Oyster reproduction is affected by exposure to polystyrene microplastics
Edited by Marguerite A. Xenopoulos, Trent University, Durham, ON, Canada, and accepted by the Editorial Board December 22, 2015 (received for review September 25, 2015)
Commentary
February 22, 2016
Letter
July 12, 2016
Significance
Plastics are a contaminant of emerging concern accumulating in marine ecosystems. Plastics tend to break down into small particles, called microplastics, which also enter the marine environment directly as fragments from a variety of sources, including cosmetics, clothing, and industrial processes. Given their ubiquitous nature and small dimensions, the ingestion and impact of microplastics on marine life are a cause for concern, notably for filter feeders. Oysters were exposed to polystyrene microparticles, which were shown to interfere with energy uptake and allocation, reproduction, and offspring performance. A drop in energy allocation played a major role in this reproductive impairment. This study provides ground-breaking data on microplastic impacts in an invertebrate model, helping to predict ecological impact in marine ecosystems.
Abstract
Plastics are persistent synthetic polymers that accumulate as waste in the marine environment. Microplastic (MP) particles are derived from the breakdown of larger debris or can enter the environment as microscopic fragments. Because filter-feeder organisms ingest MP while feeding, they are likely to be impacted by MP pollution. To assess the impact of polystyrene microspheres (micro-PS) on the physiology of the Pacific oyster, adult oysters were experimentally exposed to virgin micro-PS (2 and 6 µm in diameter; 0.023 mg·L−1) for 2 mo during a reproductive cycle. Effects were investigated on ecophysiological parameters; cellular, transcriptomic, and proteomic responses; fecundity; and offspring development. Oysters preferentially ingested the 6-µm micro-PS over the 2-µm-diameter particles. Consumption of microalgae and absorption efficiency were significantly higher in exposed oysters, suggesting compensatory and physical effects on both digestive parameters. After 2 mo, exposed oysters had significant decreases in oocyte number (−38%), diameter (−5%), and sperm velocity (−23%). The D-larval yield and larval development of offspring derived from exposed parents decreased by 41% and 18%, respectively, compared with control offspring. Dynamic energy budget modeling, supported by transcriptomic profiles, suggested a significant shift of energy allocation from reproduction to structural growth, and elevated maintenance costs in exposed oysters, which is thought to be caused by interference with energy uptake. Molecular signatures of endocrine disruption were also revealed, but no endocrine disruptors were found in the biological samples. This study provides evidence that micro-PS cause feeding modifications and reproductive disruption in oysters, with significant impacts on offspring.
Data Availability
Data deposition: The data reported in this paper have been deposited in the Gene Expression Omnibus (GEO) database, www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/geo (accession no. GSE71845).
Acknowledgments
We thank F. Galgani, M. Van der Meulen, L. Devriese, D. Vethaak, T. Maes, D. Mazurais, M. Alunno-Bruscia, S. Pouvreau, and P. Boudry for helpful discussions; H. McCombie for her help in editing the English; C. Laot, C. Quéré, M. Boulais, P. Le Souchu, P. Miner, B. Petton, A. L. Cassonne, and N. Le Cuff for technical assistance; all the staff of the Argenton hatchery; and the staff of the INSERM U1078 microarray core facility (Brest, France) and of the Proteomics Core Facility Biogenouest, INSERM U1085 (Rennes, France). This study was partly funded by the MICRO EU Interreg-funded project MicroPlastics (MICRO 09-002-BE).
Supporting Information
Supporting Information (PDF)
Supporting Information
- Download
- 1.42 MB
pnas.1519019113.sd01.xls
- Download
- 59.50 KB
pnas.1519019113.sd02.xls
- Download
- 48.50 KB
pnas.1519019113.sd03.xls
- Download
- 47.50 KB
References
1
CM Rochman, et al., Policy: Classify plastic waste as hazardous. Nature 494, 169–171 (2013).
