Skip to main content Accessibility help
×
Hostname: page-component-848d4c4894-v5vhk Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-06-20T01:45:03.939Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

7 - Detecting ecological effects of pollutants in the aquatic environment

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  05 June 2012

Alastair Grant
Affiliation:
School of Environmental Sciences, University of East Anglia, Norwich, United Kingdom
Lesley C. Batty
Affiliation:
University of Birmingham
Kevin B. Hallberg
Affiliation:
University of Wales, Bangor
Get access

Summary

Introduction

In the marine environment a widely used definition of pollution is the ‘introduction by man, directly or indirectly, of substances or energy into the marine environment (including estuaries) resulting in deleterious effects such as harm to living resources, hazards to human health, hindrance of marine activities, including fishing, impairing quality for use of sea-water and reduction of amenities’ (GESAMP 1982 – my emphasis). The increasing sophistication of analytical chemical methods means that we can detect contamination by a wide range of chemicals in almost any aquatic environment (see Chapter 5). But the rational regulation of direct contaminant discharges to the environment and the setting of priorities for dealing with contaminants arising from diffuse sources requires us to be able to identify the subset of cases of contamination where deleterious effects are, or may be, occurring. There has been considerable recent improvement in methods for prospective risk assessment – methods that allow an assessment of whether particular concentrations of a substance might cause ecological effects in the field. For example, the development of species sensitivity distributions has given greatly improved information on whether the sensitivity of standard laboratory test organisms reflects the sensitivity of the much wider range of organisms that occur in the field (see, e.g., Maltby et al. 2005), and there is discussion of risk assessment methods elsewhere in this volume (Chapters 5 and 9). However, determining whether an individual substance actually is having deleterious effects on the ecology at any particular location remains a major challenge for ecotoxicology.

Type
Chapter
Information
Publisher: Cambridge University Press
Print publication year: 2010

