Biota monitoring under the Water Framework Directive: On tissue choice and fish species selection

被引:48
|
作者
Fliedner, Annette [1 ]
Ruedel, Heinz [1 ]
Lohmann, Nina [2 ]
Buchmeier, Georgia [3 ]
Koschorreck, Jan [4 ]
机构
[1] Fraunhofer Inst Mol Biol & Appl Ecol Fraunhofer I, Dept Environm Specimen Bank & Elemental Anal, D-57392 Schmallenberg, Germany
[2] Eurofins GfA Lab Serv GmbH, Neulaender Kamp 1a, D-21079 Hamburg, Germany
[3] Bavarian Environm Agcy LfU, Demollstr 31, D-82407 Wielenbach, Germany
[4] German Environm Agcy Umweltbundesamt, D-06813 Dessau Rosslau, Germany
关键词
Biota monitoring; Priority substances; Fillet-to-whole fish conversion equation; Conversion factor; POLYBROMINATED DIPHENYL ETHERS; PERSISTENT ORGANIC POLLUTANTS; PERFLUORINATED COMPOUNDS; PRIORITY SUBSTANCES; STATISTICAL-SURVEY; FLAME RETARDANTS; US LAKES; FOOD-WEB; MERCURY; ACIDS;
D O I
10.1016/j.envpol.2017.12.052
中图分类号
X [环境科学、安全科学];
学科分类号
08 ; 0830 ;
摘要
The study addresses the topic of suitable matrices for chemical analysis in fish monitoring and discusses the effects of data normalization in the context of the European Water Framework Directive (WFD). Differences between species are considered by comparing three frequently monitored species of different trophic levels, i.e., chub (Squalius cephalus, n = 28), (bream, Abramis brama, n = 11), and perch (Perca fluviatilis, n = 19) sampled in the German Danube. The WFD priority substances dioxins, furans and dioxin-like polychlorinated biphenyls (PCDD/F + dl-PCB), polybrominated diphenyl ethers (PBDE), alpha-hexabromocyclododecane (alpha-HBCDD), hexachlorobenzene (HCB), mercury (Hg), and perfluorooctane sulfonic acid (PFOS) as well as non-dioxin-like (ndl)-PCB were analyzed separately in fillet and carcass and whole body concentrations were calculated. Hg was analyzed in individual fish fillets and carcasses, all other substances were determined in pool samples, which were compiled on the basis of fish size (3 chub pools, 1 bream pool, 2 perch pools). The data were normalized to 5% lipid weight (or 26% dry mass in the case of Hg and PFOS) for comparison between matrices and species. Hg concentrations were generally higher in fillet than in whole fish (mean whole fish-to-fillet ratio: 0.7) whereas all other substances were mostly higher in whole fish. In the case of lipophilic substances these differences leveled after lipid normalization. Significant correlations (p <= .05) were detected between Hg and fish weight and age. Hg concentrations varied least among younger fish. PCDDIF, dl-PCB, ndl-PCB, PBDE, alpha-HBCDD and HCB correlated significantly (p <= .05) with lipid concentrations. Fillet-to-whole fish conversion equations and/or conversion factors were derived for all substances except alpha-HCBDD. Although more data also for individual fish would be desirable the results are nevertheless a step on the way to translate fillet concentrations of priority substances to whole fish concentrations. (C) 2017 The Authors. Published by Elsevier Ltd.
引用
收藏
页码:129 / 140
页数:12
相关论文
共 50 条
  • [1] A practical example of the challenges of biota monitoring under the Water Framework Directive
    Lava, Roberto
    Majoros, Laszlo I.
    Dosis, Ioannis
    Ricci, Marina
    TRAC-TRENDS IN ANALYTICAL CHEMISTRY, 2014, 59 : 103 - 111
  • [2] Passive sampling in support of biota monitoring of hydrophobic substances under the Water Framework Directive
    Allan, Ian John
    Miege, Cecile
    Jahnke, Annika
    Rojo-Nieto, Elisa
    Vorkamp, Katrin
    Kech, Cecile
    Polesello, Stefano
    Perceval, Olivier
    Booij, Kees
    Dulio, Valeria
    Estoppey, Nicolas
    Mayer, Philipp
    Mchugh, Brendan
    Munschy, Catherine
    Staub, Pierre-Francois
    Vrana, Branislav
    JOURNAL OF HAZARDOUS MATERIALS, 2025, 483
  • [3] Guidance for sediment and biota monitoring under the Common Implementation Strategy for the Water Framework Directive
    Carere, Mario
    Dulio, Valeria
    Hanke, Georg
    Polesello, Stefano
    TRAC-TRENDS IN ANALYTICAL CHEMISTRY, 2012, 36 : 15 - 24
  • [4] Biota monitoring and the Water Framework Directive—can normalization overcome shortcomings in sampling strategies?
    Annette Fliedner
    Heinz Rüdel
    Diana Teubner
    Georgia Buchmeier
    Jaqueline Lowis
    Christiane Heiss
    Jörg Wellmitz
    Jan Koschorreck
    Environmental Science and Pollution Research, 2016, 23 : 21927 - 21939
  • [5] Surface Water Monitoring and Assessment under the EU Water Framework Directive
    Buijs, Paul
    PROCEEDINGS OF THE 2ND INTERNATIONAL YELLOW RIVER FORUM ON KEEPING HEALTHY LIFE OF THE RIVER, VOL VI, 2005, : 236 - 246
  • [6] Biota monitoring and the Water Framework Directive-can normalization overcome shortcomings in sampling strategies?
    Fliedner, Annette
    Ruedel, Heinz
    Teubner, Diana
    Buchmeier, Georgia
    Lowis, Jaqueline
    Heiss, Christiane
    Wellmitz, Joerg
    Koschorreck, Jan
    ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCE AND POLLUTION RESEARCH, 2016, 23 (21) : 21927 - 21939
  • [7] Chemical water monitoring under the Water Framework Directive with Certified Reference Materials
    Ricci, Marina
    Kourtchev, Ivan
    Emons, Hendrik
    TRAC-TRENDS IN ANALYTICAL CHEMISTRY, 2012, 36 : 47 - 57
  • [8] Fish biomarkers for environmental monitoring within the Water Framework Directive of the European Union
    Sanchez, Wilfried
    Porcher, Jean-Marc
    TRAC-TRENDS IN ANALYTICAL CHEMISTRY, 2009, 28 (02) : 150 - 158
  • [9] Selection and application of trophic magnification factors for priority substances to normalize freshwater fish monitoring data under the European Water Framework Directive: a case study
    Ruedel, Heinz
    Kosfeld, Verena
    Fliedner, Annette
    Radermacher, Georg
    Schlechtriem, Christian
    Duffek, Anja
    Rauert, Caren
    Koschorreck, Jan
    ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCES EUROPE, 2020, 32 (01)
  • [10] Selection and application of trophic magnification factors for priority substances to normalize freshwater fish monitoring data under the European Water Framework Directive: a case study
    Heinz Rüdel
    Verena Kosfeld
    Annette Fliedner
    Georg Radermacher
    Christian Schlechtriem
    Anja Duffek
    Caren Rauert
    Jan Koschorreck
    Environmental Sciences Europe, 2020, 32