A sustainable L-serine-induced hydrogel with ultrafast gelation, mechanical resilience, and environmental robustness for efficient sand stabilization

Zuming Jiang*, Qi Lv, Fangjian Zhao, Binlin Pan, Yu Liu, Xinyue Song, Haonan Li and Yi Wang*
Exploration and Development Research Institute, Shengli Oilfield Company, SINOPEC, Dongying City, Shandong Province 257015, China. E-mail: jiangzuming.slyt@sinopec.com; wangyi2020@sicnu.edu.cn

First published on 5th August 2025

---

---

1 Introduction

Desertification poses a critical and escalating global environmental threat, especially in arid and semi-arid regions.^1–4 Driven by climate change and intensified by wind, water, and freeze–thaw erosion, it leads to vegetation loss, soil degradation, and ultimately ecosystem collapse.^5–7 Addressing this challenge requires effective sand stabilization strategies that not only resist erosion but also support ecological restoration. Current stabilization approaches can be broadly categorized into mechanical, biological, and chemical methods.^8–14 Mechanical stabilization involves the use of physical barriers, such as sand fences, which offer immediate but short-lived protection because of high maintenance costs, low adaptability, and burial risks. Biological stabilization relies on drought-tolerant vegetation to anchor sand, but often fails in extreme environments with limited water availability. In contrast, chemical stabilization offers significant advantages, including rapid deployment and adaptability, making it more suitable for large-scale desertification control.¹⁵

However, conventional chemical stabilizers, such as asphalt emulsions, suffer from poor durability and environmental concerns as they contain hazardous components such as heavy metals and phenols.^16–18 These materials can crack under thermal stress, hinder plant growth, and cause long-term soil contamination. To address these limitations, increasing attention has shifted toward eco-friendly alternatives derived from natural polymers, biomass, and mineral fillers.^19–22 Although these materials show promise, they often face challenges such as slow curing, insufficient toughness, or complex fabrication procedures, which reduce their field applicability.^23,24 Therefore, the development of next-generation sand stabilizers calls for a synergistic integration of fast curing, mechanical robustness, and long-term environmental adaptability under harsh field conditions. Hydrogels have recently emerged as promising candidates stemming from their inherent water retention, tunable mechanics, and environmental responsiveness.^25–30 Nonetheless, designing a single hydrogel system that achieves ultrafast in situ gelation, sustained interfacial adhesion, and tolerance to environmental extremes remains a formidable challenge. Particularly, combining mechanical toughness, flexibility, and ecological safety in a field-deployable hydrogel system is crucial for real-world desert applications.

Building on our recent advances in amino acid-mediated radical polymerization and dynamic hydrogen-bond engineering,^31,32 we herein report a biocompatible and environmentally adaptive hydrogel–based sand stabilizer composed of methoxy poly(ethylene glycol) methacrylate (PEGMA), L-serine, and glycerol—referred to as the PGL hydrogel (Scheme 1a). L-serine not only facilitates ultrafast polymerization under mild conditions by enhancing the redox initiation process, but also contributes amino, carboxyl, and hydroxyl groups that establish extensive hydrogen bonding, reinforcing the mechanical integrity and elasticity of the hydrogel network. Its amphoteric nature also imparts pH-buffering capacity, improving hydrogel stability under both acidic and alkaline conditions. Glycerol further enhances moisture retention, thermal resistance, and freeze–thaw durability through synergistic interactions with the polymer chains. When applied to desert soil analogs such as quartz sand, the PGL hydrogel precursor rapidly forms a cohesive, flexible surface layer that consolidates sand particles without inducing crusting, thereby preserving air permeability and facilitating root penetration. The resulting hydrogel-stabilized sand demonstrates high compressive strength, effective wind erosion resistance, and long-term structural stability under thermal aging, freeze–thaw cycling, and pH fluctuations. Moreover, plant cultivation experiments using mung bean and wheat confirm the hydrogel's excellent environmental compatibility, supporting robust seed germination and root development. Overall, this work presents a multifunctional, scalable, and sustainable hydrogel strategy for efficient sand stabilization and vegetation restoration in challenging environments (Scheme 1b). It addresses key limitations of traditional stabilizers and opens new avenues for eco-friendly materials in large-scale desertification control.

