Interim report of the HELCOM CORESET project

More documents

Recommendations

Info

122 3. Frogs have been shown to approximately as sensitive as fi sh to EE2 exposures; 1.7 ng/L resulted in skewed sex ratios of adult frogs and malformations of their gonadal duct system (Pettersson and Berg. Environmental Toxicology and Chemistry 2007. 26 (5) 1005-1009 Status of a compound on international priority lists and other policy relevance Both are on the draft revision list for EU Priority Substances Status of restrictions, bans or use The use of Diclofenac as a human drug is not restricted. India is phasing out diclofenac because of its impacts on the vulture population. EE2 is not restricted. GES boundaries and matrix Existing quantitative targets Table 3.18. Existing quantitative targets for diclofenac and EE2. Source EC Diclofenac EE2 Draft QS water 0.1 μg L-1 0.0035 ng L-1 Draft QS biota 1 μg kg-1 ww 0.067 μg kg-1 Draft QS sediment ww NOEC (open literature) = 1 μg/L LOEC = approximately 1 ng/L Recommended GES Water: 0.1 μg L boundaries -1 Sediment: Biota: 1 μg kg-1 Water: 0.0035 ng L ww Seafood: -1 Sediment: Biota: 0.067 μg kg-1 ww Seafood: According to SCHER (2011), there is uncertainty in the background material of the EQS and therefore the GES boundary for diclofenac is only tentative. The SCHER opinion on the EE2 supports the WFD WG E proposal (SCHER 2011), but the EQSs are still considered tentative. Preferred matrix Diclofenac can readily be analysed in water and in fi sh plasma. EE2 can be analyzed in water and in fi sh plasma. Monitoring the compound Status of monitoring network (geographical and temporal coverage) Diclofenac and EE2 is not monitored anywhere in the Baltic Sea, but it is included at least in the Swedish EPA’s screening program. Gaps in the monitoring of the compound There are gaps. Recommendation Diclofenac and EE2 are recommended as core indicators, because of their policy relevance and known adverse effects in environment.
3.10. Lysosomal membrane stability Author: Katja Broeg, Doris Schiedek and Kari Lehtonen ICES SGEH Biological Effects methods Background Documents for the Baltic Sea region (ICES/OSPAR document from the ICES SGIMC Report 2010, complemented and modifi ed by SGEH 2011 with information relevant for application in the Baltic Sea region) Description of the indicator Lysosomal functional integrity is a generic common target for environmental stressors in all eukaryotic organisms from yeast and protozoans to humans (Cuervo 2004), that is evolutionarily highly conserved. The stability of lysosomal membranes is a good diagnostic biomarker of individual health status (Allen and Moore 2004; Broeg et al. 2005; Köhler et al. 1992, Lowe et al. 2006). Dysfunction of lysosomal processes has been mechanistically linked with many aspects of pathology associated with toxicity and degenerative diseases (Cuervo 2004; Köhler 2004; Köhler et al. 2002; Moore et al. 2006a, b, Broeg 2010). Lysosomes are known to accumulate many metals and organic xenobiotics. Metals such as copper, cadmium and mercury are known to induce lysosomal destabilisation in mussels (Viarengo et al. 1981, 1985a, b). LMS is strongly correlated with the concentration of PAHs and PCBs in mussel tissue (Cajaraville et al. 2000; Krishnakumar et al. 1994; Moore 1990; Moore et al. 2006a, b; Viarengo et al. 1992, Strand et al. 2009), as well as organochlorines and PCB congeners in the liver of fi sh (Köhler et al. 2002, Broeg et al. 1992). LMS of various species of mussel and fi sh from different climate zones clearly refl ect gradients of complex mixtures of chemicals in water and sediments (Da Ros et al. 2002; Pisoni et al, 2004; Schiedek et al. 2006, Barsiene et al. 2006; Sturve et al. 2005), point sources of pollution, single pollution events and accidents (Garmendia et al. 2011; Einsporn et al. 2005; Broeg et al. 2002, Broeg et al. 2008, Nicholson and Lam, 2005) and also serves for the discovery of new “Hot Spots” of pollution (Bressling 2006; Moore et. al. 1998; 