RATL: A Database of Reptile and Amphibian Toxicology Literature

More documents

Recommendations

Info

Table 6 - pH Studies - 34 Species Code b Lifestage Study Endpoint g pH Level(s) Temp h Additional Contam a Cont. Conc. Conc. e Units e LC50 LC100 e Effects eg Reference k RATE embryo DEVOBS 4.0-5.0 -2.0-25 Al A few of the eggs in the 31 ponds died before Beattie and Tyler-Jones first cleavage, particularly in circumneutral ponds, but most eggs died at mid-late cleavage/early gastrula (stages 7-12). Various types of abnormal embryos were observed. 1992 RATE embryo MORT 3.5-4.5 and 6.0 10±1 Ca 0.5, 1.0, mg/L All but one of the embryos exposed to pH Cummins 1988 (control) 2.0 and 3.5 and 3.75 died within 24 h. There was 4.0 some mortality between 6 h and 12 h at pH 3.5 but no discernible effect of calcium concentration within that period. RATE embryo MORT 3.5-4.75 and 6.0 12±1 Ca 0.5, 1.0, mg/L At the lowest pH, all embryos but one died Cummins 1988 (control) 2.0 and within 45 h. At pH 3.75 mortality increased 4.0 with duration of exposure and with decreasing calcium concentration. RATE embryo DEVOBS 4.0-5.0 -2.0- Al Embryonic survival decreased with increasing Beattie and Tyler-Jones 25.0 inorganic monomeric Al at pH 4.5. High conc. of Al also increased embryo mortality. Body length of surviving larvae was decreased by both increasing Al conc. and low pH. 1992 RATE embryo DEVOBS 4.5 and 6.0 10 Al 0-0.4 mg/L Embryonic survival decreased with increasing Beattie and Tyler-Jones inorganic monomeric Al concentration at pH 4.5. High conc. of inorganic monomeric Al also increased the number of embryos which died in the early stages of development. 1992 RATE embryo DEVOBS 4.5-6.0 0-5 and Al 0-14.83 µmol/L Embryonic survival was lower at lower Beattie et al. 1992 10 aluminum conc. Gastrulation and hatching appeared to be the most sensitive stages to both pH and Al concentration. RATE embryo MORT 3.92-7.39 Fertilization success was 87 % in acidic water Beattie et al. 1993 and increased to 100 % following liming. It was estimated that at least 2.1 % of eggs deposited in a limed pond gave rise to metamorphs. RATE embryo DEVOBS Inorganic monomeric Al conc. was the principal factor reducing fertilization success. Exposure to a high zinc concentration, early in development, subsequently increased the number of abnormal species. Beattie et al. 1991 RATE embryo MORT 4.0-4.5 No embryos survived to become adults. Hagstrom 1977 k
Table 6 - pH Studies - 35 Species Code b Lifestage Study Endpoint g pH Level(s) Temp h Additional Contam a Cont. Conc. Conc. e Units e LC50 LC100 e Effects eg Reference k RATE embryo DEVOBS 4.5, 6.0 Al 0-1600 µg/L pH in the absence of Al had no effect on survival to tadpoles stage. Increasing Al conc. reduced the survival of lowland embryos in circumneutral water, but did not effect upland embryos. Tyler-Jones et al. 1989 RATE embryo MORT 3.8, 4.0, 4.25, 7±1 Ca 0.5, 1.0, mg/L pH rose then remained close to initial levels. Cummins 1988 4.5 2.0 and There was no significant relation between 4.0 calcium conc. and the amount pH increased. RATE embryo DEVOBS 3.92-4.84 Al When limestone was added to ponds 1 and 2, Beattie and Tyler-Jones fertilization success increased from approx 87% to 100%. The mean percentage survival of embryos increased significantly from 22% to 93% and from 0% to 69.3%, respectively. 1992 RATE embryo- MORT 5.0 14.5 Al 0-1.6 mg/L Elevated Al conc. increased the rate of Olsson et al. 1987 tadpoles morphological defects in larvae. Spinal curvatures and vesicles on head and thorax were observed. Vesicles ruptured and caused ulceration at later stages. RATE embryo- MORT 4.0 14.5 No altered hatching frequency could be found Olsson et al. 1987 tadpoles for any stage of development due to a 24 h reduction of pH to 4.0. All samples from a certain egg mass showed similar hatching success independent of the stage at which they were acid shocked. RATE embryo- HATSUC 4.5 18.0 Significantly lower hatching