| Literature DB >> 33194429 |
Fabrício  Gabriel1, Rachel Ann Hauser-Davis2, Lorena Soares3, Ana Carolina A Mazzuco1, Rafael Christian Chavez Rocha4, Tatiana D Saint Pierre4, Enrico Saggioro5, Fabio Verissimo Correia3, Tiago O Ferreira6, Angelo F Bernardino1.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: The Rio Doce estuary, in Brazil, was impacted by the deposition of iron mine tailings, caused by the collapse of a dam in 2015. Based on published baseline datasets, the estuary has been experiencing chronic trace metal contamination effects since 2017, with potential bioaccumulation in fishes and human health risks. As metal and metalloid concentrations in aquatic ecosystems pose severe threats to the aquatic biota, we hypothesized that the trace metals in estuarine sediments nearly two years after the disaster would lead to bioaccumulation in demersal fishes and result in the biosynthesis of metal-responsive proteins.Entities:
Keywords: Environmental pollution; Estuaries; Health risk assessment; Metalloproteins; Rio Doce
Year: 2020 PMID: 33194429 PMCID: PMC7602685 DOI: 10.7717/peerj.10266
Source DB: PubMed Journal: PeerJ ISSN: 2167-8359 Impact factor: 2.984
Figure 1Map of the sampling stations in the Rio Doce estuary, Brazil in August 2017.
Fundão dam failure area (star), sediment sampling (circles), and fish sampling areas (rectangle).
Comparison between mean elements values in sediments with the local reference values (LRV) and sediment quality guidelines (SQGs).
| Element | This study | LRV | Sediment quality guidelines (SQGs) | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Min–max | Mean ± SD | TEL | PEL | TEC | PEC | ||
| Cr | 18–71.1 | 47.4 ± 15.2 | 3.6 | 52.3 | 160 | 43 | 110 |
| Zn | 18.2–78.1 | 38.7 ± 14.5 | 1.6 | 124 | 271 | 120 | 460 |
| Mn | 148.7–1,002.7 | 540.8 ± 220 | 231 | – | – | 460 | 1,100 |
| As | <LQ–28.8 | 7.8 ± 7.7 | 3.3 | 7.24 | 41.6 | 9.8 | 33 |
| Cu | 3–15.0 | 9.4 ± 4.0 | 1.3 | 18.7 | 108 | 32 | 150 |
| Pb | 5.6–192.9 | 100.2 ± 47.5 | 4.7 | 30.2 | 112 | 36 | 130 |
| Cd | 0.6–7.1 | 3.6 ± 1.4 | 0.01 | 7.24 | 41.6 | 0.99 | 5 |
| Se | <LQ–13.6 | 5.9 ± 4.3 | 1.0 | – | – | – | – |
Note:
Threshold effect level (TEL), Probable effect level (PEL), Threshold effect concentrations (TEC) and Probable effect concentrations (PEC). All values are reported as mg kg−1. Local reference values were calculated from pre-impact assessment in the Rio Doce estuary by De Oliveira Gomes et al. (2017). LOQ for Se and As = 0.01 mg kg−1.
National and international maximum permissible levels (mg kg−1) for the ingestion of fish products worldwide.
| Agency | Zn | Cu | Cd | Pb | Hg | As | Se | Cr | Mn |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| ANVISA | 50 | 30 | 1 | 2 | 0.5 | 1 | 0.3 | 0.1 | – |
| FAO/WHO | 30 | 30 | 1 | 2 | 0.5 | – | – | – | 0.5 |
| US FDA | NA | NA | 3.7 | – | – | – | – | – | – |
| US EPA | 10–30 | 1–20 | >2 | – | – | – | – | – | – |
| MAFF | 50 | 20 | 0.2 | 2 | 0.3 | – | – | – | – |
| EC | – | – | 0.05 | 0.2 | 0.5 | – | – | – | – |
Note:
NA = Not Available.
