Chemicals in the environment occur in mixtures rather than as individual entities. Environmental quality monitoring thus faces the challenge to comprehensively assess a multitude of contaminants and potential adverse effects. Effect-based methods have been suggested as complements to chemical analytical characterisation of complex pollution patterns. The regularly observed discrepancy between chemical and biological assessments of adverse effects due to contaminants in the field may be either due to unidentified contaminants or result from interactions of compounds in mixtures. Here, we present an interlaboratory study where individual compounds and their mixtures were investigated by extensive concentration-effect analysis using 19 different bioassays. The assay panel consisted of 5 whole organism assays measuring apical effects and 14 cell- and organism-based bioassays with more specific effect observations. Twelve organic water pollutants of diverse structure and unique known modes of action were studied individually and as mixtures mirroring exposure scenarios in freshwaters. We compared the observed mixture effects against component-based mixture effect predictions derived from additivity expectations (assumption of non-interaction). Most of the assays detected the mixture response of the active components as predicted even against a background of other inactive contaminants. When none of the mixture components showed any activity by themselves then the mixture also was without effects. The mixture effects observed using apical endpoints fell in the middle of a prediction window defined by the additivity predictions for concentration addition and independent action, reflecting well the diversity of the anticipated modes of action. In one case, an unexpectedly reduced solubility of one of the mixture components led to mixture responses that fell short of the predictions of both additivity mixture models. The majority of the specific cell- and organism-based endpoints produced mixture responses in agreement with the additivity expectation of concentration addition. Exceptionally, expected (additive) mixture response did not occur due to masking effects such as general toxicity from other compounds. Generally, deviations from an additivity expectation could be explained due to experimental factors, specific limitations of the effect endpoint or masking side effects such as cytotoxicity in in vitro assays. The majority of bioassays were able to quantitatively detect the predicted non-interactive, additive combined effect of the specifically bioactive compounds against a background of complex mixture of other chemicals in the sample. This supports the use of a combination of chemical and bioanalytical monitoring tools for the identification of chemicals that drive a specific mixture effect. Furthermore, we demonstrated that a panel of bioassays can provide a diverse profile of effect responses to a complex contaminated sample. This could be extended towards representing mixture adverse outcome pathways. Our findings support the ongoing development of bioanalytical tools for (i) compiling comprehensive effect-based batteries for water quality assessment, (ii) designing tailored surveillance methods to safeguard specific water uses, and (iii) devising strategies for effect-based diagnosis of complex contamination.
Surface waters can contain a diverse range of organic pollutants, including pesticides, pharmaceuticals and industrial compounds. While bioassays have been used for water quality monitoring, there is limited knowledge regarding the effects of individual micropollutants and their relationship to the overall mixture effect in water samples. In this study, a battery of in vitro bioassays based on human and fish cell lines and whole organism assays using bacteria, algae, daphnids and fish embryos was assembled for use in water quality monitoring. The selection of bioassays was guided by the principles of adverse outcome pathways in order to cover relevant steps in toxicity pathways known to be triggered by environmental water samples. The effects of 34 water pollutants, which were selected based on hazard quotients, available environmental quality standards and mode of action information, were fingerprinted in the bioassay test battery. There was a relatively good agreement between the experimental results and available literature effect data. The majority of the chemicals were active in the assays indicative of apical effects, while fewer chemicals had a response in the specific reporter gene assays, but these effects were typically triggered at lower concentrations. The single chemical effect data were used to improve published mixture toxicity modeling of water samples from the Danube River. While there was a slight increase in the fraction of the bioanalytical equivalents explained for the Danube River samples, for some endpoints less than 1% of the observed effect could be explained by the studied chemicals. The new mixture models essentially confirmed previous findings from many studies monitoring water quality using both chemical analysis and bioanalytical tools. In short, our results indicate that many more chemicals contribute to the biological effect than those that are typically quantified by chemical monitoring programs or those regulated by environmental quality standards. This study not only demonstrates the utility of fingerprinting single chemicals for an improved understanding of the biological effect of pollutants, but also highlights the need to apply bioassays for water quality monitoring in order to prevent underestimation of the overall biological effect.
