Assessment of acrylamide toxicity using a battery of standardised bioassays / Procjena toksičnosti akrilamida pomoću standardiziranih biotestova

Open access

Acrylamide is a monomer widely used as an intermediate in the production of organic chemicals, e.g. polyacrylamides (PAMs). Since PAMs are low cost chemicals with applications in various industries and waste- and drinking water treatment, a certain amount of non-polymerised acrylamide is expected to end up in waterways. PAMs are non-toxic but acrylamide induces neurotoxic effects in humans and genotoxic, reproductive, and carcinogenic effects in laboratory animals. In order to evaluate the effect of acrylamide on freshwater organisms, bioassays were conducted on four species: algae Desmodesmus subspicatus and Pseudokirchneriella subcapitata, duckweed Lemna minor and water flea Daphnia magna according to ISO (International Organization for Standardisation) standardised methods. This approach ensures the evaluation of acrylamide toxicity on organisms with different levels of organisation and the comparability of results, and it examines the value of using a battery of low-cost standardised bioassays in the monitoring of pollution and contamination of aquatic ecosystems. These results showed that EC50 values were lower for Desmodesmus subspicatus and Pseudokirchneriella subcapitata than for Daphnia magna and Lemna minor, which suggests an increased sensitivity of algae to acrylamide. According to the toxic unit approach, the values estimated by the Lemna minor and Daphnia magna bioassays, classify acrylamide as slightly toxic (TU=0-1; Class 1). The results obtained from algal bioassays (Desmodesmus subspicatus and Pseudokirchneriella subcapitata) revealed the toxic effect of acrylamide (TU=1-10; Class 2) on these organisms.

1. European Chemicals Bureau. European Union Risk Assessment Report (EURAR): Acrylamide. Luxembourg: Office for Official Publications of the European Communities, 2002.

2. Smith EA, Oeheme FW. Acrylamide and polyacrylamide: A review of production, use, environmental fate and neurotoxicity. Rev Environ Health 1991;9:215-28. PMID: 1668792

3. Bologna LS, Andrawes FF, Barvenik FW, Lentz RD, Sojka RE. Analysis of residual acrylamide in field crops. J Chromatogr Sci 1999;37:241-4. doi: 10.1093/ chromsci/37.7.240

4. Hashimoto K. The toxicity of acrylamide. Sangyo Igaku 1980;22:233-48. doi: 10.1539/joh1959.22.233

5. World Health Organization (WHO). International Programme on Chemical Safety - Environmental Health Criteria 49: Acrylamide. Geneva: WHO; 1985.

6. International Agency for Research on Cancer (IARC).Monographs on the Evaluation of the Carcinogenic Risk of Chemicals to Humans. Some Industrial Chemicals, Vol. 60.Lyon: IARC, 1994.

7. Council of the European Union. Council Directive 98/83/EC of 3 November 1998 on the quality of water intended for human consumption. Off J Eur Comm 1998, L 330/32.

8. World Health Organization (WHO). Acrylamide in Drinkingwater: Background document for development of WHO Guidelines for Drinking-water Quality. Geneva: WHO; 2011.

9. Backe WJ, Yingling V, Johnson T. The determination of acrylamide in environmental and drinking waters by largevolume injection - hydrophilic-interaction liquid chromatography and tandem mass spectrometry. J Chromatogr A 2014;1334:72-8. doi: 10.1016/j. chroma.2014.02.005

10. Weideborg M, Källqvist T, Ødegård, KE, Sverdrup LE, Vik EA. Environmental risk assessment of acrylamide and methylacrylamide from a grouting agent used in the tunnel construction of Romeriksporten, Norway. Water Res 2001;35:2645-52. PMID: 11456163

11. DeArmond PD, DiGoregorio AL. Characterization of liquid chromatography-tandem mass spectrometry method for the determination of acrylamide in complex environmental samples. Analyt Bioanal Chem 2013;405:4159-66. doi: 10.1007/s00216-013-6822-4

12. The European Parliament and the Council of the European Union. Regulation (EC) No 1272/2008 of European the Parliament and of the Council of 16 December 2008 on classification, labelling and packaging of substances and mixtures, amending and repealing Directives 67/548/EEC and 1999/45/EC, and amending Regulation (EC) No 1907/2006 (Text with EEA relevance). Off J Eur Comm 2008, L 353/1.

13. European Parliament and the Council of the European Union.Regulation (EC) No 1907/2006 of European the Parliament and of the Council of 18 December 2006 concerning the Registration, Evaluation, Authorisation and Restriction of Chemicals (REACH), establishing a European Chemicals Agency, amending Directive 1999/45/EC and repealing Council Regulation (EEC) No 793/93 and Commission Regulation (EC) No 1488/94 as well as Council Directive 76/769/EEC and Commission Directives 91/155/EEC, 93/67/ EEC, 93/105/EC and 2000/21/EC (Text with EEA relevance). Off J Eur Comm 2006, L 396.

