Changes of toxic metals bioavailability in urban creeks as a potential environmental hazard

  • Dana Kominkova
  • Jana Nabelkova
  • Dasa Starmanova
Conference paper
Part of the Alliance for Global Sustainability Bookseries book series (AGSB, volume 19)


The impact of different urban drainage structures (combine sewer overflow, stormwater drain and waste water treatment plant) on fate of toxic metals in urban creeks was studied on three creeks in the Prague area. The results show that bioavailability of toxic metals is affected by the type of urban drainage and environmental conditions. The bioavailability is significantly influenced by a type of urban drainage, while combine sewer overflows cause decrease of biological availability, storm water drains and a waste water treatment plant cause increase of bioavailability of toxic metals.


Toxic Metal Hazard Quotient Aquatic Biota Environmental Quality Standard Waste Water Treatment Plant 
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.


Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.


  1. 1.
    John D.A., Leventhal J.S. (1995) Bioavailability of metals. In Preliminary Compilation of Descriptive Geoenvironmental Mineral Deposit Model. Edited by A.du Bray. U.S. Geology Survey Open File Report 95–831Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Eggleton J., Thomas K.V. (2004) A review of factors affecting the release and bioavailability of contaminants during sediment disturbance events. Environmental International 30, 973–980CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Luoma S.N. (1983) Bioavailability of trace metals to aquatic organism – A review. The Science of the Total Environment 28, 1–22CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Bryan G.W., Langstone W.J. (1992) Bioavailability, accumulation and effects of toxic metals in sediment with special references to United Kingdom estuaries: a review. Environmental Pollution 76, 89–131CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Davis A., Ruby M.V., Bergstrom P.D. (1994) Factors controlling lead bioavailability in the Butte mining district, Montana, USA. Environmental Geochemistry and Health 3/4, 147–157CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Di Toro D.M., Mahony J.D., Hansen D.J. et al. (1990) Toxicity of cadmium in sediment: the role of acid volatile sulfide. Environmental Toxicology and Chemistry 9, 1487–1502CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Nábĕlková J. (2005) Mobility of heavy metals in the urban creeks environment. (Ph.D. thesis). ČVUT. FSv. Prague (in Czech)Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    Barwick M. (1999) Assessment of copper, cadmium, zinc, arsenic, lead and selenium biomagnification within a temperate eastern Australian seagrass food web. Ph.D. thesis, University of Canberra. AustraliaGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Zhuang Y. Allen, H.E. and Fu, G. (1994) Effect of aeration of sediments on cadmium binding. Environmental Toxicology and Chemistry. 13(5).717-724.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Pollert J., Kominkova D., Handova Z. et al (2005). Impact of floods on technical and ecological stability of small urban creeks. Report CTU. Prague. (in Czech)Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    US EPA (1994) Standard method 3051. Microwave Assisted Acid Digestion of Sediments, Sludges, Soils, and Oils. Washington DC, USAGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Tessier A., Campbell P.G.C. (1987) Partitioning of trace metals in sediments: relationship with bioavailability. Hydrobiologia 149, 43–52CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Komínková D. (2006) Impact of urban drainage on bioaccumulation of toxic metals. [Habilitation thesis]. ČVUT, Faculty of Civil Engineering, Prague, Czech Republic. 112 p. (in Czech)Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    Page S.D. et al. (1999) US EPA 402-R-99-004A: Understanding Variation in Partition Coefficient, Kd, Values. Volume I - Kd Model, Measurement Methods, and Application of Chemical Reaction Codes. Office of Air and Radiation, Washington DC, USAGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Veselý J. (1994) The chemical composition of the water and sediment in the Elbe River near to the state boarder in Hřensko. The Elbe River, river of the present and future. Děčín: 97-103(in Czech)Google Scholar
  16. 16.
    Barnthouse L.W. et al. (1982) Methodology for Risk Environmental Risk Analysis. ORNL/TM/8167. Oak Ridge National Laboratory, USAGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Clements W.H., Carlisle D.M., Lazorchak J.M., Johnon P.H. (2000) Toxic metals structure benthic communities in Colorado mountain streams. Ecological Applications 10, 626–638CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Rand G.M. (1995) Fundamentals of Aquatic Toxicology. Effects, Environmental Fate and Risk Assessment. Second Edition. Taylors & Francis. North Palm Beach, USAGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Handová Z., Koníček Z., Liška M., Maršálek J., Matěna J., Sed’a J. (1996) CSO Impacts on receiving waters: Toxic metals in Sediments and Macrozoobenthos. Proceedings of 7th International Conference on Urban Storm Drainage, Hannover, Germany, 9–13.Sept. 96, pp 485–490Google Scholar
  20. 20.
    Komínková D., Nábělková J. (2006) The Risk Assessment of Toxic Metals in the Ecosystem of Urban Creeks. Water Science & Technology 53, 65–73.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Jones D.S. et al. (1997) Toxicological Benchmarks for Screening Contaminants of Potential Concern for Effects on Sediment-Associated Biota. 1997 Revision, ES/ER/TM-95/R4. Oak Ridge National Laboratory, USAGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Forstner U. (1989) Contaminated sediments: lectures on environmental aspects of particle-associated chemicals in aquatic systems. Springer-Verlag, Berlin, GermanyGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media B.V. 2012

Authors and Affiliations

  • Dana Kominkova
    • 1
  • Jana Nabelkova
    • 1
  • Dasa Starmanova
    • 1
  1. 1.Faculty of Civil EngineeringCzech Technical University in PraguePragueCzech Republic

Personalised recommendations