants improve indoor air quality. Limited information on number and group of plant species indicating their potential and suita bility for removing a ir polluta nts enta ils uncertainties. The studies should be planned to concentrate on developing plant by editing genomes through DNA modifications to over express or insert genes coding for detoxifying enzymes. The integration of sma r t sensor networ ks a nd computer ized technologies with highly performing indoor plant species could provide great opportunities to improve IAQ through eco-sustainable and cost-effective techniques. Recent adva ncements in indoor a ir phytoremediation technologies, botanical biofiltration systems could more efficiently filter indoor air but still research needs to be focused on potential and cost effectiveness for their functional integration in buildings. Further research is needed to develop, test and confirm their effectiveness and safety before they can be. Studies on indoor air phytoremediation technologies is a multidisciplina r y a ppr oa ch tha t dema nds collaboration among researchers from different fields at regional, national, and international levels so that there is a paradigm shift in the way in which plants will become functional entity instead of just a decorative tool. Phytoremediation of indoor air pollutants REFERENCES Agar wa l, P., Sarkar, M. , Chakr abor ty, B. a nd Banerjee, T. 2019. Phytoremediation of Air Polluta nts: Pr ospects a nd Cha llenges. In: Phytomanagement of polluted sites; Pandey, V.C. and Bauddh, K., (Eds.) Elsevier, Amsterdam, p221-241. Anderson, J. M. and Osmond, C. B. 1987. Shade-sun responses: compromises between acclimation and photoinhibition. In: Topics in photosynthesis. Photoinhibition; Kyle, D. J., Osmond, C. B. and Arntzen, C.J., (Eds.) Elsevier, Amsterdam 9:1-38. Anonymous, 2007. Plants at work, indoors. https:// www.everythingzoomer.com/style/home-garden/ 2007/01/18/ Anonymous, 2008. Going outside even in cold impr oves memor y a ttention. https:// news.umich.edu/ Anonymous, 2016. 3 Helpful Plants to Purify the Air in Your Home. https://isha.sadhguru.org/uk/en/ wisdom/article/ Anonymous, 2018a. Household air pollution and health. https://www.who.int/news-room/fact- sheets/detail/household-airpollutionandhealth Anonymous, 2018b. Revision of the Wor ld Urbanization Prospects. Population Division of the United Nations, Department of Economic and Social Affairs (UN DESA). https://www.un.org/ development/desa/publications/2018-revision-of- world-urbanization-prospects.html Anonymous, 2021. Volatile Organic Compounds’ Impa ct on Indoor Air Qua lity. https:// www.epa.gov/indoor-air-quality-iaq/ Anonymous. 1998. Indoor Air Quality: Biological Contaminants: Report on a WHO Meeting, J. Hortl. Sci. Vol. 16(2) : 131-143, 2021 140 Rautavaara; World Health Organization Regional Office for Europe: Copenhagen, Denmark, 31. Archibald, A. T., Folberth, G., Wade, D. C. and Scott, D. 2017. A world avoided: impacts of changes in anthropogenic emissions on the burden and effects of air pollutants in Europe and North America. Farad. Discuss., 200: 475-500. Aydogan, A. and Montoya, L. 2011. Formaldehyde removal by common indoor plant species and va r ious gr owing media . Atmos. Environ., 45(16):2675-2682. Baldacci, S., Maio, S., Cerrai, S., Sarno, G., Baýz, N., Simoni, M., Annesi-Maesano, I. and Viegi, G. 2015. Allergy and asthma: Effects of the exposure to particulate matter and biological allergens. Respir. Med., 109: 1089-1104. Bandehali, S., Miri, T., Onyeaka, H. and Kumar, P. 