4.8 Article

Influence of Prey Type on Nickel and Thallium Assimilation, Subcellular Distribution and Effects in Juvenile Fathead Minnows (Pimephales promelas)

Journal

ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCE & TECHNOLOGY
Volume 43, Issue 22, Pages 8665-8670

Publisher

AMER CHEMICAL SOC
DOI: 10.1021/es901929m

Keywords

-

Funding

  1. Metals in the Human Environment Strategic Network (MITHE-SN)

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Because fish take up metals from prey, it is important to measure factors controlling metal transfer between these trophic levels so as to explain metal bioaccumulation and effects in fish. To achieve this, we exposed two types of invertebrates, an oligochaete (Tubifex tubifex) and a crustacean (Daphnia magna), to environmentally relevant concentrations of two important contaminants, nickel (Ni) and thallium (TI), and fed these prey to juvenile fathead minnows (Pimephales promelas). We then measured the assimilation efficiency (AE), subcellular distribution and effects of these metals in fish. Fish assimilated dietary TI more efficiently from D. magna than from T tubifex, and more efficiently than Ni, regardless of prey type. However, the proportion of metal bound to prey subcellular fractions that are likely to be trophically available (TAM) had no significant influence on the efficiency with which fish assimilated Ni or TI. In fish, the majority of their Ni and TI was bound to subcellular fractions that are purportedly detoxified, and prey type had a significant influence on the proportion of detoxified Ni and TI in fish. We measured higher activities of cytochrome C oxidase and glutathione S-transferase in fish fed D. magna compared to fish fed T tubifex, regardless of the presence or absence of Ni or TI in prey. However, we measured decreased activities of glutathione S-transferase and nucleoside diphosphate kinase in fish fed Tl-contaminated D. magna compared to fish from the three other treatment levels.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.8
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available