Next Article in Journal
Predicting of Daily PM2.5 Concentration Employing Wavelet Artificial Neural Networks Based on Meteorological Elements in Shanghai, China
Next Article in Special Issue
Monitoring the Health of Coastal Environments in the Pacific Region—A Review
Previous Article in Journal
Roe Deer (Capreolus capreolus) Hair as a Bioindicator for the Environmental Presence of Toxic and Trace Elements
Previous Article in Special Issue
Ozonation of Selected Pharmaceutical and Personal Care Products in Secondary Effluent—Degradation Kinetics and Environmental Assessment
 
 
Font Type:
Arial Georgia Verdana
Font Size:
Aa Aa Aa
Line Spacing:
Column Width:
Background:
Article

Hawksbill Sea Turtle (Eretmochelys imbricata) Blood and Eggs Organochlorine Pesticides Concentrations and Embryonic Development in a Nesting Area (Yucatan Peninsula, Mexico)

by
Patricia I. Salvarani
1,
Luis R. Vieira
2,3,
Jaime Rendón-von Osten
4 and
Fernando Morgado
1,*
1
Department of Biology and the Centre for Environmental and Marine Studies (CESAM), University of Aveiro, 3810-193 Aveiro, Portugal
2
Interdisciplinary Centre of Marine and Environmental Research (CIIMAR), University of Porto, Terminal de Cruzeiros do Porto de Leixões, Av. General Norton de Matos s/n, 2250-208 Matosinhos, Portugal
3
School of Medicine and Biomedical Sciences (ICBAS), University of Porto, Rua de Jorge Viterbo Ferreira, 228, 4050-313 Porto, Portugal
4
Instituto Epomex, Universidad Autónoma de Campeche, Av Augustin de Melgar y Juan de la Barrera s/n, Campeche 24039, Mexico
*
Author to whom correspondence should be addressed.
Toxics 2023, 11(1), 50; https://doi.org/10.3390/toxics11010050
Submission received: 22 November 2022 / Revised: 21 December 2022 / Accepted: 26 December 2022 / Published: 3 January 2023
(This article belongs to the Special Issue Ecotoxicity of Contaminants in Water and Sediment)

Abstract

:
Environmental contaminants with chemical origins, such as organochlorine pesticides (OCPs) have major impacts on the health of marine animals, including sea turtles, due to the bioaccumulation of those substances by transference throughout the food chain. The effects of environmental pollution on the health of marine turtles are very important for management strategies and conservation. During recent decades, the south Gulf of Mexico and the Yucatan Peninsula have suffered from increasingly frequent disturbances from continental landmasses, river systems, urban wastewater runoff, port areas, tourism, industrial activities, pesticides from agricultural use, and other pollutants, such as metals, persistent organic pollutants (POPs) and hydrocarbons (from the oil industry activities), which contaminate water and sediments and worsen the environmental quality of the marine ecosystem in this region. In this study, we assessed the concentrations of OCPs in the blood and eggs of 60 hawksbill turtles (Eretmochelys imbricata) nesting at the Punta Xen turtle camp, and their effects on the nesting population’s reproductive performance: specifically, maternal transfer and embryonic development were analyzed. Hematologic characteristics, including packed cell volume, white blood cell count, red blood cell count, and haemoglobin levels, and plasma chemistry values, including creatinine, blood urea nitrogen, uric acid, triglyceride, total cholesterol and glucose, were also measured. The general health of the turtles in this study, as well as their levels of urea, serum creatinine, glucose, uric, acid, cholesterol, and triglyceride, fell within normal ranges and was similar to other normal values, which could indicate the turtles’ good energy levels and body conditions for nest-building activity, with all of the turtles able to successfully come ashore to nest. All the same, the obtained results also indicate that OCPs affect the nesting and reproductive performance of the hawksbill turtles, as well as their fertility and the development of the population of eggs and reproductive performance, specifically in terms of maternal transference and embryonic development. There were significant differences in the concentrations of OCPs (ΣHCHs and ΣDienes) between maternal blood and eggs, indicating that these chemicals are transferred from nesting females to eggs and, ultimately, to hatchlings. OCPs may, therefore, have an effect on the health and reproductive performance of hawksbill turtles, both in terms of their fertility and egg development. Conservation strategies need to be species-specific, due to differences in feeding, and address the reasons for any decline, focusing on regional assessments. Thus, accurate and comparable monitoring data are necessary, which requires the standardization of monitoring protocols.

1. Introduction

Sea turtles are among the oldest animals on Earth, their origins dating back more than 150 million years [1,2]; additionally, they are some of the most widely distributed vertebrates on the planet [3,4]. The adults of some species can be found throughout tropical, temperate, and subarctic waters, and regularly migrate hundreds or thousands of kilometers between foraging areas and nesting grounds [3,5]. They have a long-life expectancy, late maturity, slow reproductive rates, vast geographic ranges, and spend all their lives at sea, coming to beaches exclusively to lay eggs [6,7,8,9]. Their movements during spawning and feeding between different habitats (seagrass beds, coral reefs, ocean waters, and sandy beaches) are considered especially important for energy transfer and nutrient recycling in aquatic systems [4,10,11]. Marine turtles have a particularly important ecological role in the coastal ecosystem, both as consumers (seaweed, seagrass, sponges, tunicates, crustaceans, cnidarians) and as prey (eggs, juveniles, and adults) [11,12], thus occupying different concentrations in the food chain. Marine turtles are also reptiles with slow growth rates and long-life cycles, and are often used as models for evolutionary studies of adaptation to different environmental conditions, since they are extremely susceptible to several anthropogenic activities at all phases of their life cycle [13,14,15,16]. During their life cycle, sea turtles face various challenges in the fight for survival and are subject to many biotic, abiotic, and anthropogenic threats [17,18,19,20]. Many marine turtle populations are declining worldwide at alarming rates [8,20] and are considered globally threatened or endangered [20], and are nearing extinction [20,21]. Global sea turtle conservation programs have been developed and are currently ongoing; these programs have environmental, biological, and socio-economic dimensions. Various institutions and government bodies, spanning multiple geopolitical boundaries, and agreements at local, national, and international scales, have been established to ensure the assessment of risks and threats and the development of conservation strategies, to define conservation and management priorities, and to develop ecological information to assist in decision making [21,22,23,24,25,26].
The Gulf of Mexico and the Yucatan Peninsula represent an area of vital importance for the mating, breeding, foraging, and developmental habitats of six of the seven existing sea turtle species in the world [27,28,29,30]: the green turtle (Chelonia mydas), the loggerhead turtle (Caretta caretta), the olive ridley turtle (Lepidochelys olivacea), Kemp’s ridley turtle (Lepidochelys kempii), the hawksbill turtle (Eretmochelys imbricata), and the leatherback turtle (Dermochelys coriacea) [31,32,33]. This area is highly vulnerable to environmental and anthropogenic pressures [34,35,36] that cause the degradation of and changes to the quality of water and sediments, and produce pollution and contaminants, which may significantly affect turtles’ health and development [33,37,38]. During the last few decades, due to rapid increases in population, urbanization, agriculture, industrialization, fisheries, and leisure activities [39,40,41,42], this region has suffered from various disturbances. Moreover, significant contamination is visible, such as that produced by pesticides, trace metals, phosphorous, PCBs, and polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons that can be absorbed and concentrated by sediments, water, and suspended matter in this aquatic system [42,43,44]. Anthropogenic pollution, oil spills, and chemical runoff seriously contribute to the degradation of water and sediment quality in this region, and may have severe impacts on sea turtles [32,33,36,38,45,46,47]. Recently, several works have reported the effects of environmental [30,48,49,50] and anthropogenic disturbances [51,52,53,54,55] on turtle populations dynamics and distribution, migration corridors, species co-occurrence, the oxidative stress of nesting females, genetic structures, and connectivity between nesting and foraging areas and global threats for foraging habitats, namely threats for foraging habitats in the Gulf of Mexico. Chemical contamination is one of the biggest threats in the region for the turtles’ reproduction and nesting migratory movements, and is responsible for the degradation of foraging habitats and the occurrence of embryonic deformities [45,48,56,57]. Levels of contaminant exposure in marine turtles may vary according to the level of contamination and the time spent on foraging grounds [58], although the exact impact of chemical pollutants on sea turtles’ health is unknown and there is no information available on their toxicological effects or thresholds for any marine reptiles. Due to the biogeographic relevance of this region for the turtles’ breeding, mating, foraging, and developmental habitats, several sea turtle conservation programs and turtle monitoring and conservation marine identification programs for marine key areas have been developed across the Caribbean and Yucatán Peninsula to ensure the conservation of these critically endangered species [59,60,61,62,63,64].
Environmental contaminants, such as organochlorine contaminants (OCs) including organochlorine pesticides (OCPs) and polychlorinated biphenyls (PCBs), are highly persistent lipophilic organic pollutants that were first introduced into the environment in the late 1940s [65]. There is considerable evidence that, due to their high persistence in the environment, and their hydrophobicity and resistance to environmental degradation, OCPs can be absorbed and concentrated by sediments, water and suspended matter, biomagnified in the food webs, and bioaccumulated in organisms, including marine reptiles and mammals through direct and trophic exposure [66,67,68,69]. Several studies emphasize the relationship that arises from the sea turtles’ long-life cycles and their high capacity for OCP bioaccumulation [58,65,66,70,71,72,73], as well as their lower efficiency in the metabolic processes of OCP detoxification [68,71,74] when compared with other marine reptile vertebrates. Such substances may affect the turtles’ health status and their physiological characteristics and the process whereby hatchlings hatch in nests [75,76,77,78,79,80], and may influence the development and survival of the offspring, since the early stages of embryonic development are the most vulnerable to toxic exposure [58,66,69,81]. Throughout their life cycles, highly migratory sea turtles move between residency sites and their mating and nesting beaches; OCPS, which are associated to runoff processes from rain, can be transported to the nesting beaches from adjacent or distant areas, and eggs can absorb moisture from the environment around them, thus absorbing the toxicants dissolved in nesting beaches [33,46,82,83,84]. Additionally, given the late sexual maturity of sea turtles, nesting female turtles can incorporate OCPs into eggs during vitellogenesis and oviposition [46,71], where they can interfere with sensitive early-life development processes [28,33,58,71]. Concentrations of OCPs in eggs reflect that a developing embryo has been exposed to them at a time when their toxic effects may be especially detrimental [85]. The transportation of these contaminants in association with particulate matter represents a major pathway in the biogeochemical cycling of trace contaminants, and sea turtles have proved to be suitable bioindicators of the bioaccumulation and maternal transference of these contaminants on the ocean and also its fecundity and reproductive competence [51,73,85,86]. OCPs can accumulate over many years before being transferred from the mother to her offspring via eggs, and, after hatching, this can have serious implications for embryonic development and health [26,35,68,71,81,85,87]. In their early life stages, oviparous organisms often exhibit a greater sensitivity to chemical contaminants than in adult life stages [71,88].
The effects of anthropogenic pollution on the health and survival of marine turtles is currently one of the top twenty research topics for sea turtle conservation [17,19,68], and is considered of high importance to the recovery of turtle populations and to their conservation and management [17,18,51,53,68,88]. Many studies focusing on the concentrations of pollutants in sea turtles have examined tissues collected from dead animals, such as liver and fat; these tissues are usually used for the investigation of organic compounds because they reflect the physical and chemical properties of the target analytes [73,74,86]. Studies using plasma are very effective as a non-lethal sampling technique, and assist in efforts to monitor the long-term trends of contamination and pollutants in the fat and blood of female turtles and their respective broods, and to investigate possible maternal transference [51,89]. The maternal transference of contaminants to the eggs present in the nesting and feeding areas is not fully understood, and more investigation is needed to evaluate contaminant concentrations and their effects on hawksbill turtles’ reproductive performance. In addition, since the changes in blood chemistry can be related to their physiological state, a health assessment of nesting turtles through hematological and plasma biochemical profiles is required to obtain information on their physiological reproductive states and organ system functions [75,76,77,78,79,80]. Such information will enable the development of marine turtle management strategies in the medium and long term through informed decision making and the development of a more integrative approach to hawksbill turtle conservation. The hawksbill turtle Eretmochelys imbricata is a pan-tropical species listed globally as critically endangered in the International Union for Conservation of Nature Red List [20], and is legally protected by various international legislation (the Convention on International Trade in Endangered Species of Wild Flora and Fauna, the Protocol of Specially Protected Areas and Wildlife of the Wider Caribbean Region, and the Inter-American Convention for the Protection and Conservation of Sea Turtles) and national legislation in Mexico (the Endangered Species Act in the USA, NOM-SEMARNAT-059-2001) [46,77]. Hawksbill turtle conservation efforts remain primarily focused on the nesting beaches in the Yucatan Peninsula [30,31,33,38], even though nesting females spend, on average, less than 1% of their total lifetime in such habitats, recognizing that it is necessary to focus efforts towards understanding which factors (natural and anthropogenic) influence hawksbill turtles’ life stages in the marine environment. The objective of this study was to determine OCP concentrations in the blood and eggs of the hawksbill turtle Eretmochelys imbricata, and the relationship between the concentrations of contaminants and the nesting turtle population’s reproductive performance-specifically, maternal transference and embryonic development (total eggs, number of offspring, offspring/eggs ratio, the weight of the whole egg, weight content, and shell) in relation to sea turtle size (CCL = curved carapace length; CCW = curved carapace width). In addition, we evaluated the turtles’ health state during the breeding season and produced working reference intervals for the hematologic and plasma biochemical parameters of nesting hawksbill sea turtles along the Mexican coast (Punta Xen) [90]. Physical examinations, hematology, and the plasma biochemistry reference ranges of biochemical parameters were taken to assess and monitor the health status of sea turtles and to create suitable environmental indicators to improve the effectiveness of conservation strategies.

