Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Occurrences and potential risks of 16 fragrances in five German sewage treatment plants and their receiving waters

  • Research Article
  • Published:
Environmental Science and Pollution Research Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Fragrances are used in a wide array of everyday products and enter the aquatic environment via wastewater. While several musk compounds have been studied in detail, little is known about the occurrence and fate of other fragrances. We selected 16 fragrance compounds and scrutinized their presence in Bavarian sewage treatment plants (STP) influents and effluents and discussed their ecological risks for the receiving surface waters. Moreover, we followed their concentrations along the path in one STP by corresponding time-related water sampling and derived the respective elimination rates in the purification process. Six fragrance substances (OTNE, HHCB, lilial, acetyl cedrene, menthol, and, in some grab samples, also methyl-dihydrojasmonate) could be detected in the effluents of the investigated sewage treatment plants. The other fragrances under scrutiny were only found in the inflow and were eliminated in the purification process. Only OTNE and HHCB were found in the receiving surface waters of the STP in congruent concentrations, which exceeded the preliminary derived environmental thresholds by a factor of 1.15 and 1.12, respectively, indicating potential risks. OTNE was also detected in similar concentration ranges as HHCB in muscles and livers of fish from surface waters and from ponds that are supplied with purified wastewater. The findings show that some fragrance compounds undergo high elimination rates, whereas others—not only musks—are present in receiving surface water and biota and may present a risk to local aquatic biota. Hence, our results suggest that the fate and potential effects of fragrance compounds in the aquatic environment deserve more attention.

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+ Basic
$34.99 /Month
  • Get 10 units per month
  • Download Article/Chapter or eBook
  • 1 Unit = 1 Article or 1 Chapter
  • Cancel anytime
Subscribe now

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
Fig. 3
Fig. 4
Fig. 5
Fig. 6

Similar content being viewed by others

Explore related subjects

Discover the latest articles, news and stories from top researchers in related subjects.

References

  • Balk F, Ford RA (1999a) Environmental risk assessment for the polycyclic musks AHTN and HHCB in the EU: I. Fate and exposure assessment. Toxicol Lett 111(1–2):57–79

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Balk F, Ford RA (1999b) Environmental risk assessment for the polycyclic musks, AHTN and HHCB: II. Effect assessment and risk characterisation. Toxicol Lett 111(1–2):81–94

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Bayerisches Landesamt für Umwelt (2008) Analysis of fish and mussles in bavarian water—fish and mussle bioaccumulation monitoring programme. Report 2005/2006 and 2006/2007 (in German) http://www.lfu.bayern.de/analytik_stoffe/akkumulationsmonitoring/stoffanreicherung_wassertiere_daten/doc/bericht_fischmonitoring.pdf

  • Bester K (2004) Retention characteristics and balance assessment for two polycyclic musk fragrances (HHCB and AHTN) in a typical German sewage treatment plant. Chemosphere 57:863–870

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Bester K (2005) Polycyclic musks in the Ruhr catchment area—transport, discharges of waste water, and transformations of HHCB, AHTN and HHCB-lactone. J Environ Monit 7:43–51

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Bester K, Hüffmeyer N, Schaub E, Klasmeier J (2008a) Surface water concentrations of the fragrance compound OTNE in Germany—a comparison between data from measurements and models. Chemosphere 73:1366–1372

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Bester K, Klasmeier J, Kupper T (2008b) Emissions of OTNE (Iso-E-super)—mass flows in sewage treatment plants. Chemosphere 71:2003–2010

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Bickers DR, Calow P, Greim HA, Hanifin JM, Rogers AE, Saurat J-H, Sipes IG, Smith RL, Tagami H (2003) The safety assessment of fragrance materials. Regul Toxicol Pharm 37:218–273

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Breitholtz M, Wollenberger L, Dinan L (2003) Effects of four synthetic musks on the life cycle of the harpacticoid copepod Nitocra spinipes. Aquat Toxicol 63(2):103–118

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Bschorer A (2011) Concentration and fate of selected fragrance compounds in Bavarian surface water (diploma thesis in German)

