4.7 Article

Ecotoxicological evaluation of four UV filters using marine organisms from different trophic levels Isochrysis galbana, Mytilus galloprovincialis, Paracentrotus lividus, and Siriella armata

Journal

CHEMOSPHERE
Volume 104, Issue -, Pages 44-50

Publisher

PERGAMON-ELSEVIER SCIENCE LTD
DOI: 10.1016/j.chemosphere.2013.10.053

Keywords

UV filters; BP-3; BP-4; 4-MBC; EHMC; Embryo-larval bioassays

Funding

  1. Galician Government (Xunta de Galicia) [10MDS700006PR]
  2. Spanish Ministry of Education

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Due to the concern about the negative effects of exposure to sunlight, combinations of UV filters like 4-Methylbenzylidene-camphor (4-MBC), Benzophenone-3 (BP-3), Benzophenone-4 (BP-4) and 2-Ethyl-hexy1-4-methoxycinnamate (EHMC) are being introduced in all kind of cosmetic formulas. These chemicals are acquiring a concerning status due to their increasingly common use and the potential risk for the environment. The aim of this study is to assess the behaviour of these compounds in seawater, the toxicity to marine organisms from three trophic levels including autotrophs (Isochrysis galbana), herbivores (Mytilus galloprovincialis and Paracentrotus lividus) and carnivores (Siriella armata), and set a preliminary assessment of potential ecological risk of UV filters in coastal ecosystems. In general, EC50 results show that both EHMC and 4-MBC are the most toxic for our test species, followed by BP-3 and finally BP-4. The most affected species by the presence of these UV filters are the microalgae I. galbana, which showed toxicity thresholds in the range of mu g L-1 units, followed by S. armata > P. Lividus > M. galloprovincialis. The UV filter concentrations measured in the sampled beach water were in the range of tens or even hundreds of ng L-1. The resulting risk quotients showed appreciable environmental risk in coastal environments for BP-3 and 4-MBC. (c) 2013 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

4.7
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available