Effectivity of advanced wastewater treatment: reduction of in vitro endocrine activity and mutagenicity but not of in vivo reproductive toxicity

  • Sabrina Giebner
  • Sina Ostermann
  • Susanne Straskraba
  • Matthias Oetken
  • Jörg Oehlmann
  • Martin Wagner
Effect-related evaluation of anthropogenic trace substances, -concepts for genotoxicity, neurotoxicity and, endocrine effects

Abstract

Conventional wastewater treatment plants (WWTPs) have a limited capacity to eliminate micropollutants. One option to improve this is tertiary treatment. Accordingly, the WWTP Eriskirch at the German river Schussen has been upgraded with different combinations of ozonation, sand, and granulated activated carbon filtration. In this study, the removal of endocrine and genotoxic effects in vitro and reproductive toxicity in vivo was assessed in a 2-year long-term monitoring. All experiments were performed with aqueous and solid-phase extracted water samples. Untreated wastewater affected several endocrine endpoints in reporter gene assays. The conventional treatment removed the estrogenic and androgenic activity by 77 and 95 %, respectively. Nevertheless, high anti-estrogenic activities and reproductive toxicity persisted. All advanced treatment technologies further reduced the estrogenic activities by additional 69–86 % compared to conventional treatment, resulting in a complete removal of up to 97 %. In the Ames assay, we detected an ozone-induced mutagenicity, which was removed by subsequent filtration. This demonstrates that a post treatment to ozonation is needed to minimize toxic oxidative transformation products. In the reproduction test with the mudsnail Potamopyrgus antipodarum, a decreased number of embryos was observed for all wastewater samples. This indicates that reproductive toxicants were eliminated by neither the conventional nor the advanced treatment. Furthermore, aqueous samples showed higher anti-estrogenic and reproductive toxicity than extracted samples, indicating that the causative compounds are not extractable or were lost during extraction. This underlines the importance of the adequate handling of wastewater samples. Taken together, this study demonstrates that combinations of multiple advanced technologies reduce endocrine effects in vitro. However, they did not remove in vitro anti-estrogenicity and in vivo reproductive toxicity. This implies that a further optimization of advanced wastewater treatment is needed that goes beyond combining available technologies.

Keywords

Micropollutants Ozonation Granulated activated carbon Estrogenicity Androgenicity Anti-estrogenicity Genotoxicity Potamopyrgus antipodarum 

Notes

Acknowledgments

The authors would like to thank all SchussenAktivplus project partners and especially the project coordinator Rita Triebskorn for a successful cooperation. The project SchussenAktivplus is funded by the Federal Ministry for Education and Research (BMBF) and co-funded by the Ministry of the Environment, Climate Protection and the Energy Sector, Baden-Württemberg. In addition, Jedele & Partner GmbH, Ökonsult GbR, the city of Ravensburg, the AZV Mariatal and the AV Unteres Schussental financially contribute to the project. SchussenAktivplus is part of the BMBF action plan “Sustainable water management (NaWaM)” and is integrated in the BMBF frame program “Research for sustainable development FONA.” It is part of the funding measure “Risk Management of Emerging Compounds and Pathogens in the Water Cycle (RiSKWa)” (contract period: January 2012 to June 2016, funding number: 02WRS1281J).

Supplementary material

11356_2016_7540_MOESM1_ESM.pdf (257 kb)
ESM 1 (PDF 256 kb)

