Feeding and reproduction measurement in Gammarus fossarum: recommendations for freshwater sediment toxicity assessment.

IF 3.3 4区 环境科学与生态学 Q2 ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCES
Cécile Luc-Rey, Anthony G E Mathiron, Pierre-Louis Hombert, Nicolas Delorme, Benoît J D Ferrari, Hélène Budzinski, Guillaume Jubeaux, Olivier Geffard
{"title":"Feeding and reproduction measurement in Gammarus fossarum: recommendations for freshwater sediment toxicity assessment.","authors":"Cécile Luc-Rey, Anthony G E Mathiron, Pierre-Louis Hombert, Nicolas Delorme, Benoît J D Ferrari, Hélène Budzinski, Guillaume Jubeaux, Olivier Geffard","doi":"10.1093/inteam/vjag156","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Sediments are a key compartment of aquatic ecosystems, providing habitat for benthic species while acting as both sink and source of contaminants. Sediment quality assessment relies largely on chemical analyses that do not account for contaminant bioavailability or mixture effects. Sediment toxicity bioassays could address these gaps, but standardized test using European species remain scarce. This study aimed to develop two new bioassays on sediments - feeding and reproduction- using a freshwater amphipod Gammarus fossarum, a species widely used in European ecotoxicology. A total of 137 natural sediments, characterized in terms of physical and chemical properties, from four French river basins were tested, alongside a formulated sediment used as a laboratory control and reference. Three key questions were investigated: (1) whether grain size and organic carbon content act as confounding factors on survival, consumption rate of MUG® and fecundity; (2) whether a formulated sediment provides a suitable laboratory control; and (3) whether the two bioassays can discriminate between natural sediments of contrasting toxicity. Results showed no correlation between grain size or organic carbon content and consumption rate or fecundity, indicating that these properties did not confound the interpretation of bioassays. While survival in formulated sediment met established validity criteria, feeding rate and fecundity were significantly altered, questioning its suitability as a reference. A threshold-based statistical approach, derived from the distribution of responses across natural sediments, was therefore proposed as an alternative interpretation method and successfully identified toxic sites. These findings support that feeding and reproduction bioassays with G. fossarum are sensitive and discriminating tools for sediment quality monitoring, under the Water Framework Directive, and dredged sediment management. Further work on validity criteria and interlaboratory reproducibility is needed to support their future standardization.</p>","PeriodicalId":13557,"journal":{"name":"Integrated Environmental Assessment and Management","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":3.3000,"publicationDate":"2026-10-05","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Integrated Environmental Assessment and Management","FirstCategoryId":"93","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1093/inteam/vjag156","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"环境科学与生态学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCES","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Sediments are a key compartment of aquatic ecosystems, providing habitat for benthic species while acting as both sink and source of contaminants. Sediment quality assessment relies largely on chemical analyses that do not account for contaminant bioavailability or mixture effects. Sediment toxicity bioassays could address these gaps, but standardized test using European species remain scarce. This study aimed to develop two new bioassays on sediments - feeding and reproduction- using a freshwater amphipod Gammarus fossarum, a species widely used in European ecotoxicology. A total of 137 natural sediments, characterized in terms of physical and chemical properties, from four French river basins were tested, alongside a formulated sediment used as a laboratory control and reference. Three key questions were investigated: (1) whether grain size and organic carbon content act as confounding factors on survival, consumption rate of MUG® and fecundity; (2) whether a formulated sediment provides a suitable laboratory control; and (3) whether the two bioassays can discriminate between natural sediments of contrasting toxicity. Results showed no correlation between grain size or organic carbon content and consumption rate or fecundity, indicating that these properties did not confound the interpretation of bioassays. While survival in formulated sediment met established validity criteria, feeding rate and fecundity were significantly altered, questioning its suitability as a reference. A threshold-based statistical approach, derived from the distribution of responses across natural sediments, was therefore proposed as an alternative interpretation method and successfully identified toxic sites. These findings support that feeding and reproduction bioassays with G. fossarum are sensitive and discriminating tools for sediment quality monitoring, under the Water Framework Directive, and dredged sediment management. Further work on validity criteria and interlaboratory reproducibility is needed to support their future standardization.

沙鼠的摄食和繁殖测量:淡水沉积物毒性评估的建议。
沉积物是水生生态系统的关键区域,为底栖生物提供栖息地,同时也是污染物的汇和源。沉积物质量评估主要依赖于化学分析,而不考虑污染物的生物利用度或混合物效应。沉积物毒性生物测定可以解决这些空白,但是使用欧洲物种的标准化测试仍然很少。本研究旨在开发两种新的沉积物生物测定方法——取食和繁殖——使用淡水片脚动物Gammarus fossarum,这是一种在欧洲生态毒理学中广泛使用的物种。研究人员对来自法国四个河流流域的137种天然沉积物进行了物理和化学性质的测试,同时还测试了一种用作实验室对照和参考的配方沉积物。研究了三个关键问题:(1)籽粒大小和有机碳含量是否为影响麦聚糖®成活率、消耗率和繁殖力的混杂因素;(2)配方沉积物是否提供合适的实验室控制;(3)两种生物测定法能否区分毒性对比的天然沉积物。结果显示,颗粒大小或有机碳含量与消耗速率或繁殖力之间没有相关性,表明这些特性不会混淆生物测定的解释。虽然在配方沉积物中的存活率符合既定的有效性标准,但摄食率和繁殖力显著改变,质疑其作为参考的适用性。因此,基于阈值的统计方法被提出作为一种替代解释方法,并成功地确定了有毒地点,该方法来源于自然沉积物的响应分布。这些发现表明,在《水框架指令》和疏浚沉积物管理的指导下,用沙蚤进行饲养和繁殖生物测定是监测沉积物质量的灵敏和有区别的工具。需要进一步开展效度标准和实验室间可重复性方面的工作,以支持其未来的标准化。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
Integrated Environmental Assessment and Management
Integrated Environmental Assessment and Management ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCESTOXICOLOGY&nbs-TOXICOLOGY
CiteScore
5.90
自引率
6.50%
发文量
156
期刊介绍: Integrated Environmental Assessment and Management (IEAM) publishes the science underpinning environmental decision making and problem solving. Papers submitted to IEAM must link science and technical innovations to vexing regional or global environmental issues in one or more of the following core areas: Science-informed regulation, policy, and decision making Health and ecological risk and impact assessment Restoration and management of damaged ecosystems Sustaining ecosystems Managing large-scale environmental change Papers published in these broad fields of study are connected by an array of interdisciplinary engineering, management, and scientific themes, which collectively reflect the interconnectedness of the scientific, social, and environmental challenges facing our modern global society: Methods for environmental quality assessment; forecasting across a number of ecosystem uses and challenges (systems-based, cost-benefit, ecosystem services, etc.); measuring or predicting ecosystem change and adaptation Approaches that connect policy and management tools; harmonize national and international environmental regulation; merge human well-being with ecological management; develop and sustain the function of ecosystems; conceptualize, model and apply concepts of spatial and regional sustainability Assessment and management frameworks that incorporate conservation, life cycle, restoration, and sustainability; considerations for climate-induced adaptation, change and consequences, and vulnerability Environmental management applications using risk-based approaches; considerations for protecting and fostering biodiversity, as well as enhancement or protection of ecosystem services and resiliency.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信
小红书