2021. Cur r ent Sta te of Indoor Air Phytoremediation Using Potted Plants and Green Walls. Atmosphere., 12: 473-497. Barac, T., Taghavi, S., Borremans, B., Provoost, A., Oeyen, L., Colpaert, J. V., Vangronsveld, J. and van der Lelie, D. 2004. Engineered endophytic bacteria improve phytoremediation of water- soluble, vola tile, orga nic polluta nts. Nat. Biotechnol., 22:583-588. Berman, M. G., Jonides, J. and Kaplan, S. 2008. The Cognitive Benefits of Interacting With Nature. Psychol. Sci. 19:1207-1212. Bernstein, J. A., Alexis, N., Bacchus, H., Bernstein, I. L., Fritz, P., Horner, E., Li, N., Mason, S., Nel, A., Oullette, J. and Reijula, K. 2008. The health effects of nonindustrial indoor air pollution. J. Allergy Clin. Immunol.. 121(3): 585-591. Brickus, L. R., Cardoso, J. and Neto, F. R. D. A. 1998. Distributions of indoor and outdoor air pollutants in rio de janeiro, brazil: Implications to indoor air quality in bayside offices. Environ. Sci. Technol.. 32: 3485-3490. Bringel, F. and Couee, I. 2015. Pivotal roles of phyllosphere microorganisms at the interface between plant functioning and atmospheric trace gas dynamics. Front. Microbiol., 6:486. Brook, R. D., Rajagopalan, S., Pope, C. A., Brook, J. R., Bhatnagar, A., Diez-Roux, A. V., Holguin, F., Hong, Y., Luepker, R. V., Mittleman, M. A., Peters, A., Siscovick, D., Smith, S. C., Whitsel, L. and Kaufman, J. D. 2010. Particulate matter air pollution and cardiovascular disease: An update to the scientific statement from the american heart association. Circulation., 121(21): 2331-2378. Bruno, R.C. 1983. Sources of indoor radon in houses: A review. J. Air Pollut. Control Assoc., 32: 105- 109. Bulińska, A., Popiołek,  Z. and Bulińsk, Z. 2014. xper imenta lly va lida ted CFD a na lysis on sampling region determination of average indoor carbon dioxide concentration in occupied space. Build. Environ., 72: 319-331. Burns, J., Boogaard, H., Polus, S., Pfadenhauer, L. M., Rohwer, A. C., van Erp, A. M., Turley, R. and Rehfuess, E. A. 2020. Interventions to reduce ambient air pollution and their effects on health: An a br idged Cochr a ne systema tic r eview. Environ. Int., 135: 105400. Carinanos, P. and Casares-Porcel, M. 2011. Urban green zones and related pollen allergy: A review. Some guidelines for designing spaces with low allergy impact. Landsc. Urban Plan., 101: 205- 214. Chang, C. and Chen, P. 2005. Human response  to window views a nd indoor pla nts in the workplace. Hort. Science., 40: 1354-1359. Colt, J. S., Lubin, J., Camann, D., Davis, S., Cerhan, J., Severson, R. K., Cozen, W. and Hartge, P. 2004. Comparison of pesticide levels in carpet dust and self-reported pest treatment practices in four us sites. J. Expo. Anal. Environ. Epidemiol., 14: 74-83. De Kempeneer, L., Sercu, B., Vanbrabant, W., Van La ngenhove, H. a nd Ver str a ete, W. 2004. Bioaugmentation of the phyllosphere for the r emova l of toluene fr om indoor a ir. Appl. Microbiol. Biotechnol., 64: 284-288. 27. Fares, S., Paoletti, E., Loreto, F. and Brilli, F. 2015. Bidirectional flux of methyl vinyl ketone and methacrolein in trees with different isoprenoid emission under realistic ambient concentrations. Environ. Sci.Technol., 49: 7735-7742. Jhanji and Dhatt J. Hortl. Sci. Vol. 16(2) : 131-143, 2021 141 Fjeld T. 2000. The Effect of Interior Planting on Health and Discomfort among Workers and School Children. Hort. Tech. 10: 46-52. Ga wr onska , H. a nd Ba ker a , B. 2015. Phytoremediation of particulate matter from indoor air by Chlorophytum comosum L. plants. Air