Pharmaceuticals and personal care products: A critical review of the impacts on fish reproduction

Abstract

Research in environmental toxicology involving pharmaceuticals and personal care products (PPCPs) has increased greatly over the last 10-15 years. Much research has been focused on the endocrine-disrupting potential of PPCPs, as they relate to negative population impacts of aquatic organisms. This review assesses the current data on the reported effects of PPCPs on fish reproduction with an emphasis on fecundity, a predictor of population effects. Studies of both individual PPCPs and PPCP mixtures are presented. As the majority of individual PPCP studies reviewed demonstrate negative effects on fish fecundity, we relate these findings to detected surface water concentrations of these compounds. Very few studies involving PPCP mixtures have been conducted; however, the need for these types of studies is warranted as fish are most likely exposed to mixtures of PPCPs in the wild. In addition, laboratory and field assessments of wastewater treatment plant (WWTP) effluents, a major source of PPCPs, are reviewed. Much of the data provided from these assessments are variable and do not generally demonstrate negative impacts on reproduction, or the studies are unable to directly associate observed effects with WWTP effluents. Finally, future research considerations are outlined to provide an avenue into understanding how wild populations of fish are affected by PPCPs. These considerations are aimed at determining the adaptation potential of fish exposed to mixtures of PPCPs over multiple generations. As global use of PPCPs continually rises, the need to discern the effects of chronic exposure to PPCPs is greatly increased.

20 Years of fish immunotoxicology – what we know and where we are

“…The input of pharmaceuticals into surface waters can represent a serious hazard for aquatic animals (Overturf et al 2015). Among the studies analyzed for this review, 4% of the used chemicals were pharmaceuticals (article-based analysis).…”

The challenge: Establishing policy in an uncertain world: What can be done to address emerging environmental contaminants having indeterminate or subtle ecological or human impacts?

“…Ultimately, it would be beneficial if laboratory assays could be used to predict effects seen in the field. Even laboratory effects of these chemicals can be variable and are not well tied to changes seen in the field, which leads to questions as to whether PPCPs are having an environmental impact [15]. This, of course, is complicated by the fact that the environment contains not only a mixture of low concentrations of PPCPs but larger concentrations of traditional pollutants as well as other stressors such as low oxygen levels, particulate matter, and other factors that can influence populations and communities of organisms.…”

Neuroendocrine disruption of organizational and activational hormone programming in poikilothermic vertebrates

“…Several reviews provide insight into the growing body of evidence reporting exposure effects attributed to NED (Gore and Patisaul 2010; Waye and Trudeau 2011; LePage et al 2011; Ottinger and Dean 2011; León-Olea et al 2014). Some NED were characterized first and more generally as endocrine disrupting chemicals (EDC) (Frye et al 2012; Söffker and Tyler 2012), and others emerged from investigations examining effects of neuroactive pharmaceuticals and other personal care products measured in wastewater treatment plant effluent and surface water (Overturf et al 2015; Waye and Trudeau 2011; Mennigen et al 2011). Many studies in adults determined effects on reproductive behavior, but other key behaviors may be affected and they need to be studied in greater detail.…”