Open access peer-reviewed chapter

Catfish as an Ecotoxicological Model for Assessment of Nanoparticle Toxicity Profiling

Written By

Muhammed Atamanalp, Arzu Ucar and Gonca Alak

Submitted: 10 May 2022 Reviewed: 18 August 2022 Published: 30 October 2022

DOI: 10.5772/intechopen.107213

From the Edited Volume

Catfish - Advances, Technology, Experiments

Edited by Muhammed Atamanalp

Chapter metrics overview

78 Chapter Downloads

View Full Metrics

Abstract

The developing technological infrastructure has accelerated the evolution of nanoscience and encouraged the use of nanomaterials in very large areas. However, environmental liberation of nanomaterials can pose potential risks. Although different toxicity screening methodologies have been successfully used to assess the potential risks of these substances, little is known about their environmental impact. Fish are the most visible members of the aquatic ecosystem, vulnerable to toxicants. Although the ecotoxicology of fish and nanoparticles are complex, this review evaluates approaches to using catfish as a bio-indicator for the effects of nanoparticles on fish.

Keywords

  • nanoparticle
  • toxicity
  • catfish
  • fish metabolism

1. Introduction

Nanotechnology is the branch of science that deals with the characterization, production, management, and manufacturing use of nanostructured materials (NM) for different sectors/applications. The NMs produced with this technology generally have an intermediate size between 1−100 nm and can be converted to desired lengths. This process (size reduction) increases the surface-to-volume ratio (thus surface energy), biological efficiency, and adsorption capacity of the obtained product. In addition, its chemical/physical (such as diffusion, strength, color, solubility, and quantum effects), optical, magnetic, and thermodynamic properties are significantly improved [1, 2]. Innovative nanostructured materials and nanocomposites equipped with these superior properties have a wider application area (environment, agriculture, medicine, food, etc.) than their macro counterparts and are one of the fastest developing research areas, especially in the food industry. Due to nanotechnological advances, NMs are estimated to be components of more than 2,000 commercial products, and this number is expected to increase significantly in the coming years. However, during the production, carrying, use, and exterminating of these products, NMs are inevitably released into the environment, especially in the waters as the final destination [2]. Keller et al. [3] reported that 0.4−7% of these products eventually enter the aquatic environment, assuming that there is approximately 309,000 tons of NM production globally. Contaminations in aquatic environments, which are the final destination of all pollutants, can occur through industrial wastewater, domestic sewage, and coastal recreational activities (e.g. swimming and diving) [4, 5, 6]. Especially with the increasing environmental awareness in recent years, the NMs’ risk to the aquatic ecosystem has become an increasing concern [7].

Although at present, the development of NM-related adverse outcome pathways has mainly focused on human toxicity, an additional nanosafety component to consider in risk assessment of this class of material is eco-toxicity [8]. The unique physicochemical properties of NMs enable them to interact with biomolecules and change essential biochemical pathways. However, the abundance of NMs in water bodies can affect water quality and threaten the survival of aquatic species also they can be accumulated through the food chains [9]. The reaching of nanoparticles to aquatic environments and possible action mechanisms had been figured out by Bundschuh et al. [10] and shown in Figure 1.

Figure 1.

Exposure and potential pathways to toxicity of nanoparticles in aquatic environments (red), (1) toxic properties, (2) biomagnification potential induced by adsorption leading to assimilation, and (3) aquatic absorption onto organisms and fish, aquatic plants, various invertebrates, and uptake by algae and other organisms. ROS, reactive oxygen types Bundschuh et al. [10].

As in all vertebrates, fish’s general physiological response to threatening situations is called “stress.” A short time after the perception of a stressor, the stress response begins in the organism. The physiological response (Stress response) triggered by stressors is a set of adjustments that can maintain internal homeostasis to a certain level and sustain vitality [11]. Mildly stressful situations may have positive effects (eustress), while higher intensities may have negative consequences. The stress response is initiated and controlled by two hormonal systems that lead to the production of corticosteroids (mainly cortisol) and catecholamines (such as adrenaline and noradrenaline). Together, these regulate secondary stress response factors that alter the distribution of essential resources such as energy and oxygen to tissues and organs and also compromise hydro-mineral imbalance and the immune system. It is known that long-term exposure to stress negatively affects basic life functions (growth, development, disease resistance, energy balance, behavior, and reproduction) [12].