Elements concentrations in liver and muscle tissues and percentage (number/total samples) of samples that exceeded maximum permissible levels allowed by Brazilian and international guidelines.
| Species | Tissue | As | Cd | Cr | Cu | Hg | Mn | Pb | Se | Zn |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Muscle | 7.46 ± 10.46 | <LOQ | 0.38 ± 0.14 | 0.30 ± 0.32 | 0.22 ± 0.02 | 0.48 ± 0.97 | 0.03 ± 0.02 | 0.53 ± 0.20 | 8.21 ± 12.60 | |
| (0.17–39.31) | <LOQ | (0.25–0.66) | (0.14–1.27) | (0.02–0.07) | (0.11–3.16) | (0.02–0.07) | (0.29–0.85) | (3.58–46.64) | ||
| Liver | 0.31 ± 1.24 | 0.26 ± 0.17 | 0.40 ± 0.11 | 15.13 ± 37.87 | 0.45 ± 0.52 | 3.27 ± 1.84 | 0.18 ± 0.11 | 4.13 ± 3.42 | 94.61 ± 203.05 | |
| (0.13–3.64) | (0.16–0.76) | (0.31–0.70) | (0.66–129.10) | (0.03–1.81) | (0.17–5.86) | (0.06–0.47) | (0.34–11.08) | (18.50–693.80) | ||
| Muscle | 0.23 ± 4.12 | <LOQ | 0.34 ± 0.11 | 0.29 ± -0.13 | 0.26 ± 0.15 | 0.43 ± 0.19 | 0.13 ± 0.07 | 0.38 ± 0.08 | 14,00 ± 5.74 | |
| (0.10–15.51) | <LOQ | (0.25–0.58) | (0.11–0.61) | (0.11–0.61) | 0.14–0.94 | (0.02–0.19) | (0.32–0.61) | (6.61–95.41) | ||
| Liver | 0.21 ± 0.35 | 0.41 ± 0.49 | 0.41 ± 0.17 | 8.94 ± 9.48 | 0.75 ± 0.66 | 1.49 ± 1.87 | 0.29 ± 0.40 | 3.91 ± 1.60 | 571.43 ± 320.2 | |
| (0.12–1.35) | (0.03–2.36) | (0.30–0.62) | (1.89–46.20) | (0.14–3.02) | (0.89–9.00) | (0.03–1.91) | (2.37–9.75) | (126.00–1310.90) | ||
| Muscle | 0.20 ± 0.08 | <LOQ | 0.39 ± 0.09 | 0.32 ± 0.40 | 0.19 ± 0.07 | 0.35 ± 0.91 | 0.05 ± 0.08 | 0.69 ± 0.34 | 3.22 ± 4.61 | |
| (0.11–0.33) | <LOQ | (0.26–0.51) | (0.13–1.71) | (0.07–0.30) | (0.08–4.22) | (0.02–0.23) | (0.33–1.90) | (1.75–22.97) | ||
| Liver | 0.51 ± 0.23 | 0.19 ± 0.25 | 0.42 ± 0.11 | 2.36 ± 0.75 | 0.11 ± 0.02 | 7.20 ± 4.10 | 0.05 ± 0.04 | 2.14 ± 0.84 | 27.27 ± 25.70 | |
| (0.09–0.91) | (0.04–0.96) | (0.25–0.67) | (0.32–3.66) | (0.06–0.15) | (0.28–17.25) | (0.02–0.14) | (0.58–3.86) | (3.41–119.56) | ||
| Muscle | 0.52 ± 0.56 | <LOQ | 0.21 ± 0.04 | 0.16 ± 0.03 | 0.08 ± 0.05 | 0.30 ± 0.53 | 0.02 ± 0.01 | 0.78 ± 0.23 | 3.81 ± 1.34 | |
| (0.15–1.73) | <LOQ | (0.17–0.27) | (0.14–0.22) | (0.05–0.23) | (0.10–1.67) | (0.02–0.03) | (0.45–1.11) | (2.50–7.10) | ||
| Liver | 0.97 ± 0.62 | 0.05 ± 0.26 | 0.34 ± 0.11 | 1.67 ± 0.82 | 0.10 ± 0.03 | 9.01 ± 8.29 | 0.06 ± 0.02 | 1.26 ± 0.79 | 32.9 ± 28.68 | |
| (0.26–2.37) | (0.04–0.81) | (0.14–0.58) | (0.16–3.04) | (0.06–0.16) | (0.53–31.90) | (0.03–0.08) | (0.17–2.96) | (1.54–99.79) | ||
| Muscle | 0.25 ± 0.53 | <LOQ | 0.32 ± 0.06 | 0.30 ± 0.28 | 0.07 ± 0.06 | 0.20 ± 0.18 | <LOQ | 0.50 ± 0.21 | 3.21 ± 2.74 | |
| (0.17–2.02) | <LOQ | (0.27–0.42) | (0.15–0.73) | (0.05–0.24) | (0.07–0.57) | <LOQ | (0.17–0.97) | (1.81–12.18) | ||
| Liver | 1.73 ± 1.99 | 0.11 ± 0.35 | 0.46 ± 0.17 | 47.30 ± 150.60 | 0.16 ± 0.40 | 1.85 ± 2.14 | 0.04 ± 0.30 | 5.81 ± 9.33 | 71.71 ± 370.92 | |
| (0.24–7.34) | (0.03–1.17) | (0.30–0.75) | (2.83–539.90) | (0.03–1.23) | (0.93–8.78) | (0.02–0.89) | (1.16–33.38) | (23.80–1351.00) |
Note:
LOQ for Cd = 0.0255 and Pb = 0.0126 mg kg−1.
