trends in bioaccumulation of fly ash contaminants by aquatic invertebrates downstream of the...
TRANSCRIPT
Trends in Bioaccumulation of Fly Ash Contaminants by Aquatic
Invertebrates Downstream of the Tennessee Valley Authority Kingston
Fossil Plant
John G. Smith, ORNLand
Tyler F. Baker, TVA
Study Objectives
Assess spatial and temporal trends in the bioaccumulation of potential fly ash contaminants by aquatic invertebratesdownstream of the Kingston Fossil Fuel Plant fly ash spill.
Pleurocera canaliculatum (Silty hornsnail)
Grazer/herbivore-detritivore
Hexagenia bilineata(Borrowing mayfly)
Filter-feeder/deposit-feeder/detritivore
Target Species
Nymphs
Adults
Sampling Locations
Field Procedures
Snail “noodling”
Snails
Mayfly nymphs
Mayfly nymph
Field Procedures
Mayfly mating swarm
Mayflyadults
Snails
Laboratory Processing
Tissue extraction
Depuration?NoYes
Freeze/store at -20 C
Clean snails72 hr
Laboratory Processing
12 hr
36 hr
Freeze/store at -20 C
Mayfly nymphs
Depuration?
Rinse thoroughly with distilled water
Yes (48 hr)
No
Non-depurated
Depurated
Laboratory Processing
Freeze/store at -20 C
Mayfly adults
Sex and stage
Samples arefreeze-dried
Analyzed for suite of 26 elements with EPA 6020
Laboratory Processing
1”ND” = not depurated; “D” = depurated.2Mayfly nymphs and adults = Hexagenia bilineata; snails = Pleurocera canaliculatum.3ERM = Emory River mile; CRM = Clinch River mile; TRM = Tennessee River mile; LERM = Little Emory River mile.
Samples – 2009 & 2010Mayfly nymphs1,2
Mayfly adults2
Snails1,2
Subimagos Imagos
River/Site3 Year D ND Female Male Female Male D ND
Emory River
ERM 0.62009 - - - - - - - -
2010 - - X X - X - -
ERM 1.02009 X X - - - X X -
2010 X X X X - X X X
ERM 22009 - X - - - X X -
2010 X X X X X X X X
ERM 2.82009 - - - - - - - -
2010 - - - - X X - -
ERM 4.02009 - - - - - X - -
2010 X X - - - - X X
ERM 6.02009 - X - - - - X -
2010 X X - - - - X X
Clinch River
CRM 1.52009 X X - - X X X -
2010 X X - - X X X X
CRM 3.52009 - - - - - X - -
2010 X X X - X X X X
CRM 6.02009 - X X X - - X -
2010 X X - - - X X X
Tennessee River
TRM 560.82009 - - - - - - - -
2010 - X - - - - - -
TRM 563.02009 - - - - - X - -
2010 - - X X - X - -
TRM 567.02009 - - X X X X - -
2010 X X X X - X X -
TRM 572.52009 - - - - - - - -
2010 X X X X - X X -
Little Emory River
LERM 1.02009 - X - - X X - -
2010 - X - - - - X -
Principal Components Analysis – Snails2009 & 2010
Axis 1A
xis
2
Depurated - 2009Depurated - 2010Non-Depurated - 2010
E6.0
E6.0
E6.0
C6.0
C6.0C6.0
E2.5
E2.5
T572
C1.5
C1.5
C1.5
C3.5
C3.5
E1.0
E1.0
E4.0
E1.0
T566.3
L1.0E2.5
Axis 1
Axi
s 2
20092010
E6.0
E6.0
C6.0
C6.0
E2.5E2.5
T572
C1.5
C1.5
C3.5
E1.0
E1.0
E4.0 T566.3
L1.0
Principal Components AnalysisDepurated Snails Only – 2009 & 2010*
*(Blue and red lines join Emory River and Clinch River sites, respectively, between years)
Axis 1
Axi
s 2
Depurated - 2009Non-Depurated - 2009Depurated - 2010Non-Depurated - 2010
E6.0
E6.0
E6.0
C6.0
C6.0
C6.0
E2.5
E2.5
T572
C1.5
C1.5
C1.5
C3.5
C3.5
E1.0
E1.0
E4.0
E1.0
T566.3
L1.0
E2.5
E1.0
E4.0
T572
L1.0
T566.3
T560.8
C1.5
Principal Components Analysis – Mayfly Nymphs2009 & 2010
Principal Components Analysis – Adult Mayflies2009 & 2010
Principal Components Analysis – Adult MayfliesExcluding Ca, Fe, Mg, Mn, K, Na - 2009 & 2010
Concentrations of As, Se, and Hg – Snails2009 & 2010
Mercury
Site / River mile
Hg
(g/g
dry
wgt)
0.0
0.1
0.2
0.3
0.4
ERM CRMTRM
LERM
Selenium
Se ( g
/g d
ry w
gt)
0
5
10
Arsenic
As (
g/g
dry
wgt)
0
5
10
15
20
25
2009 (Depurated)2010 (Not depurated)2010 (Depurated)
Kingston FossilFuel Plant
Emory Riverconfluence
Clinch Riverconfluence
Proposed EPA whole body fish criterion
EPA methylmercury fish tissue criterion
Concentrations of As, Se, and Hg – Mayflies2009 & 2010
Mercury
Site / River mile
Hg
(g
