Comparison of five in vitro bioassays to measure estrogenic activity in environmental waters
Author(s)
Leusch, Frederic DL
De Jager, Christiaan
Levi, Yves
Lim, Richard
Puijker, Leo
Sacher, Frank
Tremblay, Louis A
Wilson, Vickie S
Chapman, Heather F
Griffith University Author(s)
Year published
2010
Metadata
Show full item recordAbstract
Bioassays are well established in the pharmaceutical industry and single compound analysis, but there is still uncertainty about their usefulness in environmental monitoring.Wecompared the responses of five bioassays designed to measure estrogenic activity (the yeast estrogen screen, ER-CALUX, MELN,T47D-KBluc,andE-SCREENassays)andchemical analysis on extracts from four different water sources (groundwater, raw sewage, treated sewage, and river water). All five bioassays displayed similar trends and there was good agreement with analytical chemistry results. The data from the ER-CALUX and E-SCREEN bioassays were ...
View more >Bioassays are well established in the pharmaceutical industry and single compound analysis, but there is still uncertainty about their usefulness in environmental monitoring.Wecompared the responses of five bioassays designed to measure estrogenic activity (the yeast estrogen screen, ER-CALUX, MELN,T47D-KBluc,andE-SCREENassays)andchemical analysis on extracts from four different water sources (groundwater, raw sewage, treated sewage, and river water). All five bioassays displayed similar trends and there was good agreement with analytical chemistry results. The data from the ER-CALUX and E-SCREEN bioassays were robust and predictable, and wellcorrelated with predictions from chemical analysis. The T47DKBluc appeared likewise promising, but with a more limited sample size it was less compelling. The YES assay was less sensitive than the other assays by an order of magnitude, which resulted in a larger number of nondetects. The MELN assay was less predictable, although the possibility that this was due to laboratory-specific difficulties cannot be discounted. With standardized bioassay data analysis and consistency of operating protocols, bioanalytical tools are a promising advance in the development of a tiered approach to environmental water quality monitoring.
View less >
View more >Bioassays are well established in the pharmaceutical industry and single compound analysis, but there is still uncertainty about their usefulness in environmental monitoring.Wecompared the responses of five bioassays designed to measure estrogenic activity (the yeast estrogen screen, ER-CALUX, MELN,T47D-KBluc,andE-SCREENassays)andchemical analysis on extracts from four different water sources (groundwater, raw sewage, treated sewage, and river water). All five bioassays displayed similar trends and there was good agreement with analytical chemistry results. The data from the ER-CALUX and E-SCREEN bioassays were robust and predictable, and wellcorrelated with predictions from chemical analysis. The T47DKBluc appeared likewise promising, but with a more limited sample size it was less compelling. The YES assay was less sensitive than the other assays by an order of magnitude, which resulted in a larger number of nondetects. The MELN assay was less predictable, although the possibility that this was due to laboratory-specific difficulties cannot be discounted. With standardized bioassay data analysis and consistency of operating protocols, bioanalytical tools are a promising advance in the development of a tiered approach to environmental water quality monitoring.
View less >
Journal Title
Environmental Science & Technology
Volume
44
Issue
10
Copyright Statement
© 2010 American Chemical Society. Self-archiving of the author-manuscript version is not yet supported by this publisher. Please refer to the journal link for access to the definitive, published version or contact the author[s] for more information.
Subject
Analytical biochemistry