Expert Workshop on Causes of Sediment Toxicity in California Marine Waters

Transcription

1 Expert Workshop on Causes of Sediment Toxicity in California Marine Waters Background Information on Sediment Toxicity and Workshop Logistics Long Beach, CA, November 16, 12 Organizers: Southern California Coastal Water Research Project, University of California, Davis-Marine Pollution Studies Laboratory, San Francisco Estuary Institute. Workshop participants: Thank you for your participation in our upcoming workshop on sediment toxicity. In order to help you prepare for the workshop we are providing the following materials in this communication: Meeting Logistics information Draft agenda List of attendees Background on sediment toxicity testing and toxicity identification evaluation in San Francisco Bay (summaries and highly relevant papers). Meeting Logistics: The workshop will be held in the Glenn M. Anderson Federal Building, 51 West Ocean Boulevard, Long Beach, CA 982. Our conference room is located on the third floor, room 347. Please note that you must pass through a security check to enter this building, including a metal detector and x-ray screening of baggage. You should allow extra time to go through this process (and make sure to leave any weapons back in the hotel). We will have someone to meet you in the building lobby and direct you to the conference room. The building is within walking distance of several hotels in downtown Long Beach, the closest are the Hilton and Renaissance. The Westin and Hyatt (SETAC main conference hotel) are also very close. There is a free city shuttle service that will take you to the federal building. We will also make arrangements for a shuttle from the Hyatt in the morning. The workshop will run from 9:am to 3:3 pm. A cafeteria is available on the same floor for coffee and snacks. We'll provide lunch at a nearby restaurant. Please see the agenda on the following page. 1

2 Agenda Workshop on Causes of Sediment Toxicity in California Marine Waters Friday, November 16, 12 9: am to 3:3 pm; conference room 347 Glenn M. Anderson Federal Building, 51 West Ocean Boulevard, Long Beach, CA Workshop objective: The objective of this workshop is to develop a series of testable hypotheses and associated study designs to determine the cause of moderate sediment toxicity in San Francisco Bay. The emphasis is on both contaminant and non-contaminant stressors that affect E. estuarius; of particular interest are tools and approaches that can be applied to field sediments that exhibit low to moderate toxicity. 9: 9:15 Introductions and workshop goals Steve Bay 9:15 9:3 Regulatory agency needs for toxicity identification in SF Bay 9:3 1:3 Summary of SF Bay sediment toxicity and TIE studies 1:3 12: Identification of likely sediment toxicity stressors Tom Mumley Brian Anderson Group discussion 12: 1:3 Lunch (offsite) 1:3 3: Development of study designs to confirm hypotheses/fill data gaps Group discussion 3: 3:3 Summary and next steps Steve Bay 2

3 Workshop Participants The workshop will include the following confirmed attendees. Additional participants are expected, but have not yet finalized their plans. Name Brian Anderson Howard Bailey Steve Bay Chris Beegan Bryan Brooks Rob Burgess Don Cadien Eric Chavez Ted DeWitt Jay Field Darrin Greenstein Kay Ho Chris Ingersoll Keith Maruya David Moore Tom Mumley Susan Norton Bryn Philips Meg Sedlack Jim Shine Karen Taberski Jack Word Josh Westfall Organization UC Davis, Marine Pollution Studies Laboratory Nautilus Environmental SCCWRP State Water Board Baylor University USEPA Narragansett Lab LA County Sanitation Districts NOAA, National Marine Fisheries Service USEPA NOAA Office of Response and Restoration SCCWRP USEPA Narragansett Lab USGS SCCWRP Weston Solutions San Francisco Regional Water Quality Control Board USEPA Washington, D.C. UC Davis, Marine Pollution Studies Laboratory San Francisco Estuary Institute Harvard School of Public Health San Francisco Regional Water Quality Control Board NewFields Consulting LA County Sanitation Districts 3

