Animal cells and systems

The Korean Society for Integrative Biology (한국통합생물학회)
권호 표지
DOI QR코드

DOI QR Code

New ecological health assessment approaches of an urban stream using molecular and physiological level biomarkers and bioindicators

  • Kim, Ja-Hyun (Environmental Toxicology Research Center, Korea Institute of Toxicology) ;
  • Yeom, Dong-Hyuk (Environmental Toxicology Research Center, Korea Institute of Toxicology) ;
  • Kim, Joon-Ha (Department of Environmental Science and Engineering, Gwangju Institute of Science and Technology) ;
  • An, Kwang-Guk (School of Bioscience and Biotechnology, Chungnam National University)
  • Received : 2011.09.20
  • Accepted : 2012.12.23
  • Published : 2012.08.31
Download PDF
⟨ Previous Next ⟩

Abstract

This study evaluated ecological health, using various biomarkers and bioindicators, of pale chub (Zacco platypus) as a sentinel species, in Daejeon Stream, South Korea, during AprilMay 2011. The biomarkers and bioindicators were compared among three sites of control: Reference ($C_z$), transition ($T_z$), and the urban zones ($U_z$); and the 7-Ethoxyresorufin-O-deethylase (EROD) activity, DNA damage, acetylcholinesterase (AChE) activity, and vitellogenin (VTG) concentrations were more significantly increased in the $U_z$ than in the $C_z$. Also, physiological markers such as condition factor, liver somatic index, visceral somatic index, and gonad somatic index were significantly increased in the $U_z$ than in the $C_z$. For the health assessments, three categorized parameters of blood chemistry, molecular biomarkers, and physiological bioindicators were standardized and calculated as a star-plot, representing values of Integrated Health Response (IHR). Values of IHR had more significant (P<0.05) increases in the $U_z$ than any other zones, indicating an impairment of ecological health by organic matter, nutrients (N, P), and toxic chemicals. This study is based on low levels of biological organization approach of molecular and physiological biomarkers and bioindicators, so further study of high-levels of biological organization approach such as community and population is required for overall range of health assessments. The approach of IHR values, however, may be useful in providing early warning of future impacts on ecological health.