2. Material and Methods

2.1. Study Area

Over the last few decades, the south Gulf of Mexico and the Yucatan Peninsula have suffered from increasingly frequent disturbances from continental landmasses and river systems, urban wastewater runoff, port areas, tourism, industrial activities, pesticides from agricultural use, and other pollutants, such as metals, POPs, and hydrocarbons (from the oil industry), which contaminate water and sediments and deteriorate the environmental quality of the marine ecosystem in this region [42,43].
The studded hawksbill sea turtles (Eretmochelys imbricata) were collected from Punta Xen Turtle camp, Campeche, a nesting area located in south-eastern Mexico on the Yucatan Peninsula, one of the most important nesting sites for the hawksbill turtle [63] (Figure 1). The samples were collected in the sea turtle camp of Grupo Ecologista Quelonios A.C. from Punta Xen, Campeche, Mexico, which is located on 700 hectares of natural beach (19°12′39″ N, 90°52′09.7″ W). This area hosts a few habitats, including a turtle nesting beach, a forest, mangrove habitats, and a renowned wealth of natural flora and fauna.

2.2. Blood Sample Collection

During nesting seasons, whole blood and egg samples were collected from 60 nesting hawksbill turtles at Punta Xen beach in Campeche (19°12′39″ N, 90°52′09.7″ W) and were analyzed for OCPs. The license (SGPA/DGVS/03974/14) to collect the blood samples was provided by the Secretaria de Medio Ambiente y Recursos Naturales (SEMARNAT). The nesting female turtles’ curved carapace length and curved carapace width were measured using flexible tape [37]. Blood was collected from the dorsal cervical sinus [91] after the egg-laying process was complete. A 4 mL sample of blood was collected using a disposable syringe and immediately transferred to an EDTA Vacutainer tube (Becton Drive, Franklin Lakes, NJ, USA). For the hematological and biochemical analysis, before collecting the blood, one egg of the same hatching was collected during oviposition and wrapped in aluminum foil, transported in Ziploc bags, stored on ice, and frozen at −20 °C. For each female, a total of 5mL of blood was collected with a disposable syringe and collection tubes containing lithium heparin (Becton Drive, Franklin Lakes, NJ, USA) to prevent coagulation. The samples were centrifuged (Hermle Z206-A, Labortechnik GmbH, Wehingen, Germany) at 4000g for 10 min to obtain plasma, which was stored at −20 °C until the assay was conducted. For the hematological and biochemical analysis, the biological material that had been collected was sent to and processed in the Central Laboratory of Animal Pathology of Campeche (LACEPAC) (Campeche, México). Plasma biochemistry determinations included cholesterol, glucose, triglycerides, urea, creatinine, and uric acid [90]. All contaminant analysis was performed at the Institute of Ecology, Fishery, and Oceanography of the Gulf of Mexico (EPOMEX, Campeche, Mexico).

2.3. Contaminant Analysis

The organochlorine pesticides to be analyzed were selected based on the main anthropogenic activities and impacts in the area (e.g., agriculture, fisheries, waste waters), as identified in previous works [51,52,54]. OCP analysis of the blood followed the method detailed in [52]. The egg OCP analysis followed the method described by [92]. Fertile eggs were rinsed with distilled water and the contents were extracted and homogenized thoroughly. Eggs were weighed with a precision digital scale (VE-210, Velab, Mexico) (weight of the whole egg, weight content, and shell mass). The homogenized mixture was dried in an oven at 40 °C (Oven FE-291AD-Felisa, San Juan de Ocotán Zapopan, Jalisco, Mexico). Three extractions were performed in an ultrasonic bath (FS60, Fisher Scientific, Mexico). For the first extraction, 50 mL of ethyl acetate-hexane (1:1) was added, and the sample was sonicated for 1 h. The organic layer was transferred to a glass tube, and the extraction was repeated twice with 40 mL of hexane for 1 h. The samples were purified using column chromatography. The column was packed with silica gel (Aldrich Chemistry, China) (2 g), alumina (Sig-ma-Aldrich, Germany) (2 g), florisil (Sigma-Aldrich, USA) (2 g), and sodium sulfate (CTR Scientific, Mexico) (2 g). To prepare the column, 20 mL of methylene chloride (Macron Chemicals, USA), 20 mL acetone (Macron Chemicals, USA), and 20 mL hexane were added. Lastly, the sample was eluted with a 35 mL mixture of ethyl acetate: hexane (1:9). The cleaned extracts were diluted to 5 mL for analysis. The final volume of the solvent used was 0.5 mL. A mix of standards was used to analyze the OCPs (SUPELCO 47426-U CLP Organochlorine Pesticide Mix) and was divided into seven families as follows: the ΣDienes-related family (the sum of aldrin, endrin, dieldrin, endrin ketone, and endrin aldehyde), ΣHCH (the sum of α-HCH, β-HCH, χ-HCH, and δ-HCH), ΣChlordanes (the sum of cis-chlordane and trans-chlordane), ΣEndosulfans (the sum of endosulfan I, endosulfan II and endosulfan aldehyde), ΣDDTs (the sum of p,p’ DDT, p,p’ DDD and p,p’ DDE), ΣHeptachlors (the sum of heptachlor epoxide and heptachlor), and methoxychlor. The limit of detection for each family of compounds was in μg g−1 (HCHs—0.007; Aldrin—0.0018; DDTs—0.01; Chlordanes—0.009; Endosulfans—0.007; Heptachlors—0.013; Methoxychlor—0.01) [11].

2.4. Instrumental Analysis

A Varian 3800 gas chromatograph was used to quantify the contaminants equipped with a Ni63 electron capture detector and a DB-5 (5% phenyl) methylpolysiloxane column measuring 30 m × 0.25 mm × 0.32 mm. The injector temperature was 270 °C and the detector was 300 °C. The initial temperature of the oven was 60 °C and it increased at a rate of 2 °C/min until reaching 300 °C, and this temperature was maintained for 5 min. The flow of nitrogen into the column was 2 mL/min and a makeup of 30 mL/min. Quantitative data were obtained by calculating the area under the curve with the Star Chromatography Workstation software (version 6) and using the calibration standards. Laboratory blanks were analyzed for quality assurance. Chicken egg samples were used in triplicate. One milliliter of a 200 ng/mL pesticide mix (SUPELCO) was added to the samples before the extraction, and they were subsequently refrigerated for 48 h. One of the subsamples was not spiked with the standard as a positive blank. Afterward, the contaminants were extracted and processed in a process identical to that used for the rest of the samples, with a recovery of >85%.

