| Literature DB >> 24285934 |
Madalena C S Scalon1, Ciliana Rechenmacher, Anna Maria Siebel, Michele L Kayser, Manoela T Rodrigues, Sharbel W Maluf, Marco Antonio S Rodrigues, Luciano Basso da Silva.
Abstract
The present study aimed to evaluate the physicochemical parameters and the genotoxic potential of water samples collected in the upper, middle, and lower courses of the Sinos River, southern Brazil. The comet assay was performed in the peripheral blood of fish Hyphessobrycon luetkenii exposed under laboratory conditions to water samples collected in summer and winter in three sampling sites of Sinos River. Water quality analysis demonstrated values above those described in Brazilian legislation in Parobé and Sapucaia do Sul sites, located in the middle and in the lower courses of the Sinos River, respectively. The Caraá site, located in the upper river reach, presented all the physicochemical parameters in accordance with the allowed limits in both sampling periods. Comet assay in fish revealed genotoxicity in water samples collected in the middle course site in summer and in the three sites in winter when compared to control group. Thus, the physicochemical parameters indicated that the water quality of the upper course complies with the limits set by the national guidelines, and the ecotoxicological assessment, however, indicated the presence of genotoxic agents. The present study highlights the importance of combining water physicochemical analysis and bioassays to river monitoring.Entities:
Mesh:
Year: 2013 PMID: 24285934 PMCID: PMC3830767 DOI: 10.1155/2013/209737
Source DB: PubMed Journal: ScientificWorldJournal ISSN: 1537-744X
Physicochemical parameters of water samples from different sites of Sinos River in the summer and winter of 2008.
| Parameter | CONAMA |
Caraá |
Parobé |
Sapucaia do Sul | |||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Summer | Winter | Summer | Winter | Summer | Winter | ||
| BOD5, mgO2 L−1 | 5.0 | <1.0 | 1 | 1 | 7* | 7* | 12* |
| COD, mgO2 L−1 | — | 8 | 2 | 10 | 7 | 15 | 34 |
| Chlorides, mg L−1 | 250 | 3.1 | 2.9 | 2.9 | 3.5 | 12.2 | 10.7 |
| Conductivity, | 100 | 32.75 | 29 | 69.05 | 68.45 | 142.85* | 119.7* |
| Hardness, mgCaCO3 L−1 | — | 7 | 13 | 22 | 29 | 31 | 42 |
| Total nitrogen, mg L−1 | — | 1.3 | <0.5 | 2.28 | <0.5 | 3.91 | <0.5 |
| Ammoniacal nitrogen, mg L−1 | 3.7 | nd | <0.5 | nd | <0.5 | 1.46 | <0.5 |
| Total phosphorus, mg L−1 | 0.1 | nd | <0.012 | 0.105* | 0.06 | 0.201* | 1.075* |
| Aluminum, mg L−1 | 0.1 | 0.05 | nd | 0.59* | 0.18* | 0.05 | 2.0* |
| Lead, mg L−1 | 0.01 | nd | nd | nd | 0.0015 | nd | 0.004 |
| Chromium, mg L−1 | 0.05 | nd | nd | nd | nd | nd | 0.04 |
| Copper, mg L−1 | 0.009 | nd | nd | 0.002 | nd | 0.004 | 0.04* |
| Nickel, mg L−1 | 0.025 | nd | nd | nd | nd | nd | 0.01 |
| Iron, mg L−1 | 0.3 | 0.08 | 0.23 | 1.93* | 0.66* | 1.13* | 6.88* |
| Zinc, mg L−1 | 0.18 | 0.01 | nd | 0.01 | nd | 0.01 | 0.08 |
| Sodium, mg L−1 | — | 5 | 5.4 | 6 | 6.9 | 13.4 | 14.1 |
| Dissolved solids, mg L−1 | 500 | 10.5 | 77 | 35.5 | 91 | 17 | 110 |
| Total solids, mg L−1 | — | 51.5 | 197 | 117.5 | 215 | 169 | 870 |
| Total volatile solids, mg L−1 | — | 34.5 | 144 | 75.5 | 133 | 105 | 227 |
| pH | 6.0 to 9.0 | 7.46 | 7.06 | 7.21 | 7.28 | 6.89 | 6.89 |
| Nitrates, mg L−1 | 10.0 | 1.09 | 0.12 | 2.83 | 1.42 | 2.18 | 1.28 |
| Nitrite, mg L−1 | 1.0 | nd | 0.003 | 0.04 | 0.04 | 0.16 | 0.12 |
| Turbidity, NTU | 100 | 0.42 | 0.02 | 17.4 | 0.9 | 12.4 | 50.5 |
| Dissolved oxygen, mg L−1 | 5.0 | 8.13 | 8.53 | 7.31 | 7.11 | 4.47* | 2.03* |
| Total coliforms, NMP/100 mL | — | 5012 | 697 | 101120 | 68930 | 56300 | 23100 |
| Fecal coliforms, NMP/100 mL | 1000 | 85 | 84 | 2690* | 8620* | 3000* | 5200* |
Values were obtained from one water sample. nd: not detected. *Values at odds with the CONAMA resolution n. 357/05 upper limits to class 2 water category [18].
Damage frequency (the sum of cells with damage classes 1 to 4, in %) and damage index estimated by the comet assay (mean ± standard deviation) in the erythrocytes of H. luetkenii exposed to water samples from the Sinos River and to tap water (control).
| Sampling site | Summer | Winter | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Damage frequency ( | Damage index | Damage frequency ( | Damage index | |
| Caraá | 50.6 ± 9.3 (12)a | 58.1 ± 14.5 | 66.3 ± 13.3 (11)a | 69.5 ± 14.2a |
| Parobé | 61.3 ± 6.3 (12)b | 64.6 ± 7.4 | 62.9 ± 16.0 (8)a | 65.3 ± 17.9a |
| Sapucaia do Sul | 53.3 ± 10.4 (12)ab | 60.8 ± 16.0 | 59.6 ± 11.5 (11)a | 62.5 ± 15.0a |
| Control | 47.1 ± 11.5 (12)a | 51.1 ± 14.2 | 40.4 ± 16.0 (8)b | 40.4 ± 16.0b |
|
| ||||
|
| 0.005 | 0.107 | 0.002 | 0.002 |
The number of fish analyzed in each sample is presented between brackets. P values referring to ANOVA between sampling sites and respective control group (a,bvalues with different letters have significant difference in the same column).