Toxicity of endosulfan to tadpoles of Fejervarya spp. (Anura: Dicroglossidae): mortality and morphological deformities
The acute toxicity of endosulfan to the tadpoles of three coexisting species of the anuran genus Fejervarya revealed 96 h LC50 values of 46.715, 6.596, and 3.015 μg l−1 for Fejervarya sp.1, F. teraiensis and Fejervarya sp.2, respectively. Toxicity of endosulfan was also tested at the sublethal concentrations of 5 and 0.5, and 0.3 and 0.03 μg l−1 (c 10 and 1 % of their respective 96 h LC50 values) in Fejervarya sp.1 and Fejervarya sp.2, and 0.35 and 0.18 μg l−1 (c 5 and 2.5 % of 96 h LC50) in F. teraiensis. Endosulfan was observed to cause mortality at concentrations as low as c 1, 2.5 and 10 % of their respective 96 h LC50 values in Fejervarya sp.2, F. teraiensis, and Fejervarya sp.1. Such vulnerabilities are likely to have implications for the survival of natural populations of these co-existing species as well as other anurans present in the study area where pesticide use is relatively high in the tea plantations. Morphological deformities caused by endosulfan comprised failure to develop one or both forelimb in Fejervarya sp.1 and F. teraiensis, stunted hindlimb growth in Fejervarya sp.1, and axial malformation in Fejervarya sp.1 and Fejervarya sp.2. Fore- and hind-limb deformities were likely to have occurred due to the impairment of thyroid metabolism by endosulfan. These effects illustrate the threat that continued endosulfan use poses to natural populations of anuran amphibians.
KeywordsAnura Endosulfan Mortality Sublethal toxicity Deformity
The authors are grateful to the University Grants Commission, India, for providing funding assistance for a major research project (Grant Number: F. No. 37-51/2009-SR) during 2010–2013, and to two anonymous reviewers for suggesting revisions that helped to improve the original manuscript.
Conflict of interest
The authors declare that they have no conflict of interest.
- Burggren WW, Just JJ (1992) Developmental changes in physiological systems. In: Feder ME, Burggren WW (eds) Environmental physiology of the amphibians. University of Chicago Press, Chicago, pp 467–530Google Scholar
- Dimitrie D (2010) The effects of two insecticides on California anurans (Rana sierrae and Pseudacris sierra) and the implications for declining amphibian populations. Dissertation, Southern Illinois University CarbondaleGoogle Scholar
- Dinesh KP, Radhakrishnan C, Gururaja KV, Deuti K, Bhatta G (2012) A checklist of amphibia of India with IUCN Red list status. Updated till April 2013 (Online Version) http://zsi.gov.in/checklist/Amphibia_final.pdf Accessed 19 August 2013
- Finney DJ (1971) Probit analysis, 3rd edn. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, p 333Google Scholar
- Gosner KL (1960) A simplified table for staging anuran embryo and larvae with notes on identification. Herpetologica 16:183–190Google Scholar
- Gurusubramanian G, Rahman A, Sarmah M, Ray S, Bora S (2008) Pesticide usage pattern in tea ecosystem, their retrospects and alternative measures. J Environ Biol 29:813–826Google Scholar
- IUCN (2009) India: The state of amphibians in India. http://www.iucn.org/about/union/secretariat/offices/asia/regional_activities/asian_amphibian_crisis/india/ Accessed 19 August 2013
- Leight AK, Van Dolah RF (1999) Acute toxicity of the insecticides endosulfan, chlorpyrifos, and malathion to the epibenthic estuarine amphipod Gammarus palustris (Bousfield). Environ Toxicol Chem 18:958–964Google Scholar
- Mahapatra D (2012) Lift endosulfan ban, exhaust stocks: panel. http://articles.timesofindia.indiatimes.com/2012-11-21/india/35256892_1_endosulfan-ban-food-security-exhaust. Accessed 19 August 2013
- OECD (1992) OECD Guideline for testing of chemicals: fish acute toxicity test http://www.oecd.org/chemicalsafety/risk-assessment/1948241.pdf. Accessed 19 August 2013
- Rasel MMR, Hannan MA, Howlader MSA (2007) Four new country records of Fejervarya Bolkay, 1915 (Amphibia: Anura: Dicroglossidae) from Bangladesh. Bangladesh Wildl Bull 4:1–2Google Scholar
- Rolland RM (2000) A review of chemically-induced alterations in thyroid and vitamine A status from field studies of wildlife and fish. J Wildl Dis 36:615–635Google Scholar
- USEPA (1996) Ecological effects tests guidelines: OPPTS 850.1075—fish acute toxicity test, freshwater and marine. http://www.epa.gov/ocspp/pubs/frs/publications/OPPTS_Harmonized/850_Ecological_Effects_Test_Guidelines/Drafts/850-1075.pdf. Accessed 19 August 2013
- Viju B (2012) Greens hail Supreme Court decision on endosulfan. http://articles.timesofindia.indiatimes.com/2012-09-01/thiruvananthapuram/33534880_1 endosulfan-victims-c-jayakumar-supreme-court. Accessed 19 August 2013
- Wan MT, Kuo J, Buday C, Schroeder G, Van Aggelen G, Pasternak J (2005) Toxicity of a-, b-, (a + b)-endosulfan and their formulated and degradation products to Daphnia magna, Hyalella azteca, Oncorhynchus mykiss, Oncorhynchus kisutch, and biological implications in streams. Environ Toxicol Chem 24:1146–1154. doi: 10.1897/04-300R1.1 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- Westman ADJ, Elliott J, Cheng K, Van Aggelen G, Bishop CA (2010) Effects of environmentally relevant concentrations of endosulfan, azinphosmethyl, and diazinon on Great Basin spadefoot (Spea intermontana) and Pacific treefrog (Pseudacris regilla). Environ Toxicol Chem 7:1604–1612CrossRefGoogle Scholar