frequency for Olsson et al. 1987 tadpoles embryos incubated on sphagnum (35.2% survival) in comparison to controls (67.6% survival). A rise in pH occurred in control aquaria (from 4.5 to 4.97); this did not happen in the sphagnum treated aquaria. RATE larvae MORT 3.92-7.39 Embryonic survival in the two acidic ponds increased from 0 % and 22 % to 69% and 93 % respectively following liming. A year after liming, embryonic survival in one pond had decreased significantly from 93 % to 79 %. Beattie et al. 1993 RATE larvae DEVOBS 4.0-6.0 Al 100-800 Low pH exerted a strong harmful effect and high levels of Al almost completely precluded successful reproduction. Andren and Nilson 1988 RATE not specified POPSUR 4.0-8.0 Survey of amphibian breeding sites. Beebee 1983 k
Page 1 and 2:
RATL: A Database of Reptile and Amp
Page 3 and 4:
RATL: A Database of Reptile and Amp
Page 5 and 6:
ABSTRACT Many amphibian and reptile
Page 7 and 8:
PRÉFACE De nombreuses populations
Page 9 and 10:
TABLE OF CONTENTS Abstract………
Page 11 and 12:
LIST OF TABLES Table 1: Contaminant
Page 13 and 14:
INTRODUCTION Why is there a need fo
Page 15 and 16:
Limitations of RATL The RATL databa
Page 17 and 18:
Contaminant a Species Code b Lifest
Page 19 and 20:
Page 21 and 22:
Page 23 and 24:
Page 25 and 26:
Page 27 and 28:
Page 29 and 30:
Page 31 and 32:
Page 33 and 34:
Page 35 and 36:
Table 1- Field Residues - 20 Contam
Page 37 and 38:
Page 39 and 40:
Page 41 and 42:
Page 43 and 44:
Page 45 and 46:
Page 47 and 48:
Page 49 and 50:
Page 51 and 52:
Page 53 and 54:
Page 55 and 56:
Page 57 and 58:
Page 59 and 60:
Page 61 and 62:
Page 63 and 64:
Page 65 and 66:
Page 67 and 68:
Page 69 and 70:
Page 71 and 72:
Page 73 and 74:
Page 75 and 76:
Page 77 and 78:
Page 79 and 80:
Page 81 and 82:
Page 83 and 84:
Page 85 and 86:
Page 87 and 88:
Page 89 and 90:
Page 91 and 92:
Page 93 and 94:
Page 95 and 96:
Page 97 and 98:
Page 99 and 100:
Page 101 and 102:
Page 103 and 104:
Page 105 and 106:
Page 107 and 108:
Page 109 and 110:
Table 2 - Field Studies - 2 Contami
Page 111 and 112:
Page 113 and 114:
Page 115 and 116:
Page 117 and 118:
Page 119 and 120:
Table 2 - Field Studies - 12 Contam
Page 121 and 122:
Page 123 and 124:
Page 125 and 126:
Page 127 and 128:
Page 129 and 130:
Page 131 and 132:
Page 133 and 134:
Page 135 and 136:
Page 137 and 138:
Page 139 and 140:
Page 141 and 142:
Page 143 and 144:
Page 145 and 146:
Table 3: Acute toxicity values from
Page 147 and 148:
Page 149 and 150:
Page 151 and 152:
Contaminant a Species Code b azinph
Page 153 and 154:
Page 155 and 156:
Page 157 and 158:
Page 159 and 160:
Page 161 and 162:
Page 163 and 164:
Page 165 and 166:
Page 167 and 168:
Page 169 and 170:
Page 171 and 172:
Page 173 and 174:
Page 175 and 176:
Page 177 and 178:
Page 179 and 180:
Contaminant a Species Code b tar XE
Page 181 and 182:
Page 183 and 184:
Table 4: Laboratory studies not inc
Page 185 and 186:
Page 187 and 188:
Page 189 and 190:
Page 191 and 192:
Page 193 and 194:
Contaminant a Species Code b Cd AMG
Page 195 and 196:
Page 197 and 198:
Page 199 and 200:
Page 201 and 202:
Page 203 and 204:
Page 205 and 206:
Page 207 and 208:
Page 209 and 210:
Page 211 and 212:
Page 213 and 214:
Page 215 and 216:
Page 217 and 218:
Page 219 and 220:
Page 221 and 222:
Page 223 and 224:
Page 225 and 226:
Page 227 and 228:
Page 229 and 230:
Page 231 and 232:
Page 233 and 234:
Page 235 and 236:
Page 237 and 238:
Page 239 and 240:
Page 241 and 242:
Page 243 and 244:
Page 245 and 246:
Page 247 and 248:
Page 249 and 250:
Page 251 and 252:
Page 253 and 254:
Page 255 and 256:
Table 5: FETAX data. [FETAX (Frog E
Page 257 and 258:
Table 5 - FETAX Studies - 3 Contami
Page 259 and 260: Table 5 - FETAX Studies - 5 Contami
Page 261 and 262: Contaminant a Contaminant b Concent
Page 263 and 264: Table 5 - FETAX Studies - 9 Contami
Page 265 and 266: Table 5 - FETAX Studies - 11 Contam
Page 277 and 278: Table 6: pH study data. (Studies th
Page 279 and 280: Table 6 - pH Studies - 3 Species Co
