Search

A one-year angler intercept survey was conducted on the lower 17 miles of the Passaic River, an urban industrialized river that flows through Newark, New Jersey. The purpose of the survey was to co...

The use and interpretation of fish consumption surveys and interviews, the application of fish consumption rates for sediment evaluation and cleanup, and the development of human health water quality criteria (HH WQC) are complex and interrelated issues. The present article focuses on these issues using examples from the United States, although the issues may be relevant for other countries. Some key considerations include the fact that there are many types of fish consumption surveys (e.g., 24-h recall surveys, food frequency questionnaires, creel surveys), and these surveys have different advantages and limitations. Identification of target populations for protection, identification of the species and quantities of fish consumed, and determination of bioaccumulation assumptions are important factors when developing water quality and sediment screening levels and standards. Accounting for the cultural importance of fish consumption for some populations is an even more complex element. Discussions about HH WQC often focus only on the fish consumption rate and may not have broad public input. Some states are trying to change this through extensive public participation efforts and use of probabilistic approaches to derive HH WQC. Finally, there are limits to what WQC can achieve. Solutions beyond the establishment of WQC that target toxics reduction from other sources may provide the greatest improvements to water quality and reductions in human health risks in the future.

Proposes the need to isolate differences in languages and universally define reading failure. (TO)

The use and interpretation of fish consumption surveys and interviews, the application of fish consumption rates for sediment evaluation and cleanup, and the development of human health water quality criteria (HH WQC) are complex and interrelated issues. The present article focuses on these issues using examples from the United States, although the issues may be relevant for other countries. Some key considerations include the fact that there are many types of fish consumption surveys (e.g., 24-h recall surveys, food frequency questionnaires, creel surveys), and these surveys have different advantages and limitations. Identification of target populations for protection, identification of the species and quantities of fish consumed, and determination of bioaccumulation assumptions are important factors when developing water quality and sediment screening levels and standards. Accounting for the cultural importance of fish consumption for some populations is an even more complex element. Discussions about HH WQC often focus only on the fish consumption rate and may not have broad public input. Some states are trying to change this through extensive public participation efforts and use of probabilistic approaches to derive HH WQC. Finally, there are limits to what WQC can achieve. Solutions beyond the establishment of WQC that target toxics reduction from other sources may provide the greatest improvements to water quality and reductions in human health risks in the future.

Fipronil is a widely used, broad-spectrum pesticide that is applied as an equal mixture of two enantiomers. As regulations on older pesticides become more stringent, production and application of fipronil is expected to grow, leading to increased inputs into aquatic environments and complex exposures to biota. To better understand the potential exposures introduced by fipronil contamination, we conducted subchronic toxicity tests with larval fathead minnows (Pimephales promelas) and waterborne fipronil and its enantiomers and exposed juvenile fathead minnows to fipronil-spiked sediment. Enantioselective toxicity was observed in fish after the 7-d subchronic exposure, with increased toxicity of the racemate and (+) enantiomer observed compared with the (−) enantiomer. Curiously, toxicities of the racemate and (+) enantiomer were not significantly different, even though the racemate contains 50% of the (+) enantiomer and 50% of the less toxic (−) enantiomer. During the sediment exposure, racemic fipronil in sediment was transformed primarily to fipronil sulfide, while exposed fish rapidly accumulated fipronil and/or fipronil sulfide and transformed the majority to fipronil sulfone. Using the results of the sediment-exposure experiment, the authors explored a mechanism that may contribute to the interesting trends in enantioselective toxicity observed during the waterborne exposures. In tandem, the aquatic toxicity experiment and the spiked sediment exposure demonstrate the potentially complex behavior of fipronil in sediment and fish. Environ. Toxicol. Chem. 2013;32:222–227. © 2012 SETAC