Exposure to a glyphosate-based herbicide induces avoidance behavior and impairs coelomocyte viability in Eisenia andrei earthworms

Authors

  • Diovana Gelati de Batista Regional University of Northwestern Rio Grande do Sul, Rua do Comércio 3000, Ijuí, RS, Brazil, CEP 98700-000
  • Juliana Furlanetto Pinheiro Regional University of Northwestern Rio Grande do Sul, Rua do Comércio 3000, Ijuí, RS, Brazil, CEP 98700-000
  • Isadora Sulzbacher Ourique Regional University of Northwestern Rio Grande do Sul, Rua do Comércio 3000, Ijuí, RS, Brazil, CEP 98700-000
  • Bethina Barz Basso Regional University of Northwestern Rio Grande do Sul, Rua do Comércio 3000, Ijuí, RS, Brazil, CEP 98700-000
  • Maria Eduarda Todendi de Bragas 25 de Julho State Technical School, Ijuí, RS, Brazil, CEP 98700-000
  • Lucas Machado Sulzbacher Regional University of Northwestern Rio Grande do Sul, Rua do Comércio 3000, Ijuí, RS, Brazil, CEP 98700-000
  • Pauline Brendler Goettems Fiorin Regional University of Northwestern Rio Grande do Sul, Rua do Comércio 3000, Ijuí, RS, Brazil, CEP 98700-000
  • Thiago Gomes Heck Regional University of Northwestern Rio Grande do Sul, Rua do Comércio 3000, Ijuí, RS, Brazil, CEP 98700-000

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.48797/sl.2024.144

Keywords:

Selected Oral Communication

Abstract

Background: Glyphosate-based herbicides (GBH) are the most widely used agrochemicals [1]. Earthworms are key soil organisms used as bioindicators and alternative experimental models for studying the immune system [2,3]. Objective: We tested whether agronomic dosages of GBH induce avoidance behavior and alter the immunological profile of earthworms Eisenia andrei. Methods: Adult earthworms (0.318 ± 0.007 g) were divided into four groups and exposed for 48h: Control group (native soil), GBH1.5, GBH3, and GBH6 groups (native soil with GBH at concentrations equivalent to 1.5, 3.0, and 6.0 L/ha, respectively). Under these conditions, we applied the Avoidance Behavior Test (% of animals that escape from contaminated areas) and Acute Toxicity Test. We used glyphosate (Roundup®, Original DI, Monsanto, 44.5% w/v active ingredient) or water (control) in each experimental unit (n=6; 6 animals/experimental unit, 6 replicates each, in a box with 600g of soil, 95% of dystrophic red latosol:5% organic matter). The coelomocytes were collected by a non-invasive method [4]. Results: The highest concentration (GBH6) induced avoidance behavior in earthworms (% avoidance = GBH6 = 83.3±18.2, p=0.01) without modification in the immune profile. Furthermore, there was a reduction in cell viability of the coelomocytes obtained from the GBH6 (p=0.001) and also GBH3 (p=0.01) groups, when the animals had no option to avoid the contaminated area (CTRL: 75.7±18.9%; GBH1.5: 63.7±22%; GBH3: 56.7±29.6%; and GBH6: 56.0±21.4%). Conclusion: The presence of GBH in the soil at a typical agronomic dose (3.0 L/ha) or higher (6.0 L/ha) threatens the immune defense of earthworms and may lead to the loss of the ecological function of soil.

References

1. Van Bruggen, A.H.C. et al. Environmental and health effects of the herbicide glyphosate. Sci Total Environ 2018, 616-617, p. 255-268.

2. Liu, T. et al. Earthworms Coordinate Soil Biota to Improve Multiple Ecosystem Functions. Curr Biol 2019, 29, p. 3420-3429.

3. Teixeira, C. F. et al. Safety indicators of a novel multi supplement based on guarana, selenium, and L-carnitine: Evidence from human and red earthworm immune cells. Food Chem Toxicol 2021, 150, p. 112066.

4. Eyambe, G. S. et al. A non-invasive technique for sequential collection of earthworm (Lumbricus terrestris) leukocytes during subchronic immunotoxicity studies. Lab Anim 1991, 25, p. 61-67.

Downloads

Published

2024-05-01

How to Cite

Gelati de Batista, D., Furlanetto Pinheiro, J. ., Sulzbacher Ourique, I., Barz Basso, B., Todendi de Bragas, M. E., Machado Sulzbacher, L. ., Brendler Goettems Fiorin, P., & Gomes Heck, T. (2024). Exposure to a glyphosate-based herbicide induces avoidance behavior and impairs coelomocyte viability in Eisenia andrei earthworms. Scientific Letters, 1(Sup 1). https://doi.org/10.48797/sl.2024.144

Issue

Section

Oral Communications

Similar Articles

1 2 3 4 > >> 

You may also start an advanced similarity search for this article.