Advertisement

Estuaries and Coasts

, Volume 35, Issue 6, pp 1551–1570 | Cite as

Modeling Fate, Transport, and Biological Uptake of Selenium in North San Francisco Bay

  • Limin Chen
  • Shannon L. Meseck
  • Sujoy B. RoyEmail author
  • Thomas M. Grieb
  • Barbara Baginska
Article

Abstract

Selenium behavior in North San Francisco Bay, the largest estuary on the US Pacific coast, is simulated using a numerical model. This work builds upon a previously published application for simulating selenium in the bay and considers point and non-point sources, transport and mixing of selenium, transformations between different species of selenium, and biological uptake by phytoplankton, bivalves, and higher organisms. An evaluation of the calibrated model suggests that it is able to represent salinity, suspended material, and chlorophyll a under different flow conditions beyond the calibration period, through comparison against long-term data, and the distribution of different species of dissolved and particulate selenium. Model-calculated selenium concentrations in bivalves compared well to a long-term dataset, capturing the annual and seasonal variations over a 15-year period. In particular, the observed lower bivalve concentrations in the wet flow periods, corresponding to lower average particulate selenium concentrations in the bay, are well represented by the model, demonstrating the role of loading and hydrology in affecting clam concentrations. Simulated selenium concentrations in higher organisms including white sturgeon and greater scaup also compared well to the observed data in the bay. Finally, a simulation of changing riverine inflows into the bay that might occur as a consequence of proposed hydrologic modifications indicated significant increases in dissolved and particulate selenium concentrations in the bay. The modeling framework allows an examination of the relationship between selenium loads, variations in inflow, in-bay concentrations, and biota concentrations to support management for limiting wildlife impacts.

Keywords

Bioaccumulation Selenium speciation TMDL Estuarine modeling ECoS 

Notes

Acknowledgments

We thank J.R.W. Harris for providing a copy of the ECoS modeling framework for this application. We thank Nicholas Fisher, Samuel Luoma, Regina Linville, and John Oram for serving as reviewers during the model development process and appreciate the comments of two anonymous reviewers of the manuscript. These inputs have strengthened the analysis and presentation of this work. Financial support for LC, SBR, and TMG was provided by the Western States Petroleum Association. Opinions expressed in the paper are those of the authors and not of the agencies they are employed by or of the funding entity.

Supplementary material

12237_2012_9530_MOESM1_ESM.doc (512 kb)
ESM 1 (DOC 512 kb)

