Selenium and Mercury in Freshwater Fish Muscle Tissue and Otoliths: A Comparative Analysis

Abstract

Evaluating potential ecological and human health risks of exposure to bioaccumulative trace elements is typically implemented using analysis of tissue samples. Increasingly, the microchemistry of fish calcified structures is used to elucidate the lifetime exposure to trace elements. In the present study, we measured total mercury (THg), methylmercury (MeHg), and selenium (Se) in muscle tissue and otolith samples from 12 species of fish collected at reference sites and locations influenced by power plant wastewater. Muscle tissue concentrations of Se were sensitive to recent wastewater exposure magnitude, stream type, trophic level, and species (p < 0.001). For Hg, concentrations in muscle tissue and otoliths were affected only by trophic level and species. Levels of THg and Se in muscle tissue and otolith samples were positively correlated for those species with a robust sample size. Some individual fish from 3 species (channel catfish, hybrid striped bass, and freshwater drum) showed significantly increasing or decreasing lifetime concentrations of either THg or Se in otolith samples. Multiple regression analysis indicated that for bluegill muscle tissue Se concentrations could be best explained utilizing water concentrations of selenium, sulfate, and molybdenum (r2 = 0.87; p < 0.001). Because of the increased cost and specialized sample processing requirements of analyzing trace elements in otolith structures, it may be prudent to limit these analyses to those species where insights into temporal trends are sought or where evidence indicates that fish move into or out of contaminated water bodies. Environ Toxicol Chem 2019;38:1467–1475. © 2019 SETAC

Derivation of site‐specific selenium water quality criteria: A comparison of two methods and regulatory implications

“…The concentration of Se in muscle tissue samples-for the current study-was generally smaller than levels reported for the same species in previous Ohio River studies, notably bluegill and sauger (ORSANCO, 2020;Reash et al, 2015Reash et al, , 2019. Moreover, the Se tissue concentrations reported in the current study-and in previous studies-are all smaller than the USEPA-recommended muscle and whole-body criteria.…”

“…In the Ohio River, fish tissue Se concentrations (mostly muscle samples) rarely exceed USEPA's recommended tissue criteria (ORSANCO, 2020; Reash et al, 2015, 2019); similarly, according to ORSANCO, analytical data water Se concentrations in the river do not exceed the USEPA‐recommended lotic water quality criterion (3.1 µg/L). Nevertheless, in this study we sought to compare resulting site‐specific Se water quality criteria at two sampling locations using the BAF and mechanistic modeling approaches, assuming that one or more fish tissue criteria have been exceeded.…”

Field-Based Selenium Partitioning Coefficients, Trophic Transfer Factors, and Otolith Time-Series Analyses for a Walleye Community from an Ecotonal Plains Reservoir, Colorado. III.

“…After removal, each sagittal otolith was dried and placed in a labeled envelope. For microbeam laser ablation inductively coupled plasma mass spectrometry (LA-ICP-MS) analysis, we prepared the otoliths using the steps outlined by Halden and Friedrich (2008), Friedrich and Halden (2010), and Reash et al (2019). Briefly, the sagittal otoliths were embedded in epoxy, and then they were cut dorsoventrally with a Buehler Isomet 1000 precision saw and diamond wafering blade.…”

“…Time-series analysis of walleye sagittal otoliths .—For each of 21 walleye otoliths, concentrations of annular Se were statistically evaluated using Kendall's tau nonparametric trend test. Similar to data analysis methods of Reash et al (2019), we followed Se temporal trends for all fish ranging from age 3+ to 14+, covering years 2002–2017. The control of the error rate was implemented based on the Bonferroni adjustment of individual significance levels.…”

Risks from mercury in anadromous fish collected from Penobscot River, Maine

“…The concentration of mercury in fish has been demonstrated through studies in the Great Lakes area ( Wiener et al, 2012 ; Grieb et al, 2019 ), Colorado lakes ( Herrman et al, 2018 ), areas influenced by power plants ( Reash et al, 2019 ), rural Alaska ( Bridges et al, 2020 ), and in U.S. rivers and streams ( Wathen et al, 2015 ). However, the fish in these studies are residential, i.e., stay within the waterbody.…”