4.6 Article

Biomarkers responses in Manila clam, Ruditapes philippinarum after single and combined exposure to mercury and benzo[a]pyrene

出版社

ELSEVIER SCIENCE INC
DOI: 10.1016/j.cbpc.2019.02.010

关键词

Ruditapes philippinarum; Mercury; Benzo[a]pyrene; Physiological and biochemical biomarkers; IBR value

资金

  1. National Natural Science Foundation of China [41761134052, 41676147]
  2. Qingdao National Laboratory for Marine Science and Technology [QNLM201707]
  3. China Postdoctoral Science Foundation [2018M642728]
  4. Modern Agroindustry Technology Research System [CARS-49]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Physiological and biochemical responses in bivalves exposed to pollutants have proved a valuable tool to assess the health of organisms in aquatic ecosystems. The single and combined effects of mercury (Hg2+, 2 and 10 mu g/L) and benzo[a] pyrene (BaP, 3 mu g/L) on physiological and biochemical biomarkers in Manila clam, Ruditapes philippinarum were evaluated. Results showed that significant higher oxygen consumption (OR) and ammonia-N excretion rates (NR) together with significant lower ingestion rates (IR) were observed for the 10 mu g/L Hg2+ or 3 mu g/L BaP treatments compared to controls (P < 0.05). However, clam NR decreased significantly in response to the binary mixtures of 10 mu g/L Hg2+ and 3 mu g/L BaP (P < 0.05). Moreover, the levels of superoxide dismutase (SOD), catalase (CAT), glutathione-s-transferases (GSTs), glutathione (GSH), acetylcholinesterase (AChE) and malondialdehyde (MDA) in the hepatopancreas of clams were induced substantially, whereas glycogen (GLY) contents were suppressed dramatically after Hg2+ and BaP exposure. Additionally, the integrated biomarker response (IBR) values measured showed significant increases in combination treatments and they were much higher than that in the Hg2+ treatment. This study will provide further information on the defense mechanism in the Manila clam after exposure to marine pollutants and may help evaluate the quality of the aquatic environment.

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

4.6
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