Pollution Threat of Heavy Metals in Aquatic Environments

384 Pages·1987·10.57 MB·English

by  Geoffrey Mance (auth.)

POLLUTION THREAT OF HEAVY METALS
IN AQUATIC ENVIRONMENTS
POLLUTION MONITORING SERIES
Advisory Editor: Professor Kenneth Mellanby
Monks Wood Experimental Station,
Abbots Ripton, Huntingdon
Previous titles include
Quantitative Aquatic Biological Indicators
by DAVID J. H. PHILLIPS
Biomonitoring Air Pollutants with Plants
by WILLIAM J. MANNING and WILLIAM A. FEDER
Effect of Heavy Metal Pollution on Plants
Volume I-Effect of Trace Metals on Plant Function
Volume 2-Metals in the Environment
Edited by N. W. LEPp
Biological Monitoring of Heavy Metal Pollution
by M. H. MARTIN and P. J. COUGHTREY
Biological Indicators of Freshwater Pollution and
Environmental Management
by J. M. HELLAWELL
POLLUTION THREAT OF
HEAVY METALS IN
AQUATIC ENVIRONMENTS
GEOFFREY MANCE
Regional Scientist, Water Quality, Severn-Trent Water
Authority, UK
ELSEVIER APPLIED SCIENCE
LONDON and NEW YORK
ELSEVIER SCIENCE PUBLISHERS LTD
Crown House, Linton Road, Barking, Essex IG II 8JU, England
Sole Distributor in the USA and Canada
ELSEVIER SCIENCE PUBLISHING CO., INC.
655 Avenue of the Americas, New York, NY 10010, USA
WITH 62 TABLES AND 36 ILLUSTRATIONS
© ELSEVIER SCIENCE PUBLISHERS LTD 1987
Softcover reprint of the hardcover 1st edition 1987
First edition 1987
Reprinted 1990
British Library Cataloguiug in Publication Data
Mance, Geoffrey
Pollution threat of heavy metals in aquatic
environments.-(Pollution monitoring
series)
l. Aquatic ecology 2. Water-Pollution
3. Heavy metals-Environmental aspects
I. Title II. Series
574.5'263 QH541.5.W3
Library of Congress Cataloging-in-Publication Data
Mance, Geoffrey
Pollution threat of heavy metals in aquatic
environments.
(Pollution monitoring series)
Bibliography: p.
Includes index.
l. Heavy metals--Environmental aspects. 2. Aquatic
organisms--Effect of water pollution. 3. Water
Pollution-Environmental aspects. 4. Water-Pollution
Toxicology. I. Title. II. Series.
QH545.H42M264 1987 574.5'263 86-24131
ISBN -13: 978-94-010-8030-9 e-ISBN -13: 978-94-009-3421-4
DOl: 10.1007/978-94-009-3421-4
No responsibility is assumed by the Publisher for any injury and/or damage to persons or
property as a matter of products liability, negligence or otherwise, or from any use or
operation of any methods, products, instructions or ideas contained in the material herein.
Special regulations for readers in the USA
This publication has been registered with the Copyright Clearance Center Inc. (Ccq,
Salem, Massachusetts. Information can be obtained from the CCC about conditions
under which photocopies of parts of this publication may be made in the USA. All other
copyright questions, including photocopying outside of the USA, should be referred to the
publisher.
All rights reserved. No part of this publication may be reproduced, stored in a retrieval
system, or transmitted in any form or by any means, electronic, mechanical, photocopying,
recording, or otherwise, without the prior written permission of the publisher.
Preface
The role of the European Community in developing environmental
legislation has focused the minds of pollution control agencies and
industrialists on the need for, and the evidence to support, water quality
standards. This is particularly so for the Dangerous Substances Directive
which has led to European standards for cadmium, mercury and lindane.
Additionally the United Kingdom has published standards for six other
non-ferrous metals.
In this book I have sought to review the aquatic toxicity information
for these and other metals, not just by the collation of the results of all
the published toxicity tests, but by the critical consideration of the test
techniques. A surprising proportion of the reported toxicity studies for
aquatic organisms are based on unsatisfactory chemical or biological
methods. That such weaknesses persist at a time of limited resources for
environmental research is disappointing, especially when sound metho
dologies are extensively documented and widely published.
Evaluation of the critically reviewed and vetted data indicates that
many of the previously accepted generalisations about the toxicity of
metals to aquatic life are invalid: for instance the assumption that
salmonid species of fish are more susceptible to these metals than coarse
fish, or that increased water hardness decreases toxicity. Too few studies
have actually sought to test such hypotheses.
In the absence of such general relationships, can standards be dev
eloped? The answer is, 'yes'; and where extensive field and laboratory
data both exist there is remarkable agreement on the maximum safe
concentrations. However, derivation of water quality standards is not an