14. Joint FAO/WHO Expert Committee on Food Additives.Sixty-fourth meeting 8-17 February 2005, Rome, Italy [displayed 26 November 2015]. Available at

15. Bull RJ, Robinson M, Laurie RD, Stoner GD, Greisiger E, Meier RJ, Stober J. Carcinogenic effects of acrylamide in Sencar and A/J mice. Cancer Res 1984;44:107-11. PMID: 636034

16. Rice JM. The carcinogenicity of acrylamide. Mutat Res 2005;580:3-20. doi: 10.1016/j.mrgentox.2004.09.008

17. Costa LC, Calleman CJ. Determination of Hemoglobin Adducts Following Acrylamide Exposure. Washington (DC): U.S. Environmental Protection Agency; 1994.

18. Repetto G, Jos A, Hazen MJ, Molero ML, del Peso A, Salguero M, del Castillo P, Rodrı́guez-Vicente MC, Repetto M. A test battery for the ecotoxicological evaluation of pentachlorophenol. Toxicol in Vitro 2001;15:503-9. doi: 10.1016/S0887-2333(01)00055-8

19. Pandard P, Devillers J, Charissou AM, Poulsen V, Jourdain MJ, Férard JF, Grand C, Bispo A. Selecting a battery of bioassays for ecotoxicological characterization of wastes.Sci Total Environ 2006;363:114-25. doi: 10.1016/j. scitotenv.2005.12.016

20. European Commission. International Uniform Chemical Information Database (IUCLID) - Existing Chemicals [CD version 1.0]. Ispra (IT): European Chemical Bureau, European Commission - JRC Environmental Institute, 1996.

21. EG&G Bionomics. Acute Toxicity of Acrylamide to Mysid Shrimp (Mysidopsis bahia) (Report BP-83-5-58-R).Pensacola (FL): EG&G Bionomics Marine Research Laboratory; 1986.

22. ABC Laboratories. Test Report 29736: Dynamic 96 hour acute toxicity of acrylamide monomer to bluegill sunfish (Lepomis macrochirus). Columbia (MO): ABC Labs; 1982.

23. Krautter GR, Mast RW, Alexander HC, Wolf CH, Friedman MA, Koschier FJ, Thompson CM. Acute aquatic toxicity tests with acrylamide monomer and macroinvertebrates and fish. Environ Toxicol Chem 1986;5:373-7. doi: 10.1002/ etc.5620050406

24. Shaw JR, Pfrender ME, Eads BD, Klaper R, Callaghan A, Sibly RM, Colson I, Jansen B, Gilbert D, Colbourne JK.Daphnia as an emerging model for toxicological genomics.Adv Exp Biol 2008;2:165-219. doi: 10.1016/S1872-2423(08)00005-7

25. Nauman B, Eberius M, Appenroth KJ. Growth rate based dose-response relationships and EC-values of ten heavy metals using the duckweed growth inhibition test (ISO 20079) with Lemna minor L. clone St. J Plant Physiol 2007;164:1656-64. doi: 10.1016/j.jplph.2006.10.011

26. Wolska L, Sagajdakow A, Kuczyńka A, Namieśnik J.Application of ecotoxicological studies in integrated environmental monitoring: possibilities and problems. Trend Anal Chem 2007;26:332-4. doi: 10.1016/j.trac.2006.11.012

27. International Organization for Standardization (ISO). ISO 8692:2012 Water quality - Freshwater algal growth inhibition test with unicellular green algae. Geneva: ISO;2012.

28. International Organization for Standardization (ISO). ISO 20079:2005 Water quality - Determination of the toxic effect of water constituents and waste water on duckweed (Lemna minor) - Duckweed growth inhibition test. Geneva: ISO;2005.

29. International Organization for Standardization (ISO). ISO 6341:2012 Water quality - Determination of the inhibition of the mobility of Daphnia magna Straus (Cladocera, Crustacea) - Acute toxicity test. Geneva: ISO; 2012.

30. International Organization for Standardization (ISO). ISO/ TC 147/SC 5/WG N 182, Nomenclature Selenastrum capricornutum. Geneva: ISO; 1999.

31. Hegewald E. New combinations in the genus Desmodesmus (Chlorophyceae, Scenedesmaceae). Arch Hydrobiol 2000;96(Suppl 131):1-18.