2 Experimental section

2.1 Materials

L-serine and potassium persulfate (KPS) were purchased from Adamas Reagent Co. Ltd, China. Methoxy poly(ethylene glycol) methacrylate (PEGMA, M_n ≈ 480) was obtained from Aladdin Reagent Co. Ltd, China. Glycerol was supplied by Chengdu Huaxia Chemical Reagent Co. Ltd, China. N,N,N′,N′-tetramethylethylenediamine (TMEDA) was sourced from Sigma-Aldrich Trading Co. Ltd, China. Quartz sand (SiO₂, 40–50 mesh) was provided from Titan Scientific Co. Ltd, China. Deionized water was prepared in-house at Shengli Oilfield Company.

2.2 Preparation of materials

Hydrogels composed of PEGMA, glycerol, and L-serine (referred to as PGL_x hydrogels, where x indicates the molar concentration of L-serine) were prepared by first dissolving PEGMA (1.0 M), varying concentrations of L-serine (0, 0.1, 0.25, and 0.5 M), and glycerol (0.5 M) in deionized water with continuous stirring to ensure homogeneity. The mixture was then deoxygenated, followed by the addition of 0.015 M KPS and 0.017 M TMEDA to initiate polymerization at room temperature. For comparison, a hydrogel lacking glycerol but containing 0.25 M L-serine was prepared using the same method and labeled as PL_0.25 hydrogel.

For soil stabilization trials, quartz sand was selected as a model substrate. Hydrogel precursor solutions of PL_0.25 (without glycerol), PGL₀ (without L-serine), and PGL_0.25 were each poured into cylindrical molds pre-filled with quartz sand using a tubular container. The mass ratio of hydrogel precursor to sand was maintained at 1:3. After complete gelation, the consolidated sand specimens were demolded and denoted as PL_0.25/SiO₂, PGL₀/SiO₂, and PGL_0.25/SiO₂, respectively.

2.3 Characterization of hydrogels

A comprehensive set of characterizations was conducted to assess gelation behavior, chemical composition, rheological properties, and thermal resilience. Gelation time was determined using the Fishe method in conjunction with the vial-inversion technique. Chemical structures were analyzed via Fourier transform infrared (FTIR) spectroscopy. Rheological properties were measured through oscillatory frequency sweep tests. Water retention capacity was quantified using gravimetric methods. Thermal transitions and decomposition behavior were studied using differential scanning calorimetry (DSC) and thermogravimetric analysis (TGA), respectively. Freeze resistance was evaluated by visual inspection following freezing at −20 °C. In addition, the swelling ratio and degradation behavior of the hydrogels were examined by immersing samples in aqueous solutions of varying pH (3–9), and monitoring their water uptake and mass retention over time. Detailed methodologies are described in the SI.

2.4 Evaluation of hydrogel–stabilized sand samples

3 Results and discussion

3.1 Design and physicochemical characterization of the PGL hydrogel–based sand stabilizer

This study designs a hydrogel–based sand stabilizer that integrates rapid gelation, mechanical toughness, and environmental adaptability. L-serine promotes the radical polymerization of PEGMA under mild conditions. After gelation, L-serine remains in the network and forms dynamic hydrogen bonds through its amino, carboxyl, and hydroxyl groups, thereby enhancing toughness. Glycerol acts synergistically with L-serine to improve water retention, freeze resistance, and thermal stability. Additionally, the amphoteric nature of L-serine contributes to structural stability under both acidic and alkaline conditions. This strategy aims to construct a sustainable and durable hydrogel system suitable for harsh desert environments.

The incorporation of L-serine markedly accelerates the gelation process of PEGMA-based hydrogels. As shown in Fig. 1a, the gelation time for PGL₀ hydrogel (without L-serine) is approximately 320 s. Upon the addition of 0.1 M L-serine, gelation is significantly shortened to ∼60 s, and further increasing the concentration to 0.5 M reduces it to ∼35 s. This acceleration is attributed to L-serine-assisted enhancement of the redox reaction between KPS and TMEDA, leading to rapid radical generation and efficient network formation. Such fast gelation is advantageous for field applications, as it minimizes infiltration into deeper soil layers and enables in situ stabilization with minimal material loss. In addition, glycerol exerts a moderating effect on the gelation rate. The gelation time of PL_0.25 hydrogel (without glycerol) is shorter than that of PGL_0.25 hydrogel (with glycerol), indicating that glycerol slightly delays the gelation process. These results highlight the tunable gelation kinetics of the system by adjusting L-serine and glycerol concentrations to meet varied application needs.

