Ecotoxicology

, Volume 18, Issue 8, pp 1087–1094 | Cite as

Intracellular and extracellular ammonium (NH4+) uptake and its toxic effects on the aquatic biomonitor Fontinalis antipyretica

  • Ana Rute Vieira
  • Carla Gonzalez
  • Maria Amélia Martins-Loução
  • Cristina Branquinho
Article

Abstract

The objective of this work is to validate the use of the aquatic moss Fontinalis antipyretica as biomonitor of NH4+ aquatic pollution. In order to achieve this objective we needed to understand the pattern of uptake of NH4+ by the moss and evaluate the impact of high concentrations on its physiological performance. The cellular location of NH4+ in the moss is crucial for understanding its monitoring capacity. We were able to show that a sequential elution technique, based on the use of NiCl2 as an efficient displacing agent, allowed the quantification of the cellular location of NH4+. This was done along a concentration gradient and time of exposure. The extracellular and intracellular NH4+ concentrations that caused significant physiological impact in membrane permeability of F. antipyretica were the same that caused significant decreasing in the photosynthetic capacity of the same moss. The former NH4+ concentration thresholds were shown to decrease with increasing exposure time. These results are important since under natural conditions lower concentration of NH4+ are present in waters but for very long periods of time. The importance of applying this knowledge in biomonitoring studies to fulfil the requirements of the Water Framework Directive is discussed.

Keywords

Water pollution Mosses Eutrophication Mediterranean streams Cellular location Fluorescence of chlorophyll a 

