Advertisement

Absence of PCB Hot Spot Effect in Walleye Sander vitreus from Lower Green Bay of Lake Michigan

  • Charles P. MadenjianEmail author
  • Daniel J. Dembkowski
  • Daniel A. Isermann
  • Stuart A. Batterman
  • Sergei M. Chernyak
  • Stewart F. Cogswell
  • Mark E. Holey
Article

Abstract

Under certain conditions, polychlorinated biphenyl (PCB) concentration in individuals of one sex of an adult fish population may exceed that of the other sex by more than a factor of two. This phenomenon, known as the PCB hot spot effect, has been postulated to be contingent upon the following two conditions: (1) presence of a PCB hot spot in the bottom sediments of the aquatic ecosystem, such that prey PCB concentrations in the hot spot region are substantially higher than prey PCB concentrations in locations distant from the hot spot, and (2) habitat use varying between the sexes, such that individuals of one sex inhabit the hot spot region to a considerably greater degree than individuals of the other sex. To test whether PCB concentrations in walleye Sander vitreus from lower Green Bay of Lake Michigan displayed a PCB hot spot effect, whole-fish PCB concentrations were determined in ten female and ten male adult walleye from the population spawning in the Fox River, the main tributary to lower Green Bay. In addition, mark-recapture data for the Fox River walleye population were analyzed to determine differences in spatial distributions between the sexes. Results revealed that the ratio of mean PCB concentration in males to mean PCB concentration in females was only 1.13, indicating the absence of a PCB hot spot effect. This result was corroborated by the mark-recapture data analysis, which showed no significant difference in habitat use between the sexes. Thus, although condition 1 was met, condition 2 was not met. Consequently, the PCB hot spot effect was not observed in the Fox River walleye population. Lack of a significant difference in PCB congener distributions between the sexes further corroborated our conclusions.

Notes

Acknowledgements

The authors thank Steve Hogler and other WDNR personnel for their assistance with the capture of walleye from the Fox River spawning run and for estimating walleye ages, Tim Desorcie and Lynn Ogilvie for their assistance with homogenization of the walleye, Emma Easterly and Jenna Ruzich for preparing the map, and Justin VanDeHey for reviewing a draft of this manuscript and providing helpful comments for its improvement. Use of trade, product, or firm names does not imply endorsement by the U.S. Government.

Compliance with Ethical Standards

Conflict of interest

The author Charles P. Madenjian has no actual or potential conflicts of interests to disclose with regard to this manuscript submission to Archives of Environmental Contamination and Toxicology.

