Assessment of heavy metal concentrations and bioaccumulation in the invasive round goby (Neogobius melanostomus) and associated risks to human health

Figures & data

Figure 1. Location of water, bottom sediment, and fish sampling sites from Dąbie Lake, Szczecin Lagoon and Puck Bay.

Table I. Comparative analysis of heavy metals (mean ± standard deviation) detected in water and bottom sediments of Dąbie Lake, Szczecin Lagoon, and Puck Bay.

Heavy metals	Water N = 3			Bottom sediments N = 4
	Dąbie Lake	Szczecin Lagoon	Puck Bay	Dąbie Lake	Szczecin Lagoon	Puck Bay
	$\mathit{\mu }$g L^−1			mg kg^−1
Cd	0.043^b ± 0.012	0.044^b ± 0.006	0.026^a ± 0.005	0.115^c ± 0.045	0.063^b ± 0.004	0.011^a ± 0.002
Co	0.080^a ± 0.026	0.167^b ± 0.060	0.207^b ± 0.012	1.798^c ± 0.299	0.679^b ± 0.108	0.166^a ± 0.022
Cr	1.586^b ± 0.315	1.210^b ± 0.070	0.957^a ± 0.012	2.935^b ± 0.952	1.428^a ± 0.614	0.718^a ± 0.059
Mo	1.973^a ± 0.562	2.163^b ± 0.211	1.617^a ± 0.025	0.236^c ± 0.066	0.076^b ± 0.009	0.058^a ± 0.011
Ni	2.247^b ± 0.095	2.177^b ± 0.181	1.163^a ± 0.015	2.069^b ± 0.235	1.133^a ± 0.227	0.915^a ± 0.143
Pb	0.668^b ± 0.137	0.666^b ± 0.182	0.290^a ± 0.026	5.368^c ± 1.089	1.387^b ± 0.382	0.269^a ± 0.031

^a,b,c– the same indices in the rows (separately for water and bottom sediment samples) indicate no significant differences in metal concentrations at the significance level of p = 0.05 (one-way ANOVA, Tukey HSD test).

Table II. Comparative analysis of round goby (average ± standard deviation) between Dąbie Lake, Szczecin Lagoon, and Puck Bay (F – female; M – male; GSI – gonadosomatic index; HIS – hepatosomatic index).

Water body	Sex of fish	Total length	Standard length	Individual weight	Fulton coefficient	GSI	HSI
		cm	cm	g		%	%
Dąbie Lake	F M Together	15.00 ± 0.55^a 16.70 ± 0.87^a 15.88 ± 1.11^A	12.50 ± 0.54^a 13.90 ± 0.37^a 13.19 ± 0.80^A	72.41 ± 13.05^a 80.98 ± 9.20^a 76.69 ± 12.08^B	2.11 ± 0.22^a 1.74 ± 0.21^a 1.93 ± 0.28^B	1.88 ± 0.52^a 1.88 ± 0.42^a 1.88 ± 0.47^B	2.74 ± 0.9 ^a 2.15 ± 0.73^a 2.44 ± 0.89^A
Szczecin Lagoon	F M Together	16.10 ± 0.93^a 16.30 ± 0.86^a 16.21 ± 0.91^A	13.40 ± 0.94 ^a 13.60 ± 0.50 ^a 13.49 ± 0.77^A	69.49 ± 19.26^a 71.27 ± 9.03^a 70.32 ± 15.38^B	1.63 ± 0.23^b 1.63 ± 0.14^a 1.63 ± 0.19^A	0.26 ± 0.12^a 0.53 ± 0.36^b 0.39 ± 0.29^A	3.23 ± 0.49^a 3.33 ± 0.39^a 3.28 ± 0.45^B
Puck Bay	F M Together	16.60 ± 0.98^b 15.20 ± 0.81^a 16.37 ± 0.93^A	13.00 ± 1.02^b 12.60 ± 0.76^a 12.76 ± 0.92^A	61.82 ± 11.76^b 55.28 ± 9.6^a 58.55 ± 11.22^A	1.62 ± 0.17^b 1.58 ± 0.13^a 1.60 ± 0.15^A	2.12 ± 0.46^a 2.08 ± 0.56^a 2.10 ± 0.51^B	2.44 ± 0.75^b 1.86 ± 0.56^a 2.15 ± 0.72^A

