4.7 Article

Comparisons of PAH-induced immunomodulation in three bivalve molluscs

Journal

AQUATIC TOXICOLOGY
Volume 65, Issue 1, Pages 13-25

Publisher

ELSEVIER SCIENCE BV
DOI: 10.1016/S0166-445X(03)00098-5

Keywords

immunotoxicology; PAH; bivalve; Mytilus; haemocyte

Ask authors/readers for more resources

There is growing evidence that contaminants may be partly responsible for the observed increase in disease in marine organisms by adversely affecting their immunity. Bivalve molluscs are common sentinels used in invertebrate immunotoxicology, however, to date, studies have been restricted to a few resilient species. This present study is a comparative investigation into the effects of the polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbon, phenanthrene, on the immuno-competence of three bivalve species. The commonly-studied marine mussel, Mytilus edulis. was compared with two species that have never been studied with respect to immunomodulation, namely. the edible cockle, Cerastoderma edule and the razor shell, Ensis siliqua. Animals were exposed to a range of phenanthrene concentrations (50, 100. 200 or 400 mug 1(-1)) and haemocyte immune parameters, including haemocyte counts, phagocytosis, superoxide generation, lysosomal enzymes and lectin-binding, were monitored. Aims were not only to extend existing knowledge of bivalve immunotoxicology, but also to establish whether contaminant-induced immunomodulation in the sentinel species. M. edulis, is comparable to that observed in other bivalves. Results showed that the immune response of the three species was differentially affected by phenanthrene exposure, with immunomodulation in M. edulis not reflecting the immunological changes observed in the other two species. This suggests M. edulis may not be a suitable sentinel bivalve, and that other species, such as C edule, may more accurately reflect the general immunological response of this group of marine animals. (C) 2003 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