Scientific Reports | Article Open
The biological impacts of the Fukushima nuclear accident on the pale grass blue butterfly
- Journal name:
- Scientific Reports
- Volume:
- 2,
- Article number:
- 570
- DOI:
- doi:10.1038/srep00570
- Received
- Accepted
- Published
The collapse of the Fukushima Dai-ichi Nuclear Power Plant caused a massive release of radioactive materials to the environment. A prompt and reliable system for evaluating the biological impacts of this accident on animals has not been available. Here we show that the accident caused physiological and genetic damage to the pale grass blue Zizeeria maha, a common lycaenid butterfly in Japan. We collected the first-voltine adults in the Fukushima area in May 2011, some of which showed relatively mild abnormalities. The F1 offspring from the first-voltine females showed more severe abnormalities, which were inherited by the F2 generation. Adult butterflies collected in September 2011 showed more severe abnormalities than those collected in May. Similar abnormalities were experimentally reproduced in individuals from a non-contaminated area by external and internal low-dose exposures. We conclude that artificial radionuclides from the Fukushima Nuclear Power Plant caused physiological and genetic damage to this species.
Subject terms:
At a glance
Figures
-
Figure 1: First-voltine collection and abnormalities. (a) Collection localities. A red dot indicates the location of the Fukushima Dai-ichi NPP. Black dots and black half dots indicate the cities from which the first-voltine adults were collected. Brown dots and brown half dots indicate cities from which the host plant leaves were collected for the internal exposure experiment. All experiments were performed in Okinawa, marked by a blue dot. Inset shows the collection localities around the NPP. (b) Representative wings with normal (leftmost) and aberrant colour patterns. Numbers 1, 2, 3, and 4 indicate the first, second, third, and fourth spot arrays, respectively, and “D” indicates the discal spot. Red arrows indicate loss, dislocation, and weak expression of spots (left individual), weak expression and dislocation of spots (middle individual), and enlargement of spots (right individual). These samples were caught in Mito except for the leftmost aberrant specimen, which was caught in Iwaki. Scale bar, 1.0 cm. (c) Male forewing sizes from various localities. The first quartile and third quartile were indicated by horizontal bars at the bottom and top of the box, respectively. Median is indicated as the centre line inside the box. Outliers were indicated by dots. A red dot indicates the mean value and a red bar the standard deviation (SD). Holm-corrected p-values are shown, which were obtained for pairwise comparisons among 8 localities using t tests with pooled SD. Only male samples were used here because when the female samples were used to obtain eggs, broken wings resulted from the egg collection procedure. Samples from Shiroishi (n = 5) and Koriyama (n = 3) were excluded because of small sample sizes. (d) Scatter plot of the male forewing size and ground radiation dose at each collection locality. Pearson correlation coefficient r = −0.74 (Holm-corrected p = 0.029). (e) Representative morphological abnormalities. From left to right, dented eyes (Shiroishi), deformed left eye (Iwaki), deformed right palpus (Takahagi), and deformed wing shape (Fukushima). Arrowheads indicate deformation. Scale bars, 0.50 mm with the exception of the rightmost bar, which is 1.0 cm.
