Effects and Implications of Trophic Transfer and Accumulation of CeO2

Jan 13, 2014 - ...
0 downloads 0 Views 736KB Size
Subscriber access provided by DUESSELDORF LIBRARIES

Article

Effects and implications of trophic transfer and accumulation of CeO nanoparticles in a marine mussel 2

Jon Robert Conway, Shannon Kareem Hanna, Hunter Lenihan, and Arturo A. Keller Environ. Sci. Technol., Just Accepted Manuscript • DOI: 10.1021/es404549u • Publication Date (Web): 13 Jan 2014 Downloaded from http://pubs.acs.org on January 20, 2014

Just Accepted “Just Accepted” manuscripts have been peer-reviewed and accepted for publication. They are posted online prior to technical editing, formatting for publication and author proofing. The American Chemical Society provides “Just Accepted” as a free service to the research community to expedite the dissemination of scientific material as soon as possible after acceptance. “Just Accepted” manuscripts appear in full in PDF format accompanied by an HTML abstract. “Just Accepted” manuscripts have been fully peer reviewed, but should not be considered the official version of record. They are accessible to all readers and citable by the Digital Object Identifier (DOI®). “Just Accepted” is an optional service offered to authors. Therefore, the “Just Accepted” Web site may not include all articles that will be published in the journal. After a manuscript is technically edited and formatted, it will be removed from the “Just Accepted” Web site and published as an ASAP article. Note that technical editing may introduce minor changes to the manuscript text and/or graphics which could affect content, and all legal disclaimers and ethical guidelines that apply to the journal pertain. ACS cannot be held responsible for errors or consequences arising from the use of information contained in these “Just Accepted” manuscripts.

Environmental Science & Technology is published by the American Chemical Society. 1155 Sixteenth Street N.W., Washington, DC 20036 Published by American Chemical Society. Copyright © American Chemical Society. However, no copyright claim is made to original U.S. Government works, or works produced by employees of any Commonwealth realm Crown government in the course of their duties.

Page 1 of 26

Environmental Science & Technology

1

Effects and implications of trophic transfer and

2

accumulation of CeO2 nanoparticles in a marine

3

mussel

4

Jon R. Conway, Shannon K. Hanna, Hunter S. Lenihan, Arturo A. Keller*

5

University of California Center for Environmental Implications of Nanotechnology

6

Bren School of Environmental Science and Management

7

University of California, Santa Barbara, CA 93106

8 9

KEYWORDS

10

CeO2,

Engineered

11

galloprovincialis

Nanomaterials,

Trophic

Transfer,

Subchronic

Exposure,

Mytilus

12 13

ABSTRACT

14

Bivalves are hypothesized to be key organisms in the fate and transport of engineered

15

nanomaterials (ENMs) in aquatic environments due to their ability to filter and concentrate

16

particles from water, but how different exposure pathways influence their interactions with

ACS Paragon Plus Environment

1

Environmental Science & Technology

Page 2 of 26

17

ENMs is not well understood. In a five week experiment we tested how interactions between

18

CeO2 ENMs and a marine mussel, Mytilus galloprovincialis, are affected through two exposure

19

methods, direct and through sorption to phytoplankton. We found that phytoplankton sorbed

20

ENMs in 99.9% of CeO2 was filtered from the water over a 2 day time

133

period. In a previous study using M. galloprovincialis and CeO2 ENMs at a similar concentration

134

(1 mg L-1)11 18 MΩcm), and dried for 72 h at 60°C. Tissue samples were weighed and digested

139

in a 3:2 mixture of 30% H2O2:HNO3 at 80°C for 2.5 h. Pseudofeces was allowed to settle in

140

sample cups after aeration was removed then collected by pipette and triple washed with purified

141

water. Identical drying, weighing, and digestion techniques were followed for pseudofeces

142

samples. Since mussel feces dissolve in water, it was assumed that in the closed systems used in

143

this experiment they were re-filtered by the mussels and eventually the CeO2 ENMs would be

144

captured in tissue or pseudofeces. Tissue and pseudofeces samples were analyzed for Ce via

145

inductively coupled plasma atomic emission spectroscopy (ICP-AES, iCAP 6300 Thermo

146

Scientific, Waltham, MA), with a detection limit of 50 µg L-1. Standard solutions were measured

147

every 15 samples for quality assurance. Results are reported as Ce but samples are assumed to

148

have contained Ce in the form of nanoparticulate CeO2 before acid digestion.

