Triclosan occurrence in freshwater systems in the United States (1999–2012): A meta‐analysis

Abstract

Recently, concern has grown regarding the presence of triclosan (TCS) in waters because of its potential for causing ecological and human health effects. The authors present a statistical analysis of TCS concentrations reported between 1999 and 2012 in freshwater environments in the United States and provide a comparison with available health-based and aquatic guidance values. Data from 46 peer-reviewed and unpublished investigations from 45 states and 1 US territory were included in the meta-analysis, encompassing the following coded water types: untreated (raw wastewater), effluent (wastewater treatment plant effluent), effluent-impacted environmental, environmental, and finished drinking water (total n = 2305). Triclosan was most frequently detected in untreated waters (92% detection frequency; mean ± standard error, 11 270 ± 2925 ng/L; n = 237), but concentrations were significantly reduced in effluent waters (83% detection frequency 775 ± 311 ng/L; n = 192, α = 0.05). Triclosan concentration in effluent-impacted environmental waters (62% detection frequency; 130 ± 17 ng/L; n = 228) was not significantly reduced from effluent waters but was significantly greater than TCS in environmental waters not classified as effluent impacted (11% detection frequency; 13 ± 3 ng/L; n = 1195). In finished drinking water, TCS was largely undetected (1% detection frequency; 4 ± 2 ng/L n = 453), suggesting that for the United States, drinking water is not an appreciable source of TCS exposure. In posttreatment waters, average TCS concentrations were below part-per-billion levels. Although no US regulatory standard exists for TCS in aquatic systems, comparison of averages reported in the present study with a predicted-no-effect concentration (PNEC) of 500 ng/L showed that 5.3% of effluent-impacted environmental waters were above the PNEC for changes in algal biomass, while only 0.25% of environmental waters surpassed this value.

Urinary triclosan concentrations are inversely associated with body mass index and waist circumference in the US general population: Experience in NHANES 2003–2010

“…It is widely used in household and health care-related products, such as toothpaste, hand/dishwashing soaps, deodorants, and mouthwash, as well as in medical devices, textiles, toys, and construction materials(Bedoux et al, 2012; Dann and Hontela, 2011). Triclosan and its derivatives are present in the environment, particularly in various water bodies and sediments(Bedoux et al, 2012; Perez et al, 2013). As evidence that humans are widely exposed to triclosan, triclosan is detectable in the liver and bile(Geens et al, 2012), fat tissue(Geens et al, 2012), urine(Calafat et al, 2008; Li et al, 2013; Pirard et al, 2012), blood(Allmyr et al, 2006; Allmyr et al, 2008; Wu et al, 2012), nails(Shi et al, 2013), and human milk(Toms et al, 2011).…”

A National Survey of Trace Organic Contaminants in Australian Rivers

“…†Low reliability PNEC values derived from quantitative structure–activity relationship (QSAR) data are indicated in brackets. Data sources: (a) Quednow and Puttmann (2009); (b) Agerstrand and Ruden (2010); (c) derived based on no observable effect concentration (NOEC) for condition index in fathead minnow of 1 mg/L, as reported by Winter et al (2008) with an uncertainty factor (UF) of 100; (d) Jahnel et al (2006); (e) Escher et al (2011); (f) Carlsson et al (2006); (g) Wang et al (2010); (h) derived based on half maximal effective concentration (EC 50 ) for green algae (96 h) of 3.9 mg/L, as calculated by ECOSAR (Ecological Structure Activity Relationships, software developed by the USEPA), with a UF of 1000; (i) derived based on EC 50 for growth inhibition of Pseudokirchneriella subcapitata of 2 mg/L, as reported by Harada et al (2008), with a UF of 1000; (j) derived based on EC 50 for growth inhibition of Tetrahymena pyriformis of 45 mg/L, as reported by Henschel et al (1997), with a UF of 1000; (k) derived based on EC 50 for green algae (96 h) of 0.21 mg/L, as calculated by ECOSAR, with a UF of 1000; (l) Schowanek and Webb (2002); (m) Komori et al (2013); (n) derived based on EC 50 for green algae (96 h) of 0.69 mg/L, as calculated by ECOSAR, with a UF of 1000; (o) derived based on the median lethal dose (LC 50 ) for daphnid (48 h) of 1.9 mg/L, as calculated by ECOSAR, with a UF of 1000; (p) Halling‐Sorensen et al (2000); (q) Yamamoto et al (2011); (r) derived from a NOEC based on an 8‐d chronic toxicity test with Ceriodaphnia dubia reported by Tamura et al (2012), with a UF of 10; (s) Perez et al 2013; (t) Agriculture and Resource Management Council of Australia and New Zealand (2000) 95th percentile; (u) Crane et al (2007); (v) Derived from a NOEC based on a Daphnia magna reproduction test by Bayer AG (2001), with a UF of 10; (w) Agriculture and Resource Management Council of Australia and New Zealand (2000), 99th percentile.…”

“…Triclosan was also found in wild fish in WWTP effluent receiving environments in Sweden at concentrations up to 0.90 mg/kg fresh weight of bile (Adolfsson‐Erici et al, 2002). New evidence suggests that the risk from exposure to triclosan could be underestimated and, as such, the PNEC of 500 ng/L (Perez et al, 2013) may not be adequate. For instance, triclosan was found to negatively affect larval fathead minnow ( Pimephales promelas ) swimming performance at 151 ng/L, an exposure concentration less than twice the maximum concentration reported here (87 ng/L, Table 3; Cherednichenko et al, 2012).…”

Embryonic exposure to environmentally relevant concentrations of triclosan impairs foraging efficiency in zebrafish larvae

“…Triclosan is used in products ranging from hand soaps, toothpaste, and cosmetics to textiles and plastics. Environmental concentrations can vary widely from ng to low mg/L concentrations in surface waters (Dann and Hontela 2011;Blair et al 2013;Perez et al 2013) to as high as 20 mg/L near a wastewater treatment plant in Rhode Island (Lopez-Avila and Hites 1980). Environmental concentrations can vary widely from ng to low mg/L concentrations in surface waters (Dann and Hontela 2011;Blair et al 2013;Perez et al 2013) to as high as 20 mg/L near a wastewater treatment plant in Rhode Island (Lopez-Avila and Hites 1980).…”