Comparative impact of two glyphosate-based formulations in interaction with Limnoperna fortunei on freshwater phytoplankton

Although contamination and invasive species are two of the most relevant anthropogenic drivers affecting ecosystems, their joint impact on the environment has been poorly investigated. Glyphosate, directly or indirectly, contaminates freshwater systems which in turn may be invaded by the golden muss...

Full description

Bibliographic Details
Main Authors: De Stefano, L.G., Gattas, F., Vinocur, Alicia Liliana, Cristos, Diego Sebastian, Rojas, Dante Emanuel, Cataldo, D., Pizarro, H.
Format: info:ar-repo/semantics/artículo
Language:Inglés
Published: 2018
Subjects:
Online Access:https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1470160X17307331#!
http://hdl.handle.net/20.500.12123/2206
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecolind.2017.11.021
_version_ 1855034922144628736
author De Stefano, L.G.
Gattas, F.
Vinocur, Alicia Liliana
Cristos, Diego Sebastian
Rojas, Dante Emanuel
Cataldo, D.
Pizarro, H.
author_browse Cataldo, D.
Cristos, Diego Sebastian
De Stefano, L.G.
Gattas, F.
Pizarro, H.
Rojas, Dante Emanuel
Vinocur, Alicia Liliana
author_facet De Stefano, L.G.
Gattas, F.
Vinocur, Alicia Liliana
Cristos, Diego Sebastian
Rojas, Dante Emanuel
Cataldo, D.
Pizarro, H.
author_sort De Stefano, L.G.
collection INTA Digital
description Although contamination and invasive species are two of the most relevant anthropogenic drivers affecting ecosystems, their joint impact on the environment has been poorly investigated. Glyphosate, directly or indirectly, contaminates freshwater systems which in turn may be invaded by the golden mussel Limnoperna fortunei. Under laboratory conditions, we studied the combined effect of technical-grade glyphosate, Roundup Max® and Glifosato Atanor®, in scenarios with and without L. fortunei, on phytoplankton from Salto Grande Reservoir (Uruguay River, Argentina). We expected that the effects of the interaction on phytoplankton and water quality would vary with the form of herbicide applied. The assay was conducted for 14 days (Tf) using 3-L bottles as experimental units. Eight treatments were performed in triplicate: C: Control; M: mussel; G: technical-grade glyphosate acid; R: Roundup Max®; A: Glifosato Atanor®; MG: mussel + technical-grade glyphosate acid, MA: mussel + Glifosato Atanor® and MR: mussel + Roundup Max®. The active ingredient was applied at 6 ppm. The dissipation of glyphosate in water was 1.5–2.6 times higher in presence of mussels. Treatments G and A showed an increase in phytoplankton abundance, mainly the cyanobacteria Microcystis spp. wich rised to 289% and 639% at Tf, respectively, relative to their values at Ti. Roundup Max® limited the growth of Microcystis spp., as its abundance decreased 59% relative to Ti. L. fortunei reduced phytoplankton abundances at Tf. Evenness increased significantly in M, MG, MR and MA, while it decreased in G, R and A relative to C. The interaction of factors produced a significant synergistic increase in periphyton; periphytic chlorophyll a concentration was 0.81 ± 0.02 μg cm−2 for MR; 0.09 ± 0.02 μg cm−2 for MA and 0.02 ± 0.01 μg cm−2 for MG. Limnoperna fortunei appeared as the driving force in the interaction. The assay described here allows for the rapid assessment of the impact of these types of agents on freshwater.