References

  1. Bannister R, Beresford N, May D, Routledge EJ, Jobling S, Rand-Weaver M (2007) Novel estrogen receptor-related transcripts in Marisa cornuarietis; a freshwater snail with reported sensitivity to estrogenic chemicals. Environ Sci Technol 41:2643–2650CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Benner J, Ternes TA (2009) Ozonation of propranolol: formation of oxidation products. Environ Sci Technol 43:5086–5093CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Buckley JA (2010) Quantifying the antiestrogen activity of wastewater treatment plant effluent using the yeast estrogen screen. Environ Toxicol Chem 29(1):73–78CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Choi KJ, Kim SG, Kim CW, Park JK (2006) Removal efficiencies of endocrine disrupting chemicals by coagulation/flocculation, ozonation, powdered/granular activated carbon adsorption, and chlorination. Korean J Chem Eng 23(3):399–408CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Henneberg A, Bender K, Blaha L, Giebner S, Kuch B, Köhler HR, Maier D, Oehlmann J, Richter D, Scheurer M, Schulte-Oehlmann U, Sieratowicz A, Ziebart S, Triebskorn R (2014) Are in vitro methods for the detection of endocrine potentials in the aquatic environment predictive for in vivo effects? Outcomes of the project SchussenAktiv and SchussenAktivplus in the Lake Constance area, Germany. PLoS One 9(6):e98307CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Hollender J, Zimmermann SG, Koepke S, Krauss M, Mcardell CS, Ort C, Singer H, von Gunten U, Siegrist H (2009) Elimination of organic micropollutants in a municipal wastewater treatment plant uprgraded with a full-scale post-ozonation followed by sand filtration. Environ Sci Technol 43:7862–7869CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Huber MM, Ternes TA, von Gunten U (2004) Removal of estrogenic activity and formation of oxidation products during ozonation of 17α-ethinylestradiol. Environ Sci Technol 38:5177–5186CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Huber MM, Göbel A, Joss A, Hermann N, Löffler D, Mcardell CS, Ried A, Siegrist H, Ternes TA, von Gunten U (2005) Oxidation of pharmaceuticals during ozonation of municipal wastewater effluents: a pilot study. Environ Sci Technol 39:4290–4299CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. International Standard ISO 11350 (2009) Water quality—determination of the genotoxicity of water and wastewater using the Salmonella/microsome fluctuation test (ames fluctuation test)Google Scholar
  10. Jobling S, Beresford N, Nolan M, Rodgers-Gray T, Brighty GC, Sumpter JP, Tyler CR (2002a) Altered sexual maturation and gamete production in wild roach (Rutilus rutilus) living in rivers that receive treated sewage effluents. Biol Reprod 66(2):272–281CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Jobling S, Casey D, Rodgers-Gray T, Oehlmann J, Schulte-Oehlmann U, Pawlowski S, Braunbeck T, Turner AP, Tyler CR (2004) Comparative responses of molluscs and fish to environmental estrogens and an estrogenic effluent. Aquat Toxicol 66:207–222CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Joss A, Siegrist H, Ternes TA (2008) Are we about to upgrade wastewater treatment for removing organic micropollutants? Water Sci Technol 57:251–255CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Kirk LA, Tyler CR, Lye CM, Sumpter JP (2002) Changes in estrogenic and androgenic activities at different stages of treatment in wastewater treatment works. Environ Toxicol Chem 21:972–979CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Kuchenmeister F, Schmezer P, Engelhardt G (1998) Genotoxic bifunctional aldehydes produce specific images in the comet assay. Mutat Res – Gen Tox En 419:69–78CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Leusch FDL, Khan SJ, Gagnon MM, Quale P, Trinh T, Coleman H, Rawson C, Chapman HF, Blair P, Nice H, Reitsema T (2014) Assessment of wastewater and recycled water quality: a comparison of lines of evidence from in vitro, in vivo and chemical analyses. Water Res 50:420–431CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Li J, Wang Z, Ma M, Peng X (2010) Analysis of environmental endocrine disrupting activities using recombinant yeast assay in wastewater treatment plant effluents. B Environ Contam Tox 84:529–535CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Liu Z, Kanjo Y, Mizutani S (2009) Removal mechanisms for endocrine disrupting compounds (EDCs) in wastewater treatment—physical means, biodegradation, and chemical advanced oxidation: a review. Sci Total Environ 407:731–748CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Liu S, Ying G-G, Zhao J-L, Zhou L-J, Yang B, Chen Z-F, Lai H-J (2012) Occurrence and fate of androgens, estrogens, glucocorticoids and progestagens in two different types of municipal wastewater treatment plants. J Environ Monit 14:482–491CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Lüddeke F, Heß S, Gallert C, Winter J, Güde H, Löffler H (2015) Removal of total antibiotic resistant bacteria in advanced wastewater treatment by ozonation in combination with different filtering techniques. Water Res 69:243–251CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Magdeburg A, Stalter D, Oehlmann J (2012) Whole effluent toxicity assessment at a wastewater treatment plant upgraded with a full-scale post-ozonation using aquatic key species. Chemosphere 88:1008–1014CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Magdeburg A, Stalter D, Schlüsener M, Ternes T, Oehlmann J (2014) Evaluating the efficiency of advanced wastewater treatment: target analysis of organic contaminants and (geno-)toxicity assessment tell a different story. Water Res 50:35–47CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Matsui Y, Knappe DRU, Takagi R (2002) Pesticide adsorption by granular activated carbon adsorbers. 