Sensitivity of Eisenia fetida in comparison to Aporrectodea caliginosa and Lumbricus terrestris after imidacloprid exposure. Body mass change and histopathology
- 416 Downloads
The use of only one or a few species—representing an entire taxon—in ecotoxicological standard tests poses risk of underestimating the impact of toxicants on the environment. In earthworm ecotoxicity tests, the species Eisenia fetida or Eisenia andrei are commonly used, and there is evidence that these species respond relatively insensitive towards environmental pollution. With the present study, we wanted to evaluate the risk of underestimating effects of the insecticide imidacloprid in soil organisms by comparing E. fetida with two other earthworm species (Aporrectodea caliginosa and Lumbricus terrestris) regarding their sensitivities towards soil contaminated with this widely used insecticide.
Materials and methods
In laboratory experiments, the specimens were individually exposed to various concentrations of the pesticide (0.2, 0.66, 2 and 4 mg kg−1 dry weight (DW)) for 1, 7 and 14 days. Afterwards, histopathological changes in the midgut, chloragogenous tissue and skin, as well as body mass changes, were assessed.
Results and discussion
While significant changes in body mass in E. fetida and A. caliginosa occurred after exposure to imidacloprid concentrations as low as 0.2 (7 days) and 0.66 mg kg−1 DW (14 days), significant body mass changes in L. terrestris observed to 2 and 4 mg kg−1 DW, for 7 and 14 days of exposure, respectively. The histopathological examinations revealed that significant cellular changes already occurred after 24 h exposure to the lowest test concentrations in all species, but the degree of detrimental effects as well as species-specific differences were dependent on the monitor tissue. In general, E. fetida seemed to be more sensitive than L. terrestris concerning cellular alterations, but the hierarchy in species-specific differences was less obvious than for body mass change.
Even if E. fetida proved to be the most sensitive species in this study, general differences in sensitivity make evident that always a range of species—being representatives of an animal taxon—in ecotoxicological tests should be tested in order to avoid underestimations of effects. In the case of testing only one species, an increase of safety factors should be considered. Since effects already occurred at environmentally relevant concentrations, the use of imidacloprid in agriculture might be of great concern.
KeywordsBody mass change Earthworms Histopathology Imidacloprid Standard test organism
The first author thank the FAZIT-Stiftung and Teufel-Stiftung as well as the Evangelisches Studienwerk for financial support. All authors are grateful to Kathy Breitweg for the proof reading and to the anonymous reviewers for their meaningful questions and suggestions.
- Bouché MB (1992) Earthworm species and ecotoxicological studies. In: Greig-Smith PW, Becker H, Edwards PJ, Heimbach F (eds) Ecotoxicology of earthworms. Intercept, Andover, pp 20–35Google Scholar
- Cajaraville MP, Robledo Y, Etxeberria M, Marigomez I (1995) Cellular biomarkers as useful tools in the biological monitoring of environmental pollution: molluscan digestive lysosomes. In: Cajaraville MP (ed) Cell biology in environmental toxicology. University of the Basque Country Press, Bilbao, Spain, pp 29–55Google Scholar
- Capowiez Y, Rault M, Mazzia C, Belzunces L (2003) Earthworm behaviour as a biomarker—a case study using imidacloprid. Pedobiologia 47:542–547Google Scholar
- Christensen O, Mather J (1994) Earthworms as ecotoxicological test-organisms. Bekaempelsesmiddelforskning fra Miljostyrelsen. No. 5. Miljoministeriet Miljostyrelsen, Copenhagen, p 36Google Scholar
- Dittbrenner N, Capowiez Y, Köhler H-R, Triebskorn R (2011b) Stress protein response (Hsp70) and avoidance behaviour in Eisenia fetida, Aporrectodea caliginosa and Lumbricus terrestris when exposed to imidacloprid. J Soils Sediments (in press)Google Scholar
