Advertisement

Radiation and Environmental Biophysics

, Volume 49, Issue 1, pp 87–95 | Cite as

An approach for the assessment of risk from chronic radiation to populations of phytoplankton and zooplankton

  • R. C. WilsonEmail author
  • J. Vives i Batlle
  • S. J. Watts
  • P. McDonald
  • S. R. Jones
  • A. Craze
Original Paper

Abstract

A conceptual model of the effects of chronic radiation on a population of phytoplankton and zooplankton in an oceanic nutrient layer is presented. The model shows that there are distinct threshold dose rates at which the different plankton populations become unsustainable. These are 10,400 µGy h−1 for phytoplankton and 125 µGy h−1 for zooplankton. Both these values are considerably greater than the current screening values for protection of 10 µGy h−1. The model highlights the effects of predator–prey dynamics in predicting that when the zooplankton is affected by the radiation dose, the phytoplankton population can increase. In addition, the model was altered to replicate the dose rates to the plankton of a previous ERICA Irish Sea assessment (24 µGy h−1 for zooplankton and 430 µGy h−1 to phytoplankton). The results showed only a 10% decrease in the zooplankton population and a 15% increase in the phytoplankton population. Therefore, at this level of dose, the model predicts that although the dose rate exceeds the guideline value, populations are not significantly affected. This result highlights the limitations of a single screening value for different groups of organisms.

Keywords

Phytoplankton Dose Rate Radiation Model Phytoplankton Population Light Shading 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.

Notes

Acknowledgments

The authors wish to acknowledge the Nuclear Decommissioning Authority (NDA, UK) for financial support (Project Ref. CJ000090). The authors would also like to thank Drs Tatiana Sazykina and Alexander Kryshev from the Scientific Association Typhoon (Obninsk, Russia) for assistance in radiation modelling parameterization.

References

  1. Andersson P, Beaugelin-Seiller K, Beresford NA, Copplestone D, Della Vedova C, Garnier-Laplace J, Howard BJ, Howe P, Oughton DH, Wells C, Whitehouse P (2008) PROTECT, protection of the environment from ionising radiation in a regulatory context. Deliverable 5 Numerical benchmarks for protecting biota from radiation in the environment: proposed levels, underlying reasoning and recommendationsGoogle Scholar
  2. Beresford N, Justin J, Copplestone D, Garnier-Laplace J, Howard B, Larsson C-M, Oughton D, Pröhl GIZ (2007) D-ERICA: an integrated approach to the assessment and management of environmental risks from ionising radiation. A deliverable of the ERICA project (FI6R-CT-2004-508847). Swedish Radiation Protection Authority (SSI), Stockholm. http://www.erica-project.org/
  3. Bonham K, Palumbo R (1951) Effects of X-rays on snails, crustacea, and algae. Growth 15:155–188Google Scholar
  4. Bytwerk DP (2006) An allometric examination of the relationship between radiosensitivity and mass. M.Sc. Thesis, Oregon State University, 70 pp. Available via http://ir.library.oregonstate.edu/jspui/handle/1957/7688. Accessed 11 September 2009
  5. Copplestone D, Bielby S, Jones SR, Patton D, Daniel CP, Gize I (2001) Impact assessment of ionising radiation on wildlife. R&D Publication 128, Environment Agency, UK and English NatureGoogle Scholar
  6. Edwards AM, Bees MA (2001) Generic dynamics of a simple plankton population model with a non-integer exponent of closure. Chaos Solitons Fractals 12:289–300zbMATHCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Edwards AM, Brindley J (1999) Zooplankton mortality and the dynamical behaviour of plankton population models. Bull Math Biol 61:303–339CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Edwards AM, Yool A (2000) The role of higher predation in plankton population models. J Plankton Res 22(6):1085–1112CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Goshawk JA, Clarke S, Smith CN, McDonald P (2003) MEAD (part I)—a mathematical model of the long-term dispersion of radioactivity in shelf sea environments. J Environ Radioact 68(2):115–135CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Guirey E (2007) Application of synchronisation theory to plankton patchiness. PhD Thesis, University of Southampton, 166 ppGoogle Scholar
  11. Hosseini A, Brown J, Jones SR, Vives-Lynch S, Johnson CE (2007) Chapter 4: Sellafield marine. In: Beresford NA, Howard BJ, Barnett CL (eds) Application of ERICA integrated approach at case study sites, Deliverable D10, Final Report, 28 February 2007. EU sixth framework: http://www.erica-project.org/
  12. ICRP (2003) A framework for assessing the impact of ionising radiation on non-human species. ICRP Publication 91. Annals of the ICRP 33(3). Pergamon Press, OxfordGoogle Scholar
  13. ICRP (2009) The Concept and use for Reference Animals and Plants for the purposes of Environmental Protection. In: Valentin J (ed) ICRP Publication 108, Annals of the ICRP, vol 38, No 4–6, 330 ppGoogle Scholar
  14. Kryshev AI, Sazykina TG, Badalian KD (2006) Mathematical simulation of dose-effect relationships for fish eggs exposed chronically to ionizing radiation. Radiat Environ Biophys 45(3):195–201CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Kryshev AI, Sazykina TG, Sanina KD (2008) Modelling of effects due to chronic exposure of a fish population to ionizing radiation. Radiat Environ Biophys 47(1):121–129. doi: 10.1007/s00411-007-0127-y CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Polikarpov GG (1965) Radioecology of aquatic organisms: the accumulation and biological effects of radioactive substances. North Holland Publishing Co, AmsterdamGoogle Scholar
  17. Rose KSB (1992) Lower limits of radiosensitivity in organisms, excluding man. J Environ Radioact 15:113–133CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Smith CN, Goshawk JA, Charles K, McDonald P, Leonard KS, McCubbin D (2003) MEAD (part II)—predictions of radioactivity concentrations in the Irish Sea. J Environ Radioact 68(3):193–214CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Vives i Batlle J, Wilson RC, Watts SJ, Jones SR, McDonald P, Vives-Lynch S (2008) Dynamic model for the assessment of radiological exposure to marine biota. J Environ Radioact 99(11):1711–1730CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag 2009

Authors and Affiliations

  • R. C. Wilson
    • 1
    Email author
  • J. Vives i Batlle
    • 1
  • S. J. Watts
    • 1
  • P. McDonald
    • 1
  • S. R. Jones
    • 1
  • A. Craze
    • 2
  1. 1.Westlakes Scientific Consulting LtdMoor RowUK
  2. 2.Nuclear Decommissioning AuthorityMoor RowUK

Personalised recommendations