Human health risk assessment of heavy metal accumulation through fish consumption, from Machilipatnam Coast, Andhra Pradesh, India

Abstract

The progress of aquaculture, agriculture and industrial development activities has led to the increased pollutants emission into the coastal ecosystem. Heavy metals are one of the most common pollutants in the coastal area. This observation deals with the human health risk assessment of metal accumulation through the consumption of marine fish Liza macrolepis. The concentration of zinc (Zn), lead (Pb), nickel (Ni), cupper (Cu), mercury (Hg) and cadmium (Cd) were investigated in muscle and liver of the fish in this coast. The study explains the heavy metal concentration in the fish and leads to health risk assessment in the human beings. The average measured concentrations (mg/kg) in the edible organs of fish were follows: Zn concentration was 34.6 and 38.2 that of Pb was 14.2 and 15.5, that of Ni was 10.4 and 11.8; that of Cu was 33.2 and 34.2; that of Hg 2.1 and 2.9 that of Cd were 0.8 and 0.9 in the muscle and liver respectively. The average " Target Hazard Quotient " (THQ) value of Zn goes to 17.9; Pb was 7.3; Ni was 5.3; Cu was 17.2; Hg was 1.08; and Cd was 0.4 recorded in the study area in food fish L. macolepis.

Full text

International Research Journal of Public and Environmental Health Vol.1 (5),pp. 121-125, July 2014
Available online at http://www.journalissues.org/IRJPEH/
© 2014 Journal Issues ISSN 2360-8803
Original Research Paper
Human health risk assessment of heavy metal
accumulation through fish consumption, from
Machilipatnam Coast, Andhra Pradesh, India
Accepted 4 July, 2014
Krishna, P.V.*,
V. Jyothirmayi
and
K. Madhusudhana Rao
Department of Zoology and
Aquaculture, Acharya Nagarjuna
University, Nagarjuna Nagar –
522 510
Andhra Pradesh, India.
*Corresponding Author
E mail: drpvkrishna@gmail.com
Tel: (+91) 9985206281,
Fax: +91.0863-2293378; 2293320
The progress of aquaculture, agriculture and industrial development
activities has led to the increased pollutants emission into the coastal
ecosystem. Heavy metals are one of the most common pollutants in the
coastal area. This observation deals with the human health risk assessment
of metal accumulation through the consumption of marine fish Liza
macrolepis. The concentration of zinc (Zn), lead (Pb), nickel (Ni), cupper
(Cu), mercury (Hg) and cadmium (Cd) were investigated in muscle and liver
of the fish in this coast. The study explains the heavy metal concentration in
the fish and leads to health risk assessment in the human beings. The
average measured concentrations (mg/kg) in the edible organs of fish were
follows: Zn concentration was 34.6 and 38.2 that of Pb was 14.2 and 15.5,
that of Ni was 10.4 and 11.8; that of Cu was 33.2 and 34.2; that of Hg 2.1 and
2.9 that of Cd were 0.8 and 0.9 in the muscle and liver respectively. The
average “Target Hazard Quotient” (THQ) value of Zn goes to 17.9; Pb was 7.3;
Ni was 5.3; Cu was 17.2; Hg was 1.08; and Cd was 0.4 recorded in the study
area in food fish L. macolepis.
Key words: Heavy metals, health risk, Liza macrolepis, Target hazard quotient
(THQ).
INTRODUCTION
The rapid development of industrial activities has resulted
in heavy metal pollution, which is a significant health
hazard to human beings through food chain. Heavy metals
may enter into the ecosystems from different natural and
anthropogenic sources, including domestic waste water,
application of pesticides and inorganic fertilizers, shipping
and harbor activities, and also geological weathering of
earth crust (Yilmaz, 2009). According to World Health
Organization (WHO, 1991). Metal occurs less than 1% of
the earth’s crust, with trace amount generally found in the
environment and when these concentrations exceed a
stipulated limit, they may toxic to the surrounding
environment. The last three decades were witness to
several reports on the toxicity of heavy metals in human
beings, due to the contamination in the fish and fishery
organisms (Anim et al., 2011; Mohamad and Osman, 2014).
The accumulation of heavy metals in the aquatic
environment has direct consequence to man and to the
ecosystem. The impact of increasing concentration of such
metal in the environment is further enhanced by their poor
degradability, which results in bioaccumulation and
transport along successive links of the food chain
(Ciesielski et al., 2010).
