Bioaccumulation in aquatic systems: methodological approaches, monitoring and assessment

Bioaccumulation, the accumulation of a chemical in an organism relative to its level in the ambient medium, is of major environmental concern. Thus, monitoring chemical concentrations in biota are widely and increasingly used for assessing the chemical status of aquatic ecosystems. In this paper, various scientific and regulatory aspects of bioaccumulation in aquatic systems and the relevant critical issues are discussed. Monitoring chemical concentrations in biota can be used for compliance checking with regulatory directives, for identification of chemical sources or event related environmental risk assessment. Assessing bioaccumulation in the field is challenging since many factors have to be considered that can effect the accumulation of a chemical in an organism. Passive sampling can complement biota monitoring since samplers with standardised partition properties can be used over a wide temporal and geographical range. Bioaccumulation is also assessed for regulation of chemicals of environmental concern whereby mainly data from laboratory studies on fish bioaccumulation are used. Field data can, however, provide additional important information for regulators. Strategies for bioaccumulation assessment still need to be harmonised for different regulations and groups of chemicals. To create awareness for critical issues and to mutually benefit from technical expertise and scientific findings, communication between risk assessment and monitoring communities needs to be improved. Scientists can support the establishment of new monitoring programs for bioaccumulation, e.g. in the frame of the amended European Environmental Quality Standard Directive

Berlin statement on legacy and emerging contaminants in polar regions

Polar regions should be given greater consideration with respect to the monitoring, risk assessment, and management of potentially harmful chemicals, consistent with requirements of the precautionary principle. Protecting the vulnerable polar environments requires (i) raising political and public awareness and (ii) restricting and preventing global emissions of harmful chemicals at their sources. The Berlin Statement is the outcome of an international workshop with representatives of the European Commission, the Arctic Council, the Antarctic Treaty Consultative Meeting, the Stockholm Convention on Persistent Organic Pollutants (POPs), environmental specimen banks, and data centers, as well as scientists from various international research institutions. The statement addresses urgent chemical pollution issues in the polar regions and provides recommendations for improving screening, monitoring, risk assessment, research cooperation, and open data sharing to provide environmental policy makers and chemicals management decision-makers with relevant and reliable contaminant data to better protect the polar environments. The consensus reached at the workshop can be summarized in just two words: “Act now!” Specifically, “Act now!” to reduce the presence and impact of anthropogenic chemical pollution in polar regions by. •Establishing participatory co-development frameworks in a permanent multi-disciplinary platform for Arctic-Antarctic collaborations and establishing exchanges between the Arctic Monitoring and Assessment Program (AMAP) of the Arctic Council and the Antarctic Monitoring and Assessment Program (AnMAP) of the Scientific Committee on Antarctic Research (SCAR) to increase the visibility and exchange of contaminant data and to support the development of harmonized monitoring programs. •Integrating environmental specimen banking, innovative screening approaches and archiving systems, to provide opportunities for improved assessment of contaminants to protect polar regions

Food web on ice: a pragmatic approach to investigate the trophic magnification of chemicals of concern

BACKGROUND: The trophic magnification factor (TMF) is a metric that describes the average trophic magnification of a chemical through a food web. TMFs may be used for the risk assessment of chemicals, although TMFs for single compounds can vary considerably between studies despite thorough guidance available in the literature to eliminate potential sources of error. The practical realization of a TMF investigation is quite complex and often only a few chemicals can be investigated due to low sample masses. This study evaluated whether a pragmatic approach involving the large-scale cryogenic sample preparation practices of the German Environmental Specimen Bank (ESB) is feasible. This approach could provide sufficient sample masses for a reduced set of samples allowing screenings for a broad spectrum of substances and by that enabling a systematic comparison of derived TMFs. Furthermore, it was assessed whether plausible TMFs can be derived with the ‘Food web on ice’ approach via a comparison with literature TMF values. RESULTS: This investigation at Lake Templin near Potsdam is the first TMF study for a German freshwater ecosystem and aimed to derive TMFs that are appropriate for regulatory purposes. A set of 15 composite biota samples was obtained and analyzed for an extended set of benchmark chemicals such as persistent organic pollutants, mercury and perfluoroalkyl substances. TMFs were calculated for all substances that were present in > 80% of the biota samples. For example, in the case of polychlorinated biphenyls, TMFs from 1.7 to 2.5 were determined and comparisons to literature TMFs determined in other freshwater ecosystems showed similarities. We showed that 32 out of 35 compounds analyzed had TMFs significantly above 1. In the remaining three cases, the correlations were not statistically significant. CONCLUSIONS: The derived food web samples allow for an on-demand analysis and are ready-to-use for additional investigations. Since substances with non-lipophilic accumulation properties were also included in the list of analyzed substances, we conclude that the ‘Food web on ice’ provides samples which could be used to characterize the trophic magnification potential of substances with unknown bioaccumulation properties in the future which in return could be compared directly to the benchmarking patterns provided here

Validation of the Hyalella azteca Bioconcentration Test (HYBIT)