Qual. Atmos. Health., 8: 265-272. Gommers, C. M., Visser, E. J., St Onge, K. R., Voesenek, L. A. and Pierik, R. 2013. Shade tolerance: when growing tall is not an option. Trends Plant Sci., 18: 65-71. Hall, C. R. and Dickson, M. W. 2011. Economic, Environmental, and Health/Well-Being Benefits Associated with Green Industry Products and Services: A Review. J. Environ. Hort. 29: 96-103. Hamanaka, R. B. and Mutlu, G. M. 2018. Particulate matter air pollution: Effects on the cardiovascular system. Front. Endocrinol., 9: 680. Health Effects Institute. 2018. State of Global Air 2018. In: Health Effects Institute, Special Report, Boston, MA. Holt, E., Audy, O., Booij, P., Melymuk, L., Prokes, R. and Klá nová , J. 2017. Orga nochlor ine pesticides in the indoor air of a theatre and museum intheczech republic: Inhalation exposure and ca ncer r isk. Sci. Total Environ., 609: 598-606. Hong, S. H., Hong, J., Yu, J. and Lim, Y. 2017. Study of the removal difference in indoor particulate matter and volatile organic compounds through the application of plants. Environ. Health Toxicol., 32: 2017006. Huang, Y., Yang, Z. and Gao, Z. 2019. Contributions of indoor and outdoor sour ces to ozone in residential buildings in nanjing. Int. J. Environ. Res. Public Health., 16: 2587. Hwang, H. M., Park, E. K., Young, T. M. and Hammock, B. D. 2008. Occurrence of endocrine- disrupting chemicals in indoor dust. Sci. Total Environ., 404: 26-35. Irga, P. J., Torpy, F. R. and Burchett, M. D. 2013. Ca n hydr ocultur e be used to enha nce the performance of indoor plants for removal of air pollutants? Atmos. Environ., 77: 267-271. Kampa, M. and Castanas, E. 2008. Human health effects of air pollution. Environ. Pollut., 151: 362-367. Kaplan, R. 2001. The  nature  of  the  view  from home: P s yc hologic a l b en ef it s . E n v i ro n . Behav., 33: 507-542. Kim, K. J., Jeong, M., Lee, D. W., Song, J. S., Kim, H. D. and Yoo, E. H. 2010. Variation in formaldehyde removal efficiency among indoor plant species. Hort. Science., 45: 1485-1498. Kim, K. J., Yoo, E. H., Jeong, M. I., Song, J. S., Lee, S. Y. and Keys, S. J. 2011. Changes in the phytoremediation potential of indoor plants with exposure to toluene. Hort. Science., 46: 1646-1649. Koivisto, A. J., Kling, K. I., Hänninen, O., Jayjock, M., Löndahl, J., Wierzbicka, A., Fonseca, A.S., Uhrbrand, K., Boor, B. E., Jiménez, A. S. and Hämeri, K. 2019. Source specific exposure and risk assessment for indoor aerosols. Sci. Total Environ., 668: 13-24. Kulmala, M., Asmi, A. and Pirjola, L. 1999. Indoor air aerosol model: The effect of outdoor air, f ilt r a t io n a nd vent ila t ion on indoor concentrations. Atmos. Environ., 33: 2133- 2144. L i, S . , Tos ens , T. , H a r ley, P. C . , Jia ng, Y. , Kanagendran, A., Grosberg, M., Jaamets, K. and Niinemets, U. 2018. Glandular trichomes as a ba rr ier against a tmospher ic oxida tive stress: relationships with ozone uptake, leaf damage, and emission of LOX products across a diverse set of species. Plant Cell Environ., 41(6): 1263-1277. Liu, Y. J., Mu, Y. J., Zhu, Y. G., Ding, H. and Arnes, N. C. 2007. Which ornamental plant species effectively remove benzene from indoor air? Atm. Environ., 41: 650-654. Lohr, V. I. 2010. What are the benefits of plants indoors and why do we respond positively to them? Acta Hortic., 881: 675-682. Lohr, V. I. a nd Pea r s on-Mims, C. H. 20 00. Physica l Discomfor t Ma y Be Reduc ed In Presence of Interior Plants. Hort. Tech., 10: 53-58. Lohr, V. I., Pearson-Mims, C. H.  and Goodwin, G. K. 1996. Interior  plant  may  