4.8 Article

Pollution biomarkers in two estuarine invertebrates, Nereis diversicolor and Scrobicularia plana, from a Marsh ecosystem in SW Spain

期刊

ENVIRONMENT INTERNATIONAL
卷 35, 期 3, 页码 523-531

出版社

PERGAMON-ELSEVIER SCIENCE LTD
DOI: 10.1016/j.envint.2008.09.013

关键词

Nereis diversicolor; Scrobicularia plana; Biomarkers; Marsh areas

资金

  1. Consejeria Medio Ambiente (Junta de Andalucia)

向作者/读者索取更多资源

The polychaete worm Nereis diversicolor and the clam Scrobicularia Plana were collected from several sites, affected by different types of contamination, in a littoral enclosure in the SW Spain (Cano Sancti-Petri and Rio San Pedro). N. diversicolor was present in 6 sampling sites whereas S. Plana in 4 of them. The aim of our study was to relate several pollution biomarkers to chemical sources (metals and organic pollutants e.g. PCB, PAH) in these species, thereby confirming their adequacy as sentinels for this habitat. The biomarkers surveyed in the two invertebrates were the activities of the antioxidant enzyme catalase (CAT), the phase II detoxifying enzyme glutathione S-transferase (GST) and the neurotoxicity marker acetylcholinesterase (AChE). Metallothionein (MT) levels were measured as a biomarker of exposure to metals. The results suggested a different response in the two sediment-dwelling organisms, the sediment-eating polychaete and the water-filtering clam. probably as a consequence of different contamination exposures. The results also suggested that samples from the Cano Sancti-Petri were exposed to biologically active compounds that altered some of their biochemical responses. Of all the biomarkers tested, AChE was the most sensitive one and N. diversicolor the potentially most robust sentinel in this ecosystem. In this low to moderately polluted environment, the biochemical approach better reflected temporal trends than site-related differences although it was also able to detect punctual chemical insults. (C) 2008 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.8
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据