The project VALIMAR (VALIdation of bioMARkers for the assessment of small stream pollution): objectives, experimental design, summary of results, and recommendations for the application of biomarkers in risk assessment

  • Rita Triebskorn
  • Jürgen Böhmer
  • Thomas Braunbeck
  • Wolfgang Honnen
  • Heinz-R. Köhler
  • Reinhold Lehmann
  • Axel Oberemm
  • Julia Schwaiger
  • Helmut Segner
  • Gerrit Schüürmann
  • Walter Traunspurger
Article

Abstract

Between 1995 and 1999, active and passivebiomonitoring experiments in two small streams,and tests with pollutant mixtures in thelaboratory were performed with brown trout(Salmo trutta f. fario) and stone loach(Barbatula barbatula) in order toevaluate the suitability of biomarkersrepresenting different levels of biologicalorganization for the assessment of pollution insmall streams. The following groups ofbiomarker responses were measured in bothspecies: (1) induction of stress proteins(hsp70) in fish liver, (2) alterations in theactivities of 13 metabolic enzymes and ofacetylcholine esterase in liver or brain in vivo as well as in cultured fish cells, (3)changes in phase I and II biotransformationenzyme activities in liver, (4) responses ofblood parameters, (5) histopathologicalalterations in liver, kidney, gills, andspleen, and (6) ultrastructural effects in theliver, gills, and kidney of individuals, aswell as in fish cell cultures. To supplementthese biomarker studies, (7) behavioral changesof fish and (8) impacts on embryo developmentwere also investigated. In parallel, the teststreams were characterized morphometrically,limnologically and analytically for five years.Furthermore, during the second-half of thisproject, ecological studies characterizingbrown trout and stone loach populationdemography and the fish, macro- andmeiozoobenthos communities in the two teststreams were also included. The present papersummarizes the aims and scopes and the generalresults of this project and provides a detaileddescription of the experimental designs whichare the basis of all related studies reportedin this issue. Recommendations are alsoprovided for the application of biomarkers inrisk assessment of small stream pollution.