2
JR Jambeck, R Geyer, C Wilcox, et al., Plastic waste inputs from land into the ocean. Science 347, 768–771 (2015).
3
C Wilcox, E Van Sebille, BD Hardesty, Threat of plastic pollution to seabirds is global, pervasive, and increasing. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA 112, 11899–11904 (2015).
4
, eds C Arthur, J Baker, H Bamford, Proceedings of the International Research Workshop on the Occurrence, Effects, and Fate of Microplastic Marine Debris. September 9–11, 2008. NOAA Technical Memorandum NOS-OR&R-30. p 530. (2009).
5
MF Costa, et al., On the importance of size of plastic fragments and pellets on the strandline: a snapshot of a Brazilian beach. Environ Monit Assess 168, 299–304 (2010).
6
AL Andrady, Microplastics in the marine environment. Mar Pollut Bull 62, 1596–1605 (2011).
7
M Cole, P Lindeque, C Halsband, TS Galloway, Microplastics as contaminants in the marine environment: A review. Mar Pollut Bull 62, 2588–2597 (2011).
8
M Eriksen, et al., Plastic pollution in the world’s oceans: More than 5 trillion plastic pieces weighing over 250,000 tons afloat at sea. PLoS One 9, e111913 (2014).
9
A Cózar, et al., Plastic debris in the open ocean. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA 111, 10239–10244 (2014).
10
A Wegner, E Besseling, EM Foekema, P Kamermans, AA Koelmans, Effects of nanopolystyrene on the feeding behavior of the blue mussel (Mytilus edulis L.). Environ Toxicol Chem 31, 2490–2497 (2012).
11
M Cole, et al., Microplastic ingestion by zooplankton. Environ Sci Technol 47, 6646–6655 (2013).
12
MA Browne, SJ Niven, TS Galloway, SJ Rowland, RC Thompson, Microplastic moves pollutants and additives to worms, reducing functions linked to health and biodiversity. Curr Biol 23, 2388–2392 (2013).
13
SL Wright, D Rowe, RC Thompson, TS Galloway, Microplastic ingestion decreases energy reserves in marine worms. Curr Biol 23, R1031–R1033 (2013).
14
MA Browne, A Dissanayake, TS Galloway, DM Lowe, RC Thompson, Ingested microscopic plastic translocates to the circulatory system of the mussel, Mytilus edulis (L). Environ Sci Technol 42, 5026–5031 (2008).
15
N von Moos, P Burkhardt-Holm, A Köhler, Uptake and effects of microplastics on cells and tissue of the blue mussel Mytilus edulis L. after an experimental exposure. Environ Sci Technol 46, 11327–11335 (2012).
16
L Van Cauwenberghe, M Claessens, MB Vandegehuchte, CR Janssen, Microplastics are taken up by mussels (Mytilus edulis) and lugworms (Arenicola marina) living in natural habitats. Environ Pollut 199, 10–17 (2015).
17
CG Avio, et al., Pollutants bioavailability and toxicological risk from microplastics to marine mussels. Environ Pollut 198, 211–222 (2015).
18
ER Graham, JT Thompson, Deposit- and suspension-feeding sea cucumbers (Echinodermata) ingest plastic fragments. J Exp Mar Biol Ecol 368, 22–29 (2009).
19
E Besseling, A Wegner, EM Foekema, MJ van den Heuvel-Greve, AA Koelmans, Effects of microplastic on fitness and PCB bioaccumulation by the lugworm Arenicola marina (L.). Environ Sci Technol 47, 593–600 (2013).
20
K-WW Lee, WJ Shim, OY Kwon, J-HH Kang, Size-dependent effects of micro polystyrene particles in the marine copepod Tigriopus japonicus. Environ Sci Technol 47, 11278–11283 (2013).
21
E Besseling, B Wang, M Lürling, AA Koelmans, Nanoplastic affects growth of S. obliquus and reproduction of D. magna. Environ Sci Technol 48, 12336–12343 (2014).