2004a). LMS can also be used as a prognostic tool, able to predict liver damage and tumour progression in the liver of various fi sh species (Broeg et al. 1999; Diamant et al. 1999; Köhler et al. 2002; Köhler 2004, Broeg 2010). Also hepatopancreatic degeneration in molluscs, coelomocyte damage in earthworms, enhanced protein turnover as a result of radical attack on proteins, and energetic status an indicator of fi tness of individuals within a population can be predicted (Allen & Moore 2004; Kirchin et al. 1992; Köhler et al. 2002; Moore et al. 2004a, 2006a; Nicholson & Lam 2005; Svendsen & Weeks 1995; Svendsen et al. 2004). Recently it is tested for its prognostic potential with respect to reproductive disorders in amphipods in the Baltic Sea. For eelpout, this prognostic potential could already been demonstrated. Low membrane stabilities coincided with distinct reproductive disorders that indicated adverse effects at the population level (Broeg and Lehtonen 2006). Thus, LMS has been adopted by UNEP as part of the fi rst tier of techniques for assessing harmful impact in the Mediterranean Pollution programme (MEDPOL Phase IV) and is also recommended as biomarker to be included into the OSPAR Coordinated Environmental Monitoring Programme (pre-CEMP). LMS of blue mussel from the Inner Danish waters and the Danish Belt Sea is part of the Danish monitoring programme NOVANA since 2003 (Strand et al. 2009). It is also under consideration for the Swedish monitoring programme (Granmo, pers. comm.). Methods applied to assess LMS are the Neutral Red Retention test (NRR) on living cells like mussel haemocytes, and the cytochemical test on serial cryostat sections performed from snap-frozen tissue. These methods are described in detail by Moore et al. (2004b). Currently a new method is developed for the assessment of LMS in single tissue sections of small indicator species like amphipods (Broeg and Schatz, in prep.). Beside LMS, adverse lysosomal reactions to xenobiotic pollutants include swelling, lipidosis (pathological accumulation of lipid), and lipofuscinosis (pathological accumulation of age/stress pigment) in molluscs but 123
Page 1:
Baltic Sea Environment Proceedings
Page 4 and 5:
2 Helsinki Commission Katajanokanla
Page 6 and 7:
4 4.16. Cumulative impact on benthi
Page 8 and 9:
6 descriptions of the indicators. T
Page 10 and 11:
8 The CORESET expert group on biodi
Page 12 and 13:
10 fi sh stocks and change in diet,
Page 14 and 15:
12 Figure 2.3. The prevalence of pr
Page 16 and 17:
14 Seasonal changes in blubber thic
Page 18 and 19:
16 Blubber thickness suggestions Bl
Page 20 and 21:
18 Weaknesses/gaps Monitoring of th
Page 22 and 23:
20 2.3. Population growth rate of m
Page 24 and 25:
22 Annual adult survival 1 0,95 0,9
Page 26 and 27:
24 Existing monitoring data Informa
Page 28 and 29:
26 References Bäcklin, B. M. 2011.
Page 30 and 31:
28 Reproduction in the Baltic eagle
Page 32 and 33:
30 Breeding success The proportion
Page 34 and 35:
32 of the real number of nestlings
Page 36 and 37:
34 Gaps and weaknesses Minimum dete
Page 38 and 39:
36 2.5. Abundance of wintering popu
Page 40 and 41:
38 Table 2.10. Pressures affecting
Page 42 and 43:
40 Refrences Skov et al. (2000) Bir
Page 44 and 45:
42 termined by application of the 7
Page 46 and 47:
44 Approach for defi ning GES All s
Page 48 and 49:
46 Sampling It is suggested to incl
Page 50 and 51:
48 2.7. Fish population abundance 2
Page 52 and 53:
50 Coastal Fish - Community Abundan
Page 54 and 55:
52 When a reference data set cannot
Page 56 and 57:
54 well, but were not included in t
Page 58 and 59:
56 Weighting For Nordic Costal mult
Page 60 and 61:
58 12. Current monitoring Monitored
Page 62 and 63:
60 Błeńska M., Osowiecki A., Kra
Page 64 and 65:
62 10. Spatial considerations Fucus
Page 66 and 67:
64 2.15. Trend in the arrival of ne
Page 68 and 69:
66 jectives is to reach “No intro
Page 70 and 71:
68 Sweden Figure 2.23 shows the rat
Page 72 and 73:
70 Strengths and weaknesses of data