International audienceBioconcentration factors (BCF) for regulatory purposes are conventionally determined experimentally by aqueous exposure bioconcentration fish tests according to OECD test guideline (TG) 305. Fish bioconcentration studies are time consuming, expensive, and use vertebrate organisms in the range of 100-200 organisms per study. The availability of alternative methods may help to reduce the use of fish for BCF testing. The Hyalella azteca Bioconcentration Test (HYBIT) provides a non-vertebrate alternative for fish bioconcentration studies. The suitability of H. azteca as an alternative test organism for bioconcentration studies was recently investigated. Eighteen substances of different hydrophobicity (log KOW 0.7 - 7.8) were tested under flow-through or semi-static conditions to determine steady-state and kinetic bioconcentration factors (BCFSS and BCFK). It has been shown that the BCFs obtained from bioconcentration studies with the freshwater amphipod H. azteca correlate significantly (r²=0.69) with fish BCF values described in the literature. Thus, H. azteca BCF values can be assessed in accordance with the standard B criteria, e.g. BCF > 2000 (REACH), and thereby enable the prediction of B or non-B classification in the standard fish test. Generally, technical (smaller-scale test systems) and economic reasons (less time-consuming, more cost-efficient) favour the use of H. azteca over fish in bioconcentration studies. In addition, significantly smaller amounts of test substance are required compared to the flow-through test with fish. A protocol for carrying out bioconcentration tests with the aquatic invertebrate species H. azteca under standardized conditions has been developed as part of the project CEFIC-LRI ECO40. This protocol includes both, the flow-through and semi-static test design. Validation was needed to confirm the transferability of the test protocols and to prove the reproducibility of the results obtained in order to support the development of a new OECD TG. For this purpose, a multi-laboratory ring trial involving the HYBIT was carried out in 2020. The ring test has confirmed the high potential of the Hyalella azteca Bioconcentration Test (HYBIT) to be used as a non-vertebrate alternative for bioconcentration studies. The transferability of the test protocols (semi-static and flow-through approach) as well as the reproducibility of the results obtained was proven supporting the development of a new OECD TG

Halogenated flame retardants in tree samples applied as bioindicators for atmospheric pollution

Coniferous shoots and deciduous tree leaf samples from 10 sites in Germany were taken in 2015 or 2016 within the German Environmental Specimen Bank sampling program and analysed for 24 polybrominated biphenyl ethers (PBDEs) and 19 additional halogenated flame retardants (HFRs). At one site, additional historic samples dating back till 2003 were also investigated. Samples were Soxhlet-extracted, cleaned-up by a non-destructive multi-step procedure involving gel permeation chromatography, and detected by GC-API-MS/MS as well as GC-MS. Besides PBDEs as classical HFRs, emerging HFRs such as Dechlorane Plus, DPTE, DBDPE, or ATE were region-wide observed demonstrating their widespread occurrence in the atmosphere. Highest concentrations in recent samples were found for DBDPE (<230-2760 pg/g dry weight (dw)) followed by DPTE (91-1540 pg/g dw), BDE209 (<156-461 pg/g dw), and BDE47 (<27-505 pg/g dw) or DP (31-122 pg/g dw). The overall uniform and widespread distribution as well as similar HFR levels and composition profiles observed in recent conifer shoots and corresponding deciduous tree leaves from the same area indicate a prolonged medium to long-range transport as sources. Furthermore, it is demonstrated that both tree types are generally suitable bioindicators for atmospheric pollution with HFRs, although accumulation may vary depending on HFR properties and accumulation period. The historic samples showed decreasing PBDE levels whereas no clear trend could be observed for other investigated HFRs at this site

Selection and application of trophic magnification factors for priority substances to normalize freshwater fish monitoring data under the European Water Framework Directive: a case study

BACKGROUND: The European Water Framework Directive (WFD) requires the monitoring of biota—preferably fish—to check the compliance of tissue concentrations of priority substances (PS) against substance-specific environmental quality standards (EQSs). In monitoring programs, different fish species are covered, which often are secondary consumers with a trophic level (TL) of about 3. For harmonization, a normalization of monitoring data to a common trophic level is proposed, i.e., TL 4 (predatory fish) in freshwaters, so that data would be sufficiently protective. For normalization, the biomagnification properties of the chemicals can be considered by applying substance-specific trophic magnification factors (TMFs). Alternatively, TL-corrected biomagnification factors (BMFTLs) may be applied. Since it is impractical to derive site-specific TMFs or BMFTLs, often data from literature will be used for normalization. However, available literature values for TMFs and BMFTLs are quite varying. In the present study, the use of literature-derived TMFs and BMFTLs in data normalization is studied more closely. RESULTS: An extensive literature evaluation was conducted to identify appropriate TMFs for the WFD PS polybrominated diphenyl ethers (PBDE), hexachlorobenzene, perfluorooctane sulfonate (PFOS), dioxins and dioxin-like compounds (PCDD/F + dl-PCB), hexabromocyclododecane, and mercury. The TMFs eventually derived were applied to PS monitoring data sets of fish from different trophic levels (chub, bream, roach, and perch) from two German rivers. For comparison, PFOS and PBDE data were also normalized using literature-retrieved BMFTLs. CONCLUSIONS: The evaluation illustrates that published TMFs and BMFTLs for WFD PS are quite variable and the selection of appropriate values for TL 4 normalization can be challenging. The normalized concentrations partly included large uncertainties when considering the range of selected TMFs, but indicated whether an EQS exceedance at TL 4 can be expected. Normalization of the fish monitoring data revealed that levels of substances accumulating in the food web (TMF or BMF &amp;gt; 1) can be underestimated when relying on fish with TL &amp;lt; 4 for EQS compliance assessment. The evaluation also revealed that TMF specifically derived for freshwater ecosystems in Europe would be advantageous. Field-derived BMFTLs seemed to be no appropriate alternative to TMFs, because they can vary even stronger than TMFs