Advertisement

Environmental Monitoring and Assessment

, Volume 184, Issue 6, pp 3407–3414 | Cite as

Methyl mercury in fish—a case study on various samples collected from Ganges river at West Bengal

  • Moumita Pal
  • Santinath Ghosh
  • Madhumita Mukhopadhyay
  • Mahua Ghosh
Article

Abstract

This study investigated the presence of total mercury (Hg) and organic mercury levels in the muscle of 19 common fresh water fish species captured from river Ganges, West Bengal, India. The total mercury level found in our study may not cause any toxic effect, but the methyl mercury (MeHg) level in some freshwater fish species was surprisingly very high and toxically unacceptable. The results of mercury analysis in various specimens indicated that some fish muscles tended to accumulate high levels of Hg, and approximately 50–84% of Hg was organic mercury. A strong positive correlation between mercury levels in muscle with food habit and fish length (age) was found. Wallago attu possessed the highest amount of organic mercury in their muscle tissues, and it was 0.93 ± 0.61 μg Hg/g of wet weight. Whereas in small-sized fishes Eutropiichthys murius, Puntius sarana, Cirrhinus mrigala, Mystus vittatus or Mystus gulio, and Tilapia mossambicus, it was below the detection limit. Contamination in Catla catla (0.32 ± 0.11), Anguilla bengalensis bengalensis (0.26 ± 0.07 μg Hg/g), Chitala chitala (0.25 ± 0.18), Rita rita (0.34 ± 0.14), and Ompok pabda (0.26 ± 0.04) was also above the 0.25 μg Hg/g of wet weight, the limit set by the PFA for the maximum level for consumption of fish exposed to MeHg. Though in Labeo rohita (0.12 ± 0.03), Mastacembelus armatus (0.17 ± 0.02), Pangasius pangasius (0.12 ± 0.16), Bagarius bagarius (0.12 ± 0.01), and Clupisoma garua (0.1 ± 0.01), concentration was below the recommended level, in Lates calcarifer (0.23 ± 0.0) and Mystus aor (0.23 ± 0.1), it was threatening. Interestingly, a low concentration of Hg was found in post-monsoon samples.

