Advertisement

Fish whole-body selenium: interspecies translation experiment

  • Earl R. Byron
  • Gary M. Santolo
Article
  • 54 Downloads

Abstract

The Total Maximum Daily Load (TMDL) for selenium in the freshwater drainages to Newport Bay, California, is being developed based on selenium concentration in the tissues of fish and bird eggs. This paper demonstrates the use of fish mesocosms and monitoring results to facilitate the comparisons of selenium contamination across fish species and areas of the watershed with differing fish assemblages. In this watershed, mosquitofish dominate across all the small, upper watershed drainages while sunfish family species dominate in deeper, ponded reaches of the lower watershed. Mesocosms were used to hold mosquitofish in ponds where they did not occur to compare their concentrations of bioaccumulated selenium to the tissue selenium of resident bluegill sunfish of the same pond. The caged fish were allowed to bioaccumulate selenium over time to achieve tissue concentrations at equilibrium conditions to compare as a ratio to resident bluegill. Those results were compared to the ratio of tissue concentrations from a later sampling of the same pond when the two species were found to co-occur for the first time. The ratios were brought into agreement only after altering assumptions of time to achieve equilibrium in bioaccumulated selenium for the transplanted mosquitofish and extrapolation of the mesocosm results. The technique demonstrates important considerations for the use of mesocosms to facilitate comparisons between allopatric species in terms of selenium bioaccumulation. A careful consideration of trophic level of the caged fish was found to be critical in setting the total time of bioaccumulation as part of the experimental design needed to achieve equilibrium tissue concentrations.

Keywords

Mesocosm Bioaccumulation Mosquitofish Bluegill Selenium 

Notes

Acknowledgements

We acknowledge the assistance of Harry Ohlendorf (CH2M) and Terri Reeder, Santa Ana Region Water Quality Control Board, for planning and review, Ava Edens CH2M) for field assistance, Orange County and Irvine Ranch Water District environmental staff for field support, and financial support to CH2M from Orange County.

References

  1. Adams WJ, Toll JE, Brix KV, Tear LM, DeForest DK (2000). Site-specific approach for setting water quality criteria for selenium: differences between lotic and lentic systems. 24th Annual British Columbia Mine Reclamation Symposium. Selenium Session; June 21–22; Williams Lake, British Columbia, Canada: Sponsored by Ministry of Energy and Mines.Google Scholar
  2. Beckon, W. N. (2016). A method for improving predictive modeling by taking into account lag time: Example of selenium bioaccumulation in a flowing system. Aquatic Toxicology, 176, 172–180.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Blanco, S., Romo, S., & Villena, M.-J. (2004). Experimental study on the diet of mosquitofish (Gambusia holbrooki) under different ecological conditions in a shallow lake. International Review of Hydrobiology, 89, 250–262.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Byron ER, Santolo GM. (2013). Habitat survey, Newport Bay watershed. Technical Memorandum, prepared for Orange County. CH2M HILL, Sacramento, CA.Google Scholar
  5. CH2M HILL. (2014). Selenium and organochlorine compounds in Newport Bay watershed fish and bird eggs, 2013. Draft Technical Memorandum prepared for Orange County, CA. January 13, 2014.Google Scholar
  6. DeForest, D. K., Brix, K. V., & Adams, W. J. (1999). Critical review of proposed residue-based selenium toxicity thresholds for freshwater fish. Human and Ecological Risk Assessment, 5, 1187–1228.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Froese R, Pauly D. (2016). FishBase. World Wide Web electronic publication: http://www.fishbase.org.
  8. Luoma SN, Presser TS. (2009). Modeling of selenium for the San Diego Creek watershed and Newport Bay, California. U.S. Geological Survey Open-File Report 2009-1114, available at http://pubs.usgs.gov/ of/2009/1114/, p. 48.
  9. Nico L, Fuller P, Jacobs G, Cannister M, Larson J, Fusaro A, Makled TH, Neilson M. (2016). Gambusia affinis. http://nas.er.usgs.gov/queries/FactSheet.aspx?speciesID=846 Revision Date: 1/25/2016. USGS Nonindigenous Aquatic Species Database, Gainesville, FL.
  10. Ohlendorf, H. M., Covington, S. M., Byron, E. R., & Arenal, C. A. (2011). Conducting site-specific assessments of selenium bioaccumulation in aquatic systems. Integrated Environmental Assessment and Management, 7, 314–324.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Orange County Water Monitoring Data. (2018). Nitrogen selenium monitoring program. http://www.ocwatersheds.com/rainrecords/waterqualitydata/water_quality_monitoring_data. Accessed 8 Nov 2018.
  12. Presser, T. S., & Luoma, S. N. (2010). A methodology for ecosystem-scale modeling of selenium. Integrated Environmental Assessment and Management, 6, 685–710.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Saiki, M. K., Jennings, M. R., & Brumbaugh, W. G. (1993). Boron, molybdenum, and selenium in aquatic food chains from the lower San Joaquin River and its tributaries California. Archives of Environmental Contamination and Toxicology, 24(3), 307–319.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Saiki, M. K., Martin, B. A., & May, T. W. (2004). Reproductive status of western mosquitofish inhabiting selenium-contaminated waters in the Grassland Water District, Merced County, California. Archives of Environmental Contamination and Toxicology, 47, 363–369.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Saiki, M. K., Martin, B. A., & May, T. W. (2012). Selenium in aquatic biota inhabiting agricultural drains in the Salton Sea Basin, California. Environmental Monitoring and Assessment, 184, 5623–5640.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Santa Ana Region Water Quality Control Board (SARWQCB). (2016). Total Maximum Daily Loads for selenium in freshwater: Draft Staff Report, September 2016. Prepared by Terri Reeder, Joanne Schneider, and Larry Walker Associates, with support from CH2M Hill, GEI, and Risk Sciences.Google Scholar
  17. Santolo, G. M., Byron, E. R., & Ohlendorf, H. M. (2016). Contaminants in sediment, food-chain biota, and bird eggs from the Newport Bay watershed, Orange County, California. Environmental Monitoring and Assessment, 188, 113–131.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. SAS® Institute (1996). Statview computer statistical package version 4.57, Cary, (NC).Google Scholar
  19. Stewart R, Grosell M, Buchwalter D, N.Fisher, Luoma S, Mathews T, Orr P, Wang W-X (2010). Bioaccumulation and trophic transfer of selenium. In Ecological assessment of selenium in the aquatic environment, Chapman P. M., Adams WJ, Brooks ML, Delos CG, Luoma SN, Maher WA, Ohlendorf HM, Presser TS, Shaw DP (eds), 5, pp 93–139. Boca Raton FL (USA): CRC Press.Google Scholar
  20. Toll J, Tear LM, DeForest DK, Brix KV, Adams WJ (2005). Setting site-specific water quality standards using tissue residue criteria and bioaccumulation data. Part 1. Methodology. Environmental Toxicology and Chemistry.Google Scholar
  21. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (USEPA). (2000). Mercury research strategy. U.S. EPA Office of Research and Development. Washington, D.C. PA/600/R-00/073.Google Scholar
  22. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (USEPA). (2016a). Aquatic life ambient water quality criterion for selenium (freshwater) 2015. In Office of Water OoSaT (ed.), U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Washington, D.C.Google Scholar
  23. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (USEPA). (2016b). Water quality standards; establishment of revised numeric criteria for selenium for the San Francisco Bay and Delta, State of California. A proposed rule by the USEPA. 81-FR-46030. 7/15/2016.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Nature Switzerland AG 2018

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.CH2M, Inc.SacramentoUSA
  2. 2.SacramentoUSA

Personalised recommendations