My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
7092
CWCB
>
UCREFRP
>
Public
>
7092
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
7/14/2009 5:02:29 PM
Creation date
5/20/2009 10:14:01 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
UCREFRP
UCREFRP Catalog Number
7092
Author
Eisler, R.
Title
Arsenic Hazards to Fish, Wildlife, and Invertebrates
USFW Year
1988.
USFW - Doc Type
A Synoptic Review.
Copyright Material
NO
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
104
PDF
Print
Pages to print
Enter page numbers and/or page ranges separated by commas. For example, 1,3,5-12.
After downloading, print the document using a PDF reader (e.g. Adobe Reader).
Show annotations
View images
View plain text
ug/l of As +5 or various methylated arsenicals, mortality+las 10% to 32% in <br />amphipods (Gammarus pseudolimnaeus) in 28 days; at 9?5ug As /1, marine red <br />alga failed to reproduce sexually; and at 100 ug As /1, marine copepods died <br />and goldfish behavior was impaired ??able 4). Rainbow trout (Salmo gairdneri) <br />fed diets containing up to 90 mg As /kg were only sliq?tly affected, but <br />those given diets containing 120 mg As/kg (as As or As ), and higher, grew <br />poorly, avoided food, and failed to metabolize food efficiently; no toxic <br />effects were reported over 8 weeks of exposure to diets containing 1,600 <br />mg/kg, as methylated arsenicals (Table 4). In bluegills (Lepomis <br />macrochirus), tissue residues of 1.35 mg As/kg fresh weight in juveniles and 5 <br />mg/kg in adults are considered elevated and potentially hazardous (NRCC <br />1978). <br />Toxic and other effects of arsenicals to aquatic life are significantly <br />modified by numerous biological and abiotic factors (Woolson 1975; NAS 1977; <br />NRCC 1978; EPA 1980, 1985; Howard et al. 1984; Michnowicz and Weaks 1984; <br />Bryant et al. 1985; Sanders 1986). The LC-50 values, for example, are <br />markedly affected by water temperature, pH, Eh, organic content, phosphate <br />concentration, suspended solids, and presence of other substances and <br />toxicants, as well as arsenic speciation, and duration of exposure. In <br />general, inorganic arsenicals are more toxic than organoarsenicals to aquatic <br />biota, and trivalent species are more toxic than pentavalent species. Early <br />life stages are most sensitive, and large interspecies differences are <br />recorded, even among those closely related taxonomically. <br />Arsenic is accumulated from the water by a variety of organisms; however, <br />there is no evidence of magnification along the aquatic food chain (Woolson <br />1975; NAS 1977; NRCC 1978; Hallacher et al. 1985; Hood 1985). In a marine <br />ecosystem based on the alga Fucus vesiculosus, arsenate (7.5 ug As+5/1) was <br />accumulated by all biota. After 3 months, arsenic was concentrated most <br />efficiently by Fucus (120 mg/kg dry weight in apical fronds) and filamentous <br />algal species (30 mg/kg dry weight); little or no bioaccumulation occurred in <br />invertebrates, although arsenic seemed to be retained by gastropods and <br />mussels (Rosemarin et al. 1985). In a freshwater food chain composed of <br />algae, daphnids, and fish, water concentrations of 0.1 mg cacodylic acid/l <br />produced residues (mg As/kg dry weight), after 48 hours of 4.5 in algae and <br />3.9 in daphnids, but only 0.09 in fish (NAS 1977). Microcosms of a Delaware <br />co+ggrass (Spartina alterniflora) salt marsh exposed to elevated levels of <br />As showed that virtually all arsenic was incorporated into plant tissue or <br />strongly sorbed to cell surfaces (Sanders and Osman 1985). Studies with <br />radioarsenic and mussels (M ty ilus galloprovincialis) showed that accumulation <br />varied with nominal arsenic concentrations, tissues, age of the mussel, and <br />temperature and salinity of the medium (Unlu and Fowler 1979). Arsenate <br />uptake increased with increasing arsenic concentration in the medium, but the <br />response was not linear, accumulation being suppressed at higher external <br />arsenic concentrations. Smaller mussels took up more arsenic than larger <br />ones. In both size groups, arsenic was concentrated in the byssus and <br />digestive gland. In general, arsenic uptake and loss increased at increasing <br />53
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.