4.7 Article

Sertraline accumulation and effects in the estuarine decapod Carcinus maenas: Importance of the history of exposure to chemical stress

期刊

JOURNAL OF HAZARDOUS MATERIALS
卷 283, 期 -, 页码 350-358

出版社

ELSEVIER SCIENCE BV
DOI: 10.1016/j.jhazmat.2014.08.035

关键词

Bioaccumulation; Cholinergic neurotransmission; Oxidative stress; Exposure history; Risk assessment; Invertebrates

资金

  1. FCT/MCTES (PIDDAC)

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Sertraline is widely prescribed worldwide and frequently detected in aquatic systems. There is, however, a remarkable gap of information on its potential impact on estuarine and coastal invertebrates. This study investigated sertraline accumulation and effects in Carcinus maenas. Crabs from a moderately contaminated (Lima) and a low-impacted (Minho) estuary were exposed to environmental and high levels of sertraline (0.05, 5, 500 mu g L-1). A battery of biomarkers related to sertraline mode of action was employed to assess neurotransmission, energy metabolism, biotransformation and oxidative stress pathways. After a seven-day exposure, sertraline accumulation in crabs' soft tissues was found in Lima (5 mu g L-1:15.3 ng L-1 ww; 500 mu g L-1: 1010 ng L-1 ww) and Minho (500 mu g L-1: 605 ng L-1 ww) animals. Lima crabs were also more sensitive to sertraline than those from Minho, exhibiting decreased acetylcholinesterase activity, indicative of ventilatory and locomotory dysfunction, inhibition of antioxidant enzymes and increased oxidative damage at >= 0.05 mu g L-1. The Integrated Biomarker Response (IBR) index indicated their low health status. In addition, Minho crabs showed non-monotonic responses of acetylcholinesterase suggestive of hormesis. The results pointed an influence of the exposure history on differential sensitivity to sertraline and the need to perform evaluations with site-specific ecological receptors to increase relevance of risk estimations when extrapolating from laboratory to field conditions. (C) 2014 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