Beyond gelation kinetics, L-serine plays a critical role in reinforcing the hydrogel network. The hydroxyl, amino, and carboxyl groups in L-serine facilitate the formation of extensive dynamic hydrogen bonds, enhancing the crosslinking density and network stability. FTIR analysis reveals a progressive red shift in the –OH stretching vibration from 3393 cm⁻¹ to 3356 cm⁻¹ and the CO stretching from 1643 cm⁻¹ to 1636 cm⁻¹ with increasing L-serine content (Fig. 1b), indicating stronger hydrogen bonding interactions. Similarly, glycerol contributes to the hydrogen bonding network, as evidenced by red shifts of the corresponding peaks in the PL_0.25 hydrogel to 3380 cm⁻¹ and 1640 cm⁻¹, respectively (Fig. S1). This intensified hydrogen bonding network directly translates to improved mechanical properties. As shown in Fig. 1c, the storage modulus (G′) increases with L-serine concentration, confirming a denser and more elastic network. Notably, the PGL_0.25 hydrogel exhibits a higher G′ value than the PL_0.25 hydrogel, further supporting the synergistic role of L-serine and glycerol in strengthening the hydrogel structure.

The dense hydrogen bonding network not only improves mechanical strength but also enhances the hydrogel's water-binding capability, resulting in superior moisture retention and environmental resilience. Under conditions of 25 °C and 60% relative humidity, the residual water content after 72 h increases with L-serine concentration, with glycerol further enhancing water retention (Fig. 1d). DSC analysis reveals that the crystallization temperature of freezable water in the PGL₀ hydrogel is −7.7 °C. This value drops sharply to −20.2 °C in the PGL_0.1 hydrogel, while the PGL_0.25 and PGL_0.5 hydrogels show no apparent crystallization peak, suggesting effective inhibition of ice nucleation due to strong water-network interactions (Fig. 1e). For comparison, the PL_0.25 hydrogel exhibits a crystallization temperature of −9.3 °C, indicating that glycerol also contributes to the suppression of freezing. After storage at −20 °C for 7 days, all hydrogel samples exhibit increased G′ values due to freezing-induced hardening. However, the extent of G′ increase is significantly lower in the PGL_0.25 hydrogel than in the PGL₀ or PL_0.25 hydrogel (Fig. 1f and g), reflecting superior structural resilience against ice-induced stiffening. Optical images further confirm this trend: while the PL_0.25 hydrogel forms visible ice crystals, the PGL₀ and PGL_0.25 hydrogels remain transparent, highlighting the freeze-resistant properties of the latter.

The hydrogels also display remarkable thermal stability. After incubation at 45 °C for 7 days, all samples show increased G′ values due to water evaporation-induced hardening, but the increase is smallest for the PGL_0.25 hydrogel (Fig. 1i and j), indicating enhanced thermal tolerance. TGA results reveal negligible weight loss below 100 °C, with significant decomposition occurring only above 360 °C (Fig. 1k). Moreover, the PGL hydrogels retain their flexibility even after 72 h of thermal treatment at 100 °C, indicating excellent resistance to heat-induced aging and brittleness. Collectively, these results demonstrate that L-serine not only facilitates rapid gelation but also synergistically interacts with glycerol to construct a mechanically robust and environmentally resilient hydrogel network. The resulting PLG hydrogels exhibit superior water retention, freeze resistance, and thermal stability, making them promising candidates for high-performance, moisture-preserving sand stabilization under extreme environmental conditions.

In addition to rheological and thermal characterizations, the swelling and degradation behaviors of the PGL₀.₂₅ hydrogel are evaluated under different pH conditions to assess its environmental responsiveness (Fig. S2). In neutral conditions (pH = 7), the hydrogel rapidly swells during the first 6 days and reaches equilibrium at ∼310% by day 10 (Fig. S2a), indicating the formation of a stable and hydrated network. Across pH 3–9, it maintains high swelling capacity, with slightly higher values under acidic conditions due to protonation of L-serine amino groups that increase osmotic pressure. Degradation profiles reveal good short-term stability, with mass retention exceeding 80% at pH 7 after 15 days (Fig. S2b). As pH decreases, degradation accelerates—retention drops to ∼70% at pH 3, while remaining above 88% at pH 9—likely due to acid-induced hydrolysis and network relaxation. Despite these variations, the hydrogel retains its shape and cohesion without fragmentation, confirming its robust hydration behavior and structural durability under diverse chemical environments. These attributes support its applicability in acidic, saline, or alkaline desert soils.

