Feminized Male Fish

June FOTM Photo Contest Starts Now!
FishForums.net Fish of the Month
🏆 Click to enter! 🏆

Syphoniera

Fish Herder
Joined
Sep 8, 2008
Messages
1,048
Reaction score
0
Rather than clutter up somebody's post with this, I'll slap this hastily assembled assortment on a separate post.

We're all having more and more trouble trying to tell the boys from the girls, as so many fish now seem to have sex characteristics - and even sex organs - from both sides.


Feminized male fish are rapidly becoming common - and not only in British and North American waters...

This is an issue that has to be considered as well in the context of increasing numbers of pet fish demonstrating similar problems - likely from tap water contaminants as well as from food, etc. sources.

And, believe it or not, this is already having a major impact on life itself.

(Of course, I'm still terming the female ( ? ) Betta I bought as a male ( ? ) a girl...)

http://www.grist.org/news/2008/02/22/hornyhead/

The Male of the Species Is More Female Than the Female
California sewage makes for femme fish, says study
Posted at 3:18 PM on 22 Feb 2008
Chemicals in southern California wastewater are sneaking past sewage-treatment plants and into the ocean, where they can seriously wack out fishy hormone levels, according to preliminary research. Flame retardants, PCBs, residue from long-banned pesticide DDT, and other chemicals from pills and beauty products have all showed up in the water, via human pee. An ongoing study of a flatfish called the hornyhead turbot (hee hee) finds that some males of the species have abnormally high levels of estrogen, while one hearty male had actually produced eggs. Activists urge that treatment plants be upgraded to catch more chemicals.



http://www.stcloudstate.edu/cose/college/d...erlawmakers.pdf


Feminized fish

sober lawmakers

... Yet, certain chemicals from these pharmaceuticals and from

household cleaning and personal care products are among the

“emerging contaminants” disrupting the endocrine systems of

fish in the Mississippi River.

In his testimony to the committee at the State Office Building

in St. Paul, Schoenfuss, associate professor in the Department

of Biological Sciences and director of St. Cloud State

University’s Aquatic Toxicology Laboratory, said the emerging

contaminants — even in concentrations so minute they are

measured in parts per trillion — can and do disrupt the endocrine

systems of fish.

A study of water and fish samples from more than 40 sites

in the Mississippi in 2006 revealed “hot spots” — areas with

emerging contaminant concentrations high enough to affect

fish. And fish samples from these spots showed feminization:

male fish are producing egg yolk.

Higher concentrations of emerging contaminants in the

Potomac River near Washington, D.C., Boulder Creek in

Colorado and the California coast; are producing some intersex

fish, according to studies conducted by the National

Geological Survey in 2003. Intersex means the fish have both

ovarian and testicular tissue. ...'

... “Emerging contaminants interact with hormone receptors on

the cells in our bodies,” Schoenfuss said, adding that because

the receptors cannot distinguish between the contaminants

and natural hormones, they readily bind to the contaminants.

The contaminants then “tell the receptor sites to do something

they would otherwise not do.”

When the receptors are estrogen receptors, which the cells of

both males and females have, the results can vary from sluggish

or non-existent reproductive activity, to feminization of

male fish, to intersex fish.

Schoenfuss said some fish may show no effects, but their offspring

or succeeding generations of offspring may show the

effects. ...


Below: another term is used for industrially produced endocrine-disrupting chemicals, 'ecoestrogens', bearing a different connotation and sounding more 'natural'. ???

The Skinner studies, etc. have already demonstrated not only the effects of such endocrine disrupting artificial chemicals, but their epigenetic transfer to further generations.



http://www.mote.org/index.php?src=director...zine&id=599


Mote Marine Laboratory

At Lake Apopka in Central Florida, the alligators have tiny penises. They run a third the size of normal alligator phalli and have significantly diminished sperm counts. In England, on the Lee River, feminized male fish have eggs as well as sperm in their gonads. And in the Great Lakes region, birds - including male herring gulls, terns and bald eagles - start exhibiting hermaphroditic changes after eating feminized fish.
Some scientists think the culprit in all of these gender-bending events might be exposure to ecoestrogens - a broad class of chemicals that mimic the hormone estrogen and disrupt normal functioning of the endocrine system, a body-wide network of hormone-producing glands that control things like growth and reproduction.