22
M Cole, P Lindeque, E Fileman, C Halsband, TS Galloway, The impact of polystyrene microplastics on feeding, function and fecundity in the marine copepod Calanus helgolandicus. Environ Sci Technol 49, 1130–1137 (2015).
23
EL Teuten, SJ Rowland, TS Galloway, RC Thompson, Potential for plastics to transport hydrophobic contaminants. Environ Sci Technol 41, 7759–7764 (2007).
24
RW Chapman, et al., The transcriptomic responses of the eastern oyster, Crassostrea virginica, to environmental conditions. Mol Ecol 20, 1431–1449 (2011).
25
DK Barnes, F Galgani, RC Thompson, M Barlaz, Accumulation and fragmentation of plastic debris in global environments. Philos Trans R Soc Lond B Biol Sci 364, 1985–1998 (2009).
26
MA Browne, TS Galloway, RC Thompson, Spatial patterns of plastic debris along Estuarine shorelines. Environ Sci Technol 44, 3404–3409 (2010).
27
JE Ward, SE Shumway, Separating the grain from the chaff: Particle selection in suspension- and deposit-feeding bivalves. J Exp Mar Biol Ecol 300, 83–130 (2004).
28
AL Lusher, M McHugh, RC Thompson, Occurrence of microplastics in the gastrointestinal tract of pelagic and demersal fish from the English Channel. Mar Pollut Bull 67, 94–99 (2013).
29
N Hussain, V Jaitley, AT Florence, Recent advances in the understanding of uptake of microparticulates across the gastrointestinal lymphatics. Adv Drug Deliv Rev 50, 107–142 (2001).
30
E Navarro, JIPIP Iglesias, APP Camacho, U Labarta, The effect of diets of phytoplankton and suspended bottom material on feeding and absorption of raft mussels (Mytilus galloprovincialis Lmk). J Exp Mar Biol Ecol 198, 175–189 (1996).
31
BL Bayne, Phenotypic flexibility and physiological tradeoffs in the feeding and growth of marine bivalve molluscs. Integr Comp Biol 44, 425–432 (2004).
32
L Donaghy, et al., Reactive oxygen species in unstimulated hemocytes of the pacific oyster Crassostrea gigas: A mitochondrial involvement. PLoS One 7, e46594 (2012).
33
M Nagao, B Parimoo, K Tanaka, Developmental, nutritional, and hormonal regulation of tissue-specific expression of the genes encoding various acyl-CoA dehydrogenases and alpha-subunit of electron transfer flavoprotein in rat. J Biol Chem 268, 24114–24124 (1993).
34
P Lettéron, et al., Glucocorticoids inhibit mitochondrial matrix acyl-CoA dehydrogenases and fatty acid beta-oxidation. Am J Physiol 272, G1141–G1150 (1997).
35
DR Levitan, Sperm velocity and longevity trade off each other and influence fertilization in the sea urchin Lytechinus variegatus. Proc Biol Sci 267, 531–534 (2000).
36
R Cannuel, PG Beninger, Is oyster broodstock feeding always necessary? A study using oocyte quality predictors and validators in Crassostrea gigas. Aquat Living Resour 18, 35–43 (2005).
37
SM Baynes, BR Howell, The influence of egg size and incubation temperature on the condition of Solea solea (L.) larvae at hatching and first feeding. J Exp Mar Biol Ecol 199, 59–77 (1996).
38
NR Mtango, S Potireddy, KE Latham, Oocyte quality and maternal control of development. Int Rev Cell Mol Biol 268, 223–290 (2008).
39
C Leclerc, P Guerrier, M Moreau, Role of dihydropyridine-sensitive calcium channels in meiosis and fertilization in the bivalve molluscs Ruditapes philippinarum and Crassostrea gigas. Biol Cell 92, 285–299 (2000).