1. Effect of natural organic matter preloading on removal rates and model simplification. Environ Sci Technol 36:3426–3431CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Mestankova H, Schirmer K, Canonica S, von Gunten U (2014) Development of mutagenicity during degradation of N-nitrosamines by advanced oxidation processes. Water Res 66:399–410CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Monarca S, Feretti D, Collivignarelli C, Guzzella L, Zerbini I, Bertanza G, Pedrazzani R (2000) The influence of different disinfectants on mutagenicity and toxicity of urban wastewater. Water Res 34(17):4261–4269CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Neale PA, Escher BI, Leusch FDL (2015) Understanding the implications of dissolved organic carbon when assessing antagonism in vitro: an example with an estrogen receptor assay. Chemosphere 135:341–346CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. OECD 242 (2016) OECD guideline for the testing chemicals. Potamopyrgus antipodarum reproduction test. Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development, ParisCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Petala M, Samaras P, Zouboulis A, Kungolos A, Sakellaropoulos GP (2008) Influence of ozonation on the in vitro mutagenic and toxic potential of secondary effluents. Water Res 42:4929–4940CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Prasse C, Stalter D, Schulte-Oehlmann U, Oehlmann J, Ternes TA (2015) Spoilt for choice: a critical review on the chemical and biological assessment of current wastewater treatment technologies. Water Res 87:237–270CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Reifferscheid G, Maes HM, Allner B, Badurova J, Belkin S, Bluhm K, Brauer F, Bressling J, Domeneghetti S, Elad T, Flückinger-Isler S, Grummt HJ, Gürtler R, Hecht A, Heringa MB, Hollert H, Huber S, Kramer M, Magdeburg A, Ratte HT, Sauerborn-Klobucar R, Sokolowski A, Soldan P, Smital T, Stalter D, Venier P, Ziemann C, Zipperle J, Buchinger S (2012) International round-robin study on the Ames fluctuation test. Environ Mol Mutagen 53(3):185–197CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Reungoat J, Macova M, Escher BI, Carswell S, Mueller JF, Keller J (2010) Removal of micropollutants and reduction of biological activity in a full scale reclamation plant using ozonation and activated carbon filtration. Water Res 44:625–637CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Richardson SD, Plewa M, Wagner ED, Schoeny R, DeMarini DM (2007) Occurrence, genotoxicity, and carcinogenicity of regulated and emerging disinfection by-products in drinking water: a review and roadmap for research. Mutat Res – Gen Tox En 636:178–424Google Scholar
  32. Routledge EJ, Sumpter JP (1996) Estrogenic activity of surfactants and some of their degradation products assessed using a recombinant yeast screen. Environ Toxicol Chem 15(3):241–248CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. Santos LHMLM, Araújo AN, Fachini A, Pena A, Delerue-Matos C, Montenegro MCBSM (2010) Ecotoxicological aspects related to the presence of pharmaceuticals in the aquatic environment. J Hazard Mater 175:45–95CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. Schmidt CK, Brauch HJ (2008) N,N-Dimethylsulfamide as precursor for N-nitrosodimethylamide (NDMA) formation upon ozonation and its fate during drinking water treatment. Environ Sci Technol 42:6340–6346CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. Schneider I, Oehlmann J, Oetken M (2015) Impact of an estrogenic sewage treatment plant effluent on life-history traits of the freshwater amphipod Gammarus pulex. J Environ Sci Heal A 50:272–281CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. Schwarzenbach RP, Escher BI, Fenner K, Hofstetter TB, Johnson CA, von Gunten U, Wehrli B (2006) The challenge of micropollutants in aquatic systems. Science 313(5790):1072–1077CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. Snyder SA, Adham S, Redding AM, Cannon FS, DeCarolis J, Oppenheimer J, Wert EC, Yoon Y (2007) Role of membranes and activated carbon in the removal of endocrine disruptors and pharmaceuticals. Desalination 202:156–181CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. Sohoni P, Sumpter JP (1998) Several environment estrogens are also anti-androgens. J Endocrinol 158(3):327–339CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. Stackelberg PE, Gibs J, Furlong ET, Meyer MT, Zaugg SD, Lippincott RL (2007) Efficiency of conventional drinking-water-treatment processes in removal of pharmaceuticals and other organic compounds. Sci Total Environ 377:255–272CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. Stalter D, Magdeburg A, Oehlmann J (2010a) Comparative toxicity assessment of ozone and activated carbon sewage effluents using in vivo test battery. Water Res 44:2610–2620CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. Stalter D, Magdeburg A, Weil M, Knacker T, Oehlmann J (2010b) Toxication or detoxication? In vivo toxicity assessment of ozonation as advanced wastewater treatment with the