&EPA
                         United States
                         Environmental Protection
                         Agency	    	
                                        National Health and Environmental
                                        Effects Research Laboratory
                                        Gulf Breeze, FL 32561-5299
                         Research and Development
                                        EPA/600/S-97/007 April 1998
ENVIRONMENTAL
RESEARCH   BRIEF
             Development and Application of Protocols for Evaluation of
                                   Oil  Spill Bioremediation
                                    J.E. Lepo1 and C.R. Gripe2
Abstract
Test systems that simulate oil slicks on open water or oiled
sandy beaches were developed to test the effectiveness of
commercial oil spill bioremediation agents (CBAs). Gravimetric
and gas chromatographic-mass spectrometric analytes (e.gv
selected n-alkanes, isoprenoids, and aromatic compounds) were
used to provide efficacy endpoints for comparing CBA-treated
test systems with untreated control systems. The resulting test
systems, and protocols for their use, .were evaluated using a
variety of CBAs. Aquatic chronic estimator toxicology tests
provided information on the environmental risks posed by the
bioremediation agent itself as well as by the effluent,from CBA-
treated test systems. Selected CBAs produced only minimal
losses of analytes in the open-water test system after 7 days
and somewhat greater, losses from the beach test system after
28 days. The use of a positive control consisting of selected oil
degrading bacteria and nutrients enhanced degradation of cer-
tain oil components. The environmental safety protocols were
also tested with a variety of CBAs; their intrinsic toxicity was
relatively low (>75 ppm), and effluent exiting open-water test
systems in which CBA and oil were allowed to interact was
toxic for only one out of six products.  A variety of research
topics related to the development of CBA test system protocols
were also investigated.
'Center for Environmental Diagnostics and Bioremediation, University of West
 Florida, Pensacola, FL 32514
HJ.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Gulf Ecology Division, Gulf Breeze, FL
 32561 .
                         Introduction
                         Nutrient enrichment or seeding with microorganisms are ap-
                         proaches used to enhance the biodegradation rate of the oil
                         when bioremediation is considered as a treatment option for oil
                         spills. The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) and
                         Exxon tested the potential for bioremediation by applying vari-
                         ous fertilizer formulations to oiled beaches that resulted from
                         the Exxon Valdez oil spill in Prince William Sound, AK, on
                         March 24, 1989. Analysis of the results suggested that this
                         approach enhanced biodegradation rates  of the indigenous
                         microorganisms two- to three-fold. That study, as well as oth-
                         ers, stimulated interest in developing and testing a variety of oil
                         spill  commercial bioremediation  agents (CBAs) designed to
                         facilitate the biodegradation of spilled oil. Despite the prolifera-
                         tion of these CBAs, no standardized methods were available to
                         assess their efficacy and environmental safety. In this study we
                         report the development of test systems and protocols to mea-
                         sure the effectiveness of CBAs in various marine environments
                         as well as to evaluate the toxicity associated with their use.

                         The  efficacy issue has many components^ The results from
                         consistent CBA efficacy tests for various environments (e.g.,
                         beach,  marsh, open-water) can aid on-scene coordinators in
                         the selection of cost-effective technologies  from the variety of
                         available commercial  products used  in the treatment of oil
                         spills. The efficacy tests should simulate, within reason, those
                         environmental variables that significantly affect performance of
                         a CBA. In addition, it is desirable to compare use of CBA-
                         enhanced degradation to that of intrinsic biodegradation (i.e.,
                         no intervention). Finally, efficacy assessments  are dependent
                                                                              Printed on Recycled Paper

-------
on the bioremediation endpoints selected which, in turn,  may
be influenced by the toxicity of certain petroleum hydrocarbon
components as well as aesthetic factors.

There are a number of environmental concerns with the use of
biotechnology  products for cleaning  up oil spills in marine
environments.  CBAs contain a variety of components, includ-
ing fertilizers, microorganisms, surfactants, enzymes or combi-
nations of these ingredients that may  have direct, adverse
effects on resident organisms  because of their toxicity. For
example,  nitrogenous nutrients, frequently used to stimulate
biodegradation, are toxic to marine fauna, as are surfactants.
Various inert particulates (e.g., clay) used as carriers may also
be harmful to some organisms. Indirect effects of CBAs could
include (1) depletion of oxygen through eutrophication or in-
creased activity of oil-degrading microorganisms, (2) increased
bioavailability of and/or exposure to toxic oil components by
surfactants in the CBA or through microbiologically generated
surfactants, or (3)  production of toxic  metabolites from en-
hanced oil biodegradation.

