6 research outputs found
Biomarkers in monitoring - a review
Get PDFĂ
rsliste 2006Biological effects are increasingly used to monitor impacts of contaminants in marine ecosystems. Biomarkers have been defined as âbiochemical, cellular, physiological or behavioural variations in the tissue or body fluids or at the level of whole organism that provide evidence of exposure to chemical pollutants, and may also indicate a toxic effectâ. The biomarkers reviewed here were PAH bile metabolites, cytochrome P4501A, glutathione S-transferase, markers for DNA damage (adducts, alkaline unwinding, Comet assay), micronucleus formation, peroxisomal proliferation, acetyl cholinesterase inhibition, metallothionein, vitellogenin and delta-aminolevulinic acid dehydratase. Focus for the review was dose-response relationships, confounding factors, links to population effects, baseline values, assessment criteria and quality assurance for the relevant biomarker. Whereas correlative links to population-relevant effects have been found for some biomarkers, e.g. biomarkers for DNA damage, most biomarkers are generally more useful as markers for possible impacts elsewhere in ecosystems.OL
Heart rate, respiration and total oxyradical scavenving capacity of the Arctic spider crab, Hyas araneus, following exposure to crude oil via sediment and injection.
No full textTotal oxyradical scavenging capacity and cell membranes stability of haemocytes of the Arctic scallop, Chlamys islandicus, following benzo(a)pyrene exposure.
No full textMeasurements of oxygen consumption in Mytilus edulis during exposure to, and recovery from, high sublethal concentrations of formaldehyde, benzene and phenol
No full textBiomarker responses and PAH uptake in Mya truncata following exposure to oil-contaminated sediment in an Arctic fjord (Svalbard).
No full textWater Column Monitoring 2012 Troll C platform
Get PDFThe WCM programme was performed at the Troll field where the potential biological effects of operational discharges were investigated. The 2012 WCM programme focused on caged mussels allowing for an increased number of sampling stations and biological effects endpoints to be measured. Therefore, the programme involved 13 mussel stations including 2 reference stations and 11 exposure stations. The positions of the 11 exposure stations at 500 m, 1000 m and 2000 m from the Troll C platform were positioned with respect to the predicted, and later confirmed, plume direction (Fig 1). Mussels (Mytilus spp.) were held at a depth of 15 m at all stations and retrieved after an exposure period of 6 weeks.
The current meter data confi1med the expected dominant direction of the PW plume, and the stations selected for the biomarker analysis were in the PW plume axis direction
