» Articles » PMID: 32955772

Deriving a Chronic Guideline Value for Nickel in Tropical and Temperate Marine Waters

Overview
Date 2020 Sep 21
PMID 32955772
Citations 1
Authors
Affiliations
Soon will be listed here.
Abstract

The absence of chronic toxicity data for tropical marine waters has limited our ability to derive appropriate water quality guideline values for metals in tropical regions. To aid environmental management, temperate data are usually extrapolated to other climatic (e.g., tropical) regions. However, differences in climate, water chemistry, and endemic biota between temperate and tropical systems make such extrapolations uncertain. Chronic nickel (Ni) toxicity data were compiled for temperate (24 species) and tropical (16 species) marine biota and their sensitivities to Ni compared. Concentrations to cause a 10% effect for temperate biota ranged from 2.9 to 20 300 µg Ni/L, with sea urchin larval development being the most sensitive endpoint. Values for tropical data ranged from 5.5 to 3700 µg Ni/L, with copepod early-life stage development being the most sensitive test. There was little difference in temperate and tropical marine sensitivities to Ni, with 5% hazardous concentrations (95% confidence interval) of 4.4 (1.8-17), 9.6 (1.7-26), and 5.8 (2.8-15) µg Ni/L for temperate, tropical, and combined temperate and tropical species, respectively. To ensure greater taxonomic coverage and based on guidance provided in Australia and New Zealand, it is recommended that the combined data set be used as the basis to generate a jurisdiction-specific water quality guideline of 6 µg Ni/L for 95% species protection applicable to both temperate and tropical marine environments. Environ Toxicol Chem 2020;39:2540-2551. © 2020 The Authors. Environmental Toxicology and Chemistry published by Wiley Periodicals LLC on behalf of SETAC.

Citing Articles

Development of a bioavailability-based risk assessment framework for nickel in Southeast Asia and Melanesia.

Garman E, Schlekat C, Middleton E, Merrington G, Peters A, Smith R Integr Environ Assess Manag. 2021; 17(4):802-813.

PMID: 33404201 PMC: 8359217. DOI: 10.1002/ieam.4384.

References
1.
Chapman P, McDonald B, Kickham P, McKINNON S . Global geographic differences in marine metals toxicity. Mar Pollut Bull. 2006; 52(9):1081-4. DOI: 10.1016/j.marpolbul.2006.05.004. View

2.
Blewett T, Leonard E . Mechanisms of nickel toxicity to fish and invertebrates in marine and estuarine waters. Environ Pollut. 2017; 223:311-322. DOI: 10.1016/j.envpol.2017.01.028. View

3.
Howe P, Reichelt-Brushett A, Clark M . Aiptasia pulchella: a tropical cnidarian representative for laboratory ecotoxicological research. Environ Toxicol Chem. 2012; 31(11):2653-62. DOI: 10.1002/etc.1993. View

4.
Mohammed E, Wang G, Jiang J . The effects of nickel on the reproductive ability of three different marine copepods. Ecotoxicology. 2010; 19(5):911-6. DOI: 10.1007/s10646-010-0471-6. View

5.
Zhou G, Wang Z, Lau E, Xu X, Leung K . Can we predict temperature-dependent chemical toxicity to marine organisms and set appropriate water quality guidelines for protecting marine ecosystems under different thermal scenarios?. Mar Pollut Bull. 2014; 87(1-2):11-21. DOI: 10.1016/j.marpolbul.2014.08.003. View