- MeSH
- biotest metody MeSH
- buněčné linie MeSH
- chemické látky znečišťující vodu * MeSH
- kvalita vody * MeSH
- lidé MeSH
- monitorování životního prostředí metody MeSH
- řeky MeSH
- ryby MeSH
- voda MeSH
- zvířata MeSH
- Check Tag
- lidé MeSH
- zvířata MeSH
- Publikační typ
- časopisecké články MeSH
- práce podpořená grantem MeSH
Bioassays are particularly useful tools to link the chemical and ecological assessments in water quality monitoring. Different methods cover a broad range of toxicity mechanisms in diverse organisms, and account for risks posed by non-target compounds and mixtures. Many tests are already applied in chemical and waste assessments, and stakeholders from the science-police interface have recommended their integration in regulatory water quality monitoring. Still, there is a need to address bioassay suitability to evaluate water samples containing emerging pollutants, which are a current priority in water quality monitoring. The presented interlaboratory study (ILS) verified whether a battery of miniaturized bioassays, conducted in 11 different laboratories following their own protocols, would produce comparable results when applied to evaluate blinded samples consisting of a pristine water extract spiked with four emerging pollutants as single chemicals or mixtures, i.e. triclosan, acridine, 17α-ethinylestradiol (EE2) and 3-nitrobenzanthrone (3-NBA). Assays evaluated effects on aquatic organisms from three different trophic levels (algae, daphnids, zebrafish embryos) and mechanism-specific effects using in vitro estrogenicity (ER-Luc, YES) and mutagenicity (Ames fluctuation) assays. The test battery presented complementary sensitivity and specificity to evaluate the different blinded water extract spikes. Aquatic organisms differed in terms of sensitivity to triclosan (algae > daphnids > fish) and acridine (fish > daphnids > algae) spikes, confirming the complementary role of the three taxa for water quality assessment. Estrogenicity and mutagenicity assays identified with high precision the respective mechanism-specific effects of spikes even when non-specific toxicity occurred in mixture. For estrogenicity, although differences were observed between assays and models, EE2 spike relative induction EC50 values were comparable to the literature, and E2/EE2 equivalency factors reliably reflected the sample content. In the Ames, strong revertant induction occurred following 3-NBA spike incubation with the TA98 strain, which was of lower magnitude after metabolic transformation and when compared to TA100. Differences in experimental protocols, model organisms, and data analysis can be sources of variation, indicating that respective harmonized standard procedures should be followed when implementing bioassays in water monitoring. Together with other ongoing activities for the validation of a basic bioassay battery, the present study is an important step towards the implementation of bioanalytical monitoring tools in water quality assessment and monitoring.
- MeSH
- biotest MeSH
- chemické látky znečišťující vodu MeSH
- čištění vody MeSH
- kvalita vody * MeSH
- monitorování životního prostředí MeSH
- voda * MeSH
- zvířata MeSH
- Check Tag
- zvířata MeSH
- Publikační typ
- časopisecké články MeSH
Surface water can contain countless organic micropollutants, and targeted chemical analysis alone may only detect a small fraction of the chemicals present. Consequently, bioanalytical tools can be applied complementary to chemical analysis to detect the effects of complex chemical mixtures. In this study, bioassays indicative of activation of the aryl hydrocarbon receptor (AhR), activation of the pregnane X receptor (PXR), activation of the estrogen receptor (ER), adaptive stress responses to oxidative stress (Nrf2), genotoxicity (p53) and inflammation (NF-κB) and the fish embryo toxicity test were applied along with chemical analysis to water extracts from the Danube River. Mixture-toxicity modeling was applied to determine the contribution of detected chemicals to the biological effect. Effect concentrations for between 0 to 13 detected chemicals could be found in the literature for the different bioassays. Detected chemicals explained less than 0.2% of the biological effect in the PXR activation, adaptive stress response, and fish embryo toxicity assays, while five chemicals explained up to 80% of ER activation, and three chemicals explained up to 71% of AhR activation. This study highlights the importance of fingerprinting the effects of detected chemicals.
- MeSH
- biotest MeSH
- chemické látky znečišťující vodu analýza toxicita MeSH
- ekotoxikologie metody MeSH
- embryo nesavčí účinky léků MeSH
- NF-kappa B MeSH
- organické látky analýza toxicita MeSH
- receptory aromatických uhlovodíků metabolismus MeSH
- receptory pro estrogeny metabolismus MeSH
- řeky chemie MeSH
- ryby embryologie MeSH
- steroidní receptory metabolismus MeSH
- techniky in vitro MeSH
- teoretické modely MeSH
- testy genotoxicity metody MeSH
- testy toxicity metody MeSH
- zvířata MeSH
- Check Tag
- zvířata MeSH
- Publikační typ
- časopisecké články MeSH
- práce podpořená grantem MeSH