  • CEC (2011) Technical Guidance for Deriving Environmental Quality Standards. Guidance Document No 27:204. http://ec.europa.eu/environment/water/water-dangersub/lib_pri_substances.htm

  • Chen X, Bester K (2009) Determination of organic micro-pollutants such as personal care products, plasticizers and flame retardants in sludge. Anal Bioanal Chem 395:1877–1884

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Chen X, Pauly U, Rehfus S, Bester K (2009a) Personal care compounds in a reed bed sludge treatment system. Chemosphere 76:1094–1101

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Chen X, Pauly U, Rehfus S, Bester K (2009b) Removal of personal care compounds from sewage sludge in reed bed container (lysimeter) studies—effects of macrophytes. Sci Total Environ 407(21):5743–5749

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Dai L (2009) Fate and effects of sediment-associated acetyl cedrene in sediments inhabited by the deposit feeder, Capitella sp. I. (Master thesis)

  • EC (2002) Endocrine disruptors: study on gathering information on 435 substances with insufficient data, European Commission, DG ENV, Final Report, RPS-BKH Report

  • EC (2008) Guidance on information requirements and chemical safety assessment, http://echa.europa.eu/web/guest/guidance-documents/gauidance-on-information-requirements-and-chemical-safety-assessment

  • ECHA (2010) Guidance on information requirements and chemical safety assessment, Chapter R.16: environmental Exposure Estimation; R.16.6.5.4 Modelling STP. http://www.echa.europa.eu/documents/10162/13632/r16_echa_17_03_2010_en.pdf

  • Eriksson E, Auffarth K, Eilersen A-M, Henze M, Ledin A (2003) Household chemicals and personal care products as sources for xenobiotic organic compounds in grey wastewater. Water SA 29:135–146

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Fromme H, Otto T, Pilz K (2001) Polycyclic musk fragrances in different environmental compartments in Berlin (Germany). Water Res 35(1):121–128

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Heberer T (2002) Occurrence, fate, and assessment of polycyclic musk residues in the aquatic environment of urban areas—a review. Acta Hydrochim Hydrobiol 30(5–6):227–243

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Heberer T, Gramer S, Stan HJ (1999) Occurrence and distribution of organic contaminants in the aquatic system in Berlin. Part III: determination of synthetic musks in Berlin surface water applying solid-phase microextraction (SPME) and gas chromatography–mass spectrometry (GC-MS). Acta Hydroch Hydrob 27(3):150–156

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Huschek G, Hansen PD, Maurer HH, Krengel D, Kayser A (2004) Environmental risk assessment of medicinal products for human use according to European Commission recommendations. Env Tox. doi:10.1002/tox.20015

  • Klaschka U (2008) The infochemical effect—a new chapter in ecotoxicology. Environ Sci Pollut R 15(6):448–458

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Klaschka U (2010) Risk management by labelling 26 fragrances? Evaluation of Article 10 (1) of the seventh Amendment (Guideline 2003/15/EC) of the Cosmetic Directive. Int J Hyg Environ Health 213(4):308–320

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Klaschka U, Kolossa-Gehring M (2007) Review article: fragrances in the environment: pleasant odours for nature? Environ Sci Pollut R 14(1):44–52

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Langdon KA, Warne MS, Kookana RS (2010) Aquatic hazard assessment for pharmaceuticals, personal care products, and endocrine-disrupting compounds from biosolids-amended land. Integr Environ Assess Manag 6(4):663–676

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Letzel M, Weiss K, Schüssler W, Sengl M (2010) Occurrence and fate of the human pharmaceutical metabolite Ritalinic acid in the aquatic system. Chemosphere 81:1416–1422

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Luger A (2001) Fragrances in washing and cleansing products. Report about the amounts used in various washing and cleansing products (in German). Niedersächsisches Ministerium für Ernährung, Landwirtschaft und Forsten

  • Nasu M, Goto M, Kato H, Oshima Y, Tanaka H (2001) Study on endocrine disrupting chemicals in wastewater treatment plants. Water Sci Tech 43(2):101–108

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Noser J, Sutter A, Auckenthaler A (2000) Musk compounds: useful indicators for contaminants in drinking water? (in German). Mitt Lebensmittelunters Hyg 91:102–115

