Water, Air, and Soil Pollution

, Volume 78, Issue 3–4, pp 359–373 | Cite as

Using the Caenorhabditis elegans soil toxicity test to identify factors affecting toxicity of four metal ions in intact soil

  • Steven G. Donkin
  • David B. Dusenbery


A previously developed soil toxicity test for rapidly determining the toxicity of chemicals to the soil-dwelling nematode Caenorhabditis elegans (Donkin and Dusenbery, 1993) was used to measure the toxicity of four metals (Zn2+, Cd2+, Cu2+, and Pb2+) added to four soils common to the southeastern United States. Nematode survival after a 24-hour exposure in the presence of a bacterial food source was assessed. All soils reduced the toxicity of most metal ions compared to solutions without soil. Pb was the most strongly affected, while Cd toxicity was not much influenced by the soils. Correlations between the LC50S and various soil or metal characteristics were determined. No significant correlation was found between LC50s and many soil characteristics commonly cited as having large effects on soil bioavailability of metals. Although sample size was limited, the indication was that bioavailability of metals to nematodes is determined by a complex array of many interacting soil, as well as metal, properties. Comparison of the relative mobilities of these ions in other soils with the relative toxicity measured here suggests that mobility may be a good predictor of toxicity. The C. elegans soil toxicity test is shown to be as sensitive and more rapid than the commonly used earthworm soil toxicity test.


Toxicity United States Soil Characteristic Caenorhabditis Elegans Relative Toxicity 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.


Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.


  1. Athey, L. A., Thomas, J. M., Miller, W. E., and Word, J. Q.: 1989, Environ. Toxicol. Chem. 8, 223.Google Scholar
  2. Baes, C. F. and Mesmer, R. E.: 1976, The Hydrolysis of Cations, John Wiley & Sons, Inc., New York.Google Scholar
  3. Beyer, W. N. and Cromartie, E. J.: 1987, Environ. Monit. Assess. 8, 27.Google Scholar
  4. Biddappa, C. C., Chino, M., and Kumazawa, K.: 1981, J. Environ. Sci. Health Part B: 16, 511.Google Scholar
  5. Bittel, J. E. and Miller, R. J.: 1974, J. Environ. Qual. 3, 250.Google Scholar
  6. Brenner, S. J.: 1974, Genetics 77, 71.Google Scholar
  7. Callahan, C. A., Menzie, C. A., Burmaster, D. E., Wilborn, D. C., and Ernst, T.: 1991, Environ. Toxicol. Chem. 10, 817.Google Scholar
  8. Cavallaro, N. and McBride, M. B.: 1978, Soil Sci. Soc. Am. J. 42, 550.Google Scholar
  9. Christensen, T. H.: 1989, Water, Air, and Soil Pollut. 44, 71.Google Scholar
  10. Donkin, S. G. and Dusenbery, D. B.: 1993, Arch. Environ. Contam. Toxicol. 25, 145.Google Scholar
  11. Elliott, H. A., Liberati, M. R., and Huang, C. P.: 1986a, Water, Air, and Soil Pollut. 27, 379.Google Scholar
  12. Elliott, H. A., Liberati, M. R., and Huang, C. P.: 1986b, J. Environ. Qual. 15, 214.Google Scholar
  13. Finney, D. J.: 1971, Probit Analysis, 3rd ed., Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, pp. 50–80.Google Scholar
  14. Fried, M. and Broeshart, H.: 1967, The Soil-Plant System, Academic Press, New York, p. 19.Google Scholar
  15. Giblin, A. E., Bourg, A., Valiela, I., and Teal, J. M.: 1980, Am. J. Bot. 67, 1059.Google Scholar
  16. Harter, R. D.: 1979, Soil Sci. Soc. Am. J. 43, 679.Google Scholar
  17. Harter, R. D.: 1983, Soil Sci. Soc. Am. J. 47, 47.Google Scholar
  18. James, R. O. and Healy, T. W.: 1972, J. Colloid Interface Sci. 40, 65.Google Scholar
  19. John, M. K.: 1972, Can. J. Soil. Sci. 52, 343.Google Scholar
  20. Kinniburgh, D. G., Jackson, M. L., and Syers, J. K.: 1976, Soil Sci. Soc. Am. J. 40, 796.Google Scholar
  21. Korte, N. E., Skopp, J., Fuller, W. H., Niebla, E. E., and Alesh, B. A.: 1976, Soil Sci. 122, 350.Google Scholar
  22. Lagerwerff, J. V., Biersdorf, G. T., and Brower, D. L.: 1976, J. Environ. Qual. 5, 19.Google Scholar
  23. Levi-Minzi, R., Soldatini, G. F., and Riffaldi, R.: 1976, J. Soil Sci. 27, 10.Google Scholar
  24. Neuhauser, E. F., Loehr, R. C., Milligan, D. L., and Malecki, M. R.: 1985, Biol. Fert. Soils 1, 149.Google Scholar
  25. Nicholas, W. L.: 1984, The Biology of Free-Living Nematodes, 2nd (ed.), Clarendon Press, Oxford.Google Scholar
  26. Pickering, W. F.: 1980, ‘Cadmium retention by clays and other soil or sediment components’ in Nriagu (ed.), Cadmium in the Environment. Part I. Ecological Cycling, John Wiley & Sons, Inc., New York, pp. 365–397.Google Scholar
  27. Russell, E. W.: 1973, Soil Conditions and Plant Growth, 10th (ed.), Longman, Inc., New York, p. 544.Google Scholar
  28. Samoiloff, M. R., Bell, J., Birkholz, D. A., Webster, G. R. B., Arnott, E. G., Pulak, R., and Madrid, A.: 1983, Environ, Sci. Technol 17, 329.Google Scholar
  29. Schnitzer, M.: 1969, Soil Sci. Soc. Am. Proc. 33, 75.Google Scholar
  30. Scokart, P. O., Meeus-Verdinne, K., and DeBorger, R.: 1983, Water, Air, and Soil Pollut. 20, 451.Google Scholar
  31. Shuman, L. M.: 1975, Soil Sci. Soc. Am. Proc. 39, 454.Google Scholar
  32. Stevenson, F. J.: 1977, Soil Sci. 123, 10.Google Scholar
  33. U.S.Environmental Protection Agency.: 1979, Criteria for classification of solid waste disposal facilities and practices. Fed. Regist. 44(179), 53438–53464.Google Scholar
  34. Williams, P. L. and Dusenbery, D. B. 1988, Toxicol. Ind. Health. 4, 469.Google Scholar
  35. Williams, P. L. and Dusenbery, D. B. 1990a, Environ. Toxicol. Chem. 9, 1285.Google Scholar
  36. Williams, P. L. and Dusenbery, D. B. 1990b, Toxicol. Ind. Health. 6, 425.Google Scholar
  37. Wood, W. B.: 1988, ‘Introduction to C. elegans biology’, in Wood (ed.), The Nematode Caenorhabditis elegans, Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory, Cold Spring Harbor, New York, pp. 1–16.Google Scholar
  38. Zachara, J. M., Smith, S. C., Resch, C. T., and Cowan, C. E.: 1992, Soil Sci. Soc. Am. J. 56, 1074.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Kluwer Academic Publishers 1994

Authors and Affiliations

  • Steven G. Donkin
    • 1
  • David B. Dusenbery
    • 1
  1. 1.Georgia Institute of TechnologyAtlantaUSA

Personalised recommendations