| Literature DB >> 27548282 |
T T Yen Le1, Milen Nachev1, Daniel Grabner1, A Jan Hendriks2, Bernd Sures1,3.
Abstract
Because of different reported effects of parasitism on the accumulation of metals in fish, it is important to consider parasites while interpreting bioaccumulation data from biomonitoring programmes. Accordingly, the first step is to take parasitism into consideration when simulating metal bioaccumulation in the fish host under laboratory conditions. In the present study, the accumulation of metals in fish-parasite systems was simulated by a one-compartment toxicokinetic model and compared to uninfected conspecifics. As such, metal accumulation in fish was assumed to result from a balance of different uptake and loss processes depending on the infection status. The uptake by parasites was considered an efflux from the fish host, similar to elimination. Physiological rate constants for the uninfected fish were parameterised based on the covalent index and the species weight while the parameterisation for the infected fish was carried out based on the reported effects of parasites on the uptake kinetics of the fish host. The model was then validated for the system of the chub Squalius cephalus and the acanthocephalan Pomphorhynchus tereticollis following 36-day exposure to waterborne Pb. The dissolved concentration of Pb in the exposure tank water fluctuated during the exposure, ranging from 40 to 120 μg/L. Generally, the present study shows that the one-compartment model can be an effective method for simulating the accumulation of metals in fish, taking into account effects of parasitism. In particular, the predicted concentrations of Cu, Fe, Zn, and Pb in the uninfected chub as well as in the infected chub and the acanthocephalans were within one order of magnitude of the measurements. The variation in the absorption efficiency and the elimination rate constant of the uninfected chub resulted in variations of about one order of magnitude in the predicted concentrations of Pb. Inclusion of further assumptions for simulating metal accumulation in the infected chub led to variations of around two orders of magnitude in the predictions. Therefore, further research is required to reduce uncertainty while characterising and parameterising the model for infected fish.Entities:
Mesh:
Substances:
Year: 2016 PMID: 27548282 PMCID: PMC4993497 DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0161091
Source DB: PubMed Journal: PLoS One ISSN: 1932-6203 Impact factor: 3.240
The number and wet weight (average ± SD) of the chub Leuciscus cephalus and the acanthocephalan Pomphorynchus tereticolis in the group investigated.
| Parameters | Control groups | Pb-exposed groups | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Uninfected | Infected | Uninfected | Infected | |||
| Number | 7 | 7 | 5.29 (± 2.21) | 7 | 7 | 5.71 (± 3.77) |
| Weight | 7.60 (± 2.41) | 10.76 (± 2.83) | 1.62 (± 1.11) | 9.86 (± 3.86) | 10.74 (± 1.64) | 1.87 (± 1.13) |
*Units of the chub and acanthocephalan weight: g and mg, respectively.
Scenarios examined for assessing sensitivity of the modelled metal concentration in the parasite-fish system.
| Parameters | Standard scenarios | Absorption-efficiency-scenarios | Elimination-rate-scenarios | ||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| S1 | S2 | A1 | A2 | B1 | B2 | C1 | C2 | D1 | D2 | ||
| Absorption efficiency | Uninfected chub | Default | Default | 2 times lower than Default | 2 times lower than Default | 2 times higher than Default | 2 times higher than Default | Default | Default | Default | Default |
| Infected chub | Act like Cd | Act like Co | Act like Cd | Act like Co | Act like Cd | Act like Co | Act like Cd | Act like Co | Act like Cd | Act like Co | |
| Elimination rate | Uninfected chub | Default | Default | Default | Default | Default | Default | 2 times lower than Default | 2 times lower than Default | 2 times higher than Default | 2 times higher than Default |
| Infected chub | Act like Cd | Act like Co | Act like Cd | Act like Co | Act like Cd | Act like Co | Act like Cd | Act like Co | Act like Cd | Act like Co | |
Fig 1Metal concentrations in the uninfected chub, the infected chub, and the acanthocephalans based on wet weight (ww) when the chub is not exposed to Pb (A) and when the chub is exposed to Pb (B).
The error bars represent the standard deviation. The slashes on the y-axis represent the breaks.