References

  1. Aerts R, Wallen B, Malmer N (1992) Gowth-limiting nutrients in Sphagum-dominated bogs subject to low and high atmospheric nitrogen supply. J Ecol 80:131–140CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Branquinho C (2001) Lichens. In: Prasad MNV (ed) Metals in the environment: analysis by biodiversity. Marcel Dekker, New York, pp 117–158Google Scholar
  3. Branquinho C, Brown HD, Catarino F (1997) The cellular location of Cu in lichens and its effects on membrane integrity and chlorophyll fluorescence. Environ Exp Bot 38:165–179CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Britto DT, Kronzucker HJ (2002) NH4 + toxicity in higher plants: a critical review. J Plant Physiol 159:56–584CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Brown DH, Buck GW (1979) Desiccation effects and cation distribution in bryophytes. New Phytol 82:115–125CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Brown DH, Wells JM (1988) Sequential elution technique for determining the cellular location of cations. In: Glime JM (ed) Methods in bryology. Hattori Botanical Laboratory, Nichinan, pp 227–233Google Scholar
  7. Cenci RM (2000) The use of aquatic moss (Fontinalis antipyretica) as monitor of contamination in standing and running waters: limits and advantages. J Limnol 60:53–61Google Scholar
  8. Christmas M, Whitton BA (1998) Phosphorus and aquatic bryophytes in the Swale–Ouse river system, north-east England. 1. Relationship between ambient phosphate, internal N:P ratio and surface phosphatase activity. Sci Total Environ 210:389–399CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Cruz C, Martins-Loução MA (2000) Nitrogen in a sustainable environment: a matter of integration. In: Martins-Loução MA, Lips SH (eds) Nitrogen in a sustainable ecosystem. Backhuys, The Neederlands, pp 415–419Google Scholar
  10. Ellwood NTW, Haile SM, Whitton BA (2008) Aquatic plant nutrients, moss phosphatase activities and tissue composition in four upland streams in northern England. J Hydrol 350:246–260CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Figueira R (2002) Desenvolvimento de um sistema de biomonitorização ambiental. PhD thesis, Faculdade de Ciências da Universidade de Lisboa, LisboaGoogle Scholar
  12. Galloway JN, Cowling EB (2002) Reactive nitrogen and the world: 200 years to change. Ambio 31:64–71Google Scholar
  13. García-Álvaro MA, Martinez-Abaigar J, Nunez-Olivera E et al (2000) Element concentrations and enrichment ratios in the aquatic moss Rhynchostegium riparioides along the River Iregua (La Rioja, Northern Spain). Bryol 103:518–533CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Jonsdottir IS, Callaghan TV et al (1995) Fate of added nitrogen in a moss sedge Artic community and effects of increased nitrogen deposition. Sci Total Environ 161:677–685CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Kelly MG, Whitton BA (1998) Biological monitoring of eutrophication in rivers. Hydrobiologia 384:55–67CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Krupa SV (2003) Effects of atmospheric ammonia (NH3) on terrestrial. Environ Pollut 124:179–221CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Limpens J, Berendse F (2003) Growth reduction of Sphagnum magellanicum subjected to high nitrogen deposition: the role of amino acid nitrogen concentration. Oecol 135:339–345Google Scholar
  18. Manning WJ, Feder WA (1980) Biomonitoring air pollutants with plants. Applied Science Pub, LondonGoogle Scholar
  19. Martins R, Pardo R et al (2004) Cadmium (II) and Zinc (II) adsorption by the aquatic moss Fontinalis antipyretica: effect of temperature, pH and water hardness. Water Res 38:693–699CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Mersch J, Reichard M (1997) In situ investigation of trace metal availability in industrial effluents using transplanted aquatic mosses. Arch Environ Contam Toxicol 34:336–342CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Miller JE, Brown DH (1999) Studies of ammonia uptake and loss by lichen. Lichenol 31:85–93Google Scholar
  22. Mitchell RJ, Sutton MA et al (2004) Growth and tissue nitrogen of epiphytic Atlantic bryophytes: effects of increased and decreased atmospheric N deposition. Funct Ecol 18:322–329CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Nieboer E, Puckett KJ et al (1976) The uptake of nickel by a physicochemical process. Can J Bot 54:724–733CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Nordin A, Gunnarsson U (2000) Amino acid accumulation and growth of Sphagnum under different levels of N deposition. Ecoscience 7:474–480Google Scholar
  25. Paulissen M, Besalu LE et al (2005) Contrasting effects of ammonium enrichment on fen bryophytes. J Bryol 27:109–117CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Pearce ISK, Woodin SJ et al (2003) Physiological and growth responses of the montane bryophyte Racomitrium lanoginosum to atmospheric nitrogen deposition. New Phytol 160:145–155CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Pereira HM, Domingos T, Vicente L (2004) Portugal millennium ecosystem assessment: state of the assessment report. Millennium Ecosystem AssessmentGoogle Scholar
  28. Potter JA, Press MC, Callaghan TV et al (1995) Growth responses of Polytrichum commune and Hylocomium splendens to simulated environmental change in the sub-arctic. New Phytol 131:533–541CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Sérgio C, Séneca C, Máguas C, Branquinho C (1992) Biological responses of Sphagnum auriculatum Schimp. to water pollution by heavy metals. Cryptogamie Bryologie Lichenologie 13(2):155–163Google Scholar
  30. SNIRH (2008) National System of Information on Water Resources. Available at http://snirh.pt/snirh.php?main_id=1. Accessed 30 May 2008
  31. Solga A, Burkhardt J, Zechmeister HG, Frahm JP (2005) Nitrogen content, N-15 natural abundance and biomass of two pleurocarpous mosses Pleurozium schreberi (Brid.) Mitt. and Scleropodium purum (Hedw.) Limpr. in relation to atmospheric nitrogen deposition. Environ Pollut 134:465–473CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Van der Heijden E, Verbeek SK, Kuiper PJC (2000) Elevated atmospheric CO2 and increased nitrogen deposition: effects of C and N metabolism and growth of the peat moss Sphagnum recurvum P. Beauv. var. macronatum (Russ.) Warnst. Glob Chang Biol 6:201–212CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. Vázquez MD, López J, Carballeira A (1999) Uptake of heavy metals to the extracellular and intracellular compartments in three species of aquatic bryophyte. Ecotoxicol Environ Saf 44:12–24CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. Vitousek PW, Aber JD, Howarth RW et al (1997) Human alteration of the global nitrogen cycle: sources and consequences. Ecol Appl 7:737–750Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media, LLC 2009

Authors and Affiliations

  • Ana Rute Vieira
    • 1
  • Carla Gonzalez
    • 1
    • 2
  • Maria Amélia Martins-Loução
    • 1
    • 3
  • Cristina Branquinho
    • 1
  1. 1.Faculty of Sciences, Centre for Environmental Biology (CBA)University of LisbonLisbonPortugal
  2. 2.CENSE-ECOMAN—Centre for Environmental and Sustainability Research, Ecological Economics and Environmental Management Group, Faculty of Sciences and TechnologyNew University of Lisbon, Edifício DepartamentalQuinta da TorrePortugal
  3. 3.Botanical Garden, Natural History MuseumUniversity of LisbonLisbonPortugal

Personalised recommendations