Effect of silver nanoparticles on the standard soil arthropod Folsomia candida (Collembola) and the eukaryote model organism Saccharomyces cerevisiae

Abstract

BackgroundBecause of their antimicrobial properties, silver nanoparticles (AgNPs) have been widely used and have come into contact with the environment. In the present work, an effect of AgNPs on a standard soil organism, Folsomia candida, was studied (in comparison to silver nitrate) focusing on molecular and cellular alterations as ecotoxicological endpoints.ResultsAt the molecular level, an up-regulation of metallothionein-containing protein (MTC) mRNA in AgNP-treated groups indicated toxic heavy metal stress effects caused by the release of silver ions from AgNPs, which is similar to animal groups treated with silver nitrate. Alteration of the steady-state level of glutathione S-transferase (GST) mRNA was detected in animal treated with AgNPs and AgNO3. At the cellular level, the relation between GST activity and the size of the glutathione (GSH) was examined. Change of GST activity from different animal groups was not significant, whereas the GSH pool (reduced and oxidized forms) decreased with increasing concentration of AgNPs. In order to obtain direct evidence whether AgNPs cause oxidative stress, treated animals were incubated with the non-fluorescent probe, 2′,7′-dichlorodihydrofluorescein diacetate (DCFH-DA). A fluorescence signal was observed in both AgNPs- and AgNO3-treated groups pointing to the production of reactive species (RS). Since RS formation in F.candida is difficult to quantify, yeast strain BY4742 (wild-type) and mutants lacking of oxidative stress-related protective enzymes were exploited as a further eukaryote model organism. AgNPs and AgNO3 were found to also affect growth of yeast and induced oxidative stress.ConclusionsAn effect of AgNPs on Collembola and yeast strains is similar to the one from AgNO3. However, AgNPs is less toxic due to the slow release of silver ions. In summary, the toxic effect of AgNPs on F. candida is caused by the combination of the release of silver ions from AgNPs and the formation of reactive species.Electronic supplementary materialThe online version of this article (doi:10.1186/s12302-016-0095-4) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.

<p>Silver nanoparticles induce reactive oxygen species-mediated cell cycle delay and synergistic cytotoxicity with 3-bromopyruvate in <em>Candida</em> <em>albicans</em>, but not in <em>Saccharomyces</em> <em>cerevisiae</em></p>

“…In addition, in fission yeast, the toxic effects of AgNPs are attributed to the generation of ROS through the release of Ag ions inside the cells internalizing AgNPs 34. Consistent with our results, no increase in ROS production in S. cerevisiae BY4741 treated with 4–100 μg/mL PVP-coated AgNPs,15 and a similar effect of AgNPs on the growth of wild-type and single-gene deletion mutants of S. cerevisiae defective in oxidative stress defense (yap1∆, sod1∆, or sod2∆) have been reported.15 However, Sillapawattana et al observed increased ROS production in S. cerevisiae BY4742 and more prominent growth suppression in ctt1, sod2 , or gsh2 deletion mutants compared to wild type when treated with AgNPs 35. Of note, the discordance of our results with those of Sillapawattana et al may be related to the difference in S. cerevisiae strains and culture conditions.…”

Effects of Silver Nanoparticles on Multiple Drug-Resistant Strains of Staphylococcus aureus and Pseudomonas aeruginosa from Mastitis-Infected Goats: An Alternative Approach for Antimicrobial Therapy

“…Glutathione reductase (GR) and GST act in concert with the antioxidant compound GSH and play major roles in mediating the tolerance of a P. aeruginosa strain to various herbicides [78]. Similarly, Folsomia candida exposed to AgNPs displayed decreased levels of GSH and increased GST activity [79]. Exposure of P. putida to environmentally relevant concentrations of AgNPs caused ROS production, glutathione depletion, and inactivation of the antioxidant enzymes superoxide dismutase, catalase, and glutathione reductase [72].…”

Effect of engineered nanoparticles on soil biota: Do they improve the soil quality and crop production or jeopardize them?

“…Similarly, Sillapawattana et al (2016) Similar to the evaluations carried out with the microfauna, for the meso and macrofauna, it was observed that there is an effect of the NPs on the abundance and diversity of soils. However, in some cases with contradictory results and again, it is suggested that the adverse effects depend on the type of organisms to be evaluated, methods of application of the NPs, doses and the physical and chemical properties of the soil.…”

“…In agriculture, ENP have been designed for reducing the population of arthropods or pathogens (Dubey & Mailapalli, 2016), increasing the control of diseases or weeds (Duhan et al, 2017), or improving the growth rates of crops with environmental benefits or economic profits (Liu, Zhang, & Lal, 2016). In contrast, it has also been discussed the adverse effects of ENP on soil organ-isms´diversity and abundance Wang, Shu, Zhang, & Youbin, 2017 such as fungus (Duhan et al, 2017), collembola (McKee et al, 2017Sillapawattana, Gruhlke, & Schäffer, 2016;Topuz & van Gestel, 2017), isopods (Malev et al, 2017), annelids (Brami, Glover, Butt, & Lowe, 2017;Jesmer, Velicogna, Schwertfeger, Scroggins, & Princz, 2017;Patricia et al, 2017;Romero-Freire, Lofts, Peinado, & van Gestel, 2017), as well as on the symbiotic association of bacteria and plants (Cao, Fen, Lin, & Wang, 2016). The toxic effects of ENP regarding their bioaccumulation and persistence have also been reported on organisms of different trophic levels (Chae, Kim, & An, 2016).…”