Earthworm Comet Assay for Assessing the Risk of Weathered Petroleum Hydrocarbon Contaminated Soils: Need to Look Further than Target Contaminants
- 397 Downloads
Earthworm toxicity assays contribute to ecological risk assessment and consequently standard toxicological endpoints, such as mortality and reproduction, are regularly estimated. These endpoints are not enough to better understand the mechanism of toxic pollutants. We employed an additional endpoint in the earthworm Eisenia andrei to estimate the pollutant-induced stress. In this study, comet assay was used as an additional endpoint to evaluate the genotoxicity of weathered hydrocarbon contaminated soils containing 520 to 1450 mg hydrocarbons kg−1 soil. Results showed that significantly higher DNA damage levels (two to sixfold higher) in earthworms exposed to hydrocarbon impacted soils. Interestingly, hydrocarbons levels in the tested soils were well below site-specific screening guideline values. In order to explore the reasons for observed toxicity, the contaminated soils were leached with rainwater and subjected to earthworm tests, including the comet assay, which showed no DNA damage. Soluble hydrocarbon fractions were not found originally in the soils and hence no hydrocarbons leached out during soil leaching. The soil leachate’s Electrical Conductivity (EC) decreased from an average of 1665 ± 147 to 204 ± 20 µS cm−1. Decreased EC is due to the loss of sodium, magnesium, calcium, and sulphate. The leachate experiment demonstrated that elevated salinity might cause the toxicity and not the weathered hydrocarbons. Soil leaching removed the toxicity, which is substantiated by the comet assay and soil leachate analysis data. The implication is that earthworm comet assay can be included in future eco (geno) toxicology studies to assess accurately the risk of contaminated soils.
KeywordsComet Assay Petroleum Hydrocarbon Total Petroleum Hydrocarbon Soil Leachate Total Petroleum Hydrocarbon Concentration
This research was supported by the Project funded by Cooperative Research Centre for Contamination Assessment and Remediation of the Environment (CRC CARE).
- Chapman H, Huston R, Gardner T, Chan A, Shawl G Chemical water quality and health risk assessment of urban rainwater tanks. In: 7th international conference on urban drainage modelling and the 4th international conference on water sensitive urban design; Book of Proceedings, 2006. Monash University, p 509Google Scholar
- Lionetto MG, Calisi A, Schettino T (2012) Earthworm biomarkers as tools for soil pollution assessment. Soil health and land use management, InTech-Open Access Publisher in Science, Technology and Medicine, Rijeka (Croatia), pp 305–332Google Scholar
- Naidu R et al (2013) Towards bioavailability-based soil criteria: past, present and future perspectives. Environ Sci Poll Res 1–7Google Scholar
- NEPC (2011) National Environment Protection (Assessment of Site Contamination) Measure http://www.scew.gov.au/archive/site-contamination/pubs/asc-nepm/schedule_b1__guideline_on_investigation_levels_for_soil_and_groundwater__sep10.pdf
- O’Reilly KT, Magaw RI, Rixey WG (2001) Predicting the effect of hydrocarbon and hydrocarbon-impacted soil on groundwater. Am Petrol Inst 14Google Scholar
- Oboh B, Adeyinka Y, Awonuga S, Akinola M (2007) Impact of soil types and petroleum effluents on the earthworm. Eudrilus eugeniae, J Environ Biol, p 28Google Scholar
- OECD (2004) OECD guidelines for testing chemicals. Method 222, Earthworm reproduction test (Eisenia fetida/Eisenia Andrei). Paris, FranceGoogle Scholar
- Salagovic J, Gilles J, Verschaeve L (1996) The comet assay for the detection of genotoxic damage in the earthworms: a promising tool for assessing the biological hazards of polluted sites. Folia Biol 42:17–21Google Scholar
- Sanchez-Hernandez J (2006) Earthworm biomarkers in ecological risk assessment. In: Reviews of environmental contamination and toxicology. Springer, New York, pp 85–126Google Scholar
- Shastri S, Kamper S, Sonigra T, Hill T, Beales J (2012) Australia’s Mining Thirst. GTL Solution, MumbaiGoogle Scholar
- Thavamani P, Smith E, Kavitha R, Mathieson G, Megharaj M, Srivastava P, Naidu R (2015) Risk based land management requires focus beyond the target contaminants: a case study involving weathered hydrocarbon contaminated soils. Environ Technol Innov 4:98–109. doi: 10.1016/j.eti.2015.04.005 CrossRefGoogle Scholar