Stress response of organisms sent to a stimulus (stressor) that is perceived as dangerous helps maintain homeostasis [13]. These reactions are grouped as primary, secondary, and tertiary phases (Figure 2) [14]. The primary phase represents a neuroendocrine response. Cortisol is released from interrenal cells and catecholamines are released from chromaffin. High levels of these hormones trigger a secondary response. The secondary phase presents as hyperglycemia, vasodilation of the arteries in the gill filaments, increased heart rate, and decreased immunity [15]. The first two stages are considered adaptive and maintain homeostasis by enabling the fish to adapt to stress factors. On the other hand, in the tertiary phase, it includes systemic changes in which organisms are not able to adapt to stress factors and this leads to negative effects on the situation. Its effects on behavior, health, growth, and reproduction, including swimming performances, emerge in this context [14].

Figure 2.

Stress response phases [14].

Behavioral alterations are the other most widely used biomarkers at the individual level. Because changes in behavior are the integration of many cellular processes necessary for the viability of the organism, population, and community. Therefore, the observation of behavioral changes provides a unique toxicological perspective connecting both the ecological and biochemical consequences of environmental pollution [16]. Behavioral changes of living things in aquatic ecosystems are accepted as the most sensitive indicators of possible toxic effects. Social interactions such as changes in feeding activities, swimming behaviors, competition, hunting, reproduction, and aggression of fish exposed to different insecticides have been determined [17].

Since behavior acts as a link between physiological and ecological processes, it is an ideal parameter for studying environmental pollutant effects. Fish are the prominent aquatic indicators in this parameter due to the ease of monitoring their behavior. However, a very good knowledge of their physiology is an advantage for ecological monitoring of contamination [18]. Individual fish’s behavioral performance follows certain physiological sequences triggered by external stimuli acting through neural networks [19].

The metabolism of fish is closely related to its behavioral state and is affected by many varied physiologic functions. Metabolic dysfunction caused by aquatic pollutants can result from disruption at many different physiological levels [20, 21, 22, 23, 24]. Metabolic degradation of the whole organism had been expressed in a number of different ways, most commonly indicated by varying resting metabolic rates (ventilation rate or oxygen consumption) or reduced swimming performance (critical swimming rate, Ucrit) [25, 26, 27, 28].

Catfish are gaining increasing attention as bioindicators for monitoring NP-fish interaction. In this section, eco-toxicological concerns of the NMs/NPs and their effects on the ecosystem are presented, with special emphasis on catfish health. For this purpose, we wanted to prepare a data pool for future research by integrating the data and information found in scientific publications with catfish as a bio-indicator, emphasizing where targeted analyzes are needed among different potential pathways/mechanisms of toxic effect in ecotoxicological findings for NMs. It is aimed to gather NM effect studies on catfish, which has an important place in aquaculture. The results of different researchers on different catfish species are summarized in Table 1. In this way, the NMs’ biological effects on this fish species, including negative effects, aim to provide a complete picture of the situation, which will provide a better understanding of the mechanisms of the biological effects of NMs and assist in the sustainable development of nanotechnology, which is increasingly used.

