4.7 Article

Comparative toxicities of four benzophenone ultraviolet filters to two life stages of two coral species

期刊

SCIENCE OF THE TOTAL ENVIRONMENT
卷 651, 期 -, 页码 2391-2399

出版社

ELSEVIER
DOI: 10.1016/j.scitotenv.2018.10.148

关键词

Benzophenone ultraviolet filter; Scleractinia; Bioaccumulation; Biodegradation; Risk assessment

资金

  1. Research Grants Council of the Hong Kong Special Administrative Region, China [160913]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

The benzophenone (BP) organic ultraviolet (UV) filters have been measured in seawater at ng/L to mu g/L levels, but more data on their effects in non-target marine organisms are needed. Corals can be exposed to BPs due to wastewater discharges and coastal recreational activities. In this study, toxicities and bioaccumulation of BP-1 (2,4-dihydroxybenzophenone), BP-3 (oxybenzone), BP-4 (sulisobenzone) and BP-8 (dioxybenzone) to larvae and adults of two coral species, Pocillopora damicornis and Seriatopora caliendrum, were assessed at concentrations ranging from 0.1-1000 mu g/L. BP-1 and BP-8 exposure caused significant settlement failure, bleaching and mortality of S. caliendrum larvae [lowest observed effect concentration (LOEC): >= 10 mu g/L] compared to the other BPs, while none of the tested compounds and concentrations affected P. damicornis larvae. Nubbins were more sensitive to BP-3, BP-1 and BP-8 than larvae. Overall, BP-1 and BP-8 were more toxic to the two tested species than BP3 and BP-4, which matches the relative bioaccumulation potential of the four BPs (BP-8 > BP-1 approximate to BP-3 > BP-4). A conservative risk assessment using the effect concentrations derived from this study showed that BP-3, BP-1 and BP-8 pose high or medium risk to the health of corals in popular recreational areas of Taiwan and Hong Kong. Our study suggests that future ecotoxicological studies of corals should take their sensitivities, life stages and metabolic capacities into consideration. (C) 2018 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.7
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据