Premium
Micronucleus Test Reveals Genotoxic Effects in Bats Associated with Agricultural Activity
Author(s) -
SandovalHerrera Natalia,
Paz Castillo Jesusa,
Herrera Montalvo L. Gerardo,
Welch Kenneth C.
Publication year - 2021
Publication title -
environmental toxicology and chemistry
Language(s) - English
Resource type - Journals
SCImago Journal Rank - 1.1
H-Index - 171
eISSN - 1552-8618
pISSN - 0730-7268
DOI - 10.1002/etc.4907
Subject(s) - micronucleus test , genotoxicity , biomonitoring , biology , micronucleus , cave , ecology , pesticide , toxicology , zoology , chemistry , toxicity , organic chemistry
Bats play a vital role in our ecosystems and economies as natural pest‐control agents, seed dispersers, and pollinators. Agricultural intensification, however, can impact bats foraging near crops, affecting the ecosystem services they provide. Exposure to pesticides, for example, may induce chromosome breakage or missegregation that can result in micronucleus formation. Detection of micronuclei is a simple, inexpensive, and relatively minimally invasive technique commonly used to evaluate chemical genotoxicity but rarely applied to assess wildlife genotoxic effects. We evaluated the suitability of the micronucleus test as a biomarker of genotoxicity for biomonitoring field studies in bats. We collected blood samples from insectivorous bats roosting in caves surrounded by different levels of disturbance (agriculture, human settlements) in Colima and Jalisco, west central Mexico. Then, we examined the frequency of micronucleus inclusions in erythrocytes using differentially stained blood smears. Bats from caves surrounded by proportionately more (53%) land used for agriculture and irrigated year‐round had higher micronucleus frequency than bats from a less disturbed site (15% agriculture). We conclude that the micronucleus test is a sensitive method to evaluate genotoxic effects in free‐ranging bats and could provide a useful biomarker for evaluating risk of exposure in wild populations. Environ Toxicol Chem 2021;40:202–207. © 2020 SETAC