NanomaterialLive materialObtained alterations/EffectsReferences
Silica nanoparticles (SiNPs)African catfish, Clarias gariepinus8-OHdG and MDA elevation, reduction in AChE, effects on GPX, SODRahman et al. [29]
Copper ferrite nanoparticles (CuFe2O4NPs)Channel catfish ovary cellsSignificant increase in LPO, GST, and GPX was observed in CCO cells exposed to CuFe2O4NPs after 24 h of treatment. However, the CAT and GSH levels in CCO cells exposed to CuFe2O4NPs decreased significantly after 24 h. The CCO cells exposed to 10 μg/mL concentration of CuFe2O4NPs for 24 h showed remarkable changes in their morphology.Srikanth and Nutalapati [30]
Tucumã nanocapsulesSilver catfish, Rhamdia quelenThe most abundant carotenoid in tucumã oil was all-trans-beta-carotene. Nanocapsules are good carriers for tucumã oil. Tucumã oil nanocapsules do not have a toxicity effect in catfish.Nascimento et al. [31]
Nano-sized zinc oxide (nano-ZnO)Yellow catfish Pelteobagrus fulvidracoIncreased intestinal Zn contents. The zip6 and zip10 mRNA expression levels were higher in the H-Zn group than those in the control (0 mg/kg nano-ZnO). Epsl5, dynamin1, dynamin2, caveolin1, and caveolin2 mRNA expression levels tended to reduce with dietary nano-ZnO addition. Dietary nano-ZnO increased TG content and G6PD activities.Chen et al. [32]
Amme-functionalized single-carbon nanotube (NH2 f-SWCNT)Channel Catfish (Ictalurus punctatus)Decrease of CAT and SOD activity, an increase in MDA and LDH. Real-time PCR assay showed inflammatory response with a dose-dependent increase of tumor necrosis factor alpha (TNFα) and transient increase of IL-1β in the liver.Gao et al. [33]
Chitosan nanoparticles (CSNPs)African catfish, Clarias gariepinusFSH and 17-β estradiol (E2) were significantly decreased in female catfish. While testosterone and luteinizing hormone (LH) were increased after exposure to BPA. Significant reduction in CAT, GSH-px, TAC, GSH, and GST levels.Hamed et al. [34]
ZnO NPsMagur catfish C. magurResulted in oxidative stress as evidenced by an initial sharp rise of intracellular concentrations of H2O2 and malondialdehyde (MDA) but decreased gradually at later stages. GSH level increased gradually in all the tissues after a mitial decrease.Koner et al. [35]
Gold nanoparticles AuNPsAfrican catfish C. gariepinusThe embryo’s hatching rate and larvae’s survival rate decreased. Embryonic malformations such as pericardial edema, yolk sac edema, neck, and head defectsMarimuthu et al. [36]
Nano-ZnIntestinal epithelial cells of yellow catfishIncreased the contents of TG and free fatty acids (FFA), the activities of G6PD, 6GPD, ME, and FAS.Ling et al. [37]
Single-walled carbon nanotube (COOH-SWCNT) chitosan (CS) hybrid (COOH-SWCNT-CS).Magur catfish C. magurDNA damage was observed in fish injected with nanotubes alone than chitosan hybrid groups. Histological observations revealed severe liver cell damage at higher concentrations of COOH-SWCNT whereas, in COOH-SWCNT-CS, no such damage was observed. However, kidney tissue remained unaffected in all groups.Wisdom et al. [38]
Titanium dioxide nanoparticles (TiO2 NPs)African catfish, C.gariepinusNeurotoxicity, changes of antioxidant enzymes, and retardation of food uptake.Matouke and Mustapha [39]
Titanium dioxide nanoparticles (FeTiO2 NPs)/Nickel ferrite nanoparticle (NiFe2O4 NPs)CatfishAbnormal behaviors such as loss of equilibrium, pigmentation, and lying down at the bottom of the aquaria were observed.Rao et al. [40]
Chitosan nanoparticles (BD+CHN)African catfish (C. gariepinus)Significantly improved water quality, daily weight gain, feed utilization, and survival as well as body compositionUdo et al. [41]
Copper (Cu) as nanoparticle (Cu-NPs)Catfish, C.batrachusEffects on expression levels of several steroidogenic enzymes (3β-hsd, cyp11a1, 11β-hsd2, 11β-h, and star) and transcription factor genes (wt1, ad4bp/sf-1, dmrt1, sox9a, and gata4)Murugananthkumar et al. [42]
Nano-ZnO, TiO2, CuO, and CO3O4Primary culture of channel catfish hepatocytesSignificant toxicity in both HepG2 cells and catfish primary hepatocytes. The results demonstrate that HepG2 cells are more sensitive than catfish primary hepatocytes to the toxicity of metal oxide NPs.Wang et al. [43]

Table 1.

Obtained alteration/effects of NM/MPs on catfish reported by different researchers.

8-OHdG: 8-hydroxy-2-deoxyguanosine, MDA: Malondialdehyde, AChE: Acetylcholine esterase, GPX: Glutathione peroxidase, SOD: Superoxide dismutase, CAT: Catalase, LDH: Lactin dehydrogenase, TNFα: Tumor necrosis factor alpha, H2O2: Hydrogen peroxide, FFA: Free fatty acids, TAC: Total antioxidant capacity, LH: Luteinizing hormone

