Comparison of Three Marine Screening Tests and Four Oslo and Paris Commission Procedures to Evaluate Toxicity of Offshore Chemicals

Abstract

Abstract-The results from the screening toxicity tests Artemia salina, Microtox, and Mitochondria RET test were compared with those obtained from OSPAR (Oslo and Paris Commissions)-authorized procedures for testing of offshore chemicals (Skeletonema costatum, Acartia tonsa, Abra alba, and Corophium volutator). In this study 82 test substances (26 non-water soluble) were included. The Microtox test was found to be the most sensitive of the three screening tests. Microtox and Mitochondria RET test results showed good correlation with results from Acartia and Skeletonema testing, and it was concluded that the Microtox test was a suitable screening test as a base for assessment of further testing, especially regarding water-soluble chemicals. Sensitivity of Artemia salina to the tested chemicals was too low for it to be an appropriate bioassay organism for screening testing. A very good correlation was found between the results obtained with the Skeletonema and Acartia tests. The results indicated no need for more than one of the Skeletonema or Acartia tests if the Skeletonema median effective concentration or Acartia median lethal concentration was greater than 200 mg/L. The sediment-reworker tests (A. alba or C. volutator) for chemicals that are likely to end up in the sediments (non-water soluble or surfactants) should be performed, independent of results from screening tests and other OSPAR species.

Toxicity of landfill leachate to sea urchin development with a focus on ammonia

“…Most samples were toxic to the gametes and embryos of H. tuberculata and the sea urchin tests were most sensitive across most leachates. As highlighted in the comparative assessment of the four tests (Binet et al 2003;Byrne et al 2003), bacterial luminescence and submitochondrial particle function were most sensitive to leachates with a high content of organic chemicals, a feature characteristic of these tests (Weideborg et al 1997;Argese et al 1998;Qureshi et al 1998). The large standard deviations in the EC50s for each site (Table 2) reflect the marked temporal variation in site sample chemistry (Table 1).…”

“…Not surprisingly, none of the tests were consistently sensitive to all samples (statistical comparison in Byrne et al 2003), illustrating the importance of using a battery of tests for monitoring the toxicity of complex mixtures. Although generally less sensitive, bacterial luminescence and submitochondrial particle function are useful as rapid tests for day-to-day monitoring of toxicity (Weideborg et al 1997;Qureshi et al 1998;Argese et al 1998). …”

“…might be released into the marine environment and are often used as part of a battery of bioassays for monitoring the toxicity of complex mixtures such as effluents, sediment pore water and organic effluent from marine fish farms (Weideborg et al 1997;Fernandez and Beiras 2001;Binet et al 2003;Byrne et al 2003;Doyle et al 2003;McCready et al 2004;Carr et al 2006;Marin et al 2007).…”

Utilization of Marine Crustaceans as Study Models: A New Approach in Marine Ecotoxicology for European (REACH) Regulation

“…As a matter of fact, it is normally easy to obtain many individuals starting from commercial cysts. In spite of this, to date the employment of Artemia is controversial particularly owing to its supposed inadequate sensitivity (Weideborg et al, 1997;Davoren et al, 2005). Otherwise, recent studies indicated that the evaluation of survival in Artemia in long-term toxicity tests is an useful and sensitive parameter (Brix et al, 2003(Brix et al, , 2004Manfra et al, 2009).…”

New Development in Aflatoxin Research: From Aquafeed to Marine Cells

“…than other acute toxicity tests (Weideborg et al, 1997) and can be used for the prediction of chemical toxicity in other aquatic organisms (Chen & Que Hee, 1995;Zhao et al, 1995). V. fischeri is a Gram-negative, rod-shaped, flagellate, heterotrophic bacterium recovered in marine ecosystem, with bioluminescence capability (Fig.…”