Search USGSSearch

USGS · 70240830

A framework for prioritizing contaminants in retrospective ecological assessments: Application in the Milwaukee Estuary (Milwaukee, WI)

Abstract

Watersheds are subjected to diverse anthropogenic inputs, exposing aquatic biota to a wide range of chemicals. Detection of multiple, different chemicals can challenge natural resource managers who often have to determine where to allocate potentially limited resources. Here, we describe a weight-of-evidence framework for retrospectively prioritizing aquatic contaminants. To demonstrate framework utility, we used data from 96-h caged fish studies to prioritize chemicals detected in the Milwaukee Estuary (WI, USA; 2017–2018). Across study years, 77/178 targeted chemicals were detected. Chemicals were assigned prioritization scores based on spatial and temporal detection frequency, environmental distribution, environmental fate, ecotoxicological potential, and effect prediction. Chemicals were sorted into priority bins based on the intersection of prioritization score and data availability. Data-limited chemicals represented those that did not have sufficient data to adequately evaluate ecotoxicological potential or environmental fate. Seven compounds (fluoranthene, benzo[ a ]pyrene, pyrene, atrazine, metolachlor, phenanthrene, and DEET) were identified as high or medium priority and data sufficient and flagged as candidates for further effects-based monitoring studies. Twenty-one compounds were identified as high or medium priority and data limited and flagged as candidates for further ecotoxicological research. Fifteen chemicals were flagged as the lowest priority in the watershed. One of these chemicals (2-methylnaphthalene) displayed no data limitations and was flagged as a definitively low-priority chemical. The remaining chemicals displayed some data limitations and were considered lower-priority compounds (contingent on further ecotoxicological and environmental fate assessments). The remaining 34 compounds were flagged as low or medium priority. Altogether, this prioritization provided a screening-level (non-definitive) assessment that could be used to focus further resource management and risk assessment activities in the Milwaukee Estuary. Furthermore, by providing detailed methodology and a practical example with real experimental data, we demonstrated that the proposed framework represents a transparent and adaptable approach for prioritizing contaminants in freshwater environments. Integr Environ Assess Manag 2023;00:1–21. © 2022 SETAC

Explore related subjects

90° N90° S · 180° W ← longitude → 180° E
Source-reported bounding extent: 42.86483538384232° to 43.25798227617699° latitude; -88.24783012360321° to -87.80856354645815° longitude. This indicates report coverage, not an exact sampling location. View area on OpenStreetMap.

Keep this discovery

Explore connections, maps & timelines

BibTeXRIS

Erin M Maloney, Daniel L. Villeneuve, Brett R Blackewell, Kelsey Vitense, Steven R. Corsi, Matthew A. Pronschinske, Kathleen Jensen, Gerald T. Ankley. 2022-12-16. A framework for prioritizing contaminants in retrospective ecological assessments: Application in the Milwaukee Estuary (Milwaukee, WI). https://doi.org/10.1002/ieam.4725

Cite the original work for its findings. Save a collection to share your selection of sources.

KEEP EXPLORING

Related USGS reports

Integrative monitoring strategy for marine and freshwater harmful algal blooms and toxins across the freshwater-to-marine continuum

Many coastal states throughout the USA have observed negative effects in marine and estuarine environments caused by cyanotoxins produced in inland waterbodies that were transported downstream or produced in the estuaries. Estuaries and other downstream receiving waters now face the dual risk of impacts from harmful algal blooms (HABs) that occur in the coastal ocean as well as those originating in inland watersheds. Despite this risk, most HAB monitoring efforts do not account for hydrological connections in their monitoring strategies and designs. Monitoring efforts in California have revealed the persistent detection of cyanotoxins across the freshwater-to-marine continuum. These studies underscore the importance of inland waters as conduits for the transfer of cyanotoxins to the marine environment and highlight the importance of approaches that can monitor across hydrologically connected waterbodies. A HAB monitoring strategy is presented for the freshwater-to-marine continuum to inform HAB management and mitigation efforts and address the physical and hydrologic challenges encountered when monitoring in these systems. Three main recommendations are presented based on published studies, new datasets, and existing monitoring programs. First, HAB monitoring would benefit from coordinated and cohesive efforts across hydrologically interconnected waterbodies and across organizational and political boundaries and jurisdictions. Second, a combination of sampling modalities would provide the most effective monitoring for HAB toxin dynamics and transport across hydrologically connected waterbodies, from headwater sources to downstream receiving waterbodies. Third, routine monitoring is needed for toxin mixtures at the land–sea interface including algal toxins of marine origins as well as cyanotoxins that are sourced from inland freshwater or produced in estuaries. Case studies from California are presented to illustrate the implementation of these recommendations, but these recommendations can also be applied to inland states or regions where the downstream receiving waterbody is a freshwater lake, reservoir, or river.

California, Oregon