149

Phytoplankton/CeO2 Interactions

150

Sorption of CeO2 ENMs to I. galbana was determined by the separation of the fraction of

151

phytoplankton with sorbed CeO2 using centrifugal split-flow thin-channel (CSPLITT)

ACS Paragon Plus Environment

7

Environmental Science & Technology

Page 8 of 26

152

fractionation (CFS 2000, Postnova Analytics, Salt Lake City, UT). Operational parameters (flow

153

rates and centrifuge rpm) were calibrated for this experiment to give a roughly 50/50 split of both

154

I. galbana and CeO2 ENMs into the two fractions (lighter and denser) produced by this

155

technique, which gave the greatest sensitivity to changes in either component or fraction. The

156

cutoff density between the light and dense fractions is approximately 0.5 g cm-3, the average

157

density of an I. galbana cell. Sorption of CeO2 ENMs to a cell will increase its density and

158

increase the likelihood it will be captured in the dense fraction.

159

To perform a separation, 0.5 mL of phytoplankton culture exposed to CeO2 ENMs was

160

injected into the channel at 0.5 mL min-1 using a 1:7 filtered seawater:deionized water carrier

161

solution with a flow rate of 4.5 mL min-1 and spun at 600 rpm for 15 minutes, followed by a

162

second injection of a second 0.5 mL of exposed phytoplankton. Dense and light fractions were

163

collected during these steps, which corresponded respectively to phytoplankton with and without

164

sorbed CeO2. After an additional 15 minutes, the centrifuge was shut off and collection was

165

routed entirely through the dense outflow for 20 minutes before stopping. Phytoplankton

166

concentrations were determined through visual counts. Ce concentrations could not be reliably

167

detected in either fraction via ICP-AES analysis due to the large dilution necessitated by this

168

technique.

169

Sorption of CeO2 ENMs to phytoplankton cells was verified by exposing cultures to 1, 10, 20,

170

and 30 mg L-1 CeO2 ENMs for 30 min and separating sorbed and unsorbed fractions. Sorption

171

kinetics were estimated by exposing phytoplankton cultures to 30 mg L-1 CeO2 ENMs and

172

measuring phytoplankton densities in each fraction in a time series, beginning immediately after

173

exposure then at 6, 12, 24, 48, 72, and 96 h. Cell weight was calculated by comparing the mass

174

of identical volumes of seawater and phytoplankton cultures of a known cell density.

ACS Paragon Plus Environment

8

Page 9 of 26

Environmental Science & Technology

175

Dissolved extracellular polymeric substances (EPS) were extracted from I. galbana cultures by

176

centrifuging cultures at 1545 g for 30 minutes and collecting the supernatant24. EPS protein and

177

carbohydrate content was measured using the modified Lowry Protein Assay Kit (Pierce, 23240,

178

USA) and the anthrone method,25 respectively.

179

Statistical Analyses

180

We tested whether clearance rate, Ce concentrations in pseudofeces, pseudofeces mass, and

181

phytoplankton growth varied as functions of time and CeO2 exposure treatment using two-way

182

ANOVA. We also tested whether the sorption of CeO2 to phytoplankton varied over time with a

183

one-way ANOVA. When ANOVA showed significant differences, Tukey’s tests were conducted

184

posthoc. A linear regression was performed to test the dependence of clearance rate of mussels

185

exposed to CeO2 ENMs directly on the length of exposure. Levene’s test was used to ensure

186

homogeneity of variance between groups. Tissue Ce concentrations did not follow a normal

187

distribution, therefore Kruskal-Wallis tests with posthoc Dunn’s test for multiple comparisons

188

were used to determine if Ce tissue concentrations varied significantly as functions of time,

189

exposure method, and exposure concentration. Hydrodynamic diameters of CeO2 ENMs in

190

dissolved EPS solution and phytoplankton growth media were compared using a two-sample t-

191

test. All statistical analyses were performed using the statistical software R (v. 2.11.1).