biomarkers biomonitoring brown trout stone loach stream pollution validation 

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. Adam, S., M. Pawert, E. Müller & R. Triebskorn, 2000. Das BMBFVerbundprojekt Valimar-Biozönotische Aspekte. In: Arndt, U., Fomin, A. & Lorenz, S. (eds), Bioindikation: 169-174.Google Scholar
  2. Adam, S., M. Pawert, R. Lehmann, B. Roth, E. Müller & R. Triebskorn, 2001. Physicochemical and morphological characterization of two small polluted streams in southwest Germany J. Aquat. Ecosyst. Stress. Recov. 8: 179-194.Google Scholar
  3. Adams, S. M., 1990. Status and use of biological indicators for evaluating the effects of stress on fish. Am. Fish. Soc. Symp. 8: 1-8.Google Scholar
  4. Adams, S. M., K. D. Ham, M. S. Greeley, R. F. LeHew, D. E. Hinton & C. F. Saylor, 1996. Downstream gradients in bioindicator responses: point source contamination effects on fish health. Can. J. Fish. Aquat. Sci. 53: 2177-2187.Google Scholar
  5. Adams, S. M., M. S. Bevelhimer, M. S. Greeley, D. A. Levine & S. J. Teh, 1999. Ecological risk assessment in a large riverreservoir: 6: bioindicators of fish population health. Environ. Toxicol. Chem. 18(4): 628-640.Google Scholar
  6. Adams, S. M., 2000. Assessing sources of stress to aquatic ecosystems using integrated biomarkers. Biological Resource Management Connecting Science and Policy 2000: 17-29.Google Scholar
  7. Adams, S. M., M. S. Greeley & M. G. Ryon, 2000. Evaluating effects of contaminants on fish health at multiple levels of biological organization: Extrapolating from lower to higher levels. Human Ecol. Risk Ass. 6(1): 15-27.Google Scholar
  8. Behrens, A. & H. Segner, 2001. Hepatic biotransformation enzymes of fish exposed to non-point source pollution in small streams. J. Aquat. Ecosyst. Stress. Recov. 8: 281-297.Google Scholar
  9. Beier, S. & W. Traunspurger, 2001. The meiofauna community of two small German streams as indicator of pollution. J. Aquat. Ecosyst. Stress. Recov. 8: 387-405.Google Scholar
  10. Böhmer, J., A. Zenker, B. Ackermann & B. Kappus, 2001. Macrozoobenthos communities and biocoenotic assessment of ecological status in relation to degree of human impact in small streams in southwest Germany. J. Aquat. Ecosyst. Stress. Recov. 8: 407-419.Google Scholar
  11. Braunbeck, T. & M. Strmac, 2001. Assessment of water and sediment contamination in small streams by means of cytological and biochemical alterations in isolated rainbow trout (Oncorhynchus mykiss) hepatocytes. J. Aquat. Ecosyst. Stress. Recov. 8: 337-354.Google Scholar
  12. Collier, T. K., B. F. Anulacion, J. E. Stein, A. Goksøyr & U. Varanasi, 1995. A field evaluation of cytochrome P4501A as a biomarker of contaminant exposure in three species of flatfish. Environ.Toxicol. Chem. 14(1): 143-152.Google Scholar
  13. Depledge, M. H. & M. C. Fossi, 1994. The role of biomarkers in environmental assessment (2). Invertebrates. Ecotoxicology 3: 161-172Google Scholar
  14. Dietze, U., T. Braunbeck, W. Honnen, H.-R. Köhler, J. Schwaiger, H. Segner, R. Triebskorn & G. Schüürmann, 2001. Chemometric discrimination between streams based on chemical, limnological and biological data taken from freshwater fishes and their interrelationships J. Aquat. Ecosyst. Stress. Recov. 8: 319-336.Google Scholar
  15. Förlin, L., T. Andersson, L. Balk & A. Larsson, 1995. Biochemical and physiological effects in fish exposed to bleached kraft mill effluents. Ecotoxicol. Environ. Saf. 30: 164-170.Google Scholar
  16. Gernhöfer, M., M. Pawert, M. Schramm, E. Müller & R. Triebskorn, 2001. Ultrastructural biomarkers as tools to characterize the health status of fish in contaminated streams. J. Aquat. Ecosyst. Stress. Recov. 8: 241-260.Google Scholar
  17. Ham, K. D., S. M. Adams & M. J. Peterson, 1997. Application of multiple bioindicators to differentiate spatial and temporal variability from the effects of contaminant exposure on fish. Ecotoxicol. Environ. Saf. 37: 53-61.Google Scholar
  18. Honnen, W., K. Rath, T. Schlegel, A. Schwinger & D. Frahne, 2001. Chemical analyses of water, sediment and biota in two small streams in southwest Germany. J. Aquat. Ecosyst. Stress. Recov. 8: 195-213.Google Scholar
  19. Köhler, H.-R., C. Bartussek, H. Eckwert, K. Farian, S. Gränzer, T. Knigge & N. Kunz, 2001. The hepatic stress protein (hsp70) response to interacting abiotic parameters in fish exposed to various levels of pollution. J. Aquat. Ecosyst. Stress. Recov. 8: 261-279.Google Scholar
  20. Körner, W., U. Bolz, R. Triebskorn, J. Schwaiger, R.-D. Negele, A. Marx & H. Hagenmaier, 2001. Steroid analysis and xenosteroid potentials in two small streams in southwest Germany. J. Aquat. Ecosyst. Stress. Recov. 8: 215-229.Google Scholar
  21. Konradt, J. & T. Braunbeck, 2001. Alterations of selected metabolic enzymes in fish following long-term exposure to contaminated streams. J. Aquat. Ecosyst. Stress. Recov. 8: 299-318.Google Scholar
  22. Luckenbach T., A. Oberemm, E. Müller & R. Triebskorn, 1999. Untersuchungen zur Wirkung anthropogener Gewässerbelastungen auf die Entwicklung von Bachforellen (Salmo trutta f. fario L.). In: Markert, B. & Oehlmann, J. (eds), Ökotoxikologie. Ecomed, Landsberg, FRG: 399-407.Google Scholar
  23. Luckenbach, T., R. Triebskorn, E. Müller & A. Oberemm, 2001a. Toxicity of waters from two streams to early life stages of brown trout (Salmo trutta f. fario l.), tested under semi-field conditions. Chemosphere, in press.Google Scholar
  24. Luckenbach, T., M. Kilian, R. Triebskorn & A. Oberemm, 2001b. Fish early life stage tests as a tool to assess embryotoxic potentials in small streams. J. Aquat. Ecosyst. Stress. Recov. 8: 355-370.Google Scholar
  25. McCarty, L. S. & K. R. Munkittrick, 1996. Environmental biomarkers in aquatic toxicology: Fiction, fantasy, or functional? Hum. Ecol. Risk Assess. 2(2): 268-274.Google Scholar
  26. Munkittrick, K. R., G. van der Kraak, M. E. McMaster, C. G. Portt, M. R. van der Heuvel & M. R. Servos, 1994. Survey of receivingwater environmental impacts associated with discharges from pulp mills. 2. Gonad size, liver size, hepatic erod activity. Environ. Toxicol. Chem. 13: 1089-1101.Google Scholar
  27. Munkittrick, K. R. & L. S. McCarty, 1995. An integrated approach to aquatic ecosystem health: Top-down, bottom-up or middleout. J. Aquatic Ecosyst. Health 4: 77-90.Google Scholar
  28. Munkittrick, K. R., M. R. Servos, J. H. Carey & G. J. van der Kraak, 1997. Environmental impacts of the pulp and paper wastewater: Evidence for a reduction in environmental effects at North American pulp mills since 1992. Wat. Sci. Tech. 35(2/3): 329-338.Google Scholar
  29. Narbonne, J. F., P. Mora, X. Michel, H. Budzinski, P. Garrigues, M. Lafaurie, J. P. Salaun, J. B. Berge, P. Den-Besten, G. Pagano, C. Porte, D. Livingstone, P. D. Hansen & A. Herbert, 1999. Biological markers of environmental contamination in marine ecosystems: BIOMAR project. J. Toxicol. Toxin Rev. 18(3-4): 205-220.Google Scholar
  30. Pawert, M., E. Müller & R. Triebskorn, 1998. Ultrastructural changes in fish gills as biomarker to assess small stream pollution. Tissue and Cell. 30(6): 617-626.Google Scholar
  31. Peakall, D. B. & C. H. Walker, 1994. The role of biomarkers in environmental assessment (3). Vertebrates. Ecotoxicology 3: 173-179.Google Scholar
  32. Schmidt, H., D. Bernet, T. Wahli, W. Meier & P. Burkhardt-Holm, 1999. Active biomonitoring with brown trout and rainbow trout in diluted sewage plant effluents. J. Fish Biol. 54: 585-596.Google Scholar
  33. Schramm, M., 1998. Zur Ökotoxikologie von kleinen Fließgewässern-Leberultrastruktur und hämatologische Parameter als Biomarker bei Fischen. Medien Verlag Köhler, Tübingen, FRG, ISBN 3-932694-33-3, 250 pp.Google Scholar
  34. Schramm, M., E.Müller & R. Triebskorn, 1998. Brown trout (Salmo trutta) f. fario) liver ultrastructure as biomarkers of small stream pollution. Biomarkers 3(2): 93-108.Google Scholar
  35. Schwaiger, J., R. Wanke, S. Adam, M. Pawert, W. Honnen & R. Triebskorn, 1997. The use of histopathological indicators to evaluate contaminant-related stress in fish. J. Aquat. Ecosyst. Stress Recov. 6: 75-86.Google Scholar
  36. Schwaiger, J., 2001. Histopathological alterations and parasite infection in fish: indicators of multiple stress factors. J. Aquat. Ecosyst. Stress. Recov. 8: 231-240.Google Scholar
  37. Siligato, S. & J. Böhmer, 2001. Using indicators of fish health at multiple levels of biological organization to assess effects of stream pollution in xouthwest Germany. J. Aquat. Ecosyst. Stress. Recov. 8: 371-386.Google Scholar
  38. Steyermark, A. C., J. R. Spotila, D. Gillette & H. Isseroff, 1999. Biomarkers indicate health problems in brown bullheads from the industrialized Schuylkill River, Philadelphia. Transact. Americ. Fish. Soc. 128(2): 328-338.Google Scholar
  39. Strmac, M. & T. Braunbeck, 2000. Isolated hepatocytes of rainbow trout (Oncorhynchus mykiss) as a tool to discriminate between differently contaminated small river systems. Toxicol. in Vitro 14: 361-377.Google Scholar
  40. Triebskorn, R., H.-R. Köhler, W. Honnen, M. Schramm, S. M. Adams & E. F. Müller, 1997. Induction of heat shock proteins, changes in liver ultrastructure, and alterations of fish behavior: Are these biomarkers related and are they useful to reflect the state of pollution in the field? J. Aquat. Ecosyst. Stress Recov. 6: 57-73.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Kluwer Academic Publishers 2001

