4.7 Article

DNA damage in Gammarus fossarum sperm as a biomarker of genotoxic pressure: intrinsic variability and reference level

Journal

SCIENCE OF THE TOTAL ENVIRONMENT
Volume 409, Issue 17, Pages 3230-3236

Publisher

ELSEVIER SCIENCE BV
DOI: 10.1016/j.scitotenv.2011.05.012

Keywords

Comet assay; Gammarus fossarum; Biomarker; Intrinsic variability; Reference value; Biomonitoring

Funding

  1. Cluster Environnement Region Rhone-Alpes
  2. National Research Project [ANR 08-CES-014 RESYST]

Ask authors/readers for more resources

In the perspective of a biomonitoring application for assessing genotoxicity of freshwater ecosystems, the Comet assay has recently been developed on spermatozoa in the amphipod Gammarus fossarum, in order to propose a sensitive and reliable genotoxicity biomarker in an ecologically relevant freshwater species. The appropriate use of a genotoxicity biomarker requires good knowledge of its basal level and its natural variability related to intrinsic biotic and environmental abiotic factors. We propose a procedure for which the lowest biomarker variability related to methodological and intrinsic biotic factors is obtained and a reference value of biomarker basal response taking into account its spatio-temporal changes has been defined. A strong impact of spermatogenesis status and exposure time on the response to genotoxicant pressure was observed. These reports led us to select a standard organism, i.e., the mature male gammarid in precopula. No effect of temperature and conductivity on baseline DNA damage was observed in the laboratory for the tested range (6-24 degrees C and 300/600 mu S cm(-1)). Similarly, no spatio-temporal change relative to season or the physicochemical characteristics of the water was recorded during the field survey. On the basis of these results, a reference level with maximal threshold values has been proposed for the standard gammarid. (C) 2011 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.

Authors

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

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.7
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available