^a,b– The same indices in the columns indicate no significant differences in biological traits between female and male fish inhabiting each basin; A, B – The same indices in the columns indicate no significant differences in biological traits of fish between basins (significance level p = 0.05, one-way ANOVA, Tukey HSD test).

Table III. Comparison of heavy metals (average ± standard deviation; concentration in $\mathit{\mu }$g kg⁻¹) between the studied organs of fish from Dąbie Lake, Szczecin Lagoon, and Puck Bay.

Heavy metals	Gills				Muscle				Liver				Gonads
	Dąbie Lake	Szczecin Lagoon	Puck Bay	Mean	Dąbie Lake	Szczecin Lagoon	Puck Bay	Mean	Dąbie Lake	Szczecin Lagoon	Puck Bay	Mean	Dąbie Lake	Szczecin Lagoon	Puck Bay	Mean
Cd	7.33^a ±2.62	6.82^a ±2.62	5.9^a ±1.98	6.69^A	3.73^b 1.38	2.92^ab ±1.4	2.57^a ±1.09	3.08^A	42.35^b ±21.88	20.81^a ±4.74	24.85^a ±8.7	29.34^C	19.56^b ±6.01	19.66^b ±7.02	13.45^a ±5.11	17.56^B
Co	10.05^a ±3.28	8.54^a ±3.07	8.67^a ±1.51	9.09^B	5.98^b ±2.06	4.26^a ±1.28	3.03^a ±0.96	4.43^A	30.31^a ±12.48	26.35^a ±12.55	35.76^a ±9.8	30.81^C	11.41^b ±3.24	5.53^a ±1.64	9.3^b ±2.91	8.75^B
Cr	76.87^a ±24.77	70.63^a ±16.71	64.69^a ±10.68	70.74^D	52.24^b ±15.11	38.31^a ±11.2	31.39^a ±8.21	40.65^C	34.88^a ±13.14	29.32^a ±8.86	27.27^a ±8.56	30.49^B	36.8^b ±18.18	19.61^a ±6.52	11.23^a ±3.28	22.55^A
Mo	48.01^b ±13.48	34.78^a ±8.11	29.38^a ±9.58	37.39^B	47.14^a ±13.39	39.41^a ±14.82	38.03^a ±5.31	41.53^B	71.44^a ±17.72	73.98^a ±14.17	75.75^a ±9.99	73.1^C	19.15^a ±5.08	19.32^a ±8.12	22.58^a ±9.43	20.36^A
Ni	41.61^a ±8.543	38.22^a ±15.68	35.41^a ±10.71	38.41^A	106.41^b ±26.94	34.91^a ±13.96	37.58^a ±7.93	59.63^B	41.68^b ±22.79	24.6^a ±6.95	25.06^a ±9.9	30.45^A	38.39^a ±19.21	53.45^a ±22.18	53.15^a ±22.34	48.34^B
Pb	54.85^b ±33.15	16.59^a ±1.75	11.2^a ±3.01	27.55^A	50.37^a ±20.59	44.32^a ±14.67	38.98^a ±11.51	44.56^B	66.07^b ±29.39	63.35^b ±28.3	36.98^a ±14.8	55.47^C	57.91^b ±27.67	38.9^a ±13.84	25.54^a ±9.48	40.78^B

^a,b,– the same indexes in rows for individual fish body parts mean no significant differences between basins (ANOVA, post-hoc Tukey HSD, p < 0.05).

^{A, B, C, D}– the same indexes in the rows indicate no significant differences in metal content between fish body parts (ANOVA, post-hoc Tukey HSD, p < 0.05).