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  • OSPAR Commission (2004) Musk xylene and other musks. OSPAR Background document on musk xylene and other musks. Hazardous Substances Series

  • Paxéus N, Schröder HF (1996) Screening for non-regulated organic compounds in municipal wastewater in Göteborg, Sweden. Water Sci Technol 33(6):9–15

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Rimkus GG (ed) (2004) Synthetic musk fragrances in the environment: In: The Handbook of Environmental Chemistry. Volume 3, Part X. Springer, Heidelberg

  • SCCNFP (2000) Opinion concerning the 1st update of the inventory of ingredients employed in cosmetic products. Section II: perfume and aromatic materials. SCCNFP/0389/00/Final

  • Schnuch A, Uter W, Geier J, Lessmann H, Frosch P (2007) Sensitization to 26 allergens to be labelled according to current European regulation. Results of the IVDK and review of the literature. Contact Dermatitis 57:1–10

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Sengl M, Krezmer S (2010) Not a question of size: efficient analytical detection of pesticides and SHKWs (in German). Gerstel Aktuell 41:16–19

    Google Scholar 

  • Simonich SL (2005) Fragrance materials in waste water treatment. In: Barcelo D (ed) Handbook of the environmental Chemistry. Emerging organic pollutants in waste water and sludge, 5th edn. Springer, Heidelberg, pp 79–118

    Google Scholar 

  • Simonich SL, Begley WM, Debaere G, Eckhoff W (2000) Trace analysis of fragrance materials in wastewater and treated wastewater. Environ Sci Technol 34:959–965

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Simonich SL, Federle TW, Eckhoff WS, Rottiers A, Webb S, Sabaliunas D, De Wolf W (2002) Removal of fragrance materials during U.S. and European wastewater treatment. Environ Sci Technol 36:2839–2847

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Ternes TA, Knacker T, Oehlmann J (2003) Personal care products in the aquatic environment. A group of compounds that has been neglected so far. (in German). Umweltwiss Schadstoff Forsch 15:169–180

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • von der Ohe PC, Dulio V, Slobodnik J, De Deckere E, Kühne R, Eber R-U, Ginebreda A, De Cooman W, Schüürmann G, Brack W (2011a) A new risk assessment approach for the prioritization of 500 classical and emerging organic microcontaminants as potential river basin specific pollutants under the European Water Framework Directive. Sci Total Environ 409:2064–2077

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • von der Ohe PC, Schmitt-Jansen M, Slobodnik J, Brack W (2011b) Triclosan—the forgotten priority substance? Environ Sci Pollut Res. doi:10.1007/s11356-011-580-7

  • Wollenberger L, Breitholz M, Kust KO, Bengtsson B-E (2003) Inhibition of larval development of the marine copepod Acartia tonsa by for four synthetic musk substances. Sci Total Environ 305:53–64

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. University of Applied Sciences Ulm, Prittwitzstr. 10, 89075, Ulm, Germany

    Ursula Klaschka

  2. UFZ—Helmholtz Centre for Environmental Research, Permoserstr. 15, 04318, Leipzig, Germany

    Peter Carsten von der Ohe

  3. Bavarian Environment Agency, Demollstr. 31, 82407, Wielenbach, Germany

    Anne Bschorer & Marion Letzel

  4. Bavarian Environment Agency, Kaulbachstr. 37, 80539, Munich, Germany

    Sonja Krezmer & Manfred Sengl

Authors
  1. Ursula Klaschka
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Peter Carsten von der Ohe
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Anne Bschorer
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Sonja Krezmer
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  5. Manfred Sengl
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  6. Marion Letzel
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Ursula Klaschka.

Additional information

Communicated by Hongwen Sun

Responsible editor: Hongwen Sun

Electronic supplementary material

Below is the link to the electronic supplementary material.

ESM 1

(DOC 109 KB)

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Klaschka, U., von der Ohe, P.C., Bschorer, A. et al. Occurrences and potential risks of 16 fragrances in five German sewage treatment plants and their receiving waters. Environ Sci Pollut Res 20, 2456–2471 (2013). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11356-012-1120-9

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11356-012-1120-9

Keywords

Search

Navigation