4.8 Article

Benzo(a)pyrene Metabolism and EROD and GST Biotransformation Activity in the Liver of Red- and White-Blooded Antarctic Fish

期刊

ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCE & TECHNOLOGY
卷 49, 期 13, 页码 8022-8032

出版社

AMER CHEMICAL SOC
DOI: 10.1021/acs.est.5b00176

关键词

-

资金

  1. Swiss National Science Foundation [SNSF 31003A_149964/1]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Climate change and anthropogenic pollution are of increasing concern in remote areas such as Antarctica. The evolutionary adaptation of Antarctic notothenioid fish to the cold and stable Southern Ocean led to a low plasticity of their physiological functions, what may limit their capacity to deal with altered temperature regimes and pollution in the Antarctic environment. Using a biochemical approach, we aimed to asSess the hepatic biotransformation capacities of Antarctic fish species by determining (i) the activities of ethoxyresorufin-O-deethylase (EROD) and glutathione-S-transferase (GST), and (ii) the metabolic clearance of benzo(alpha)pyrene by hepatic S9 supernatants. In addition, we determined the thermal sensitivity of the xenobiotic biotransformation enzymes. We investigated the xenobiotic metabolism of the red-blooded Gobionotothen gibberifrons and Notothenia rossii, the hemoglobin-less Chaenocephalus aceratus and Champsocephalus gunnari, and the rainbow trout Oncorhynchus mykiss as a reference. Our results revealed similar metabolic enzyme activities and metabolic clearance rates between red- and white-blooded Antarctic fish, but significantly lower rates in comparison to rainbow trout. Therefore, bioaccumulation factors for metabolizable lipophilic contaminants may be higher in Antarctic than in temperate fish. Likewise, the thermal adaptive capacities and flexibilities of the EROD and GST activities in Antarctic fish were significantly lower than in rainbow trout. As a consequence, increasing water temperatures in the Southern Ocean will additionally compromise the already low detoxification capacities of Antarctic fish.

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

4.8
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