4.8 Article

Evaluation of genotoxic responses of Chaetoceros tenuissimus and Skeletonema costatum to water accommodated fraction of petroleum hydrocarbons as biomarker of exposure

Journal

WATER RESEARCH
Volume 44, Issue 7, Pages 2235-2244

Publisher

PERGAMON-ELSEVIER SCIENCE LTD
DOI: 10.1016/j.watres.2009.12.048

Keywords

DNA integrity; Genotoxicity; Diatom; Growth response; Petroleum hydrocarbons; DNA strand breaks; Water accommodated fraction

Funding

  1. COMAPS [GAP-0323]
  2. CSIR, New Delhi, India

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Genotoxic responses towards chronic exposure of Chaetoceros tenuissimus and Skeletonerna costatum to water accommodated fraction of petroleum hydrocarbons (WAF-P) were evaluated as biomarkers of petroleum hydrocarbons pollution. The DNA damage caused by water accommodated fraction of petroleum hydrocarbons was assessed in terms of the DNA integrity measured by alkaline unwinding assay. The comparative study of the growth pattern of C. tenuissimus with respect to DNA integrity and the DNA strand breaks in different concentrations of WAF-P showed sufficient tolerance. However, its toxicity increased proportionately with exposure to elevated levels of WAF-P. Although DNA damage in S. costatum was similar to C. tenuissimus, its tolerance level to WAF-P was at least 5 times lower than that of C. tenuissimus indicating its high sensitivity to petroleum hydrocarbons. Active growth was exhibited by C. tenuissimus between 10 and 20% WAF-P (ranging from 0.59 to 1.18 mg/L petroleum hydrocarbons) which can be related to the polluted regions only, suggesting the tolerant nature of this organism. Considering the degree of sensitivity to petroleum products and good growth under laboratory conditions, these two diatoms could be recommended as model species for evaluating ecogenotoxic effects of wide range of petroleum hydrocarbon pollutants using alkaline unwinding assays. (C) 2010 Elsevier Ltd. 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

4.8
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available