| Literature DB >> 29556481 |
Paraskevi Malea1, Theodoros Kevrekidis2, Konstantina-Roxani Chatzipanagiotou1, Athanasios Mogias2.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Seagrass species have been recommended as biomonitors of environmental condition and as tools for phytoremediation, due to their ability to concentrate anthropogenic chemicals. This study aims to provide novel information on metal accumulation in seagrasses under laboratory conditions to support their use as a tool in the evaluation and abatement of contamination in the field. We investigated the kinetics of cadmium uptake into adult leaf blades, leaf sheaths, rhizomes and roots of Cymodocea nodosa in exposure concentrations within the range of cadmium levels in industrial wastewater (0.5-40 mg L-1).Entities:
Keywords: Accumulation kinetics; Biomonitor; Cymodocea nodosa; Metal; Phytoremediation; Seagrass parts
Year: 2018 PMID: 29556481 PMCID: PMC5840812 DOI: 10.1186/s40709-018-0076-4
Source DB: PubMed Journal: J Biol Res (Thessalon) ISSN: 1790-045X Impact factor: 1.889
Fig. 1Kinetics of cadmium accumulation in adult leaf blades and leaf sheaths of Cymodocea nodosa at different concentrations of cadmium in water. Values plotted are mean tissue concentration ± standard error (n = 3); bold lines are the accumulation kinetics calculated using a Michaelis–Menten-type equation
Fig. 2Kinetics of cadmium accumulation in rhizomes and roots of Cymodocea nodosa at different concentrations of cadmium in water. Values plotted are mean tissue concentration ± standard error (n = 3); bold lines are the accumulation kinetics calculated using a Michaelis–Menten-type equation (rhizomes at 0.5, 10, 20 and 40 mg L−1 and roots at 0.5 and 5 mg L−1) or an S equation (rhizomes at 5 mg L−1 and roots at 10 and 20 mg L−1)
Spearman’s rank correlation coefficient values between exposure concentration and experimental tissue cadmium concentration (C) at each incubation day
| Variables | Blades | Sheaths | Rhizomes | Roots |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| C at day 3 | 1.0*** | 1.0*** | 0.9* | 0.9* |
| C at day 5 | 1.0*** | 1.0*** | 1.0*** | 1.0*** |
| C at day 7 | 1.0*** | 1.0*** | 1.0*** | 0.9* |
| C at day 9 | 0.9* | 1.0*** | 1.0*** | 0.9* |
* p < 0.05; *** p < 0.001
Kinetics of cadmium accumulation in parts of Cymodocea nodosa exposed to different concentrations of cadmium in water
| Exposure concentration (mg L−1) | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 0.5 | 5 | 10 | 20 | 40 | |
| Blades | |||||
| Cmax | 306.5 (± 194.8) | 611.2 (± 39.0) | 3289.5 (± 1438.7) | 1748.5 (± 559.9)a | 7386.1 (± 6749.5)a |
| | 17.1 (± 15.3) | 3.8 (± 0.6) | 17.9 (± 10.9) | 3.3 (± 2.6) | 16.7 (± 20.4) |
| Cmax/(2 × | 9.0 | 80.4 | 91.9 | 264.9 | 221.1 |
| r2 | 0.968*** | 0.997*** | 0.986*** | 0.971** | 0.975** |
| Sheaths | |||||
| Cmax | 13.5 (± 3.0) | 134.8 (± 22.8) | 272.8 (± 132.6) | 568.4 (± 73.3)a | 942.6 (± 180.6) |
| | 0.1 (± 1.1) | 4.7 (± 1.8) | 3.1 (± 4.3) | 4.6 (± 1.3) | 1.4 (± 1.3) |
| Cmax/(2 × | 67.5 | 14.3 | 44.0 | 61.8 | 336.6 |
| r2 | 0.881** | 0.985*** | 0.837** | 0.997*** | 0.950** |
| Rhizomes | |||||
| Cmax | 63.7 (± 33.9) | 405.2 (± 204.8) | 514.2 (± 158.2)a | 852.0 (± 82.0)a | |
| | 14.1 (± 11.2) | 12.7 (± 9.8) | 2.4 (± 2.2) | 0.1 (± 0.4) | |
| Cmax/(2 × | 2.2 | 16.0 | 107.1 | 4260.0 | |
| r2 | 0.968*** | 0.968*** | 0.965** | 0.992** | |
| Roots | |||||
| Cmax | 138.8 (± 27.8) | 333.3 (± 106.0) | |||
| | 0.9 (± 1.2) | 0.1 (± 1.5) | |||
| Cmax/(2 × | 77.1 | 1666.5 | |||
| r2 | 0.937** | 0.812** | |||
The exposure concentrations of 0.5, 5, 10, 20 and 40 mg L−1 correspond to 4.44, 44.48, 88.95, 177.94 and 355.88 μM, respectively
The fits correspond to a Michaelis–Menten-type equation: C = (Cmax × t)/(K+ t)
C, tissue concentration (μg g−1 dry wt) reached in a given time; Cmax, maximum tissue concentration; K time (in days) to reach half of the value of Cmax; t, time (in days); standard errors are given in parentheses
