contaminants of concern in puget sound’s food web presentation to the pacific northwest pollution...
TRANSCRIPT
Contaminants of Concernin Puget Sound’s
Food Webpresentation to the Pacific Northwest Pollution Prevention Resource Center
24 October, 2012James E. West,
Puget Sound Ecosystem Monitoring Program Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife
Today I will…• Describe PSEMP contaminant
monitoring in Puget Sound• Provide three examples of chemical
contaminants in the food web• Compare metrics of contaminant
exposure or effects with “deleterious effects thresholds”
• An extensive network of regional scientists who monitor key indicators of ecosystem health.
• Formed in 1988 to assess status and trends of Puget Sound health.
• State funds, coordinated by the Puget Sound Partnership
• Science linked to Management to support PS Recovery
PSEMP In a Nutshell
PSEMP monitors toxics in sentinel species…..
Coho, chinook
herring
3 spp ofrockfish
English sole
PSAMP Toxics in Biota Component
• Plankton• Pacific cod• Lingcod• Sixgill shark• Herring eggs• Dungeness crab• ….and Mussels
James E. West, Puget Sound Assessment and Monitoring Program, April 18th, 2008
……while striving for broad coverage in the Food Web
Why monitor toxics in biota?
• What/where is the harm from exposure to toxics?
• Which chemicals are of most concern?• How are conditions changing over
time?• Unexpected conditions
How do we measure exposure to these pollutants?
Some accumulate in organisms• measure in tissues = “tissue residues”
Some are metabolized• measure metabolites, e.g., bile or blood
With some, it’s easy to see characteristic “toxicopathic” effects
Three types of pollutants we’ll mention today
• Persistent Bioaccumulative Toxics (PBTs)– e.g., PCBs, PBDEs,
• Ongoing/current (PAHs)– Petroleum products– Products of combustion
• Endocrine Disruptors– Esp. xenoestrogens– typically from pharmaceuticals and personal
care products
Simplified pathwayfor PCBs enteringand biomagnifying in the pelagic food web
Source: Seattle Post-Intelligencer“The Zone”[email protected]
0
50
100
150
200
South PS
0
50
100
150
200
Central PS
0
50
100
150
200
Northern PS
Puget Sound is a Regional Hot Spot
of PCBs in thePelagic Food web(Pacific herring)
0
50
100
150
200
San Francisco
0
50
100
150
200
WA Coast
0
50
100
150
200
Vancouver Is.
0
50
100
150
200
BC Central
0
50
100
150
200
Q. Charlottes
Ocean herring data courtesy Sandie O’Neill, NOAA Fisheries
PCBs in the pelagic food web (cont’d)
PCB levels in Puget Sound salmon may impair the health of killer whales
Hickie et al. 2007
2006 WADOH Report: recommends restricting intake of Puget Sound
Chinook salmon to only 1 meal/week
Puget Sound Chinook 3 to 5x more contaminated than
Pacific Coastal: 22% of PS Chinook exceed an effects
threshold
(O’Neill and West 2009)
Concentration (ug/kg)
0 20 40 60 80
OregonColumbia R.
WA CoastPuget Sound
British ColumbiaSE Alaska
Kenai
Port Orchard/Madison Stock
1998 2000 2002 2004 2006 2008 2010 2012
Tot
al P
CB
s (n
g/g
lipid
)
1000
2000
3000
4000
5000
6000
7000
Fish HealthThreshold
(Meador 2002)
Fish Health Target?PCBs in Pacific herring (Clupea pallasi)
from Central Puget Sound
1998 2000 2002 2004 2006 2008 2010
PC
Bs
ng
/g w
et w
t.
0
50
100
150
200
250
300
350 Port Orchard
Cal. EPA Advisory
Tissue Levels
≥3 servings/week
<3 servings/week
“no consumption”
Human Health Targets? PCBs in Pacific herring (Clupea pallasi)
from Central Puget Sound
20012002
20032004
20062007
20082010S
um
PB
DE
s (n
g/g
wet
wt.
)
0
20
40
60
80
100
120
140
Brominated flame retardants in Pacific herring (Clupea pallasi)
from Central Puget Sound(Human Health Target)
Cal. EPA AdvisoryTissue level
≥3 servings/week
<3 servings/week
Exposure to PAHs causes
characteristic liver disease in English
sole
PAHs in bottom-dwelling species
English sole (Parophrys vetulus)can metabolize PAHs
1990 1995 2000 2005 2010
Pre
vale
nce
(%
) o
f fis
h w
ith
an
y o
f fo
ur
typ
es
of
live
r d
ise
ase
0%
10%
20%
30%
40%
Liver Disease (solid line)
PAH-related liver disease in English sole from Elliott Bay
1990 1995 2000 2005 2010
Pre
vale
nce
(%
) o
f fis
h w
ith
an
y o
f fo
ur
typ
es
of
live
r d
ise
ase
0%
10%
20%
30%
40%
PA
H e
xpo
sure
(n
g B
aP
me
tab
olit
e/m
l bile
± 9
5%
C.I
.)
0
500
1000
1500
2000
2500
3000
Liver Disease (solid line)PAH Exposure (dashed line)
Adding measure of PAH-metabolites
Target <5% prevalence of liver disease
1990 1995 2000 2005 2010
Pre
vale
nce
(%
) o
f fis
h w
ith
an
y o
f fo
ur
typ
es
of l
ive
r d
ise
ase
0%
10%
20%
30%
40%
Endocrine disrupting chemicals ……a global environmental issue
Chemicals capable of acting as hormone mimics or blocking hormone action
Can alter the hormonal balance in animals and humans
Effects include developmental, behavioral and reproductive abnormalities
Slide courtesy Lyndal Johnson, NOAA Fisheries
spent or regressed
vitellogenic
spawning
Reproductive condition, female English Sole from 22 Puget Sound locations, April/May
Elliott Bay
Washington
Department of
Fish and Wildlife
Slide adapted from data used in: L.L. Johnson et al. 2008. Xenoestrogen exposure and effects in English sole (Parophrys vetulus) from Puget Sound,WA. Aquatic Toxicology 88: 29-38.
0
25
50
75
100Port
Susan
0
25
50
75
100Port
Gardner
0
25
50
75
100Elliott Bay
0
25
50
75
100TheaFoss
Waterway
0
25
50
75
100
SinclairInlet
Percentage of male English sole
blood samples with detected vitellogenin
Hood Canal(0%)
Nisqually Reach(0%)
Source: James E. West, Washington Dept. of Fish and Wildlife, Puget Sound Assessment and Monitoring Program, [email protected]
Summary• Use organisms to help guide recovery
goals
• Insist on meaningful deleterious effects thresholds to use as recovery targets
• Monitor appropriate exposure or effects metrics to evaluate success
Acknowledgements
WDFW
Jennifer Lanksbury
Laurie Niewolny
Stefanie Orlaineta
Jim Beam
Steve Quinnell
Kurt Stick
NOAA Fisheries
Sandie O’Neill
Lyndal Johnson
Gina Ylitalo
Mark Myers
Nat Scholz
John Incardona