Keywords

References

  1. Adams SM, Greeley MS. 2000. Ecotoxicological indicators of water quality: using multi-response indicators to assess the health of aquatic ecosystems. Water Air Soil Pollut. 123:103-115. https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1005217622959
  2. Adams SM, Ham KD, Greeley MS, LeHew RF, Hinton DE, Saylor CF. 1996. Downstream gradients in bioindicator response: point source contaminant effects on fish health. Can J Fish Aquat Sci. 53:2177-2187. https://doi.org/10.1139/f96-191
  3. Adams SM, McLean RB. 1985. Estimation of largemouth bass, Micropterus salmoides Lacepede, growth using the liver somatic index and physiological variables. J Fish Biol. 26:111-126. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1095-8649.1985.tb04248.x
  4. Barbour MT, Gerritsen J, Snyder BD, Stribling JB. 1999. Rapid bioassessment protocols for use in streams and wadeable rivers: periphyton, benthic macroinvertebrates and fish. 2nd ed. EPA 841-B-99-002. Washington (DC): U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Office of Water.
  5. Beliaeff B, Burgeot T. 2002. Integrated biomarker response: a useful tool for ecological risk assessment. Environ Toxicol Chem. 21:1316-1322. https://doi.org/10.1002/etc.5620210629
  6. Busacker GP, Adelman IR, Goolish EM. 1990. Growth. In: Schreck CB, Moyle PB, editors, Methods for fish biology. Bethesda (MD): American Fisheries Society, Chapter 11, p. 363-387.
  7. Cho HJ, Lee BH, Lee KB. 2000. A study on the characteristics of benthic sediments in an urban river. Korean J Civil Engineers. 20:607-618.
  8. Finkenbine JK, Atwater JW, Mavinic DS. 2000. Stream health after urbanization. Am Water Res Assoc. 36:1149-1160. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1752-1688.2000.tb05717.x
  9. Folmar LC, Gardner GR, Hinckey J, Bonomelli S, Moody T. 1993. Serum chemistry and histopathological evaluations of brown bullheads (Ameiurus nebulosus) from the Buffalo and Niagara Rivers, New York. Arch Environ Contam Toxicol. 25:298-303. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF00210721
  10. Gestel CAM, Brummelen TC. 1996. Incorporation of the biomarkers concept in ecotoxicology calls for a redefinition of terms. Ecotoxicology. 5:217-225. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF00118992
  11. Jung JH, Kim DJ, Han CH. 2004. Rockfish (Sebastes schlegeli) vitellogenin purification, characterization and development of sandwich ELISA system. Korean J Fish Sci Technol. 7:99-108.
  12. Jung JH, Kim SJ, Lee TK, Shim WJ, Woo SN, Kim DJ, Han CH. 2008. Biomarker responses in caged rockfish (Sebastes schlegeli) from Masan bay and Haegeumgang, South Korea. Mar Pollut Bull. 57:599-606. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.marpolbul.2007.12.006
  13. Karr JR, Chu EW. 2000. Sustaining living rivers. Hydrobiologia. 422/423:1-14. https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1017097611303
  14. Kennedy SW, Jones SP. 1994. Simultaneous measurement of cytochrome P4501A catalytic activity and total protein concentration with a fluorescence plate reader. Anal Biochem. 222:217-223. https://doi.org/10.1006/abio.1994.1476
  15. Kim KW, Lee HK. 1996. Heavy metal contamination of stream water and sediment in the Taejon Area. Korean J Geosys Eng. 33:266-273.
  16. Kim WK, Lee SK, Jung JH. 2010. Integrated assessment of biomarker responses in common carp (Cyprinus carpio) exposed to perfluorinated organic compounds. J Hazard Mater. 180:395-400. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jhazmat.2010.04.044
  17. Kim GB, Lee RF, Mitchell DL. 2000. Damage to grass shrimp (Palaemonetes pugio) embryo DNA by summer sunlight followed by DNA repair in the dark. Mar Biol. 137:675-682. https://doi.org/10.1007/s002270000371
  18. Kim JH, Yeom DH. 2009. Population response of Pale Chub (Zacco platypus) exposed to wastewater effluents in Gap Stream. Toxicol Environ Health Sci. 1:169-175. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF03216481
  19. Lam PKS, Gray JS. 2003. The use of biomarkers in environmental monitoring programmes. Mar Pollut Bull. 46:182-186. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0025-326X(02)00449-6
  20. Meyer JL, Paul MJ, Taulbee WK. 2005. Stream ecosystem function in urbanizing landscapes. J N Am Benthol Soc. 24:602-612. https://doi.org/10.1899/04-021.1
  21. Miserendino ML, Brand C, Di Prinzio CY. 2008. Assessing urban impacts on water quality, benthic communities and fish in streams of the Andes Mountains, Patagonia (Argentina). Water Air Soil Pollut. 194:91-110. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11270-008-9701-4
  22. Nolan PA, Guthrie N. 1998. River rehabilitation in an urban environment: examples from the Mersey basin, North West England. Aqua Conserv Mar Freshw Ecosystem. 8:685-700. https://doi.org/10.1002/(SICI)1099-0755(199809/10)8:5<685::AID-AQC308>3.0.CO;2-9
  23. Peakall DW, Walker CH. 1994. The role of biomarkers in environmental assessment. Ecotoxicology. 3:173-179. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF00117082
  24. Richard FL, Steinert S. 2003. Use of the single cell gel electrophoresis/comet assay for detecting DNA damage in aquatic (marine and freshwater) animals. Mutat Res. 544:43-64. https://doi.org/10.1016/S1383-5742(03)00017-6
  25. Singh NP, McCoy MT, Tice RR, Schneider EL. 1988. A simple technique for quantification of low levels of DNA damage in individual cells. Exp Cell Res. 175:184-191. https://doi.org/10.1016/0014-4827(88)90265-0
  26. Sturm A, Radau TS, Hahn T, Schulz R. 2007. Inhibition of rainbow trout acetylcholinesterase by aqueous and suspended particle-associated organophosphorous insecticides. Chemosphere. 68:605-612. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chemosphere.2007.02.056
  27. SYSTAT. 2004. SYSTAT Software 11.0 K. Richmond,CA: SYSTAT Software.
  28. Triebskorn R, Bohmer J, Braunbeck T, Honnen W, Kohler HR, Lehmann R, Oberemm A, Schwaiger J, Segner H, Schuurmann G, et al. 2001. The project VALIMAR (VALIdation of bioMARkers for the assessment of small stream pollution): objectives, experimental design, summary of results, and recommendations for the application of biomarkers in risk assessment. J Aqua Ecosystem Stress Recov. 8:161-178. https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1012902209178
  29. USGS (U.S. Geological Survey). 2000. Biomonitoring of environmental status and trends (BEST) program: selected methods for monitoring chemical contaminants and their effects in aquatic ecosystems, UITR-2000-0005, Information and Technology Report, Columbia.
  30. Yeom DH, Chung KH, Kim YH, Adams SM. 2009. Ecological health and causal assessment of fish communities experiencing multiple stressors in Gap Stream, South Korea. Toxicol Environ Health Sci. 1:97-108. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF03216470

Cited by

  1. Use of the Integrated Biomarker Response to Measure the Effect of Short-term Exposure to Dibenz[a,h]anthracene in Common carp (Cyprinus carpio) vol.96, pp.4, 2012, https://doi.org/10.1007/s00128-015-1726-y
  2. Regional Ecological Health or Risk Assessments of Stream Ecosystems Using Biomarkers and Bioindicators of Target Species (Pale Chub) vol.227, pp.12, 2016, https://doi.org/10.1007/s11270-016-3173-8