Among the aquatic fauna, fish is the most susceptible to
heavy metal toxicants (Nwaedozie, 1998). It is well known
that fish are good indicators of chemical pollution and as a
result they long been used to monitor metal pollution in
coastal and marine environment. Adverse anthropogenic
activities on the coastal environment include aquaculture
operations, burning of fossil fuels and geologic weathering

Int. Res. J. Public Environ. Health 122
contribute to the heavy metals in the water bodies
(Erdogrul and Erbilir, 2007). Lee and Cundy (2001)
reported that human activities such as dredging and
reclamation in coastal environment can remobilize the
heavy metals from sediment to water.
Fishes lie at the top of the aquatic food chain and may
concentrate large amounts of metals from the water. Fish
take heavy metals from the surrounding water through
their gills which are the primary route for the uptake of
water borne pollutants and contaminated them in their
tissues (Allen and Wilson, 1991; Kalay et al., 1999). The
food of the fish is another source of these pollutants.
Krishna Kumar et al. (1990) have studied the heavy metal
concentration in marine zooplankton and invertebrates. All
forms heavy metals in aquatic ecosystems may be taken by
marine organisms and ultimately enter aquatic food chains
and accumulate in various concentrations in organisms
tissues (Tuzen, 2009). The study would provide a base line
data related to the heavy metal pollution stress in the
Machilipatnam coastal area and could help in designing
strategies aimed at the management of the control of the
metal pollution and associated with health risk.
MATERIALS AND METHODS
Fish samples (Liza macrolepis) are collected from fish
landing centre, at Machilipatnam (Lat: N16° 11' 3.768" and
Long: E 81° 8' 5.7588") of Bay of Bengal coast, and
transported to the laboratory in ice boxes and stored at -
10°C until subjected for future analysis. The fishes were
dissected and care was taken to avoid external
contaminated to the samples. Rust free stainless steel kit
was sterilized to dissect the fishes. None edible parts (Fins,
scales, intestine) removed and parts like muscle and liver
was chopped in to small pieces before air drying and then
dried on an oven at 60°C until constant weight was
obtained. The dried samples were powdered with pestle
and mortar. The resulting fine powder was stored until
chemical analysis. The samples (triplicate) were analyzed
to each metal (Zn, Pb, Ni, Cu, Hg, and Cd) and was detected
in ash samples of fish muscle recoded in mg/kg according
to APHA (1998) using an Atomic Absorption
Spectrophotometer (GBC Avanthe model, Australia).
Statistical analyses were performed using SPSS 12.0
software for windows. Mean and standard deviation (±) of
heavy metal concentrations in mg/kg dry weight of fish
muscle and liver were calculated.
Health risk assessment
Health risk assessment was calculated only for fish muscle.
The liver was eliminated according to common house hold
practices in this area.
Estimated daily intake (EDI):
EF = The exposure frequency 365 days/year.
ED = The exposure duration, equivalent to average life
time (65 years).
FIR = The fresh food ingestion rate (g/person/day) which
is considered to be India 55 g/person/day (Mitra et al.,
2012).
Cf = The conversion factor (= 0.208) (The content of fresh
weight (fw) to dry weight (dw) considering 79% of
moisture content).
Cm = The heavy metal concentration in food stuffs
(mg/kg dw).
WAB = Average body weight (bw) (average body weight
to be 60kg).
TA = Is the average exposure of time for non carcinogens
(It is equal to (EF×ED) as used by in many previous studies
(Wang et al., 2005).
Target hazard quotient
RfD: Oral reference dose (mg/kg bw/day).
“THQ” below 1 means the exposed population is unlikely
to experience obviously adverse effects, whereas “THQ”
above means that there is a chance of non-carcinogenic
effects, with an increasing probability as the value
increases.
RESULTS AND DISCUSSIONS
The average concentration of heavy metals (Zn, Pb, Ni, Cu,
Hg and Cd) determined in fish muscle and liver are given
Table 1. The highest concentration of the metal in liver and
muscle tissue of was recorded in Zn, followed by Cu, Pb, Ni,
Hg and Cd. Higher concentration metals was recorded in
the liver compare with muscle tissues. Zn is essential
element and is an important component of the human body.
Further, zinc is an essential nutrient for almost all plants.
For this reason, algae growing in streams and lakes can
absorb a large part of the zinc dissolved in water. In
addition to its nutritive effect, zinc is also toxic to most
forms of plants when present in amounts exceeding certain
limits. In the present study shows that the average
concentration of fish muscle goes to 34.6 mg/kg and fish
liver goes to 38.2 mg/kg of zinc and it contain within the
permissible limits of WHO (2010) standards. Lead is a
heavy metal that occurs in nature mainly lead sulphide.
This metal is extremely insoluble and is readily absorbed by
organic matter, especially under reducing conditions.