Wastewater treatment plants constantly release ecoestrogen-containing effluent into the wild. "There's little doubt that wastewater-related pollutants represent significant risks to human and wildlife populations," said Dr. James Gelsleichter, who manages Mote's elasmobranch physiology and environmental biology program in the Center for Shark Research. "They do clear out the effluents pretty efficiently - usually about 80 to 90 percent of contaminants are removed - but the problem is the level of human usage and development."
Gelsleichter wants to know exactly what endocrine disruption looks like at the molecular level. To do this he's in the process of developing an innovative microarray in conjunction with EcoArray, a Florida-based biotech company.

The microarray, called the SharkChip, will use cutting-edge genomics technology to produce a "genetic fingerprint" that will enable Gelsleichter to determine if ecoestrogens are affecting bonnethead sharks.

A microarray, sometimes called a gene chip or a biochip, is a small, nylon or glass wafer-like chip capable of holding thousands of genes. Such arrays represent a quantum leap forward for scientists who study pollution impacts because they allow the comprehensive study of how pollution affects gene expression - when genes are turned on or off.

Before microarrays, toxicologists could only study how individual, isolated genes responded to pollution. Now they can look at thousands of genes at once. The SharkChip's creation is part of a long-term study of 10 species that Gelsleichter hopes will reveal how much danger ecoestrogens pose to wildlife and people. "We know ecoestrogens are all over in the environment," Gelsleichter said. "We just don't know exactly how they impact wildlife."

Irksome Ecoestrogens


Ecoestrogens are common byproducts of the industrial world and exist in a slew of everyday products such as plastics, pesticides and birth control pills. Since they are so pervasive, ecoestrogens quickly find their way into the nation's waterways and can wreak havoc on the reproductive systems of organisms exposed to them in high doses, particularly fish and other marine animals. In the wild, ecoestrogens cause feminization of males and tend to become concentrated in large predators such as sharks. "They're a potentially huge problem," Gelsleichter said. ...



... One technique Gelsleichter is using to monitor ecoestrogen exposure is to test for the presence of vitellogenin in sharks and other marine animals. Vitellogenin is an egg yolk precursor protein expressed only in female fish that is normally dormant in male fish. However, when male fish are exposed to ecoestrogens, the vitellogenin gene turns on, causing organisms to produce the substance.
Vitellogenin indicates exposure to ecoestrogens in a broad sense, but it doesn't tell scientists the precise chemical causing the vitellogenin reaction. That's where the SharkChip comes in. It will allow Gelsleichter to associate specific changes in gene expression with exposure to specific types of ecoestrogens.

Gelsleichter, for example, plans to look at the molecular fingerprints of 17a-ethnylestradiol, synthetic estrogen from birth control pills, Bisphenol A, a common component of certain plastics, and Alkylphenol Ethoxylates, a class of chemicals found in home and industrial cleaning products. Scientists suspect that all of these chemicals may disrupt the reproductive activities of fish and other marine animals at environmentally relevant levels.

"We feel these tests are the wave of the future," said Dr. Patrick Larkin, the director of research at EcoArray, the company partnering with Gelsleichter to make the chip. "They really allow us to get a snapshot of what's going on in a cell."

In some situations, as in the case of the alligators of Lake Apopka, the impact is drastic and quite apparent. Scientists call these large-scale changes "organismal markers." But often the impact of ecoestrogens is much less obvious, revealing itself only years later in the form of high rates of animal cancers and other reproductive disorders. Scientists call these more subtle changes in gene expression "biomarkers."

"The problem with organismal markers is that they are relatively insensitive to pollutants. Biomarkers can tell you exactly what's going on in an organism when it is exposed to even low levels of contaminants," Gelsleichter said. ...



... One problem is organizing and sorting through the mountains of data that microarrays produce. Another is separating chemically-induced effects from naturally occurring changes in gene expression. Small environmental changes such as the weather, can influence gene expression, as can other difficult-to-discern factors such as diet, or even mood.

None of this daunts Gelsleichter, however. "Ultimately, the more genes you look at, the more accurate your diagnosis is going to be," he said. ...



And in the meantime, betta breeders are going to have a heck of a time trying to sort things out...
 