40
M Rohlfs, R Arasada, P Batsios, J Janzen, M Schleicher, The Ste20-like kinase SvkA of Dictyostelium discoideum is essential for late stages of cytokinesis. J Cell Sci 120, 4345–4354 (2007).
41
KS Sinsimer, JJ Lee, SY Thiberge, ER Gavis, Germ plasm anchoring is a dynamic state that requires persistent trafficking. Cell Reports 5, 1169–1177 (2013).
42
MR Iyengar, et al., Expression of creatine kinase isoenzyme during oogenesis and embryogenesis in the mouse. Dev Biol 96, 263–268 (1983).
43
L Gricourt, M Mathieu, K Kellner, An insulin-like system involved in the control of Pacific oyster Crassostrea gigas reproduction: hrIGF-1 effect on germinal cell proliferation and maturation associated with expression of an homologous insulin receptor-related receptor. Aquaculture 251, 85–98 (2006).
44
M Tena-Sempere, The roles of kisspeptins and G protein-coupled receptor-54 in pubertal development. Curr Opin Pediatr 18, 442–447 (2006).
45
SALM Kooijman Dynamic Energy Budget Theory for Metabolic Organisation (Cambridge Univ Press, Cambridge, UK, 2010).
46
EB Muller, RM Nisbet, HA Berkley, Sublethal toxicant effects with dynamic energy budget theory: Model formulation. Ecotoxicology 19, 48–60 (2010).
47
A Huvet, et al., Disruption of amylase genes by RNA interference affects reproduction in the Pacific oyster Crassostrea gigas. J Exp Biol 218, 1740–1747 (2015).
48
M Waibel, et al., Bibenzyl- and stilbene-core compounds with non-polar linker atom substituents as selective ligands for estrogen receptor beta. Eur J Med Chem 44, 3412–3424 (2009).
49
R Kiyama, Y Wada-Kiyama, Estrogenic endocrine disruptors: Molecular mechanisms of action. Environ Int 83, 11–40 (2015).
50
CM Rochman, T Kurobe, I Flores, SJ Teh, Early warning signs of endocrine disruption in adult fish from the ingestion of polyethylene with and without sorbed chemical pollutants from the marine environment. Sci Total Environ 493, 656–661 (2014).
51
M Filella, Questions of size and numbers in environmental research on microplastics: Methodological and conceptual aspects. Environ Chem 12, 527–538 (2015).
52
C Fabioux, et al., Temperature and photoperiod drive Crassostrea gigas reproductive internal clock. Aquaculture 250, 458–470 (2005).
53
M Savina, S Pouvreau, A comparative ecophysiological study of two infaunal filter-feeding bivalves: Paphia rhomboïdes and Glycymeris glycymeris. Aquaculture 239, 289–306 (2004).
54
H Haberkorn, et al., Cellular and biochemical responses of the oyster Crassostrea gigas to controlled exposures to metals and Alexandrium minutum. Aquat Toxicol 147, 158–167 (2014).
55
C Corporeau, et al., Proteomic identification of quality factors for oocytes in the Pacific oyster Crassostrea gigas. J Proteomics 75, 5554–5563 (2012).
56
M Suquet, et al., Survival, growth and reproduction of cryopreserved larvae from a marine invertebrate, the Pacific oyster (Crassostrea gigas). PLoS One 9, e93486 (2014).
57
R Gonzalez Araya, C Mingant, B Petton, R Robert, Influence of diet assemblage on Ostrea edulis broodstock conditioning and subsequent larval development. Aquaculture 364-365, 272–280 (2012).
58
M Callebaut, C Meeussen, Method for the preservation of polystyrene latex beads in tissue sections. Stain Technol 2, 100–102 (1989).
59
R Sussarellu, et al., Additive transcriptomic variation associated with reproductive traits suggest local adaptation in a recently settled population of the Pacific oyster, Crassostrea gigas. BMC Genomics 16, 808 (2015).
