Toxicity Evaluation with the Microtox Test to Assess the Impact of In Situ Oiled Shoreline Treatment Options: Natural Attenuation and Sediment Relocation

Changes in the toxicity levels of beach sediment, nearshore water, and bottom sediment samples were monitored with the Microtox^® Test to evaluate the two in situ oil spill treatment options of natural attenuation (natural recovery--no treatment) and sediment relocation (surf washing). During a series of field trials, IF-30 fuel oil was intentionally sprayed onto the surface of three mixed sediment (pebble and sand) beaches on the island of Spitsbergen, Svalbard, Norway (78°56^′ N, 16°45^′ E). At a low wave-energy site (Site 1 with a 3-km wind fetch), where oil was stranded within the zone of normal wave action, residual oil concentrations and beach sediment toxicity levels were significantly reduced by both options in less than five days. At Site 3, a higher wave-energy site with a 40-km wind fetch, oil was intentionally stranded on the beach face in the upper intertidal/supratidal zones, above the level of normal wave activity. At this site under these experimental conditions, sediment relocation was effective in accelerating the removal of the oil from the sediments and reducing the Microtox^® Test toxicity response to background levels. In the untreated (natural attenuation) plot at this site, the fraction of residual oil remaining within the beach sediments after one year (70%) continued to generate a toxic response. Chemical and toxicological analyses of nearshore sediment and sediment-trap samples at both sites confirmed that oil and suspended mineral fines were effectively dispersed into the surrounding environment by the in situ treatments. In terms of secondary potential detrimental effects from the release of stranded oil from the beaches, the toxicity level (Microtox^® Test) of adjacent nearshore sediment samples did not exceed the Canadian regulatory limit for dredged spoils destined for ocean disposal.     

A necessary distinction between spatial representativeness of an air quality monitoring station and the delimitation of exceedance areas

The European legislation on ambient air quality introduces the concepts of spatial representativeness of a monitoring station and spatial extent of an exceedance zone. Spatial representativeness is an essential macro-scale siting criterion which should be evaluated before the setting-up and during the life of a monitoring point. As for the exceedance area, it has to be defined each time an environmental objective is exceeded in an assessment zone. No specific approach is prescribed to delimit such areas. A probabilistic methodology is presented, based on a preliminary kriging estimation of atmospheric concentrations at each point of the domain. It is applied to NO₂ pollution on the urban scale. In the proposed approach, a point belongs to the area of representativeness of a station if its concentration differs from the station measurement by less than a given threshold. To take the estimation uncertainty into account, the standard deviation of the kriging error is used in a probabilistic framework. The choice of the criteria used to deal with overlapping areas is first tested on NO₂ annual mean concentration maps of France, built by combining surface monitoring observations and outputs from the CHIMERE chemistry transport model. At the local scale, data from passive sampling surveys and high -resolution auxiliary variables are used to provide a more precise estimation of the background pollution in different French cities. The traffic-related pollution can also be accounted for in the map by additional predictors such as distance to the road, and traffic-related NO_x emissions. Similarly, the proposed approach is implemented to identify the points, at a given statistical risk, where the NO₂ concentration is above the annual limit value.     

What is the best biomarker to assess arsenic exposure via drinking water?

Arsenic (As) is a ubiquitous element. The current WHO guideline for As in drinking water is 10 μg/L. Furthermore, about 130 million people have only access to drinking water containing more than 10 gAs/L. Although numerous studies have shown the related adverse effects of As, sensitive appropriate biomarkers are still required for studies of environmental epidemiology. A review of the literature has shown that various biomarkers are used for such research. Their limits and advantages are highlighted in this paper: (i) the detection of As or its derivatives in the blood is an indication of the dose ingested but it is not evidence of chronic intoxication. (ii) The detection of As in urine is an indispensible procedure because it is a good marker for internal dose. It has been demonstrated to correlate well for a number of chronic effects related to As levels in drinking water. However confounding factors must be taken into account to avoid misinterpretation and this may require As speciation. (iii) As in the hair and nails reflects the level of long term exposure but it is difficult to relate the level with the dose ingested. (iv) Some studies showed a correlation between urinary As and urinary and blood porphyrins. However, it is difficult to use only porphyrins as a biomarker in a population survey carried out without doing further studies. (v) Genotoxic effects are based on the characterization of these potential effects. Most studies have detected increases in DNA damage, sister chromatid exchange, micronuclei or chromosomal aberrations in populations exposed to As in drinking water. Micronuclei assay is the technique of choice to follow these populations, because it is sensitive and easy to use.To conclude, whatever epidemiological studies are, the urinary and toenail biomarkers are useful to provide indications of internal dose. Moreover, micronuclei assay can be complementary use as biomarker of early effects.     

A simple empirical model to predict forest insecticide ground-level deposition from a compendium of field data

Deposit data from 205 aerial forest insecticide applications conducted in field trials by the Canadian Forest Service, Great Lakes Forestry Centre over a 15-year period are summarized. Deposit measurements were taken under “worst case” scenarios in the sense that direct applications were made over water bodies, and ground samplers were intentionally placed in open or cleared areas of forest. The median % deposit on shoreline collectors (32 separate applications) was 5.7%, on mid-stream collectors (44 separate applications) was 6.2%, and on forest floor collectors (129 separate applications) was 4.9%. Forest floor deposit was most closely associated with application rate and droplet size (r = 0.624, p < 0.001 and r = 0.662, p = 0.011, respectively) but these variables combined only explained 44% of the variation in deposit. Data from all three collector types were grouped by 10% deposit increments and combined to provide a data set from all deposition scenarios. A negative exponential model was fitted to the proportion of these combined sites regressed on % deposit in 10% increments and plotted as a deposit probability distribution curve (p < 0.001, r² = 0.992). The probability distribution curve indicated that 5–10% deposit would be expected about 57–91% of the time, whereas 50% deposit or greater would be expected about 2% of the time or less. In a probabilistic risk assessment for aerially applied insecticides in a conifer-dominated forest environment, the probability distribution curve based on empirical data presented here can be used to refine the characterization of exposure scenarios from which effects estimates can be derived.