Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
. 2024 May 22:6:100173.
doi: 10.1016/j.crtox.2024.100173. eCollection 2024.

Reproductive cytotoxic and genotoxic impact of polystyrene microplastic on Paracentrotus lividus spermatozoa

Affiliations

Reproductive cytotoxic and genotoxic impact of polystyrene microplastic on Paracentrotus lividus spermatozoa

Filomena Mottola et al. Curr Res Toxicol. .

Erratum in

Abstract

In recent decades, industrialization, intensive agriculture, and urban development have severely impacted marine environments, compromising the health of aquatic and terrestrial organisms. Inadequate disposal results in hundreds of tons of plastic products released annually into the environment, which degrade into microplastics (MPs), posing health risks due to their ability to biomagnify and bioaccumulate. Among these, polystyrene MPs (PS-MPs) are significant pollutants in marine ecosystems, widely studied for their reproductive toxicological effects. This research aimed to evaluate the reproductive cytotoxic and genotoxic effects of PS-MPs on sea urchin (Paracentrotus lividus) spermatozoa in vitro. Results showed that PS-MPs significantly reduced sperm viability and motility without altering morphology, and induced sperm DNA fragmentation mediated by reactive oxygen species production. Furthermore, head-to-head agglutination of the spermatozoa was observed exclusively in the sample treated with the plastic agents, indicating the ability of microplastics to adhere to the surface of sperm cells and form aggregates with microplastics on other sperm cells, thereby impeding movement and reducing reproductive potential. These findings suggest that PS-MPs can adversely affect the quality of sea urchin sperm, potentially impacting reproductive events.

Keywords: Aquatic pollution; DNA damage; Microplastics; Oxidative stress; Sea urchin reproductive potential; Sperm parameters.

PubMed Disclaimer

Conflict of interest statement

The authors declare that they have no known competing financial interests or personal relationships that could have appeared to influence the work reported in this paper.

Figures

None
Graphical abstract
Fig. 1
Fig. 1
Three representative images (1, 2, 3) obtained by optical microscope (Carl Zeiss, Germany) at 40X magnification showing sea urchin (P. lividus) sperm agglutination after a 30-minute treatment with 50 µg/mL of PS-MPs. The presence of microparticles between sperm heads is also visible (black arrows).
Fig. 2
Fig. 2
A) Percentage of Sperm DNA Fragmentation (SDF) in sea urchin (P. lividus) spermatozoa obtained by TUNEL Assay. Black bar: untreated spermatozoa; white bar: spermatozoa after 30 min of treatment with 50 µg/mL PS-MPs; grey bar: spermatozoa after 30 min of treatment with 1 µL/mL H2O2. B) Representative image of sea urchin (P. lividus) spermatozoa after treatment with 50 µg/mL PS-MPs obtained by TUNEL technique. In blue (DAPI filter) spermatozoa with intact DNA, in green (FITC filter) spermatozoa with fragmented DNA. (For interpretation of the references to colour in this figure legend, the reader is referred to the web version of this article.)
Fig. 3
Fig. 3
A) Percentage of Nitro-Blue Tetrazolium chloride (NBT) in sea urchin (P. lividus) spermatozoa. Black bar: untreated spermatozoa; white bar: spermatozoa after 30 min of treatment with 50 µg/mL PS-MPs; grey bar: spermatozoa after 30 min of treatment with 1 µL/mL H2O2. B) Representative image of ROS highlighted by NBT (arrows) in P. lividus spermatozoa after 30 min of treatment with 50 µg/mL PS-MPs. (For interpretation of the references to colour in this figure legend, the reader is referred to the web version of this article.)

Similar articles

Cited by

References

    1. Adams N.L., Heyland A., Rice L.L., Foltz K.R. Procuring animals and culturing of eggs and embryos. Methods Cell Biol. 2019;150:3–46. doi: 10.1016/bs.mcb.2018.11.006. - DOI - PubMed
    1. Almeda R., Rodriguez-Torres R., Rist S., Winding M.H.S., Stief P., Hansen B.H., et al. Microplastics do not increase bioaccumulation of petroleum hydrocarbons in Arctic zooplankton but trigger feeding suppression under co-exposure conditions. Sci. Total Environ. 2021;751 doi: 10.1016/j.scitotenv.2020.141264. - DOI - PubMed
    1. Bessa F., Ratcliffe N., Otero V., Sobral P., Marques J.C., Waluda C.M., et al. Microplastics in gentoo penguins from the Antarctic region. Sci. Rep. 2019;9(1):14191. doi: 10.1038/s41598-019-50621-2. - DOI - PMC - PubMed
    1. Blackburn K., Green D. The potential effects of microplastics on human health: What is known and what is unknown. Ambio. 2022;51(3):518–530. doi: 10.1007/s13280-021-01589-9. - DOI - PMC - PubMed
    1. Daniel D.B., Ashraf P.M., Thomas S.N., Thomson K.T. Microplastics in the edible tissues of shellfishes sold for human consumption. Chemosphere. 2021;264(Pt 2) doi: 10.1016/j.chemosphere.2020.128554. - DOI - PubMed

LinkOut - more resources