3.2 Sand stabilization and wind erosion resistance of the PGL hydrogel–stabilized sand

To evaluate the practical sand stabilization performance of PGL hydrogels, quartz sand is selected as a model substrate. The PGL_0.25 hydrogel precursor solution is poured into a column mold filled with quartz sand, forming hydrogel–stabilized sand samples (PGL_0.25/SiO₂) via in situ rapid gelation. Control samples (PL_0.25/SiO₂ and PGL₀/SiO₂) are prepared using precursor solutions without glycerol or L-serine, respectively, following the same procedure. To elucidate the interaction between the precursor and sand, we characterize the surface of the quartz sand column. The moderate roughness (R_a = 2.38 μm, R_q = 3.53 μm, where R_a and R_q denote arithmetical mean and root mean square roughness, respectively) and low initial contact angle (∼31°) indicate excellent wettability (Fig. S3), which facilitates rapid infiltration and uniform adhesion of the precursor within the sand matrix (Fig. S4), supporting effective gelation and consolidation.

Compression testing reveals that the PGL_0.25/SiO₂ sample exhibits significantly higher compressive strength than the control groups (Fig. 2a), indicating enhanced interparticle cohesion. Although the compressive strength does not reach the MPa level typical of rigid sand binders, the hydrogel-stabilized layer maintains structural integrity under high stress without visible cracking (Fig. 2b), owing to the high flexibility and toughness of the PGL hydrogel network. This deformable yet cohesive structure helps avoid soil crusting—a common issue with traditional rigid binders—and promotes air permeability and root penetration, creating a more favorable environment for vegetation establishment.³⁶

SEM analysis provides direct evidence of the adhesive interaction between the PGL hydrogel and sand particles, thereby elucidating the underlying stabilization mechanism.^37,38 In the absence of hydrogel, sand particles remain loosely dispersed. In contrast, PGL_0.25 forms a continuous hydrogel network that not only physically bridges but also tightly adheres to individual sand grains, generating a stable and integrated sand matrix (Fig. 2c). This microstructural consolidation not only improves static mechanical stability but also plays a key role in resisting dynamic external forces such as wind. Wind erosion resistance is assessed using a simulated wind tunnel test. The PGL_0.25 precursor solution is sprayed onto the sand surface at a dosage of 2 kg m⁻². Rapid gelation occurs within 50 seconds, forming a uniform and dense surface layer. This rapid curing effectively prevents infiltration and concentrates the binding effect at the surface. Under simulated wind erosion conditions (wind speed: 15 m s⁻¹, wind angle: 30°), untreated sand samples are quickly blown away, whereas no noticeable particle loss is observed on the PGL-treated surfaces, demonstrating excellent wind erosion resistance and the ability to withstand wind speeds of at least 7 on the Beaufort scale (Fig. 2d).³⁹ These results collectively indicate that the PGL hydrogel establishes strong interfacial adhesion with sand particles, which is crucial for maintaining cohesion under both static and dynamic stress. Overall, the PGL hydrogel system achieves effective sand stabilization through rapid gelation, a tough hydrogen-bonded network, and strong interparticle adhesion.

3.3 Water retention and environmental stability of the PGL hydrogel–stabilized sand

Reversing desertification critically relies on sustaining moisture in arid soil surfaces, where water retention must outweigh evaporative loss. Sand stabilization materials with intrinsic water-holding capability can suppress surface evaporation, mitigate aridification, and create favorable conditions for vegetation establishment.⁴⁰ Here, the water retention performance and environmental resilience of the PGL hydrogel–based sand stabilization system are systematically investigated under thermal and freeze–thaw conditions.

To evaluate water retention, quartz sand samples are treated by spraying either distilled water or the PGL_0.25 hydrogel precursor solution at a dosage of 2 kg m⁻². After drying to constant weight, distilled water is reapplied at the same dosage, and samples are incubated at 35 °C to monitor water loss over time. As shown in Fig. 3a, untreated sand (SiO₂) loses nearly all moisture within 48 hours, whereas the PGL_0.25/SiO₂ samples retain approximately 40% of their initial water content. This enhanced retention arises from the synergistic effect of the hydrogel's abundant hydrophilic functional groups and the formation of a dense, cohesive network that anchors water molecules and reduces surface evaporation. Furthermore, the hydrogel–sand interface facilitates the formation of a continuous surface layer, effectively creating a localized microenvironment that preserves moisture.

The thermal stability of the PGL hydrogel system is assessed under simulated high-temperature conditions (45 °C). A notable reduction in mass is observed during the first two days (Fig. 3b), consistent with moisture loss confirmed by thermogravimetric analysis. This mass loss correlates with a pronounced decrease in compressive strength (Fig. 3c), suggesting that water loss compromises interparticle cohesion. However, SEM imaging reveals that after 32 days of thermal exposure, the PGL hydrogel maintains strong adhesion to sand particles without visible cracking or delamination (Fig. 3d). The sand grains remain firmly embedded within the hydrogel matrix, indicating the persistence of interfacial adhesion even under prolonged heat stress. These observations demonstrate that the hydrogel possesses excellent thermal durability. Its flexible, hydrogen-bonded network accommodates thermal stress while maintaining cohesive binding and intimate contact between hydrogel and sand, which is essential for sustaining structural integrity in hot, arid environments.

