| Literature DB >> 26859569 |
Tetsuya Endo1, Osamu Kimura1, Chiho Ohta2, Nobuyuki Koga2, Yoshihisa Kato3, Yukiko Fujii4, Koichi Haraguchi4.
Abstract
We analyzed Hg, Cd, Zn, Cu and Fe concentrations in liver samples as well as the Hg concentration and stable isotope ratios of carbon and nitrogen (δ13C and δ15N) in muscle samples from silvertip sharks (Carcharhinus albimarginatus) in Japan. Muscular and hepatic Hg concentrations increased with increased body length. However, these increases were more prominent in the liver than in the muscle samples, and appeared to occur after maturation. Hepatic Zn and Cu concentrations decreased during the growth stage, and then increased concomitantly thereafter with increases in Cd burden. Hepatic Fe concentration from males increased proportionally with increases in body length, whereas no increase was observed in samples from females, probably due to the mother-to-embryo transfer of Fe. The δ13C values tended to decrease with increases in body length, whereas no decrease in the δ15N values was observed.Entities:
Mesh:
Substances:
Year: 2016 PMID: 26859569 PMCID: PMC4747518 DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0147797
Source DB: PubMed Journal: PLoS One ISSN: 1932-6203 Impact factor: 3.240
Analytical results for male and female silvertip sharks (mean ±S.D.).
| Weight | Length | Muscle | Liver | ||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| (kg) | (PCL; m) | Hg (μg/wet g) | δ15N (‰) | δ13C (‰) | Hg (μg/wet g) | Cd (μg/wet g) | Zn (μg/wet g) | Cu (μg/wet g) | Fe (μg/wet g) | HEL (%) | |
| Total | 40.3 | 1.26 | 2.04 | 10.9 | -16.2 | 3.34 | 1.26 | 8.54 | 1.71 | 31.12 | 38.1a |
| ±31.1 | ±0.32 | ±1.16 | ±0.41 | ±0.50 | ±6.56 | ±2.47 | ±4.62 | ±0.91 | ±20.59 | ±9.4 | |
| Range (n = 71) | 6–147 | 0.65–1.90 | 0.58–5.80 | 10.0–12.0 | -17.2 to -14.9 | 0.122–33.03 | 0.02–12.30 | 2.52–23.45 | 0.55–4.31 | 9.4–102 | 22.4–56.2 |
| Male | 37.6 | 1.27 | 2.24 | 10.9 | -16.2 | 2.24 | 0.82 | 8.21 | 1.46 | 36.35 | 35.3b |
| (n = 32) | ±21.7 | ±0.26 | ±1.14 | ±0.4 | ±0.5 | ±1.14 | ±1.41 | ±4.39 | ±0.37 | ±25.89 | ±8.1 |
| Female | 42.5 | 1.25 | 1.87 | 10.9 | -16.3 | 3.71 | 1.61 | 8.82 | 1.92 | 26.99 | 40.5c |
| (n = 39) | ±37.2 | ±0.36 | ±1.16 | ±0.4 | ±0.5 | ±7.96 | ±3.05 | ±4.83 | ±1.13 | ±13.88 | ±8.8 |
#Significantly different from males (P<0.05).
Numbers of samples measured HEL were 29a, 10b and 19c, respectively.
Fig 1Relationship between length (PCL) and weight in male and female silvertip sharks.
Fig 2Relationships between length (PCL) and Hg or Cd concentration in the liver of male and female silvertip sharks.
Fig 3Relationships between length (PCL) and Zn, Cu or Fe concentration in the muscle of male and female silvertip sharks.
Fig 4Relationship between Zn and Cu concentrations in the liver of silvertip sharks.
Fig 5Relationship between Zn and Cu concentrations in the liver of silvertip sharks.
Fig 6Relationships between δ15N or δ13C and metal concentrations in the liver of silvertip sharks Male (●), Female (○).
Analytical results for two silvertip shark embryo-mother pairs.
| Body length | Muscle | Liver | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| (m PCL) | Hg (μg/wet g) | δ15N (‰) | δ13C (‰) | Hg (μg/wet g) | δ15N (‰) | δ13C (‰) | |
| Pair 1 | |||||||
| Embryo | 0.40 | 0.924 | 10.6 | -15.9 | 0.101 | 12.1 | -15.1 |
| Mother | 1.90 | 3.410 | 9.9 | -17.8 | 16.08 | 10.1 | -16.9 |
| Pair 2 | |||||||
| Embryo | 0.45 | 1.160 | 13.0 | -15.8 | 0.205 | 13.4 | -14.3 |
| Mother | 1.75 | 3.080 | 10.5 | -16.6 | 5.560 | 10.1 | -16.3 |
A comparison of analytical data for silvertip sharks with those of spiny dogfish, star-spotted dogfish and tiger sharks.
| Muscle (μg/wet g) | Liver (μg/wet g) | HEL (%) | Relative liver weight (%) | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Spiny dogfish | 0.354 ± 0.312 (n = 75) a | 0.027 ± 0.019 (n = 75) a | 63.5 ± 5.40 (n = 14) b | 13.6 ± 2.2 (n = 14) b |
| male | 0.316 ± 0.202 (n = 35) a | 0.023 ± 0.012 (n = 35) a | ||
| female | 0.387 ± 0.378 (n = 40) a | 0.031 ± 0.022 (n = 40) a | ||
| Star-spotted dogfish | 0.900 ± 0.527 (n = 61) b | 1.11 ± 1.30 (n = 61) b | 22.7 ± 3.7 (n = 14) b | 6.9 ± 2.7 (n = 14) b |
| male | 1.15 ± 0.57 (n = 20) b | 1.17 ± 1.73 (n = 20) b | ||
| female | 0.776 ± 0.460 (n = 41) b | 0.607 ± 0.753 (n = 41) b | ||
| Tiger shark | 0.86 ± 0.34 (n = 112) c | 1.32 ± 2.43 (n = 114) c | 38.1 ± 9.4 (n = 12) c | 17.1 ±1.7 (n = 16) c |
| male | 0.82 ± 0.32 (n = 50) c | 1.16 ± 2.87 (n = 52) c | ||
| female | 0.89 ± 0.36 (n = 62) c | 1.46 ± 1.98 (n = 62) c | ||
| Silvertip shark | 2.04 ± 1.16 (n = 71) d | 3.34 ± 6.56 (n = 71) d | 38.1 ± 9.4 (n = 10) d | 8.5 ± 2.1 (n = 7) d |
| male | 2.24 ± 1.14 (n = 32) d | 2.24 ± 1.14 (n = 32) d | ||
| female | 1.87 ± 1.16 (n = 39) d | 3.71 ± 7.96 (n = 39) d |
The data were quoted from Endo et al. (2009)[8]a, Endo et al. (2013)[10]b, Endo et al. (2015)[9]c and the present studyd.
HEL and relative live weight were determined from combined samples from male and female sharks.
The data were shown as mean ± S.D.