4 Background Information This workshop will focus on developing hypotheses/study designs to determine the cause of sediment toxicity to Eohaustorius estuarius in San Francisco Bay. It is expected that the products of this workshop will be applicable to other locations in California and the Pacific coast, as similar conditions are present in multiple embayments. We have assembled the following information to brief you on the current knowledge regarding the life history of E. estuarius, test protocol, contaminant sensitivity, sediment quality conditions in SF Bay, and prior efforts to determine the cause of toxicity to this species. The following documents are included: Sediment toxicity protocol fact sheet Background on the E. estuarius test method and sensitivity to contaminants and environmental factors. Appendix I provides a summary of standardized test conditions. Summary of amphipod sediment toxicity in San Francisco Bay Overview of past monitoring and assessment studies in San Francisco Bay. Supporting details are included in the attached paper (Anderson7a_SFSynthesis) TIE studies in California Summary of sediment TIE studies conducted in California bays and estuaries. Supporting details are described in a TIE study report for San Francisco Bay (Phillips9_TIEStudy). Sediment and water toxicity benchmarks (Appendix II) Tables of sediment and water effects levels for E. estuarius exposed to chemicals in sediment or water. Sediment chemistry and toxicity plots (Appendix III) Scatter plots of recent monitoring data (8-1) are provided to illustrate the sediment characteristics of San Francisco Bay sediments and associated E. estuarius toxicity test responses. Additional references cited in this background information will be available at the workshop and we will be happy to provide you with them upon request. 4

5 Sediment Toxicity Protocol Fact Sheet Eohaustorius estuarius Original Protocol A 1d amphipod test protocol using E. estuarius was evaluated by DeWitt et al. (DeWitt 1989) and found to meet many of the desired criteria for a sediment toxicity test for estuarine habitats. Standardized test guidelines were developed for this species by US EPA and ASTM (Appendix I). Protocol Guidelines U.S. EPA Methods for assessing the toxicity of sediment-associated contaminants with estuarine and marine amphipods (U.S. EPA 1994) ASTM.. Standard guide for conducting 1-day static sediment toxicity tests with marine and estuarine amphipods. (ASTM ) California protocol evaluations A rigorous comparison with other toxicity test species was conducted early in the Bay Protection and Toxic Cleanup Program (Hunt, Anderson et al. 1998; Hunt, Anderson et al. 1) and as part of the early San Francisco Estuary Regional Monitoring Program. Eohaustorius estuarius was the best performing laboratory test species for solid-phase testing, in addition to the bivalve development test conducted at the sediment-water interface. The Southern California Coastal Water Research Project (SCCWRP) also compared a number of test protocols as part the California State Water Resources Control Board s development of sediment quality objectives. Eohaustorius estuarius performed well in interlaboratory comparisons conducted under this program and was recommended as one of the preferred solid-phase test species for use in California (Greenstein, Bay et al. 8). Natural history Eohaustorius estuarius is a free burrowing sandy beach species that occupies intertidal to subtidal habitats along the west coast of North America from central California to British Columbia. It is considered to be a mesohaline species and has been shown to tolerate salinities from 2-28 (DeWitt 1989). Haustoriid amphipods are infaunal deposit feeders. Grain Size Tolerance Dewitt et al. (1989) assessed survival of E. estuarius in 42 uncontaminated field sediment samples from Puget Sound, Washington and Oregon. These authors reported that E. estuarius showed little sensitivity to sediments of different grain sizes: mean survival was 92.4% in sediments with >8% silt-clay content and 96.7% for coarser sediments. Environment Canada (1998) published grain size recommendations for the 1d test with E. estuarius. Based on un-published tolerance tests using commercial formulations of mixture of sand and clay. Tay et al. (1998) found mean survival was 74% in mixtures with 57% clay and 99% fines. Based on these experiments, they established tolerance limits of <9% coarse grained sediment, and less than 7% clay. The Environment Canada (1998) 1d guideline states that test materials with > 7% clay must not be used in a 1d sediment toxicity test with E. estuarius. 5

