| Literature DB >> 26473892 |
Luís André Mendes1,2, Vera L Maria3, Janeck J Scott-Fordsmand2, Mónica J B Amorim4.
Abstract
The effects of nanomaterials have been primarily assessed based on standard ecotoxicity guidelines. However, by adapting alternative measures the information gained could be enhanced considerably, e.g., studies should focus on more mechanistic approaches. Here, the environmental risk posed by the presence of silver nanoparticles (Ag NM300K) in soil was investigated, anchoring population and cellular level effects, i.e., survival, reproduction (28 days) and oxidative stress markers (0, 2, 4, 6, 10 days). The standard species Folsomia candida was used. Measured markers included catalase (CAT), glutathione reductase (GR), glutathione S-transferase (GST), total glutathione (TG), metallothionein (MT) and lipid peroxidation (LPO). Results showed that AgNO₃ was more toxic than AgNPs at the population level: reproduction EC₂₀ and EC₅₀ was ca. 2 and 4 times lower, respectively. At the cellular level Correspondence Analysis showed a clear separation between AgNO₃ and AgNP throughout time. Results showed differences in the mechanisms, indicating a combined effect of released Ag⁺ (MT and GST) and of AgNPs (CAT, GR, TG, LPO). Hence, clear advantages from mechanistic approaches are shown, but also that time is of importance when measuring such responses.Entities:
Keywords: antioxidant defenses; mechanisms of response; soil invertebrates.
Mesh:
Substances:
Year: 2015 PMID: 26473892 PMCID: PMC4626984 DOI: 10.3390/ijerph121012530
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Int J Environ Res Public Health ISSN: 1660-4601 Impact factor: 3.390
Figure 1Survival (number of adults) and reproduction (number of juveniles) for Folsomia candida when exposed in LUFA 2.2 soil to (A) AgNO3 and (B) Ag NM300K. Results are expressed as average ± standard error (Av ± SE) (n = 4). *: Dunnett’s (p < 0.05) for differences between control and treatments. Lines represent the model fit to data.
Effect Concentrations (ECx) for survival and reproduction of Folsomia candida when exposed to AgNO3 and AgNPs (Ag NM300K). n.d.: not determined. n.e.: no effect (95% Confidence Intervals). EC10, 20, 50, 80: Concentration that causes 10%, 20%, 50%, 80% Effect, respectively. S: relative slope estimated at EC50, Y0: Average control value (average of control values for survival and reproduction).
| Test Materials | EC10 (mg/kg) | EC20 (mg/kg) | EC50 (mg/kg) | EC80 (mg/kg) | Model and Parameters |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Survival | |||||
| AgNO3 | 82 (20–162) | 118 (62–174) | 179 (77–280) | 240 (57–422) | Logistic 2 parameters (S:0.0057; Y0:8.7) |
| Ag NM300K | n.e. | n.e. | n.e. | n.e. | – |
| Reproduction | |||||
| AgNO3 | 31 (−35–97) | 76 (36–115) | 152 (108–196) | 228 (134–324) | Logistic 2 parameters (S:0.0045; Y0:610.0) |
| Ag NM300K | n.d. | 173 (70–277) | 540 (412–667) | 906 (653–1159) | Logistic 2 parameters (S:0.0009; Y0:988.3) |
Figure 2Oxidative stress biomarker results for Folsomia candida when exposed in LUFA 2.2 soil to the reproduction EC50 of AgNO3 (black dots) and Ag NM 300K (white dots). Results are expressed as % and normalized to the respective controls (water and dispersant) mean values ± standard error (Av ± SE) (n = 5). Dotted horizontal line represents the control reference, i.e., 100%. CAT: Catalase; GR: Glutathione Reductase (GR), GST: Glutathione S-Transferase, TG: Total Glutathione; MT: Metallothionein; LPO: Lipid Peroxidation; *: Dunnett’s test (p < 0.05) for differences between control and treatments.
Figure 3Correspondence Analysis (CA) of data from Folsomia candida exposed to AgNP (Ag NM300K) [640 mg Ag/kg soil] and AgNO3 [145 mg Ag/kg soil], as sampled at 0-2-4-6-10 days, in terms of Catalase (CAT), Glutathione Peroxidase (GPx), Glutathione S-Transferase (GST), Glutathione Reductase (GR), Total Glutathione (TG), Metallothionein (MT) and Lipid Peroxidation (LPO). Percentage (%) explanatory power is added for each axis. All time points showed significant differences (discriminant analysis), the day 6 time point shows largest overlap of the two confidence ellipse, which show the difference here is the least.