<br />SELENIVv[ IN RAZORBACK SLCKERS IN GREEN RIVER. UTAH
<br />
<br />[~l
<br />
<br />Selenium concentrations in eggs could result in slightly
<br />higher concentrations in hatched larvae because the chorion
<br />membrane probably would not contribute much selenium
<br />to the egg, yet would contribute mass. Selenium in fish eggs
<br />is carried as part of the yolk precursor proteins lipovitellin
<br />and phosvitin and is incorporated into egg immunoglobulin
<br />and vitellogenin and transferred to yolk molecules (Kroll
<br />and Doroshov, 1991).
<br />The selenium in larvae in the present study may also have
<br />come from waterborne and dietary uptake of selenium.
<br />Although larvae were probably less than a month old at the
<br />time of capture by light trap, they would have been exposed
<br />to selenium and other inorganic elements in water since
<br />hatching, and in food organisms since initiation of feeding at
<br />about 4-5 days old. Several reports have documented elev-
<br />ated selenium concentrations in water and biota at Brush
<br />Creek, Stewart lake Drain, Ashley Creek, Sportsman's
<br />Lake, and Sheppard Bottom, which all have contributed
<br />selenium loading to the Green River (Stephens et al., 1988,
<br />1992; Peltz and WaddelL 1991; Waddell and Wiens, 1994a).
<br />This selenium loading has resulted in elevated selenium in
<br />adult razorback sucker and contributed to the exposure of
<br />larvae and their concomitant accumulation of selenium.
<br />
<br />Selenium Hazards to Razorback Sucker
<br />
<br />Selenium concentrations in larvae from the present study
<br />were higher than concentrations in fish from control treat-
<br />ments in laboratory studies with water, diet, or combined
<br />water and diet exposures, or reference sites in field studies
<br />(0.4-2.0Ilg/g; Table 3). The geometric inean for selenium
<br />reported in the National Contaminant Biomonitoring Pro-
<br />gram (NCBP) for 315 composite samples of whole-body
<br />adult fish (47 taxa) collected from 109 stations nationwide in
<br />late 1984 to early 1985 (Schmitt and Brumbaugh, 1990) was
<br />1.6 Ilg/g and the 85th percentile was 2.8 Ilg/g. The 85th
<br />percentile is an arbitrary value used to identify values that
<br />are substantially above the nationwide median and possibly
<br />of concern, although the 85th percentile concentration has
<br />no toxicological significance. Selenium concentrations of
<br />about 4 Ilg/g or more in whole-body of young fish exposed
<br />through dietary or waterborne exposures have been asso-
<br />ciated with adverse effects (Table 4), Although some of the
<br />waterborne exposures may seem high in Table 4, the main
<br />point of the table is the values for whole-body residue and
<br />the resulting adverse effect. Once whole-body selenium
<br />reaches a toxic threshold concentration (i.e., 4 Ilg/g), regard-
<br />less of exposure route, adverse effects will occur. Based on
<br />the literature given in Table 4 and information from several
<br />other laboratory and field studies with a variety of fish
<br />species, lemly (1993) recommended that whole-body resi-
<br />dues of selenium in fish of 4Ilg/g, regardless of exposure
<br />route, be taken as the toxic threshold for adverse effects.
<br />This toxic threshold was equaled or exceeded in the residues
<br />
<br />in larval razorback sucker collected from the five sites in the
<br />present study (Table I).
<br />One of the cited studies in Table 4 involved feeding larval
<br />razorback sucker selenium-laden zooplankton collected
<br />from sites in Sheppard Bottom at Ouray NWR (Hamilton et
<br />al., 1996). In that study, 5-, 10-, 24-. and 28-day-old larvae
<br />tested in four experiments experienced nearly complete
<br />mortality in 20-25 days after feeding on zooplankton from
<br />three to six sites with selenium concentrations in zooplank-
<br />ton ranging from 2.3 to 96Ilg/g. Whole-body residues in
<br />these fish ranged from 3.6 to 94 Ilgjg. The range of residues
<br />in larvae demonstrates the variation that can occur in sur-
<br />viving fish, but from a toxicological standpoint, adverse
<br />effect concentrations are always linked with the lowest treat-
<br />ment or residue concentration associated with the observed
<br />adverse effect (Rand and Petrocelli, 1985). In the Ouray
<br />study, mortality occurred concurrently in larvae fed zo-
<br />oplankton from the six sites, which suggests that a toxic
<br />threshold was exceeded. The concentrations of selenium in
<br />zooplankton and larvae from the three least selenium con-
<br />taminated sites (2.3 to 4.5 Ilg/g in zooplankton and 3.6 to
<br />14.3Ilg/g in larvae) were close to or higher than the toxic
<br />thresholds (3 Ilg/g in diet and 4 Ilg/g in whole-body) pro-
<br />posed by Lemly (1993) and supported by the results of
<br />studies summarized in Table 4.
<br />As with any normal, bell-shaped distribution of responses
<br />in a group of individuals to a stimulus, some individuals will
<br />be adversely affected at low levels of stimulus, i.e., selenium
<br />residues less than the mean response, whereas some indi-
<br />viduals will not be adversely affected until levels of stimulus
<br />are higher than the mean, i.e., selenium residues greater than
<br />the mean response. One misconception of threshold concen-
<br />trations is that once a threshold is exceeded, all organisms
<br />are adversely affected on an equal basis. Toxic thresholds
<br />are usually based on the response of the most sensitive
<br />species tested, but there may be other untested species with
<br />greater sensitivity and others with less sensitivity to a stres-
<br />sor. Likewise, within a species, sensitivity is usually greatest
<br />in very young life stages, and within a life stage, sensitivity
<br />will vary among individuals. Also, threshold values may be
<br />affected by other inorganic or organic contaminants or
<br />synergistic or antagonistic interactions between con-
<br />taminants. Consequently, threshold values should be used
<br />with caution.
<br />Some fish in the Ouray study (Hamilton et al., 1996) died
<br />with lower whole-body concentrations of selenium than
<br />selenium concentrations in live, wild larvae collected in the
<br />present study (assumes that fish drying in a treatment have
<br />the same toxicant concentration as fish still alive in that
<br />treatment). Sato et al. (1980) reported that selenium concen-
<br />trations in dead carp (e. carpio) from two experiments with
<br />waterborne selenium were lower than those in live fish
<br />sampled during the experiments, which shows the difference
<br />in sensitivity that can occur between individuals of a single
<br />
|