Interesting, it really makes you wonder what we are drinking. I'm sure there is fluctuations in the water of various 'things'. If i've lost a fish to septicimia its always been after a water change even though i tend to double dose with declorinator. So is it possible something in the water gets into the blood stream and poisons them???
 
Interesting, it really makes you wonder what we are drinking. I'm sure there is fluctuations in the water of various 'things'. If i've lost a fish to septicimia its always been after a water change even though i tend to double dose with declorinator. So is it possible something in the water gets into the blood stream and poisons them???



Hi, dusky,
you're so right it's painful.

Just a fast example of how water can kill fish as well as people, U.S. EPA info only, but too lazy right now to dig for global examples.

For 'child' substitute 'Betta'

http://www.epa.gov/ogwdw/contaminants/index.html

Lists various contaminants and officially recognized effects

(Note, 'Organic chemicals' includes anything from a once-living source - such as those derived from fossil fuels, including the most toxic/damaging known so far.)

http://www.epa.gov/ogwdw/hfacts.html

http://yosemite.epa.gov/ochp/ochpweb.nsf/c...ater_contam.htm

... The contaminants in drinking water are quite varied and can cause a range of diseases in children, including cancer, developmental effects such as learning disorders, and acute diseases such as gastrointestinal illness. Children are particularly sensitive to microbial contaminants because their immune systems may be less well developed than those of most adults. Children are sensitive to lead, which affects brain development, and to nitrates, which can cause methemoglobinemia (blue baby syndrome). ...

... One way to measure children's risk of exposure to contaminated drinking water is to identify public water systems that contain contaminants at levels greater than those allowed by the drinking water standards. Ideally, we would look at data on concentrations of all of the chemical and microbial contaminants in all public drinking water systems and identify any areas of risk for children. This is not currently possible, for two reasons. First, the national data systems for drinking water do not track concentrations of contaminants in drinking water, but rather the frequency with which standards are exceeded. Second, the information on violations is incomplete because not all public water systems fully monitor contaminants or report their monitoring results. (We do, however, have some data that identify the public water systems that do not monitor or report their results.)
We can use information about violations as a surrogate for exposure to unacceptably high levels of drinking water contaminants. We also need to consider information about water systems that do not monitor or report results, because we do not know with certainty whether populations served by these systems are at risk.

Data are available only for public water systems. Approximately 42 million people are served by private drinking water systems, which are not required to monitor and report the quality of drinking water. We do not have information to indicate whether these people are at risk. ...

... Data on violations reported to the federal government are of generally high quality. However, many public water systems fail to report all violations. A recent review of the data concluded that 68 percent of the microbial contaminant violations are reported, 19 percent of the violations for other contaminants are reported, and 11 percent of the treatment and filtration violations are reported.31


Nitrates and Nitrites
High levels of nitrites or nitrates in the water supply can interfere with infants' ability to absorb oxygen and can lead to "blue-baby" syndrome (methemoglobinemia), which can result in death. EPA has set drinking water standards for nitrates and nitrites. ...

But 'fish kills' and distress in people's tanks after water changes are as good an indication as any, I suppose, and in fact far more tap water testing is certainly conducted by aquarists, (if for very limited contaminants and with low-efficiency testing,) than by any public body.

And an example of the sort of thing which may or may not be included in an official list:



http://www.liebertonline.com/doi/abs/10.10...287503768335896

The abstract of the paper:

N-Nitrosodimethylamine (NDMA) is a member of a family of extremely potent carcinogens, the N-nitrosamines. Until recently, concerns about NDMA mainly focused on the presence of NDMA in food, consumer products, and polluted air. However, current concern focuses on NDMA as a drinking water contaminant resulting from reactions occurring during chlorination or via direct industrial contamination. Because of the relatively high concentrations of NDMA formed during wastewater chlorination, the intentional and unintentional reuse of municipal wastewater is a particularly important area of concern. Although ultraviolet (UV) treatment can effectively remove NDMA, there is considerable interest in the development of less expensive alternative treatment technologies. These alternative technologies include approaches for removing organic nitrogen-containing NDMA precursors prior to chlorination and the use of sunlight photolysis, and in situ bioremediation to remove NDMA and its precursors.



And that's just a drop in the bucket of what's really in the water, and known to be hazardous and present in drinking water in independent testing.
 

Most reactions

Back
Top