Environmental Effects of Effluents from Pulp and Paper Mills

Seasonal changes in reproductive endpoints inTrichomycterus areolatus(Siluriformes: Trichomycteridae) andPercilia gillissi(Perciformes, Perciliidae), and the consequences for environmental monitoring

“…Fish have played an increasing role in environmental monitoring programs that are focused on detecting the impacts of industrial effluents in many countries, including Canada (Munkittrick 2004;Lowell et al 2005;McMaster et al 2006), USA (Sepúlveda et al 2002;Theodorakis et al 2006;Yeom & Adams 2007) Sweden (Larsson et al 2000;Sandström & Neuman 2003), Finland (Donald 1997;Karels & Oikari 2000) and New Zealand ( Van den Heuvel et al 2007). Less attention has been paid to this type of environmental monitoring in South America, until quite recently.…”

Estrogenicity and intersex in juvenile rainbow trout (Oncorhynchus mykiss) exposed to Pine/Eucalyptus pulp and paper production effluent in Chile

“…Fish are considered a sentinel species in environmental monitoring programs designed to assess the impacts of pulp and paper mill effluents (PPMEs) in Canada (Munkittrick, 2004;Lowell et al, 2005;McMaster et al, 2006), the United States (Sepúlveda et al, 2002;Theodorakis et al, 2006;Yeom and Adams, 2007), Sweden (Larsson et al, 2000;Sandström and Neuman, 2003), Finland (Donald, 2003;Karels and Oikari, 2000) and New Zealand ( Van den Heuvel et al, 2007). In general, less emphasis has been placed on fish-based environmental monitoring in South America.…”

Detectable effect size and bioassay power of mummichog (Fundulus heteroclitus) and fathead minnow (Pimephales promelas) adult reproductive tests

“…A general pattern of metabolic disruption (decreased gonad size, increased condition and liver size) has been described in fish collected downstream from Canadian mill discharges [1,2]. These response differences could be due to differences in furnish, mill processes, receiving environment characteristics, fish species, or a combination of these [5,6]. In spite of the recognition of a national response pattern, not all fish species respond similarly and not all mill effluents are similar [3,4].…”

“…In spite of the recognition of a national response pattern, not all fish species respond similarly and not all mill effluents are similar [3,4]. These response differences could be due to differences in furnish, mill processes, receiving environment characteristics, fish species, or a combination of these [5,6].…”