Buckley and Hargrave (1989) reported that the lead

Krishna et al. 123
Table 1. Average heavy metals concentration (mg/kg dry weight) in liver and muscle
of Liza macrolepis collected from Machilipatnam coast, Andhra Pradesh, India
S. No.
Heavy Metals
Liza macrolepis
(No. Specimens-30)
Muscle
(Means ± SD)
Liver
(Means ± SD)
1.
Zinc (Zn)
34.6±1.4
38.2±1.5
2.
Lead (Pb)
14.2±1.3
15.5±1.3
3.
Nickel (Ni)
10.4±1.4
11.8±1.3
4.
Cupper (Cu)
33.2±1.7
34.2±1.8
5.
Mercury (Hg)
2.1±0.56
2.9±0.4
6.
Cadmium (Cd)
0.8±0.19
0.9±0.19
Abbreviations: S.No. : Serial Number; SD: Standard deviation
sources of environmental contamination are from mining,
smelting and reprocessing operation and as a combustion
product of lead additives in gasoline. Lead has also been
used in a variety of paints and is a common constituent in
municipal and industrial wastes. Lead was causes mental
retardation among children and also hyper tension in
pregnant women (Beevens et al., 1976). Lead poising
causes by symptoms of intestinal crams, anemic condition
and fatigue (Umar et al., 2001). Lead is highly toxic to
aquatic organisms, especially fish (Rompala et al., 1984).
The biological effects of sub lethal concentrations of lead
included delayed embryonic development, suppressed
reproduction and inhibition of growth, increased mucous
formation, neurological problems, enzyme inhalation and
kidney dysfunction (Leland and Kawabara, 1985). The level
of average lead in muscle and liver goes to 14.2 and 15.2
mg/kg respectively. According to WHO (1985), the
maximum accepted limit was 2 mg/kg for food fish. The
present study indicated that the concentration of lead levels
was higher than permissible limits.
Nickel plays important role in the biology of organisms
and plants also. In the present study nickel was observed at
an average of 10.4 mg/kg in case of fish muscle, and 11.8
mg/kg (body weight) in case of liver. Our present study
shows that the average concentration was higher than
WHO (1985) and FAO (1989) standards. Copper is an
essential metal of number of enzymes, and also higher
levels of copper leads to toxic effects on biota. Excessive
intake of this metal results in its accumulating in the liver.
Sources of contamination in natural sediments are often
related to mining wastes, industrial metal manufacturing
and processing, corrosion products or as a result of
excessive use of antifouling paints in marine areas. Copper
is also often association with sewage sludge, where it is
most likely complexes with a variety of organic compounds.
In the present study the results shows that the average
concentration of copper in fish muscle goes to 33.2 mg/kg
(body weight) in case of muscle where as liver goes to 34.2
mg/kg, which is higher than the permissible limits set by
WHO (1985).
Mercury is highly dangerous as it readily bio accumulates
in the aquatic organisms. Methyl-Hg the most toxic form of
mercury is a known neurotoxin. Consumption of Hg
contaminated fish on regular basis therefore has been
recognized to cause of severe health problems. Mercury
concentration of above permissible levels in fish muscle can
be associated with emaciation, decreasing in coordination,
losing appetite_ and mortality in fish (Eisler, 1987).
Mercury pollution in aquatic ecosystems has received great
attention since the discovery of mercury as the cause of
Minamata disease in Japan in the 1950’s. Mercury
poisoning in the adult brain is characterized by damage of
discrete visual cortex areas and neuronal loss in the
cerebellum granule layer (Vettori et al., 2003). Further,
mercury poisoning during the early stages of nervous
system development may cause catastrophic consequences
for infants who exhibit widespread neural impairment
(Harada, 1995). In the present study mercury average
concentration was 2.1 mg/kg in muscle tissue and 2.9
mg/kg in the liver which was higher than permissible levels
of WHO (1985). Cadmium is toxic element which shows
their carcinogenic effect on aquatic biota and humans. It is
widely distributed at low levels in the environment and is
not an essential element for humans, animals and plants. In
the present study Cd shows 0.8 mg/kg in case of muscle
and liver 0.9 mg/kg. According WHO(1989), the pregnant
women and breast feeding woman are likely to be at much
greater risk due to the vulnerability of embryos and infants
exceeding due to the permissible limits of Cd.
Heavy metals are one of the more serious pollutants in
our natural environment due to their toxicity. The efficiency
of metal up take from polluted water may different
ecological need, metabolism and contaminated level, food
and sediment as well as other environmental factors such
as temperature, salinity and interacting gent (Rauf et al.,
2009). When the organisms are exposed to high level metal
in an aquatic environment, they can absorb the available
metals directly from the environment via the gills or

Int. Res. J. Public Environ. Health 124
Table 2. THQ values of muscle in Liza macrolepis collected
from Machilipatnam coast, Andhra Pradesh, India.