-
Figure 2: F1 abnormalities. (a) Eclosion-time dynamics. Cumulative percentages of eclosed individuals were plotted against eclosion day. All local populations differ significantly from the Tsukuba population (generalized Wilcoxon test, Holm-corrected p < 0.00001). (b) Scatter plot of half-eclosion time and distances of the collection localities from the NPP. Half-eclosion time was derived from the eclosion-time dynamics shown in (a) as the time when 50% of the pupae eclosed. Pearson correlation coefficient r = −0.91 for half-eclosion time (Holm-corrected p = 0.045). (c) Scatter plot of abnormality rate of appendages and distances from the NPP. Pearson correlation coefficient r = −0.86 (Holm-corrected p = 0.18). (d) Representative morphological abnormalities of appendages. Miniaturized left foreleg tarsus (Fukushima F1, leftmost), undeveloped left middle leg tarsus (Fukushima F1 and Hirono F1, second and third from the left, respectively), and undeveloped palpi (Takahagi F1, rightmost) were structurally abnormal, reminiscent of Drosophila Distal-less mutants. Arrowheads indicate abnormal structures. Insets show enlargements of boxed areas. Scale bar, 0.50 mm. (e) Representative morphological abnormalities of eyes. Both compound eyes were dented (Fukushima F1, left), and left compound eye was bar-like in shape (Hirono F1, right), reminiscent of Drosophila Bar mutants. Scale bar, 0.50 mm. (f) Representative wing size and shape deformation. Right hindwing was much smaller than the left hindwing of the same individual (Fukushima F1, left), wings were folded (Takahagi F1, middle), and wings were rumpled (Iwaki F1, right). Scale bar, 1.0 cm. (g) Representative wing colour-pattern modifications. The top left three individuals are F1 individuals from an Iwaki parent, and the top rightmost individual is a Hirono F1. The bottom samples, from left to right, are F1 individuals from Hirono, Mito, Shiroishi, Motomiya, and Motomiya. Arrows indicate modified spots. Scale bar, 1.0 cm.
-
Figure 3: F2 abnormalities. (a) Abnormality rate for the F2 generation. The x-axis shows strain names that indicate the local origin of their P generation. The total number of individuals (corresponding to 100%) was indicated for each strain. See also Supplementary Table 3. (b) Identical and homologous abnormality rates. The number of individuals that show abnormal traits identical to the F1 parents was divided by the total number of individuals obtained and expressed as a percentage. Similarly, the number of individuals that show abnormal traits in organs, such as wings and appendages, homologous with those in their F1 parents was divided by the total number of individuals obtained and expressed as a percentage. The total number of abnormal individuals (corresponding to 100%) was indicated for each strain. (c) Representative wing colour-pattern aberrations. Arrows indicate modified spots and wing parts. The top leftmost wings are the wing-wide spot elongation type of the Iwaki F2, a phenotype similar to that of its F1 parent shown in Fig. 2g. The top four samples, from left to right, are Iwaki F2, Takahagi F2, Iwaki F2, and Fukushima F2 individuals. All of the samples at the bottom are Fukushima F2 individuals. The bottom middle and rightmost wings show a deformation of the hindwing shape, which were obtained from the offspring of the Fukushima F1 parent that had the small hindwing shown in Fig 2f. Scale bar, 1.0 cm. (d) Antenna and leg malformations. The left panel shows a Takahagi F2 individual with a malformation of left antenna, which is short and forked (arrowheads). The right panel shows a Takahagi F2 individual with a deformation of the left hindleg femur. Insets show pictures taken from different angles. Scale bars, 0.50 mm.
-
Figure 4: Abnormalities in the adult samples collected in September 2011 and in their F1 offspring. (a) Representative morphological abnormalities of the field-caught individuals. Insets are enlargement of the boxed areas. The tarsus of the left hindleg was structurally abnormal (Hirono, left), the tarsus of the right foreleg was not developed at all (Fukushima, second from left), the right antenna (an arrowhead) was elongated with abnormal structure and colouration (Motomiya, second from right), and the wing colour-patterns and wing shape were modified as indicated by arrows (Iwaki and Fukushima, right). All scale bars indicate 1.0 mm with the exception of the rightmost bar, which is 1.0 cm. (b) Scatter plot of ground radiation dose and abnormality rate of the field-caught adults. Pearson correlation coefficient r = 0.84 (Holm-corrected p = 0.13). (c) Representative abnormalities in the F1 generation. The left three panels indicate malformations of left foreleg tarsus (an arrowhead) (Takahagi F1, top), tumor-like solid protuberance (arrowheads) in the ventral side of the thorax (Takahagi F1, middle), and dented eyes (Fukushima F1, bottom). Scale bars in the left three panels all indicate 1.0 mm. Wing colour-pattern modifications (arrows) of the F1 samples were shown on the right: from left to right, Iwaki, Iwaki, Motomiya, Hirono, and Takahagi (top), and Takahagi, Motomiya, Motomiya, Fukushima, Motomiya, and Motomiya (bottom). Scale bar in the wing panel indicates 1.0 cm.