Bioconcentration factors (i.e. the ratio between the metal concentration in parasites and the concentration in the whole fish or in the muscle) for different metals found in the present study or reported in previous studies.
| Fish-parasite system | Experimental set-up | Fe | Cu | Zn | Pb | Other metals | References | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Fish | Parasite | |||||||
| Lab exposure experiment/Water | 8.58 (± 0.90) | 32.00 (± 34.23) | 3.58 (± 1.74) | 140 (± 237) | Present study | |||
| 9.07 (± 0.50) | 102.96 (± 35.25) | 10.16 (± 1.24) | 178 (± 57) | Present study | ||||
| Field sampling | 400–2700 (Cd, Pb) | Sures and Siddall [ | ||||||
| Field sampling | 0.2–600 | Thielen et al. [ | ||||||
| Field sampling | 67.7 | 10.1 | 52.1 | Brazova et al. [ | ||||
| 19.8 | 8.7 | 21.3 | ||||||
| Field sampling | 3.3. (± 2.8) | 26.0 (± 26.5) | 10.3 (± 4.7) | 337 (± 401) | Nachev et al. [ | |||
| 14.3 (± 7.7) | 122.9 (± 71.0) | 11.6 (± 6.1) | 9.4 (± 12.5) | |||||
| Laboratory exposure experiment/Dietary | 0.09 (Se) | Hursky and Pietrock [ | ||||||
| Field sampling | 27.02 (± 9.8) | 60.1 (± 5) | 33.3 (± 9) | 6.7 (± 4.3) | 185 (± 0.06) (Cd) | Mazhar et al. [ | ||
| 25.4 (± 5.4) | 52.3 (± 2) | 24.2 (± 7) | 11 (± 1.9) | 292 (± 0.06) (Cd) | ||||
| Field sampling | 147 | Paller et al. [ | ||||||
| Field sampling | 11.45 | 240 | 20.79 | Sures [ | ||||
| Field sampling | 26–407 (Cd, Pb, Zn) | Schludermann et al. [ | ||||||
| Field sampling | 7 | 81 | 325 | Sures and Reimann [ | ||||
| Field sampling | 11 | 250 | 33 | Sures et al. [ | ||||
| Field sampling | 24.4 | 4.7 | Jankovska et al. [ | |||||
aDetermined in control experiment, i.e. the chub is exposed to metals at the background concentrations of the tap water;
bDetermined in Pb exposure experiment;
cMetal concentrations in the muscle of the host were used to represent the concentration in the whole host because of the dominant contribution of this organ to the total weight of the host;
dMultiple metals (As, Al, Ag, Ba, Bi, Ca, Cd, Co, Cr, Cu, Fe, Ga, Mg, Mn, Ni, Pb, Sb, Sn, Sr, Tl, V, Zn)
Fig 2Comparison of the predicted and the measured concentrations of Fe, Cu, Zn, and Pb in the chub-acanthocephalan system.
The horizontal error bars represent the standard deviation in the measurement of metal concentrations. The solid line represents the 1:1 ratio (i.e. the measured concentration equals the predicted concentration). The dashed lines represent the deviation of one order of magnitude from the 1:1 ratio. The model predictions for Pb accumulation in the chub-acanthocephalan system obtained in scenario S1 with the default absorption efficiency and elimination rate were given to provide an illustration on the model performance.
Statistical parameters (including the correlation coefficient r2, p, the mean absolute error MAE, and the root mean square error RMSE) describing the relationship between the modelled and measured concentrations of essential metals (Fe, Cu, and Zn) in the uninfected and infected chub and the parasites at the background concentrations of the tap water.
| Statistical parameters | Fe | Cu | Zn |
|---|---|---|---|
| 0.50 | 0.91 | 0.93 | |
| < 0.05 | < 0.0005 | < 0.00001 | |
| MAE | 44.54 | 16.70 | 30.58 |
| RMSE | 81.02 | 33.39 | 42.57 |
Statistical parameters (including the correlation coefficient r2, p, the mean absolute error MAE, and the root mean square error RMSE) describing the relationship between the modelled and measured concentrations of Pb in the uninfected and infected chub and in the parasites in different scenarios.
| Statistical parameters | S1 | S2 | A1 | A2 | B1 | B2 | C1 | C2 | D1 | D2 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 0.99 | 0.97 | 0.99 | 0.97 | 0.99 | 0.97 | 0.99 | 0.97 | 0.99 | 0.96 | |
| < 0.00001 | < 0.00005 | < 0.00001 | < 0.00005 | < 0.00001 | < 0.00005 | < 0.00001 | < 0.00005 | < 0.00001 | < 0.00005 | |
| MAE | 23.46 | 35.10 | 30.02 | 36.12 | 10.74 | 33.67 | 20.57 | 34.21 | 27.23 | 35.95 |
| RMSE | 46.26 | 73.72 | 62.17 | 75.93 | 15.40 | 69.30 | 38.85 | 71.36 | 55.50 | 75.63 |