improve worker productivity and reduce stress in a windowless environment. J. Environ. Hort., 14: 97-100. Phytoremediation of indoor air pollutants J. Hortl. Sci. Vol. 16(2) : 131-143, 2021 142 Madany, I. M. 1994. The correlations between heavy metals in residential indoor dust and outdoor street dust in bahrain. Environ. Int., 20: 483-492. Marco, M., Seifert, B. and Lindvall, T. 1995. Indoor air quality: A comprehensive reference book. Air quality monographs. Academic Press, New York. Miller, M. R., Shaw, C. A. and Langrish, J. P. 2012. From particles to patients: Oxidative stress and the cardiovascular effects of air pollution. Future Cardiol., 8: 577-602. Oh, H. J., Jeong, N. N., Sohn, J. R. and Kim, J. 2019. Personal exposure to indoor aerosols as actual concern: Perceived indoorand outdoor air quality, and health performances. Build. Environ., 165: 106403. Oikawa, P. Y. and Lerdau, T. M. 2013. Catabolism of volatile organic compounds influences plant survival. Trends Plant Sci., 18: 695-703. Panyametheekul, S., Rattanapun, T. and Ongwandee, M. 2018. Ability of artificial and live houseplants to capture indoor particulate matter. Indoor Built Environ., 27:121-128. Perry, L. 2018. Indoor plants provide many benefits. https://www.vtcng.com/ Pettit, T., Irga, P. J. and Torpy, F. R. 2018. Towards practical indoor air phytoremediation: a review. Chemosphere., 208: 960-974. Prill, R. 2000. Why Measure Carbon Dioxide Inside Buildings? Washington State University Extension Energy Program, 07-003, pp 1–3. Rackes, A. and Waring, M. S. 2014. Using multi objective optimizations to discover dynamic building ventilation strategies that can improve indoor air quality and reduce energy use. Energy Building., 75: 272-280. Rashed, M. N. 2008. Total and extractable heavy metals in indoor, outdoor and street dust from aswan city, Egypt. Clean., 36: 850-857. Raub, J. A., Mathieu-Nolf, M., Hampson, N. B. and Thom, S. R. 2000. Carbon monoxide poisoning- A public hea lth per spective. Toxicology. , 145: 1-14. Salonen, H., Salthammer, T. and Morawska, L. 2018. Human exposure to ozone in school and office indoor envir onments. Environ. Int. , 119: 503-514. Sandhu, A., Halverson, L. and Beattie, G. A. 2007. Bacterial degradation of air borne phenol in the phyllosphere. Environ. Microbiol. 9: 383-392. Schreck, E., Foucault, Y., Sarret, G., Sobanska, S., Ce´cillon, L., Castrec-Rouelle, M., Uzu, G. and Dumat, C. 2012. Metal and metalloid foliar uptake by various plant species exposed to atmospheric industria l fallout: mechanisms involved for lead. Sci. Total Environ., 427-428: 253-262. Seow, W. J., Downward, G. S., Wei, H., Rothman, N., Reiss, B., Xu, J., Bassig, B. A., Li, J., He, J., Hosgood, H. D., Wu, G., Chapman, R. S., Tian, L., Wei, F., Caporaso, N. E., Vermeulen, R. and Lan, Q. 2016. Indoor concentrations of nitrogen dioxide and sulfur dioxide from burning solid fuels for cooking and heating in Yunnan Province, China. Indoor Air., 26(5): 776-783. Sharma, P., Tomar, P. C. and Chapadgaonkar, S. S. 2019. Phytoremediation of indoor pollution-a mini review. World J. Pharm. Res., 8(7): 2136-2143. Shinohara, N., Mizukoshi, A. and Yangisawa, Y. 2004. Identification of responsible volatile chemicals that induce hypersensitive reactions to multiple chemical sensitivity patients. J. Expo. Anal. Environ. Epidemiol., 14: 84-91. Siskos, P. A., Bouba, K. E. and Stroubou, A. P. 2001. Deter mina tion of selected polluta nts a nd measurement of physical parameters for the evaluation of indoor air quality in school building in