rainbow trout. Water Res 44:439–448CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. Stalter D, Magdeburg A, Wagner M, Oehlmann J (2011) Ozonation and activated carbon treatment of sewage effluents: removal of endocrine activity and cytotoxicity. Water Res 45:1015–1024CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  43. Stalter D, Peters LI, O’Malley E, Tang JY-M, Revalor M, Farré MJ, Watson K, von Gunten U, Escher BI (2016) Sample enrichment for bioanalytical assessment of disinfection drinking water: concentrating the polar, the volatiles, and the unknowns. Environ Sci Technol 50(12):6495–6505CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  44. Stange D, Sieratowicz A, Horres R, Oehlmann J (2012) Freshwater mudsnail (Potamopyrgus antipodarum) estrogen receptor: identification and expression analysis under exposure to (xeno-)hormones. Ecotox Environ Saf 75:94–101CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  45. Tang X, QY W, Huang H, HY H, Li Q (2013) Removal potential of anti-estrogenic activity in secondary effluents by coagulation. Chemosphere 93:2562–2567CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  46. Ternes TA, Meisenheimer M, McDowell D, Sacher F, Brauch HJ, Haist-Gulde B, Preuss G, Wilme U, Zuleil-Seibert N (2002) Removal of pharmaceuticals during drinking water treatment. Environ Sci Technol 36:3855–3863CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  47. Triebskorn R, Hetzenauer H (2012) Micropollutants in three tributaries of Lake Constance Argen, Schussen and Seefelder Aach: a literature review. Environ Sci Eur 24:8CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  48. Triebskorn R, Amler K, Blaha L, Gallert C, Giebner S, Güde H, Henneberg A, Hess S, Hetzenauer H, Jedele K, Jung RM, Kneipp S, Köhler HR, Kraus S, Kuch B, Lange C, Löffler H, Maier D, Metzger J, Müller M, Oehlmann J, Osterauer R, Peschke K, Raizner J, Rey P, Rault M, Richter D, Sacher F, Scheurer M, Schneider-Rapp J, Seifan M, Spieth M, Vogel HJ, Weyhmüller M, Winter J, Wurm K (2013) SchussenAktivplus: reduction of micropollutants and of potentially pathogenic bacteria for further water quality improvement of the river Schussen, a tributary of Lake Constance, Germany. Environ Sci Eur 25:2CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  49. Tsutsumi N, Inami K, Mochizuki M (2010) Activation mechanism for N-nitroso-N-methylbutylamine mutagenicity by radical species. Bioorgan Med Chem 18:8284–8288CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  50. Urase T, Kikuta T (2005) Separate estimation of adsorption and degradation of pharmaceutical substances and estrogens in the activated sludge process. Water Res 39:1289–1300CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  51. Völker J, Castronovo S, Wick A, Ternes TA, Joss A, Oehlmann J, Wagner M (2016) Advancing biological wastewater treatment: extended anaerobic conditions enhance removal of endocrine and dioxin-like activities. Environ Sci Technol. doi: 10.1021/acs.est.5b05732 Google Scholar
  52. von Gunten U (2003a) Ozonation of drinking water: part I: oxidation kinetics and product formation. Water Res 37:1443–1467CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  53. Wagner M, Oehlmann J (2009) Endocrine disruptors in bottled mineral water: Total estrogenic burden and migration from plastic bottles. Environ Sci Pollut R 16:278–286CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  54. Wagner M, Oehlmann J (2011) Endocrine disruptors in bottled mineral water: estrogenic activity in the E-Screen. Steroid Biochem. Mol Biol 127:128–135Google Scholar
  55. Wagner M, Schlusener MP, Ternes TA, Oehlmann J (2013) Identification of putative steroid receptor antagonists in bottled water: combining bioassays and high-resolution mass spectometry. PLoS One 8(8):e72472CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  56. Wenzel H, Larsen HF, Clauson-Kaas J, Hoibye L, Jacobsen BN (2008) Weighing environmental advantages and disadvantages of advanced wastewater treatment of micro-pollutants using environmental life cycle assessment. Water Sci Technol 57(1):27–32CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  57. Wick A, Fink G, Joss A, Siegrist H, Ternes TA (2009) Fate of beta blockers and psycho-active drugs in conventional wastewater treatment. Water Res 43(4):1060–1074CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  58. Wu QY, Hu HY, Zhao X, Sun YX (2009) Effect of chlorination on the estrogenic/antiestrogenic activities of biologically treated wastewater. Environ Sci Technol 43:4940–4945CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  59. Yamada M, Sedgwick B, Sofuni T, Nohmi T (1995) Construction and characterization of mutants of Salmonella typhimurium deficient in DNA repair of O 6-methylguanine. J Bacteriol 177(6):1511–1519Google Scholar
  60. Yamada M, Matsui K, Sofuni T, Nohmi T (1997) New tester strains of Salmonella typhimurium lacking O 6-methylguanine DNA methyltransferases and highly sensitive to mutagenic alkylating agents. Mutat Res 381:15–24CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2016

Authors and Affiliations

  • Sabrina Giebner
    • 1
  • Sina Ostermann
    • 1
  • Susanne Straskraba
    • 1
  • Matthias Oetken
    • 1
  • Jörg Oehlmann
    • 1
  • Martin Wagner
    • 1
  1. 1.Faculty of Biological Sciences, Department Aquatic EcotoxicologyGoethe University Frankfurt am MainFrankfurt am MainGermany

Personalised recommendations