DDT in fish from the Bulgarian region of the Black Sea

In spite of a worldwide reduction in the utilization of organochlorine pesticides (OCPs), they are still a problem for the aquatic environment and human health. The Black Sea is still being polluted with persistent chemicals, including OCPs. Aquatic organisms (sprat, scad, bluefish, shad, belted bonito, goby, and black mussel) with different feeding behaviours were sampled on a seasonal basis from the Bulgarian region of the Black Sea, and the concentrations of 13 OCP residues were determined. Although many of the OCPs were not detected in the samples, in all samples 1,1,1-trichloro-2,2-bis(4-chlorophenyl) ethane (DDT) was present mainly in the form of its metabolites 1,1-dichloro-2,2-bis(4-chlorophenyl) ethane (DDD) and 1,1-dichloro-2,2-bis(4-chlorophenyl) ethylene (DDE). Only about 12% of the total DDT was present as the parent compound pp-DDT, which suggests that it was not being used recently in the region. The total DDT concentrations were generally below 150 μg kg^-1 fresh weight, but higher levels—up to 354 μg kg^-1 fresh weight—were also measured for fish species with a high fat content. Between-species differences were observed, even when the concentrations were presented on a fat-level basis. DDT concentrations did not show any significant changes over the 2-yr sampling period. Fish sampled in the northern areas of the Bulgarian Black Sea coast seemed to contain higher DDT levels than those from the southern areas, suggesting a major (historical) influence of the Danube River. For permanent monitoring purposes, the utility of Black Sea gobies and scad should be considered.     

Soil sampling and analysis for volatile organic compounds

Concerns over data quality have raised many questions related to sampling soils for volatile organic compounds (VOCs). This paper was prepared in response to some of these questions and concerns expressed by Remedial Project Managers (RPMs) and On-Scene Coordinators (OSCs). The following questions are frequently asked:

1. Is there a specific device suggested for sampling soils for VOCs?
2. Are there significant losses of VOCs when transferring a soil sample from a sampling device (e.g., split spoon) into the sample container?
3. What is the best method for getting the sample from the split spoon (or other device) into the sample container?
4. Are there smaller devices such as subcore samplers available for collecting aliquots from the larger core and efficiently transferring the sample into the sample container?
5. Are certain containers better than others for shipping and storing soil samples for VOC analysis?
6. Are there any reliable preservation procedures for reducing VOC losses from soil samples and for extending holding times?

Guidance is provided for selecting the most effective sampling device for collecting samples from soil matrices. The techniques for sample collection, sample handling, containerizing, shipment, and storage described in this paper reduce VOC losses and generally provide more representative samples for volatile organic analyses (VOA) than techniques in current use. For a discussion on the proper use of sampling equipment the reader should refer to other sources (Acker, 1974; U.S. EPA, 1983; U.S. EPA, 1986a). Soil, as referred to in this report, encompasses the mass (surface and subsurface) of unconsolidated mantle of weathered rock and loose material lying above solid rock. Further, a distinction must be made as to what fraction of the unconsolidated material is soil and what fraction is not. The soil component here is defined as all mineral and naturally occurring organic material that is 2 mm or less in size. This is the size normally used to differentiate between soils (consisting of sands, silts, and clays) and gravels. Although numerous sampling situations may be encountered, this paper focuses on three broad categories of sites that might be sampled for VOCs:

1. Open test pit or trench.
2. Surface soils (<5 ft in depth).
3. Subsurface soils (>5 ft in depth).

     

Sampling and analysis for radon-222 dissolved in ground water and surface water

Radon-222 is a naturally occurring radioactive gas in the uranium-238 decay series that has traditionally been called, simply, radon. The lung cancer risks associated with the inhalation of radon decay products have been well documented by epidemiological studies on populations of uranium miners.The realization that radon is a public health hazard has raised the need for sampling and analytical guidelines for field personnel. Several sampling and analytical methods are being used to document radon concentrations in ground water and surface water worldwide but no convenient, single set of guidelines is available. Three different sampling and analytical methods-bubbler, liquid scintillation, and field screening-are discussed in this paper. The bubbler and liquid scintillation methods have high accuracy and precision, and small analytical method detection limits of 0.2 and 10 pCi/l (picocuries per liter), respectively. The field screening method generally is used as a qualitative reconnaissance tool.     

金属对催化还原DDT的降解产物及其反应机制的研究

本报告介绍DDT经金属对处理后降解产物的分析鉴定和有关反应机制的初步研究。 降解产物主要是用气相色谱—质谱联用分析鉴定的。水溶液中的DDT用Cu-Zn金属对还原其降解产物经鉴定是DDD、DDMS、DDE_t,它们是DDT分子脱去烷基碳原子上不同数目的氯原子的产物。而在Cu-Fe金属对作用下,水溶液中的DDT的还原则是同时得到四种不同类型的产物。它们是DDT脱去烷基碳原子上的1个和3个氯原子的DDD和DDE_t;DDT脱氯、氧化产物DBP和DBH;DDT脱去HCI生成的DDE;两个DDT分子二聚脱氯的产物TTTB和TTDB。 实验证明金属对对DDT的作用是催化还原反应,金属对起着催化剂和还原剂双重作用。通过实验结果对DDT在金属对作用下的反应机制进行了初步探讨。