Skip to main content
Springer Nature Link
Log in

Comparison of Bulk Sediment and Sediment Elutriate Toxicity Testing Methods

  • Published:
Archives of Environmental Contamination and Toxicology Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Numerous methods exist for assessing the potential toxicity of sediments in aquatic systems. In this study, the results from 10-day bulk sediment toxicity test methods using Hyalella azteca and Chironomus tentans were compared to results from 96-h Pimephales promelas and Ceriodaphnia dubia renewed acute toxicity tests conducted using elutriate samples prepared from the same sediments. The goal of the study was to determine if the results from the elutriate tests were comparable to those obtained from the bulk sediment tests. Of the 25 samples analyzed, 16 were found to be toxic to at least one of the species tested, in either elutriate or bulk sediment tests. The C. tentans 10-day bulk sediment test was the most sensitive, with 12 sediment samples exhibiting toxicity to this species, whereas the H. azteca bulk sediment test and C. dubia 96-h elutriate test were the least sensitive, exhibiting toxicity in only 7 of the 25 sediments tested. The P. promelas elutriate test found 8 of the 25 sediments to be toxic. Based on the total number of sites found to show toxicity, results from testing indicate 96-h elutriate tests show a level of sensitivity comparable to 10-day bulk sediment tests in assessing toxicity quantitatively. However, the methods did not always find toxicity at the same sites, suggesting that the ability of elutriate tests to predict toxicity (quantitatively) is not statistically correlated with bulk sediment methods. This would indicate that a suite of toxicity test methods would provide the most complete measure of site condition; however, in circumstances where bulk sediment testing is not feasible, elutriate tests can provide a practical and credible alternative for toxicity assessment.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Subscribe and save

Springer+
from $39.99 /Month
  • Starting from 10 chapters or articles per month
  • Access and download chapters and articles from more than 300k books and 2,500 journals
  • Cancel anytime
View plans

Buy Now

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2

Similar content being viewed by others

Explore related subjects

Discover the latest articles, books and news in related subjects, suggested using machine learning.

References

  • Ahlf W, Wild-Metzko S (1992) Bioassay responses to sediment elutriates and multivariate data analysis for hazard assessment of sediment-bound chemicals. Hydrobiolgia 235–236(1):415–418

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • ASTM International (2000) Standard guide for collection, storage, characterization, and manipulation of sediment for toxicological testing. In: ASTM Guide 1391-94, annual book of ASTM standards. American Society for Testing and Materials, West Conshohocken, PA

  • Burton GA Jr (1992) Sediment toxicity assessment. Lewis Publishers, Chelsea, MI

    Google Scholar 

  • Burton GA Jr, Norberg-King TJ, Ingersoll CG, Benoit DA, Ankley GT, Winger PV, Kubitz J, Lazorchak JM, Smith ME, Greer E, Dwyer FJ, Call DJ, Day KE, Kennedy P, Stinson M (1996) Interlaboratory study of precision: Hyalella azteca and Chironomus tentans freshwater sediment toxicity assays. Environ Toxicol Chem 15(8):1335–1343

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Cairns MA, Nebeker AV, Gakstatter JH, Griffis WL (1984) Toxicity of copper-spiked sediments to freshwater invertebrates. Environ Toxicol Chem 3(3):435–445

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Callier MD, Fletcher RL, Thorp CH, Fichet D (2009) Macrofanual community responses to marina-related pollution on the south coast of England and west coast of France. J Marine Biol Assoc UK 89(1):19–29

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Chapman PM, Swartz RC, Roddie B, Phelps HL, van der Hurk P, Bulter P (1992) An international comparison of sediment toxicity tests in the North Sea. Marine Ecol Prog Ser 91:253–264

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Finlayson B, Fujimura R, Huang Z-Z (2000) Toxicity of metal-contaminated sediment from Keswick Reservoir, California, USA. Environ Toxicol Chem 19(2):485–494

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Hall RK, Wolinsky GA, Husby P, Harrington J, Spindler P, Vargas K, Smith G (2000) Status of aquatic bioassessment in U.S. EPA Region IX. Environ Monit Assess 64(1):17–30

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Karbe L (1992) Toxicity of surface microlayer, subsurface water and sediment-elutriates from the German Bight: summary and conclusions. Marine Ecol Prog Ser 91:197–201

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lazorchak JM, Smith ME, Haring HJ (2009) Development and validation of a Daphnia magna four-day survival and growth test method. Environ Toxicol Chem 28(5):1028–1034

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Liß W, Ahlf W (1997) Evidence from whole-sediment, porewater, and elutriate testing in toxicity assessment of contaminated sediments. Ecotoxicol Environ Safety 36(2):140–147

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Marin MG, Da Ros L, Moschino V, Campesan G (2001) Sediment elutriate toxicity testing with embryos of sea urchin (Paracentrotus lividus). Aquat Ecosyst Health Manage 4(2):215–221

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Mucha AP, Bordalo AA, Vasconcelos MTSD (2004) Sediment quality in the Douro River estuary based on trace metal contents, macrobenthic community and elutriate sediment toxicity test (ESTT). J Environ Monit 6(7):585–592

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Novelli AA, Losso C, Libralato G, Tagliapietra D, Pantani C, Ghirardini AV (2006) Is the 1:4 elutriation ratio reliable? Ecotoxicological comparison of four different sediment:water proportions. Ecotoxicol Environ Safety 65(3):306–313