6 UC Davis conducted similar experiments using mixtures of sand and field-collected reference mud that was comprised of silt and clay. The field reference material was sieved through a 75 µm screen then mixed with sand to give sediments with 1 9% fines. E. estuarius 1d survival was >85% in sediments with <7% fines. Survival was 57% in sediment with 9% fines (Marine Pollution Studies Laboratory-Granite Canyon unpublished data). Eohaustorius estuarius Sensitivity to Chemicals Results of spiked water and/or spiked sediment toxicity tests suggest that E. estuarius is insensitive to metals relative to other amphipod species (Appendix II). For example, E. estuarius is not sensitive to copper (LC5 = 534 µg/g) or cadmium (LC5 = >1, µg/g) at concentrations typically measured in field sediments. Eohaustorius estuarius is relatively sensitive to certain classes of organic chemicals. For example, this species demonstrates comparable sensitivity to Hyalella azteca to current use pesticides, such as pyrethroids and organophosphates (e.g., chlorpyrifos). Eohaustorius estuarius are moderately sensitive to some organochlorine pesticides such as DDT, but not others, such as chlordane, and E. estuarius is moderately sensitivity to PAHs. 6

7 Summary of Amphipod Toxicity Test Results - San Francisco Estuary (Anderson, Hunt et al. 7) Seasonal effects Results have demonstrated greater toxicity in samples collected in winter months relative to summer months. Spatial Patterns Certain sites have demonstrated more consistent toxicity than others. Sites with the most consistent toxicity are usually located nears the margins of the estuary, and are proximate to estuarine tributaries such as creeks, rivers, and storm drains. Correlation studies Amphipod mortality in San Francisco Estuary sediments has been shown to correlate strongly with metals (e.g., Cu, Zn), organics (e.g., PAHs, chlordane), and mixtures of chemicals as expressed by an ERM Quotient value (ERMq) or Sediment Quality Guideline Quotient value (SQGQ1) (Thompson, Anderson et al. 1999; Hunt, Anderson et al. 1; Anderson, Hunt et al. 7; Phillips, Anderson et al. 9). All of these studies have also shown that amphipod mortality is strongly correlated with sediment grain size, particularly percent clay. Response relationships Scatter plots showing the association of E. estuarius survival with sediment characteristics are provided in Appendix III. These plots are based on randomly sampled stations from 8-1 regional monitoring studies in San Francisco Bay and are representative of the magnitude of concentrations and responses observed in the bay. Hotspot studies Studies in the mid-199s by the Bay Protection and Toxic Cleanup Program (BPTCP) identified several hotspots and reference sites in the San Francisco Estuary (Hunt, Anderson et al. 1998; Hunt, Anderson et al. 1; Hunt, Anderson et al. 1). All of the hotpots were located at the margins of the system at sites proximate to storm drains or adjacent to industrial chemical activities. Recent surveys have indicated that some of the hotspots remain toxic and contaminated (e.g., Mission Creek), while other former hotspots are now non-toxic and uncontaminated (e.g., Castro Cove). In addition, moderately high amphipod mortality has been observed at one of the former reference sites (Paradise Cove) identified by the BPTCP. These results suggest the Estuary remains a highly dynamic system, where deposition of uncontaminated sediment has reduced contamination at former hotspots such as Castro Cove, and where unknown stressors continue to affect amphipod survival at reference sites. 7