** p < 0.01; *** p < 0.001
aOnly the initial four points were fitted
Regression models tested in those cases in which the Michaelis–Menten-type model did not provide a satisfactory fit to the uptake kinetics data
| Exposure concentration (mg L−1) | Model | r2 | F | df1 | df2 | Significance | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Rhizomes | 5 | Linear | 0.778 | 7.003 | 1 | 2 | 0.118 |
| Logarithmic | 0.868 | 13.130 | 1 | 2 | 0.068 | ||
| Inverse | 0.815 | 8.811 | 1 | 2 | 0.097 | ||
| Exponential | 0.702 | 4.717 | 1 | 2 | 0.162 | ||
| Power | 0.917 | 22.175 | 1 | 2 | 0.042 | ||
| S | 0.993 | 292.077 | 1 | 2 | 0.003 | ||
| Roots | 10 | Linear | 0.945 | 34.576 | 1 | 2 | 0.028 |
| Logarithmic | 0.802 | 8.106 | 1 | 2 | 0.104 | ||
| Inverse | 0.639 | 3.533 | 1 | 2 | 0.201 | ||
| Exponential | 0.825 | 9.429 | 1 | 2 | 0.092 | ||
| Power | 0.973 | 73.230 | 1 | 2 | 0.013 | ||
| S | 0.998 | 1200.35 | 1 | 2 | 0.001 | ||
| 20 | Linear | 0.903 | 18.599 | 1 | 2 | 0.050 | |
| Logarithmic | 0.749 | 5.972 | 1 | 2 | 0.134 | ||
| Inverse | 0.602 | 3.021 | 1 | 2 | 0.224 | ||
| Exponential | 0.792 | 7.606 | 1 | 2 | 0.110 | ||
| Power | 0.954 | 41.675 | 1 | 2 | 0.023 | ||
| S | 0.997 | 581.401 | 1 | 2 | 0.002 |
The exposure concentrations of 5, 10 and 20 mg L−1 correspond to 44.48, 88.95 and 177.94 μM, respectively
Kinetics of cadmium accumulation in parts of Cymodocea nodosa exposed to different concentrations of cadmium in water
| Exposure concentration (mg L−1) | |||
|---|---|---|---|
| 5 | 10 | 20 | |
| Rhizomes | |||
| | 5.512 (± 0.180) | ||
| | − 5.909 (± 0.346) | ||
| r2 | 0.993** | ||
| Roots | |||
| | 8.366 (± 0.148)a | 8.980 (± 0.225)a | |
| | − 9.745 (± 0.281) | − 10.313 (± 0.428) | |
| r2 | 0.998** | 0.997** | |
The exposure concentrations of 5, 10 and 20 mg L−1 correspond to 44.48, 88.95 and 177.94 μM, respectively
The fits correspond to an S equation: lnC = α + [b/(t + 1)]
C, tissue concentration (μg g−1 dry wt) reached in a given time; α and b constants; t, time (in days); standard errors are given in parentheses
** p < 0.01
aOnly the initial four points were fitted
Equilibrium concentration, (Ceq in μg g−1 dry wt), time to reach equilibrium (Teq, in days), mean rate of uptake (Vc, in concentration/days) and bioconcentration factor at equilibrium (BCF)
| Exposure concentration (mg L−1) | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 0.5 | 5 | 10 | 20 | 40 | |
| Blades | |||||
| Ceq | 203.9 | 504.7 | 2155.0 | 1467.3a | 4908.6a |
| Teq | 34 | 18 | 34 | 17 | 33 |
| Vc | 6.0 | 28.0 | 63.4 | 86.3 | 148.7 |
| BCF | 404.3 | 100.6 | 215.3 | 73.3 | 122.7 |
| Sheaths | |||||
| Ceq | 11.7 | 109.1 | 228.5 | 457.6a | 836.2 |
| Teq | 14 | 20 | 16 | 19 | 11 |
| Vc | 0.8 | 5.5 | 14.3 | 24.1 | 76.0 |
| BCF | 21.3 | 21.6 | 22.7 | 22.8 | 20.9 |
| Rhizomes | |||||
| Ceq | 43.8 | 193.6 | 144.0 | 439.0a | 824.5a |
| Teq | 31 | 22 | 7 | 14 | 3 |
| Vc | 1.4 | 8.8 | 20.6 | 31.4 | 274.8 |
| BCF | 86.3 | 38.6 | 14.3 | 21.9 | 20.6 |
| Roots | |||||
| Ceq | 126.2 | 322.5 | 3138.9a | 5694.9a | |
| Teq | 9 | 3 | 29 | 29 | |
| Vc | 14.0 | 107.5 | 108.2 | 196.4 | |
| BCF | 251.9 | 64.4 | 313.9 | 284.7 | |
The exposure concentrations of 0.5, 5, 10, 20 and 40 mg L−1 correspond to 4.44, 44.48, 88.95, 177.94 and 355.88 μM, respectively
aOnly the initial four points were fitted
Spearman’s rank correlation coefficient values between exposure concentration uptake parameters; n = 5
| Variables | Blades | Sheaths | Rhizomes | Roots |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Cmax | 0.9* | 1.0*** | 1.0*** | |
| Km | − 0.3ns | 0.1ns | − 1.0*** | |
| Cmax/(2 × Km) | 0.9* | 0.4ns | 1.0*** | |
| Ceq | 0.9* | 1.0*** | 0.8ns | 1.0*** |
| Teq | − 0.41ns | − 0.3ns | − 0.9* | 0.737ns |
| Vc | 1.0*** | 1.0*** | 1.0*** | 1.0*** |
| BCF | − 0.5ns | 0.0ns | − 0.7ns | 0.6ns |
For abbreviations, see Tables 2 and 5
nsNon significant; * p < 0.05; *** p < 0.001