Authors and Affiliations

  • Rita Triebskorn
    • 1
    • 2
  • Jürgen Böhmer
    • 3
  • Thomas Braunbeck
    • 4
  • Wolfgang Honnen
    • 5
  • Heinz-R. Köhler
    • 1
  • Reinhold Lehmann
    • 6
  • Axel Oberemm
    • 7
  • Julia Schwaiger
    • 8
  • Helmut Segner
    • 9
  • Gerrit Schüürmann
    • 9
  • Walter Traunspurger
    • 10
  1. 1.Animal Physiological EcologyUniversity of TübingenTübingen
  2. 2.Germany; Steinbeis-Transfer Center for Ecotoxicology and EcophysiologyRottenburgGermany
  3. 3.Institute of ZoologyUniversity of HohenheimStuttgartGermany
  4. 4.Department of ZoologyUniversity of HeidelbergHeidelbergGermany
  5. 5.Steinbeis-Transfer Center for Applied and Environmental ChemistryReutlingenGermany
  6. 6.Geo-Ökologie-ConsultingWeilheimGermany
  7. 7.Institute for Freshwater Biology and Inland FisheriesGermany;
  8. 8.Laboratory for Fish PathologyMunichGermany;
  9. 9.Department of Chemical EcotoxicologyUFZ Centre for Environmental Research Leipzig-HalleLeipzigGermany;
  10. 10.Animal EcologyUniversity of BielefeldBielefeldGermany

Personalised recommendations