Freeze–thaw durability is further evaluated under cyclic −20 °C conditions to simulate extreme temperature fluctuations typical of desert climates. As shown in Fig. 3e and f, both mass and compressive strength decrease during the early cycles and then stabilize, indicating that gradual moisture loss leads to slight structural loosening, while the overall mechanical support remains intact. SEM analysis further shows that sand particles remain firmly embedded in the PGL_0.25/SiO₂ matrix after 32 freeze–thaw cycles (Fig. 3g), without interfacial separation or particle loss, indicating that strong adhesion is well maintained throughout the process. These results demonstrate that the hydrogel exhibits excellent resistance to freeze–thaw-induced damage, with its flexible network structure ensuring stable particle binding and overall integrity under harsh cyclic conditions. For comparison, a control group is prepared by mixing the same amount of water with quartz sand, followed by freezing and thawing before compression testing. The water-treated sample becomes highly brittle upon thawing and fractures easily under minimal pressure. In contrast, the thawed PGL_0.25/SiO₂ samples retain their form and exhibit good deformation recovery under compressive loading (Fig. 3h), highlighting their superior post-thaw mechanical resilience. This performance is attributed to the intrinsic freeze resistance and elastic recovery capability of the PGL hydrogel, as well as its strong interfacial adhesion to sand particles. The robust hydrogel–sand interface preserves structural continuity and flexibility even under repeated thermal cycling, effectively mitigating internal stress accumulation and preventing failure due to temperature fluctuations. These characteristics collectively ensure environmental robustness and make the material well-suited for sand stabilization under challenging desert conditions.

3.4 Water and pH stability of the PGL hydrogel–stabilized sand

In desert regions, annual precipitation typically remains below 250 mm—and in some areas, even less than 10 mm—yet sporadic heavy rainfall events still occur. Consequently, sand stabilization systems must demonstrate both water resistance and environmental adaptability under alternating drought and rain conditions. To evaluate these properties, the swelling behavior and structural integrity of the PGL hydrogel–stabilized sand are systematically examined under various pH environments. As shown in Fig. 4a, after immersion in neutral aqueous solution for 72 hours, the PGL_0.25/SiO₂ sample exhibits a swelling ratio of approximately 50%, with a nearly twofold volume increase that then remains stable (Fig. 4b and c). This demonstrates not only water uptake but also strong water retention, which is critical for maintaining surface moisture in arid environments. Importantly, the swelling behavior and volume change of the PGL hydrogel–stabilized sand remain consistent under acidic (pH 3, 5) and alkaline (pH 9) conditions, confirming excellent pH stability. This broad chemical tolerance renders the system suitable for applications in saline or acidified desertified soils. The pH adaptability is attributed to the zwitterionic nature of L-serine:⁴¹ under acidic conditions, the amino group neutralizes protons, while in alkaline environments, the carboxyl group interacts with hydroxide ions, thereby stabilizing the hydrogel–sand interface. Moreover, even after swelling, the hydrogel matrix continues to effectively bind sand particles, maintaining a cohesive structure (Fig. 4c). This indicates that the PGL hydrogel–stabilized sand not only responds to environmental moisture and pH variations but also preserves its mechanical cohesion and sand-fixing capability following exposure. Such a combination of responsiveness and robustness is essential for real-world applications in fluctuating desert climates. Collectively, the PGL hydrogel–stabilized sand demonstrates outstanding water resistance and pH durability, providing an effective and adaptive solution for sand fixation and ecological restoration in diverse and challenging environments.