Page 281 and 282: Species Code b Lifestage Study Endp
Page 289 and 290: Table 6 - pH Studies - 13 Species C
Page 309: Table 6 - pH Studies - 33 Species C
Page 317 and 318: Table 7: Reviews of primary literat
Page 319 and 320: Table 7 - Reviews - 3 Review Title
Page 321 and 322: Table 8 - Population Status - 2 Pop
Page 323 and 324: Table Notes Note a : see Appendix 2
Page 325 and 326: References - 2 Anderson, L.M. and R
Page 327 and 328: References - 4 Bantle, J.A., D.J. F
Page 329 and 330: References - 6 Beresford, W.A. , M.
Page 331 and 332: References - 8 Bishop, C.A, P. Ng,
Page 333 and 334: References - 10 Bragg, A.N. 1964. M
Page 335 and 336: References - 12 Burke, E.M. and F.H
Page 337 and 338: References - 14 Chattopadhyay, D.P.
Page 339 and 340: References - 16 Cooke, A.S. 1974. T
Page 341 and 342: References - 18 Dash, M.C. and A.K.
Page 343 and 344: References - 20 DeWitt, J.B., D.G.
Page 345 and 346: References - 22 Dutta, S.K. and P.
Page 347 and 348: References - 24 Elisyeyeva, K.H., H
Page 349 and 350: References - 26 Fontenot, L., C. Ro
Page 351 and 352: References - 28 Frisbie, M.P. and R
Page 353 and 354: References - 30 Godet, F., M. Babut
Page 355 and 356: References - 32 Gunther, R. and J.
Page 357 and 358: References - 34 Harfenist, A., T. P
Page 359 and 360: References - 36 Herkovits, J. and C
Page 361 and 362:
References - 38 Hota, A. K. and M.C
Page 363 and 364:
References - 40 Johnson, C.R. 1972a
Page 365 and 366:
References - 42 Karns, D.R. 1984. T
Page 367 and 368:
References - 44 Kraskowski, H.V., K
Page 369 and 370:
References - 46 Leblanc, G.A. and L
Page 371 and 372:
References - 48 Lotshaw, D.P. 1977.
Page 373 and 374:
References - 50 Massot, M., J. Clob
Page 375 and 376:
References - 52 Mendonca, M., J. Sh
Page 377 and 378:
References - 54 Munro, D.F. 1949. E
Page 379 and 380:
References - 56 Oliveira, E.M., D.V
Page 381 and 382:
References - 58 Paulov, S. 1977b. T
Page 383 and 384:
References - 60 Pierce, M.E. 1958.
Page 385 and 386:
References - 62 Raj, T.P., A. Jeban
Page 387 and 388:
References - 64 Rolfe, G. L., A. Ha
Page 389 and 390:
References - 66 Sassaman, J.F. 1978
Page 391 and 392:
References - 68 Semlitsch, R.D. and
Page 393 and 394:
References - 70 Sparling, D.W., T.P
Page 395 and 396:
References - 72 Surova, G.S. and A.
Page 397 and 398:
References - 74 Tomar, V. and A. K.
Page 399 and 400:
References - 76 Vijverberg, H.P.M.,
Page 401 and 402:
References - 78 White, D.H. and A.J
Page 403 and 404:
References - 80 Wyman, R.L. and J.
Page 405 and 406:
Appendix 1a: Species codes in alpha
Page 407 and 408:
Appendix 1a - Species Codes - 3 Cla
Page 409 and 410:
Page 411 and 412:
Page 413 and 414:
Page 415 and 416:
Appendix 1a - Species Codes - 11 Cl
Page 417 and 418:
Appendix 1a - Species Codes - 13 Cl
Page 419 and 420:
Appendix 1b - Species Common Names
Page 421 and 422:
Page 423 and 424:
Page 425 and 426:
Page 427 and 428:
Page 429 and 430:
Page 431 and 432:
Page 433 and 434:
Appendix 1c - Species Scientific Na
Page 435 and 436:
Page 437 and 438:
Page 439 and 440:
Page 441 and 442:
Page 443 and 444:
Page 445 and 446:
Appendix 2a: Contaminant codes foun
Page 447 and 448:
Appendix 2a - Contaminant Codes - 3
Page 449 and 450:
Page 451 and 452:
Page 453 and 454:
Page 455 and 456:
Page 457 and 458:
Page 459 and 460:
Page 461 and 462:
Page 463 and 464:
Page 465 and 466:
Page 467 and 468:
Appendix 2b: Contaminants sorted by
Page 469 and 470:
Appendix 2b - Contaminant Type - 3
Page 471 and 472:
Page 473 and 474:
Page 475 and 476:
Page 477 and 478:
Page 479 and 480:
Page 481 and 482:
Page 483 and 484:
Page 485 and 486:
Page 487 and 488:
Appendix 4: Descriptions of exposur
Page 489 and 490:
Appendix 6a: Glossary of Abbreviati
Page 491 and 492:
Appendix 6b: Relevant biological an
Page 493 and 494:
Appendix 6b - Glossary of RATL term
show all

RATL: A Database of Reptile and Amphibian Toxicology Literature

Create successful ePaper yourself

Delete template?

Save as template?