Although it has clarified the potential hazards of NPs on aquatic organisms and their environmental effects, the knowledge about the mechanisms of cellular toxicity caused by NP/NM due to overproduction of reactive oxygen species (ROS) is not very extensive. In order to overcome this lack of information, studies on different fish species are continuing intensively, thanks to these studies, the effects of NPs on bioaccumulation, oxidative stress, and subsequent activation of the antioxidant defense system have been revealed [44, 45, 46]. NPs are taken up by fish, the most important component of Aquatic ecosystems, and transported to various tissues −organs via blood [47]. In vitro and in vivo studies on NM in fish had shown that NPs can induce oxidative stress by triggering the ROS formation. Stimulation of oxidative stress causes extensive damage to biomolecules such as DNA, proteins, lipids and cellular membranes [48]. Oxidative stress in the cellular system is produced as a result of an imbalance between oxidative and reducing processes and is typically induced when the physiological antioxidant defense system is unable to counteract the increased level of ROS [35]. Like other vertebrates, teleosts attempt to convert ROS into harmless metabolites to maintain and restore normal cellular homeostasis and functions. For this, a wide variety of enzymatic and non-enzymatic antioxidant defense systems have been developed [49, 50]. These include low molecular weight antioxidants such as glutathione (GSH) and high molecular weight defenses with enzymes such as superoxide dismutase (SOD), catalase (CAT) as the first line of defense, and enzymes involved in glutathione metabolisms such as glutathione peroxidase (GPx), glutathione reductase (GR) and glutathione-S-transferase (GST), and glutathione reductase (GR) [51]. However, some fish species may be at the forefront due to their advantages in monitoring NP-induced oxidative stress processes in different cellular systems of teleost fish. One of these species, catfish (Siluriformes) is one of the important species worldwide in aquaculture, with an annual production of approximately 6 million tons in 2018 [52]. They live mainly in freshwater and are widely distributed in the tropics of Africa, South America, and Asia. Consisting of more than 3000 species and an estimated 1750 undescribed species, the Siluriformes is one of the largest orders of the Teleostei [53, 54]. Catfish are of paramount importance not only for commercial but also for recreational fishing. Their high domestication potential and adaptability to intensive breeding conditions, high fecundity, and nocturnal foraging habits characteristics are attractive. The ability to live in turbid waters, high resistance to diseases, successful tolerant to low dissolved oxygen levels, efficient feed conversion, and ease of fillet processing, make them important in aquaculture [52, 55].

As in other aquatic organisms, the effects of NPs on catfish had attracted the attention of researchers and had been the subject of many studies. According to their origin, NPs caused different sizes of changes/negatives in catfish. As can be seen from Table 1, the neurotoxicity effect [39] is one of the effects that should be considered the most. In addition, the negative effects on hormonal balance [34] are undesirable in terms of breeding catfish with its economic importance. Similarly, behavioral changes [40] will be effective upon reproduction. Studies on enzymes that show general health and well-being in fish [33, 35] also show how effective NPs are for catfish.

Advertisement

2. Conclusion

Nanoparticles, which have an important place in developing technology, cause problems in aquatic ecosystems, as well as in other fish species. In this book chapter, which brings together studies by different researchers on different catfish in the Siluriformes group, it draws attention to taking the necessary precautions to prevent this economically important species from being exposed to NPs.

References

  1. 1. Chausali N, Saxena J, Prasad R. Recent trends in nanotechnology applications of bio-based packaging. Journal of Agriculture and Food Research. 2022;7:100257
  2. 2. Huang Y, Gao M, Wang W, Liu Z, Qian W, Chen CC, et al. Effects of manufactured nanomaterials on algae: Implications and applications. Frontiers of Environmental Science & Engineering. 2022;16(9):1-16
  3. 3. Keller AA, McFerran S, Lazareva A, Suh S. Global life cycle releases of engineered nanomaterials. Journal of Nanoparticle Research. 2013;15(6):1-17
  4. 4. Cedervall T, Hansson LA, Lard M, Frohm B, Linse S. Food chain transport of nanoparticles affects behaviour and fat metabolism in fish. PLOS One. 2012;7(2):e32254
  5. 5. Yue D, Zhang F, Wang L. An immature suggestion for organization of aquaculture cooperation and quality safety of aquatic products. Journal of Agricultural Science and Technology (Beijing). 2012;14(6):139-144
  6. 6. Huang W, Song B, Liang J, Niu Q, Zeng G, Shen M, et al. Microplastics and associated contaminants in the aquatic environment: A review on their ecotoxicological effects, trophic transfer, and potential impacts to human health. Journal of Hazardous Materials. 2021;405:124187
  7. 7. Haque E, Ward AC. Zebrafish as a model to evaluate nanoparticle toxicity. Nanomaterials. 2018;8(7):561
  8. 8. Jagiello K, Judzinska B, Sosnowska A, Lynch I, Halappanavar S, Puzyn T. Using AOP-Wiki to support the ecotoxicological risk assessment of nanomaterials: First steps in the development of novel adverse outcome pathways. Environmental Science: Nano. 2022;9(5):1675-1684
  9. 9. Rath P, Ranjan A, Chauhan A, Basniwal RK, Rajput VD, Sushkova S, et al. Ecotoxicology and Toxicology of Metal-based Nanoparticles. Cham: Springer; 2022
  10. 10. Bundschuh M, Seitz F, Rosenfeldt RR, Schulz R. Effects of nanoparticles in fresh waters: Risks, mechanisms and interactions. Freshwater Biology. 2016;61(12):2185-2196
  11. 11. Petitjean Q, Jean S, Gandar A, Côte J, Laffaille P, Jacquin L. Stress responses in fish: From molecular to evolutionary processes. Science of the Total Environment. 2019;684:371-380
  12. 12. Schreck CB, Tort L. The concept of stress in fish. In: Fish Physiology. Vol. 35. Academic Press; 2016. pp. 1-34
  13. 13. Uçar A, Parlak V, Özgeriş FB, Yeltekin AÇ, Alak G, Atamanalp M. Determination of Fipronil toxicity by different biomarkers in gill and liver tissue of rainbow trout (Oncorhynchus mykiss). In Vitro Cellular & Developmental Biology-Animal. 2020;56(7):543-549
  14. 14. Barton BA. Stress in fishes: A diversity of responses with particular reference to changes in circulating corticosteroids. Integrative and Comparative Biology. 2002;42(3):517-525
  15. 15. Gratzek JB, Reinert R. Physiological responses of experimental fish to stressful conditions. Journal of the National Cancer Institute Monographs. 1984;65:187-193
  16. 16. Little EE, Finger SE. Swimming behavior as an indicator of sublethal toxicity in fish. Environmental Toxicology and Chemistry: An International Journal. 1990;9(1):13-19
  17. 17. Rehman MU, Mir MUR, Ahmad SB, Shakeel S. Endosulfan, a global pesticide: A review of its toxicity on various aspects of fish biology. International Journal of General Medicine and Pharmacy. 2016;5:17-26
  18. 18. Atchison GJ, Henry MG, Sandheinrich MB. Effects of metals on fish behavior: A review. Environmental Biology of Fishes. 1987;18(1):11-25
  19. 19. Weber DN, Spieler RE. In: Malins DC, editor. Aquatic Toxicology| Molecular, Biochemical, and Cellular Perspectives. 1994. pp. 421-467
  20. 20. Haller J. Biochemical cost of a fight in fed and fasted Betta splendens. Physiology & Behavior. 1991;49(1):79-82
  21. 21. Lebedeva KV, Vendilo NV, Pletnev VA, Bocharova NI, Buleza VV, Vasil’eva VS, et al. [Effect of Admixture cis-11-Hexadecenol in Synthetic cis-11-Hexadecenilacetate on Behavioral Response of Cabbage Moth (Mamestra brassicae) [on pheromone traps use]]. [Russian]. Agrokhimiya; 1993
  22. 22. Haller J, Do TK, Makara GB. The physiology of social conflict in rats: What is particularly stressful? Behavioral Neuroscience. 1996;110(2):353