Figure 2Total metallothionein and reduced glutathione concentrations (μmol g−1 wet weight) in estuarine fishes liver and muscle tissues in the Rio Doce estuary.
Box plots indicate minimum, maximum, median, quartiles, and outliers (cicle). The asterisk indicates significance at p < 0.05.
Results of the canonical analysis of principal coordinates to evaluate the contribution of elements contamination and the variations in the expression of antioxidant biomarkers in estuarine fishes.
| Muscle | Liver | |||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| CAP 1 (0.99%) | CAP 2 (0.01%) | CAP 1 (99%) | CAP 2 (0.01%) | |||||
| Zn | 0.28 | −0.69 | 1.61 | 0.200 | 0.59 | 0.22 | 12.44 | |
| Cu | −0.52 | −0.14 | 7.12 | 0.18 | −0.002 | 1.61 | 0.203 | |
| Cd | – | – | – | – | 0.33 | 0.04 | 0.29 | 0.613 |
| Pb | – | – | – | – | 0.31 | −0.09 | 2.76 | 0.097 |
| Hg | 0.58 | −0.40 | 3.03 | 0.084 | 0.74 | −0.37 | 12.42 | |
| As | −0.29 | −0.12 | 0.51 | 0.490 | −0.11 | −0.34 | 2.29 | 0.153 |
| Se | −0.49 | 0.31 | 0.48 | 0.503 | 0.24 | 0.12 | 0.22 | 0.631 |
| Cr | −0.43 | −0.58 | 5.11 | 0.21 | 0.02 | 0.14 | 0.690 | |
| Mn | −0.50 | −0.56 | 0.93 | 0.334 | −0.54 | −0.18 | 3.32 | 0.076 |
Note:
Spearman correlation values for each metal are described for CAP axis 1–2. Note: proportions of variability explained by CAP axes are between parentheses ‘()’, Fisher test statistic, significant results (p < 0.05) are in bold. Muscle: F = 2.68, p = 0.016; Liver: F = 3.94, p = 0.003.
Figure 3Canonical analysis of principal coordinates (CAP) indicating differences in expression of antioxidant biomarkers and the contribution of elemental contamination in estuarine fishes.
Vectors are based on Spearman correlation values > 0.5 (p < 0.05) for elements and scores for protein concentration and species (mean score among sampled). The proportions of data explained by axis 1 and 2 are in parentheses.
Elements concentrations (mg kg−1) in muscle and liver tissues of fish from the Rio Doce estuary compared with other polluted and pristine estuaries and coastal bays in Brazil.