2.5. Statistical Analysis

For the hematological and biochemical statistical analysis (mean, standard deviation, minimum, and maximum), R version 3.2.3 was used (R Core Team (2015)). The statistical significance level was set at p < 0.05. The distribution of all parameters was tested for normality using a Shapiro-Wilk test. Correlations between curved carapace length data and the biochemical parameter values of this study were evaluated using Pearson’s chi-squared test. A non-parametric statistic was applied to data: the differences between years were accessed using the Mann-Whitney U Test and the differences between tissues were evaluated by applying the Wilcoxon signed rank test [93]. A Spearman correlation was performed to analyze the degree of association between the OCP concentrations and the morphometric parameters, the number of offspring, and offspring/egg ratios. The Spearman correlation was performed for p < 0.05. Non-metric multidimensional scaling (MDS) was used to produce two-dimensional ordination plots. The Bray-Curtis coefficient was used to construct the similarity matrix from the square-root-transformed data. For the tests, 9999 permutations were used. A significance level (p) of <0.05 was considered. All preliminary data analyses and non-parametric tests were performed using SPSS (IBM version 21). The MDS tests were performed using PRIMER with PERMANOVA+ software (PRIMER v6 and PERMANOVA+ v1, PRI-MER-E Ltd.).

3. Results

3.1. Concentrations and Patterns

Sixty hawksbill sea turtles were sampled with a mean CCL of 89.87 ± 6.36 cm (75.50–101.00 cm). A gross clinical examination did not detect obvious abnormalities, such as tumors or injuries, in any of the sampled turtles. The size and egg contents in hawksbill turtles showed a significant increase in shell mass between 2014 and 2015 (Table 1).

3.2. Hematology and Plasma Biochemistry

The range, mean, and standard deviation (Mean ± SD) of biometric data and biochemical parameters of female foraging and nesting turtles are given in Figure 2, and the results of the hematologic tests are provided in Figure 3. The mean PCV was 0.80, with a range of 0.20 ± 2.50, and the mean WBC count was 215.50, with a range of 101.20 ± 250.70.
Plasma biochemistry data are provided in Figure 3, with values reported for blood collected in lithium heparin. Most of the biochemical parameters have a significant correlation with biometric factors (p < 0.05) with CCL: urea (p-value = 0.494); creatinine (p-value = 0.4227), glucose (p-value = 0.4554), cholesterol (p-value = 0.08054), uric acid (p-value = 0.9309) and triglyceride (p-value = 0.4908) [90].

3.3. Relationship between Egg and Blood Concentrations

In blood, ΣDienes and ΣDDTs were the predominant OCPs found in 2014, and ΣHCHs and ΣDDTs predominated in 2015 (Table 2). ΣDienes were detected in all blood samples in 2014. ΣDDTs were the second most frequent OCP class measured each year, represented mainly by the metabolites p,p’ DDT, p,p’ DDD, and p,p’ DDE, which occurred in 91.6% of the samples. A significant difference was observed between the years for the concentrations of ΣDienes, ΣDDTs, and Methoxychlor in blood. No significant differences were observed in the blood concentrations between the years for the other contaminant classes. In eggs, ΣHCHs and ΣDienes were the most frequent OCP classes, found in 98.3% and 93.3% of samples, respectively, in 2014. Meanwhile, ΣHCHs (88.3%) were predominant in 2015. ΣChlordanes were the third most frequent OCPs class measured, represented mainly by the metabolites cis-chlordane and trans-chlordane; they occurred in 88.3% of samples in 2014. There were significant differences in concentrations of ΣDienes, ΣChlordanes, and ΣDDTs in eggs between 2014 and 2015. No significant differences were observed between the years for the remaining OCPs.
Considering the eggs/blood ratios, significant differences between years were found for ΣHCHs, ΣDienes, ΣChlordanes, and ΣDDTs (Table 3). Significant differences between tissues (eggs and blood) were observed for ΣHCHs and ΣDienes. Pearson correlations are presented in Table 4. Significant correlations were observed between ΣDDTs and both the weight of the whole egg (g) and the total weight content (g). The results also suggest that the shell (g) is positively correlated with the levels of ΣHCHs, ΣDienes, ΣChlordanes, ΣEndosulfans, and Methoxychlor measured in eggs.
The observed Pearson correlations between the number of offspring and OCPs measured in the blood (Table 5) suggest that some of the detected contaminants, including ΣDienes, ΣEndosulfans, and Methoxychlor, may have significant negative effects on the turtles’ reproductive success. The levels of ΣHCHs found in eggs seem to have significant negative effects on hatching success. No significant correlations were observed for the remaining OCPs measured in eggs.
An MDS was used to produce two-dimensional ordination plots for two years (2014 and 2015). The results for the two consecutive years indicated a clear separation between the three major blocks (eggs, blood, and morphometrics) (Figure 2a,b). Both MDS analyses suggest a clear separation between the three major groups, including OCPs in eggs, OCPs in blood, and morphometric parameters, particularly in the 2014 data (Figure 4a,b), thus reinforcing the correlations presented in Table 4. In both years, the eggshell weight was positively correlated with the OCPs measured in the eggs.

4. Discussion

The present study focused on the effects of environmental pollution, and in particular on OCP contamination, in order to assess the potential risk that they pose to turtles’ health; our findings are significant for management strategies and conservation. Our study provides new eco-toxicological data for OCs in live hawksbill turtles nesting at Punta Xen turtle camp (Yucatan, Mexico), and constitutes one of the few studies that has tracked the hawksbill turtles of the Yucatan Peninsula, which are part of a broadly distributed group and one of the largest in the Atlantic Basin [94]. Due to inadequate conservation measures on the nesting beaches [18,33,34], and due to their unsustainable exploitation for food and tortoiseshell, this species has historically suffered population declines [38,94].
This research provides additional baseline data on contaminant concentrations in sea turtle blood and eggs, and offers evidence of possible maternal transference. The observed results show significant differences between maternal blood and egg OCPs concentrations (ΣHCHs and ΣDienes), indicating that these chemicals are transferred from nesting females to eggs and, ultimately, to hatchlings. In 2014, the ΣHCHs in blood and eggs and the ΣDDTs in blood were similar to the levels observed in [85] in leatherback turtles, Dermochelys coriacea, nesting in French Guiana. The values of ΣDDTs detected were higher in the eggs of loggerhead turtles [72] than in leatherback turtles [89] and the hawksbill turtles from this study. However, the concentrations of ΣDDTs in the blood of hawksbill turtles were higher than the concentrations in leatherback turtles [85,89]. The relationship found between OCP concentrations in eggs and blood was positive for ΣHCHs, ΣDienes, and ΣChlordane, following the results obtained in [85], which showed positive correlations between concentrations of ΣDDT and p,p’ DDE (p = 0.0009 and p = 0.0001, respectively) in the leatherback turtles’ blood and eggs. Another study [88] found that total PCBs, 4,4-DDE, total PBDEs, and total chlordane were significantly and positively correlated between blood and eggs, suggesting that lower levels of lipophilic compounds appear to more readily transfer from females to their eggs. Significant correlations between maternal blood and eggs were found for PCBs, PBDEs, HCH, trans-chlordane, and mirex [85]. Similar correlations were observed between eggs and hatchlings’ blood [94]. A relationship between hawksbill turtles and the concentrations of OCPs was previously reported [51]. However, in the present investigation, no significant relationships (p < 0.05) were found between the CCL and CCW and the concentration of OCPs measured in hawksbill turtles. [51] Another study observed a negative correlation between the size of the turtles and the concentration of OCPs in the eggs and blood of the hawksbills. The hawksbill turtles have a complex life cycle [95]; thus, these differences can be explained by the turtles’ life history and/or seasonal and age-related diet shifts (shifting from omnivore to herbivore) [96], leading to a dilution of the concentration of OCPs (and other contaminants) as the animals grow. Another possible explanation is related to age; considering that size and age are related, a possible maternal transfer could also be a factor for the elimination or partial elimination of OPCs [51].
These results are also in good agreement with the MDS for both years, with three major groups (eggs, blood, and morphometric parameters) being, in general, unrelated to each other. However, the MDS results also indicated that the eggshell weight is positively correlated with the OCPs measured in eggs. The variation in the OCP profiles observed in the present study indicates that animals are being exposed to different types and concentrations of OCPs. Nevertheless, care is needed when comparing values with other studies, because concentrations of OCPs in sea turtles are driven by complex interactions between biological (e.g., age class, sex, body condition, season (nesting or breading)), anthropogenic (e.g., sources of contamination and other pressures) and environmental (e.g., temperature, salinity, precipitation) factors [51,67,97]. Another recurring issue arises from the comparison of different OCPs using distinct laboratory methods and concentration units [98], resulting in biased interpretations.
The MDS results also support this important aspect of our research. Significant correlations between maternal blood, eggs, and hatching success and OCP concentrations indicate that these chemicals are being transferred from nesting females to their eggs and have negative effects on hatchlings [94]. Due to the lipophilic properties of OCPs, these chemicals are likely to be transferred from nesting females as lipids, which are mobilized for yolk production [94,99]. In recent years, several studies have reported the potential effects that OCPs may have on the reproduction and health of wild animals, compromising the future of some of these species [68,69]. Moreover, [85] and [89] found that both PCBs and PBDEs are maternally transferred to eggs and hatchlings in leatherback turtles, as we found in this study. The authors of [70] provided the first evidence that POPs can affect health parameters and may have sub-lethal effects in the loggerhead sea turtle; there is also evidence that certain levels of POPs can have negative effects on the reproductive success of green turtles [94]. A strong negative correlation between the sum of PBDE concentrations and the hatching success rate was reported by [67]. A detrimental effect on the turtles’ hatching success rate can result in demographic structure shifts, with a severe impact on population persistence and survival.
The general health status of the turtles in this study, as measured by urea, serum, creatinine, glucose, uric acid, and cholesterol, and triglyceride, was rated within normal ranges and was similar to other species’ normal values in other latitudes, which could indicate that the turtles have good energy levels and body conditions suitable for nest-building activity, with all of these turtles able to successfully come ashore to nest [9,66,75,76,77,78,79,80]. However, the obtained results also indicate that OCPs affect the health of organisms, the nesting and reproductive performance of hawksbill turtles, their fertility, and the development of the population of eggs and reproductive performance, specifically in terms of maternal transference and embryonic development. In the present investigation, significant negative correlations were found between ΣDienes measured in the blood samples and the number of offspring. Furthermore, the levels of ΣEndosulfans and Methoxychlor measured in the blood and the levels of ΣHCHs found in eggs seem to have significant negative effects on the hatching success. Moreover, the eggshell weight was found to be positively correlated with the majority of OCPs (except for ΣDDTs and ΣHeptachlors) measured in eggs. These results clearly indicate that some of the OCPs detected in mothers’ blood and eggs have negative effects on the reproductive success of hawksbill turtles, as has been found in other studies [67,72]. Moreover, they indicate a significant increase in consecutive years and did not differentiate between tissues, which also suggests that the transfer of OCPs to hatchlings may occur beyond the compound-specific contaminant, reducing survival through several mechanisms including acute mortality. Considering the results of other studies, these elevated levels of contaminants likely contribute to the deaths of young organisms and mortality in the initial stages of development [100,101,102]. The transference of accumulated contaminants to the eggs during the life of an adult female turtle may result in lethal levels being transferred to the developing embryo, especially in the first clutch of eggs, which can impair the reproductive rate by many mechanisms, most significant of which is the disruption of the endocrine system. This disruption by contaminants can result in abnormal development, altered sex ratios, and a reduction in reproductive rates, as observed in other animals [103,104]. In the early life stages of oviparous vertebrates, such as turtles, the developing embryo is likely most sensitive and susceptible to anthropogenic contaminants, compared with adults [105,106]. According to [107], exposure to POPs during the early life stages of several oviparous organisms is similar to the exposure of the adults (who deposit the eggs). This means that, if animals are more susceptible to these contaminants during the earlier stages of life, the toxic effects are more likely to occur in developing embryos than in the adult organisms.
These results represent important contributions to the development of conservation strategies for sea turtles on the Mexican coast, considering the regional context in addition to the global situation [108]. Findings such as these are important because they allow for the assessment of risks and threats to sea turtles, and assist important projects such as the development of conservation strategies and structures to define conservation priorities and develop ecological information, as well as assisting in decision-making processes, as in the case of legal and social causes to balance technical, governance, and social factors [109]. Conservation strategies need to focus on regional assessments and on differentiating each species by addressing stream-specific reasons for their decline. Thus, long-term, accurate, and comparable monitoring data are needed. This implies the standardization of monitoring protocols, which is essential for efforts directed toward understanding which (natural and anthropogenic) factors influence the life stages of hawksbill turtles in the marine environment. This information strengthens the capacity of sea turtle management strategies in the medium and long term, and will inform decision making and allow for the development of a more integrative approach to hawksbill conservation (protection and management) and long-term conservation measures.
Even with the conservation programs for sea turtles in this region (the WWF, Marine Turtle Action Plan, Latin America and the Caribbean: 2015–2020) [110], it is recognized that natural science research alone is insufficient to find solutions to complex conservation problems that have social dimensions [111]. Hawksbills are threatened by the direct legal and illegal capture of meat and eggs, and the international trade of their shells, which are used for decorative purposes around the world [112]. Due to coastal development, sand erosion, artificial lights, and pollution, hawksbill nesting and foraging habitats have been lost or modified in Latin America and the Caribbean. Climate change is likely to further alter conditions at existing nesting and foraging sites [110]. It is still necessary to strengthen these programs and raise awareness in the communities around the main beaches to involve them in the work of protection and conservation. Due to their highly migratory and geographically widespread nature, sea turtles require transboundary conservation strategies that often include multiple institutions and government bodies, spanning multiple geopolitical boundaries, agreements, and instruments at local, national, and international scales [59,60,61]. Conservation strategies must include ongoing research, the management of local turtle populations, and the education of local people, including encouraging fishermen to release turtles that are accidentally caught. Data, such as those related to concentrations of contaminants, are also relevant; they are necessary for investigations of the geographic trends related to these concentrations and the potential health effects caused by these contaminants. Such investigations would include the relationships of these compounds with hatching success, embryo abnormality rates, hatch survival rates, sex ratios, and hatch growth rates in sea turtle development. However, it is important to keep in mind that conservation priorities vary widely depending on the goals and values of different governing bodies, NGOs, researchers, funding bodies, and other stakeholders [17,18,19]. Considering marine turtles’ biological features and human-induced threats, conservation actions also need to be sustained over decades, conducted over vast areas, be relevant to diverse marine and terrestrial environments, and involve international cooperation and coordination. Activities and studies must include research, strengthening environmental education, local management strategies, interaction with local fishermen, encouraging the safe release of turtles accidentally caught in fishing nets, discussion programs for the conservation of wildlife threatened by extinction, and voluntary training courses [105]. Programs must also emphasize information exchange between science, policy, and public participation in the design and implementation of conservation actions.