60
RC Gentleman, et al., Bioconductor: Open software development for computational biology and bioinformatics. Genome Biol 5, R80 (2004).
61
G Zhang, et al., The oyster genome reveals stress adaptation and complexity of shell formation. Nature 490, 49–54 (2012).
62
A Conesa, et al., Blast2GO: A universal tool for annotation, visualization and analysis in functional genomics research. Bioinformatics 21, 3674–3676 (2005).
63
I Bernard, G de Kermoysan, S Pouvreau, Effect of phytoplankton and temperature on the reproduction of the Pacific oyster Crassostrea gigas: Investigation through DEB theory. J Sea Res 66, 349–360 (2011).
64
C Lacroix, et al., Development of an innovative and “green” stir bar sorptive extraction-thermal desorption-gas chromatography-tandem mass spectrometry method for quantification of polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons in marine biota. J Chromatogr A 1349, 1–10 (2014).
65
LR Gilfillan, MD Ohman, MJ Doyle, W Watson, Occurrence of plastic micro-debris in the southern California current system. CCOFI Rep 50, 123–133 (2009).
66
M Eriksen, et al., Plastic pollution in the South Pacific subtropical gyre. Mar Pollut Bull 68, 71–76 (2013).
67
CJ Moore, SL Moore, MK Leecaster, SB Weisberg, A comparison of plastic and plankton in the north Pacific central gyre. Mar Pollut Bull 42, 1297–1300 (2001).
68
A Lechner, et al., The Danube so colourful: A potpourri of plastic litter outnumbers fish larvae in Europe’s second largest river. Environ Pollut 188, 177–181 (2014).
69
MS Reddy, S Adimurthy, G Ramachandraiah, Description of the small plastics fragments in marine sediments along the Alang-Sosiya ship-breaking yard, India. Estuar Coast Shelf Sci 68, 656–660 (2006).
70
M Claessens, S De Meester, L Van Landuyt, K De Clerck, CR Janssen, Occurrence and distribution of microplastics in marine sediments along the Belgian coast. Mar Pollut Bull 62, 2199–2204 (2011).
Information & Authors
Information
Published in
Classifications
Data Availability
Data deposition: The data reported in this paper have been deposited in the Gene Expression Omnibus (GEO) database, www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/geo (accession no. GSE71845).
Submission history
Published online: February 1, 2016
Published in issue: March 1, 2016
Keywords
Acknowledgments
We thank F. Galgani, M. Van der Meulen, L. Devriese, D. Vethaak, T. Maes, D. Mazurais, M. Alunno-Bruscia, S. Pouvreau, and P. Boudry for helpful discussions; H. McCombie for her help in editing the English; C. Laot, C. Quéré, M. Boulais, P. Le Souchu, P. Miner, B. Petton, A. L. Cassonne, and N. Le Cuff for technical assistance; all the staff of the Argenton hatchery; and the staff of the INSERM U1078 microarray core facility (Brest, France) and of the Proteomics Core Facility Biogenouest, INSERM U1085 (Rennes, France). This study was partly funded by the MICRO EU Interreg-funded project MicroPlastics (MICRO 09-002-BE).
Notes
This article is a PNAS Direct Submission. M.A.X. is a guest editor invited by the Editorial Board.
See Commentary on page 2331.
Authors
Competing Interests
The authors declare no conflict of interest.
Metrics & Citations
Metrics
Citation statements
Altmetrics
Citations
If you have the appropriate software installed, you can download article citation data to the citation manager of your choice. Simply select your manager software from the list below and click Download.
Cited by
Loading...
View Options
View options
PDF format
Download this article as a PDF file
DOWNLOAD PDFGet Access
Login options
Check if you have access through your login credentials or your institution to get full access on this article.
Personal login Institutional LoginRecommend to a librarian
Recommend PNAS to a LibrarianPurchase options
Purchase this article to access the full text.