Environmental Toxicology
Myriophyllum aquaticum versus Lemna minor: Sensitivity and recovery potential after exposure to atrazine
Article first published online: 14 DEC 2011
DOI: 10.1002/etc.748
Copyright © 2011 SETAC
Additional Information
How to Cite
Teodorović, I., Knežević, V., Tunić, T., Čučak, M., Lečić, J. N., Leovac, A. and Tumbas, I. I. (2012), Myriophyllum aquaticum versus Lemna minor: Sensitivity and recovery potential after exposure to atrazine. Environmental Toxicology and Chemistry, 31: 417–426. doi: 10.1002/etc.748
Publication History
- Issue published online: 12 JAN 2012
- Article first published online: 14 DEC 2011
- Accepted manuscript online: 17 NOV 2011 07:20PM EST
- Manuscript Accepted: 6 OCT 2011
- Manuscript Revised: 12 JUL 2011
- Manuscript Received: 11 MAY 2011
Vol. 31, Issue 7, 1676, Article first published online: 14 JUN 2012
Keywords:
- Aquatic macrophytes;
- Atrazine;
- Lemna minor;
- Myriophyllum aquaticum;
- Risk assessment
Abstract
The relative sensitivity and recovery potential of two aquatic macrophyte species, Lemna minor and Myriophyllum aquaticum, exposed to atrazine (concentration ranges 80–1,280 µg/L and 40–640 µg/L, respectively) were evaluated using slightly adapted standard protocol for Lemna spp.: relative growth rates (RGR) and yield of both plants were measured in 3-d-long intervals during the exposure and recovery phase. Myriophyllum aquaticum was also exposed to atrazine-spiked sediment (0.1–3.7 µg/g) in a water-free system. The results of M. aquaticum sediment contact tests showed that root- and shoot-based growth parameters are equally sensitive endpoints. In the water (sediment-free) test system, L. minor recovered after short (3 d) and longer exposure (7 d) to all atrazine concentrations after only a 5- to 6-d-long recovery phase. The recovery of M. aquaticum after short exposure was slower and less efficient: after 12 d of recovery phase the final biomass of plants exposed to 380 and 640 µg/L was below the initial values. The last interval RGR provides a good indication of plant recovery potential regardless of species growth strategy. If compared to L. minor, the difference in growth rate, sensitivity, lag phase, recovery potential from water-column substances, and also suitability for studies investigating the effect of sediment-bound pollutants advocates the use of M. aquaticum as an additional macrophyte species in risk assessment. Environ. Toxicol. Chem. 2012;31:417–426. © 2011 SETAC

1552-8618/asset/olbannerleft.gif?v=1&s=27ff872c6376061529ca080147e2f8fb8fdbcad4)
1552-8618/asset/olbannerright.gif?v=1&s=963f2820acff318b2289658b893e9f78f3bd2c1f)