5. Conclusions

This study provides a basis for the monitoring of nesting sea turtles’ general health status and blood and eggs for contaminant concentrations, and the toxic effects of these contaminants in hawksbill turtles. Our results also suggest that OCPs can be maternally transferred in hawksbill turtles, and provide an important baseline of OCP concentrations for nesting and stranded hawksbills in south-eastern Mexico. However, further research is needed to confirm this hypothesis. Furthermore, dedicated studies must be undertaken to examine the source of these contaminants and, more importantly, to determine the population-level effects of these compounds on this endangered species. Future research is required to investigate geographical trends in contaminant concentration levels at broader temporal and spatial scales; this work must prioritize regional assessments, as well as the potential health effects of these contaminants on sea turtles’ development. The present work contributes to ongoing effort to understand and mitigate these threats, facilitating the development of appropriate management and conservation tools for wild hawksbill turtles.

Author Contributions

P.I.S.: literature review, analysis of the existing relevant studies, data collection. L.R.V.: review and editing, literature and statistical analysis. F.M. and J.R.-v.O.: review and editing, supervision, synthesis of results. All authors have read and agreed to the published version of the manuscript.

Funding

This research was supported by Coordination for the Improvement of Higher Education Personnel (CAPES Brazil), (1201/2013-01) and by the Foundation for Science and Technology (FCT) and Ministério da Ciência, Tecnologia e do Ensino Superior (MCTES) for the financial support to CESAM (UIDP/50017/2020+UIDB/50017/2020+LA/P/0094/2020). This research was also supported by the contract 2021.02308. CEECIND through national funds provided by FCT.

Institutional Review Board Statement

Not applicable.

Informed Consent Statement

Not applicable.

Data Availability Statement

Not applicable.

Acknowledgments

The license (SGPA/DGVS/03974/14) to collect the blood and egg samples of 60 turtles was provided by the Secretaria de Medio Ambiente y Recursos Naturales (SEMARNAT). The authors want to thank the turtle camp Grupo Ecologista Quelonios A.C. officials who aided in the fieldwork at Punta Xen.

Conflicts of Interest

The authors declare no conflict of interest.

