Risk assessment of pesticides in estuaries: a review addressing the persistence of an old problem in complex environments
Estuaries, coastal lagoons and other transition ecosystems tend to become the ultimate reservoirs of pollutants transported by continental runoff, among which pesticides constitute the class of most concern. High amounts of dissolved and particulated organic matter greatly contribute to the accumulation of pesticides that eventually become trapped in sediments or find their way along food chains. Perhaps not so surprisingly, it is common to find elevated levels of pesticides in estuarine sediments decades after their embargo. Still, it remains challenging to address ecotoxicity in circumstances that invariably imply mixtures of contaminants and multiple factors affecting bioavailability. Despite advances in methods for detecting pesticides in waters, sediments and organisms, chemical data alone are insufficient to predict risk. Many researchers have been opting for ex situ bioassays that mimic the concentrations of pesticides in estuarine waters and sediments using a range of ecologically relevant model organisms, with emphasis on fish, molluscs and crustaceans. These experimental procedures unravelled novel risk factors and important insights on toxicological mechanisms, albeit with some prejudice of ecological relevance. On the other hand, in situ bioassays, translocation experiments and passive biomonitoring strive to spot causality through an intricate mesh of confounding factors and cocktails of pollutants. Seemingly, the most informative works are integrative approaches that combine different assessment strategies, multiple endpoints and advanced computational and geographical models to determine risk. State-of-art System Biology approaches combining high-content screening approaches involving “omics” and bioinformatics, can assist discovering and predicting novel Adverse Outcome Pathways that better reflect the cumulative risk of persisting and emerging pesticides among the wide range of stressors that affect estuaries.
KeywordsTransition ecosystems Brackish water Sediments Toxicity Contaminant mixtures Systems biology
The Portuguese Foundation for Science and Technology (FCT) is acknowledged for the funding for MARE through the strategic programme UID/MAR/04292/2013, and Unidade de Ciências Biomoleculares Aplicadas - UCIBIO which is financed by the national funds from FCT/MCTES (UID/Multi/04378/2013) and co-financed by the ERDF under the PT2020 Partnership Agreement (POCI-010145-FEDER-007728) REQUIMTE. FCT is also acknowledged for the grants SFRH/BPD/109734/2015 to M.M. and IF/00265/2015 to P.M.C. The research project GreenTech (PTDC/MAR-BIO/0113/2014), also funded by FCT, is acknowledged as well for the funding of the fellowship to N.C.
Compliance with ethical standards
Conflict of interest
The authors declare that they have no conflict of interest.
This article does not contain any studies with human participants or animals performed by any of the authors.
- Ankley GT, Bennett RS, Erickson RJ, Hoff DJ, Hornung MW, Johnson RD, Mount DR, Nichols JW, Russom CL, Schmieder PK, Serrrano JA, Tietge JE, Villeneuve DL (2010) Adverse outcome pathways: a conceptual framework to support ecotoxicology research and risk assessment. Environ Toxicol Chem 29:730–741CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- Barranger A, Akcha F, Rouxel J, Brizarda R, Maurouarda E, Palludb M, Menardb D, Tapiec N, Budzinski H, Burgeot T, Benabdelmouna A (2014) Study of genetic damage in the Japanese oyster induced by an environmentally-relevant exposure to diuron: evidence of vertical transmission of DNA damage Aquat Toxicol 146:93–104CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- Caeiro S, Vaz-Fernandes P, Martinho AP, Costa PM, Silva MJ, Lavinha J, Matias-Dias C, Machado A, Castanheira I, Costa MH (2017) Environmental risk assessment in a contaminated estuary: an integrated weight of evidence approach as a decision support tool. Ocean Coast Manag 143:51–62CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- Carson R (1962) Silent Spring.. Houghton Mifflin, Boston, MA, p 368Google Scholar
- Chorney DS, Büyükpınar Ç, Turak F, Komesli OT, Bakırdere S (2017) Simultaneous determination of selected hormones, endocrine disruptor compounds, and pesticides in water medium at trace levels by GC-MS after dispersive liquid-liquid microextraction. Environ Monit Assess 189:277CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- Cooper CM, Smith Jr. S, Moore MT (2003) Surface water, ground water and sediment quality in three oxbow lake watersheds in the Mississippi delta agricultural region: pesticides. Int J Ecol Environ Sci 29:1171–1184Google Scholar
- Costa PM, Chicano-Gálvez E, Caeiro S, Lobo J, Martins M, Ferreira AM, Caetano M, Vale C, Alhama-Carmona J, Lopez-Barea J, DellValls TÀ, Costa MH (2012b) Hepatic proteome changes in Solea senegalensis exposed to contaminated estuarine sediments: a laboratory and in situ survey Ecotoxicology 21:1194–1207CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- Cruzeiro C, Amaral S, Rocha E, Rocha MJ (2017) Determination of 54 pesticides in waters of the Iberian Douro River estuary and risk assessment of environmentally relevant mixtures using theoretical approaches and Artemia salina and Daphnia magna bioassays. Ecotoxicol Environ Safe 145:126–134CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- Hanke G, Mariani G, Comero S, Loos R, Bidoglio G, Polesello S, Valsecchi S, Rusconi M, Wollgast J, Castro-Jiménez J, Patrolecco L, Ademollo N (2012) Chemical-monitoring on-site exercises to harmonize analytical methods for priority substances in the European Union. Trends Anal Chem 36:25–35CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- Hering D, Borja A, Carstensen J, Carvalho L, Elliott M, Feld CK, Heiskanen AS, Johnson RK, Moe J, Pont D, Solheim AL, van de Bund W (2010) The European Water Framework Directive at the age of 10: a critical review of the achievements with recommendations for the future. Sci Total Environ 408:4007–4019CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- Hook SE, Kroon FJ, Metcalfe S, Greenfield PA, Moncuquet P, McGrath A, Smith R, Warne MS, Turner RD, McKeown A, Westcott DA (2017) Global transcriptomic profiling in barramundi (Lates calcarifer) from rivers impacted by differing agricultural land uses. Environ Toxicol Chem 36:103–112CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- Roig B, Allan I, Mills GA, Guigues N, Greenwood R, Gonzalez C (2009) Existing and new methods for chemical and ecological status monitoring under the WFD. In: Gonzalez C, Greenwood R, Quevauviller P (Eds.) Rapid chemical and biological techniques for water monitoring.. Wiley, Chichester, UK, p 39–50CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- Routti H, van Bavel B, Letcher RJ, Arukwe A, Chu S, Gabrielsen GW (2009) Concentrations, patterns and metabolites of organochlorine pesticides in relation to xenobiotic phase I and II enzyme activities in ringed seals (Phoca hispida) from Svalbard and the Baltic Sea. Environ Pollut 157:2428–2434CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- Tuffnail W, Mills GA, Cary P, Greenwood R (2009) An environmental 1H NMR metabolomic study of the exposure of the marine mussel Mytilus edulis to atrazine, lindane, hypoxia and starvation. Environ Sci Pollut Res 5:33–43Google Scholar
- USEPA (2007) Sediment Toxicity IdentificationEvaluation (TIE). Phases I, II and III. Guidance document. EPA/600/R-07/080Google Scholar