Figure 2. Results of PCA analysis using concentrations of all elements.

Table IV. Pearson’s correlation coefficients (r) for the dependence of metal concentrations in muscle, liver, and gonads on body weight, liver weight, and gonad weight of fish from Dąbie Lake (DL), Szczecin Lagoon (SL) and Puck Bay (PB), respectively.

Heavymetals	r for metal in muscle			r for metal in liver			r for metal in gonads
	DL	SL	PB	DL	SL	PB	DL	SL	PB
Cd	0.89*	0.69*	0.66*	0.28	0.69*	0.35	0.34	−0.15	0.05
Co	0.78*	0.34	0.56*	0.39	0.78*	0.68*	0.65*	−0.23	−0.27
Cr	0.84*	0.77*	0.74*	0.59*	0.65*	0.61*	0.22	0.12	0.15
Mo	0.69*	0.63*	0.23	0.20	0.55*	0.41	0.12	−0.46	−0.09
Ni	0.57*	0.59*	0.71*	0.12	0.64*	0.40	0.39	−0.41	0.04
Pb	0.70*	0.63*	0.69*	0.36	0.56*	0.56*	0.15	0.01	0.01

*Correlation significant at p < 0.05.

Table V. Bioconcentration of heavy metals in different fish tissues (BFC_W – Bioconcentration factor for water; BCF_{BS –} Bioconcentration factor for bottom sediments).

Heavy metals	Gills			Muscle			Liver			Gonads
	Dąbie Lake	Szczecin Lagoon	Puck Bay	Dąbie Lake	Szczecin Lagoon	Puck Bay	Dąbie Lake	Szczecin Lagoon	Puck Bay	Dąbie Lake	Szczecin Lagoon	Puck Bay
BCFW
Cd	170.5^ab	155.1^a	227.1^b	86.8^ab	66.4^a	99.1^b	985.0^b	473.1^a	955.7^b	455.1^a	446.9^a	517.2^a
Co	125.7^b	51.2^a	41.9^a	74.8^b	25.5^a	14.6^a	379.0^b	157.8^a	172.8^a	142.7^b	33.1^a	44.9^a
Cr	48.5^a	58.4^a	67.6^b	32.9^a	31.7^a	32.8^a	22.0^a	24.2^a	28.5^a	23.2^b	16.2^a	11.7^a
Mo	21.4^b	16.1^a	18.2^a	21.0^ab	18.2^a	23.5^b	31.8^a	34.2^a	46.8^b	8.5^a	8.9^a	14.0^b
Ni	18.5^a	17.6^a	30.4^b	47.4^c	16.0^a	32.3^b	18.6^b	11.3^a	21.6^b	17.1^a	24.6^a	45.7^b
Pb	82.1^b	24.9^a	38.6^a	75.4^a	66.6^a	134.4^b	98.9^a	95.1^a	127.5^a	86.7^b	58.4^a	88.1^b
BCFBS
Cd	0.064^a	0.108^a	0.537^b	0.032^a	0.046^a	0.234^b	0.368^a	0.330^a	2.259^b	0.170^a	0.312^a	1.223^b
Co	0.006^a	0.013^b	0.052^c	0.003^a	0.006^a	0.018^b	0.017^a	0.039^a	0.215^b	0.006^a	0.008^a	0.056^b
Cr	0.026^a	0.049^b	0.090^c	0.018^a	0.027^b	0.044^c	0.012^a	0.021^a	0.038^b	0.013^a	0.014^a	0.016^a
Mo	0.203^a	0.458^b	0.507^b	0.200^a	0.519^b	0.656^c	0.303^a	0.974^b	1.306^c	0.081^a	0.254^b	0.389^c
Ni	0.020^a	0.034^b	0.039^b	0.051^c	0.031^a	0.041^b	0.020^a	0.022^a	0.027^a	0.019^a	0.047^b	0.058^b
Pb	0.010^a	0.012^a	0.042^b	0.009^a	0.032^b	0.145^c	0.012^a	0.046^b	0.137^c	0.011^a	0.028^a	0.095^b

^a,b,c– the same indexes in the rows for different parts of the fish’s body indicate no significant differences (one-way ANOVA, post-hoc Tukey HSD, p < 0.05).

