Environmental contaminants can alter the course of neural development, with consequences that appear in behavior. Such effects extend into adulthood and sometimes accelerate the rate of aging, even when exposure ceases by birth. The neurotoxicant methylmercury provides an interesting case study that reveals much about how disrupted neural development has lifelong consequences. Methylmercury also provides an example of the assessment and management of risks associated with exposure to developmental neurotoxicants.
ClarksonT.W. (2002). The three modern faces of mercury. Environmental Health Perspectives, 110(Suppl. 1), 11–23.
2.
Committee on the Toxicological Effects of Methylmercury, National Research Council. (2000). Toxicological effects of methylmercury. Washington, DC: National Academy Press.
3.
CranmerJ.S. (Ed.). (1996). Neurotoxicity of methylmercury: Indicators and effects of low-level exposure [Special issue]. Neurotoxicology, 17(1).
4.
NewlandM.C.ReileP.A. (1999). Learning and behavior change as neurotoxic endpoints. In TilsonH.A.HarryJ. (Eds.), Target organ series: Neurotoxicology (pp. 311–338). New York: Raven Press.
5.
WeissB.ClarksonT.W.SimonW. (2002). Silent latency periods in methylmercury poisoning and in neurodegenerative disease. Environmental Health Perspectives, 110(Suppl. 5), 851–854.
6.
BurbacherT.M.RodierP.M.WeissB. (1990). Methylmercury developmental neurotoxicity: A comparison of effects in humans and animals. Neurotoxicology and Teratology, 12, 191–202.
7.
CamusA. (1972). The plague(S. Gilbert, Trans.).New York: Vintage Books. (Original work published 1947)
8.
DavisonM.McCarthyD. (1988). The matching law: A research review. Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.
9.
GlowaJ.R.MacPhailR.C. (1995). Quantitative approaches to risk assessment in neurotoxicology. InChangL.W.SlikkerW.(Eds.), Neurotoxicology: Approaches and methods(pp.777–787). San Diego, CA: Academic Press.
10.
GrandjeanP.WeiheP.WhiteR.F.DebesF. (1998). Cognitive performance of children prenatally exposed to “safe” levels of methylmercury. Environmental Research, 77, 165–172.
11.
HaradaM. (1995). Minamata disease: Methylmercury poisoning in Japan caused by environmental pollution. Critical Reviews in Toxicology, 25, 1–24.
12.
KinjoY.HigashiH.NakanoA.SakamotoM.SakaiR. (1993). Profile of subjective complaints and activities of daily living among current patients with Minamata disease after 3 decades. Environmental Research, 63, 241–251.
13.
KollinsS.H.NewlandM.C.CritchfieldT.S. (1997). Human sensitivity to reinforcement in operant choice: How much do consequences matter? Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, 4, 208–220.
14.
NewlandM.C.PaletzE.M. (2000). Animal studies of methylmercury and PCBs: What do they tell us about expected effects in humans? Neurotoxicology, 21, 1003–1027.
15.
NewlandM.C.RasmussenE.B. (2000). Aging unmasks adverse effects of gestational exposure to methylmercury in rats. Neurotoxicology and Teratology, 22, 819–828.
16.
NewlandM.C.ReileP.A. (1999). Blood and brain mercury levels after chronic gestational exposure to methylmercury in rats. Toxicological Sciences, 50, 106–116.
17.
NewlandM.C.YezhouS.LogdbergB.BerlinM. (1994). Prolonged behavioral effects of in utero exposure to lead or methyl mercury: Reduced sensitivity to changes in reinforcement contingencies during behavioral transitions and in steady state. Toxicology and Applied Pharmacology, 126, 6–15.
18.
RasmussenE.B.NewlandM.C. (2001). Developmental exposure to methylmercury alters behavioral sensitivity to d amphetamine and pentobarbital in adult rats. Neurotoxicology and Teratology, 23, 45–55.
19.
RiceD.C. (1996). Sensory and cognitive effects of developmental methylmercury exposure in monkeys, and a comparison to effects in rodents. Neurotoxicology, 17, 139–154.
20.
SmithW.E.SmithA.M. (1975). Minamata. New York: Holt, Rinehart, and Winston.