Athens, Gr eece. Indoor Built Environ. , 10(3-4): 185-192. Smith, A. and Pitt, M. 2011. Healthy Workplaces: Plantscaping for indoor environmental quality. Facilities., 29 : 169-187. Sriprapat, W., Boraphech, P. and Thiravetyan, P. 2013. Factor affecting xylene contaminated air r emova l by the or na menta l pla nts Zamioculcaszamiifolia. Environ. Sci. Pollut. Res., 21: 2603-2610. Susanto, A. D., Winardi, W., Hidayat, M. and De Gruyter, A. W. 2021. The use of indoor plant as an alternative strategy to improve indoor air Jhanji and Dhatt J. Hortl. Sci. Vol. 16(2) : 131-143, 2021 143 quality in Indonesia.Rev. Environ. Health., 36(1): 95-99. Tang, X., Misztal, P. K., Nazaroff, W. W. and Goldstein, A. H. 2015. Siloxanes are the most abundant volatile organic compound emitted from engineering students in a classroom. Environ. Sci. Technol. Lett., 2: 303-307. Tani, A., Tobe, S. and Shimizu, S. 2009. Uptake of methacrolein and methyl vinyl ketone by tree saplings and implications for forest atmosphere. Environ. Sci.Technol., 44: 7096-7101. Teiri, H., Pourzamzni, H. and Hajizadeh, Y. 2018. Phytoremediation of formaldehyde from indoor environment by ornamental plants: an approach to promote occupant’s health. Int. J. Prev. Med., 9: 70. Toabaita, M., Vangnai, A. S. and Thiravetyan, P. 2016. Remova l of ethyl benzene fr om contaminated air by Zamioculcaszamiifolia and microorganisms associated on Z. zamiifolia leaves. Water Air Soil Pollut., 227: 1–11. United Nations. 2004. World Urbanization Prospects (the 2003 Revision). In: New Yor k, NY: Population Division, Department of Economic and Social Affairs, United Nations. Van Aken, B., Yoon, J. M. and Schnoor, J. L. 2004. Biodegradation of nitro-substituted explosives 2,4,6-trinitrotoluene, hexahydro-1,3,5-trinitro- 1,3,5-triazine, and octahydro-1,3,5,7-tetranitro- 1, 3, 5-tetr a zocine by a phytosymbiotic Methylobacterium sp. associated with poplar tissues (Populus deltoides × nigra DN34). Appl. Environ. Microbiol., 70: 508-517. Watson, A. F. R. 2013. Indoor Air Quality in Industrial Nations. Earth Systems and Environmental Sciences. Wei, X., Lyu, S., Yu, Y., Wang, Z., Liu, H., Pan, D. and Chen, J. 2017. Phylloremediation of air pollutants: Exploiting the potential of plant leaves and lea f-a ssocia ted micr obes. Front. Plant Sci., 8:1318. Weschler, C. J. and Nazaroff, W. W. 2012. Svoc exposure indoors: Fresh look at dermal pathways. Indoor Air., 22: 356-377. Wolverton, B. C., Johnson, A. and Bounds, K. 1989. Interior landscape plants for indoor air pollution abatement. In: Plants for clear air council, NASA, Stennis Space Center, Mitchellville, Marryland. Wood, R. A., Burchett, M. D., Alquezar, R., Orwell, R. L., Tarran, J. and Torpy, F. 2006. The potted- plant microcosm substantially reduces indoor air VOC pollution: I. Office field-study. Water Air Soil Pollut., 175: 163-180. Yrieix, C., Dulaurent, A., Laffargue, C., Maupetit, F., Pacary, T. and Uhde, E. 2010. Characterization of VOC and formaldehyde emissions from a wood based panel: results from an inter-laboratory comparison. Chemosphere., 79(4): 414-419. Zabiegala, B. 2006. Organic compounds in indoor environments. Polish J. Environ. Stud., 15: 383- 393. Zhai, Z. 2016. Breathing wall: concept and thermal performance. Cityscape., 18: 183-188. Phytoremediation of indoor air pollutants J. Hortl. Sci. Vol. 16(2) : 131-143, 2021 (Received on 02.06.2021, Revised on 20.07.2021 and Accepted on 30.07.2021) 00 Contents.pdf 01 Shalini.pdf 19 Lamesssa.pdf 20 Divya.pdf 21 Wani.pdf 23 Index and Last Pages.pdf