Table VI. Health risk analysis of heavy metals: estimated daily intake (EDI) and comparison with reference dose (%RfD), target hazard quotient (THQ), hazard index (HI), carcinogenic risk (CR) and total carcinogenic risk (ΣCR) for mean concentration of elements in the fish muscle from Dąbie Lake, Szczecin Lagoon and Puck Bay.

Water body	Heavy metals	RfD	EDI	%RfD	THQ	CSF	CR
		mg kg^−1 day^−1	mg kg^−1 day^−1			mg kg^−1 day^−1
Dąbie Lake	Cd	1.0E–04^a	1.60E–06	1.60	1.60E–02	6.3E + 00^c	1.01E–05
	Co	3.0E–04^a	2.56E–06	0.85	8.54E–03
	Cr	3.0E–03^a	2.24E–05	0.75	7.46E–03	5.0E–01 ^a	1.12E–05
	Mo	5.0E–03^a	2.02E–05	0.40	4.04E–03
	Ni	2.0E–02^a	4.56E–05	0.23	2.28E–03	1.7E + 00 ^a	7.75E–05
	Pb	1.43E–04^b	2.16E–05	15.1	1.51E–01	8.5E–03 ^a	1.83E–07
HI = ΣTHQi					1.89E–01
ΣCR							9.90E–05
Szczecin Lagoon	Cd	1.0E–04^a	1.25E–06	1.25	1.25E–02	6.3E + 00^c	7.88E–06
	Co	3.0E–04^a	1.83E–06	0.61	6.09E–03
	Cr	3.0E–03^a	1.64E–05	0.55	5.47E–03	5.0E–01 ^a	8.21E–06
	Mo	5.0E–03^a	1.69E–05	0.34	3.38E–03
	Ni	2.0E–02^a	1.50E–05	0.07	7.48E–04	1.7E + 00 ^a	2.25E–05
	Pb	1.43E–04^b	1.90E–05	13.3	1.33E–01	8.5E–03 ^a	1.61E–07
HI = ΣTHQi					1.61E–01
ΣCR							4.17E–05
Puck Bay	Cd	1.0E–04^a	1.10E–06	1.10	1.10E–02	6.3E + 00^c	6.94E–06
	Co	3.0E–04^a	1.30E–06	0.43	4.33E–03
	Cr	3.0E–03^a	1.35E–05	0.45	4.48E–03	5.0E–01 ^a	6.73E–06
	Mo	5.0E–03^a	1.63E–05	0.33	3.26E–03
	Ni	2.0E–02^a	1.61E–05	0.08	8.05E–04	1.7E + 00 ^a	2.74E–05
	Pb	1.43E–04^b	1.67E–05	11.7	1.17E–01	8.5E–03 ^a	1.42E–05
HI = ΣTHQi					1.41E–01
ΣCR							4.12E–05

RfD (chronic oral reference dose) and CSF (cancer slope factor) taken from: ^a US EPA (2023); ^b Li et al. (2014); ^c US EPA (2010).

U.S. E.P.A. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. 2023. Regional Screening Level (RSL) summary table (TR=1E-06, HQ=1) November 2023. https://semspub.epa.gov/work/HQ/400431.pdf. Accessed Jan 2024 10.

 Google Scholar

Li Z, Ma Z, van der Kuijp, TJ, Yuan Z, Huang L. 2014. A review of soil heavy metal pollution from mines in China: Pollution and health risk assessment. Science of the Total Environment 468–469:843–853. DOI: 10.1016/j.scitotenv.2013.08.090

 PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar

U.S. E.P.A. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. 2010. Risk based screening table. http://www.epa.gov/iriswebp/iris/index.html

 Google Scholar