/g d
ry w
gt)
0.00
0.25
0.50
0.75
1.00
1.25
ERM CRMTRM
LERM
Selenium
Se
(g
/g d
ry w
gt)
0
4
8
12
Arsenic
As
(g
/g d
ry w
gt)
0
5
10
15
20
25
30
35
40
45
50
55
2009 (Not depurated)2010 (Not depurated)2009 (Depurated)2010 (Depurated)
Kingston FossilFuel Plant
Emory Riverconfluence
Clinch Riverconfluence
Proposed EPA whole body fish criterion
EPA methylmercury fish tissue criterion
Mercury
Site / River mile
Hg
(g/g
dry
wgt)
0.0
0.1
0.2
0.3
0.4
ERM CRMTRM
Selenium
Se
(g/g
dry
wgt)
0
5
10
Arsenic
As
(g/g
dry
wgt)
0.00
0.25
0.50
0.75
Male Subimagos (2009) Female Subimagos (2009)Male Subimagos (2010)Female Subimagos (2010)
Kingston FossilFuel Plant
Emory Riverconfluence
Clinch Riverconfluence
Proposed EPA whole body fish criterion
EPA methylmercury fish tissue criterion
ND
Mercury
Site / River mile
Hg
(g
/g d
ry w
gt)
0.0
0.1
0.2
0.3
0.4
ERM CRMTRM
LERM
Selenium
Se
(g
/g d
ry w
gt)
0
5
10
Arsenic
As
(g
/g d
ry w
gt)
0.00
0.25
0.50
0.75
Male Imagos (2009)Female Imagos (2009)Male Imagos (2010)Female Imagos (2010)
Kingston FossilFuel Plant
Emory Riverconfluence
Clinch Riverconfluence
Proposed EPA whole body fish criterion
EPA methylmercury fish tissue criterion
Nymphs Subimagos Imagos
Conclusions - General
Highest concentrations of elements for all groups generally in Emory and Clinch Rivers downstream of the spill site
Highest concentrations of many elements in mayfly nymphs typically at ERM 1.0
Highest concentrations of many elements in adults typically adjacent to the spill site (i.e., around ERM 2.0)
Highest concentrations of many elements in snails generally at Clinch River sites (CRM 1.5 and CRM 6.0)
Conclusions - General
Spatial trends were generally stronger than temporal trends, and they appeared to be similar between years
Depuration had a significant effect on concentrations of most elements (e.g., Cd, Cu, and Zn were higher in both species)
Bioaccumulation of some elements is clearly different in male and female mayflies
Differences between male imagos and subimagos appear to be related mostly to differences in concentrations of essential elements
Conclusions – Arsenic
Depurated versus non-depurated snails suggest As may be bioaccumulating in tissue
Highest concentrations generally found in mayfly nymphs
Depurated versus non-depurated mayfly nymphs suggest less tissue bioaccumulation than in snails
Amount of As leaving the water via adult mayflies is minimal(but does this apply to all insects?)
Primary source of As appears to be KIF fly ash, but there may be secondary source in Clinch River
Conclusions – Selenium
Depuration had minimal effect on concentrations in snails and nymphs
Concentrations highest in mayfly nymphs and lowest in snails
Primary source of Se appears to be KIF fly ash
Concentrations declined downstream of ERM 1.0 in nymphs, and downstream of ERM 2 in the adults
Concentrations in snails appeared to increase with distance downstream from ERM 2.5 to CRM 1.5
Concentrations generally only slightly lower in adult mayflies than the nymphs
Conclusions – Mercury
Only contaminant that showed similar spatial trends among all three groups
All three groups indicated that the primary source of Hg is the Clinch River upstream of CRM 6.0
Depuration had little effects on concentrations of Hg in snails
Depuration drastically reduced concentrations in nymphs from Clinch River sites, but not the Emory River sites
Concentrations in adult mayflies were considerably lower than in the nymphs
Questions
How much are native soils contributing to element concentrations?
What factors are contributing to differences between snails and mayfly nymphs? (physiological, environmental)
What effects do natural differences in water quality of the three rivers have on availability, transport and fate of contaminants?