8 Toxicity Identification Evaluation (TIE) in California Sediment TIEs of samples from several California sites have indicated toxicity to E. estuarius is frequently due to pyrethroid pesticides. These include sediments from San Diego Harbor (Anderson, Phillips et al. 1), the Ballona Creek Estuary (Lao, Tsukada et al. 1), and upper Newport Bay (Anderson, Hunt et al. 7). A TIE of sediment from the Dominguez Channel in Long Beach Harbor suggested sediment toxicity was due to a mixture of organic chemicals which included high concentrations of PAHs (Anderson, Hunt et al. 7). TIE evidence from sites in the San Francisco Estuary has been less conclusive. A TIE of Mission Creek sediment suggested toxicity to E. estuarius was due to ammonia and mixtures of organic chemicals. The organic chemical mixture from Mission Creek was dominated by concentrations of organochlorine pesticides, especially chlordane. Subsequent dose-response experiments have shown that the chlordane concentrations in this sample were below the toxicity threshold for E. estuarius ([cis chlordane] = 29.8 ng/g; LC5 > 13,4 ng/g; [trans chlordane] = 35.5 ng/g; LC5 = >31,4 ng/g). Mission Creek sediment also contained approximately.63 toxic units of chlorpyrifos, as well as several PAHs. The copper concentration was 173 ug/g, which was equivalent to approximately one-third of a toxic unit (Phillips, Anderson et al. 9). A summary of chemical toxicity benchmarks for E. estuarius is provided in Appendix II. 8

9 Appendix I. Test conditions for conducting 1-d sediment tests with E. estuarius (US EPA 1994). 9

10 1

11 Appendix II. Sediment and Water LC5 and Guideline Values Showing Toxicity of Selected Chemicals to E. estuarius. Eohaustorius estuarius Sediment Thresholds Chemical ng/g ug/g oc Endpoint Alternate Species Reference Pyrethroids Bifenthrin LC5 (Anderson, Lowe et al. 8) Cyfluthrin (Phillips, Anderson et al. 11) Cyfluthrin LC5 (Bay et al., 1) Cypermethrin LC5 (Anderson, Lowe et al. 8) Permethrin LC5 (Anderson, Lowe et al. 8) Organochlorines Total Chlordane >49 NOEC (Stransky, Rudolph et al. 6) Cis-Chlordane >13,4 >21 LC5 (Bay et al., 1) Trans-Chlordane >31,4 >3489 LC5 (Phillips, Anderson et al. 11) DDE p p' >19,3 >35 LC5 (Bay et al., 1) DDT p,p' 49.5 LC5 Rhepoxynius (Word, Ward et al. 1987) DDT p p' LC5 (Bay et al., 1) Total DDT LC5 (Weston 1996) Total DDT ug/g oc 2,5 LC5* (Swartz, Cole et al. 1994) *Determined from field-collected sediment, not spiked Organophosphates Chlorpyrifos LC5 (Anderson, Lowe et al. 8) PAHs Acenaphthene 2,577 LC5 (U.S. EPA 3) Fluoranthene 85,3 1,935 LC5 (Anderson, Lowe et al. 8) Fluoranthene 3,533 LC5 (DeWitt 1989) Phenanthrene 4,1 LC5 (U.S. EPA 3) Pyrene >22, >2,467 LC5 (Phillips, Anderson et al. 11) Total PAHs 1,8 MEC* Rhepoxynius (Swartz 1999; Page, Boehm et al. 2) *Determined from field-collected sediment, not spiked Total PAHs 1,75 LC5 Rhepoxynius (Swartz 1999; Page, Boehm et al. 2) Total PAHs 1,75 LC5* Rhepoxynius *Calculated from Page et al. (2) based on assumed TOC of 1% PCBs Aroclor LC5 Rhepoxynius (Swartz, Kemp et al. 1988) Metals ug/g Cadmium >1 11 LC5 (Weston 1996) Copper 534 LC5 (Anderson, Lowe et al. 8) Mercury 13.1 LC5 Rhepoxynius (Swartz, Kemp et al. 1988) Zinc 276 LC5 Rhepoxynius (Swartz, Kemp et al. 1988) Other ng/g Nonylphenol LC5 (Anderson, Hunt et al. 7) Tetrachlorobenzene 8 16 LC5 (Anderson, Hunt et al. 7) 11