Keywords

Bioaccumulation Mercury Methyl mercury Freshwater fish Ganges river 

References

  1. Agarwal, R., Kumar, R., & Behari, J. R. (2007). Mercury and lead content in fish species from the River Gomti, Lucknow, India, as biomarkers of contamination. Bulletin of Environmental Contamination and Toxicology, 78, 118–122.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Altindag, A., & Yigit, S. (2005). Assessment of heavy metal concentrations in the food web of lake Beysehir, Turkey. Chemosphere, 60, 552–556.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. ATSDR. (2003). Mercury. Agency for toxic substances and disease registry. GA: US. Department of health and human services, public health services, Atlanta. http://www.atsdr.cdc.gov/ToxProfiles/tp46-c5.pdf. Accessed 15 Nov 2010.
  4. Ben-Ozer, E. Y., Rosenspire, A. J., McCabe, M. J., Worth, R. G., Kinzelskii, A. L., Warra, N. S., et al. (2000). Mercuric chloride damages cellular DNA by a non-apoptotic mechanism. Mutatation Research, 470, 19–27.Google Scholar
  5. Bhattacharyya, S., Chaudhuri, P., Dutta, S., & Santra, S. C. (2010). Assessment of total mercury level in fish collected from East Calcutta wetlands and Titagarh sewage fed aquaculture in West Bengal, India. Bulletin of Environmental Contamination and Toxicology, 84, 618–622.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Campbell, L. M., Dixon, D. G., & Hecky, R. E. (2003). Review of mercury in Lake Victoria, East Africa: implications for human and ecosystem health. Journal of Toxicology and Environmental Health Part B, 6, 325–356.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Cohen, J. T., Bellinger, D. C., Connor, W. E., Kris-Etherton, P. M., Lawrence, R. S., Savitz, D. A., et al. (2005). A quantitative risk–benefit analysis of changes in population fish consumption. American Journal of Preventive Medicine, 29, 325–334.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Clarkson, T. W. (2002). The three modern faces of mercury. Environmental Health Perspective, 110(suppl 1), 11–23.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Darnton-Hill, I., Hassan, N., Karim, R., & Duthie, M. R. (1988). Tables of nutrient composition of Bangladeshi foods. English version with particular emphasis on vitamin A content. Dhaka: Helen Keller International.Google Scholar
  10. Eisler, R. (2006). Mercury hazards to living organisms. Mercury poisoning and treatment (pp. 37–43). Maryland: CRC Press. doi: 10.1201/9781420008838.ch4.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Felton, J. S., Kahn, E., Salick, B., van Natta, F. C., & Whitehouse, M. W. (1972). Heavy metal poisoning: mercury and lead. Annals of Internal Medicine, 76, 779–792.Google Scholar
  12. Glockling, F., Hosmane, N. S., Mahale, V. B., Swindall, J. J., Magos, L., & King, T. L. (1977). Mono, bis-, and tris-(trimethylsilyl)methyl derivatives of mercury. Journal of Chemical Research, 116, 1201–1256.Google Scholar
  13. Holsbeek, L., Das, H. K., & Joiris, C. R. (1997). Mercury speciation and accumulation in Bangladesh freashwater and anadromous fish. Journal of the Science of the Total Environment, 198, 201–210.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Horwitz, W. (2000). Official methods of analysis of AOAC International, vols. 1 and 2 (17th ed.). Gaithersburg: AOAC International.Google Scholar
  15. IRIS- Integrated Risk Information System. (1993). EPA. Washington, DC: Office of Research and Development.Google Scholar
  16. Kris-Etherton, P. M., Harris, W. S., Appel, L. J., & for the Nutrition Committee. (2002). Fish consumption, fish oil, omega-3 fatty acids, and cardiovascular disease. Circulation, 106, 2747–2757.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Lebel, J., Mergler, D., Lucotte, M., Amorim, M., Dolbec, J., Miranda, D., et al. (1996). Evidence of early nervous system dysfunction in Amazonian populations exposed to low levels of methylmercury. Neurotoxicology, 7, 157–167.Google Scholar
  18. Lewis, S. A., & Furness, R. W. (1993). The role of eggs in mercury excretion by quail Coturnix coturnix and the implications for monitoring mercury pollution by analysis of feathers. Ecotoxicology, 2, 55–64.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Maršálek, P., & Svobodová, Z. (2006). Rapid determination of methylmercury in fish tissues. Czech Journal of Food Science, 24, 138–142.Google Scholar
  20. Moszczynski, P., Rutowski, J., Słowinski, S., & Bem, S. (2008). Immunological effects of occupational exposure to metallic mercury in the population of T-cells and NK-cells. Analyst, 123, 99–103.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Moszczynski, P., & Moszczynski, P. (1990). Current views on biotransformation and metabolism of mercury (in Polish). Postȩpy Higieny i Medycyny Doświadczalnej, 44, 153–180.Google Scholar
  22. Park, J. S., Lee, J. S., Kim, G. B., Cha, J. S., Shin, S. K., Kang, H. G., et al. (2010). Mercury and methylmercury in freshwater fish and sediments in South Korea using newly adopted purge and trap GC-MS detection method. Water, Air, and Soil Pollution, 207, 391–401.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Petruccioli, L., & Turillazzi, P. (1991). Effects of methylmercury on acetyl cholinesterase and serum cholinesterase activity in monkeys, Macaca fascicularis. Bulletin of Environmental Contamination and Toxicology, 46, 769–773.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Rainbow, P. S. (1985). The biology of heavy metals in the sea. International Journal of Environmental Studies, 25, 195–211.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Rutowski, J., Moszczynski, P., Bem, S., & Szewczyk, A. (1998). Efficacy of urine determination of early renal damage markers for nephrotoxicity monitoring during occupational exposure to mercury vapor. Medycyna Pracy, 49, 129–135.Google Scholar
  26. Sinha, R. K., Sinha, S. K., Kedia, D. K., Kumari, A., Rani, N., Sharma, G., et al. (2007). A holistic study on mercury pollution in the Ganga river system at Varanasi, India. Current Science, 92(9), 1223–1227.Google Scholar
  27. Stohs, S. J., & Bagchi, D. (1995). Oxidative mechanisms in the toxicity of metal ions. Free Radical Biology & Medicine, 18, 321–336.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. The Prevention of Food Adulteration Act (1954). Together with prevention of adulteration rules, (1955) and notification and commodity index, India (amended, 2002). Lucknow: Eastern Book Company. Table No. R-57, 106–110.Google Scholar
  29. U.S. EPA. (1992). National study of chemical residues in fish. WH-551, vol. I. Washington, DC: Office of Science and Technology.Google Scholar
  30. US EPA. (2001). Water quality criterion for the protection of human health: methylmercury. Final report EPA-823-R-01-001. Washington, DC: US EPA. http://www.epa.gov/waterscience/criteria/methylmercury/document.html. Accessed 15 Aug 2003.
  31. Virtanen, K. J., Rissanen, T. H., Voutilainen, S., & Tuomainen, T. P. (2007). Mercury as a risk factor for cardiovascular diseases. Journal Nurture Biochemistry, 18, 75–85.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. World Health Organization. (1990). Environmental health criteria 101: methylmercury. Geneva: World Health Organization. http://www.americanchronicle.com/articles/view/109078.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media B.V. 2011

Authors and Affiliations

  • Moumita Pal
    • 1
  • Santinath Ghosh
    • 1
  • Madhumita Mukhopadhyay
    • 2
  • Mahua Ghosh
    • 1
  1. 1.Department of Chemical Technology, University College of Science & TechnologyUniversity of CalcuttaKolkataIndia
  2. 2.Directorate of FisheriesGovt. of West BengalKolkataIndia

Personalised recommendations