Simple Summary
Avobenzone is a common sunscreen ingredient that can reach surface waters. Fish gills are directly exposed to the surrounding water and can show structural damage after contact with pollutants. Routine histology can identify such damage, but it usually relies on lesion scores or a small number of manual measurements. Here, gill images from adult zebrafish exposed to avobenzone were analysed using 39 measurements that describe overall gill tissue structure. Images from the same fish were always kept together during analysis. A time-matched comparison at 4 days showed clear differences between control and exposed samples, and additional differences were detected between exposure concentrations and between exposed samples collected at different time points. Because the present 40× image dataset did not include a 21-day control, longer-term comparisons were interpreted only as time-point-associated differences within exposed fish. The approach does not replace expert histopathology; instead, it provides an additional quantitative description of changes already visible in the tissue. This may help make comparisons of pollutant-related gill damage more objective and reproducible.
Abstract
Gill histopathology is widely used in fish toxicology, but lesion scores and targeted measurements capture only part of the structural information in routine sections. We tested whether a morphometric profile could quantify avobenzone-related changes in adult zebrafish gills. The 40× dataset comprised gill sections from 35 adult zebrafish across five conditions represented in the image dataset: a 4-day solvent-control group and fish exposed to nominal avobenzone concentrations of 3 or 9 g/L for 4 or 21 days. From 750 fields, quality control and automated segmentation yielded 503 accepted masks; 360 fields (72 per condition) were used in the balanced analysis. Thirty-nine descriptors quantified tissue geometry, interlamellar spaces, branch-like organisation, and thickness heterogeneity. Validation was repeated 30 times with all fields from each fish kept in the same partition. The time-matched 4-day control-versus-exposed comparison reached 89.4 ± 4.1% balanced accuracy. The 3-versus-9 g/L comparison at 4 days reached 88.7 ± 4.6%, and 4 versus 21 days within the 9 g/L group reached 88.5 ± 5.0%. Performance for direct five-condition classification was lower (68.4 ± 5.1%). Because 21-day control images were not included, exposure-related inference was restricted to the time-matched 4-day comparison. Morphometric profiling provides a quantitative complement to conventional histopathology while preserving individual fish identity as the grouping unit for image analysis.