Advertisement

Cellular and Stress Protein Responses to the UV Filter 3-Benzylidene Camphor in the Amphipod Crustacean Gammarus fossarum (Koch 1835)

  • Volker ScheilEmail author
  • Rita Triebskorn
  • Heinz-R. Köhler
Article

Abstract

Chemical ultraviolet (UV) filters are used in various products and could be released into the environment, for example, via sunscreens used at swimming lakes. UV filters have been found in surface waters in the past but only a few investigations have concentrated on the effects of these substances in the environment. This study investigates the effects of a UV filter in the amphipod Gammarus fossarum at the cellular and molecular level. Stress protein (Hsp70) responses and reactions of hepatopancreatic cells and cells of gut appendices were investigated in the freshwater amphipod Gammarus fossarum after short-term exposure (4 days) to five different concentrations of the UV filter 3-benzylidene camphor (3-BC; 33 ng/L, 330 ng/L, 3.3 μg/L, 33 μg/L, 330 μg/L) and two control conditions (water and solvent ethanol). Male as well as female gammarids showed increased Hsp70 levels after exposure to low concentrations of 3-BC, with a maximum response at 3.3 μg/L, while the higher concentrations resulted in lower Hsp70 levels. This effect was most likely due to a cessation of Hsp70 synthesis following pathological impact as indicated by strong cellular responses and cellular damage obtained in epithelia of the hepatopancreas and the gut appendices after treatment with 330 μg/L 3-BC. Although environmentally relevant concentrations of 3-BC did not seem to have an adverse effect in this short-term study, higher concentrations of 3-BC are surely detrimental. It is known that chronic exposure generally requires much lower concentrations to cause harm than acute exposure. Additionally, juvenile stages may be even more sensitive than the adults tested. Therefore, on the basis of this study, 3-BC-effects in the field cannot be excluded and should be regarded possible.

Keywords

Solvent Control Hsp70 Level Hsp70 Synthesis Hsp70 Response Increase Hsp70 Level 
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.

