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

Autores
De Stefano, L.G.; Gattas, F.; Vinocur, Alicia Liliana; Cristos, Diego Sebastian; Rojas, Dante Emanuel; Cataldo, D.; Pizarro, H.
Año de publicación
2018
Idioma
inglés
Tipo de recurso
artículo
Estado
versión publicada
Descripción
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
Fuente
Ecological indicators 85 : 575-584. (February 2018)
Materia
Fitopláncton
Glifosato
Formulaciones
Glyphosate
Phytoplankton
Formulations
Limnoperna fortunei
Nivel de accesibilidad
acceso restringido
Condiciones de uso
Repositorio
INTA Digital (INTA)
Institución
Instituto Nacional de Tecnología Agropecuaria
OAI Identificador
oai:localhost:20.500.12123/2206
Acceder
id INTADig_70535d8b26ba6328f9892496118e6b6b
oai_identifier_str oai:localhost:20.500.12123/2206
network_acronym_str INTADig
repository_id_str l
network_name_str INTA Digital (INTA)
spelling Comparative impact of two glyphosate-based formulations in interaction with Limnoperna fortunei on freshwater phytoplanktonDe Stefano, L.G.Gattas, F.Vinocur, Alicia LilianaCristos, Diego SebastianRojas, Dante EmanuelCataldo, D.Pizarro, H.FitoplánctonGlifosatoFormulacionesGlyphosatePhytoplanktonFormulationsLimnoperna fortuneiAlthough 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 AlimentosFil: 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; ArgentinaFil: 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; ArgentinaFil: 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; ArgentinaFil: Cristos, Diego Sebastián. Instituto Nacional de Tecnología Agropecuaria (INTA). Instituto de Tecnología de Alimentos; ArgentinaFil: Rojas, Dante Emanuel. Instituto Nacional de Tecnología Agropecuaria (INTA). Instituto Tecnología Alimentos; ArgentinaFil: 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; ArgentinaFil: 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; Argentina2018-04-09T18:47:11Z2018-04-09T18:47:11Z2018-02info:eu-repo/semantics/articleinfo:eu-repo/semantics/publishedVersionhttp://purl.org/coar/resource_type/c_6501info:ar-repo/semantics/articuloapplication/pdfhttps://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1470160X17307331#!http://hdl.handle.net/20.500.12123/22061470-160Xhttps://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecolind.2017.11.021Ecological indicators 85 : 575-584. (February 2018)reponame:INTA Digital (INTA)instname:Instituto Nacional de Tecnología Agropecuariaenginfo:eu-repo/semantics/restrictedAccess2025-10-30T11:22:41Zoai:localhost:20.500.12123/2206instacron:INTAInstitucionalhttp://repositorio.inta.gob.ar/Organismo científico-tecnológicoNo correspondehttp://repositorio.inta.gob.ar/oai/requesttripaldi.nicolas@inta.gob.arArgentinaNo correspondeNo correspondeNo correspondeopendoar:l2025-10-30 11:22:42.152INTA Digital (INTA) - Instituto Nacional de Tecnología Agropecuariafalse
dc.title.none.fl_str_mv 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
spellingShingle Comparative impact of two glyphosate-based formulations in interaction with Limnoperna fortunei on freshwater phytoplankton
De Stefano, L.G.
Fitopláncton
Glifosato
Formulaciones
Glyphosate
Phytoplankton
Formulations
Limnoperna fortunei
title_short 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_sort Comparative impact of two glyphosate-based formulations in interaction with Limnoperna fortunei on freshwater phytoplankton
dc.creator.none.fl_str_mv De Stefano, L.G.
Gattas, F.
Vinocur, Alicia Liliana
Cristos, Diego Sebastian
Rojas, Dante Emanuel
Cataldo, D.
Pizarro, H.
author De Stefano, L.G.
author_facet De Stefano, L.G.
Gattas, F.
Vinocur, Alicia Liliana
Cristos, Diego Sebastian
Rojas, Dante Emanuel
Cataldo, D.
Pizarro, H.
author_role author
author2 Gattas, F.
Vinocur, Alicia Liliana
Cristos, Diego Sebastian
Rojas, Dante Emanuel
Cataldo, D.
Pizarro, H.
author2_role author
author
author
author
author
author
dc.subject.none.fl_str_mv Fitopláncton
Glifosato
Formulaciones
Glyphosate
Phytoplankton
Formulations
Limnoperna fortunei
topic Fitopláncton
Glifosato
Formulaciones
Glyphosate
Phytoplankton
Formulations
Limnoperna fortunei
dc.description.none.fl_txt_mv 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
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.
publishDate 2018
dc.date.none.fl_str_mv 2018-04-09T18:47:11Z
2018-04-09T18:47:11Z
2018-02
dc.type.none.fl_str_mv info:eu-repo/semantics/article
info:eu-repo/semantics/publishedVersion
http://purl.org/coar/resource_type/c_6501
info:ar-repo/semantics/articulo
format article
status_str publishedVersion
dc.identifier.none.fl_str_mv 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
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
identifier_str_mv 1470-160X
dc.language.none.fl_str_mv eng
language eng
dc.rights.none.fl_str_mv info:eu-repo/semantics/restrictedAccess
eu_rights_str_mv restrictedAccess
dc.format.none.fl_str_mv application/pdf
dc.source.none.fl_str_mv Ecological indicators 85 : 575-584. (February 2018)
reponame:INTA Digital (INTA)
instname:Instituto Nacional de Tecnología Agropecuaria
reponame_str INTA Digital (INTA)
collection INTA Digital (INTA)
instname_str Instituto Nacional de Tecnología Agropecuaria
repository.name.fl_str_mv INTA Digital (INTA) - Instituto Nacional de Tecnología Agropecuaria
repository.mail.fl_str_mv tripaldi.nicolas@inta.gob.ar
_version_ 1847419425436729344
score 13.121305

Publicaciones similares