Trace metal availability and effects on benthic community structure in floodplain lakes

Abstract

Effects of contaminants on communities are difficult to assess and poorly understood. We analyzed in situ effects of trace metals and common environmental variables on benthic macroinvertebrate communities in floodplain lakes. Alternative measures of trace metal availability were evaluated, including total metals, metals normalized on organic carbon (OC) or clay, simultaneously extracted metals (SEM), combinations of SEM and acid-volatile sulfide (AVS), and metals accumulated by detritivore invertebrates (Oligochaeta). Accumulated metal concentrations correlated positively with sediment trace metals and negatively with surface water dissolved OC. Sixty-eight percent of the variation in benthic community composition was explained by a combination of 11 environmental variables, including sediment, water, and morphological characteristics with trace metals. Metals explained 2 to 6% of the community composition when SEM-AVS or individual SEM concentrations were regarded. In contrast, total, normalized, and accumulated metals were not significantly linked to community composition. We conclude that examination of SEM or SEM - AVS concentrations is useful for risk assessment of trace metals on the community level.

Biomonitoring of lake sediments using benthic macroinvertebrates

“…Similar results were found also by: Canfield et al [68] in the Great Lakes, Indiana, USA; Watzin et al [69] in Lake Champlain, Vermont, USA; Borgmann et al [70] in Rouyn-Noranda Lakes, Quebec, Canada; and, Van Griethuysen et al [71] in some floodplain lakes in The Netherlands. Another constraint in the use of biotic indices is that the reference values may be missing, especially for lowland lakes located in heavily urbanized areas.…”

Comprehensive assessment of heavy metal contamination in sediment of the Pearl River Estuary and adjacent shelf

“…The sediment of other sites may almost have no adverse effect on aquatic life. Van Griethuysen et al (2004) conducted a series of experiments and proposed a toxicity threshold value of 1.7 lmol g À1 for the excess heavy metals. According to this viewpoint, toxic effect may be expected to occur at sites 1, 2, and 3, while it would never occur at sites 4, 5, and 6 due to the small difference values of SEM-AVS (<1.7 lmol g À1 ).…”

Seasonal Variation of Acid Volatile Sulfide and Simultaneously Extracted Metals in Sediment Cores from the Pearl River Estuary

“…Therefore, the ratio may overestimate the toxicity of heavy metals if it is used to evaluate the bioavailability of heavy metals. A toxicity threshold value of 1.7 μmol•g −1 for the excess heavy metals has been proposed through a series of experiments (Van Griethuysen et al, 2004). According to this point of view, toxic effects may be expected to occur at sites 1, 2, and 4 in spring and at sites 4, 6, and 7 in winter.…”

“…In experiments with laboratory and field sediments, when the concentrations of AVS in sediments exceeded those of the metals that were simultaneously extracted in the AVS procedure (i.e., simultaneously extracted metals [SEM]), no adverse biological effects due to metals were found (Allen et al, 1993;Berry et al, 2004). An SEM/AVS molar ratio greater than one means that more metals are present in the sediment relative to AVS, and these unbound metals have the potential to be much more bioavailable than those bound to sulfides (Berry et al, 1996;van Griethuysen et al, 2004).…”

“…In experiments with laboratory and field sediments, when the concentrations of AVS in sediments exceeded those of the metals that were simultaneously extracted in the AVS procedure (i.e., simultaneously extracted metals [SEM]), no adverse biological effects due to metals were found (Allen et al, 1993;Berry et al, 2004). An SEM/AVS molar ratio greater than one means that more metals are present in the sediment relative to AVS, and these unbound metals have the potential to be much more bioavailable than those bound to sulfides (Berry et al, 1996;van Griethuysen et al, 2004).However, one potential limitation of using AVS as an indicator for sediment toxicity is determining when and where AVS should be measured and how it can be applied to the water body as a whole (Howard and Evans, 1993). Simpson et al (2012) highlighted the importance of considering the temporal natural of AVS in sediments and the need to monitor the presence of this phase and its influence on the bioavailability of metals in surface sediments.…”