To address these needs, the U.S. EPA, through a cooperative
agreement with the National Environmental Technology Appli-
cations Center (NETAC) at the University of Pittsburgh, estab-
lished  a panel of scientists from government,  academia, and
industry  to  oversee the development of  a tiered system  of
protocols that provide increasingly more complex and environ-
mentally realistic data. These protocols are intended to serve
as guidelines  for CBA suppliers to enable them  to provide
technical  information on their products to potential buyers and,
in the  process, to aid in the development and  commercializa-
tion of oil spill  bioremediation technology [1]. In the Base Tier,
the vendor provides information on product safety  including
formulation  and unacceptable chemical or biological compo-
nents. Tier I  is a  feasibility  assessment concerning the
manufacturer's production capabilities, a description of how the
product will be used, and information on previous usage. Tier II
efficacy (developed at the U.S. EPA Risk Reduction Engineer-
ing Laboratory, Cincinnati, OH) monitors oil biodegradation in a
closed, shake-flask test system in  which the oil is physically
agitated; environmental safety is evaluated by determining the
toxicity of the CBA itself as well as the CBA combined with the
water-soluble fraction of oil. Tier III flow-through test systems
are designed to simulate oil spills in open-water, sandy beach,
or marsh environments (the latter developed at the U.S.  EPA
Environmental  Research  Laboratory, Athens,  GA);  effluents
can be monitored for petroleum hydrocarbons  or toxicity. Tier
IV testing is an  actual field evaluation  of the protocol test
systems conducted on a controlled release of  oil or a "spill of
opportunity."

This project represented a cooperative research effort between
the University  of West Florida Center for Environmental Diag-
nostics and Bioremediation, Pensacola, FL, and the U.S. Envi-
ronmental Protection  Agency,  Gulf  Ecology  Division,  Gulf
Breeze, FL. The major focus was the development of efficacy
protocols for Tier III open-water and beach scenarios, as well
as environmental safety protocols  for these, plus the marsh
environmental and Tier II.  These protocols were published in
draft form in a manual by NETAC [1, 2]. Ancillary  research
conducted as a part of this project in areas such as analytical
chemistry, microbiology, and toxicology provided the  technical
support for these protocols; most of the research documenting
protocol considerations  and development  is detailed  in the
Research  Products Cited section of this summary.


Protocol Development

Tier Test Systems
Generic values were selected in the developmental phases of
the test systems for parameters such as temperature, turbu-
lence, salinity, and  source of seawater. An artificially weath-
ered Alaskan  North slope crude oil (ANS5213) was chosen
because it seemed likely  that a number of days would pass
before a CBA would be applied to an oil spill, and the prepara-
tion of this oil  removed  many of the low boiling point compo-
nents that would likely volatilize  over such  a period.  Both the
control containing oil and a treatment with oil plus a CBA were
conducted  in triplicate. At the end of the test period, oil  resi-
dues  in the test systems (open water and  beach sand) and
effluents were  extracted  with methylene chloride, weighed, and
analyzed gas  chromatographic-mass spectrometry  (GC/MS).
Efficacy of oil  bioegradation in  Tier III was measured at test
termination by  statistical  comparison (P<0.05) of the reductions
in chemical endpoints (e.g., oil residue weight and selected n-
alkanes, isoprenoids and  aromatic compounds) from oil-con-
taining test systems with and without a CBA.

Open-Water Test System
The Tier  III open-water test  system, illustrated in  Figure  1,
provides an intact, undisturbed oil-on-water slick in a flow-
through design [3]. The test  container is  a 500 ml  glass jar
sealed with a septum and lid. A  magnetic stirrer spins a small
stir bar  in the  bottom of the jar to mix the  water column with
minimal disturbance to the slick. A constant flow of seawater is
delivered  under  an ANS521  oil slick by  a peristaltic pump.
Water for  toxicity testing is  withdrawn by a second pump
through Teflon®4 tubing to a reservoir, while  a third pump
forces air  under the water surface for aeration  and displaces
seawater through a tube positioned at the  air/water interface.
This water sample  is acidified to stop further biodegradation
and later extracted and  analyzed for oil  residues. The system
is operated continuously for 7 days after CBA addition.