-
Figure 5: External and internal exposures. (a) Representative abnormalities obtained by external exposure. Left hindleg tibia and tarsus, antennae, palpi, and an eye showed abnormal structures (All exposed at 125 mSv with the exception of the left bottom individual, which was exposed at 55 mSv. All scale bars, 1.0 mm). Aberrant wing colour patterns are indicated by arrows and boxes (Left wings exposed at 55 mSv and right wings at 125 mSv. Scale bar, 1.0 cm). Inset shows the enlarged boxed area. (b) Forewing size reduction in the externally exposed individuals at 55 mSv (t test). (c) Survival curves of individuals that were exposed externally. Differences between the exposed at 55 mSv and its control (Holm-corrected p = 0.018), between the exposed at 125 mSv and its control (Holm-corrected p = 0.0000026), and between the exposed at 55 mSv and at 125 mSv (Holm-corrected p = 0.0040) were statistically significant (generalized Wilcoxon test). (d) Survival curves of individuals that ingested contaminated leaves from different localities. The host plant collection localities are shown. All curves differed from the non-contaminated Ube curve (generalized Wilcoxon test, Holm-corrected p < 0.000001). The Hirono curve was different from the Fukushima curve (Holm-corrected p = 0.0017) and from the Iitate flatland curve (Holm-corrected p = 0.00035) (generalized Wilcoxon test). (e) Scatter plot of the 137Cs activity of the host plant and pupal mortality rate (r = 0.91) and colour-pattern abnormality rate (r = 0.96). (f) Forewing size reduction in the internally exposed individuals (t test). (g) Representative abnormalities of individuals that ingested contaminated leaves. From the top left to the right bottom, the panels show right antenna malformation (Iitate montane region), right palpus abnormality (Fukushima), dented left compound eye (Iitate flatland), eclosion failure (Fukushima), bent wings (Fukushima), additional bent wings (Hirono), aberrant wing colour patterns (Fukushima), and an ectopic black spot beside the discal spot (Iitate flatland; enlargement in the inset). Arrowheads indicate abnormal parts, and arrows indicate deformed wing spots. Scale bars for the top four panels indicate 1.0 mm, and those for the bottom four panels indicate 5.0 mm.
Report this comment #49635
August 21, 2012
Dear Scientific Reports editors:
The recent article, The biological impacts of the Fukushima nuclear accident on the pale grass blue butterfly [Sci. Rep. 2, 570; DOI:10.1038/srep00570 (2012)], has a number of scientific problems that raise serious doubts about the validity of its findings and the conclusions that can be drawn about low dose radiation effects on insects or humans. Although these scientific issues are too numerous to be addressed here, three main problems need to be mentioned for the record.
A major finding of the study is that forewing size was inversely correlated with distance from Fukushima, resulting in the conclusion that radiation from Fukushima had stunted forewing development. However, the more distant butterfly sampling sites were all progressively further south of Fukushima, so that latitude was also changing with the distance. This is a problem because it is well established that the forewing size of a number of insect species is dependent upon the latitude of their microhabitat. This has been extensively studied both in fruit flies (Drosophila subobscura) and butterflies (Pararge aeberia), and the magnitude of the forewing changes found in this study is comparable to these known latitudinal determinants on forewing anatomy (1, 2). The potential latitudinal influences on forewing size were completely ignored in this study. Had the data been adjusted for sampling site latitude, it is likely there would have been no significant forewing findings to report.