3.5 Environmental compatibility evaluation of the PGL hydrogel–stabilized sand

Building on its rapid in situ gelation, robust mechanical performance, and strong environmental stability, the PGL hydrogel–stabilized sand is further evaluated for environmental compatibility using a plant cultivation assay. To comprehensively assess plant compatibility across different root systems, mung bean (a dicot with a taproot system) and wheat (a monocot with a fibrous root system) are selected as representative indicator species. In the experimental group, the PGL_0.25 hydrogel–stabilized quartz sand (PGL_0.25/SiO₂) serves as the planting substrate, while the control group consists of quartz sand moistened with distilled water (SiO₂). All samples are cultivated under identical light, temperature, and humidity conditions. Germination rate, shoot height, and root development are recorded to assess the substrate's ability to support seedling establishment. As shown in Fig. 5, mung bean seeds in the control group exhibit limited germination, characterized by cotyledon swelling and poor root elongation (Fig. 5a and c). In contrast, those grown on the PGL_0.25/SiO₂ substrate demonstrate significantly improved germination and root development, forming longer and thicker roots indicative of greater seed vigor (Fig. 5b and d). A similar pattern is observed for wheat: seeds on the SiO₂ samples germinate slowly, producing shallow and sparse roots (Fig. 5e and g), whereas the PGL_0.25/SiO₂ samples enable rapid germination and vertically extended, robust root systems (Fig. 5f and h). These findings highlight the multifunctional benefits of the PGL hydrogel–stabilized sand. Its rapid gelation enables efficient in situ application, forming a cohesive surface layer that retains moisture while maintaining particle integrity. The hydrogel's mechanically resilient, hydrogen-bonded network not only withstands environmental stresses—such as drying, thermal cycling, and pH fluctuations—but also preserves a porous, water-retentive matrix that is conducive to root penetration and aeration. Together, these properties create a favorable microenvironment that reduces abiotic stress and supports early-stage plant development.

Compared with the reported sand stabilizers, the PGL hydrogel system provides a rare combination of fast in situ curing, strong interfacial adhesion, excellent resistance to wind, freeze–thaw, and thermal aging, as well as demonstrated plant compatibility (Table 1). These advantages are achieved without requiring external energy input or complex fabrication steps, positioning this strategy as a promising solution for field-scale applications in harsh desert environments.

---

4 Conclusions

In summary, we present a sustainable and multifunctional hydrogel platform based on L-serine-mediated radical polymerization for efficient sand stabilization. This hydrogel combines rapid in situ gelation, mechanical resilience, and environmental adaptability within a single system. L-serine functions as a redox catalyst, accelerating polymerization under mild conditions and providing multifunctional groups that construct a dense, hydrogen-bonded polymer network with enhanced toughness. Glycerol further contributes by enhancing moisture retention and improving resistance to thermal and freeze–thaw stress. Upon application to sand, the PGL hydrogel precursor quickly cures to form a cohesive and deformable matrix that binds particles, resists wind erosion, and retains structural integrity under various environmental conditions. Moreover, the hydrogel–treated sand effectively supports the germination and root development of both dicot (mung bean) and monocot (wheat) species, validating its ecological compatibility and potential for vegetation restoration. Overall, this L-serine-guided hydrogel strategy offers a promising pathway for sustainable desertification mitigation.

Despite these advances, key challenges remain, including the high cost of functional monomers (e.g., PEGMA), limited understanding of long-term performance under natural conditions, and insufficient insights into microscale hydrogel–mineral interactions. Future work should explore cost-effective monomer substitutes, evaluate durability under realistic environmental conditions, and apply advanced interfacial characterization techniques. Developing scalable, field-deployable application strategies will also be essential to realize the full potential of this hydrogel technology for desertification control.

Author contributions

Zuming Jiang: writing – original draft, writing – review & editing, methodology, data curation, investigation, funding acquisition. Qi Lv: methodology, investigation, data curation. Fangjian Zhao: methodology, investigation. Binlin Pan: methodology, investigation. Yu Liu: methodology, investigation. Xinyue Song: software, investigation. Haonan Li: supervision, resources, investigation. Yi Wang: writing – review & editing, supervision, funding acquisition, conceptualization, project administration, resources.

Conflicts of interest

The authors declare that they have no known competing financial interests or personal relationships that could have appeared to influence the work reported in this paper.

Data availability

Data will be made available on request.

The supplementary information provides detailed methods for hydrogel characterization, including gelation time, FTIR, rheological and thermal analysis, water retention, freeze resistance, swelling behavior, and degradation tests. It also includes evaluations of hydrogel stability and environmental compatibility, such as thermal aging, freeze–thaw cycling, water/acid/base resistance, and plant growth experiments. Fig. S1–S4 present FTIR spectra, pH-responsive swelling and degradation behavior, surface roughness and wettability of quartz sand, and macroscopic images of hydrogel-infiltrated sand samples. See DOI: https://doi.org/10.1039/d5ta04592d.

Acknowledgements

This work was supported by Mount Taishan Industrial Leading Talent Project (tscx 202306048), Sinopec New Field Cultivation Project (P24016), Sinopec Forward-looking Research Project (P24185), National Natural Science Foundation of China (52203013), and Key Laboratory of the Evaluation and Monitoring of Southwest Land Resources (Ministry of Education) (TDSYS202414).

