Estuarine sediments in regions with prolonged histories of industrial activity are often laden to significant depths with complex contaminant mixtures, including trace metals and persistent organic pollutants. Given the complexity of assessing risks from multi-contaminant exposures, the direct measurement of impacts to biological receptors is central to characterizing contaminated sediment sites. Though biological consequences are less commonly assessed at depth, laboratory-based toxicity testing of subsurface sediments can be used to delineate the scope of contamination at impacted sites. The extent and depth of sediment toxicity in Bear Creek, near Baltimore, Maryland, USA, was delineated using 10-day acute toxicity tests with the estuarine amphipod Leptocheirus plumulosus, and chemical analysis of trace metals and persistent organic pollutants. A gradient of toxicity was demonstrated in surface sediments with 21 of 22 tested sites differing significantly from controls. Effects were most pronounced (100% lethality) at sites proximate to a historic industrial complex. Sediments from eight of nine core samples to depths of 80 cm were particularly impacted (i.e., caused significant lethality to L. plumulosus) even in locations overlain with relatively non-toxic surface sediments, supporting a conclusion that toxicity observed at the surface (top 2 cm) does not adequately predict toxicity at depth. In seven of nine sites, toxicity of surface sediments differed from toxicity at levels beneath by 28 to 69%, in five instances underestimating toxicity (28 to 69%), and in two instances overestimating toxicity (44 to 56%). Multiple contaminants exceeded sediment quality guidelines and correlated positively with toxic responses within surface sediments (e.g., chromium, nickel, polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbon (PAH), total petroleum hydrocarbon). Use of an antibody-based PAH biosensor revealed that porewater PAH concentrations also increased with depth at most sites. This study informs future management decisions concerning the extent of impact to Bear Creek sediments, and demonstrates the benefits of a spatial approach, relying primarily on toxicity testing to assess sediment quality in a system with complex contaminant mixtures.

Although the complexity of contaminant mixtures in sediments can confound the identification of causative agents of adverse biological response, understanding the contaminant(s) of primary concern at impacted sites is critical to sound environmental management and remediation. In the present study, a stock mixture of 18 polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbon (PAH) compounds was prepared to reflect the variety and relative proportions of PAHs measured in surface sediment samples collected from discrete areas of a historically contaminated industrial estuary. This site-specific PAH stock mixture was spiked into nontoxic in-system and out-of-system field-collected reference sediments in dilution series spanning the range of previously measured total PAH concentrations from the region. Spiked sediments were evaluated in 10-d Leptocheirus plumulosus tests to determine whether toxicity in laboratory-created PAH concentrations was similar to the toxicity found in field-collected samples with equivalent PAH concentrations. The results show that toxicity of contaminated sediments was not explained by PAH exposure, while indicating that toxicity in spiked in-system (fine grain, high total organic carbon [TOC]) and out-of-system (course grain, low TOC) sediments was better explained by porewater PAH concentrations, measured using an antibody-based biosensor that quantified 3- to 5-ring PAHs, than total sediment PAH concentrations. The study demonstrates the application of site-specific spiking experiments to evaluate sediment toxicity at sites with complex mixtures of multiple contaminant classes and the utility of the PAH biosensor for rapid sediment-independent porewater PAH analysis. Environ Toxicol Chem 2018;37:893-902. © 2017 SETAC.

No abstract

No abstract

The authors of the article have informed the Journal that an author, Dr. Sacoby Wilson of the University of Maryland School of Public Health, was inadvertently omitted from the published version of their manuscript due to a miscommunication regarding authorship criteria.