Water-extractable priority contaminants in LUFA 2.2 soil: back to basics, contextualisation and implications for use as natural standard soil

Abstract

The natural LUFA 2.2 standard soil has been extensively used in hazard assessment of soil contaminants, combining representation with ecological relevance for accurate risk evaluation. This study revisited the water-extractable fraction of LUFA 2.2 soil, through consecutive soil wet–dry cycles and discusses implications of use as standard substrate in derivation of ecotoxicological data and toxicity thresholds. Potentially bioavailable contents of metals (177.9–888.7 µg/l) and the 16 polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons (PAHs; 0.064–0.073 µg/l) were dependent on the number of soil wetting–drying cycles applied. Such contents were screened based on current EU guidelines for surface waters and reported toxicological benchmarks for aquatic organisms. Aqueous concentrations generally fit within recommended Environmental Quality Standards (EQS), except for Hg (0.13–0.22 µg/l; >Maximum Allowable Concentration—MAC—of 0.07 µg/l) and for the sum of benzo(g,h,i)perylene and indeno(1,2,3-cd)pyrene (0.005 µg/l; >double the Annual Average of 0.002 µg/l). Further, aqueous As, Zn, Cd, Ni and Cr concentrations exceeded ‘lower benchmark’ values for aquatic organisms, possibly reflecting an inadequate derivation for ecotoxicological data. In turn, PAHs in LUFA 2.2 soil aqueous extracts, whilst individually, are not likely to constitute a hazard to test biota exposed to its aqueous fractions. This study urges for potentially bioavailable fractions of reference and standard natural soils to be adequately characterized and addressed as part of the research aim, experimental approach and design, as well as the expected scope of the outcomes.