Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Chub (Leuciscus cephalus) as a Bioindicator of Contamination of the Vltava River by Synthetic Musk Fragrances

  • Published:
Archives of Environmental Contamination and Toxicology Aims and scope Submit manuscript

    We’re sorry, something doesn't seem to be working properly.

    Please try refreshing the page. If that doesn't work, please contact support so we can address the problem.

Abstract

Synthetic musk fragrances, which are contained in almost all scented consumer products, enter aquatic environment mainly by way of wastewater paths. To monitor contamination of the Vltava River by these relatively persistent chemicals in the surroundings of Prague industrialized agglomeration, chub (Leuciscus cephalus) was employed as a bioindicator. Validated gas chromatography–mass spectrometry method was used for fish sample examination. Polycyclic musks, represented by 1,3,4,6,7,8-hexahydro-4,6,6,7,8,8-hexamethyl-cyclopenta-(γ)-2-benzopyran (galaxolide) and 1-(5,6,7,8-tetrahydro-3,5,5,6,8,8-hexamethyl-2-naphthalenyl)-ethanone (tonalide) were the most abundant representatives of this group; their levels in fillets were in the range of 1.7 to 105.9 µg/kg and 0.9 to 19.3 µg/kg wet weight, respectively. Nitro-musks, musk ketone, and musk xylene were also detected in most samples; nevertheless, their levels were lower, ≤2 µg/kg. Significant contamination of resident fish was recognised in the locality of Klecany, which is located 6 km downstream from a large municipal sewage-treatment plant (STP). High levels of musks found in the locality of Vraňany, 32 km downstream from Prague STP, were caused not only by this emission source but probably also by the effluents from the local plant that produces cleaning agents in Velvary.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • Bester K, Hühnerfuss H, Lange W, Rimkus G, Theobald N (1998) Results of non target screening of lipophilic organic pollutants in the German bight II: Polycyclic musk fragrances. Wat Res 32:1857–1863

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Boer de J, Brinkman UAT (1994) The use of fish as biomonitors for the determination of the aquatic environment by persistent organochlorine compounds. Trends Anal Chem 13:397–404

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Breitholtz M, Wollenberger L, Dinan L (2003) Effects of four synthetic musks on the life cycle of the harpacticoid copepod Nitocra spinipes. Aquatic Toxicol 63:103–118

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Dietrich DR (1999) Editorial. Toxicol Lett 111:1–4

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Duedahl-Olesen L, Cederberg T, Pedersen KH, Hojgard A (2005) Synthetic musk fragrances in trout from Danish fish farms and human milk. Chemosphere 61:422–431

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • García-Jares C, Llompart M, Polo M, Salgado C, Macías S, Cela R (2002) Optimisation of a solid-phase microextraction method for synthetic musk compounds in water. J Chromatogr A 963:277–285

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gatermann R, Hellou J, Hühnerfuss H, Rimkus G, Zitko V (1999) Polycyclic and nitromusks in the environment: A comparison between Canadian and European aquatic biota samples. Chemosphere 38:3431–3441

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Gatermann R, Biselli S, Hühnerfuss H, Rimkus GG, Hecker M, Karbe L (2002a) Synthetic musks in the environment. Part 1: Species-dependent bioaccumulation of polycyclic and nitro musk fragrances in freshwater fish and mussels. Arch Environ Contam Toxicol 42:437–446

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Gatermann R, Biselli S, Hühnerfuss H, Rimkus GG, Franke S, Hecker M, et al. (2002b) Synthetic musks in the environment. Part 2: Enantioselective transformation of the polycyclic musk fragrances HHCB, AHTN, AHDI, and ATII in freshwater fish. Arch Environ Contam Toxicol 42:447–453

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Hajšlová J, Šetková L (2004) Synthetic musk fragrances in the environment. In: Rimkus GG (ed) The handbook of environmental chemistry. Springer-Verlag, Germany, pp 151–188

    Google Scholar 

  • Heberer T (2002) Occurrence, fate and assessment of polycyclic musk residues in the aquatic environment of urban areas-a review. Acta Hydrochim Hydrobiol 30:227–243

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kannan K, Reiner JL, Hun Yun S, Perrotta EE, Tao L, Johnson-Restrepo B, et al. (2005) Polycyclic musk compounds in higher trophic level aquatic organisms and humans from the United States. Chemosphere 61:693–700

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Kněžourková K (2004) Sledování kontaminace vodního ekosystému organickými polutanty. Diploma thesis, Institute of Chemical Technology, Prague

    Google Scholar 

  • Langedijk AC, Spinelli S, Anguille C, Hermans P, Nederlof J, Butenandt J, et al. (1999) Insight into odorant perception: The crystal structure and binding characteristics of antibody fragments directed against the musk odorant traseolide. J Mol Biol 292:855–869

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Ricking M, Schwarzbauer J, Hellou J, Svenson A, Zitko V (2003) Polycyclic aromatic musk compounds in sewage treatment plant effluents of Canada and Sweden―First results. Marine Pollut Bull 46:410–417

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Rimkus GG (1999) Polycyclic musk fragrances in the aquatic ecosystem. Toxicol Lett 111:37–56

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Rimkus G (2004) The handbook of environmental chemistry. Volume 3, Part X: Synthetic musk fragrances in the environment. Springer-Verlag, Germany

    Google Scholar 

  • Šetková L (2004) The fate of organic contaminants in aquatic ecosystem. Doctoral thesis, Institute of Chemical Technology, Prague

  • Wann Y, Wei Q, Hu J, Jin X, Zhang Z, Zhen H, et al. (2007) Levels, tissue distribution, and age-related accumulation of synthetic musk fragrances in Chinese sturgeon (Acipenser sinensis): Comparison to organochlorines. Environ Sci Technol 41:424–430

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgments

The development of analytical method for MCs was carried out within the projects COST 636 and MSM 6046137505 funded by Czech Ministry of Youth and Education. The study was supported by USB RIFCH No. MSM 6007665809 and Ministry of the Environment of the Czech Republic VaV/650/5/03.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Food Chemistry and Analysis, Institute of Chemical Technology, Technická 3, 166 28, Prague 6, Czech Republic

    K. Hájková, J. Pulkrabová & J. Hajšlová

  2. České Budějovice, Research Institute of Fish Culture and Hydrobiology, University of South Bohemia, Zátiší 728/II, 389 01, Vodňany, Czech Republic

    T. Randák & V. Žlábek

Authors
  1. K. Hájková
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. J. Pulkrabová
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. J. Hajšlová
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. T. Randák
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  5. V. Žlábek
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to J. Hajšlová.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Hájková, K., Pulkrabová, J., Hajšlová, J. et al. Chub (Leuciscus cephalus) as a Bioindicator of Contamination of the Vltava River by Synthetic Musk Fragrances. Arch Environ Contam Toxicol 53, 390–396 (2007). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00244-006-0190-4

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00244-006-0190-4

Keywords

Search

Navigation