Advertisement

Water, Air, & Soil Pollution

, 227:480 | Cite as

Impact of Bioavailability Incorporation on Ecological Risk Assessment of Nickel, Copper, and Zinc in Surface Waters

  • Shuping Han
  • Wataru Naito
  • Shigeki Masunaga
Article
  • 251 Downloads

Abstract

In this study, biotic ligand models (BLMs) were used to conduct bioavailability-incorporated risk assessment of metals (Ni, Cu, and Zn) in Japanese rivers. Site-specific species sensitivity distributions were constructed and site-specific risk characterization ratios (RCRs: ratios of dissolved concentrations of metals to site-specific HC5 (dissolved metal concentrations that protect 95 % of species in an ecosystem)) were derived. The obtained site-specific RCRs, which are bioavailability-incorporated risk levels, were compared with RCRs without bioavailability consideration (generic RCRs). Incorporating bioavailability lowered the site-specific RCRs of Ni compared to the corresponding generic RCRs, and the numbers of sites at risk (site-specific RCR >1) decreased in most rivers, indicating that conventional risk assessment without the consideration of bioavailability overestimated the risk of Ni. Similarly, for Cu, site-specific RCRs and the percentage of sampling sites at risk were lower than those without bioavailability consideration at sampling sites where the dissolved organic carbon and hardness in river water were high. The site-specific RCRs of Zn were higher than the generic RCRs in most rivers with soft waters, and the percentage of sampling sites at risk was higher than that calculated without the consideration of bioavailability.

Keywords

Bioavailability Ecological risk assessment Biotic ligand model Surface waters Metals 

Notes

Acknowledgments

The sampling for this study was supported in part by JSPS KAKENHI (Grant No., 22710036), the Steel Foundation for Environmental Protection Technology, and the River Fund in charge of River Foundation, Japan (Grant No., 24-1211-011). Furthermore, the authors are grateful to the Strategic International Research Cooperative Program, Japan Science and Technology Agency (JST) for their support.

Supplementary material

11270_2016_3090_MOESM1_ESM.doc (550 kb)
ESM 1 (DOC 550 kb)