References

  1. Van Houtan, K.S.; Hargrove, S.K.; Balazs, G.H. Modeling Sea Turtle Maturity Age from Partial Life History Records. Pac. Sci. 2014, 68, 465–477. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  2. Secretariat, C.I.T.E.S. Status, scope and trends of the legal and illegal international trade in marine turtles, its conservation impacts, management options and mitigation priorities. In Proceedings of the 18th Meeting of the CITES Conference of the Parties, Geneva, Switzerland, 17–28 August 2019. [Google Scholar]
  3. Thomson, S.A. Turtles of the World: Annotated Checklist and Atlas of Taxonomy, Synonymy, Distribution, and Conservation Status. Phyllomedusa J. Herpetol. 2021, 20, 225–228. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  4. Moss, B. Marine Reptiles, Birds and Mammals and Nutrient Transfers among the Seas and the Land: An Appraisal of Current Knowledge. J. Exp. Mar. Biol. Ecol. 2017, 492, 63–80. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  5. Lovich, J.E.; Ennen, J.R.; Agha, M.; Whitfield Gibbons, J. Where Have All the Turtles Gone, and Why Does It Matter? BioScience 2018, 68, 771–781. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  6. De Pádua Almeida, A.; Santos, A.J.B.; Thomé, J.C.A.; Belini, C.; Baptistotte, C.; Marcovaldi, M.Â.; dos Santos, A.S.; Lopez, M. Avaliação Do Estado de Conservação Da Tartaruga Marinha Chelonia mydas (Linnaeus, 1758) No Brasil. Biodivers. Bras. 2011, 1, 12–19. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  7. Casale, P.; Broderick, A.C.; Camiñas, J.A.; Cardona, L.; Carreras, C.; Demetropoulos, A.; Fuller, W.J.; Godley, B.J.; Hochscheid, S.; Kaska, Y.; et al. Mediterranean Sea Turtles: Current Knowledge and Priorities for Conservation and Research. Endanger. Species Res. 2018. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  8. Eckert, K.; Eckert, A. An Atlas of Sea Turtle Nesting Habitat for the Wider Caribbean Region Revised Edition; WIDECAST Technical Report; WIDECAST: Ballwin, MO, USA, 2019. [Google Scholar]
  9. Levasseur, K.E.; Stapleton, S.P.; Fuller, M.C.; Quattro, J.M. Exceptionally High Natal Homing Precision in Hawksbill Sea Turtles to Insular Rookeries of the Caribbean. Mar. Ecol. Prog. Ser. 2019, 620, 155–171. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  10. Fourqurean, J.W.; Manuel, S.; Coates, K.A.; Kenworthy, W.J.; Smith, S.R. Effects of Excluding Sea Turtle Herbivores from a Seagrass Bed: Overgrazing May Have Led to Loss of Seagrass Meadows in Bermuda. Mar. Ecol. Prog. Ser. 2010, 419, 223–232. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  11. Wabnitz, C.C.C.; Balazs, G.; Beavers, S.; Bjorndal, K.A.; Bolten, A.B.; Christensen, V.; Hargrove, S.; Pauly, D. Ecosystem Structure and Processes at Kaloko Honokōhau, Focusing on the Role of Herbivores, Including the Green Sea Turtle Chelonia mydas, in Reef Resilience. Mar. Ecol. Prog. Ser. 2010, 420, 27–44. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  12. León, Y.M.; Bjorndal, K.A. Selective Feeding in the Hawksbill Turtle, an Important Predator in Coral Reef Ecosystems. Mar. Ecol. Prog. Ser. 2002, 245, 249–258. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  13. Dodd, C.K.; Dreslik, M.J. Habitat Disturbances Differentially Affect Individual Growth Rates in a Long-Lived Turtle. J. Zool. 2008, 275, 18–25. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  14. Chaloupka, M.Y.; Musick, J.A. Age, Growth, and Population Dynamics. In The Biology of Sea Turtles, Volume I; CRC Press: London, UK, 2017. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  15. Kendall, W.L.; Stapleton, S.; White, G.C.; Richardson, J.I.; Pearson, K.N.; Mason, P. A Multistate Open Robust Design: Population Dynamics, Reproductive Effort, and Phenology of Sea Turtles from Tagging Data. Ecol. Monogr. 2019, 89, e01329. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  16. Strongin, K.; Polidoro, B.; Linardich, C.; Ralph, G.; Saul, S.; Carpenter, K. Translating Globally Threatened Marine Species Information into Regional Guidance for the Gulf of Mexico. Glob. Ecol. Conserv. 2020, 23, e01010. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  17. Hamann, M.; Godfrey, M.H.; Seminoff, J.A.; Arthur, K.; Barata, P.C.R.; Bjorndal, K.A.; Bolten, A.B.; Broderick, A.C.; Campbell, L.M.; Carreras, C.; et al. Global Research Priorities for Sea Turtles: Informing Management and Conservation in the 21st Century. Endanger. Species Res. 2010, 11, 245–269. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  18. Wallace, B.P.; DiMatteo, A.D.; Bolten, A.B.; Chaloupka, M.Y.; Hutchinson, B.J.; Abreu-Grobois, F.A.; Mortimer, J.A.; Seminoff, J.A.; Amorocho, D.; Bjorndal, K.A.; et al. Global Conservation Priorities for Marine Turtles. PLoS ONE 2011, 6, e24510. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  19. Rees, A.F.; Alfaro-Shigueto, J.; Barata, P.C.R.; Bjorndal, K.A.; Bolten, A.B.; Bourjea, J.; Broderick, A.C.; Campbell, L.M.; Cardona, L.; Carreras, C.; et al. Are We Working towards Global Research Priorities for Management and Conservation of Sea Turtles? Endanger. Species Res. 2016, 31, 337–382. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  20. IUCN. The IUCN Red List of Threatened Species. Version 2019-2. 2019. Available online: https://www.iucnredlist.org (accessed on 10 November 2022).
  21. Kouerey Oliwina, C.K.; Honarvar, S.; Girard, A.; Casale, P. (Eds.) Sea Turtles in the West Africa/East Atlantic Region; MTSG Annual Regional Report 2020; IUCN-SSC Marine Turtle Specialist Group: Ross, CA, USA, 2020. [Google Scholar]
  22. Schofield, G.; Hobson, V.J.; Fossette, S.; Lilley, M.K.S.; Katselidis, K.A.; Hays, G.C. Biodiversity Research: Fidelity to Foraging Sites, Consistency of Migration Routes and Habitat Modulation of Home Range by Sea Turtles. Divers. Distrib. 2010, 16, 840–853. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  23. Hamann, M.; Schäuble, C.S.; Simon, T.; Evans, S. Demographic and Health Parameters of Green Sea Turtles Chelonia mydas Foraging in the Gulf of Carpentaria, Australia. Endanger. Species Res. 2006, 2, 81–88. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  24. Wallace, B.P.; DiMatteo, A.D.; Hurley, B.J.; Finkbeiner, E.M.; Bolten, A.B.; Chaloupka, M.Y.; Hutchinson, B.J.; Alberto Abreu-Grobois, F.; Amorocho, D.; Bjorndal, K.A.; et al. Regional Management Units for Marine Turtles: A Novel Framework for Prioritizing Conservation and Research across Multiple Scales. PLoS ONE 2010, 5, e15465. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  25. Mazaris, A.D.; Schofield, G.; Gkazinou, C.; Almpanidou, V.; Hays, G.C. Global Sea Turtle Conservation Successes. Sci. Adv. 2017, 3, e1600730. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  26. Esteban, N.; Mortimer, J.A.; Hays, G.C. How Numbers of Nesting Sea Turtles Can Be Overestimated by Nearly a Factor of Two. Proc. R. Soc. B Biol. Sci. 2017, 284. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
  27. Hart, K.M.; Iverson, A.R.; Fujisaki, I.; Lamont, M.M.; Bucklin, D.; Shaver, D.J. Marine Threats Overlap Key Foraging Habitat for Two Imperiled Sea Turtle Species in the Gulf of Mexico. Front. Mar. Sci. 2018, 5, 336. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  28. Kocmoud, A.R.; Wang, H.H.; Grant, W.E.; Gallaway, B.J. Population Dynamics of the Endangered Kemp’s Ridley Sea Turtle Following the 2010 Oil Spill in the Gulf of Mexico: Simulation of Potential Cause-Effect Relationships. Ecol. Model. 2019, 392, 159–178. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  29. Leung, M.-R.; Marchand, M.; Stykel, S.; Huynh, M.; Flores, J.D. Effect of Localized Oil Spills on Atlantic Loggerhead Population Dynamics. Open J. Ecol. 2012, 2. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  30. Iverson, A.R.; Benscoter, A.M.; Fujisaki, I.; Lamont, M.M.; Hart, K.M. Migration Corridors and Threats in the Gulf of Mexico and Florida Straits for Loggerhead Sea Turtles. Front. Mar. Sci. 2020, 7, 208. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  31. Caillouet, C.W.; Raborn, S.W.; Shaver, D.J.; Putman, N.F.; Gallaway, B.J.; Mansfield, K.L. Did Declining Carrying Capacity for the Kemp’s Ridley Sea Turtle Population within the Gulf of Mexico Contribute to the Nesting Setback in 2010–2017? Chelonian Conserv. Biol. 2018, 17, 123–133. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  32. Ceriani, S.A.; Casale, P.; Brost, M.; Leone, E.H.; Witherington, B.E. Conservation Implications of Sea Turtle Nesting Trends: Elusive Recovery of a Globally Important Loggerhead Population. Ecosphere 2019, 10, e02936. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  33. Uribe-Martínez, A.; Liceaga-Correa, M.d.l.A.; Cuevas, E. Critical In-Water Habitats for Post-Nesting Sea Turtles from the Southern Gulf of Mexico. J. Mar. Sci. Eng. 2021, 9, 793. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  34. Burgess, M.G.; McDermott, G.R.; Owashi, B.; Peavey Reeves, L.E.; Clavelle, T.; Ovando, D.; Wallace, B.P.; Lewison, R.L.; Gaines, S.D.; Costello, C. Protecting Marine Mammals, Turtles, and Birds by Rebuilding Global Fisheries. Science 2018, 359, 1255–1258. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  35. Scales, K.L.; Hazen, E.L.; Jacox, M.G.; Castruccio, F.; Maxwell, S.M.; Lewison, R.L.; Bograd, S.J. Fisheries Bycatch Risk to Marine Megafauna Is Intensified in Lagrangian Coherent Structures. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA 2018, 115, 7362–7367. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  36. Wallace, B.P.; Stacy, B.A.; Cuevas, E.; Holyoake, C.; Lara, P.H.; Marcondes, A.C.J.; Miller, J.D.; Nijkamp, H.; Pilcher, N.J.; Robinson, I.; et al. Oil Spills and Sea Turtles: Documented Effects and Considerations for Response and Assessment Efforts. Endanger. Species Res. 2020, 41, 17–37. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  37. Bolten, A.B.; Crowder, L.B.; Dodd, M.G.; Macpherson, S.L.; Musick, J.A.; Schroeder, B.A.; Witherington, B.E.; Long, K.J.; Snover, M.L. Quantifying Multiple Threats to Endangered Species: An Example from Loggerhead Sea Turtles. Front. Ecol. Environ. 2011, 9, 295–301. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  38. Cuevas, E.; de los ángeles Liceaga-Correa, M.; Uribe-Martínez, A. Ecological Vulnerability of Two Sea Turtle Species in the Gulf of Mexico: An Integrated Spatial Approach. Endanger. Species Res. 2019, 40, 337–356. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  39. Soto, L.A.; Botello, A.V.; Licea-Durán, S.; Lizárraga-Partida, M.L.; Yáñez-Arancibia, A. The Environmental Legacy of the Ixtoc-I Oil Spill in Campeche Sound, Southwestern Gulf of Mexico. Front. Mar. Sci. 2014, 57. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  40. (NDC) Navigation Data Center. US Waterway Data–Principal Ports of the United States. 2017. Available online: http://www.navigationdatacenter.us/data/datappor.htm (accessed on 25 December 2022).
  41. [NMFS] National Marine Fisheries Service. Fisheries of the United States–2015; Lowther, A., Liddel, M., Eds.; US Department of Commerce, National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration: Silver Spring, MD, USA, 2016. [Google Scholar]
  42. ECLAC (Economic Commission for Latin America and the Caribbean). CEPALSTAT. 2020. Available online: https://cepalstat-prod.cepal.org/cepalstat/tabulador/ConsultaIntegrada.asp?idIndicador=3961&idioma=e (accessed on 23 November 2020).
  43. [INEGI] Instituto Nacional de Estadística y Geografía. Anuario Estadístico y Geográfico Por Entidad Federativa; Instituto Nacional de Estadística y Geografía: Mexico City, Mexico, 2015. [Google Scholar]