References

  1. American Fisheries Society (2004) Guidelines for the use of fishes in research. https://fisheries.org/docs/policy_useoffishes.pdf. Accessed 1 Dec 2018
  2. Ballschmiter K, Bacher R, Mennel A, Fischer R, Riehle U, Swerev M (1992) The determination of chlorinated biphenyls, chlorinated dibenzodioxins, and chlorinated dibenzofurans by GC-MS. J High Resolut Chromatogr 15:260–270CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Brownie C, Anderson DR, Burnham KP, Robson DS (1985) Statistical inference from band recovery data: a handbook. U. S. Fish and Wildlife Service Resource Publication No. 156Google Scholar
  4. Cherynak SM, Rice CP, Quintal RT, Begnoche LJ, Hickey JP, Vinyard BT (2005) Time trends (1983-1999) for organochlorines and polybrominated diphenyl ethers in rainbow smelt (Osmerus mordax) from Lakes Michigan, Huron, and Superior, USA. Environ Toxicol Chem 24:1632–1641CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Creque SM, Rutherford ES, Zorn TG (2005) Use of GIS-derived landscape-scale habitat features to explain spatial patterns of fish density in Michigan rivers. N Am J Fish Manag 25:1411–1425CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Dembkowski DJ, Isermann DA, Hogler SR, Larson WA, Turnquist KN (2018) Stock structure, dynamics, demographics, and movements of walleyes spawning in four tributaries to Green Bay. J Great Lakes Res 44:970–978CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Efron B, Tibshirani RJ (1993) An introduction to the bootstrap. Chapman & Hall, New YorkCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Feng H, Cochran JK, Lwiza H, Brownawell BJ, Hirschberg DJ (1998) Distribution of heavy metal and PCB contaminants in the sediments of an urban estuary: the Hudson River. Mar Environ Res 45:69–88CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Hickey JP, Batterman SA, Chernyak SM (2006) Trends of chlorinated organic contaminants in Great Lakes trout and walleye from 1970 to 1998. Arch Environ Contam Toxicol 50:97–110CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Jude DJ, Rediske R, O’Keefe J, Hensler S, Giesy JP (2010) PCB concentrations in walleyes and their prey from the Saginaw River, Lake Huron: a comparison between 1990 and 2007. J Great Lakes Res 36:267–276CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Karasov WH, Jung RE, Vanden Langenberg S, Bergeson TLE (2005) Field exposure of frog embryos and tadpoles along a pollution gradient in the Fox River and Green Bay ecosystem in Wisconsin, USA. Environ Toxicol Chem 24:942–953CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Mackler MS (2000) Estimation of the total PCB mass in the Hudson River System. Thesis, Columbia University, NYGoogle Scholar
  13. Macksasitorn S, Janssen J, Gray KA (2015) PCBs refocused: correlation of PCB concentrations in Green Bay legacy sediments with adjacent lithophilic, invasive biota. J Great Lakes Res 41:215–221CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Madenjian CP (2011) Sex effect on polychlorinated biphenyl concentrations in fish: a synthesis. Fish Fish 12:451–460CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Madenjian CP, Noguchi GE, Haas RC, Schrouder KS (1998) Sexual difference in polychlorinated biphenyl accumulation rates of walleye (Stizostedion vitreum). Can J Fish Aquat Sci 55:1085–1092CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Madenjian CP, Jude DJ, Rediske RR, O’Keefe JP, Noguchi GE (2009a) Gender difference in walleye PCB concentrations persists following remedial dredging. J Great Lakes Res 35:347–352CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Madenjian CP, Hanchin PA, Chernyak SM, Begnoche LJ (2009b) Sexual difference in PCB concentrations of walleyes (Sander vitreus) from a pristine lake. Sci Total Environ 407:4526–4532CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Madenjian CP, Yule DL, Chernyak SM, Begnoche LJ, Berglund EK, Isaac EJ (2014) Males exceed females in PCB concentrations of cisco (Coregonus artedi) from Lake Superior. Sci Total Environ 493:377–383CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Madenjian CP, Rediske RR, Krabbenhoft DP, Stapanian MA, Chernyak SM, O’Keefe JP (2016a) Sex differences in contaminant concentrations of fish: a synthesis. Biol Sex Differ 7:42CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Madenjian CP, Jensen OP, Rediske RR, O’Keefe JP, Pothoven SA, Vastano AR (2016b) Differences in energy expenditures and growth dilution explain higher PCB concentrations in male summer flounder. PLoS ONE 11:e0147223CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Manchester-Neesvig JB, Andren AW, Edgington DN (1996) Patterns of mass sedimentation and of deposition of sediment contaminated by PCBs in Green Bay. J Great Lakes Res 22:444–462CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Michigan Department of Natural Resources (1988) Michigan Department of Natural Resources remedial action plan for Saginaw River and Saginaw Bay – area of concern. Surface Water Quality Division, Great Lakes Environmental Assessment Section, Lansing, MIGoogle Scholar