format info:ar-repo/semantics/artículo
id INTA2206
institution Instituto Nacional de Tecnología Agropecuaria (INTA -Argentina)
language Inglés
publishDate 2018
publishDateRange 2018
publishDateSort 2018
record_format dspace
spelling INTA22062018-06-28T17:18:29Z Comparative impact of two glyphosate-based formulations in interaction with Limnoperna fortunei on freshwater phytoplankton De Stefano, L.G. Gattas, F. Vinocur, Alicia Liliana Cristos, Diego Sebastian Rojas, Dante Emanuel Cataldo, D. Pizarro, H. Fitopláncton Glifosato Formulaciones Glyphosate Phytoplankton Formulations Limnoperna fortunei Although contamination and invasive species are two of the most relevant anthropogenic drivers affecting ecosystems, their joint impact on the environment has been poorly investigated. Glyphosate, directly or indirectly, contaminates freshwater systems which in turn may be invaded by the golden mussel Limnoperna fortunei. Under laboratory conditions, we studied the combined effect of technical-grade glyphosate, Roundup Max® and Glifosato Atanor®, in scenarios with and without L. fortunei, on phytoplankton from Salto Grande Reservoir (Uruguay River, Argentina). We expected that the effects of the interaction on phytoplankton and water quality would vary with the form of herbicide applied. The assay was conducted for 14 days (Tf) using 3-L bottles as experimental units. Eight treatments were performed in triplicate: C: Control; M: mussel; G: technical-grade glyphosate acid; R: Roundup Max®; A: Glifosato Atanor®; MG: mussel + technical-grade glyphosate acid, MA: mussel + Glifosato Atanor® and MR: mussel + Roundup Max®. The active ingredient was applied at 6 ppm. The dissipation of glyphosate in water was 1.5–2.6 times higher in presence of mussels. Treatments G and A showed an increase in phytoplankton abundance, mainly the cyanobacteria Microcystis spp. wich rised to 289% and 639% at Tf, respectively, relative to their values at Ti. Roundup Max® limited the growth of Microcystis spp., as its abundance decreased 59% relative to Ti. L. fortunei reduced phytoplankton abundances at Tf. Evenness increased significantly in M, MG, MR and MA, while it decreased in G, R and A relative to C. The interaction of factors produced a significant synergistic increase in periphyton; periphytic chlorophyll a concentration was 0.81 ± 0.02 μg cm−2 for MR; 0.09 ± 0.02 μg cm−2 for MA and 0.02 ± 0.01 μg cm−2 for MG. Limnoperna fortunei appeared as the driving force in the interaction. The assay described here allows for the rapid assessment of the impact of these types of agents on freshwater. Instituto de Tecnología de Alimentos Fil: De Stefano, L.G. Consejo Nacional de Investigaciones Científicas y Técnicas. Oficina de Coordinación Administrativa Ciudad Universitaria. Instituto de Ecología, Genética y Evolución de Buenos Aires. Universidad de Buenos Aires. Facultad de Ciencias Exactas y Naturales. Instituto de Ecología, Genética y Evolución de Buenos Aires; Argentina Fil: Gattas, F. Consejo Nacional de Investigaciones Científicas y Técnicas. Oficina de Coordinación Administrativa Ciudad Universitaria. Instituto de Ecología, Genética y Evolución de Buenos Aires. Universidad de Buenos Aires. Facultad de Ciencias Exactas y Naturales. Instituto de Ecología, Genética y Evolución de Buenos Aires; Argentina Fil: Vinocur, Alicia Liliana. Consejo Nacional de Investigaciones Científicas y Técnicas. Oficina de Coordinación Administrativa Ciudad Universitaria. Instituto de Ecología, Genética y Evolución de Buenos Aires. Universidad de Buenos Aires. Facultad de Ciencias Exactas y Naturales. Instituto de Ecología, Genética y Evolución de Buenos Aires; Argentina. Universidad de Buenos Aires. Facultad de Ciencias Exactas y Naturales. Departamento de Biodiversidad y Biología