A chemical prioritization process: Applications to contaminants of emerging concern in freshwater ecosystems (Phase I)

• Published in: The Science of the total environment Vol. 772; p. 146030
• Main Authors: Deere, Jessica R., Streets, Summer, Jankowski, Mark D., Ferrey, Mark, Chenaux-Ibrahim, Yvette, Convertino, Matteo, Isaac, E.J., Phelps, Nicholas B.D., Primus, Alexander, Servadio, Joseph L., Singer, Randall S., Travis, Dominic A., Moore, Seth, Wolf, Tiffany M.
• Format: Journal Article
• Language: English
• Published: Netherlands Elsevier B.V 10.06.2021
• Subjects: Animals; Aquatic toxicity profiles; Chemicals of emerging concern; Ecosystem; Environmental Monitoring; Fresh Water; Hazard identification; Hazard ranking; Indigenous peoples; Minnesota; Pollutants; Water Pollutants, Chemical - analysis; Water Pollutants, Chemical - toxicity; Minnesota; Chemicals of emerging concern; Hazard ranking; Aquatic toxicity profiles; Pollutants; Hazard identification; Indigenous peoples
• DOI: 10.1016/j.scitotenv.2021.146030
• ISSN: 0048-9697

Contaminants of emerging concern (CECs), such as pharmaceuticals, personal care products, and hormones, are frequently found in aquatic ecosystems around the world. Information on sublethal effects from exposure to commonly detected concentrations of CECs is lacking and the limited availability of toxicity data makes it difficult to interpret the biological significance of occurrence data. However, the ability to evaluate the effects of CECs on aquatic ecosystems is growing in importance, as detection frequency increases. The goal of this study was to prioritize the chemical hazards of 117 CECs detected in subsistence species and freshwater ecosystems on the Grand Portage Indian Reservation and adjacent 1854 Ceded Territory in Minnesota, USA. To prioritize CECs for management actions, we adapted Minnesota Pollution Control Agency's Aquatic Toxicity Profiles framework, a tool for the rapid assessment of contaminants to cause adverse effects on aquatic life by incorporating chemical-specific information. This study aimed to 1) perform a rapid-screening assessment and prioritization of detected CECs based on their potential environmental hazard; 2) identify waterbodies in the study region that contain high priority CECs; and 3) inform future monitoring, assessment, and potential remediation in the study region. In water samples alone, 50 CECs were deemed high priority. Twenty-one CECs were high priority among sediment samples and seven CECs were high priority in fish samples. Azithromycin, DEET, diphenhydramine, fluoxetine, miconazole, and verapamil were high priority in all three media. Due to the presence of high priority CECs throughout the study region, we recommend future monitoring of particular CECs based on the prioritization method used here. We present an application of a chemical hazard prioritization process and identify areas where the framework may be adapted to meet the objectives of other management-related assessments. [Display omitted] •Contaminants of emerging concern persist in northeastern Minnesota.•117 contaminants were prioritized based on their relative hazard.•50 contaminants in water, 21 in sediment, and 7 in fish were high priority.•We recommend future monitoring of high priority contaminants.