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • OSPAR (1997) JAMP guidelines for general biological effects monitoring, OSPAR Agreement 1997-7. Technical annexes revised 2007. OSPAR Commission, London

  • Phipps GL, Mattson VR, Ankley GT (1995) Relative sensitivity of three freshwater benthic macroinvertebrates to ten contaminants. Arch Environ Contam Toxicol 28(3):281–286

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Sousa ECPM, Abessa DMS, Rachid BRF, Gasparro MR, Zaroni LP (2007) Ecotoxicological assessment of sediments from the Port of Santos and the disposal sites of dredged materials. Braz J Oceanogr 55(2):75–81

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Stewart AJ, Kszos LA, Harvey BC, Wicker LF, Haynes GJ, Bailey RD (1990) Ambient toxicity dynamics: assessments using Ceriodaphnia dubia and fathead minnow (Pimephales promelas) larvae in short-term tests. Environ Toxicol Chem 9(3):367–379

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Suedel BC, Rodgers JH Jr, Clifford PA (1993) Bioavailability of flouranthene in freshwater sediment toxicity tests. Environ Toxicol Chem 12(1):155–165

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Tabak HH, Lazorchak JM, Smith ME, Ferretti J (2005) A toxicity assessment approach for evaluation of in-situ bioremediation of PAH contaminated sediments. In: Ostrander GK (ed) Techniques in aquatic toxicology, vol. 2

  • USEPA (1988) Bioassay protocols for assessing acute and chronic toxicity at hazardous waste sites. US Environmental Protection Agency. Corvallis Environmental Research Laboratory, Corvallis, OR

  • USEPA (2000) Methods for measuring the toxicity and bioaccumulation of sediment-associated contaminants with freshwater invertebrates, 2nd ed. EPA-600-R-99-064. US Environmental Protection Agency, Office of Water, Washington, DC

  • USEPA (2002) Methods for measuring the acute toxicity of effluents and receiving waters to freshwater and marine organisms, 5th ed. EPA-821-R-02-012. US Environmental Protection Agency, Office of Water, Washington, DC

  • USEPA–USACOE (1998) Evaluation of dredged material proposed for discharge in waters of the U.S.-Inland testing manual. EPA-823-B-98-004. US Environmental Protection Agency, Office of Water, and US Army Corps of Engineers, Washington, DC

  • West CW, Mattson VR, Leonard EN, Phipps GL, Ankley GT (1993) Comparison of the relative sensitivity of three benthic invertebrates to copper-contaminated sediments from the Keweenaw Waterway. Hydrobiologia 262(1):57–63

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Yegane O, Parlack H, Arslan OC, Boyacioglu M (2008) Sediment toxicity of streams flow through the inner part of Izmir Bay with Daphnia magna Straus, 1820. EU J Fish Aquat Sci 25(1):47–51

    Google Scholar 

  • Zumwalt DC, Dwyer FJ, Greer IE, Ingersoll CG (1994) A water-renewal system that accurately delivers small volumes of water to exposure chambers. Environ Toxicol Chem 13(8):1311–1314

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgments

The research reported in this document was funded by the US Environmental Protection Agency. This manuscript has been subjected to the Agency’s peer and administrative review and has been approved for publication. Approval does not signify that the contents reflect the views of the Agency, nor does mention of trade names or commercial products constitute endorsement or recommendation for use. The authors would like to acknowledge the statistical technical support provided by Karen Blocksom, NERL USEPA, as well as the technical review provided and editing by Justicia Rhodus, Dynamac. The comments of two anonymous reviewers were most helpful.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. The McConnell Group, c/o US Environmental Protection Agency, Office of Research and Development, National Exposure Research Laboratory, 26 W. Martin Luther King Drive, Cincinnati, OH, 45268, USA

    Herman J. Haring, Mark E. Smith & Melissa C. Wratschko

  2. US Environmental Protection Agency, Office of Research and Development, National Exposure Research Laboratory, 26 W. Martin Luther King Drive, Cincinnati, OH, 45268, USA

    James M. Lazorchak

  3. US Environmental Protection Agency, Region 6, Monitoring and Assessment Section, 1445 Ross Avenue, Dallas, TX, 75202, USA

    Philip A. Crocker & Michael C. Schaub

  4. US Environmental Protection Agency, Region 6, 10625 Fallstone Road, Houston, TX, 77099, USA

    Abel Euresti

Authors
  1. Herman J. Haring
    View author publications

    Search author on:PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Mark E. Smith
    View author publications

    Search author on:PubMed Google Scholar

  3. James M. Lazorchak
    View author publications

    Search author on:PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Philip A. Crocker
    View author publications

    Search author on:PubMed Google Scholar

  5. Abel Euresti
    View author publications

    Search author on:PubMed Google Scholar

  6. Melissa C. Wratschko
    View author publications

    Search author on:PubMed Google Scholar

  7. Michael C. Schaub
    View author publications

    Search author on:PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to James M. Lazorchak.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Haring, H.J., Smith, M.E., Lazorchak, J.M. et al. Comparison of Bulk Sediment and Sediment Elutriate Toxicity Testing Methods. Arch Environ Contam Toxicol 58, 676–683 (2010). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00244-009-9447-z

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00244-009-9447-z

Keywords