» Articles » PMID: 37101586

Systematic Underestimation of Pesticide Burden for Invertebrates Under Field Conditions: Comparing the Influence of Dietary Uptake and Aquatic Exposure Dynamics

Overview
Journal ACS Environ Au
Date 2023 Apr 27
PMID 37101586
Authors
Affiliations
Soon will be listed here.
Abstract

Pesticides used in agriculture can end up in nearby streams and can have a negative impact on nontarget organisms such as aquatic invertebrates. During registration, bioaccumulation potential is often investigated using laboratory tests only. Recent studies showed that the magnitude of bioaccumulation in the field substantially differs from laboratory conditions. To investigate this discrepancy, we conducted a field bioaccumulation study in a stream known to receive pollutant loadings from agriculture. Our work incorporates measurements of stream pesticide concentrations at high temporal resolution (every 20 min), as well as sediment, leaves, and caged gammarid analyses (every 2-24 h) over several weeks. Of 49 investigated pesticides, 14 were detected in gammarids with highly variable concentrations of up to 140 ± 28 ng/g. Toxicokinetic modeling using laboratory-derived uptake and depuration rate constants for azoxystrobin, cyprodinil, and fluopyram showed that despite the highly resolved water concentrations measured, the pesticide burden on gammarids remains underestimated by a factor of 1.9 ± 0.1 to 31 ± 3.0, with the highest underestimations occurring after rain events. Including dietary uptake from polluted detritus leaves and sediment in the model explained this underestimation only to a minor proportion. However, suspended solids analyzed during rain events had high pesticide concentrations, and uptake from them could partially explain the underestimation after rain events. Additional comparison between the measured and modeled data showed that the pesticide depuration in gammarids is slower in the field. This observation suggests that several unknown mechanisms may play a role, including lowered enzyme expression and mixture effects. Thus, it is important to conduct such retrospective risk assessments based on field investigations and adapt the registration accordingly.

Citing Articles

Elimination Resistance: Characterizing Multi-compartment Toxicokinetics of the Neonicotinoid Thiacloprid in the Amphipod Using Bioconcentration and Receptor-Binding Assays.

Raths J, Schinz L, Mangold-Doring A, Hollender J Environ Sci Technol. 2023; 57(24):8890-8901.

PMID: 37283463 PMC: 10286312. DOI: 10.1021/acs.est.3c01891.


Speed it up: How temperature drives toxicokinetics of organic contaminants in freshwater amphipods.

Raths J, Svara V, Lauper B, Fu Q, Hollender J Glob Chang Biol. 2022; 29(5):1390-1406.

PMID: 36448880 PMC: 10107603. DOI: 10.1111/gcb.16542.

References
1.
Svara V, Krauss M, Michalski S, Altenburger R, Brack W, Luckenbach T . Chemical Pollution Levels in a River Explain Site-Specific Sensitivities to Micropollutants within a Genetically Homogeneous Population of Freshwater Amphipods. Environ Sci Technol. 2021; 55(9):6087-6096. DOI: 10.1021/acs.est.0c07839. View

2.
Miller T, McEneff G, Brown R, Owen S, Bury N, Barron L . Pharmaceuticals in the freshwater invertebrate, Gammarus pulex, determined using pulverised liquid extraction, solid phase extraction and liquid chromatography-tandem mass spectrometry. Sci Total Environ. 2014; 511:153-60. DOI: 10.1016/j.scitotenv.2014.12.034. View

3.
Meredith-Williams M, Carter L, Fussell R, Raffaelli D, Ashauer R, Boxall A . Uptake and depuration of pharmaceuticals in aquatic invertebrates. Environ Pollut. 2012; 165:250-8. DOI: 10.1016/j.envpol.2011.11.029. View

4.
Schwarzenbach R, Escher B, Fenner K, Hofstetter T, Johnson C, von Gunten U . The challenge of micropollutants in aquatic systems. Science. 2006; 313(5790):1072-7. DOI: 10.1126/science.1127291. View

5.
Bjergager M, Hanson M, Lissemore L, Henriquez N, Solomon K, Cedergreen N . Synergy in microcosms with environmentally realistic concentrations of prochloraz and esfenvalerate. Aquat Toxicol. 2011; 101(2):412-22. DOI: 10.1016/j.aquatox.2010.11.004. View