academic exercise and such standards are only one of several tools
available to the pollution control agencies. It is important that standards
are defined with a clear and unambiguous perception of their intended
application.
v
vi Preface
I have therefore tried to follow a line of thought from an appreciation
of toxicity testing and the limitations of the data so produced, through
field studies to the derivation of standards and their use in calculating
discharge limits. In so doing I hope to stimulate some researchers into a
better appreciation of the information required for environmental
managemen t.
Finally I have briefly considered the environmental consequences in a
European context. It is obvious that excessive uncontrolled release of
toxic metals to the environment is unacceptable because of the inevitable
environmental damage caused and the potential threat to human
health. Equally in any industrially active society the concept of zero
discharge is in reality unachievable, however much it may appeal to the
environmentalist. In seeking a balance between these extremes compro
mise is inevitable. It is arguable that the only secure route to en
vironmental protection is through the control of discharges to ensure
that damaging concentrations are not reached in the environment. In
Europe, at least, control pressures are leading to the point where the
quantities of metals released to the environment will be reduced well
beyond the point which will yield additional environmental improve
ment. That this results from a perception of a public desire for such
reductions implies that the same public are prepared to pay for such
over-protection. However, in healthy but contaminated environments a
situation of diminishing returns already exists. The danger must be that
real pollution control will be progressively replaced by bureaucratic
control of concentrations for little or no environmental benefit.
GEOFFREY MANCE
Acknowledgements
The views expressed in this book inevitably owe much to the experience I
have gained through contact and debate with my former colleagues at
the Steven age Laboratory of the Water Research Centre. In particular
John Garland tutored me in the manipulation and interpretation of field
data and Vince Brown introduced me to the limitations of toxicity test
procedures and the evaluation of the results obtained. I must, however,
absolve both from responsibility for any of the views expressed in this
book which are exclusively, my own, faults and all.
Two ladies have assisted me in my labours. One, Mrs Gill Aldridge, is
heartily thanked for completing the most onerous chore of manuscript
preparation, the typing of the reference list. The other is my wife
Elizabeth. That preparation of the manuscript continued in spite of a
change of job and the upheaval of moving house is totally due to her
active assistance, support and encouragement throughout. Not only is
her help warmly appreciated, but she herself is undoubtedly thankful that
the task is complete. Much as she deserves the dedication of this book, I
feel that it must go to all the water pollution control staff who in the last
three decades have been responsible for the steady, yet dramatic res
toration of environmental health to the majority of British rivers and
estuaries. I only hope that their imPt?tus will not be impaired by the
bureaucracy arising from the international environmental measures
which are now so popular.
vii
Contents
Preface. v
Acknowledgements. vii
1 INTRODUCTION 1
1.1 Mercury 3
1.2 Cadmium 4
1.3 Other Metals 5
1.4 Sources and Controls 6
2 TOXICITY TESTING TECHNIQUES 9
2.1 Introduction. 9
2.2 Terminology. 10
2.3 Physical Factors in Toxicity Tests 12
2.4 Biological Factors in Toxicity Tests 13
2.5 Numbers of Test Animals 16
2.6 Chemical Conditions of Tests 16
3 TOXICITY OF METALS TO FRESHWATER FISH 22
3.1 Arsenic. 22
3.2 Cadmium 23
3.3 Chromium 31
3.4 Copper. 45
3.5 Lead 49
3.6 Mercury 60
3.7 Nickel . 62
IX
x Contents
3.8 Selenium 63
3.9 Silver 65
3.10 Vanadium 67
3.11 Zinc 67
4 TOXICITY OF METALS TO FRESHWATER INVERTEBRATES 127
4.1 Arsenic. 127
4.2 Cadmium 132
4.3 Chromium 134
4.4 Copper. 135
4.5 Lead 144
4.6 Mercury 156
4.7 Nickel . 160
4.8 Selenium 164
4.9 Silver 164
4.10 Vanadium 165
4.11 Zinc 165
5 TOXICITY OF METALS TO MARINE LIFE 174
5.1 Arsenic. 174
5.2 Cadmium 175
5.3 Chromium 181
5.4 Copper. 192
5.5 Lead 205
5.6 Mercury 208
5.7 Nickel . 209
5.8 Selenium 221
5.9 Silver 224
5.10 Vanadium 225
5.11 Zinc 232
6 FACTORS AFFECTING TOXICITY 233
6.1 Interspecies Variations in Freshwater Fish 233
6.2 Interphyletic Variations 234
6.2.1 Freshwater. 234
6.2.2 Saltwater 234
6.3 Life Stage 236
6.4 Water Hardness 237