Cargando…

An Evaluation of Fish Tissue Monitoring Alternatives for Mercury and Selenium: Fish Muscle Biopsy Samples Versus Homogenized Whole Fillets

Fish contaminant studies with human health protection objectives typically focus on muscle tissue, recognizing that fillets are the commonly consumed tissue fraction. Muscle biopsy punch sampling for mercury analysis has recently been used as an alternative to harvesting fish for fillets; however, t...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Stahl, Leanne L., Snyder, Blaine D., McCarty, Harry B., Cohen, Tara R., Miller, Kenneth M., Fernandez, Mark B., Healey, John C.
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Springer US 2021
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8342331/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/34331106
http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s00244-021-00872-w
_version_ 1783734044613148672
author Stahl, Leanne L.
Snyder, Blaine D.
McCarty, Harry B.
Cohen, Tara R.
Miller, Kenneth M.
Fernandez, Mark B.
Healey, John C.
author_facet Stahl, Leanne L.
Snyder, Blaine D.
McCarty, Harry B.
Cohen, Tara R.
Miller, Kenneth M.
Fernandez, Mark B.
Healey, John C.
author_sort Stahl, Leanne L.
collection PubMed
description Fish contaminant studies with human health protection objectives typically focus on muscle tissue, recognizing that fillets are the commonly consumed tissue fraction. Muscle biopsy punch sampling for mercury analysis has recently been used as an alternative to harvesting fish for fillets; however, there is limited information comparing fillet plug results to whole fillet results. This study was conducted to address that data gap and to test the applicability of plugs for monitoring associated with United States Environmental Protection Agency’s fish tissue-based mercury and selenium water quality criteria. The mercury phase included 300 fillet homogenates and 300 field-extracted plug samples from 60 fish, and the selenium phase included 120 fillet homogenates and 120 plugs from 30 fish. Both phases showed that there were no statistically significant differences between fillet plug and homogenized fillet results at the community level; however, a selenium plug monitoring alternative must employ a sufficiently sensitive analytical method and consider total solids. Plug and fillet sampling alternatives have inherent advantages and disadvantages. Fillet sampling provides sufficient mass to consider multiple contaminants but requires fish to be harvested. Plug sampling only provides adequate mass for a single analyte but may allow fish survival, although additional research is needed on survival following plug removal. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1007/s00244-021-00872-w.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-8342331
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2021
publisher Springer US
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-83423312021-08-20 An Evaluation of Fish Tissue Monitoring Alternatives for Mercury and Selenium: Fish Muscle Biopsy Samples Versus Homogenized Whole Fillets Stahl, Leanne L. Snyder, Blaine D. McCarty, Harry B. Cohen, Tara R. Miller, Kenneth M. Fernandez, Mark B. Healey, John C. Arch Environ Contam Toxicol Article Fish contaminant studies with human health protection objectives typically focus on muscle tissue, recognizing that fillets are the commonly consumed tissue fraction. Muscle biopsy punch sampling for mercury analysis has recently been used as an alternative to harvesting fish for fillets; however, there is limited information comparing fillet plug results to whole fillet results. This study was conducted to address that data gap and to test the applicability of plugs for monitoring associated with United States Environmental Protection Agency’s fish tissue-based mercury and selenium water quality criteria. The mercury phase included 300 fillet homogenates and 300 field-extracted plug samples from 60 fish, and the selenium phase included 120 fillet homogenates and 120 plugs from 30 fish. Both phases showed that there were no statistically significant differences between fillet plug and homogenized fillet results at the community level; however, a selenium plug monitoring alternative must employ a sufficiently sensitive analytical method and consider total solids. Plug and fillet sampling alternatives have inherent advantages and disadvantages. Fillet sampling provides sufficient mass to consider multiple contaminants but requires fish to be harvested. Plug sampling only provides adequate mass for a single analyte but may allow fish survival, although additional research is needed on survival following plug removal. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1007/s00244-021-00872-w. Springer US 2021-07-30 2021 /pmc/articles/PMC8342331/ /pubmed/34331106 http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s00244-021-00872-w Text en © The Author(s) 2021 https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/Open AccessThis article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License, which permits use, sharing, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons licence, and indicate if changes were made. The images or other third party material in this article are included in the article's Creative Commons licence, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the article's Creative Commons licence and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder. To view a copy of this licence, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/) .
spellingShingle Article
Stahl, Leanne L.