S. No.
Heavy Metals
Liza macrolepis
(No. Specimens-30)
Muscle THQ ± SD
1.
Zinc (Zn)
17.9±1.0
2.
Lead (Pb)
7.3±0.8
3.
Nickel (Ni)
5.3±0.8
4.
Cupper (Cu)
17.2±1.2
5.
Mercury (Hg)
1.8±0.45
6.
Cadmium (Cd)
0.4±0.12
Abbreviations: S.No: Serial Number; THQ: Target Hazard Quotient;
SD: Standard deviation
contaminated water and food, thus accumulated them in
their tissues and enter the food chain and extend to so
many other problems to humans (Ahmad and Othman,
2010).
Fish is one of the most important food sources and thus,
intake of trace elements form capture fish, especially toxic
elements if one of great concern for human health. To
evaluate the health risk to people in Machilipatnam Coast,
the “Target Hazard Quotient” (THQ) of heavy metal was
estimated on the concentrations of metal in fish muscle and
daily fish consumption. The predominant pathways for
heavy metal uptake, target organs, and organisms
sensitivity are highly variable and are dependent of factors
such as metal concentrations, age, site, physiological status,
habitat preferences, feeding behavior and growth rates of
fish (Chapman et al., 1996). The increasing demand of food
safety has accelerated researching regarding the risk
associated with consumption contaminated by heavy metal
(Mansour et al., 2009). In the present study our results
clearly showed that the all observed metals are higher than
that of results reported by Li et al. (2014) and Mohamad
and Osman (2014).
The estimated Target Hazard Quotient of the observed
heavy metals through consumption of fish was given in
Table 2. The average “THQ” values for individual heavy
metal are above 1, except cadmium. Ambedkar and
Maniyan (2011) concluded that the heavy metal
concentration were above the maximum levels
recommended by regulatory agencies and depending on
daily intake by consumers, might represent a risk for
human health. Li et al.(2014) reported that highest total
“THQ” value poses relatively higher potential health risks of
human beings, particularly for the people residing in the
areas with serious metal pollution.
Finally, we conclude that long term continuous
monitoring is essential of metal pollution in Machilipatnam
coast. The “THQ” values of the all the studied metals in fish
samples were above 1 except Cd. It is suggesting that the
concentration of the metals in fish muscle from
Machilipatnam coast pose to health hazards to the
consumers.
REFERENCES
Ahmad AK, Othman Sh M (2010). Heavy metal
concentrations in sediments and fishes from Lake Chini,
Pahang. Malay. J. Biol. Sci., 10: 93-100.
Allen GT, Wilson RM (1991). Metals and organic
compounds in fish of the Missouri River: Boyd country
Nebraska to Kansas City, Missouri USFWS, Manhattan,
Kansas. USA.
Ambedkar G, Muniyan M (2011). Accumulation of metals in
the five commercially important freshwater fishes in
Vellar River, Tamil Nadu, India. Archi. Appl. Sci. Res.,
3(3):261-264.
Anim AK, Ahialey EK, Duodu GO, Ackah M and Bentil NO
(2011). Accumulation profile of heavy metals in fish
samples from Nsawam, along the Densu River, Ghana.
Res. J. Envirn. Ear. Sci., 3: 56-60.
APHA (1998). Standard Methods for the Examination of
Water and Wastewater (20th ed). New York, American
Public Health Association, Washington DC, USA.
Beevens DG, Erskine E, Robertson M, Beattle AD, Campbell
BC, Goldberg A (1976). Blood lead to hypertension.
Lancet, 2: 1-3.
Buckley DE, Hargrave BT (1989). Geochemical
characteristics of surface sediments. In. Nicholls, HB (Ed).
Intvestigation of Marine environmental Quality in Halifax
harbour (pp. 1963: 9-36), Can. Tech. Rep. Fish. Aqua. Sci.
Chapman PM, Allen HE, Godteredsen KZ, Graggen MN
(1996). Evolution of bioaccumulation factors in
regulating metals. Envirn. Sci.Tech., 30: 448.
Ciesielski T, Pastukhov MV, Szefer P, Jensen BM (2010).
Bioaccumulation of Mercury in the pelagic food chain of
Lake Baikal. Chemosphere., 78: 1378-1384.
Eisler R (1987). Mercury hazards to fish, wild fish, and
invertebrate: a synoptic review. US Fish and wild life

service Report, 85 (1.10) Washington, DC, USA.