  23. 23. Alanärä A, Winberg S, Brännäs E, Kiessling A, Höglund E, Elofsson U. Feeding behaviour, brain serotonergic activity levels, and energy reserves of Arctic char (Salvelinus alpinus) within a dominance hierarchy. Canadian Journal of Zoology. 1998;76(2):212-220
  24. 24. Sloman L, Gilbert P. Subordination and Defeat: An Evolutionary Approach to Mood Disorders and Their Therapy. Routledge; 2000
  25. 25. Beyer N, Aadahl M, Strange B, Kirkegaard P, Hansen BA, Mohr T, et al. Improved physical performance after orthotopic liver transplantation. Liver Transplantation and Surgery. 1999;5(4):301-309
  26. 26. McGeer JC, Szebedinszky C, McDonald DG, Wood CM. Effects of chronic sublethal exposure to waterborne Cu, Cd or Zn in rainbow trout. 1: Iono-regulatory disturbance and metabolic costs. Aquatic Toxicology. 2000;50(3):231-243
  27. 27. Rajotte JW, Couture P. Effects of environmental metal contamination on the condition, swimming performance, and tissue metabolic capacities of wild yellow perch (Perca flavescens). Canadian Journal of Fisheries and Aquatic Sciences. 2002;59(8):1296-1304
  28. 28. Scott GR, Sloman KA. The effects of environmental pollutants on complex fish behaviour: Integrating behavioural and physiological indicators of toxicity. Aquatic Toxicology. 2004;68(4):369-392
  29. 29. Rahman ANA, Shakweer MS, Algharib SA, Abdelaty AI, Kamel S, Ismail TA, et al. Silica nanoparticles acute toxicity alters ethology, neur -stress indices, and physiological status of African catfish (Clarias gariepinus). Aquaculture Reports. 2022;23:101034
  30. 30. Srikanth K, Nutalapati V. Copper ferrite nanoparticles induced cytotoxicity and oxidative stress in Channel catfish ovary cells. Chemosphere. 2022;287:132166
  31. 31. Nascimento K, Baldissera MD, Souza CDF, Brum GFD, Ramos AP, Riéffel RC, et al. Evaluation of the in vivo safety of tucumã oil nanocapsules in an experimental model of silver catfish Rhamdia quelen. Natural Product Research. 2022;36(2):649-653
  32. 32. Chen SW, Lv WH, Wu K, Chen GH, Chen F, Song CC, et al. Dietary nano-zno ıs absorbed via endocytosis and zıp pathways, upregulates lipogenesis, and ınduces lipotoxicity in the ıntestine of yellow catfish. International Journal of Molecular Sciences. 2021;22(21):12047
  33. 33. Gao X, Zheng X, Gao S, Huang Y, Xiong J, Ren H. Toxicity of amine-functionalized single-carbon nanotube (NH2 f-SWCNT) to Channel Catfish (Ietalurus Punetaus): Organ pathologies, oxidative stress, inflammation, and apoptosis. Chemosphere. 2021;282:131133
  34. 34. Hamed HS, Ali RM, Shaheen AA, Hussein NM. Chitosan nanoparticles alleviated endocrine disruption, oxidative damage, and genotoxicity of Bisphenol-A-intoxicated female African catfish. Comparative Biochemistry and Physiology Part C: Toxicology & Pharmacology. 2021;248:109104
  35. 35. Koner D, Banerjee B, Kumari A, Lanong AS, Snaitang R, Saha N. Molecular characterization of superoxide dismutase and catalase genes, and the induction of antioxidant genes under the zinc oxide nanoparticle-induced oxidative stress in air-breathing magur catfish (Clarias magur). Fish Physiology and Biochemistry. 2021;47(6):1909-1932
  36. 36. Marimuthu K, Subramaniam R, Lertanantawong B, Lee SY, Borgio JF, Amin SMN, et al. Toxicity of gold nanoparticles on the survival and hatching rates of African catfish (Clarias gariepinus) embryo and larvae. Journal of Environmental Biology. 2020;41:1179-1185
  37. 37. Ling SC, Zhuo MQ , Zhang DG, Cui HY, Luo Z. Nano-Zn increased Zn accumulation and triglyceride content by up-regulating lipogenesis in freshwater teleost, yellow catfish Pelteobagrus fulvidraco. International Journal of Molecular Sciences. 2020;21(5):1615
  38. 38. Wisdom KS, Bhat IA, Chanu TI, Kumar P, Pathakota GB, Nayak SK, et al. Chitosan grafting onto single-walled carbon nanotubes increased their stability and reduced the toxicity in vivo (catfish) model. International Journal of Biological Macromolecules. 2020;155:697-707
  39. 39. Matouke M, Mustapha M. Impact of co-exposure to titanium dioxide nanoparticles (TiO2 NPs) and lead (Pb) on African catfish Clarias gariepinus (Burchell, 1922) fed contaminated copepods (Eucyclop sp.). Environmental Science and Pollution Research. 2020;27(14):16876-16885