Page 74 and 75: 72 need to be revisited in light of
Page 76 and 77: 74 Considering the data set availab
Page 78 and 79: 76 In Denmark, the highest contamin
Page 80 and 81: 78 Status of a compound on internat
Page 82 and 83: 80 A temporal analysis (EU-RAR 2006
Page 84 and 85: 82 Pathways of PFOS to the Baltic e
Page 86 and 87: 84 In regions less affected by anth
Page 88 and 89: 86 3.4. Polychlorinated biphenyls a
Page 90 and 91: 88 actions related to the environme
Page 92 and 93: 90 The CORESET expert group decided
Page 94 and 95: 92 pheric deposition pattern (lowes
Page 96 and 97: 94 3.5. Polyaromatic hydrocarbons (
Page 98 and 99: 96 GES boundaries and matrix Existi
Page 100 and 101: 98 Quality Assurance of PAH metabol
Page 102 and 103: 100 Ariese F, Burgers I, Oudhoff K,
Page 104 and 105: 102 GES boundaries and matrices Exi
Page 106 and 107: 104 3.7. Cesium-137 Authors: Jürge
Page 108 and 109: 106 Figure 3.5. Average surface lev
Page 110 and 111: 108 Temporal trends in concentratio
Page 112 and 113: 110 Other important sources are glo
Page 114 and 115: 112 Conceptual model of the sources
Page 116 and 117: 114 3.8 Tributyltin (TBT) and the i
Page 118 and 119: 116 GES boundaries and matrix Exist
Page 120 and 121: 118 Monitoring the compound Status
Page 122 and 123: 120 Recommendation TBT measurements
Page 126 and 127: 124 not fi sh (Köhler et al. 2002;
Page 128 and 129: 126 The use of different fi sh spec
Page 130 and 131: 128 Kirchin, M.A. Moore, M.N. Dean,
Page 132 and 133: 130 3.11. Fish Disease Index: Exter
Page 134 and 135: 132 Confounding factors The multifa
Page 136 and 137: 134 analyses ICES data from various
Page 138 and 139: 136 An EAC is the threshold beyond
Page 140 and 141: 138 3.12. Micronucleus test Authors
Page 142 and 143: 140 main nuclei were not counted as
Page 144 and 145: 142 ing national data sets. Note: t
Page 146 and 147: 144 Baršienė J. Rybakovas A. 2006
Page 148 and 149: 146 3.13 A. Reproductive disorders
Page 150 and 151: 148 dead larvae can be induced by s
Page 152 and 153: 150 Strand, J, Dahllöf, I. (2005).
Page 154 and 155: 152 of contaminants in sediments wi
Page 156 and 157: 154 Eriksson Wiklund, A-K., and Sun
Page 158 and 159: 156 4. Candidate indicators for bio
Page 160 and 161: 158 Zooplankton-phytoplankton bioma
Page 162 and 163: 160 4.2. By-catch of marine mammals
Page 164 and 165: 162 4.3. Impacts of anthropogenic u
Page 166 and 167: 164 4.4. Fatty-acid composition of
Page 168 and 169: 166 7. Use of the indicator in prev
Page 170 and 171: 168 10. Spatial considerations Balt
Page 172 and 173: 170 4.10. Large fi sh individuals f
Page 174 and 175:
172 11. Temporal considerations Sam
Page 176 and 177:
174 7. Use of the indicator in prev
Page 178 and 179:
176 7. Use of the indicator in prev
Page 180 and 181:
178 A proposal for an approach to a
Page 182 and 183:
180 Technical data Metadata This is
Page 184 and 185:
182 F igure 4.1. Map showing the cu
Page 186 and 187:
184 4.17. Biomass of copepods 1. Wo
Page 188 and 189:
186 4.19. Zooplankton species diver
Page 190 and 191:
188 indirectly impacted by eutrophi
Page 192 and 193:
190 Notes for the GES boundary The
Page 194 and 195:
192 Step 3: Prepare a list of speci
Page 196 and 197:
194 4.22. Phytoplankton diversity 1
Page 198 and 199:
196 4. Policy relevance Nonylphenol
Page 200 and 201:
198 among different studies/measure
Page 202 and 203:
200 4.27. EROD/CYP1A induction The
Page 204 and 205:
202 5.1. Summary of all supplementa
Page 206 and 207:
204 Table 5.1. (continues) Suppleme
Page 208 and 209:
206 5.5. Biopollution level index 1
Page 210 and 211:
208 NIS for aquaculture purposes. O
Page 212 and 213:
210 Balanus improvisus Baltic Katte
Page 214 and 215:
212 Figure 5.3. The scheme for asse
Page 216 and 217:
214 5.6. Organochlorine compounds G
Page 218 and 219:
216 EU Directive 2008/105/ EC Daugh
Page 220 and 221:
218 Table 5.4. Monitoring of HCB, H
Page 222:
www.helcom.fi
show all

Interim report of the HELCOM CORESET project

Create successful ePaper yourself

Delete template?

Save as template?