Ethics approval of the testing methodology
The testing methodology for this investigation, which covers HMs and enzymatic testing of tilapia and pangasius, was approved in accordance with the policies and procedures of the laboratory of applied chemistry and chemical technology at Chattogram Veterinary and Animal Sciences University (CVASU), Bangladesh.
Sample collection and preservation
Tilapia and pangasius were procured from four wholesale fish markets in the Chattogram district (formerly known as Chittagong), Bangladesh, which is situated between 21°54' and 22°59' north latitude and 91°17' and 92°13' east longitude and has a 5282.98 sq km land area (Fig. 1). Fifteen individuals of each species were collected from each market and were then evaluated for HMs analysis in the targeted four organs (gills, kidney, liver and muscle). Thus, a total of 120 samples were studied during the study. The samples were collected and placed in a plastic bag that was carried to the laboratory of the applied chemistry and chemical technology of CVASU while being stored in an ice box. Each fish sample was cleaned in the lab to eliminate any dirt or other fouling materials. It was then placed into plastic bags with a unique identifying number and stored at -20 ° C in a refrigerator until the dissection was done. Fish samples were dissected, the organs were divided into different parts and cleansed with distilled water before being weighed. 200 g of each of the organs were then stored at 20°C after each sample was air dried to remove excess water. Each fish organ was replicated for three samples.
Sample digestion and metal analysis
According to the method outlined in UNEP Reference Methods (UNEP/FAO/IAEA/IOC, 1984), the samples were digested. Each organ sample weighed one (1) g, and it was put into a conical flask. Each flask was filled with a total of 30 ml of nitric acid and placed on a hot plate to boil. After the samples boiled, 30 ml of per-chloric acid was added, and the mixture was heated at 60 ° C for three days until just 1 ml was left. The flask was taken from the hot plate, mixed with 100 ml of distilled water, and then the final volume was filtered using filter paper (AOAC, 1995). Last but not least, the automatic absorption spectrophotometer (Model: AA-700, SHIMADZU, JAPAN) was used to measure levels of As, Cr, and Pb in various organs of tilapia and pangasius using the procedures outlined in AOAC (1995). The results of the control blank were utilized to verify the instrument's reading. According to Islam et al. (2018), the reagent (Merck VI; Germany) utilized for the analysis of the metals was prepared. The procedure' validity and correctness were examined in comparison to the approved reference material (CRM 320, Merck KGaA, Germany) (Hossain et al., 2018). In order to prevent cross contamination, the samples were prepared while wearing sterile lab coats and clean powder free latex gloves. Additionally, distilled water and chromic acid solutions were used to clean the glassware.
Determination of enzyme activity
Examined fish’s liver and muscles ALP (alkaline phosphatase) activity were assessed following the method of Garen and Levinthal (1960). The solution was made by mixing of 0.1 ml of 0.1 M magnesium chloride, 0.05 ml tissue homogenate, 0.1 ml of 0.1 M para-nitro-phenyl phosphate, 0, 0.2 ml of HCO3 buffer, and 0.5 mL of distilled water. The mixture was kept in the incubator at 37 ° C for 20 minutes. A ultra violet visible spectrophotometer (LT-2900, Germany) was used to determine optical density (OD) at 410 nm. The usual procedure outlined by Post and Sen was used to measure total ATPase enzyme activity (1967). A mixer of 100 mm NaCl, 20 mM potassium chloride, 3 mm magnesium chloride, 0.1 M HCl buffer, 0.1 ml tissue homogenate and 5 mm ATP was used. The reaction mixture was stopped using 10% TCA after 15 minutes of incubation and 660 nm OD was maintained (Fiske and Subbarow, 1925).
Human health risk assessment
The estimated daily intake (EDI) of each HMs was assessed by using the following formula (USEPA, 2018; Varol et al., 2017)
$$\text{EDI=}\frac{\text{Cn × IGr }}{\text{BWt}}$$
where Cn is the metal concentration in different organs (mg/kg dry-wt); IGr is the acceptable ingestion rate, which is 60 g/day for adults and 52.5 g/day for children (Alam and Haque, 2021; USEPA, 2018); Bwt is the body weight: 70 kg for adults and 15 kg for children (USEPA, 2018).
Target hazard quotient (THQ): The ratio of EDI and oral reference dose (RfD) was used to estimate THQ. RfDs for the As, Cr and Pb are 0.0003, 0.003 and 0.002, respectively (USEPA, 2018; Vu et al., 2017). The value of ratio < 1 implies a non-significant risk effect (Abtahi et al., 2017). The THQ formula is expressed as follows (Baki et al., 2018):
$$\text{THQ= }\frac{\text{Ed×Ep×EDI}}{\text{At×RfD}}\text{×}{\text{10}}^{\text{-3}}$$
Where Ed is exposure duration (70 years) (Alam and Haque, 2021); Ep is exposure frequency (365 days/year) (Ahmed et al., 2015); At is the average time for the non-carcinogenic element (Ed × Ep).
Hazard index (HI): Hazard index (HI) for As, Cr and Pb was calculated by the following equation (Alam and Haque, 2021):
HI =\(\sum _{\text{i=k}}^{\text{n}}\text{THQs}\)
where, THQs is the estimated risk value of metals. Consumers are supposed to be in danger of non-carcinogenic risk effect when the HI value is higher than 10 (Fakhri et al., 2017).
Carcinogenic risk (CR): Carcinogenic risk is evaluated to assess probability of developing cancer risk by the following formula (Vieira et al., 2011):
$$\text{CR= }\frac{\text{Ed×Ep×EDI×CSf}}{\text{At}}\text{×}{\text{10}}^{\text{-3}}$$
Where CSf is oral slope factor of specific carcinogen (mg/kg-day) (USEPA, 2000). Available CSf values (mg/kg-day) are: As (1.5), Cr (0.5) and Pb (0.0085) (USEPA, 2010). The acceptable range of the risk limit is 10− 6 to 10− 4 (Yin et al., 2015). CRs higher than 10− 4 are likely to increase the probability of carcinogenic risk effect (USEPA, 2018).
Data visualization and statistical analyses
The version 20 of SPSS (Statistical Package for Social Science) and the R environment (R Core Team, 2020) were used for data visualization and statistical analyses (IBM SPSS, Armonk, NY, USA). The mean and standard deviation (Mean ± SD) were used to summarize the data collected during the current investigation. The normality of the data was checked using Kolmogorov-Smirnov and Shapiro-Wilk tests, and non-normal data were square rooted before being used in the multivariate analysis. To identify the significant differences in HMs and enzymatic parameters across the various organs of tilapia and pangasius, the Kruskal-Wallis test with Tukey's post-hoc comparison (ANOVA, P 0.05) was used. Furthermore, a 2-tailed Mann-Whitney U test was used to compare the studied parameters between the fishes (P 0.05). Ward's linkage method was used to conduct cluster analysis (CA) in order to pinpoint the potential origin of HMs. Spearman rank correlation was used to determine a significant correlation (at P < 0.05) among the HMs in the studied fishes. Additionally, multiple linear regression analysis was used to predict the ALP activity and ATPase in various fish organs by the concentration of HMs at a significance threshold of P 0 < 0.05.