New Issue: Orbital Catastrophe Ahead? Read Now

On the Fence for Science

Wall lizards are good guinea pigs for signs of pollution

Join Our Community of Science Lovers!


On supporting science journalism

If you're enjoying this article, consider supporting our award-winning journalism by subscribing. By purchasing a subscription you are helping to ensure the future of impactful stories about the discoveries and ideas shaping our world today.


First came canary in the coal mine. Now there's the lizard on the wall

Researchers have found that wall lizards may be reliable early detectors for toxins and other pollutants from onshore oil drilling activity.

Environmental scientists from the University of Siena in Italy analyzed wall lizards captured at four sites downwind from the Monte Alpi Oil Center in Val d'Agri, an area in Italy's southern Apennine mountains that holds substantial oil reserves.

Tests of the lizards' blood revealed elevations in several chemicals known to cause health problems in both reptiles and humans, including the heavy metals mercury and cadmium. Also present in the animals' blood and bile were signs of exposure to carcinogenic polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons (PAHs)—a family of more than 100 substances generated by the partial burning of oil, gas and other materials.

According to the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, certain polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons "may reasonably be expected" to cause cancer in people. They also have been linked to chromosomal changes in children whose mothers were exposed to high levels of these compounds in air pollution while pregnant.

Concentrations of these harmful hydrocarbons were highest near the drilling site, the researchers say.

"Results obtained validate, for the first time, [the Italian wall lizard] as a terrestrial bio-indicator for the assessment of the toxicological impact of onshore extraction activity," the researchers wrote in their paper published online in the journal Science of the Total Environment. "The availability of this reptile in southern Europe, its easiness of capture and lifestyle (insectivorous, resident) as well as the excellent laboratory results obtained for assay of [PAHs], trace elements and enzyme responses to this toxicological stress, make it a perfect terrestrial bio-indicator for oil-derived contamination."

Bio-indicators are plants and animals that scientists use to monitor the presence of toxins in the environment (like the miners' canaries, whose lives depended on an adequate supply of breathable air).

Wall lizards often are a locally abundant species, one trait that "would make them useful as bio-indicators," says biologist Bruce Kingsbury, director of the Center for Reptile and Amphibian Conservation and Management at Indiana University–Purdue University Fort Wayne.

Indeed, Kuwaiti scientists used ants and fringe-toed lizards, a desert species of reptile, to monitor the lingering effects of the well fires at Kuwait's Al-Burgan oil fields during the 1991 Persian Gulf War. According to that study, 12 years after the event, tests of the animals showed signs of contamination with PAHs.

Russell Burke, a biologist at Hoftstra University in Hempstead, N.Y., who has studied Italian wall lizards in the U.S., says the species would be "at least as good as, and possibly better than" other bio-indicators, such as mice and plants. They exist in high densities, are easy to collect, and their organs are easy to reach and analyze in the lab.

One possible drawback, Burke says, is that as insectivores, the lizards are a step removed from direct ingestion of plants, so they might not accumulate environmental pollutants as rapidly as local flora. He says, however, because they are small and easy to keep in captivity—unlike wild mice, which are notoriously difficult to maintain in cages—wall lizards would make a good model species for experiments designed to determine the effects of toxins on mortality, reproduction and growth.

Subscribe to Support Independent Journalism

Great science journalism requires human expertise, time, effort and creativity. And it costs money. That’s why I and the journalists here at Scientific American hope you’ll join our community.

When you subscribe, you are supporting staff and freelance journalists who are passionate about telling science stories that are true, important and compelling. Our editors and reporters are often experts in their fields, which means they understand the nuances of big discoveries and can untangle the breakthroughs from the hype. With a subscription, you are also supporting rigorous fact-checking to ensure the words we publish are precise and accurate. And you’re supporting original illustrations, graphics and photos that bring you closer to an advanced laboratory, an ice sheet in Antarctica or a space mission in orbit. You’re helping us craft other types of high-quality journalism as well: Our newsletters are carefully written, edited and curated by staffers you have or will come to know and love. Our Science Quickly podcast is based on original reporting, collaboration with editors and scientists and exacting production.

Subscriptions keep this engine running so we can continue to deliver thoughtful, rigorous and independent science journalism to you. In an era of viral misinformation, this work is crucial. If you value what we do, I hope you’ll consider joining us as a subscriber

Thank you,

Jeanna Bryner, Editor in Chief, Scientific American

Subscribe