192 193

3. Results & Discussion

194

Phytoplankton/CeO2 Interactions

195

In I. galbana cultures exposed to 30 mg L-1 CeO2 ENMs for 8 days, we found that the impact

196

of CeO2 exposure on cell count depends on exposure time (ANOVA, F2,8 = 2.46, p1 μm) aggregates could

215

be seen under a light microscope after 1 h when CeO2 ENMs were suspended in seawater at an

216

equivalent concentration. This is most likely a consequence of sorption and not disaggregation

217

by EPS because when CeO2 ENMs were suspended at a concentration of 30 mg L-1 in an

218

dissolved EPS solution (containing 2.3±0.1 μg mL-1 carbohydrates and 13.3±0.0 μg mL-1

219

proteins (±SE)) aggregate sizes measured by DLS were not significantly different (two-sample

220

t(2.558)=0.5, p>0.5) from those in growth media only. Additionally, sedimentation of aggregates

ACS Paragon Plus Environment

10

Page 11 of 26

Environmental Science & Technology

221

identical to that seen in seawater was observed. Due to the presence of phytoplankton, CeO2

222

particle size in exposed cultures could not be determined through DLS to give a direct

223

comparison, but together these observations point to the conclusion that all or nearly all ENMs

224

sorbed to phytoplankton. This gives a per cell mass load of 27±1 picograms CeO2 (±SE) at 30

225

mg L-1 exposure concentration, which corresponds to a non-steady state partitioning coefficient

226

(Ks, the ratio of phytoplankton Ce concentration to the concentration of Ce in the surrounding

227

media, akin to a bioconcentration factor), of 1.1×104.

228

Accumulation & Rejection of CeO2 ENMs by M. galloprovincialis

229

Our primary hypothesis in this experiment was that mussels would accumulate more Ce when

230

exposed to CeO2 that was sorbed to phytoplankton than free CeO2 in the water column, and that

231

they would accumulate more Ce over time. This was refuted by our results as we found that the

232

impact of exposure concentration on Ce concentration in mussel tissue varied significantly with

233

time (Kruskal-Wallis, H=52.05, p0.5, Figure 3).

235

Although there was a difference in accumulation based on exposure method on day 5 (Kruskal-

236

Wallis, H=10.58, p0.5) or exposure (ANOVA, F2,3

242

= 0.412, p>0.1) corresponding concentration change in pseudofeces over time (Table S2). This

ACS Paragon Plus Environment

11

Environmental Science & Technology

Page 12 of 26

243

was due to the increased production of pseudofeces with CeO2 exposure (Figure 4). An estimate

244

of the mass balance for each treatment can be seen in Figure 5.

245

Based on these data the non-steady state partitioning coefficients (Kt, the ratio of tissue Ce

246

concentration to the concentration of Ce in the surrounding media, similar to bioaccumulation

247

factors) for each treatment were low, ranging from 8.8 to 18 with a median of 11.

248

corresponds well with the results of two other studies using marine invertebrates.14,

249

pseudofeces excreted by the mussels, a pseudofeces-water partitioning coefficient (Kp, the ratio

250

of pseudofeces Ce concentration to the concentration of Ce in the surrounding media) was also

251

determined for each treatment. Expressed as log10Kp, the values we calculated have a range

252

between 3.45 and 4.0 with a median of 3.6.

This 26

For

253

We found accumulation of CeO2 in mussel tissues over time in all experimental groups, which

254

when considered with the constant Ce concentrations in pseudofeces suggests that some ENMs

255

were being stored either in the digestive glands or elsewhere in the organism and were not

256

immediately captured in pseudofeces and excreted. It is unlikely that a significant amount

257

remained in the gut as bivalves have been shown to excrete micron-scale particles after 30 h or

258

less with and without additional food.27, 28 In seawater CeO2 ENMs form aggregates near 1 µm

259

and so will likely be egested well before the 72 h allowed for here. CeO2 ENMs have been

260

shown to disaggregate at lower pH,29 so the presence of Ce in mussel tissues detected by

261

elemental analysis could be due either to disaggregation or dissolution caused by the low pH

262

encountered in the digestive gland. This would allow for passage of ions or individual ENM

263

primary particles through the gut wall. Entry into body tissues of 10 nm amine-coated Au ENMs

264

in a freshwater bivalve30 and ionic zinc released by ZnO ENMs in M. galloprovincialis11 has

265

been seen, which suggests that Ce ions and/or CeO2 primary particles may behave similarly.

ACS Paragon Plus Environment

12

Page 13 of 26

Environmental Science & Technology

266

Physiological Effects of CeO2 Exposure

267

A small amount of mortality (