  44. Ashford, M.; Watling, J.I.; Hart, K. One Shell of a Problem: Cumulative Threat Analysis of Male Sea Turtles Indicates High Anthropogenic Threat for Migratory Individuals and Gulf of Mexico Residents. Remote Sens. 2022, 14, 3887. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  45. Ylitalo, G.M.; Collier, T.K.; Anulacion, B.F.; Juaire, K.; Boyer, R.H.; da Silva, D.A.M.; Keene, J.L.; Stacy, B.A. Determining Oil and Dispersant Exposure in Sea Turtles from the Northern Gulf of Mexico Resulting from the Deepwater Horizon Oil Spill. Endanger. Species Res. 2017, 33, 9–24. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  46. Wallace, B.P.; Stacy, B.A.; Rissing, M.; Cacela, D.; Garrison, L.P.; Graettinger, G.D.; Holmes, J.V.; McDonald, T.; McLamb, D.; Schroeder, B. Estimating Sea Turtle Exposures to Deepwater Horizon Oil. Endanger. Species Res. 2017, 33. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  47. Wilcox, C.; Puckridge, M.; Schuyler, Q.A.; Townsend, K.; Hardesty, B.D. A Quantitative Analysis Linking Sea Turtle Mortality and Plastic Debris Ingestion. Sci. Rep. 2018, 8, 12536. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  48. Hart, K.M.; Iverson, A.R.; Fujisaki, I.; Lamont, M.M.; Bucklin, D.; Shaver, D.J. Sympatry or Syntopy? Investigating Drivers of Distribution and Co-Occurrence for Two Imperiled Sea Turtle Species in Gulf of Mexico Neritic Waters. Ecol. Evol. 2018, 8, 12656–12669. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  49. Lamont, M.M.; Iverson, A.R. Shared Habitat Use by Juveniles of Three Sea Turtle Species. Mar. Ecol. Prog. Ser. 2018, 606. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  50. Gallaway, B.J.; Gazey, W.J.; Wibbels, T.; Bevan, E.; Shaver, D.J.; George, J. Evaluation of the Status of the Kemp’s Ridley Sea Turtle after the 2010 Deepwater Horizon Oil Spill. Gulf Mex. Sci. 2016, 33. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  51. García-Besné, G.; Valdespino, C.; Rendón-von Osten, J. Comparison of Organochlorine Pesticides and PCB Residues among Hawksbill (Eretmochelys imbricata) and Green (Chelonia mydas) Turtles in the Yucatan Peninsula and Their Maternal Transfer. Mar. Pollut. Bull. 2015, 91, 139–148. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  52. Salvarani, P.I.; Vieira, L.R.; Ku-Peralta, W.; Morgado, F.; Osten, J.R.-V. Oxidative Stress Biomarkers and Organochlorine Pesticides in Nesting Female Hawksbill Turtles Eretmochelys imbricata from Mexican Coast (Punta Xen, Mexico). Environ. Sci. Pollut. Res. 2018, 25, 23809–23816. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  53. Labastida-Estrada, E.; Machkour-M’Rabet, S.; Díaz-Jaimes, P.; Cedeño-Vázquez, J.R.; Hénaut, Y. Genetic Structure, Origin, and Connectivity between Nesting and Foraging Areas of Hawksbill Turtles of the Yucatan Peninsula: A Study for Conservation and Management. Aquat. Conserv. Mar. Freshw. Ecosyst. 2019, 29, 211–222. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  54. Tremblay, N.; Arana, A.O.; Jáuregui, M.G.; Rendón-von Osten, J. Relationship between Organochlorine Pesticides and Stress Indicators in Hawksbill Sea Turtle (Eretmochelys Imbricata) Nesting at Punta Xen (Campeche), Southern Gulf of Mexico. Ecotoxicology 2016, 26, 173–183. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  55. Biddiscombe, S.J.; Smith, E.A.; Hawkes, L.A. A Global Analysis of Anthropogenic Development of Marine Turtle Nesting Beaches. Remote Sens. 2020, 12, 1492. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  56. Bovery, C.M.; Wyneken, J. Seasonal Variation in Sea Turtle Density and Abundance in the Southeast Florida Current and Surrounding Waters. PLoS ONE 2015, 10. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  57. Wildermann, N.E.; Sasso, C.R.; Stokes, L.W.; Snodgrass, D.; Fuentes, M.M.P.B. Habitat Use and Behavior of Multiple Species of Marine Turtles at a Foraging Area in the Northeastern Gulf of Mexico. Front. Mar. Sci. 2019, 6, 155. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  58. Keller, J.M.; Kucklick, J.R.; Harms, C.A.; McClellan-Green, P.D. Organochlorine Contaminants in Sea Turtles: Correlations between Whole Blood and Fat. Environ. Toxicol. Chem. 2004, 23, 726–738. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  59. Shillinger, G.L.; Palacios, D.M.; Bailey, H.; Bograd, S.J.; Swithenbank, A.M.; Gaspar, P.; Wallace, B.P.; Spotila, J.R.; Paladino, F.V.; Piedra, R.; et al. Persistent Leatherback Turtle Migrations Present Opportunities for Conservation. PLoS Biol. 2008, 6, e171. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  60. Witt, M.; McGowan, A.; Blumenthal, J.; Broderick, A.; Gore, S.; Wheatley, D.; White, J.; Godley, B. Inferring Vertical and Horizontal Movements of Juvenile Marine Turtles from Time-Depth Recorders. Aquat. Biol. 2010, 8, 169–177. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  61. Witt, M.J.; Bonguno, E.A.; Broderick, A.C.; Coyne, M.S.; Formia, A.; Gibudi, A.; Mounguengui, G.A.M.; Moussounda, C.; Nsafou, M.; Nougessono, S.; et al. Tracking Leatherback Turtles from the World’s Largest Rookery: Assessing Threats across the South Atlantic. Proc. R. Soc. B Biol. Sci. 2011, 278, 2338–2347. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  62. Nivière, M.; Chambault, P.; Pérez, T.; Etienne, D.; Bonola, M.; Martin, J.; Barnérias, C.; Védie, F.; Mailles, J.; Dumont-Dayot, É.; et al. Identification of Marine Key Areas across the Caribbean to Ensure the Conservation of the Critically Endangered Hawksbill Turtle. Biol. Conserv. 2018, 223, 170–180. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  63. Guzmán-Hernández, V.; García-Alvarado, P.A. Informe Técnico 2009 Del Programa de Conservación de Tortugas Marinas En Laguna de Términos, Campeche, México. Contiene Inf. 2010, 1. [Google Scholar]
  64. Shillinger, G.L.; Swithenbank, A.M.; Bograd, S.J.; Bailey, H.; Castelton, M.R.; Wallace, B.P.; Spotila, J.R.; Paladino, F.V.; Piedra, R.; Block, B.A. Identification of High-Use Internesting Habitats for Eastern Pacific Leatherback Turtles: Role of the Environment and Implications for Conservation. Endanger. Species Res. 2010, 10. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  65. Lazar, B.; Maslov, L.; Romanić, S.H.; Gračan, R.; Krauthacker, B.; Holcer, D.; Tvrtković, N. Accumulation of Organochlorine Contaminants in Loggerhead Sea Turtles, Caretta caretta, from the Eastern Adriatic Sea. Chemosphere 2011, 82, 121–129. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  66. Camacho, M.; Boada, L.D.; Orós, J.; López, P.; Zumbado, M.; Almeida-González, M.; Luzardo, O.P. Comparative Study of Organohalogen Contamination between Two Populations of Eastern Atlantic Loggerhead Sea Turtles (Caretta caretta). Bull. Environ. Contam. Toxicol. 2013, 91, 678–683. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  67. Alava, J.J.; Keller, J.M.; Kucklick, J.R.; Wyneken, J.; Crowder, L.; Scott, G.I. Loggerhead Sea Turtle (Caretta caretta) Egg Yolk Concentrations of Persistent Organic Pollutants and Lipid Increase during the Last Stage of Embryonic Development. Sci. Total Environ. 2006, 367, 170–181. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  68. Barraza, A.D.; Komoroske, L.M.; Allen, C.D.; Eguchi, T.; Gossett, R.; Holland, E.; Lawson, D.D.; LeRoux, R.A.; Lorenzi, V.; Seminoff, J.A.; et al. Persistent Organic Pollutants in Green Sea Turtles (Chelonia mydas) Inhabiting Two Urbanized Southern California Habitats. Mar. Pollut. Bull. 2020, 153, 110979. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  69. Keller, J.M.; Kucklick, J.R.; McClellan-Green, P.D. Organochlorine Contaminants in Loggerhead Sea Turtle Blood: Extraction Techniques and Distribution among Plasma and Red Blood Cells. Arch. Environ. Contam. Toxicol. 2004, 46, 254–264. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  70. Ragland, J.M.; Arendt, M.D.; Kucklick, J.R.; Keller, J.M. Persistent Organic Pollutants in Blood Plasma of Satellite-tracked Adult Male Loggerhead Sea Turtles (Caretta Caretta). Environ. Toxicol. Chem. 2011, 30, 1549–1556. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  71. Muñoz, C.C.; Hendriks, A.J.; Ragas, A.M.J.; Vermeiren, P. Internal and Maternal Distribution of Persistent Organic Pollutants in Sea Turtle Tissues: A Meta-Analysis. Environ. Sci. Technol. 2021, 55, 10012–10024. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  72. Richardson, K.L.; Schlenk, D. Accumulation Patterns, Biotransformation Enzymes, and in Vitro Biotransformation of Polychlorinated Biphenyls in Several Species of Sea Turtle. Comp. Biochem. Physiol. Part A Mol. Integr. Physiol. 2010, 157, S9. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  73. Monagas, P.; Orós, J.; Araña, J.; González-Díaz, O.M. Organochlorine Pesticide Levels in Loggerhead Turtles (Caretta caretta) Stranded in the Canary Islands, Spain. Mar. Pollut. Bull. 2008, 56, 1949–1952. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  74. Osborne, A.G.; Jacobson, E.R.; Bresette, M.J.; Singewald, D.A.; Scarpino, R.A.; Bolten, A.B. Reference Intervals and Relationships between Health Status, Carapace Length, Body Mass, and Water Temperature and Concentrations of Plasma Total Protein and Protein Electrophoretogram Fractions in Atlantic Loggerhead Sea Turtles and Green Turtles. J. Am. Vet. Med. Assoc. 2010, 237, 561–567. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  75. Anderson, E.T.; Minter, L.J.; Clarke, E.O.; Mroch, R.M.; Beasley, J.F.; Harms, C.A. The Effects of Feeding on Hematological and Plasma Biochemical Profiles in Green (Chelonia mydas) and Kemp’s Ridley (Lepidochelys kempii) Sea Turtles. Vet. Med. Int. 2011, 2011, 890829. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  76. Espinoza-Romo, B.A.; Sainz-Hernández, J.C.; Ley-Quiñónez, C.P.; Hart, C.E.; Leal-Moreno, R.; Aguirre, A.A.; Zavala-Norzagaray, A.A. Blood Biochemistry of Olive Ridley (Lepidochelys olivacea) Sea Turtles Foraging in Northern Sinaloa, Mexico. PLoS ONE 2018, 13, e0199825. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  77. Stacy, N.I.; Bjorndal, K.A.; Perrault, J.R.; Martins, H.R.; Bolten, A.B. Blood Analytes of Oceanic-Juvenile Loggerhead Sea Turtles (Caretta caretta) from Azorean Waters: Reference Intervals, Size-Relevant Correlations and Comparisons to Neritic Loggerheads from Western Atlantic Coastal Waters. Conserv. Physiol. 2018, 6, coy006. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  78. Fleming, K.A.; Perrault, J.R.; Stacy, N.I.; Coppenrath, C.M.; Gainsbury, A.M. Heat, Health and Hatchlings: Associations of in Situ Nest Temperatures with Morphological and Physiological Characteristics of Loggerhead Sea Turtle Hatchlings from Florida. Conserv. Physiol. 2020, 8, coaa046. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  79. Page-Karjian, A.; Chabot, R.; Stacy, N.I.; Morgan, A.S.; Valverde, R.A.; Stewart, S.; Coppenrath, C.M.; Manire, C.A.; Herbst, L.H.; Gregory, C.R.; et al. Comprehensive Health Assessment of Green Turtles Chelonia mydas Nesting in Southeastern Florida, USA. Endanger. Species Res. 2020, 42, 21–35. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  80. Keller, J.M.; Ngai, L.; McNeill, J.B.; Wood, L.D.; Stewart, K.R.; O’Connell, S.G.; Kucklick, J.R. Perfluoroalkyl Contaminants in Plasma of Five Sea Turtle Species: Comparisons in Concentration and Potential Health Risks. Environ. Toxicol. Chem. 2012, 31, 1223–1230. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  81. Moorcroft, P.R.; Lewis, M.A. Mechanistic Home Range Analysis; Princeton University Press: Princeton, NJ, USA, 2006. [Google Scholar]
  82. Broderick, A.C.; Coyne, M.S.; Fuller, W.J.; Glen, F.; Godley, B.J. Fidelity and Over-Wintering of Sea Turtles. Proc. R. Soc. B Biol. Sci. 2007, 274, 1533–1539. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  83. Putman, N. Marine Migrations. Curr. Biol. 2018, 28, R972–R976. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  84. Guirlet, E.; Das, K.; Thomé, J.P.; Girondot, M. Maternal Transfer of Chlorinated Contaminants in the Leatherback Turtles, Dermochelys coriacea, Nesting in French Guiana. Chemosphere 2010, 79, 720–726. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  85. Storelli, M.M.; Zizzo, N. Occurrence of Organochlorine Contaminants (PCBs, PCDDs and PCDFs) and Pathologic Findings in Loggerhead Sea Turtles, Caretta caretta, from the Adriatic Sea (Mediterranean Sea). Sci. Total Environ. 2014, 472, 855–861. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  86. Ikonomopoulou, M.P.; Olszowy, H.; Francis, R.; Ibrahim, K.; Whittier, J. Accumulation of Trace Metals in the Embryos and Hatchlings of Chelonia mydas from Peninsular Malaysia Incubated at Different Temperatures. Sci. Total Environ. 2013, 450, 301–306. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  87. De Andrés, E.; Gómara, B.; González-Paredes, D.; Ruiz-Martín, J.; Marco, A. Persistent Organic Pollutant Levels in Eggs of Leatherback Turtles (Dermochelys coriacea) Point to a Decrease in Hatching Success. Chemosphere 2016, 146, 354–361. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  88. Stewart, K.R.; Keller, J.M.; Templeton, R.; Kucklick, J.R.; Johnson, C. Monitoring Persistent Organic Pollutants in Leatherback Turtles (Dermochelys coriacea) Confirms Maternal Transfer. Mar. Pollut. Bull. 2011, 62, 1396–1409. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  89. Escanero-F, G.; Vigilante, S.; Gómez, G.; Frazier, J.; Vázquez, R.; Galicia, E.; Durán, R.; Capurro, L. Informe Anual Del Programa de Protección y Estudio de Las Tortugas Marinas En Isla Aguada-Sabancuy, Campeche, Temporada 1990. In Memorias del IV Taller Regional sobre Programas de Conservación de Tortugas Marinas en la Península de Yucatán; Frazier, J., Ed.; Universidad Autónoma de Yucatán: Mérida, Mexico, 1993; pp. 77–90. ISBN 968-6843-23-X. Available online: https://www.academia.edu/86327550/Memorias_del_IV_Taller_Regional_sobre_Programas_de_Conservaci%C3%B3n_de_Tortugas_Marinas_en_la_Pen%C3%ADnsula_de_Yucat%C3%A1n?f_ri=250538 (accessed on 25 December 2022).
