Ocean and Polar Research

Korea Institute of Ocean Science & Technology (한국해양과학기술원)
권호 표지
DOI QR코드

DOI QR Code

Applicability of Fluorescein Diacetate (FDA) and Calcein-AM to Determine the Viability of Marine Plankton

FDA와 Calcein-AM 방법을 이용한 해양플랑크톤 생사판별기법

  • 백승호 (한국해양연구원 남해연구소) ;
  • 신경순 (한국해양연구원 남해연구소)
  • Published : 2009.12.30
Download PDF
⟨ Previous Next ⟩

Abstract

Ballast water is widely recognized as a serious environmental problem due to the risk of introducing non-indigenous aquatic species. In this study we aimed to investigate measures which can minimize the transfer of aquatic organisms from ballast water. Securing more reliable technologies to determine the viability of aquatic organisms is an important initiative in ballast water management systems. To evaluate the viability of marine phytoplankton, we designed the staining methods of fluorescein diacetate (FDA) and Calcein-AM assay on each target species belonging to different groups, such as bacillariphyceae, dinophyceae, raphidophyceae, chrysophyceae, haptophyceae and chlorophyceae. The FDA method, which is based on measurements of cell esterase activity using a fluorimetric stain, was the best dye for determining live cells of almost all phytoplankton species, except several diatoms tested in this study. On the other hand, although fluorescence of Calcein-AM was very clear for a comparatively longer time, green fluorescence per cell volume was lacking in most of the tested species. According to the Flow CAM method, which is a continuous imaging technique designed to characterize particles, green fluorescence values of stained cells by FDA were significantly higher than those of Calcein-AM treatments and control, implying that the Flow CAM using FDA assay could be adapted as an important tool for distinguishing living cells from dead cells. Our results suggest that the FDA and Calcein-AM methods can be adapted for use on phytoplankton, though species-specific characters are greatly different from one organism to another.