References

1. J. F. Reynolds, D. M. S. Smith, E. F. Lambin, B. L. Turner, M. Mortimore, S. P. J. Batterbury, T. E. Downing, H. Dowlatabadi, R. J. Fernández, J. E. Herrick, E. Huber-Sannwald, H. Jiang, R. Leemans, T. Lynam, F. T. Maestre, M. Ayarza and B. Walker, Science, 2007, 316, 847–851 CrossRef CAS PubMed .
2. A. Koppa, J. Keune, D. L. Schumacher, K. Michaelides, M. Singer, S. I. Seneviratne and D. G. Miralles, Science, 2024, 385, 967–972 CrossRef CAS .
3. C. E. Park, S. J. Jeong, M. Joshi, T. J. Osborn, C. H. Ho, S. Piao, D. Chen, J. Liu, H. Yang, H. Park, B. M. Kim and S. Feng, Nat. Clim. Change, 2018, 8, 70–74 CrossRef .
4. C. Li, B. Fu, S. Wang, L. C. Stringer, Y. Wang, Z. Li, Y. Liu and W. Zhou, Nat. Rev. Earth Environ., 2021, 2, 858–873 CrossRef .
5. X. R. Li, X. H. Jia and G. R. Dong, J. Arid Environ., 2006, 64, 505–522 CrossRef .
6. P. D'Odorico, L. Rosa, A. Bhattachan and G. S. Okin, in Dryland Ecohydrology, ed. P. D'Odorico, A. Porporato and C. Wilkinson Runyan, Springer, Cham, 2019, pp. 573–602 Search PubMed .
7. J. Huang, H. Yu, D. Han, G. Zhang, Y. Wei, J. Huang, L. An, X. Liu and Y. Ren, Ecol. Indic., 2020, 117, 106651 CrossRef CAS .
8. T. Wang, J. Qu and Q. Niu, Aeolian Res., 2020, 43, 100575 CrossRef .
9. E. Ahmadpoor Dehkordi, A. Abbasi Surki, M. Pajouhesh and P. Tahmasebi, Ecol. Eng., 2023, 193, 106994 CrossRef .
10. Y. Li, J. Cui, T. Zhang, T. Okuro and S. Drake, Ecol. Eng., 2009, 35, 118–127 CrossRef .
11. A. Howlader, Land Use Policy, 2023, 132, 106785 CrossRef .
12. S. Rezaeimalek, R. Nasouri, J. Huang, S. Bin-Shafique and J. Mater, Civ. Eng., 2018, 30, 04018200 Search PubMed .
13. M. Abulimiti, J. Wang, C. Li, Y. Zhang and S. Li, Environ. Technol. Innovation, 2023, 29, 102981 CrossRef .
14. Y. Tong, Y. Liu, M. Gong, Y. Xiang and G. Zhao, Appl. Surf. Sci., 2024, 650, 159205 CrossRef .
15. G. Ma, F. Ran, E. Feng, Z. Dong and Z. Lei, Water, Air, Soil Pollut., 2015, 226, 221 CrossRef .
16. J. He, Y. Liu, L. Liu, B. Yan, L. Li, H. Meng, L. Hang, Y. Qi, M. Wu and Y. Gao, Biogeotechnics, 2023, 1, 100022 CrossRef .
17. W. Gong, Y. Zang, B. Liu, H. Chen, F. Wu, R. Huang and S. Wang, J. Appl. Polym. Sci., 2016, 133, 44102 CrossRef .
18. Z. Dong, L. Wang and S. Zhao, J. Arid Environ., 2008, 72, 1388–1393 CrossRef .
19. X. Dang, H. Yuan and Z. Shan, J. Cleaner Prod., 2018, 188, 416–424 CrossRef CAS .
20. S. Lan, Q. Zhang, L. Wu, Y. Liu, D. Zhang and C. Hu, Environ. Sci. Technol., 2014, 48, 307–315 CrossRef CAS PubMed .
21. I. Chang, A. K. Prasidhi, J. Im, H. D. Shin and G. C. Cho, Geoderma, 2015, 253–254, 39–47 CrossRef CAS .
22. J. Liu, B. Shi, H. Jiang, H. Huang, G. Wang and T. Kamai, Eng. Geol., 2011, 117, 114–120 CrossRef .
23. Y. Chi, Z. Li, G. Zhang, L. Zhao, Y. Gao, D. Wang, L. Liu, D. Cai and Z. Wu, ACS Sustain. Chem. Eng., 2020, 8, 3477–3486 CrossRef CAS .