The second major problem is that the decreased butterfly survival rates reported to be associated with proximity to Fukushima are claimed to be reproducible in the laboratory with external beam irradiation. This claim stretches credulity since it has long been established that insects, including butterflies (Order: Lepidoptera), are resistant to radiation effects. It takes an average dose of 10,000 mSv to kill a Lepidoptera cell (3), and it requires an average dose of 1,300 mSv to Lepidoptera eggs to reduce their hatch rate by 50% (4). Larval, pupal, and adult forms of Lepidoptera are even more radioresistant (5). The concept that the low environmental radiation exposures (<15 mSv per year) that are being attributed to the Fukushima accident could be killing off butterflies, or any other insect species, is simply not credible. It should further be noted the external radiation doses that were used to reproduce the results from field-collected individuals were 100 times higher than any radiation doses in the field that could possibly be attributed to Fukushima. Thus, it can even be seen from the investigators? own laboratory experimental data that no measurable killing would be expected at the radiation doses that were encountered in the field.
The third major problem regards the time to eclosion (emergence of an adult insect from a pupa). Eclosion times were claimed to be associated with proximity to Fukushima. Yet irradiation has been employed as a pest control measure for a number of insect species for decades (6), and the effects of radiation on various insect biological endpoints have already been well characterized. It typically takes as much as 30,000 mSv of Lepidoptera egg irradiation to extend eclosion times by the 4 to 5 days reported in this study, and similarly high doses are required when irradiation is done in the larval stage (5). It is, therefore, astounding that effects on eclosion of a similar magnitude can be seen at radiation doses that are just a few fold above natural background doses. So the claim that eclosion times were extended due to these environmental radiation exposures is also incredible when compared to the literature. Perhaps it is more plausible that eclosion time of the pale grass blue butterfly, like forewing size, might also be related to microhabitat latitude or temperature. [Average daily temperatures differ by as much as 9 degrees Celsius between Fukushima and Tokyo during April (hatching season).]
There are other inferences from this study?s findings that counter established radiation biology tenets, including the notion that radiation can target specific developmental genes for mutation simultaneously in multiple individuals, which is what would be required to explain much of the findings reported in the study. Further, the field dosimetry procedures reported in the methods were inadequate to the task at hand. Namely, it should have been possible to actually measure the 137Cs contamination in the environment, which would have allowed an estimation of the component of the environmental radiation dose that could actually be attributed to the Fukushima accident. Moreover, the investigators should have applied the same sampling and statistical rigor to their environmental radiation dosimetry measurements as they did for their biological endpoints. Had they adequately captured this additional source of variability, which would have likely been substantial, it is doubtful that they would have produced the same findings.
In conclusion, the results reported in this study should be considered highly suspect due to both their internal inconsistencies and their incompatibility with earlier and more comprehensive radiation biology research on insects. The study?s central assertion is that ?artificial radionuclides from the Fukushima Nuclear Power Plant caused physiological and genetic damage to [the pale grass blue butterfly]?. This statement is incredulous and goes well beyond anything that the study data can actually substantiate. Therefore, this study?s sensational claims should not be used to scare the local population into the erroneous conclusion that their exposures to these relatively low environmental radiation doses put them at significant health risk.
Sincerely,
Timothy J. Jorgensen, PhD, MPH
Department of Radiation Medicine and the Health Physics Program
Georgetown University
Washington DC
References:
1. Gilchrest GW, Huey RB, Serra L. Rapid evolution of wing size clines in Drosophila subobscura. Genetica 2001;112:13.
2. Vandewoestijne S, Van Dyck H. Flight morphology along latitudinal gradient in a butterfly: do geographic clines differ between agricultural and woodland landscapes? Ecography 2011;34:13.
3. Koval TM. Intrinsic resistance to the lethal effects of x-irradiation in insect and arachnid cells. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A 1983;80(15):4752-5.
4. Chanu OP, Ibotombi N. Effect of 60Co gamma radiation on eggs of tasar silkworm, Antheraea pryoylei (Lepidoptera). J. Exp. Sciences 2011;2:5.
5. Ayvaz A, Albayrak S, Karaborklu S. Gamma radiation sensitivity of the eggs, larvae and pupae of Indian meal moth Plodia interpunctella (Hubner) (Lepidoptera: Pyralidae). Pest Manag Sci 2008;64(5):505-12.
6. Robinson AS. Mutations and their use in insect control. Mutat Res 2002;511(2):113-32.