12 Eohaustorius estuarius Water Thresholds Chemical Conc. Endpoint Alternate Species Reference Ammonia mg/l Unionized 2.49 LC5 (Kohn, Word et al. 1994) Pyrethroids μg/l Cypermethrin >1 LC5 (Ernst, Jackman et al. 1) Tested in product Organochlorines μg/l Chlordane 13 LC5 (Stransky, Rudolph et al. 6) Trans-Chlordane 112 LC5 (Phillips, Anderson et al. 11) Organophosphates ng/l Chlorpyrifos 529 LC5 (Anderson, Lowe et al. 8) PAHs μg/l Fluoranthene 671 LC5 (Phillips, Anderson et al. 9) Phenanthrene 158 LC5 (Swartz, Schults et al. 1995) Acenaphthene 78 LC5 (Swartz, Schults et al. 1995) PCBs μg/l Arochlor LC5 Ampelisca abdita (Ho, McKinney et al. 1997) Arochlor LC5 Ampelisca abdita (Ho, McKinney et al. 1997) Metals mg/l Cadmium 5.1 LC5 MPSL Unpublished Copper 48.7 LC5 (Phillips, Anderson et al. 9) 12

13 Appendix III: San Francisco Bay sediment characteristics and toxicity from 8-1 monitoring data. Closed symbols indicate a response that is significantly different from the control (t-test). Copper Mercury Cu concentration (ug/g) Hg concentration (ug/g) Zinc TOC Zn concentration (ug/g) Total Organic Carbon (%) 13

14 Total DDT OC Total DDE OC Total DDT OC (ug/g OC) Total DDE OC (ug/g OC) LMW PAH OC HMW PAH OC LMW PAH OC (ug/g OC) HMW PAH OC (ug/g OC) 14

15 Total Chlordanes OC Total PCBs OC Not Total Chlordanes OC (ug/g OC) Total PCBs OC (ug/g OC) % Clay Fines (%) Clay (%) Fines (%) 15

16 Permethrin OC Bifenthrin OC 1 1 Not Permethrin (ug/g OC) Bifenthrin OC (ug/g OC) Total Pyrethroids Total Pyrethroids (ug/g OC) 16

17 References Anderson, B. S., J. W. Hunt, et al. (7). "Patterns and trends in sediment toxicity in the San Francisco estuary." Environ Res 5( ). Anderson, B. S., J. W. Hunt, et al. (7). Navigating the TMDL Process: Sediment Toxicity. 2-WSM-2, Water Environment Research Foundation: 194 pp. Anderson, B. S., S. Lowe, et al. (8). "Relative sensitivities of toxicity test protocols with the amphipods Eohaustorius estuarius and Ampelisca abdita." Ecotoxicol Environ Safety 69: Anderson, B. S., B. M. Phillips, et al. (1). "Evaluation of methods to determine causes of sediment toxicity in San Diego Bay, California, USA." Ecotoxicol Environ Safety 73: ASTM (). Standard guide for conducting 1-day static sediment toxicity tests with marine and estuarine amphipods. Standard E , Annual Book of ASTM Standards. ASTM International, West Conshohocken, PA. 11.5: DeWitt, T. H., Swartz, R.C., Lamberson, J.O. (1989). "Measuring the acute toxicity of estuarine sediments." Environ Toxicol Chem 8: Ernst, W., P. Jackman, et al. (1). "Dispersion and Toxicity to Non-target Aquatic Organisms of Pesticides Used to Treat Sea Lice on Salmon in Net Pen Enclosures." Mar Poll Bull 42: Greenstein, D., S. M. Bay, et al. (8). "Comparison of methods for evaluating acute and chronic toxicity in marine sediments." Environ Toxicol Chem 27: Ho, K. T., R. A. McKinney, et al. (1997). "Identification of acute toxicants in New Bedford Harbor sediments." Environ Toxicol Chem 16: Hunt, J. W., B. S. Anderson, et al. (1998). Sediment Quality and Biological Effects in San Francisco Bay. Bay Protection and Toxic Cleanup Program Final Technical Report. California State Water Resources Control Board, Sacramento, CA. Hunt, J. W., B. S. Anderson, et al. (1). "Evaluation and use of sediment toxicity reference sites for statistical comparisons in regional assessments." Environmental Toxicology and Chemistry (6): Hunt, J. W., B. S. Anderson, et al. (1). "A large-scale categorization of sites in San Francisco Bay, USA, based on the sediment quality triad, toxicity identification evaluations, and gradient studies." Environmental Toxicology and Chemistry (6): Kohn, N. P., J. Q. Word, et al. (1994). "Acute toxicity of ammonia to four species of marine amphipod." Mar Environ Res 38: Lao, W., D. Tsukada, et al. (1). "Analysis, occurrence, and toxic potential of pyrethroids, and fipronil in sediments from an urban estuary." Environ Toxicol Chem 29: Page, D. S., P. D. Boehm, et al. (2). "Hydrocarbon composition and toxicity of sediment following the Exxon Valdez oil spill in Prince William Sound, Alaska, U.S." Environmental Toxicology and Chemistry 21:

