Skip to main content

Advertisement

Log in

Environmental hazard assessment by the Ecoscore system to discriminate PAH-polluted soils

  • Protection and Restoration of the Environment
  • Published:
Environmental Science and Pollution Research Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

A bioassay battery-integrated index was applied to different soils sampled from a former coke factory, with the aim to evaluate the discriminating capacity of the Ecoscore system (ES) to assess the environmental hazard of PAH-polluted soils. Two soils from a former coke factory, polluted with polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons (PAHs), were evaluated for their ecotoxicity to terrestrial and aquatic organisms and their genotoxicity. These soils have been already presented in a previous paper but data have been reanalyzed for the present article in an endeavor to standardize the ES. One soil was sampled in the untreated site and the second underwent a windrow treatment. While these soils had a similar total concentrations of US-EPA 16PAHs (around 3000 mg kg−1), different ecoscores were obtained when subjected to a set of solid- and liquid-phase bioassays measuring acute, chronic, and genotoxic effects. The total PAH content of the soil is not a pertinent parameter to assess soil pollution hazards contrary to the ES. ES is a robust method to classify soils according to their toxicity level. Four levels of toxicity have been defined: no (ecoscore = 0), weak (0 < ecoscore ≤33), moderate (33 < ecoscore ≤67), and strong toxicity (67 < ecoscore ≤ 100). The combination of chemical and toxicological data highlights the relationship between three-ring PAHs and acute ecotoxicity. Conversely, chronic effects of water extracts on algal growth could be explained by high molecular weight PAHs, such as five- and six-ring PAHs.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • Alexander M (1991) Research needs in bioremediation. Environ Sci Technol 25:1972–7973

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bispo A, Jourdain MJ, Jauzein M (1999) Toxicity and genotoxicity of industrial soils polluted by polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons (PAHs). Org Geochem 30:947–952

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Cerniglia CE (1992) Biodegradation of polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons. Biodegradation 3:351–368

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Chung N, Alexander M (2002) Effect of soil properties on bioavailability and extractability of phenanthrene and atrazine sequestered in soil. Chemosphere 48:109–115

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Čvančarová M, Křesinová Z, Cajthaml T (2013) Influence of the bioaccessible fraction of polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons on the ecotoxicity of historically contaminated soils. J Hazard Mater 254-255:116–124

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Eom IC, Rast C, Veber AM, Vasseur P (2007) Ecotoxicity of a polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbon (PAH)-contaminated soil. Ecotoxicol Environ Saf 67:190–205

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Fent K (2003) Ecotoxicological problems associated with contaminated sites. Toxicol Lett 140-141:353–365

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Fernandez MD, Cagigal E, Vega MM, Urzelai A, Babin M, Pro J, Tarazona JV (2005) Ecological risk assessment of contaminated soils through direct toxicity assessment. Ecotoxicol Environ Saf 62:174–184

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Ferrari B, Radetski CM, Veber AM, Ferard JF (1999) Ecotoxicological assessment of solid wastes: a combined liquid- and solid-phase testing approach using a battery of bioassays and biomarkers. Environ Toxicol Chem 18:1195–1202. doi:10.1002/etc.5620180618

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • IARC (2010) IARC monographs on the evaluation of carcinogenic risks to humans. Some non-heterocyclic polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons and some related exposures Working Group on the Evaluation of Carcinogenic Risks to Humans Vol 92. https://monographs.iarc.fr/ENG/Monographs/vol92/mono92.pdf

  • ISO 10694 (1995) Soil quality—determination of organic carbon and total carbon after dry combustion (elementary analysis). International Organization for Standardization, Geneva

    Google Scholar 

  • ISO 11267 (1999) Soil quality—inhibition of reproduction of Collembola (Folsomia candida) by soil pollutants. International Organization for Standardization, Geneva

    Google Scholar 

  • ISO 11269–2 (2005) Soil quality—determination of the pollutants effects on soil flora. Part 2. Effects of chemicals on the emergence and growth of higher plants. International Organization for Standardization, Geneva

  • ISO 11348–3 (1998) Water quality—determination of inhibitory effects of water samples on the light emission of Vibrio fischeri (luminescent bacteria test). Part 3. Method with freeze-dried bacteria. International Organization for Standardization, Geneva

  • ISO 13877 (1998) Soil quality—determination of polynuclear aromatic hydrocarbons, method using high-performance liquid chromatography. International Organization for Standardization, Geneva

    Google Scholar 

  • ISO 21268–2 (2007) Soil quality—leaching procedures for subsequent chemical and ecotoxicological testing of soil and soil materials. Part 2. Batch test using a liquid to solid ratio of 10 L/kg dry matter. International Organization for Standardization, Geneva

  • ISO 8692 (2004) Water quality—freshwater algal growth inhibition test with unicellular green algae. International Organization for Standardization, Geneva