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Allen, Y. T., Thain, J. E., Haworth, S. and Barry, J. (2007) Development and application of long-term sublethal whole sediment tests with Arenicola marina and Corophium volutator using Ivermectin as the test compound. Environmental Pollution 146, 92–99.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Baker, B. J., Lutz, M. A., Dawson, S. C., Bond, P. L. and Banfield, J. F. (2004) Metabolically active eukaryotic communities in extremely acidic mine drainage. Applied and Environmental Microbiology 70, 6264–6271.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Bizoux, J. P. and Mahy, G. (2007) Within-population genetic structure and clonal diversity of a threatened endemic metallophyte, Viola calaminaria (Violaceae). American Journal of Botany 94, 887–895.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bond, P. L., Druschel, G. K. and Banfield, J. F. (2000) Comparison of acid mine drainage microbial communities in physically and geochemically distinct ecosystems. Applied and Environmental Microbiology 66, 4962–4971.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Borgmann, U., Grapentine, L., Norwood, W. P., Bird, G., Dixon, D. G. and Lindeman, D. (2005) Sediment toxicity testing with the freshwater amphipod Hyalella azteca: relevance and application. Chemosphere 61, 1740–1743.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Borja, A. and Muxika, H. (2005) Guidelines for the use of AMBI (AZTI's Marine Biotic Index) in the assessment of the benthic ecological quality. Marine Pollution Bulletin 50, 787–789.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Borja, A., Franco, J. and Muxika, I. (2004) The biotic indices and the Water Framework Directive: the required consensus in the new benthic monitoring tools. Marine Pollution Bulletin 48, 405–408.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Borja, A., Franco, J. and Perez, V. (2000) A marine Biotic Index to establish the ecological quality of soft-bottom benthos within European estuarine and coastal environments. Marine Pollution Bulletin 40, 1100–1114.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Borja, A., Josefson, A. B., Miles, A., et al. (2007) An approach to the intercalibration of benthic ecological status assessment in the North Atlantic ecoregion, according to the European Water Framework Directive. Marine Pollution Bulletin 55, 42–52.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Brandle, M., Amarell, U., Auge, H., Klotz, S. and Brandl, R. (2001) Plant and insect diversity along a pollution gradient: understanding species richness across trophic levels. Biodiversity and Conservation 10, 1497–1511.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Brown, M. J. H., Mossman, H. L., Davy, A. J. and Grant, A. (In prep.) Elevation, drainage and sediment oxygenation constrain halophyte colonisation on a salt marsh created by managed realignment.
Bryan, G. W. and Gibbs, P. E. (1983) Heavy metals in the Fal Estuary (Cornwall): a study of long term contamination by mining waste and its effects on estuarine organisms. Marine Biological Association of the United Kingdom, Occasional Publication 2, 1–112.Google Scholar
Chapman, P. M., Ho, K. T., Munns, W. R., Solomon, K. and Weinstein, M. P. (2002) Issues in sediment toxicity and ecological risk assessment. Marine Pollution Bulletin 44, 271–278.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Chevan, A. and Sutherland, M. (1991) Hierarchical partitioning. American Statistician 45, 90–96.Google Scholar
Clarke, K. R. and Warwick, R. M. (2001a) A further biodiversity index applicable to species lists: variation in taxonomic distinctness. Marine Ecology-Progress Series 216, 265–278.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Clarke, K. R. and Warwick, R. M. (2001b) Change in Marine Communities. 2nd edn. PRIMER-E Ltd, Plymouth, UK.Google Scholar
Clarke, R. T., Wright, J. F. and Furse, M. T. (2003) RIVPACS models for predicting the expected macroinvertebrate fauna and assessing the ecological quality of rivers. Ecological Modelling 160, 219–233.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Dorigo, U., Leboulanger, C., Berard, A., Bouchez, A., Humbert, J. F. and Montuelle, B. (2007) Lotic biofilm community structure and pesticide tolerance along a contamination gradient in a vineyard area. Aquatic Microbial Ecology 50, 91–102.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Edwards, K. J., Bond, P. L., Gihring, T. M. and Banfield, J. F. (2000) An archaeal iron-oxidizing extreme acidophile important in acid mine drainage. Science 287, 1796–1799.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Fenn, M. E. and Dunn, P. H. (1989) Litter decomposition across an air-pollution gradient in the San Bernardino Mountains. Soil Science Society of America Journal 53, 1560–1567.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
,GESAMP. (1982) The Health of the Oceans, UNEP Regional Seas Reports and Studies. United Nations Environment Programme, Regional Seas Programme Activity Centre, Geneva, Switzerland, 111 pp.
Gonzalez-Toril, E., Llobet-Brossa, E., Casamayor, E. O., Amann, R. and Amils, R. (2003) Microbial ecology of an extreme acidic environment, the Tinto River. Applied and Environmental Microbiology 69, 4853–4865.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Grant, A. and Millward, R. N. (1997) Detecting community responses to pollution. In: Responses of Marine Organisms to their Environment (eds. Hawkins, L. E. and Hutchinson, S.), pp. 201–209. Proceedings of the 30th European Marine Biology Symposium, University of Southampton, Southampton, UK.Google Scholar
Grant, A., Hateley, J. G. and Jones, N. V. (1989) Mapping the ecological impact of heavy-metals on the estuarine polychaete Nereis-Diversicolor using inherited metal tolerance. Marine Pollution Bulletin 20, 235–238.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gray, J. S., Clarke, K. R., Warwick, R. M. and Hobbs, G. (1990) Detection of initial effects of pollution on marine benthos – an example from the Ekofisk and Eldfisk oilfields, North Sea. Marine Ecology-Progress Series 66, 285–299.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Jones, M. E. and Paine, T. D. (2006) Detecting changes in insect herbivore communities along a pollution gradient. Environmental Pollution 143, 377–387.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kwok, K. W., Bjorgesaeter, A., Leung, K. M.et al. (2008) Deriving site-specific sediment quality guidelines for Hong Kong marine environments using field-based species sensitivity distributions. Environmental Toxicology and Chemistry 27, 226–234.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Labrune, C., Amouroux, J. M., Sarda, R.et al. (2006) Characterization of the ecological quality of the coastal Gulf of Lions (NW Mediterranean). A comparative approach based on three biotic indices. Marine Pollution Bulletin 52, 34–47.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Leung, K. M., Bjorgesaeter, A., Gray, J. S.et al. (2005) Deriving sediment quality guidelines from field-based species sensitivity distributions. Environmental Science and Technology 39, 5148–5156.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Mac Nally, R. (2002) Multiple regression and inference in ecology and conservation biology: further comments on identifying important predictor variables. Biodiversity and Conservation 11, 1397–1401.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Maltby, L., Blake, N., Brock, T. C. M. and Brink, P. J. (2005) Insecticide species sensitivity distributions: importance of test species selection and relevance to aquatic ecosystems. Environmental Toxicology and Chemistry 24, 379–388.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Matthiessen, P., Bifield, S., Jarrett, F.et al. (1998) An assessment of sediment toxicity in the River Tyne Estuary, UK by means of bioassays. Marine Environmental Research 45, 1–15.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
