Comparative biomarker responses to urban pollution in three polychaete species: Perinereis cultrifera, Diopatra neapolitana, and Marphysa sanguinea from the lagoon of Tunis

Coastal lagoons are among the most vulnerable ecosystems as they are often exposed to different anthropogenic activities. The Polychaetes, which are dominant components in macrobenthic community, are particularly exposed to contamination. The current study was designed to assess and compare the sens...

Ausführliche Beschreibung

Gespeichert in:
Bibliographische Detailangaben
Veröffentlicht in:Environmental monitoring and assessment 2021-03, Vol.193 (3), p.119, Article 119
Hauptverfasser: Mdaini, Zied, Telahigue, Khaoula, Hajji, Tarek, Rabeh, Imen, El Cafsi, M’hamed, Tremblay, Rejean, Gagné, Jean Pierre
Format: Artikel
Sprache:eng
Schlagworte:
Online-Zugang:Volltext
Tags: Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
Beschreibung
Zusammenfassung:Coastal lagoons are among the most vulnerable ecosystems as they are often exposed to different anthropogenic activities. The Polychaetes, which are dominant components in macrobenthic community, are particularly exposed to contamination. The current study was designed to assess and compare the sensitivity of different polychaetes species towards urban pollution. To do this, three polychaete species: Perinereis cultrifera , Diopatra neapolitana , and Marphysa sanguinea , were collected from the Tunis South Lagoon during summer 2013. A set of biomarkers indicative of genotoxicity (DNA damage), biotransformation, and oxidative stress (glutathione S-transferase, GST) as well as immune response (cyclooxygenase activity (COX), lysozyme activity, and nitric oxide level (NOx)), was used. The results revealed that D. neapolitana and P. cultrifera exhibited higher genetic alteration and GST activity and more prominent immune response when compared with M. sanguinea . These findings denote of the higher sensitivity of D. neapolitana and P. cultrifera to urban pollution and suggest their possible use in environmental biomonitoring programs.
ISSN:0167-6369
1573-2959
DOI:10.1007/s10661-021-08906-5