Advertisement

Could a harmonized tiered approach assess dispersant toxicity in Italy and France?

  • Loredana ManfraEmail author
  • Andrea Tornambè
  • Julien Guyomarch
  • Karine Duboscq
  • Olga Faraponova
  • Claudia Sebbio
Challenges in Emerging Environmental Contaminants
  • 17 Downloads

Abstract

In recent years, EU countries have recognized national policies to authorize dispersant use to mitigate the petroleum hydrocarbon contamination in case of unintentional oil spills at sea. A harmonization of dispersant approval procedures is needed because the application of different methodologies agrees on dissimilar toxic responses for the same dispersant in different European countries. Actually, different dispersant approval procedures are applied in France and Italy with one French mandatory toxicity test and three Italian bioassays accompanied with different criteria of toxicity classification. In this paper, a harmonized tiered approach is proposed to address the dispersant ecotoxicological assessment in these two nations. Our approach, applicable at the European level, introduces two mandatory tests (algal growth inhibition test and mortality test with crustaceans) and one discretionary test (fish mortality test), by reducing use of vertebrates as much as possible in accordance with humane principles and animal welfare.

Keywords

Oil spill management Dispersants Toxicity Harmonized tiered approach 

Notes

Funding

This work was funded by the RAMOGE Executive Secretariat within the project “Harmonization of protocols and criteria for evaluation and classification of dispersant ecotoxicity” (2018).

Compliance with ethical standards

Conflict of interest

The authors declare that they have no competing interests.

References

  1. Bejarano AC (2018) Critical review and analysis of aquatic toxicity data on oil spill dispersants. Environ Toxicol Chem 37(12):2989–3001CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Bergami E, Pugnalini S, Vannuccini ML, Manfra L, Faleri C, Dawson KA, Corsi I (2017) Long-term toxicity of surface-charged polystyrene nanoplastics to marine planktonic species Dunaliella tertiolecta and Artemia franciscana. Aquat Toxicol 189:159–169.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.aquatox.2017.06.008 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. EMSA (2016) Overview of national dispersant testing and approval policies in the European Union European Maritime Safety Agency. pp.57Google Scholar
  4. Faraponova O, Lera S, Savorelli F, Palazzi D, Onorati F, Cicero AM, Magaletti E (2007) Valutazione della tossicità acuta di un prodotto disperdente per gli stadi giovanili di quattro specie di crostacei (caso studio). Ricerca, applicazioni e normazione di metodologie ecotossicologiche per la valutazione della qualità degli ambienti marini e salmastri ICRAM, CIBM, Viareggio, Italia. Biol Mar Mediterr 14(1):58–63Google Scholar
  5. GESAMP (2014) (2nd ed.). Revised GESAMP hazard evaluation procedure for chemical substances carried by ships (IMO/FAO/UNESCO-IOC/WMO/ IAEA/UN/UNEP/UNIDO/UNDP) Joint Group of Experts on the Scientific Aspects of Marine Environmental Protection, Rep. Stud. GESAMP No. 64Google Scholar
  6. ICRAM (2005) Programma di Ricerca TAXA - Sperimentazione di test tossicologici su organismi marini, ai fini dell’applicabilità del D.D. 23.12.2002. Relazione finale, pp. 139Google Scholar
  7. IMO/UNEP (2011) Regional information system; Part D – Operational guidelines and technical documents, Section 2, Guidelines for the use of dispersants for combating oil pollution at sea in the Mediterranean region, REMPEC. May editionGoogle Scholar
  8. ISO 10253 (2016) Water quality - Marine algal growth inhibition test with Skeletonema sp. and Phaeodactylum tricornutum. ISO/TC 147/SC 5, pp. 19Google Scholar
  9. ISO 14669 (1999) Water quality - Determination of acute lethal toxicity to marine copepods (Copepoda, Crustacea). TC/SC: ISO/TC 147/SC 5, pp.16.Google Scholar
  10. Manfra L, Tornambè A, Guyomarch J, Le Guerrogue P, Kerambrun L, Rotini A, Savorelli F, Onorati F, Magaletti E (2017) Dispersant approval procedures in France and Italy: a comparative ecotoxicity study. Ecotoxicol Environ Saf 143:180–185.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecoenv.2017.05.044 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Mariani L, De Pascale D, Faraponova O, Tornambè A, Sarni A, Giuliani S, Ruggiero G, Onorati F, Magaletti E (2006) The use of a test battery in marine ecotoxicology: the acute toxicity of sodium dodecylsulfate. Environ Toxicol 21(4):373–379.  https://doi.org/10.1002/tox.20204 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. OSPAR Agreement (2015) Guidelines for completing the Harmonised Offshore Chemical Notification Format (HOCNF)Google Scholar
  13. Rotini A, Manfra L, Canepa S, Tornambè A, Migliore L (2015) Can Artemia hatching assay be a (sensitive) alternative tool to acute toxicity test? Bull Environ Contam Toxicol 95(6):745–751.  https://doi.org/10.1007/s00128-015-1626-1 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. UNICHIM MU2396 (2014) Water quality - determination of lethal toxicity at 24 h, 48 h and 96 h exposure for Tigriopus fulvus naupli (Fischer, 1860) (Crustacea: Copepoda)Google Scholar
  15. US EPA (2012) Benchmark dose technical guidance. Risk Assessment Forum, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Washington, DC 20460EPA/100/R-12/001 June 2012.Google Scholar
  16. Wise J, Wise JP (2011) A review of the toxicity of chemical dispersants. Rev Environ Health 26(4):281–300CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag GmbH Germany, part of Springer Nature 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  • Loredana Manfra
    • 1
    • 2
    Email author
  • Andrea Tornambè
    • 1
  • Julien Guyomarch
    • 3
  • Karine Duboscq
    • 3
  • Olga Faraponova
    • 1
  • Claudia Sebbio
    • 1
  1. 1.Institute for Environmental Protection and Research (ISPRA)RomeItaly
  2. 2.Stazione Zoologica Anton DohrnNaplesItaly
  3. 3.Centre of Documentation, Research and Experimentation on Accidental Water Pollution (CEDRE)BrestFrance

Personalised recommendations