| Species | Location | Tissue | As | Cd | Cr | Cu | Hg | Mn | Pb | Se | Zn | References |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Cananéia estuary (Near-pristine) | Muscle | 0.007 | 0.067 | 0.157 | 0.059 | 10.95 | ||||||
| Santos-São Vicente estuary (Polluted) | Muscle | 0.005 | 0.351 | 0.268 | <LOD | 10.66 | ||||||
| Santos-São Vicente estuary (Polluted) | Muscle | 0.008 | 0.494 | 0.096 | 0.018 | 6.30 | ||||||
| Cananéia estuary (Near-pristine) | Liver | 0.25 | 12.7 | 1.11 | ||||||||
| Santos Bay (Polluted) | Muscle | 0.06 | ||||||||||
| Santos Bay (Polluted) | Liver | 0.33 | 15.4 | 261 | ||||||||
| Paranaguá Bay (Polluted) | Muscle | 3.24 | 0.12 | 0.22 | 5.98 | |||||||
| Rio Doce estuary | Muscle | 7.46 | <LOQ | 0.38 | 0.30 | 0.22 | 0.48 | 0.03 | 0.53 | 8.21 | This study | |
| Rio Doce estuary | Liver | 0.31 | 0.26 | 0.40 | 15.13 | 0.45 | 3.27 | 0.18 | 4.13 | 94.61 | This study | |
| Santos-São Vicente estuary (Polluted) | Muscle | 0.007 | 0.177 | 0.392 | 0.01 | 12.12 | ||||||
| Santos-São Vicente estuary (Polluted) | Muscle | 0.009 | 0.280 | 0.105 | 0.018 | 9.396 | ||||||
| Cananéia estuary (Near-pristine) | Muscle | 0.006 | 0.037 | 0.209 | 0.057 | 11.67 | ||||||
| Paranaguá Bay (Polluted) | Muscle | 0.91 | 0.1 | 0.22 | 6.93 | |||||||
| Morrão River estuary (Polluted) | Muscle | 0.003 | 1.29 | 0.07 | 80.5 | |||||||
| Morrão River estuary (Polluted) | Liver | 0.24 | 26.1 | 7.80 | 1,201 | |||||||
| Rio Doce estuary | Muscle | 0.23 | <LOQ | 0.34 | 0.29 | 0.26 | 0.43 | 0.13 | 0.38 | 14.00 | This study | |
| Rio Doce estuary | Liver | 0.21 | 0.41 | 0.41 | 8.94 | 0.75 | 1.49 | 0.29 | 3.91 | 571.43 | This study | |
| Babitonga Bay (Polluted) | Muscle | 0.06 | 9.28 | |||||||||
| Rio Doce estuary | Muscle | 0.20 | <LOQ | 0.39 | 0.32 | 0.19 | 0.35 | 0.05 | 0.69 | 3.22 | This study | |
| Rio Doce estuary | Liver | 0.51 | 0.19 | 0.42 | 2.36 | 0.11 | 7.20 | 0.05 | 2.14 | 27.27 | This study | |
| Todos os Santos Bay (Polluted) | Muscle | <LOD | 0.22 | 4.59 | <LOD | 0.61 | <LOD | 6.74 | ||||
| Morrão River estuary (Polluted) | Muscle | 0.002 | 0.79 | 0.80 | 25.2 | |||||||
| Morrão River estuary (Polluted) | Liver | 0.25 | 10.9 | 0.34 | 138 | |||||||
| Rio Doce estuary | Muscle | 0.52 | <LOQ | 0.21 | 0.16 | 0.08 | 0.30 | 0.02 | 0.78 | 3.81 | This study | |
| Rio Doce estuary | Liver | 0.97 | 0.05 | 0.34 | 1.67 | 0.10 | 9.01 | 0.06 | 1.26 | 32.9 | This study | |
| Itaipu - Guanabara Bay (Near-pristine) | Muscle | <LOQ | <LOQ | 1.18 | 3.57 | |||||||
| Itaipu - Guanabara Bay (Near-pristine) | Liver | 0.13 | 0.81 | 2.43 | 64.61 | |||||||
| Ipiranga - Guanabara Bay (Polluted) | Muscle | <LOQ | <LOQ | <LOQ | <LOQ | |||||||
| Ipiranga - Guanabara Bay (Polluted) | Liver | 0.06 | <LOQ | 0.59 | 74.31 | |||||||
| Morrão River estuary (Polluted) | Muscle | 0.001 | 0.79 | 0.06 | 11.8 | |||||||
| Morrão River estuary (Polluted) | Liver | 0.26 | 176 | 1.13 | 188 | |||||||
| Itaguaré River (Pristine) | Muscle | <LOD | 0.27 | 0.51 | 6.68 | |||||||
| São Vicente estuary (Polluted) | Muscle | 1.25 | 0.01 | 0.35 | 7.33 | |||||||
| São Vicente estuary (Polluted) | Muscle | 1.70 | 0.02 | 0.25 | 6.75 | |||||||
| Babitonga Bay (Polluted) | Muscle | 0.06 | 4.40 | |||||||||
| Vitória Bay (Polluted) | Muscle | 0.030 | 0.151 | 0.214 | 0.27 | 3.26 | ||||||
| Rio Doce estuary | Muscle | 0.25 | <LOQ | 0.32 | 0.30 | 0.07 | 0.20 | <LOQ | 0.50 | 3.21 | This study | |
| Rio Doce estuary | Liver | 1.73 | 0.11 | 0.46 | 47.30 | 0.16 | 1.85 | 0.04 | 5.81 | 71.71 | This study |