4.7 Article

Energy reserves and respiration rate in the earthworm Eisenia andrei after exposure to zinc in nanoparticle or ionic form

期刊

ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCE AND POLLUTION RESEARCH
卷 26, 期 24, 页码 24933-24945

出版社

SPRINGER HEIDELBERG
DOI: 10.1007/s11356-019-05753-3

关键词

Energy budget; Zinc; Nanoparticle; Soil; Earthworm; Metabolism

资金

  1. National Science Centre, Poland, project PRELUDIUM [2015/17/N/NZ8/01576]
  2. European Regional Development Fund [POIG.02.01.00-12-023/08]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

The energy budget is an indicator of an organism's overall condition. Changes in energy reserves and/or energy consumption have been used as biomarkers of toxic stress. To understand the effects of different forms and concentrations of Zn and the costs of effective Zn regulation by the earthworm Eisenia andrei, we performed a toxicokinetic experiment in which individuals were sampled over time to determine the available energy reserves (total carbohydrate, protein, and lipid content), energy consumption (measured at the cellular level and as the whole-animal respiration rate), and internal Zn concentration. The earthworms were exposed to ZnCl2 or zinc nanoparticles (ZnO-NPs) in Lufa 2.2 soil for 21 days (contamination phase), followed by 14 days of elimination in clean soil (decontamination phase). Carbohydrates were the only energy reserves with significantly lower levels following ZnO-NP 1000 treatment than following other treatments (p <= 0.00001) in the contamination phase. The total available energy reserves and protein content did not differ among treatments, but a significant effect of exposure time was observed (p <= 0.0001). Exposure to Zn (both ions and NPs) increased energy consumption at the cellular level, reflecting the high energy demand of the stress response. The results indicated that E. andrei can regulate internal Zn concentrations efficiently, regardless of form or concentration, without considerable impact on energy reserves or respiration rate.

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