  40. 40. Rao TN, Parvatamma B, Hussain I, Kumar A. Toxicity assessment of FeTiO2 and NiFe2O4 nanoparticles on aquatic Catfish (Siluriformes). Current Nanomaterials. 2019;4(3):206-215
  41. 41. Udo IU, Etukudo U, Anwana UIU. Effects of chitosan and chitosan nanoparticles on water quality, growth performance, survival rate and meat quality of the African catfish, Clarias gariepinus. Nanoscience. 2018;1(1):12-25
  42. 42. Murugananthkumar R, Rajesh D, Senthilkumaran B. Copper nanoparticles differentially target testis of the catfish, Clarias batrachus: In vivo and In vitro Study. Frontiers in Environmental Science. 2016;4:67
  43. 43. Wang Y, Aker WG, Hwang HM, Yedjou CG, Yu H, Tchounwou PB. A study of the mechanism of in vitro cytotoxicity of metal oxide nanoparticles using catfish primary hepatocytes and human HepG2 cells. Science of the Total Environment. 2011;409(22):4753-4762
  44. 44. Kaya H, Aydın F, Gürkan M, Yılmaz S, Ates M, Demir V, et al. Effects of zinc oxide nanoparticles on bioaccumulation and oxidative stress in different organs of tilapia (Oreochromis niloticus). Environmental Toxicology and Pharmacology. 2015;40(3):936-947
  45. 45. Shahzad A, Saeed H, Iqtedar M, Hussain SZ, Kaleem A, Abdullah R, et al. Size-controlled production of silver nanoparticles by Aspergillus fumigatus BTCB10: Likely antibacterial and cytotoxic effects. Journal of Nanomaterials. 2019;2019
  46. 46. Yang J, Wang K, Yu DG, Yang Y, Bligh SWA, Williams GR. Electrospun Janus nanofibers loaded with a drug and inorganic nanoparticles as an effective antibacterial wound dressing. Materials Science and Engineering: C. 2020;111:110805
  47. 47. Handy RD, Henry TB, Scown TM, Johnston BD, Tyler CR. Manufactured nanoparticles: Their uptake and effects on fish—a mechanistic analysis. Ecotoxicology. 2008;17(5):396-409
  48. 48. Atamanalp M, Parlak V, Özgeriş FB, Çilingir Yeltekin A, Ucar A, Keleş MS, et al. Treatment of oxidative stress, apoptosis, and DNA injury with N-acetylcysteine at simulative pesticide toxicity in fish. Toxicology Mechanisms and Methods. 2021;31(3):224-234
  49. 49. Lushchak VI, Lushchak LP, Mota AA, Hermes-Lima M. Oxidative stress and antioxidant defenses in goldfish Carassius auratus during anoxia and reoxygenation. American Journal of Physiology-Regulatory, Integrative and Comparative Physiology. 2001;280(1):R100-R107
  50. 50. Sinha AK, Zinta G, AbdElgawad H, Asard H, Blust R, De Boeck G. High environmental ammonia elicits differential oxidative stress and antioxidant responses in five different organs of a model estuarine teleost (Dicentrarchus labrax). Comparative Biochemistry and Physiology Part C: Toxicology & Pharmacology. 2015;174:21-31
  51. 51. Ucar A, Parlak V, Ozgeris FB, Yeltekin AC, Arslan ME, Alak G, et al. Magnetic nanoparticles-induced neurotoxicity and oxidative stress in brain of rainbow trout: Mitigation by ulexite through modulation of antioxidant, anti-inflammatory, and antiapoptotic activities. Science of the Total Environment. 2022;838:155718
  52. 52. Gisbert E, Luz RK, Fernández I, Pradhan PK, Salhi M, Mozanzadeh MT, et al. Development, nutrition, and rearing practices of relevant catfish species (Siluriformes) at early stages. Reviews in Aquaculture. 2022;14(1):73-105
  53. 53. Armbruster JW. Global catfish biodiversity. In: American Fisheries Society Symposium. Vol. 77. American Fisheries Society; 2011. pp. 15-37
  54. 54. Sullivan JP, Lundberg JG, Hardman M. A phylogenetic analysis of the major groups of catfishes (Teleostei: Siluriformes) using rag1 and rag2 nuclear gene sequences. Molecular Phylogenetics and Evolution. 2006;41(3):636-662
  55. 55. Wang J, Wang M, Li B, Guo H, Zhu X, Zhang L. The combined effect of acute hypoxic stress and feeding status on the metabolism of yellow catfish (Pelteobagrus fulvidraco). Aquaculture. 2022;2022:738605

Written By

Muhammed Atamanalp, Arzu Ucar and Gonca Alak

Submitted: 10 May 2022 Reviewed: 18 August 2022 Published: 30 October 2022