24. W. Yang and B. Liu, Ind. Crops Prod., 2025, 226, 120650 CrossRef CAS .
25. Z. Zhao, Y. Liu, K. Zhang, S. Zhuo, R. Fang, J. Zhang, L. Jiang and M. Liu, Angew. Chem., Int. Ed., 2017, 56, 13464–13469 CrossRef CAS .
26. C. Ma, Y. Wang, Z. Jiang, Z. Cao, H. Yu, G. Huang, Q. Wu, F. Ling, Z. Zhuang, H. Wang, J. Zheng and J. Wu, Chem. Eng. J., 2020, 399, 125697 Search PubMed .
27. N. Pettinelli, C. Sabando, S. Rodríguez-Llamazares, R. Bouza, J. Castaño, J. C. Valverde, R. Rubilar, M. Frizzo and G. Recio-Sánchez, Ind. Crops Prod., 2024, 222, 119759 CrossRef CAS .
28. Y. Liu, Z. Zhang, X. Yang, F. Li, Z. Liang, Y. Yong, S. Dai and Z. Li, J. Mater. Chem. A, 2023, 11, 6603–6614 RSC .
29. C. Wei, Y. Wang, Y. Liang, J. Wu, F. Li, Q. Luo, Y. Lu, C. Liu, R. Zhang, Z. Lu, B. Xu, N. Qing and L. Tang, J. Mater. Chem. A, 2024, 12, 10392–10402 RSC .
30. L. Li, P. Wu, F. Yu and J. Ma, J. Mater. Chem. A, 2022, 10, 9215–9247 RSC .
31. X. Luo, Z. Yuan, X. Xie, Y. Xie, H. Lv, J. Zhao, H. Wang, Y. Gao, L. Zhao, Y. Wang and J. Wu, Mater. Horiz., 2023, 10, 4303–4316 RSC .
32. Y. Wang, P. Pan, H. Liang, J. Zhou, C. Guo, L. Zhao and J. Wu, Biomacromolecules, 2024, 25, 819–828 CrossRef PubMed .
33. H. Meng, Y. Gao, J. He, Y. Qi and L. Hang, Geoderma, 2021, 383, 114723 CrossRef CAS .
34. C. Lo, H. K. Tirkolaei, M. Hua, I. M. De Rosa, L. Carlson, E. Kavazanjian Jr. and X. He, Geoderma, 2020, 361, 114090 CrossRef .
35. T. Kamei, A. Ahmed and T. Shibi, Cold Reg. Sci. Technol., 2012, 82, 124–129 CrossRef .
36. M. Arabani, M. M. Shalchian and A. Baghbani, J. Environ. Manage., 2024, 358, 120905 CrossRef CAS PubMed .
37. Z. Zhao, N. Hamdan, L. Shen, H. Nan, A. Almajed, E. Kavazanjian and X. He, Environ. Sci. Technol., 2016, 50, 12401–12410 CrossRef CAS .
38. Z. Song, J. Liu, Y. Wang, F. Bu, W. Che, M. Wu, Y. Zhang, Y. Feng and Z. Wang, Constr. Build. Mater., 2025, 460, 139900 CrossRef CAS .
39. K. Lemboye, A. Almajed, A. Alnuaim, M. Arab and K. Alshibli, Aeolian Res., 2021, 49, 100663 CrossRef .
40. Y. Wang, L. Chu, S. Daryanto, L. Lü, M. S. Ala and L. Wang, Sci. Total Environ., 2019, 648, 500–507 CrossRef CAS PubMed .
41. S. Fujii, M. Kido, M. Sato, Y. Higaki, T. Hirai, N. Ohta, K. Kojio and A. Takahara, Polym. Chem., 2015, 6, 7053–7059 RSC .
42. J. Yuan, Z. Pei, S. Yang, H. Yu, X. Hu and H. Liu, J. Appl. Polym. Sci., 2023, 140, e53804 CrossRef CAS .
43. T. Ren, L. Yuan, Y. Gao, C. Zhao, J. Yuan, J. Lu and X. Yuan, Int. J. Biol. Macromol., 2025, 309, 142514 CrossRef CAS .
44. B. Xu, Y. Hou, Z. Yang, J. Fang, X. Wu, J. Qi and H. Li, Int. J. Biol. Macromol., 2025, 311, 144018 CrossRef CAS PubMed .
45. J. Yang, F. Wang, L. Fang and T. Tan, Environ. Pollut., 2007, 149, 125–130 CrossRef CAS .
46. H. Xie, B. Liu, H. Chen and Q. Xu, J. Appl. Polym. Sci., 2019, 136, 47208 CrossRef .

This journal is © The Royal Society of Chemistry 2025