De Laender, F.

Hammer, J.

Janssen, C.R.

Soetaert, K.

Open Marine Archive

 - 25 -
COCKTAILS IN THE ARCTIC: ARE THE POLAR BEARS LOADED YET? 
De Laender Frederik1, Jort Hammer2, Karline Soetaert3 and Colin R. Janssen1 
1 Laboratory of Environmental Toxicology and Aquatic Ecology, Ghent University, Jozef Plateaustraat 
22, B-9000 Ghent, Belgium 
E-mail: frederik.delaender@ugent.be  
2 Instituut voor Biodiversiteit en Ecosysteemdynamica, University of Amsterdam, PO Box 94248, NL-
1090 GE Amsterdam, the Netherlands 
3 NIOO-CEME, Yerseke, Korringaweg 7, PO Box 140, 4400 AC Yerseke, the Netherlands 
 
Although persistent organic pollutants (POPs) are present in all oceans, the Arctic Ocean in 
particular accumulates POPs due to northward sea and air currents. Extensive databases exist that 
contain field measurements of POP concentrations in Arctic species, yet they represent a haphazard 
collection of measurements in various tissues and species. This makes it difficult to evaluate in a 
uniform way if the Arctic cocktail of POPs is expected to adversely affect Arctic ecosystems. In this 
study we have for the first time quantified if this POP cocktail has been affecting the Arctic 
ecosystem in a negative way during the last 25 years (1985 to 2010). A bioaccumulation model was 
used to standardize 50,000 measured concentrations in different matrices of various species to 
lipid tissue concentrations of 96 POPs (PCBs, HCHs, HCB, DDTs and PAHs) in 26 species ranging 
from northern shrimp (Pandalus borealis) to the polar bear (Ursus maritimus). After cross-validation 
of predicted lipid tissue concentrations, they were compared to contaminant threshold levels, i.e. 
maximum tissue concentrations beyond which adverse effects are expected and this for all 96 
chemicals in all 26 species. Lipid tissue concentrations of most POPs in all species decreased 10 
fold between 1985 and 2010. Depending on the species considered, current day tissue 
concentrations are 1,000 (polar bear) to 10,000 times lower (blue mussel, Mytilus edulis) than the 
corresponding threshold levels. However, the opposite was found for PAHs in mammalian top 
predators such as the polar bear, which had lipid tissue concentrations that increased 100 fold over 
the past 25 years, reducing the margin of safety (threshold concentration divided by tissue 
concentration) from 10,000 to 100. This increase in PAH concentrations can be explained by an 
increasing (and oil consuming) world population. When calculating the total effect on polar bears of 
all 96 POPs together, i.e. of the Arctic POP cocktail, the margin of safety is 10 times lower today (10) 
than it was 25 years ago (100). This indicates that the increase in PAHs over time is the main 
determinant of the effects of the Arctic POP cocktail. Our results therefore show that past regulatory 
efforts to phase out legacy POPs are overshadowed by rising PAH exposure in the Arctic 
environment. 


Cocktails in the Arctic: Are the polar bears loaded yet?

Abstract

Similar works

Full text

Available Versions

Open Marine Archive