Sublethal Toxicity and Gene Expression Changes in Hydra vulgaris Exposed to Polyethylene and Polypropylene Nanoparticles
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Plastic nanoparticles (NPs) released from plastic breakdown pervade aquatic ecosystems, raising concerns about their long-term toxic effects in aquatic organisms. The purpose of this study was to examine the sublethal toxicity of polyethylene (PeNPs) and polypropylene (PpNPs) nanoparticles of the same size (50 nm diameter) in Hydra vulgaris. Hydras were exposed to increasing concentrations of PeNPs and PpNPs (0.3–10 mg/L) for 96 h at 20 °C. Toxicity was determined based on the characteristic morphological changes and gene expression analysis of genes involved in oxidative stress, DNA repair, protein salvaging and autophagy, neural activity and regeneration. The data revealed that PpNPs produced morphological changes (50% effects concentration EC50 = 7 mg/L), while PeNPs did not. Exposure to both nanoplastics produced changes in gene expression in all gene targets and at concentrations less than 0.3 mg/L in some cases. PpNPs generally produced stronger effects than PeNPs. The mode of action of these plastic polymers differed based on the intensity of responses in oxidative stress (superoxide dismutase, catalase), DNA repair of oxidized DNA, regeneration and circadian rhythms. In conclusion, both plastics’ nanoparticles produced effects at concentrations well below the appearance of morphological changes and at concentrations found in highly contaminated environments.
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".