Direct and Indirect Effects of the Fungicide Carbendazim in Tropical Freshwater Microcosms

  • Michiel A. Daam
  • Kriengkrai Satapornvanit
  • Paul J. Van den Brink
  • António J. A. Nogueira
Article

Abstract

Direct and indirect effects of the fungicide carbendazim on ecosystem structure and functioning were studied ≤8 weeks after application (nominal concentrations: 0, 3.3, 33, 100, and 1000 μg/L) to outdoor microcosms in Thailand. Direct effects on macroinvertebrates are discussed in detail in a separate article. The present article presents the effects on other end points and discusses the hypothesized ecologic effect chain. Negative treatment effects on the zooplankton community were only recorded for the highest carbendazim treatment (NOECcommunity = 100 μg/L). The rotifer Keratella tropica, cladocerans (Moina micrura, Ceriodaphnia cornuta, and Diaphanosoma sp.), and cyclopoid copepods were decreased or even eliminated at this treatment level. The decrease in zooplankton and macroinvertebrate abundances was accompanied by an increase in numbers of several tolerant invertebrates, presumably caused by a release from competition and predation. The death of sensitive invertebrates probably also led to an overall decreased grazing pressure because increased levels of chlorophyll-a and bloom of the floating macrophyte Wolffia sp. were noted. The increase in primary producers is discussed to be the probable cause of changes in physicochemical water conditions, eventually resulting in an anoxic water layer during the last 3 weeks of the experiment. This is likely to have resulted in decreased invertebrate abundances noted in that period. Furthermore, the decreased decomposition of Musa (banana) leaves observed 8 weeks after application is considered to be the indirect effect of a decreased microbial activity resulting from these anoxic water conditions, rather than a direct toxic effect of carbendazim.

Keywords

Zooplankton Community Carbendazim Cyclopoid Copepod Apple Snail Zooplankton Taxon 
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.

Notes

Acknowledgements

This study was funded by the Portuguese government (scholarship SFRH/BD/8213/2002) and the European Commission’s INCO: International Scientific Cooperation Projects (MAMAS project, contract number ICA4-2000-10247). The authors are indebted to P. Yang-ngarm for nutrient analysis and to the staff of the AIT hatchery for technical assistance.