References

  1. Baines, S.B., and N.S. Fisher. 2001. Interspecific differences in the bioconcentration of selenite by phytoplankton and their ecological implications. Marine Ecology Progress Series 213: 1–12.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Baines, S.B., N.S. Fisher, M.A. Doblin, G.A. Cutter, L.S. Cutter, and B.E. Cole. 2004. Light dependence of selenium uptake by phytoplankton and implications for predicting selenium incorporation into food webs. Limnology and Oceanography 49(2): 566–578.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. CALFED (2008) Science issues related to Delta conveyance options for California water supply: Results from two workshops regarding Delta conveyance infrastructure. Available at: http://www.science.calwater.ca.gov/pdf/workshops/workshop_dci-dci2_synthesis_031208.pdf
  4. California Energy Commission (2012) California’s oil refineries. Available at: http://energyalmanac.ca.gov/petroleum/refineries.html.
  5. Cutter, G.A. 1982. Selenium in reducing waters. Science 217: 829–831.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Cutter, G.A. 1992. Kinetic controls on metalloid speciation in seawater. Marine Chemistry 40: 65–80.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Cutter, G.A., and K.W. Bruland. 1984. The marine biogeochemistry of selenium: A re-evaluation. Limnology and Oceanography 29(6): 1179–1192.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Cutter, G.A., and L.S. Cutter. 2004. Selenium biogeochemistry in the San Francisco Bay estuary: Changes in water column behavior. Estuarine, Coastal and Shelf Science 61: 463–476.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Doblin, M.A., S.B. Baines, L.S. Cutter, and G.A. Cutter. 2006. Sources and biogeochemical cycling of particulate selenium in the San Francisco Bay estuary. Estuarine, Coastal and Shelf Science 67: 681–694.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. DWR (Department of Water Resources). 2010. Available at: http://cdec.water.ca.gov/cgi-progs/iodir/WSIHIST.
  11. Harris, J.R.W. 2003. Apparent homeostasis in the surface salinity of a turbid macrotidal estuary. The Science of the Total Environment 314–316: 651–663.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Harris, J.R.W., and R.N. Gorley. 2003. ECoS, a framework for modeling hierarchical spatial systems. The Science of the Total Environment 314–316: 625–635.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Harris, J.R.W., and R.N. Gorley. 1998. An introduction to modeling estuaries with ECoS 3. Plymouth: Plymouth Marine Laboratory.Google Scholar
  14. Harrison, P.J., P.W. Yu, P.A. Thompson, N.M. Price, and D.J. Phillips. 1988. Survey of selenium requirements in marine phytoplankton. Marine Ecology Progress Series 47: 89–96.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. IEP (Interagency Ecological Program). 2010. Available at: http://www.iep.ca.gov/dayflow/index.html
  16. Kleckner, A.E., Stewart, A.R, K. Elrick, and S.N. Luoma. 2010. Selenium concentrations and stable isotopic composition of carbon and nitrogen in the benthic clam Corbula amurensis from Northern San Francisco bay, California, May 1995–February 2010. US Geological Survey open-file report 2010-1252.Google Scholar
  17. Lauchli, A. 1993. Selenium in plants—uptake, functions, and environmental toxicity. Botanica Acta 106: 455–468.Google Scholar
  18. Lee, B.G., J.S. Lee, and S.N. Luoma. 2006. Comparison of selenium bioaccumulation in the clams Corbicula fluminea and Potamocorbula amurensis: A bioenergetic modeling approach. Environmental Toxicology and Chemistry 25: 1933–1940.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Lemly, A.D. 1985. Toxicology of selenium in a freshwater reservoir: Implications for environmental hazard evaluation and safety. Ecotoxicology and Environmental Safety 10: 314–338.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Lemly, A.D. 1996. Assessing the toxic threat of selenium to fish and aquatic birds. Environmental Monitoring and Assessment 43: 19–35.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Linares, J., R.G. Linville, J.P. Van Eenennaam, and S.I. Doroshow. 2004. Selenium effects on health and reproduction of White Sturgeon in the Sacramento–San Joaquin Estuary. Davis: University of California. Final report for CALFED project No. ERP-02-P35.Google Scholar
  22. Linville, R.G. 2006. Effects of excess selenium on the health and reproduction of White Sturgeon (Acipenser transmontanours): Implications for San Francisco Bay-Delta. Ph.D. Dissertation. Davis: University of California.Google Scholar
  23. Linville, R.G., S.N. Luoma, L.S. Cutter, and G.A. Cutter. 2002. Increased selenium threat as a result of invasion of the exotic bivalve Potamocorbula amurensis into the San Francisco Bay-Delta. Aquatic Toxicology 57(1–2): 51–64.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Liu, Y.P., G.E. Millward, and J.R.W. Harris. 1998. Modeling the distribution of dissolved Zn and Ni in the Tamar Estuary using hydrodynamics coupled with chemical kinetics. Estuarine, Coastal and Shelf Science 47(5): 535–546.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Luoma, S.N., and P.S. Rainbow. 2005. Why is metal bioaccumulation so variable? Biodynamics as a unifying concept. Environmental Science and Technology 39(7): 1921–1931.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Luoma, S.N., C. Johns, N.S. Fisher, N.A. Steinberg, R.S. Oremland, and J.R. Reinfelder. 1992. Determination of selenium bioavailability to a benthic bivalve from particulate and solute pathways. Environmental Science and Technology 1992(26): 485–491.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Measures, C.I., R.E. McDuff, and J.M. Edmond. 1980. Selenium redox chemistry at the GEOSECS-I re-occupation. Earth and Planetary Science Letters 49: 102–108.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Meseck, S.L. 2002. Modeling the biogeochemical cycle of selenium in the San Francisco Bay. A dissertation submitted to the faculty of Old Dominion University in partial fulfillment of the Degree of Doctor of Philosophy.Google Scholar
