4.4 Article

Genetic, Biochemical, and Individual Responses of the Teleost Fish Carassius auratus to Uranium

Journal

Publisher

SPRINGER
DOI: 10.1007/s00244-009-9432-6

Keywords

-

Funding

  1. Portuguese Government [POCI/AMB/60899/2004]
  2. European Social Fund
  3. Foundation for Science and Technology, Portugal [SFRH/BD/370072007]
  4. Fundação para a Ciência e a Tecnologia [POCI/AMB/60899/2004] Funding Source: FCT

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Carassius auratus were exposed for 96 h to different concentrations of uranyl nitrate (corresponding to 0, 100, 450, and 2,025 mu g U L-1) and killed after different postexposure periods (0, 48, and 96 h) to assess uranium bioaccumulation, peroxisome proliferation (catalase [CAT]), lipid peroxidation (thiobarbituric acid reactive substances [TBARS]), and DNA integrity in erythrocytes (comet assay). In addition, feeding behaviour was recorded as a general response to toxicant exposure. Results provided evidence of uranium bioaccumulation in muscle of C. auratus after exposure to the highest concentrations (450 and 2,025 mu g U L-1). This tissue was able to depurate uranium to control levels 96 h after exposure ceased. However, no perturbations in feeding behaviour or cell damage were observed in the tested organisms, except for the apparent irreversible inhibition of CAT activity immediately after exposure in the highest concentration tested. Data on DNA integrity (comets) showed that waterborne uranium exposure was able to induce genotoxicity in C. auratus erythrocytes because fish exposed to all concentrations exhibited higher DNA damage than controls 96 h after exposure. No DNA damage repair was apparent throughout the postexposure period, which was contrary to a recovery scenario. This experiment provides evidence of uranium's ability to induce physiologic impairment and genotoxicity in freshwater fish at environmentally relevant concentrations.

Authors

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

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.4
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available