    Google Scholar 

  • ISPRA (2011) Batterie di saggi ecotossicologici per sedimenti di acque salate e salmastre. Manuali e linee guida 67/2011. Istituto Superiore per la Protezione e la Ricerca Ambientale, Rome

  • Juhasz AL, Waller N, Lease C, Bentham R, Stewart R (2005) Pilot scale bioremediation of creosote-contaminated soil: efficacy of enhanced natural attenuation and bioaugmentation strategies. Bioremediat J 9:139–154

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Juvonen R, Martikainen E, Schultz E, Joutti A, Ahtiainen J, Lehtokari M (2000) A battery of toxicity tests as indicators of decontamination in composting oily waste. Ecotoxicol Environ Saf 47:156–166

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Leitgib L, Kalman J, Gruiz K (2007) Comparison of bioassays by testing whole soil and their water extract from contaminated sites. Chemosphere 66:428–434

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Litchfield JT, Wilcoxon F (1949) A simplified method of evaluating dose-effect experiments. J Pharmacol Exp Ther 96:99–113

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Lors C, Martínez Aldaya M, Salmon S, Ponge JF (2006) Use of an avoidance test for the assessment of microbial degradation of PAHs. Soil Biol Biochem 38:2199–2204

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Lors C, Ponge JF, Martínez Aldaya M, Damidot D (2010) Comparison of solid-phase bioassays and ecoscores to evaluate the toxicity of contaminated soils. Environ Pollut 158:2640–2647

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Lors C, Ponge JF, Martínez Aldaya M, Damidot D (2011) Comparison of solid and liquid-phase bioassays using ecoscores to assess contaminated soils. Environ Pollut 159:2974–2981

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Manzo S, Schiavo S, Aleksi P, Tabaku A (2014) Application of a toxicity test battery integrated index for a first screening of the ecotoxicological threat posed by ports and harbors in the southern Adriatic Sea (Italy). Environ Monit Assess 186:7127–7139

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Martínez Aldaya M, Lors C, Salmon S, Ponge JP (2006) Avoidance bio-assays may help to test the ecological significance of soil pollution. Environ Pollut 140:173–180

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Mendonça E, Picado A (2002) Ecotoxicological monitoring of remediation in a coke oven soil. Environ Toxicol 17:74–79

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Nesslany F, Marzin D (1999) A micromethod for in vitro micronucleus assay. Mutagenesis 14:403–410

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Otto S, Marcus C, Pidgeon C, Jefcoate C (1991) A novel adrenocorticotropin&inducible cytochrome P450 from rat adrenal microsomes catalyzes polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbon metabolism. Endocrinology 129:970–982

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Peijnenburg W, Sneller E, Sijm D, Ljizen J, Traas T, Verbruggen E (2002) Implementation of bioavailability in standard setting and risk assessment. J. Soils Sediments 2:169–173

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Persoone G, Marsalek B, Blinova I, Törökne A, Zarina D, Manusadzianas L, Nalecz-Jawecki G, Tofan L, Stepanova N, Tothova L, Kolar B (2003) A practical and user-friendly toxicity classification system with microbiotests for natural waters and wastewaters. Environ Toxicol 18:395–402

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Prato E, Parlapiano I, Biandolino F (2015) Ecotoxicological evaluation of sediments by battery bioassays: application and comparison of two integrated classification systems. Chem Ecol 31:661–678

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Riding MJ, Doick KJ, Martin FL, Jones KC, Semple KT (2013) Chemical measures of bioavailability/bioaccessibility of PAHs in soil: fundamentals to application. J Hazard Mater 261:687–700

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Rila JP, Eisentraeger A (2003) Application of bioassays for risk characterization and remediation control of soils polluted with nitroaromatics and PAHs. Water Air Soil Pollut 148:223–242

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Semple KT, Morriss AWJ, Paton GI (2003) Bioavailability of hydrophobic organic contaminants in soils: fundamental concepts and techniques for analysis. Eur J Soil Sci 54:809–818

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Sverdrup LE, Nielsen T, Krogh PH (2002) Soil ecotoxicity of polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons in relation to soil sorption, lipophilicity, and water solubility. Environ Sci Technol 36:2429–2435

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Verschueren K (2001) Handbook of environmental data on organic chemicals, 4th edn. Wiley, New York

    Google Scholar 

  • White PA, Claxton LD (2004) Mutagens in contaminated soil: a review. Mutat Res 567:227–345

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgements

The present study was performed with a financial support from the ADEME (Agence de l’Environnement et de la Maîtrise de l’Énergie, France), which is greatly acknowledged. We thank Total (France) and Charbonnages de France (France) to put industrial sites at our disposal.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Christine Lors.

Additional information

Responsible editor: Philippe Garrigues

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Lors, C., Ponge, JF. & Damidot, D. Environmental hazard assessment by the Ecoscore system to discriminate PAH-polluted soils. Environ Sci Pollut Res 25, 26747–26756 (2018). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11356-017-9906-4

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11356-017-9906-4

Keywords

Navigation