Experimental; Argentina Fil: Cristos, Diego Sebastián. Instituto Nacional de Tecnología Agropecuaria (INTA). Instituto de Tecnología de Alimentos; Argentina Fil: Rojas, Dante Emanuel. Instituto Nacional de Tecnología Agropecuaria (INTA). Instituto Tecnología Alimentos; Argentina Fil: Catado, D. Consejo Nacional de Investigaciones Científicas y Técnicas. Oficina de Coordinación Administrativa Ciudad Universitaria. Instituto de Ecología, Genética y Evolución de Buenos Aires. Universidad de Buenos Aires. Facultad de Ciencias Exactas y Naturales. Instituto de Ecología, Genética y Evolución de Buenos Aires; Argentina Fil: Pizarro, H. Consejo Nacional de Investigaciones Científicas y Técnicas. Oficina de Coordinación Administrativa Ciudad Universitaria. Instituto de Ecología, Genética y Evolución de Buenos Aires. Universidad de Buenos Aires. Facultad de Ciencias Exactas y Naturales. Instituto de Ecología, Genética y Evolución de Buenos Aires; Argentina 2018-04-09T18:47:11Z 2018-04-09T18:47:11Z 2018-02 info:ar-repo/semantics/artículo info:eu-repo/semantics/article info:eu-repo/semantics/publishedVersion https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1470160X17307331#! http://hdl.handle.net/20.500.12123/2206 1470-160X https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecolind.2017.11.021 eng info:eu-repo/semantics/restrictedAccess application/pdf Ecological indicators 85 : 575-584. (February 2018)
spellingShingle Fitopláncton
Glifosato
Formulaciones
Glyphosate
Phytoplankton
Formulations
Limnoperna fortunei
De Stefano, L.G.
Gattas, F.
Vinocur, Alicia Liliana
Cristos, Diego Sebastian
Rojas, Dante Emanuel
Cataldo, D.
Pizarro, H.
Comparative impact of two glyphosate-based formulations in interaction with Limnoperna fortunei on freshwater phytoplankton
title Comparative impact of two glyphosate-based formulations in interaction with Limnoperna fortunei on freshwater phytoplankton
title_full Comparative impact of two glyphosate-based formulations in interaction with Limnoperna fortunei on freshwater phytoplankton
title_fullStr Comparative impact of two glyphosate-based formulations in interaction with Limnoperna fortunei on freshwater phytoplankton
title_full_unstemmed Comparative impact of two glyphosate-based formulations in interaction with Limnoperna fortunei on freshwater phytoplankton
title_short Comparative impact of two glyphosate-based formulations in interaction with Limnoperna fortunei on freshwater phytoplankton
title_sort comparative impact of two glyphosate based formulations in interaction with limnoperna fortunei on freshwater phytoplankton
topic Fitopláncton
Glifosato
Formulaciones
Glyphosate
Phytoplankton
Formulations
Limnoperna fortunei
url https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1470160X17307331#!
http://hdl.handle.net/20.500.12123/2206
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecolind.2017.11.021
work_keys_str_mv AT destefanolg comparativeimpactoftwoglyphosatebasedformulationsininteractionwithlimnopernafortuneionfreshwaterphytoplankton
AT gattasf comparativeimpactoftwoglyphosatebasedformulationsininteractionwithlimnopernafortuneionfreshwaterphytoplankton
AT vinocuralicialiliana comparativeimpactoftwoglyphosatebasedformulationsininteractionwithlimnopernafortuneionfreshwaterphytoplankton
AT cristosdiegosebastian comparativeimpactoftwoglyphosatebasedformulationsininteractionwithlimnopernafortuneionfreshwaterphytoplankton
AT rojasdanteemanuel comparativeimpactoftwoglyphosatebasedformulationsininteractionwithlimnopernafortuneionfreshwaterphytoplankton
AT cataldod comparativeimpactoftwoglyphosatebasedformulationsininteractionwithlimnopernafortuneionfreshwaterphytoplankton
AT pizarroh comparativeimpactoftwoglyphosatebasedformulationsininteractionwithlimnopernafortuneionfreshwaterphytoplankton