18 Phillips, B. M., B. S. Anderson, et al. (11). RMP Sediment Study 9-1, Determining Causes of Sediment Toxicity in the San Francisco Estuary. Regional Monitoring Program for Water Quality in the San Francisco Estuary. Contribution No. 626, San Francisco Estuary Institute. Oakland, CA. Phillips, B. M., B. S. Anderson, et al. (9). RMP Sediment TIE Study 7-8: Using Toxicity Identification Evaluation (TIE) Methods to Investigate Causes of Sediment Toxicity to Amphipods. Regional Monitoring Program for Water Quality in the San Francisco Estuary Contribution No Oakland, CA, San Francisco Estuary Institute. Stransky, C., J. Rudolph, et al. (6). Investigation of chlordane toxicity to the amphipod Eohaustorius estuarius in Mission Bay and San Diego Bay sediments. Society of Environmental Toxicology and Chemistry, Montreal, QC. Swartz, R. C. (1999). "Consensus sediment quality guidelines for polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbon mixtures." Environmental Toxicology and Chemistry 18: Swartz, R. C., F. A. Cole, et al. (1994). "Sediment toxicity, contamination and amphipod abundance at a DDT- and dieldrin-contaminated site in San Francisco Bay." Environ Toxicol Chem 13: Swartz, R. C., P. F. Kemp, et al. (1988). "Effects of mixtures of sediment contaminants on the marine infaunal amphipod, Rhepoxynius abronius." Environ Toxicol Chem 7: Swartz, R. C., D. W. Schults, et al. (1995). "Sum PAH: a model to predict the toxicity of polynuclear aromatic hydrocarbon mixtures in field-collected sediments." Environmental Toxicology and Chemistry 14: Thompson, B., B. S. Anderson, et al. (1999). "Relationships between sediment toxicity and contamination in San Francisco Bay." Mar Environ Res 48(285-39). U.S. EPA (1994). Methods for assessing the toxicity of sediment-associated contaminants with estuarine and marine amphipods, Office of Research and Development, Washington D.C. U.S. EPA (3). Procedures for the Derivation of Equilibrium Partitioning Sediment Benchmarks (ESBs) for the Protection of Benthic Organisms: PAH Mixtures. 6/R- 2/13, Office of Research and Development. Washington, D.C. Weston, D. (1996). Further development of a chronic Ampelisca abdita bioassay as an indicator of sediment toxicity: summary and conclusions. Regional Monitoring Program for Trace Substances Annual Report. Oakland, CA, San Francisco Estuary Institute: Word, J. Q., J. A. Ward, et al. (1987). Evaluation of the equilibrium partitioning theory for estimating the toxicity of the nonpolar organic compound DDT to the sediment dwelling amphipod Rhepoxynius abronius. WA56, Task 1. Washington, DC, Battelle Washington Environmental Program Office. 18