  23. Rypel AL, Findlay RH, Mitchell JB, Bayne DR (2007) Variations in PCB concentrations between genders of six warmwater fish species in Lake Logan Martin, Alabama, USA. Chemosphere 68:1707–1715CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Schmidt LJ (1997a) Extraction and lipid separation of fish samples for contaminant analysis and lipid determination. Lake Michigan Mass Balance Study (LMMB) methods compendium. Volume 2: Organic and mercury sample analysis techniques. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Great Lakes National Program Office, Chicago, IL, EPA 905-R-97-012bGoogle Scholar
  25. Schmidt LJ (1997b) Analysis of total PCBs and PCB congeners and trans-nonachlor in fish by gas chromatography/negative chemical ionization single ion mass spectrometry. Lake Michigan Mass Balance Study (LMMB) methods compendium. Volume 2: Organic and mercury sample analysis techniques. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Great Lakes National Program Office, Chicago, IL, EPA 905-R-97-012bGoogle Scholar
  26. Schneider JC, Lychwick TJ, Trimberger ET, Peterson JH, O’Neal R, Schneeberger PJ (1991) Walleye rehabilitation in Lake Michigan, 1969-1989. In: Colby PJ, Lewis CA, Eshenroder RL (eds) Status of walleye in the Great Lakes: case studies prepared for the 1989 workshop. Special Publication 91-1, Great Lakes Fishery Commission, Ann Arbor, MIGoogle Scholar
  27. Stapanian MA, Madenjian CP, Rediske RR, O’Keefe JP (2013) Sexual difference in PCB congener distributions of burbot (Lota lota) from Lake Erie. Chemosphere 93:1615–1623CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Stapanian MA, Madenjian CP, Cott PA, Rediske RR, O’Keefe JP (2014) Polychlorinated biphenyl congener distributions in burbot: evidence for a latitude effect. Environ Toxicol Chem 33:2448–2454CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Stapanian MA, Madenjian CP, Batterman SA, Chernyak SM, Edwards WH, McIntyre PB (2018) Distributions of PCB congeners and homologues in white sucker and coho salmon from Lake Michigan. Environ Sci Technol 52:4393–4401CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Thomann RV, Mueller JA, Winfield RP, Huang C-R (1991) Model of fate and accumulation of PCB homologues in Hudson estuary. J Environ Eng 117:161–178CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. United States Environmental Protection Agency (1989) Green Bay/Fox River mass balance study. Great Lakes National Program Office, Chicago, IL, EPA-905/8-89/001, GLNPO Report 06-89Google Scholar
  32. United States Environmental Protection Agency (2008) Method 1668B: Chlorinated biphenyl congeners in water, soil, sediment, biosolids, and tissue by HRGC/HRMS. Office of Water, Washington, DC, EPA-821-R-08-020Google Scholar
  33. Wisconsin Department of Natural Resources (2011) Stage 2 remedial action plan update for the Lower Green Bay and Fox River Area of Concern. Office of Great Lakes, Madison, WI. https://dnr.wi.gov/topic/GreatLakes/documents/LGB-FRStage2RAPupdate.pdf. Accessed 1 Dec 2018
  34. Wisconsin Department of Natural Resources (2018) Remedial action plan update for the Lower Green Bay and Fox River Area of Concern. Office of Great Waters – Mississippi River and Great Lakes, Madison, WI. https://dnr.wi.gov/topic/GreatLakes/documents/LGBFRRAP2017.pdf. Accessed 1 Dec 2018
  35. Zlokovitz ER, Secor DH (1999) Effect of habitat use on PCB body burden in Hudson River striped bass (Morone saxatilis). Can J Fish Aquat Sci 56(Suppl 1):86–93CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. Zorn TG, Schneeberger PJ (2011) Habitat and fish community changes in the Michigan waters of Green Bay 1989–2005. Michigan Department of Natural Resources, Lansing, MI, Fisheries Research Report 2096Google Scholar

Copyright information

© This is a U.S. Government work and not under copyright protection in the US; foreign copyright protection may apply 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  • Charles P. Madenjian
    • 1
    Email author
  • Daniel J. Dembkowski
    • 2
  • Daniel A. Isermann
    • 3
  • Stuart A. Batterman
    • 4
  • Sergei M. Chernyak
    • 4
  • Stewart F. Cogswell
    • 5
  • Mark E. Holey
    • 6
  1. 1.U. S. Geological SurveyGreat Lakes Science CenterAnn ArborUSA
  2. 2.Wisconsin Cooperative Fishery Research Unit, Fisheries Analysis CenterUniversity of Wisconsin-Stevens PointStevens PointUSA
  3. 3.U. S. Geological Survey, Wisconsin Cooperative Fishery Research UnitUniversity of Wisconsin-Stevens PointStevens PointUSA
  4. 4.School of Public HealthUniversity of MichiganAnn ArborUSA
  5. 5.U. S. Fish and Wildlife ServiceAnchorage Fish and Wildlife Conservation OfficeAnchorageUSA
  6. 6.U. S. Fish and Wildlife ServiceGreen Bay Fish and Wildlife Conservation OfficeNew FrankenUSA

Personalised recommendations