  90. Salvarani, P.I.; von Osten, J.R.; Morgado, F. Plasma Biochemistry Values in Wild Female Hawksbill Turtle (Eretmochelys imbricata) during Nesting in Mexican Coast. Brazilian J. Vet. Res. Anim. Sci. 2019, 55, e134727. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  91. Owens, D.W.; Ruiz, G.J. New Methods of Obtaining Blood and Cerebrospinal Fluid from Marine Turtles. Herpetologica 1980, 36, 17–20. [Google Scholar]
  92. Zhang, H.S.; Wang, Z.P.; Lu, B.; Zhu, C.; Wu, G.H.; Walter, V. Occurrence of Organochlorine Pollutants in the Eggs and Dropping-Amended Soil of Antarctic Large Animals and Its Ecological Significance. Sci. China Ser. D Earth Sci. 2007, 50, 1086–1096. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  93. Zar, J.H. Biological Analysis; Prentice Hall: Englewood Cliffs, NJ, USA, 1996. [Google Scholar]
  94. Muñoz, C.C.; Vermeiren, P. Profiles of Environmental Contaminants in Hawksbill Turtle Egg Yolks Reflect Local to Distant Pollution Sources among Nesting Beaches in the Yucatán Peninsula, Mexico. Mar. Environ. Res. 2018, 135, 43–54. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  95. Cuevas, E.; Abreu-Grobois, F.A.; Guzmán-Hernández, V.; Liceaga-Correa, M.A.; Van Dam, R.P. Post-Nesting Migratory Movements of Hawksbill Turtles Eretmochelys Imbricata in Waters Adjacent to the Yucatan Peninsula, Mexico. Endanger. Species Res. 2008, 10, 123–133. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  96. Clyde-Brockway, C.E.; Heidemeyer, M.; Paladino, F.V.; Flaherty, E.A. Diet and Foraging Niche Flexibility in Green and Hawksbill Turtles. Mar. Biol. 2022, 169, 108. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  97. Sánchez-Sarmiento, A.M.; Rossi, S.; Vilca, F.Z.; Thijl Vanstreels, R.E.; Monteiro, S.H.; Vale, L.A.S.; Dos Santos, R.G.; Marigo, J.; Bertozzi, C.P.; Grisi Filho, J.H.H.; et al. Organochlorine Pesticides in Green Sea Turtles (Chelonia Mydas) with and without Fibropapillomatosis Caught at Three Feeding Areas off Brazil. J. Mar. Biol. Assoc. 2017, 97, 215–223. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  98. Keller, J.M. 11 Exposure to and Effects of Persistent Organic Pollutants. Biol. Sea Turt. 2013, 3, 285. [Google Scholar]
  99. Van de Merwe, J.P.; Hodge, M.; Whittier, J.M.; Ibrahim, K.; Lee, S.Y. Persistent Organic Pollutants in the Green Sea Turtle Chelonia mydas: Nesting Population Variation, Maternal Transfer, and Effects on Development. Mar. Ecol. Prog. Ser. 2010, 403, 269–278. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  100. Ehsanpour, M.; Ahmadi, M.R.; Bahri, A.H.; Afkhami, M.; Reich, K.J. Plasma Biochemistry Values in Wild Female Hawksbill Turtles (Eretmochelys imbricata), during Nesting and Foraging Seasons in Qeshm Island, Persian Gulf. Comp. Clin. Path. 2015, 24, 561–566. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  101. Guillette, L.J., Jr.; Crain, D.A.; Rooney, A.A.; Pickford, D.B. Organization versus Activation: The Role of Endocrine-Disrupting Contaminants (EDCs) during Embryonic Development in Wildlife. Environ. Health Perspect. 1995, 103 (Suppl. 7), 157–164. [Google Scholar]
  102. Longnecker, M.P.; Klebanoff, M.A.; Zhou, H.; Brock, J.W. Association between Maternal Serum Concentration of the DDT Metabolite DDE and Preterm and Small-for-Gestational-Age Babies at Birth. Lancet 2001, 358, 110–114. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  103. Schwacke, L.H.; Voit, E.O.; Hansen, L.J.; Wells, R.S.; Mitchum, G.B.; Hohn, A.A.; Fair, P.A. Probabilistic Risk Assessment of Reproductive Effects of Polychlorinated Biphenyls on Bottlenose Dolphins (Tursiops Truncatus) from the Southeast United States Coast. Environ. Toxicol. Chem. 2002, 21, 2752–2764. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  104. Guillette, L.J., Jr.; Gross, T.S.; Masson, G.R.; Matter, J.M.; Percival, H.F.; Woodward, A.R. Developmental Abnormalities of the Gonad and Abnormal Sex Hormone Concentrations in Juvenile Alligators from Contaminated and Control Lakes in Florida. Environ. Health Perspect. 1994, 102, 680. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  105. Brasfield, S.M.; Bradham, K.; Wells, J.B.; Talent, L.G.; Lanno, R.P.; Janz, D.M. Development of a Terrestrial Vertebrate Model for Assessing Bioavailability of Cadmium in the Fence Lizard (Sceloporus Undulatus) and in Ovo Effects on Hatchling Size and Thyroid Function. Chemosphere 2004, 54, 1643–1651. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  106. Du Preez, M.; Nel, R.; Bouwman, H. First Report of Metallic Elements in Loggerhead and Leatherback Turtle Eggs from the Indian Ocean. Chemosphere 2018, 197, 716–728. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  107. Russell, R.W.; Gobas, F.A.P.C.; Haffner, G.D. Maternal Transfer and in Ovo Exposure of Organochlorines in Oviparous Organisms: A Model and Field Verification. Environ. Sci. Technol. 1999, 33, 416–420. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  108. Seminoff, J.A.; Shanker, K. Marine Turtles and IUCN Red Listing: A Review of the Process, the Pitfalls, and Novel Assessment Approaches. J. Exp. Mar. Bio. Ecol. 2008, 356, 52–68. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  109. Marsh, H.; Dennis, A.; Hines, H.; Kutt, A.; McDonald, K.; Weber, E.; Williams, S.; Winter, J. Optimizing Allocation of Management Resources for Wildlife. Conserv. Biol. 2007, 21, 387–399. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  110. Amorocho, D.; Leslie, A.; Fish, M.; Sanjurjo, E.; Amoros, S.; Avila, I.C.; Douthwaite, K. Marine Turtle Action Plan. In WWF Latin America and The Caribbean: 2015–2020; Amorocho, D., Dereix, C.A., Eds.; WWF-Colombia: Cali, Colombia, 2016; 122p, ISBN 978-958-8915-28-9. [Google Scholar]
  111. Sandbrook, C.; Adams, W.M.; Büscher, B.; Vira, B. Social Research and Biodiversity Conservation. Conserv. Biol. 2013, 27, 1487–1490. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  112. Mortimer, J.A.; Donnelly, M. Eretmochelys imbricata. IUCN Red List Threat. Species 2008, 2008, e.T8005A12881238. [Google Scholar]
Figure 1. Study area. The sea turtle camp of Grupo Ecologista Quelônios A.C. from Punta Xen (19°12′39″ N, 90°52′09.7″ W) in Campeche Mexico.
Figure 1. Study area. The sea turtle camp of Grupo Ecologista Quelônios A.C. from Punta Xen (19°12′39″ N, 90°52′09.7″ W) in Campeche Mexico.
Toxics 11 00050 g001
Figure 2. Hematological values (mean ± SD) and ranges in foraging hawksbill turtles nesting in Punta Xen, Yucatan Peninsula, Mexico.
Figure 2. Hematological values (mean ± SD) and ranges in foraging hawksbill turtles nesting in Punta Xen, Yucatan Peninsula, Mexico.
Toxics 11 00050 g002
Figure 3. Plasma chemical values (mean ± SD) and ranges in foraging hawksbill turtles nesting in Punta Xen, Yucatan Peninsula, Mexico.
Figure 3. Plasma chemical values (mean ± SD) and ranges in foraging hawksbill turtles nesting in Punta Xen, Yucatan Peninsula, Mexico.
Toxics 11 00050 g003
Figure 4. MDS output representing the correlations between the number of eggs, the morphometric variables (blue), and OCPs detected in the blood (red) and eggs (green), measured in (a) 2014; 2D stress: 0.07 and in (b) 2015; 2D stress: 0.15.
Figure 4. MDS output representing the correlations between the number of eggs, the morphometric variables (blue), and OCPs detected in the blood (red) and eggs (green), measured in (a) 2014; 2D stress: 0.07 and in (b) 2015; 2D stress: 0.15.
Toxics 11 00050 g004aToxics 11 00050 g004b
Table 1. Summary of the parameters measured in hawksbill sea turtles nesting at Punta Xen: size (cm) and egg contents (g) of hawksbill turtles (mean ± standard error of the mean; min; max). * Asymptotic p-value; p < 0.05.
Table 1. Summary of the parameters measured in hawksbill sea turtles nesting at Punta Xen: size (cm) and egg contents (g) of hawksbill turtles (mean ± standard error of the mean; min; max). * Asymptotic p-value; p < 0.05.
ParametersFirst Year Nesting SeasonSecond Year Nesting SeasonMann-Whitney U Test
Mean ± SEMMinMaxMean ± SEMMinMaxUp *
CCL (cm)89.953 ± 1.1557610189.233 ± 1.20575.5100.04070.671
CCW (cm)77.881 ± 1.652399079.550 ± 1.14270.093.5393.50.577
Total Eggs133.56 ± 3.88283178136.14 ± 5.39187.0194.04160.765
Weight of Whole Egg (g)30.632 ± 0.4792536.230.680 ± 0.48325.837.8420.50.826
Weight Content (g)28.413 ± 0.46323.133.227.917 ± 0.46223.335.1387.50.471
Shell Mass (g)2.382 ± 0.0681.83.32.763 ± 0.1082.104.602610.008
CCL = curved carapace length; CCW = curved carapace width; SEM = standard error of mean.
Table 2. Summary of the parameters measured in hawksbill sea turtles nesting at Punta Xen: organochlorine contaminant concentrations in eggs and blood (ηg/g−1). * Asymptotic p-value; p < 0.05; statistically different values are indicated in bold.
Table 2. Summary of the parameters measured in hawksbill sea turtles nesting at Punta Xen: organochlorine contaminant concentrations in eggs and blood (ηg/g−1). * Asymptotic p-value; p < 0.05; statistically different values are indicated in bold.
Blood a,1Mann–Whitney U TestEggs aMann–Whitney U Test
OCPs NFirst Year Nesting SeasonN Second Year
Nesting Season
Up *N First Year Nesting SeasonN Second Year
Nesting Season
Up *
ΣHCHs290.204 ± 0.06230 1.948 ± 0.9303140.06029 0.521 ± 0.06630 3.429 ± 1.711319.50.071
ΣDienes290.779 ± 0.09130 0.882 ± 0.449273.50.00929 0.342 ± 0.08930 2.567 ± 1.522302.50.045
ΣChlordanes290.129 ± 0.05830 0.468 ± 0.2114010.57729 0.221 ± 0.05630 1.488 ± 0.8403080.048
ΣDDTs290.290 ± 0.09530 1.593 ± 0.6313110.04729 0.203 ± 0.06630 2.072 ± 1.177299.50.034
ΣHeptachlors290.057 ± 0.01630 0.767 ± 0.4174180.79229 0.110 ± 0.02930 1.100 ± 0.6033650.258
ΣEndosulfans290.149 ± 0.05130 1.166 ± 0.5454080.68029 0.208 ± 0.06630 1.681 ± 0.999334.50.111
Methoxychlor290.080 ± 0.02330 0.566 ± 0.244307.50.04129 0.079 ± 0.02730 0.677 ± 0.4253660.228
TOTAL 1.690 ± 0.3737.395 ± 3.378 1.688 ± 0.36113.016 ± 7.229
N = sample size; a = mean ± SEM; 1—blood values were made available by [52].
Table 3. Relationship between organochlorine contaminant concentrations in eggs (ng/g wet mass) compared with concentrations in blood between the years under consideration. (a) Mann–Whitney U test (* asymptotic p-value; <0.05); (b) Wilcoxon signed rank test (** asymptotic p-value; p < 0.05); statistically different values are indicated in bold.
Table 3. Relationship between organochlorine contaminant concentrations in eggs (ng/g wet mass) compared with concentrations in blood between the years under consideration. (a) Mann–Whitney U test (* asymptotic p-value; <0.05); (b) Wilcoxon signed rank test (** asymptotic p-value; p < 0.05); statistically different values are indicated in bold.
Eggs/Blood RatioBetween Years (a)Between Tissues (b)
OCPsFirst Year Nesting
Season a
Second Year
Nesting Season a
Fp *Fp **
ΣHCHs5.838 ± 1.87741.132 ± 36.380254.50.007−2.8110.005
ΣDienes0.571 ± 0.17047.587 ± 29.849212.50.000−2.3810.017
ΣChlordanes1.302 ± 0.60312.458 ± 10.115301.50.045−1.7210.085
ΣDDTs1.817 ± 0.5989.736 ± 6.7173100.049−0.6540.513
ΣHeptachlors2.328 ± 0.8293.668 ± 1.8743340.069−0.8720.383
ΣEndosulfans2.843 ± 1.1532.851 ± 2.2463540.157−1.0380.299
Methoxychlor1.591 ± 0.6673.694 ± 2.684349.50.064−0.6980.485
TOTAL2.050 ± 0.528633.8608 ± 21.8481
a = mean ± SEM.
Table 4. Pearson correlations between the morphometric parameters and OCPs measured in eggs.
Table 4. Pearson correlations between the morphometric parameters and OCPs measured in eggs.
OCPsCCL
(cm)
CCW
(cm)
Total
Eggs
Weight of Whole
Egg (g)
Weight
Content (g)
Shell
(g)
ΣHCHs0.0220.0360.1190.1590.1100.270 *
ΣDienes−0.060−0.0280.001−0.099−0.1140.271 *
ΣChlordanes−0.130−0.1060.017−0.030−0.0620.279 *
ΣDDTs−0.026−0.2260.096−0.270 *−0.267 *0.188
ΣHeptachlors−0.114−0.0980.040−0.006−0.0260.205
ΣEndosulfans−0.114−0.0960.043−0.220−0.2250.265 *
Methoxychlor−0.149−0.1470.017−0.150−0.1630.297 *
*. Correlation is significant at the 0.05 level.
Table 5. Pearson correlations between the number of offspring and OCPs measured in blood and eggs. The same correlations between the hatching success and the contaminants analysed in both blood and eggs are also presented.
Table 5. Pearson correlations between the number of offspring and OCPs measured in blood and eggs. The same correlations between the hatching success and the contaminants analysed in both blood and eggs are also presented.
Number of OffspringHatching Success
OCPs in BloodΣHCHs0.0510.011
ΣDienes−0.369 *−0.349
ΣChlordanes0.299−0.130
ΣDDTs0.283−0.315
ΣHeptachlors0.269−0.234
ΣEndosulfans0.234−0.426 *
Methoxychlor0.293−0.350 *
OCPs in EggsΣHCHs−0.218−0.364 *
ΣDienes0.0310.112
ΣChlordanes0.2360.271
ΣDDTs0.1750.028
ΣHeptachlors0.1210.070
ΣEndosulfans0.1440.013
Methoxychlor0.0420.120
* Correlation is significant at the 0.05 level.
Disclaimer/Publisher’s Note: The statements, opinions and data contained in all publications are solely those of the individual author(s) and contributor(s) and not of MDPI and/or the editor(s). MDPI and/or the editor(s) disclaim responsibility for any injury to people or property resulting from any ideas, methods, instructions or products referred to in the content.

