OBJECTIVES: To investigate if mutagenicity could be expressed by known water pollution indicators, we determined the mutagenic activity of blue rayon extracts from sampled river water with the Ames test utilizing new strains of bacteria, and compared the results with those of known indicators of water pollution. METHODS: Water samples were collected by the blue rayon adsorption method at sixteen sites in six rivers in the North Kyushu district. The Assay of mutagenicity was carried out using the Ames test. The test strains wereSalmonella typhimurium TA100, YG1024, YG1041 and YG1042. B(a)P, Trp-P-1 and Trp-P-2 were quantified by HPLC. Determinations of SS, BOD, COD, T-N, T-P, DOC, and A(260)/DOC were performed. RESULTS: The extracts from five sampling sites showed higher mutagenicity toward strain YG1024 with or without S9mix, and the extracts from two of these five sites showed higher mutagenicity toward strain YG1041 with and without S9mix. However, the water pollution indicators did not show specific trends that were consistent with the mutagenic activity. CONCLUSIONS: Since the mutagenic activity of river water could not be predicted using known water pollution indicators, we recommend that biological examinations such as mutagenicity tests be added to the indicators that are currently in use.
OBJECTIVES: To investigate if mutagenicity could be expressed by known water pollution indicators, we determined the mutagenic activity of blue rayon extracts from sampled river water with the Ames test utilizing new strains of bacteria, and compared the results with those of known indicators of water pollution. METHODS:Water samples were collected by the blue rayon adsorption method at sixteen sites in six rivers in the North Kyushu district. The Assay of mutagenicity was carried out using the Ames test. The test strains wereSalmonella typhimurium TA100, YG1024, YG1041 and YG1042. B(a)P, Trp-P-1 and Trp-P-2 were quantified by HPLC. Determinations of SS, BOD, COD, T-N, T-P, DOC, and A(260)/DOC were performed. RESULTS: The extracts from five sampling sites showed higher mutagenicity toward strain YG1024 with or without S9mix, and the extracts from two of these five sites showed higher mutagenicity toward strain YG1041 with and without S9mix. However, the water pollution indicators did not show specific trends that were consistent with the mutagenic activity. CONCLUSIONS: Since the mutagenic activity of river water could not be predicted using known water pollution indicators, we recommend that biological examinations such as mutagenicity tests be added to the indicators that are currently in use.
Entities:
Keywords:
Ames test; YG strains; mutagenicity; river water; sewage
Authors: Grazyelle Sebrenski da Silva; Luciana Mara Lopes Fé; Maria de Nazaré Paula da Silva; Vera Maria Fonseca de Almeida E Val Journal: Genet Mol Biol Date: 2017-05-08 Impact factor: 1.771