Keywords

References

  1. 강정훈, 신경순, 현봉길, 장민철, 김은찬, 장만 (2007) 해양 플랑크톤 군집의 전기분해 염소소독 효과. 한국해양환경공학회지 10:127-137
  2. Agusti S, Sanchez MC (2002) Cell viability in natural phytoplankton communities quantified by a membrane permeability probe. Limnol Oceanogr 47:818-828 https://doi.org/10.4319/lo.2002.47.3.0818
  3. Bentley-Mowat J (1982) Application of fluorescence microscopy to pollution studies on marine phytoplankton. Bot Mar 25:203-204 https://doi.org/10.1515/botm.1982.25.4.203
  4. Brunius G (1980) Technical aspects of the use of 3', 6'- diacetyl fluorescein for vital fluorescent staining of bacteria. Curr Microbiol 4:321-323 https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02605370
  5. Cangelosi AA, Mays NL, Balcer MD, Reavie ED, Reid DM, Strurtevant R, Gao X (2007) The response of zooplankton and phytoplankton from the North American Great Lakes to filteration. Harmful Algae 6:547-566 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.hal.2006.11.005
  6. Dorsey J, Yentsch CM, Mayo S, McKenna C (1989) Rapid analytical technique for the assessment of cell metabolic activity in marine microalgae. Cytometry 10:622-228 https://doi.org/10.1002/cyto.990100518
  7. Garvey M, Moriceau B, Passow U (2007) Applicability of the FDA assay to determine the viability of marine phytoplankton under different environmental conditions. Mar Ecol Prog Ser 352:17-26 https://doi.org/10.3354/meps07134
  8. Gollasch S, David M, Voigt M, Dragsund E, Hewitt C, Fukuyo Y (2007) Critical review of the IMO international convention on the management of ship's ballast water and sediments. Harmful Algae 6:587-600 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.hal.2006.12.009
  9. Hallegraeff GM, Bolch CJ (1991) Transport of toxic dinoflagellate cycts via ship's ballast water. Mar Pollut Bull 22:27-30 https://doi.org/10.1016/0025-326X(91)90441-T
  10. Hallegraeff GM (1998) Transport of toxic dinoflagellates via ship's ballast water: Bioeconomic risk assessment and efficacy of possible ballast water management strategies. Mar Ecol Prog Ser 168:297-309 https://doi.org/10.3354/meps168297
  11. IMO (2008) Harmful aquatic organisms in ballast water. Marine environment protection committee 58th session agenda item 2
  12. IMO (2001) Report on the ballast water treatment standards workshop. In: 1st Internation ballast water treatment standards workshop, IMO London, 28-30 March 2001. http://globallast.Imo.org/workshopreport.htm
  13. Jochem F (1999) Dark survival strategies in marine phytoplankton assessed by cytometric measurement of metabolic activity with fluorescin diacetate. Mar Biol 135:721-728 https://doi.org/10.1007/s002270050673
  14. Kaneshiro ES, Wyder MA, Wu YP, Cushion MT (1993) Reliability of calcein acetoxy methyl ester and ethidium homodimer or propidium iodide for viability assessment of microbes. J Microb Methods 17:1-16 https://doi.org/10.1016/S0167-7012(93)80010-4
  15. Lundgren B (1981) Fluorescein diacetate as a stain of metabolically active bacteria in soil. Oikos 36:17-22 https://doi.org/10.2307/3544373
  16. Medzon EL, Brady ML (1969) Direct measurement of acetylesterase in living protest cells. J Bacteriol 97:402-415 https://doi.org/10.1002/path.1710970232
  17. Onji M, Sawabe T, Ezura Y (2000) An evaluation of viable staining dyes sutiable for marine phytoplankton. Bull Fac Fish Hokkaido Univ 51:151-158
  18. Perrins JC, Cordell JR, Ferm NC, Grocock JL, Herwing RP (2006) Mesocosm experiments for evaluating the biological efficacy of ozone treatment of marine ballast water. Mar Pollut Bull 52:1756-1767 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.marpolbul.2006.07.011
  19. Porter J, Diaper J, Edwards C, Pickup R (1995) Direct measurements of natural planktonic bacterial community viability by flow cytometry. Appl Environ Microbiol 61:2783-2786
  20. Schnurer J, Rosswall T (1982) Fluorescein diacetate hydrolysis as a measure of total microbial activity in soil and litter. Appl Environ Microbiol 43:1256-1261
  21. Sieracki C, Sieracki ME, Yentsch CS (1998) An imaging-inflow system for automated analysis of marine microplankton. Mar Ecol Prog Ser 168:285-296 https://doi.org/10.3354/meps168285
  22. Smayda TJ (2007) Reflections on the ballast water dispersalharmful algal bloom paradigm. Harmful Algae 6:601-622 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.hal.2007.02.003
  23. Söderström BE (1977) Vital staining of fungi in pure cultures and in soil with fluorescein diacetate. Soil Biol Biochem 9:59-63 https://doi.org/10.1016/0038-0717(77)90061-X
  24. Waite TD, Kazumi J, Lane PVZ, Farmer LL, Smith SG, Smith SL, Hitchcock G, Capo TR (2003) Removal of natural populations of marine plankton by a large-scale ballast water treatment system. Mar Ecol Prog Ser 258:51-63 https://doi.org/10.3354/meps258051

Cited by

  1. Regrowth Ability and Species Composition of Phytoplankton in International Commercial Ship's Ballast Water Berthed at Pusan and Daesan Ports vol.16, pp.2, 2011, https://doi.org/10.7850/jkso.2011.16.2.106
  2. Contrasting effects of the cyanobacteriumMicrocystis aeruginosaon the growth and physiology of two green algae,Oocystis marsoniiandScenedesmus obliquus, revealed by flow cytometry vol.58, pp.8, 2013, https://doi.org/10.1111/fwb.12143
  3. Application of Neutral Red Staining Method to Distinguishing Live and Dead Marine Plankton for the Investigation of Efficacy of Ship's Ballast Water Treatment System vol.19, pp.4, 2014, https://doi.org/10.7850/jkso.2014.19.4.223
  4. A rapid screening method to assess soil algal toxicity: Non-destructive sampling of algal cells using culture medium extraction vol.120, 2017, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.apsoil.2017.08.008
  5. A staining method to determine marine microplanktonic organism viability and investigate the efficacy of a ship's ballast water treatment system vol.16, pp.6, 2015, https://doi.org/10.5762/KAIS.2015.16.6.4328
  6. Ballast-water Microphytoplankton Diversity and Survivability from International Ships Berthed at Ulsan and Pyeongtaek Ports, Korea vol.33, pp.2, 2011, https://doi.org/10.4217/OPR.2011.33.2.113