Natural Mineral Particles Are Cytotoxic to Rainbow Trout Gill Epithelial Cells In Vitro
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Worldwide increases in fluvial fine sediment are a threat to aquatic animal health. Fluvial fine sediment is always a mixture of particles whose mineralogical composition differs depending on the sediment source and catchment area geology. Nonetheless, whether particle impact in aquatic organisms differs between mineral species remains to be investigated. This study applied an in vitro approach to evaluate cytotoxicity and uptake of four common fluvial mineral particles (quartz, feldspar, mica, and kaolin; concentrations: 10, 50, 250 mg L(-1)) in the rainbow trout epithelial gill cell line RTgill-W1. Cells were exposed for 24, 48, 72, and 96 h. Cytotoxicity assays for cell membrane integrity (propidium iodide assay), oxidative stress (H2DCF-DA assay), and metabolic activity (MTT assay) were applied. These assays were complemented with cell counts and transmission electron microscopy. Regardless of mineral species, particles ≤ 2 µm in diameter were taken up by the cells, suggesting that particles of all mineral species came into contact and interacted with the cells. Not all particles, however, caused strong cytotoxicity: Among all assays the tectosilicates quartz and feldspar caused sporadic maximum changes of 0.8-1.2-fold compared to controls. In contrast, cytotoxicity of the clay particles was distinctly stronger and even differed between the two particle types: mica induced concentration-dependent increases in free radicals, with consistent 1.6-1.8-fold-changes at the 250 mg L(-1) concentration, and a dilated endoplasmic reticulum. Kaolin caused concentration-dependent increases in cell membrane damage, with consistent 1.3-1.6-fold increases at the 250 mg L(-1) concentration. All effects occurred in the presence or absence of 10% fetal bovine serum. Cell numbers per se were marginally affected. Results indicate that (i.) natural mineral particles can be cytotoxic to gill epithelial cells, (ii.) their cytotoxic potential differs between mineral species, with clay particles being more cytotoxic, and (iii.) some clays might induce effects comparable to engineered nanoparticles.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".