  29. Meseck, S.L., and G.A. Cutter. 2006. Evaluating the biogeochemical cycle of selenium in San Francisco Bay through modeling. Limnology and Oceanography 51(5): 2018–2032.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Meseck, S.L., and G.A. Cutter. 2012. Selenium behavior in San Francisco Bay sediments. Estuaries and Coasts 35(12): 646–657.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Ohlendorf, H.M., A.W. Kilness, J.L. Simmons, R.K. Stroud, D.J. Hoffman, and J.F. Moore. 1988. Selenium toxicosis in wild aquatic birds. Journal of Toxicology and Environmental Health 24(1): 67–92.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Perrin, C., C. Michel, and V. Andreassian. 2001. Does a large number of parameters enhance model performance? Comparative assessment of common catchment model structure on 429 catchments. Journal of Hydrology 242: 275–301.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. Presser, T.S., and S.N. Luoma. 2010. A methodology for ecosystem-scale modeling of selenium. Integrated Environmental Assessment and Management 6(4): 685–710.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. Presser, T.S. and S.N. Luoma. 2006. Forecasting selenium discharges to the San Francisco Bay-Delta Estuary: Ecological effects of a proposed San Luis drain extension. USGS professional paper 1646.Google Scholar
  35. Punt, A.G., G.E. Millward, and J.R.W. Harris. 2003. Modelling solute transport in the Tweed Estuary, UK using ECoS. The Science of the Total Environment 314–316: 715–725.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. Riedel, G.F., J.G. Sanders, and C.C. Gilmour. 1996. Uptake, transformation, and impact of selenium in freshwater phytoplankton and bacterioplankton communities. Aquatic Microbial Ecology 11: 43–51.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. RMP (Regional Monitoring Program). 2010. RMP data. Available at: http://www.sfei.org/rmp/data.
  38. San Francisco Estuary Institute (SFEI) and the Regional Monitoring Program for Water Quality in San Francisco Estuary. 2006. The pulse of the Estuary. Monitoring and managing water quality in the San Francisco Estuary.Google Scholar
  39. Sanders, R.W., and C.C. Gilmour. 1994. Accumulation of selenium in a model freshwater microbial foodweb. Applied and Environmental Microbiology 60: 2677–2683.Google Scholar
  40. Schlekat, C.E., P.R. Dowdle, B. Lee, S.N. Luoma, and R.S. Oremland. 2000. Bioavailability of particle-associated Se to the bivalve Potamocorbula amurensis. Environmental Science and Technology 34: 4504–4510.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. Schlekat, C.E., B.G. Lee, and S.N. Luoma. 2002. Assimilation of selenium from phytoplankton by three benthic invertebrates: Effect of phytoplankton species. Marine Ecology Progress Series 237: 79–85.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. Skorupa, J.P. 1998. Selenium poisoning of fish and wildlife in nature: Lessons from twelve real-world examples. In Environmental chemistry of selenium, ed. W. Frankenberger and R.A. Engberg, 315–354. New York: Marcel Dekker.Google Scholar
  43. Stewart, R.S., S.N. Luoma, C.E. Schlekat, M.A. Doblin, and K.A. Hieb. 2004. Food web pathway determines how selenium affects ecosystems: A San Francisco Bay case study. Environmental Science and Technology 38(17): 4519–4526.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  44. Suzuki, Y., U. Miyake, K. Saruhashi, and Y. Sugimura. 1979. A cycle of selenium in the ocean. Papers in Meteorology and Geophysics 30: 185–189.Google Scholar
  45. Tappin, A.D., J.R.W. Harris, and R.J. Uncles. 2003. The fluxes and transformations of suspended particles, carbon and nitrogen in the Humber estuarine system (UK) from 1994 to 1996: Results from an integrated observation and modeling study. The Science of the Total Environment 314–316: 665–713.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  46. Tetra Tech, Inc. 2008. Technical Memorandum #2: North San Francisco Bay Selenium Data Summary and Source Analysis. Available at: http://www.swrcb.ca.gov/rwqcb2//water_issues/programs/TMDLs/seleniumtmdl.shtml.
  47. Tetra Tech, Inc. 2010. Technical Memorandum #6: Application of ECoS3 for Simulation and of Selenium Fate and Transport in North San Francisco Bay. Available at: http://www.swrcb.ca.gov/rwqcb2//water_issues/programs/TMDLs/seleniumtmdl.shtml.
  48. US Census of Agriculture. (2007). Available at: http://www.agcensus.usda.gov/Publications/2007/Full_Report/.
  49. Uncles, R.J., P.E. Frickers, and J. Harris. 2003. Dissolved nutrients in the Tweed Estuary, UK: Inputs, distributions and effects of residence time. The Science of the Total Environment 314–316: 727–736.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  50. Urquhart, K.A.F., Regalado, K. 1991. Selenium verification study, 1988–1990. Water Resources Control Board Rept. 91-2-WQ, Sacramento, CA. p. 176.Google Scholar
  51. Urquhart, K.A.F., Regalado, K. et al. 1991. Selenium verification study, 1988–1990 (report 91-2-WQWR). A report from the California Department of Fish and Game to the California State Water Resources Control Board: California Sate Water Resources Control Board, Sacramento, California. 94 pp. and 7 appendices.Google Scholar
  52. Wang, W.X., and N.S. Fisher. 1996. Assimilation of trace elements and carbon by the mussel Mytilus edulis: Effects of food composition. Limnology and Oceanography 41: 197–207.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  53. Wang, W.X., N.S. Fisher, and S.N. Luoma. 1996. Kinetic determination of trace element bioaccumulation of in the mussel Mytilus edulis. Marine Ecology Progress Series 140: 91–113.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  54. White, J.R., Hofmann, P.S., Hammond, D., and S. Baumgartner. 1988. Selenium verification study, 1986–1987. A report from the California Department of Fish and Game to the California State Water Resources Control Board: California State Water Resources Control Board Sacramento, California, 60 pp. and 8 appendices.Google Scholar
  55. White, J.R., Hofmann, P.S., Urquhart, K.A.F., Hammond D., and S. Baumgartner. 1989. Selenium verification study, 1987–1988. A report from the California Department of Fish and Game to the California State Water Resources Control Board: California State Water Resources Control Board, Sacramento, California, 81 pp. and 11 appendices.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Coastal and Estuarine Research Federation 2012

Authors and Affiliations

  • Limin Chen
    • 1
  • Shannon L. Meseck
    • 2
  • Sujoy B. Roy
    • 1
    Email author
  • Thomas M. Grieb
    • 1
  • Barbara Baginska
    • 3
  1. 1.Tetra Tech, Inc.LafayetteUSA
  2. 2.National Marine Fisheries ServiceMilfordUSA
  3. 3.San Francisco Bay Regional Water Quality Control BoardOaklandUSA

Personalised recommendations