References

  1. Bradford MM (1976) A rapid and sensitive method for the quantification of microgram quantities of protein utilizing the principle of protein-dye binding. Anal Biochem 77:248–254CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Bigby M (1999) The sunscreen and melanoma controversy. Arch Dermatol 135:1526–1527CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Correia A, Pereia A, Costa M, Carrapiçco F (2002) Functional anatomy of the midgut gland of Gammarus locusta (Crustacea:Amphipoda). J Mar Biol Assoc 82:201–204CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Eckwert H, Alberti G, Köhler H-R (1997) The induction of stress proteins (hsp) in Oniscus asellus (Isopoda) as a molecular marker of multiple heavy metal exposure. I. Principles and toxicological assessment. Ecotoxicology 6:249–262CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Felten V, Guerold F (2006) Short-term physiological responses to a severe acid stress in three macroinvertebrate species: a comparative study. Chemosphere 63:1427–1435CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Gernhöfer M, Müller E, Pawert M, Schramm M, Triebskorn R (2001) Ultrastructural biomarkers as tools to characterize the health status of fish in contaminated streams. J Aquat Ecosyst Stress Recov 8:241–260CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Holbech H, Nørum U, Korsgaard B, Bjerregaard P (2002) The chemical UV-filter 3-benzylidene camphor causes an oestrogenic effect in an in vivo fish assay. Pharmacol Toxicol 91:204–208CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Köhler H-R, Hüttenrauch K, Berkus M, Gräff S, Alberti G (1996) Cellular hepatopancreatic reactions in Porcellio scaber (Isopoda) as biomarkers for the evaluation of heavy metal toxicity in soils. Appl Soil Ecol 3:1–15CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Nadeau D, Corneau S, Plante I, Morrow G, Tanguay RM (2001) Evaluation for Hsp70 as a biomarker of effect of pollutants on the earthworm Lumbricus terrestris. Cell Stress Chaperon 6:153–163CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Nagtegaal M, Ternes TA, Baumann W, Nagel R (1997) UV-Filtersubstanzen in Wasser und Fischen. UWSF-Z Umweltchem Ökotox 9:79–86Google Scholar
  11. Poiger T, Buser H-R, Müller MD (2001) Verbrauch, Vorkommen in Oberflächengewässern und Verhalten in der Umwelt von Substanzen, die als UV-Filter in Sonnenschutzmitteln eingesetzt werden. Abschlussbericht Projekt FE/BUWAL/310.97.115. Eidgenössische Forschungsanstalt für Obst-, Wein- und Gartenanbau, Wädenswil, CHGoogle Scholar
  12. Richardson K, Jarret L, Finke E (1960) Embedding in epoxy resins for ultrathin sectioning in electron microscopy. Stain Technol 35:313–325Google Scholar
  13. Schill RO, Görlitz H, Köhler H-R (2003) Laboratory simulation of a mining accident: acute toxicity, hsc/hsp70 response, and recovery from stress in Gammarus fossarum (Crustacea, Amphipoda) exposed to a pulse of cadmium. BioMetals 16:391–401CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Schirling M, Triebskorn R, Köhler H-R (2004) Variation in stress protein levels (hsp70 and hsp90) in relation to oocyte development in Gammarus fossarum (Koch 1835). Invertebr Reprod Dev 45:161–167Google Scholar
  15. Schlumpf M, Cotton B, Conscience M, Haller V, Steinmann B, Lichtensteiger W (2001) In vitro and in vivo estrogenicity of UV screens. Environ Health Perspect 109:239–244CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Schwaiger J, Wanke R, Adam SM, Honnen W, Triebskorn R (1997) The use of histopathological indicators to evaluate contaminant-related stress in fish. J Aquat Ecosyst Stress Recov 6:1–86CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Triebskorn R, Henderson I, Martin A, Köhler H-R (1996) Slugs as target and non-target organisms for environmental pollution. Br Crop Prot Counc 66:65–72Google Scholar
  18. Triebskorn R, Adam S, Casper H, Honnen W, Pawert M, Schramm M, Schwaiger J, Köhler H-R (2002) Biomarkers as diagnostic tools for evaluating effects of unknown past water quality conditions on stream organisms. Ecotoxicology 11:451–465CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Triebskorn R, Casper H, Heyd A, Eikemper R, Köhler H-R, Schwaiger J (2004) Toxic effects of the non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drug diclofenac. II. Cytological effects in liver, kidney, gills and intestine of rainbow trout (Oncorhynchus mykiss). Aquat Toxicol 68:151–166CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Triebskorn R, Casper H, Scheil V, Schwaiger J (2007a) Ultrastructural effects of pharmaceuticals (carbamazepine, clofibric acid, metoprolol, diclofenac) in rainbow trout (Oncorhynchus mykiss) and common carp (Cyprinus carpio). Anal Bioanal Chem 387:1405–1416Google Scholar
  21. Triebskorn R, Telcean I, Casper H, Farkas A, Sandu C, Stan G, Colărescu O, Dori T, Köhler H-R (2007b) Monitoring pollution in River Mureş, Romania. II. Metal accumulation and histopathology in fish. Environ Monit Assess doi: 10.1007/s10661-007-9886-9
  22. Vogt G (1990) Pathology of midgut gland-cells of Penaeus monodon postlarvae after Leucaena leucocephala feeding. Dis Aquat Org 9:45–61CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Williams KA, Green DWJ, Pascoe D (1984) Toxicity testing with freshwater macroinvertebrates: methods and application in environmental management. In: Pascoe D, Edwards RW (eds) Freshwater Biological monitoring. Pergamon Press, New York, pp 81–91Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media, LLC 2007

Authors and Affiliations

  • Volker Scheil
    • 1
    Email author
  • Rita Triebskorn
    • 1
    • 2
  • Heinz-R. Köhler
    • 1
  1. 1.Animal Physiological EcologyUniversity of TübingenTübingenGermany
  2. 2.Steinbeis-Transfer Center for Ecotoxicology and EcophysiologyRottenburgGermany

Personalised recommendations