References

  1. Alekseev VR (2002) Copepoda. In: Fernando CH (ed) A guide to tropical freshwater zooplankton. Backhuys, Leiden, The Netherlands, pp 123–187Google Scholar
  2. American Public Health Association (1992) Standard methods for the examination of water and wastewater. American Public Health Organization, Washington, DCGoogle Scholar
  3. Bourdeau P, Haines JA, Klein W, Murti CRK (1989) Ecotoxicology and climate; with special reference to hot and cold climates. St. Edmundsbury Press, Bury St. Edmunds, Suffolk, Great BritainGoogle Scholar
  4. Brock TCM, Lahr J, Van den Brink PJ (2000) Ecological risk of pesticides in freshwater ecosystems. Part 1: Herbicides. Alterra report 088, Wageningen, The NetherlandsGoogle Scholar
  5. Brock TCM, Crum SJH, Deneer JW, Heimbach F, Roijackers RMM, Sinkeldam JA (2004) Comparing aquatic risk assessment methods for the photosynthesis-inhibiting herbicides metribuzin and metamitron. Environ Pollut 130:403–426CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Campbell IC, Parnrong S (2001) Limnology in Thailand: present status and future needs. Verh Internat Verein Limnol 27:2135–2141Google Scholar
  7. Carlsson NOL, Brönmark C, Hansson LA (2004) Invading herbivory: the golden apple snail alters ecosystem functioning in Asian wetlands. Ecology 85:1575–1580CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Chunyanuwat P (2005) Thailand. In: Proceedings of the Asia regional workshop on the implementation, monitoring and observance of the international code of conduct on the distribution and use of pesticides. Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations, Regional Office for Asia and the Pacific, July 26–28, 2005, Bangkok, Thailand, pp 176–183Google Scholar
  9. Corbari L, Carbonel P, Massabuau JC (2004) How a low tissue O2 strategy could be conserved in early crustaceans: the example of the podocopid ostracods. J Exp Biol 207:4415–4425CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Cuppen JGM, Van den Brink PJ, Camps E, Uil KF, Brock TCM (2000) Impact of the fungicide carbendazim in freshwater microcosms. I. Water quality, breakdown of particulate organic matter and responses of macroinvertebrates. Aquat Toxicol 48:233–250CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Daam MA, Satapornvanit K, Van den Brink PJ, Nogueira AJA (2009) Sensitivity of macroinvertebrates to carbendazim under semi-field conditions in Thailand: implications for the use of temperate toxicity data in a tropical risk assessment of fungicides. Chemosphere 74:1187–1194CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Domingues I, Guilhermo L, Soares AMVM, Nogueira AJA, Monoghan KA (2009) Influence of exposure scenario on pesticide toxicity in the midge Kiefferulus calligaster (Kieffer). Ecotoxicol Environ Saf 72:450–457CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Dudgeon D (1999) Tropical Asian streams; zoobenthos, ecology and conservation. Hong Kong University Press, Hong KongGoogle Scholar
  14. Ecobichon DJ (2001) Pesticide use in developing countries. Toxicology 160:27–33CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Hommen U, Veith D, Dülmer U (1994) A computer program to evaluate plankton data from freshwater field tests. In: Hill IR, Heimbach F, Leeuwangh P, Matthiessen P (eds) Freshwater field tests for hazard assessment of chemicals. Lewis, Boca Raton, FL, pp 503–513Google Scholar
  16. Jungbluth F (2000) Economic analysis of crop protection in citrus production in central Thailand. Special Issue Publication Series No. 4, University of Hannover, Hannover, GermanyGoogle Scholar
  17. Kutikova LA (2002) Rotifera. In: Fernando CH (ed) A guide to tropical freshwater zooplankton. Backhuys, Leiden, The Netherlands, pp 23–68Google Scholar
  18. Kwok KWH, Leung KMY, Chu VKH, Lam PKS, Morritt D, Maltby L et al (2007) Comparison of tropical and temperate freshwater species sensitivities to chemicals: implications for deriving safe extrapolation factors. Integr Environ Assess Manag 3:49–67CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Moed JR, Hallegraeff GM (1987) Some problems in the estimation of chlorophyll-a and phaeopigments from pre- and post-acidification spectrophotometric measurements. Internationale Revue der gesamten Hydrobiologie und Hydrographie 63:787–800CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Morris PF, Barker WG (1977) Oxygen transport rates through mats of Lemna minor and Wolffia sp. and oxygen tension within and below the mat. Can J Bot 55:1926–1932CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Pingali PL (1997) Living with reduced insecticide use for tropical rice in Asia. Food Policy 22:107–118CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Preston BL, Snell TW, Dusenbery DB (1999) The effects of sublethal pentachlorophenol exposure on predation risk in freshwater rotifer species. Aquat Toxicol 47:93–105CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Racke KD (2003) What do we know about the fate of pesticides in tropical ecosystems? ACS Sym Ser 853:96–123CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Roessink I, Crum SJH, Bransen F, Van Leeuwen E, Van Kerkum F, Koelmans AA et al (2006) Impact of triphenyltin acetate in microcosms simulating floodplain lakes. I. Influence of sediment quality. Ecotoxicology 15:267–293CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Satapornvanit K, Baird DJ, Little DC, Milwain GK, Van den Brink PJ, Beltman WHJ et al (2004) Risks of pesticide use in aquatic ecosystems adjacent to mixed vegetable and monocrop fruit growing areas in Thailand. Aust J Ecotoxicol 10:85–95Google Scholar
  26. Segers H (2001) Zoogeography of the Southeast Asian Rotifera. Hydrobiologia 446/447:233–246CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Slijkerman DME, Baird DJ, Conrad A, Jak RG, Van Straalen NM (2004) Assessing structural and functional plankton responses to carbendazim. Environ Toxicol Chem 23:455–462CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Ter Braak CJF, Smilauer P (2002) CANOCO reference manual and CanoDraw for windows user’s guide. Software for canonical community ordination (version 4.5). Microcomputer Power, Ithaca, NYGoogle Scholar
  29. Thapinta A, Hudak PF (2000) Pesticide use and residual occurrence in Thailand. Environ Monit Assess 60:103–114CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Van den Brink PJ, Hattink J, Bransen F, Van Donk E, Brock TCM (2000) Impact of the fungicide carbendazim in freshwater microcosms. II. Zooplankton, primary producers and final conclusions. Aquat Toxicol 48:251–264CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Victor R (2002) Ostracoda. In: Fernando CH (ed) A guide to tropical freshwater zooplankton. Backhuys, Leiden, The Netherlands, pp 189–233Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media, LLC 2009

Authors and Affiliations

  • Michiel A. Daam
    • 1
    • 2
  • Kriengkrai Satapornvanit
    • 3
  • Paul J. Van den Brink
    • 4
    • 5
  • António J. A. Nogueira
    • 1
  1. 1.CESAM and Department of BiologyUniversity of AveiroAveiroPortugal
  2. 2.Instituto Superior de AgronomiaTechnical University of LisbonLisbonPortugal
  3. 3.Department of Fishery Biology, Faculty of FisheriesKasetsart UniversityBangkokThailand
  4. 4.AlterraWageningen University and Research CentreWageningenThe Netherlands
  5. 5.Department of Aquatic Ecology and Water Quality Management, Wageningen University and Research CentreWageningen UniversityWageningenThe Netherlands

Personalised recommendations