McCready, S., Birch, G. F., Long, E. R., Spyrakis, G. and Greely, C. R. (2006) Relationships between toxicity and concentrations of chemical contaminants in sediments from Sydney Harbour, Australia, and vicinity. Environmental Monitoring and Assessment 120, 187–220.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
McCready, S., Spyrakis, G., Greely, C. R., Birch, G. F. and Long, E. R. (2004) Toxicity of surficial sediments from Sydney Harbour and vicinity, Australia. Environmental Monitoring and Assessment 96, 53–83.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Millward, R. (1995) The effects of chronic and acute metal-enrichment on the nematode community structure, composition and function in Restronguet Creek, SW England. University of East Anglia.Google Scholar
Millward, R. N. and Grant, A. (1995) Assessing the impact of copper on nematode communities from a chronically metal enriched estuary using pollution-induced community tolerance. Marine Pollution Bulletin 30, 701–706.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Millward, R. N. and Grant, A. (2000) Pollution-induced tolerance to copper of nematode communities in the severely contaminated Restronguet Creek and adjacent estuaries, Cornwall, United Kingdom. Environmental Toxicology and Chemistry 19, 454–461.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
,National Water Council. (1981) River Quality – The 1980 Survey and Future Outlook. National Water Council, London.
Ogilvie, L. A. and Grant, A. (2008) Linking pollution induced community tolerance (PICT) and microbial community structure in chronically metal polluted estuarine sediments. Marine Environmental Research 65, 187–198.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Olsgard, F. and Gray, J. S. (1995) A comprehensive analysis of the effects of offshore oil and gas exploration and production on the benthic communities of the Norwegian continental shelf. Marine Ecology-Progress Series 122, 277–306.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Pandolfi, J. M., Bradbury, R. H., Sala, E.et al. (2003) Global trajectories of the long-term decline of coral reef ecosystems. Science 301, 955–958.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Pardos, M., Benninghoff, C., Thomas, R. L. and Khim-Heang, S. (1999) Confirmation of elemental sulfur toxicity in the Microtox® assay during organic extracts assessment of freshwater sediments. Environmental Toxicology and Chemistry 18, 188–193.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Piola, R. F. and Johnston, E. L. (2008) Pollution reduces native diversity and increases invader dominance in marine hard-substrate communities. Diversity and Distributions 14, 329–342.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Schaanning, M. T., Trannum, H. C., Oxnevad, S., Carroll, J. and Bakke, T. (2008) Effects of drill cuttings on biogeochemical fluxes and macrobenthos of marine sediments. Journal of Experimental Marine Biology and Ecology 361, 49–57.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Shipp, E. and Grant, A. (2006) Hydrobia ulvae feeding rates: a novel way to assess sediment toxicity. Environmental Toxicology and Chemistry 25, 3246–3252.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Somerfield, P. J., Gee, J. M. and Warwick, R. M. (1994) Soft-sediment meiofaunal community structure in relation to a long-term heavy-metal gradient in the Fal Estuary System. Marine Ecology-Progress Series 105, 79–88.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Terlizzi, A., Bevilacqua, S., Scuderi, D.et al. (2008) Effects of offshore platforms on soft-bottom macro-benthic assemblages: a case study in a Mediterranean gas field. Marine Pollution Bulletin 56, 1303–1309.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Thain, J. E., Davies, I. M., Rae, G. H. and Allen, Y. T. (1997) Acute toxicity of ivermectin to the lugworm Arenicola marina. Aquaculture 159, 47–52.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Thomas, K. V., Barnard, N., Collins, K. and Eggleton, J. (2003) Toxicity characterisation of sediment porewaters collected from UK estuaries using a Tisbe battagliai bioassay. Chemosphere 53, 1105–1111.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Ugland, K. I., Bjorgesaeter, A., Bakke, T., Fredheim, B. and Gray, J. S. (2008) Assessment of environmental stress with a biological index based on opportunistic species. Journal of Experimental Marine Biology and Ecology 366, 169–174.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Warwick, R. M. (2001) Evidence for the effects of metal contamination on the intertidal macrobenthic assemblages of the Fal Estuary. Marine Pollution Bulletin 42, 145–148.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Warwick, R. M. and Clarke, K. R. (1991) A comparison of some methods for analyzing changes in benthic community structure. Journal of the Marine Biological Association of the United Kingdom 71, 225–244.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Warwick, R. M., Ashman, C. M., Brown, A. R.et al. (2002) Inter-annual changes in the biodiversity and community structure of the macrobenthos in Tees Bay and the Tees estuary, UK, associated with local and regional environmental events. Marine Ecology-Progress Series 234, 1–13.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Widdows, J., Donkin, P., Brinsley, M. D.et al. (1995) Scope for growth and contaminant levels in North-Sea mussels Mytilus edulis. Marine Ecology-Progress Series 127, 131–148.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Widdows, J., Donkin, P., Staff, F. J.et al. (2002) Measurement of stress effects (scope for growth) and contaminant levels in mussels (Mytilus edulis) collected from the Irish Sea. Marine Environmental Research 53, 327–356.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed

Save book to Kindle

To save this book to your Kindle, first ensure coreplatform@cambridge.org is added to your Approved Personal Document E-mail List under your Personal Document Settings on the Manage Your Content and Devices page of your Amazon account. Then enter the ‘name’ part of your Kindle email address below. Find out more about saving to your Kindle.

Note you can select to save to either the @free.kindle.com or @kindle.com variations. ‘@free.kindle.com’ emails are free but can only be saved to your device when it is connected to wi-fi. ‘@kindle.com’ emails can be delivered even when you are not connected to wi-fi, but note that service fees apply.

Find out more about the Kindle Personal Document Service.

Available formats
×

Save book to Dropbox

To save content items to your account, please confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your account. Find out more about saving content to Dropbox.

Available formats
×

Save book to Google Drive

To save content items to your account, please confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your account. Find out more about saving content to Google Drive.

Available formats
×