Share and Cite

MDPI and ACS Style

Salvarani, P.I.; Vieira, L.R.; Rendón-von Osten, J.; Morgado, F. Hawksbill Sea Turtle (Eretmochelys imbricata) Blood and Eggs Organochlorine Pesticides Concentrations and Embryonic Development in a Nesting Area (Yucatan Peninsula, Mexico). Toxics 2023, 11, 50. https://doi.org/10.3390/toxics11010050

AMA Style

Salvarani PI, Vieira LR, Rendón-von Osten J, Morgado F. Hawksbill Sea Turtle (Eretmochelys imbricata) Blood and Eggs Organochlorine Pesticides Concentrations and Embryonic Development in a Nesting Area (Yucatan Peninsula, Mexico). Toxics. 2023; 11(1):50. https://doi.org/10.3390/toxics11010050

Chicago/Turabian Style

Salvarani, Patricia I., Luis R. Vieira, Jaime Rendón-von Osten, and Fernando Morgado. 2023. "Hawksbill Sea Turtle (Eretmochelys imbricata) Blood and Eggs Organochlorine Pesticides Concentrations and Embryonic Development in a Nesting Area (Yucatan Peninsula, Mexico)" Toxics 11, no. 1: 50. https://doi.org/10.3390/toxics11010050

APA Style

Salvarani, P. I., Vieira, L. R., Rendón-von Osten, J., & Morgado, F. (2023). Hawksbill Sea Turtle (Eretmochelys imbricata) Blood and Eggs Organochlorine Pesticides Concentrations and Embryonic Development in a Nesting Area (Yucatan Peninsula, Mexico). Toxics, 11(1), 50. https://doi.org/10.3390/toxics11010050

Note that from the first issue of 2016, this journal uses article numbers instead of page numbers. See further details here.

Article Metrics

Back to TopTop