Erdogrul O, Erbilir F (2007). Heavy metal and trace
elements in various fish samples from Sir Dam Lake,
Kahramanmaras, Turkey. Environ. Monit. Assess., 130:
373-379.
FAO (1989). National Research council Recommended
Dietary allowances 10th Edn. National Academy Press.
Washington DC. USA.
Harada M (1995). Minamata disease: Methyl mercury
poisoning in Japan caused by environmental pollution.
Crit. Rev. Toxicol., 25(1): 1.24.
Kalay M, Aly O, Canil M (1999). Heavy metal concentration
in fish tissues from the Northeast Mediterranean Sea.
Bull. Environ. contam. Toxicol., 63:673-81.
Krishna KPK, Pillai VK, Valsala KK (1990). Bioaccumulation
of trace metals by marine flora and fauna near a caustic
soda plant (Karwar, India). Indian. J. Fish., 37(2): 129-
137.
Lee SV, Cundy AB (2001). Heavy metal contamination and
mixing processes in sediments from the Humber Estuary,
Eastern England. Estua. Coast. Shelf Sci., 53 (5): 619-636.
Leland HV, Kuwabara JS (1985). Trace Metals, In: Rand
G.M., and Petrocelli S.R. (eds.), Fundamentals of Aquatic
Toxicology (pp.374-415) Hemisphere, New York, USA.
Li Z, Zhang D, Wei Y, Luo L, Dai T (2014). Risk assessment of
trace elements is cultured from freshwater fishes from
Jiangxi Provence, China. Environ. Monit. Assess., 186:
2185-2194.
Mansour SA, Belal MH, Abou-Arab AAK, Gad MF (2009).
Monitoring of pesticides and heavy metals in cucumber
fruits produced from different farming systems.
Chemosphere, 75(5): 601–609.
Mitra A, Chowdhury R, Benerjee K (2012). Concentration of
some heavy metal in commercially important fin fish and
shell fish of the River Ganga. . Environ. Monit. Assess.,
184: 2219-2230.
Mohamad EA, Osman AR (2014). Heavy metals
concentration in water, muscle and gills of Oreochromis
niloticus collected from the sewage treated water and the
White Nile. Inter. J. Aquacul., 4(6): 36-42.
Nwaedozie TM (1998). The determination of heavy metal
Krishna et al. 125
pollution in some samples of River Kaduna. J. Chem. Soc.
Nigeria. 21-23.
Rauf A, Javed M, Ubaidullah M (2009). Heavy metal levels in
three major carps (Catla catla, Labeo rohita and Cirrhina
mrigala) from the River Ravi, Pakistan. Pakist. Vet. J.,
29(1): 24-26.
Rompala JM, Rutosky FW, Putnam DJ (1984).
Concentrations of environmental contaminants from
selected waters in Pennsylvania. United States Fish and
Wildlife Service Republic, State College, Pennsylvania, US.
Tuzen M (2009). Toxic and essential trace elemental
contents in fish species from the Black Sea Turkey. Food
Chem. Toxicol., 47: 1785-1790.
Umar A, Umar R, Ahmad MS (2001). Hydrogeological and
hydrochemical frame works of regional aquter system in
Kali-Ganga sub-basin. India. Envir. Geol., 40 (4-5): 602-
611.
Vettori MV, Alinovi R, Belletti S, Goldoni M, Franchini I,
Multi A (2003). In vitro model for the evaluation of the
neurotoxicity of methyl Mercury. Current state of
knowledge. Med. Lav. 94-183.
Wang X, Sato T, Xing B, Tao S (2005). Health risk of heavy
metals to the general public in Tianjin, China via
consumption of vegetables and fish. Sci. Total Envirn.,
350: 28-57.
WHO (1985). Guidelines for drinking water quality.
Recommendation WHO. Geneva\1985; 1: 130.
WHO (1989). Heavy metals-environmental aspects of
environment and health criteria. No.85. Geneva,
Switzerland.
WHO (1991). Inorganic Mercury-Environmental Health
Criteria. Geneva World Health Organization, 118: 1591.
WHO (2010). Summery and conclusion joint FAO/WHO
expert committee of food additives. (JECFA/73/SC) 73rd
meeting Geneva.
Yilmaz F (2009). The comparison of heavy metal
concentrations (Cd, Cu, Mn, Pb and Zn) in tissues of three
economically important fish (Anguilla anguilla; Mugil
cephathus and Oreochromic nilotiucus) inhabiting
Koycegiz Lake-Mugla (Turkey). Turk. J. Sci.Tech., 4(1): 7-
15.