Large volume TENAX® extraction of the bioaccessible fraction of sediment-associated organic compounds for a subsequent effect-directed analysis
Background, Aims and Scope
Effect-directed analysis (EDA) is a powerful tool for the identification of key toxicants in complex environmental samples. In most cases, EDA is based on total extraction of organic contaminants, which may lead to an erroneous prioritisation with regard to hazard and risk. Bioaccessibility-directed extraction aims to discriminate between contaminants that take part in partitioning between sediment and biota in a relevant time frame and those that are enclosed in structures that do not allow rapid desorption. Standard protocols of targeted extraction of the rapidly desorbing, and thus bioaccessible, fraction using TENAX® are based only on small amounts of sediment. In order to obtain sufficient extract for subsequent biotesting, fractionation and structure elucidation, a large volume extraction technique needs to be developed applying one selected extraction time and excluding toxic procedural blanks.
Desorption behaviour of sediment contaminants was determined by combining consecutive extraction of sediment using TENAX® with a three-compartment desorption model. Time needed to remove the rapidly desorbing fraction, trap, was calculated to select a fixed extraction time for single extraction procedures. Up-scaling by about a factor of 125 provided a large volume extraction technique for EDA. Reproducibility and comparability to the small volume approach were analysed. TENAX® blanks and sediment extracts were tested for toxicity using Scenedesmus vacuolatus and Artemia salina as test organisms.
Results and Discussion
Desorption kinetics showed that 12 to 30% of sediment-associated pollutants were available for rapid desorption, while 70 to 90% of PAHs found in the sediment belong to the slowly and very slowly desorbing pool with very limited bioavailability. trap is compound dependent and covers a range of 2 to 18 h. A fixed extraction time of 24 h was selected as a time at which even the rapidly desorbing fraction of big hydrophobic compounds should be fully desorbed. High reproducibility of the large volume approach and good agreement with the small consecutive approach were found. Significant toxicity of procedural TENAX® blanks was found with Scenedesmus vacuolatus, which is in agreement with chemical analysis and could be reduced by pre-cleaning of TENAX® with Accelerated Solvent Extraction (ASE). Toxicity of blanks prior to ASE-clean up was about three orders of magnitude below the toxicity of sediment extracts.
For consideration of bioaccessibility in EDA, a large volume TENAX® extraction method was presented. Although several other solid phases can be used to extract the bioaccessible fraction, TENAX® has unique properties for depletive extraction of the rapidly desorbing fraction from large amounts of sediment. Toxicity and chemical blanks due to production residues are shortcomings of the method that can be overcome by accurate pre-cleaning, e.g. with ASE.
Recommendations and Perspectives
Higher purity of TENAX® guaranteed by the manufacturers would significantly enhance the applicability of the method. Using TENAX® instead of total extraction may improve key toxicant prioritisation by considering exposure and effect rather than effect only.
KeywordsBioaccessibility desorption Effect-Directed Analysis (EDA) polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons (PAH) sediment TENAX®
Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.
- Biselli S, Reineke N, Heinzel N, Kammann U, Franke S, Hühnerfuss H, Theobald N (2005): Bioassay-directed fractionation of organic extracts of marine surface sediments from the North and Baltic Sea. Part I: Determination and identification of organic pollutants. J Soils Sediments 5, 171–181CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- Brack W, Bakker J, de Deckere E, Deerenberg C, van Gils J, Hein M, Jurajda P, Kooijman B, Lamoree M, Lek S, Lopez de Alda MJ, Marcomini A, Munoz I, Rattei S, Segner H, Thomas K, von der Ohe PC, Westrich B, de Zwart D, Schmitt-Jansen M (2005): MODELKEY. Models for assessing and forecasting the impact of environmental key pollutants on freshwater and marine ecosystems and biodiversity. Env Sci Pollut Res 12, 252–256CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- Cornelissen G, Gustafsson O, Bucheli TD, Jonker MTO, Koelmans AA, van Noort PCM (2005): Extensive sorption of organic compounds to black carbon, coal, and kerogen in sediments and soils: Mechanisms and consequences for distribution, bioaccumulation, and biodegradation. Environ Sci Technol 39(18) 6881–6895CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- Kammann U, Biselli S, Reineke N, Wosniok W, Danischewski D, Hühnerfuss H, Kinder A, Sierts-Herrmann A, Theobald N, Vahl HH, Vobach M, Westendorf J, Steinhart H (2005): Bioassay-directed fractionation of organic extracts of marine surface sediments from the North and Baltic Sea. Part II: Results of the biotest battery and development of a biotic index. J Soils Sediments 5(4) 225–232CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- Kukkonen JVK, Landrum PF, Mitra S, Cossiaux DC, Gunnarsson J, Weston D (2004): The role of desorption for describing the bioavailability of select polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbon and polychlorinated biphenyl congeners for seven laboratory-spiked sediments. Environ Toxicol Chem 23, 1842–1851CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- Olsman H, Schnürer A, Björnfoth H, van Bavel B, Engwall M (2007): Fractionation and Determination of Ah Receptor (AhR) Agonists in Organic Waste After Anaerobic Biodegradation and in Batch Experiments with PCB and decaBDE. Env Sci Pollut Res 14(Special Issue 1) 36–43Google Scholar
- Seiler TB, Rastall AC, Leist E, Erdinger L, Braunbeck T, Hollert H (2006): Membrane dialysis extraction (MDE): A novel approach for extracting toxicologically relevant hydrophobic organic compounds from soils and sediments for assessment in biotests. J Soils Sediments 6(1) 20–29CrossRefGoogle Scholar