32. Krajnčič B, Devidé Z. Report on photoperiodic responses in Lemnaceae from Slovenia. Berichte des Geobot Inst ETH Stiftung Rübel (Zürich) 1980;47:75-86. doi: 10.5169/ seals-377701

33. Pirson A, Seidel F. Zell- und stoffwechselphysiologische Untersuchungen an der Wurzel von Lemna minor unter besonderer Berücksichtigung von Kalium- und Calciummangel [Cell metabolism and physiology in Lemna minor root deprived of potassium and calcium, in German].Planta 1950;38:431-73.

34. Isidori M, Parella A, Piazza CML, Strada R. Toxicity screening of surface waters in southern Italy and Toxkit microbiotests. In: Persoone G, Janssen C, De Coen W, editors. New Microbiotests for Routine Toxicity Screening and Biomonitoring. New York (NY): Kluwer Academic/ Plenum Publishers; 2000. p. 289-93.

35. Michel A, Johnson RD, Duke SO, Scheffler BE. Doseresponse relationships between herbicides with different modes of action and growth of Lemna paucicostata: an improved ecotoxicological method. Environ Toxicol Chem 2004;23:1074-9. doi: 10.1897/03-256

36. Wayers A, Sokull-Klüttgen B, Baraibar-Fentanes J, Vollumer G. Acute toxicity data: a comprehensive comparision of results on fish, daphnia and algae tests with new substances notified in the European Union. Environ Toxicol Chem 2000;19:1931-3. doi: 10.1002/etc.5620190731

37. Eberius M, Mennicken G, Reuter I, Vendenhirtz J. Sensitivity of different growth inhibition tests - just a question of mathematical calculation? Ecotoxicology 2002;11:293-7. doi: 10.1023/A:1020536702081

38. Blinova I. Use of freshwater algae and duckweeds for phytotoxicity testing. Environ Toxicol 2004;19:425-8. doi: 10.1002/tox.20042

39. den Besten PJ, Munawar M. Ecotoxicological Testing of Marine and Freshwater Ecosystems: Emerging Techniques, Trends and Strategies (Ecovision World Monograph). New York (NY): Taylor & Francis Inc.; 2005.

40. Société d’Étude des Pays du Commonwealth (SEPC).Inhibition test (72 hours) in freshwater unicellular algae Selenastrum capricornutum - Company report 104. Paris: SEPC; 1997.

41. The Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD). Guidelines for the Testing of Chemicals, Section 2 - Effects on Biotic Systems. Paris: OECD, 2011. doi: 10.1787/20745761

42. The Commission of the European Communities. Commission Directive 92/69/EEC of 31 July 1992 adapting to technical progress for the seventeenth time Council Directive 67/548/ EEC on the approximation of laws, regulations and administrative provisions relating to the classification, packaging and labelling of dangerous substances. Off J Eur Comm 1992, L 383.

43. Wang W. Literature review on duckweed toxicity testing.Environ Res 1990;52:7-22. doi: 10.1016/s0013-9351(05)80147-1

44. van Steveninck RFM, van Steveninck ME, Fernando DR. Heavy-metal (Zn, Cd) tolerance in selected clones of duckweed (Lemna minor). Plant Soil 1992;146:271-80. doi: 10.1007/BF00012021

45. Prasad MNV, Malec P, Waloszek A, Bojko M, Strzałka K. Physiological responses of Lemna trisulca L. (duckweed) to cadmium and copper bioaccumulation. Plant Sci 2001;161:881-9. doi: 10.1016/S0168-9452(01)00478-2

46. Hou W, Chen X, Song G, Wang Q, Chang CC. Effects of copper and cadmium on heavy metal polluted waterbody restoration by duckweed (Lemna minor). Plant Physiol Biochem 2007;45:62-9. doi: 10.1016/j.plaphy.2006.12.005

47. ABC Laboratories. Test Report 29736: Dynamic 96 hour acute toxicity to acrylamide monomer to water fleas (Daphnia magna). Columbia (MO): ABC Labs; 1983.

48. Takahashi T, Yoshii M, Kawano T, Kosaka T, Hosoya H. A new approach for the assessment of acrylamide toxicity using a green paramecium. Toxicol in Vitro 2005;19:99-105. doi: 10.1016/j.tiv.2004.06.012

Archives of Industrial Hygiene and Toxicology

The Journal of Institute for Medical Research and Occupational Health

Journal Information

IMPACT FACTOR 2017: 1.117
5-year IMPACT FACTOR: 1.335

CiteScore 2017: 1.24

SCImago Journal Rank (SJR) 2017: 0.341
Source Normalized Impact per Paper (SNIP) 2017: 0.494

Cited By


All Time Past Year Past 30 Days
Abstract Views 0 0 0
Full Text Views 243 236 19
PDF Downloads 119 118 10