Clarkson University, Institute for a Sustainable Environment, 8 Clarkson Avenue, Potsdam, NY 13699, USA; Clarkson University, Biology Department, Potsdam, NY 13699, USA.
Clarkson University, Institute for a Sustainable Environment, 8 Clarkson Avenue, Potsdam, NY 13699, USA; State University of New York College of Environmental Sciences and Forestry, 1 Forestry Drive, Syracuse, NY 13210, USA.
Ecotoxicol Environ Saf. 2024 Sep 15;283:116819. doi: 10.1016/j.ecoenv.2024.116819. Epub 2024 Aug 2.
Non-invasive proxies, such as fur and feathers, are likely to be increasingly used to assess the potential exposure of chemicals, including trace metals and metalloids. However, the amount of external contamination is usually unknown, and there is no standard method for removing external contamination of trace metals in fur or feathers. To date, 40 % of studies published related to the measurement of trace metal levels in fur or the hair of non-human mammals and 24 % of studies in feathers do not state any washing methods or did not wash the samples before analysis. We assessed three washing techniques to remove external contamination of arsenic (As), lead (Pb), and zinc (Zn) from bat fur. We selected the three most frequently used fur washing methods from literature. To test these methods, fur samples from great flying foxes (Pteropus neohibernicus neohibernicus, n=15 individuals) from Papua New Guinea preserved over eight decades (AMNH, USA) were used. Percentages of trace metal removed are 87.19 % (SD= 12.28), 92.99 % (SD= 5.5) and 88.57 % (SD= 9.33) for As, 54.72 % (SD= 31.64), 55.89 % (SD= 37.87), and 53.93 % (SD= 41.28) for Pb, and 74.03 % (SD= 22.96), 22.93 % (SD= 73), and 24.95 % (SD= 49.5) for Zn using M2, M3, and M4, respectively. We also assessed four washing techniques to remove external contamination of arsenic (As), mercury (Hg), and zinc (Zn) from bird feathers. We identified the four most prevalent washing techniques in the literature used for feathers. We used feathers from the great horned owl (Bubo virginianus) and the great blue heron (Ardea herodias) to test these methods. Percentages of trace metal removed are 34.35 % (SD= 44.22), 69.22 % (SD= 36.5), 62.59 % (SD= 48.37), and 80.89 % (SD= 14.54) for As, 66.97 % (SD= 13.26), 29.4 % (SD= 67.06), 49.68 % (SD= 42.33), and 28.88 % (SD= 69) for Hg, and <0 % (SD= 80.1), 0 % (SD= 29.55), 11.23 % (SD= 47.73), and 57.09 % (SD= 21.2) for Zn using M2, M3, M4, and M5, respectively. This study shows the importance of washing fur and feather samples prior to trace metals analyses in ecotoxicology and biomonitoring studies.
非侵入性替代品，如皮毛和羽毛，可能越来越多地被用于评估化学品的潜在暴露情况，包括痕量金属和类金属。然而，通常不知道外部污染的程度，也没有标准的方法来去除皮毛或羽毛中痕量金属的外部污染。迄今为止，40%的已发表研究与毛皮或非人类哺乳动物毛发中的痕量金属水平有关，24%的关于羽毛的研究没有说明任何洗涤方法或在分析前没有对样品进行洗涤。我们评估了三种洗涤技术，以去除蝙蝠皮毛中的砷（As）、铅（Pb）和锌（Zn）的外部污染。我们从文献中选择了三种最常用的皮毛洗涤方法。为了测试这些方法，我们使用了保存在巴布亚新几内亚的大狐蝠（Pteropus neohibernicus neohibernicus，n=15 只个体）的皮毛样本，这些样本已经保存了八十多年（AMNH，美国）。去除痕量金属的百分比分别为 87.19%（SD=12.28）、92.99%（SD=5.5）和 88.57%（SD=9.33）为 As，54.72%（SD=31.64）、55.89%（SD=37.87）和 53.93%（SD=41.28）为 Pb，74.03%（SD=22.96）、22.93%（SD=73）和 24.95%（SD=49.5）为 Zn，分别使用 M2、M3 和 M4。我们还评估了四种洗涤技术，以去除鸟羽中的砷（As）、汞（Hg）和锌（Zn）的外部污染。我们确定了文献中用于羽毛的四种最常见的洗涤技术。我们使用大角鸮（Bubo virginianus）和大蓝鹭（Ardea herodias）的羽毛来测试这些方法。去除痕量金属的百分比分别为 34.35%（SD=44.22）、69.22%（SD=36.5）、62.59%（SD=48.37）和 80.89%（SD=14.54）为 As，66.97%（SD=13.26）、29.4%（SD=67.06）、49.68%（SD=42.33）和 28.88%（SD=69）为 Hg，<0%（SD=80.1）、0%（SD=29.55）、11.23%（SD=47.73）和 57.09%（SD=21.2）为 Zn，分别使用 M2、M3、M4 和 M5。这项研究表明，在生态毒理学和生物监测研究中，在进行痕量金属分析之前，洗涤皮毛和羽毛样品是很重要的。