- Dittbrenner N, Moser I, Triebskorn R, Capowiez Y (2011a) Assessment of short and long-term effects of imidacloprid on the burrowing behaviour of two earthworm species (Aporrectodea caliginosa and Lumbricus terrestris) by using 2D and 3D post-exposure techniques. Chemosphere. doi: 10.1016/j.chemosphere.2011.05.011
- E.E.C. (2003) SANCO/10329. Guidance document on terrestrial ecotoxicology under council directive 91/414/EEC. Rev. 2Google Scholar
- Edwards CA, Bohlen PJ (1992) The effect of toxic chemicals on earthworms. Rev Environ Contam Toxicol 125:23–99Google Scholar
- Edwards CA, Bohlen PJ (1996) Biology and ecology of earthworms. Chapman and Hall, London, p 426Google Scholar
- Edwards CA, Lofty JR (1972) Biology of earthworms. Chapman and Hall Ltd., London, p 60Google Scholar
- Edwards PJ, Coulson JM (1992) Choice of earthworm species for laboratory tests. In: Greig-Smith PW, Becker H, Edwards PJ, Heimbach F (eds) Ecotoxicology of earthworms. Intercept, Andover, pp 36–43Google Scholar
- Günther A, Greven H (1990) Increase of the number of epidermal gland-cells: an unspecific response of Lumbricus terrestris L (Lumbricidae: Oligochaeta) to different environmental stressors. Zoologischer Anzeiger 225:278–286Google Scholar
- Gupta SK, Sundararaman V (1988) Carbaryl induced changes in the earthworm Pheretima posthuma. Indian J Exp Biol 26:688–693Google Scholar
- ISO (2008) Avoidance test for determining the quality of soils and effects of chemicals on behaviour - Part 1: test with earthworms (Eisenia fetida and Eisenia andrei). ISO guideline 17512-1, Geneva, SwitzerlandGoogle Scholar
- Lavelle P, Barois I, Martin A, Zaidi Z, Schaefer R (1989) Management of earthworm populations in agro-ecosystems: a possible way to maintain soil quality? In: Clarholm M, Bergström L (eds) Ecology of arable land. Kluwer, Dordrecht, pp 109–122Google Scholar
- McCredie T, Parker L (1992) The role of earthworms in Western Australia agriculture. J Agr West Aust 33:160–165Google Scholar
- Muthukaruppan G, Paramasamy G (2010) Effect of butachlor herbicide on earthworm Eisenia fetida—its histological perspicuity. Appl Environ Soil Sci. doi: 10.1155/2010/850758
- OECD (2004) Guidelines for testing of chemicals. 222: earthworm reproduction test (Eisenia fetida/Eisenia andrei). Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development, ParisGoogle Scholar
- Sabbagh GJ, Lenz MF, Fisher JM, Arthur EL (2002) Significance of binding on imidacloprid degradation in soils, and effects of soil characteristics on imidacloprid adsorption capacity, vol 200327. Bayer CropScience, Stilwell, KansasGoogle Scholar
- Spurgeon DJ, Weeks JM (1998) Evaluation of factors influencing results from laboratory toxicity tests with earthworms. In: Sheppard SC, Bembridge JD, Holmstrup M, Posthuma L (eds) Advances in earthworm ecotoxicology. SETAC, Pensacola, pp 15–25Google Scholar
- Triebskorn R, Köhler H-R (2003) Cellular and molecular stress indicators as tools to assess effects and side effects in slugs. Br Crop Prot Counc Symp Proc 80:69–74Google Scholar
- Triebskorn R, Köhler H-R, Honnen W, Schramm M, Adams SM, Müller EF (1997) Induction of heat shock proteins, changes in liver ultrastructure, and alterations of fish behaviour: are these biomarkers related and are they useful to reflect the state of pollution in the field? Journal of Aquatic Ecosystem Stress and Recovery 6:57–73CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- Tomlin AD (1992) Behaviour as a source of earthworm susceptibility to ecotoxicants. In: Greig-Smith PW, Becker H, Edwards PJ, Heimbach F (eds) Ecotoxicology of earthworms. Intercept, Andover, pp 116–125Google Scholar
- Wielgus-Serafinska E (1979) Influence of lead poisoning and ultrastructural changes in the body wall of Eisenia foetida (Savigny), Oligochaeta. 1. Short action of different concentrations of lead and ultrastructural changes in the cells of the body wall. Folia Histochem Cytochem 17:181–188Google Scholar