This study demonstrates PFOA's negative impact on sperm function and larval viability in Prochilodus magdalenae, indicating potential reproductive risks.
Given the well-documented capacity of perfluorooctanoic acid (PFOA) to induce endocrine alterations, this study aimed to investigate the toxicity of PFOA on sperm kinetics and larval viability of Prochilodus magdalenae (bocachico). Colombia’s most economically significant freshwater fish species. Gametes were obtained through hormonal induction of P. magdalenae broodstock, and in vitro fertilization was performed to obtain larvae. The semen was activated either with water or water containing different PFOA concentrations (10-500 µM). Sperm motility (both total and specific types), progressivity, and velocity (linear and curvilinear) were assessed using computer-assisted sperm analysis (CASA) system. Fertility and hatching were evaluated in two separate experiments: the first involved one-hour PFOA (10 to 500 µM) exposure; whereas the second exposure occurred under 12-hour long assays, involving the entire embryonic development, evaluating various morphometric and functional parameters. Bocachico larvae were exposed to different PFOA concentrations for 24 h to determine the lethality percentage and the LC50. Sperm motility, progressivity and velocity were not significantly affected at PFOA concentrations below 200 µM. However, concentrations of 300 µM or higher significantly (p < 0.05) impacted sperm kinetics, particularly linear velocity, with a statistical reduction at 500 µM (16.8 ± 6.7 µm/s) compared to the control (54.9 ± 17.9 µm/s). Fertility decline was observed at one-hour exposure to PFOA concentrations equal to or greater than 300 µM. In contrast, 12-hour exposure to 10 and 50 µM PFOA resulted in significant differences in oocyte diameter, yolk sac area, and heart rate compared to the control. The results showed that PFOA exposure causes harmful effects on the early developmental stages of P. magdalenae, posing a potential risk to fertility and reproductive success in wild populations.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Espinosa-Araújo et al. (2025) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: