4.7 Article

Oil-mediated oxidative-stress responses in a keystone zooplanktonic species, Calanus finmarchicus

期刊

SCIENCE OF THE TOTAL ENVIRONMENT
卷 806, 期 -, 页码 -

出版社

ELSEVIER
DOI: 10.1016/j.scitotenv.2021.151365

关键词

Oil spills; Sublethal effects; Zooplankton; Oxidative stress; Malondialdehyde; Glutathione S-transferase

资金

  1. European Union [679266]
  2. H2020 Societal Challenges Programme [679266] Funding Source: H2020 Societal Challenges Programme

向作者/读者索取更多资源

The copepod Calanus finmarchicus responds to deep-sea petroleum pollution mainly through lipid peroxidation, with significantly higher glutathione S-transferase activity and malondialdehyde concentrations in the exposed group compared to the control group.
The copepod Calanus finmarchicus is an ecologically important species in the North Atlantic, Norwegian and Barents seas. Accidental or continuous petroleum pollution from oil and gas production in these seas may pose a significant threat to this low trophic level keystone species. Responses related to oxidative stress, protein damage and lipid peroxidation were investigated in C. finmarchicus exposed to a water-accommodated fraction (WAF) of a naphthenic North Atlantic crude oil. The exposure concentration corresponded to 50% of the 96 h LC50, and samples were obtained at 0, 24, 48, 72 and 96 h after exposure initiation. Gene expressions (superoxide dismutase, catalase, glutathione S-transferase, glutathione synthetase, heat shock protein 70 and 90, ubiquitin and cytochrome P-450 330A1), enzyme activities (superoxide dismutase, catalase, glutathione S-transferase) and concentrations of total glutathione and malondialdehyde were analyzed. Gene expression analyses showed no differences between controls and the exposed animals, however significantly higher glutathione S-transferase activity and malondialdehyde concentrations were found in the exposed group, suggests lipid peroxidation as main toxic effect. (C) 2021 The Authors. Published by Elsevier B.V.

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