References

  1. Allen, H. E., & Hansen, D. J. (1996). The importance of trace metal speciation to water quality criteria. Water Environment Research, 68(1), 42–54.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Allen, H. E., & Janssen, C. R. (2006). Incorporating bioavailability into criteria for metals. Soil and Water Pollution Monitoring,Protection and Remediation (pp. 93–105). Springer Netherlands. Google Scholar
  3. Ardestani, M. M., van Straalen, N. M., & van Gestel, C. A. (2015). Biotic ligand modeling approach: synthesis of the effect of major cations on the toxicity of metals to soil and aquatic organisms. Environmental Toxicology and Chemistry, 34(10), 2194–2204.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Aung, N. N., Nakajima, F., & Furumai, H. (2008). Trace metal speciation during dry and wet weather flows in the Tama River, Japan, by using diffusive gradients in thin films (DGT). Journal of Environmental Monitoring, 10(2), 219–230.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. De Laender, F. C., De Schamphelaere, K. M., Verdonck, F. A. M., Heijerick, D. G., Van Sprang, P. A., Vanrolleghem, P. A., & Janssen, C. R. (2005). Simulation of spatial and temporal variability of chronic copper toxicity to Daphnia magna and Pseudokirchneriella subcapitata in Swedish and British surface waters. Human and Ecological Risk Assessment: An International Journal, 11(6), 1177–1191.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Di Toro, D. M., Allen, H. E., Bergman, H. L., Meyer, J. S., Paquin, P. R., & Santore, R. C. (2001). Biotic ligand model of the acute toxicity of metals. 1.Technical basis. Environmental Toxicology and Chemistry, 20(10), 2383–2396.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. European Communities. (2008). European union risk assessment reports nickel and nickel compounds. Denmark Italy: office for official publication of the European Communities (CAS No: 7440–02–0, 7786–81–4, 3333–67–3, 7718–54–9, 13138–45–9). http://echa.europa.eu/documents/10162/cefda8bc-2952-4c11-885f-342aacf769b3. Accessed 30 May 2008.
  8. European Copper Institute. (2008). Voluntary risk assessment of copper, copper II sulphate pentahydrate, Copper (I) oxide, Copper (II) oxide, Dicopper chloride trihydroxide (CAS No: 7440–50–8, 7758–98–7, 1317–3–1, 1317–38–0, 1332–65–6). Brussels Belgium: European Copper Institute. http://echa.europa.eu/chem_data/transit_measures/vrar_en.asp. Accessed June 2008.
  9. European Union. (2013). Directive 2013/39/EU of the European Parliament and of the Council of 12 August 2013 amending Directives 2000/60/EC and 2008/105/EC as regards priority substances in the field of water policy. Official Journal of the European Union, 226, 24.8, 1–17.Google Scholar
  10. Han, S., Naito, W., Hanai, Y., & Masunaga, S. (2013). Evaluation of trace metals bioavailability in Japanese river waters using DGT and a chemical equilibrium model. Water Research, 47(14), 4880–4892.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Hayashi, T. I. (2013). Applying biotic ligand models and Bayesian techniques: ecological risk assessment of copper and nickel in Tokyo rivers. Integrated Environmental Assessment and Management, 9(1), 63–69.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Heijerick, D. G., Bossuyt, B. T., De Schamphelaere, K. A. C., Indeherberg, M., Mingazzini, M., & Janssen, C. R. (2005). Effect of varying physicochemistry of European surface waters on the copper toxicity to the green alga Pseudokirchneriella subcapitata. Ecotoxicology, 14(6), 661–670.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Nagai, T. (2007). Metal speciation in natural river waters: measurement by diffusive gradients in thin-films and estimation by chemical equilibrium model. Japanese Journal of Limnology, 68(3), 391–401.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Niyogi, S., & Wood, C. M. (2004). Biotic ligand model, a flexible tool for developing site-specific water quality guidelines for metals. Environmental Science & Technology, 38(23), 6177–6192.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Tipping, E. (2008). Humic Ion-binding model VI: an improved description of the interactions of protons and metal ions with humic substances. Aquatic Geochemistry, 4(1), 3–48.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Tsushima, K., Naito, W., & Kamo, M. (2010). Assessing ecological risk of zinc in Japan using organism- and population-level species sensitivity distributions. Chemosphere, 80(5), 563–569.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (2007). Framework for metal risk assessment EPA 120/R-07/001. Office of the science advisor, risk assessment forum. Washington, DC 20460. http://www.epa.gov/osainter/raf/metalsframework/pdfs/metals-risk-assessment-final.pdf. Accessed March 2007.
  18. Van Genderen, E., Adams, W., Cardwell, R., Van Sprang, P. A., Arnold, R., Santore, R., & Rodriguez, P. (2008). An evaluation of the bioavailability and aquatic toxicity attributed to ambient copper concentrations in surface waters from several parts of the world. Integrated Environmental Assessment and Management, 4(4), 416–424.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Van Sprang, P. A., Verdonck, F. A. M., Van Assche, F., Regoli, L., & De Schamphelaere, K. A. C. (2009). Environmental risk assessment of zinc in European freshwaters: a critical appraisal. Science of the Total Environment, 407(20), 5373–5391.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Verschoor, A. J., Vink, J. P. M., de Snoo, G. R., & Vijver, M. G. (2011). Spatial and temporal variation of watertype-specific no-effect concentrations and risks of Cu, Ni, and Zn. Environmental Science & Technology, 45(14), 6049–6056.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Verschoor, A. J., Vink, J. P., & Vijver, M. G. (2012). Simplification of biotic ligand models of Cu, Ni, and Zn by 1-, 2-, and 3-parameter transfer functions. Integrated Environmental Assessment and Management, 8(4), 738–748.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Vijver, M. G., de Koning, A., & Peijnenburg, W. J. G. M. (2008). Uncertainty of water type–specific hazardous copper concentrations derived with biotic ligand models. Environmental Toxicology and Chemistry, 27(11), 2311–2319.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer International Publishing Switzerland 2016

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Faculty of Environment and Information SciencesYokohama National UniversityYokohamaJapan
  2. 2.Research Institute of Science for Safety and SustainabilityNational Institute of Advanced Industrial Science and TechnologyTsukubaJapan

Personalised recommendations