Snyder, Blaine D.
McCarty, Harry B.
Cohen, Tara R.
Miller, Kenneth M.
Fernandez, Mark B.
Healey, John C.
An Evaluation of Fish Tissue Monitoring Alternatives for Mercury and Selenium: Fish Muscle Biopsy Samples Versus Homogenized Whole Fillets
title An Evaluation of Fish Tissue Monitoring Alternatives for Mercury and Selenium: Fish Muscle Biopsy Samples Versus Homogenized Whole Fillets
title_full An Evaluation of Fish Tissue Monitoring Alternatives for Mercury and Selenium: Fish Muscle Biopsy Samples Versus Homogenized Whole Fillets
title_fullStr An Evaluation of Fish Tissue Monitoring Alternatives for Mercury and Selenium: Fish Muscle Biopsy Samples Versus Homogenized Whole Fillets
title_full_unstemmed An Evaluation of Fish Tissue Monitoring Alternatives for Mercury and Selenium: Fish Muscle Biopsy Samples Versus Homogenized Whole Fillets
title_short An Evaluation of Fish Tissue Monitoring Alternatives for Mercury and Selenium: Fish Muscle Biopsy Samples Versus Homogenized Whole Fillets
title_sort evaluation of fish tissue monitoring alternatives for mercury and selenium: fish muscle biopsy samples versus homogenized whole fillets
topic Article
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8342331/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/34331106
http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s00244-021-00872-w
work_keys_str_mv AT stahlleannel anevaluationoffishtissuemonitoringalternativesformercuryandseleniumfishmusclebiopsysamplesversushomogenizedwholefillets
AT snyderblained anevaluationoffishtissuemonitoringalternativesformercuryandseleniumfishmusclebiopsysamplesversushomogenizedwholefillets
AT mccartyharryb anevaluationoffishtissuemonitoringalternativesformercuryandseleniumfishmusclebiopsysamplesversushomogenizedwholefillets
AT cohentarar anevaluationoffishtissuemonitoringalternativesformercuryandseleniumfishmusclebiopsysamplesversushomogenizedwholefillets
AT millerkennethm anevaluationoffishtissuemonitoringalternativesformercuryandseleniumfishmusclebiopsysamplesversushomogenizedwholefillets
AT fernandezmarkb anevaluationoffishtissuemonitoringalternativesformercuryandseleniumfishmusclebiopsysamplesversushomogenizedwholefillets
AT healeyjohnc anevaluationoffishtissuemonitoringalternativesformercuryandseleniumfishmusclebiopsysamplesversushomogenizedwholefillets
AT stahlleannel evaluationoffishtissuemonitoringalternativesformercuryandseleniumfishmusclebiopsysamplesversushomogenizedwholefillets
AT snyderblained evaluationoffishtissuemonitoringalternativesformercuryandseleniumfishmusclebiopsysamplesversushomogenizedwholefillets
AT mccartyharryb evaluationoffishtissuemonitoringalternativesformercuryandseleniumfishmusclebiopsysamplesversushomogenizedwholefillets
AT cohentarar evaluationoffishtissuemonitoringalternativesformercuryandseleniumfishmusclebiopsysamplesversushomogenizedwholefillets
AT millerkennethm evaluationoffishtissuemonitoringalternativesformercuryandseleniumfishmusclebiopsysamplesversushomogenizedwholefillets
AT fernandezmarkb evaluationoffishtissuemonitoringalternativesformercuryandseleniumfishmusclebiopsysamplesversushomogenizedwholefillets
AT healeyjohnc evaluationoffishtissuemonitoringalternativesformercuryandseleniumfishmusclebiopsysamplesversushomogenizedwholefillets