Beach Test System
The Tier  III oiled beach  test system  (Figure 2) provides a
sandy beach substratum colonized by microflora indigenous to
seawater and simulated  tidal fluxes [4]. The system consists of
an exterior 600 ml glass beaker containing a 250 ml fluorocar-
bon beaker filled with sand to which oil is added (Figure 2).
Holes drilled through the bottom  of  the  inner beaker allow
water to flow between the beakers during  tidal exchanges; a
fluorocarbon screen in the bottom  prevents  loss of sand. The
test systems are clamped on  an orbital shaker and  rotated at
70 rpm to simulate a gentle wave action,  -tf £«,
The oil was treated by the "521" process according to the Draft International
 Standard ISO/DIS (1989) method: the crude is heated to 374°F under atmo-
 spheric pressure; the system is then cooled and placed under partial vacuum
 (20 mm Hg) for the final distillation to an atmospheric equivalent of 521 "F; the
 distillate is discarded and the residue, designated ANS521, was supplied by
 NETAC to laboratories involved with protocol development research.
"Mention of trade names does not constitute endorsement by the U.S.
 Environmental Protection Agency.

-------
                           Pump
                           (800 ml/day)
                                         Microcosm &      stir plate
                                         synchronous motor
Figure 1. Tier III simulated open-water oil spill test system.


Two tidal cycles per day are simulated by adding and removing
seawater from the test systems via  timer-controlled peristaltic
pumps.  ANS521 oil is added to the beaker containing the sand
at high  tide  after cycling  for one  week  to allow  microbial
colonization. A glass cylinder is inserted into the sand in the
center of the fluorocarbon beaker to prevent oil from seeping
down the Inside of the fluorocarbon beaker. Water is drained
from the space between the glass and fluorocarbon beakers to
ensure that it passes through the oiled sand as it exits the test
system. Effluent water is collected  in a bottle to be used for
toxicity tests, or is acidified to stop microbial activity and stored
for  extraction later. The test  is conducted for 28 days after
addition of the CBA.
Validation of Tier III Test System Efficacies
Using CBAs and Positive Controls
The ability of the open-water system to measure the effective-
ness of bioremediation agents was evaluated using eight CBAs
that represented a variety of bioremediation technologies (e.g.,
nutrient, dispersant, microbial) [3, 5]. Occasionally some end-
points  such as total weight  of oil were significantly reduced in
the treated  systems compared with the controls.  However,
such differences  were very small,  sometimes amounting to
only 1 %, and of low environmental significance. Positive con-
trols (see next section) were developed, partially in an effort to
evaluate the  test  systems under more ideal conditions;  daily
addition of oil-degrading microorganisms and nutrients to the
open-water system  resulted in the greatest biodegradation of
oil components, including a statistically significant weight loss
and  decreases  in 30 of the  66 QC/MS  analytes. Thus, we
conclude that the test system itself was capable of giving  a
measurable response, although its accuracy in modeling actual
field conditions  remains to  be evaluated. These results may
indicate that the recommended application rates of CBAs are
not sufficient to  produce  substantial changes  in oil bio-
degradation.  Daily or more frequent additions may be unten-
able in some open-water field situations (e.g., large area spills);
however, spills of a more confined nature may be reasonably
treated with higher or more frequent applications. The beach
test system was evaluated with 3 CBAs and a positive control
[4]. Substantially greater losses of n-alkanes, some aromatics,
and  recoverable  oil  (gravimetric)  were noted  in  CBA-  and
positive control treated test systems when compared with open-
water systems; controls generally lost about 6% of the oil by
weight, while systems treated with a CBA or a positive control
that  utilized either nutrients or oil-degrading microorganisms
and nutrients lost approximately twice as much oil. Two prod-
ucts  were tested  twice, allowing us to examine replication of
the protocol.

Tier III Efficacy Related Research
One  of the project goals was to examine how various factors
influenced the ability of the protocols to measure CBA effec-
tiveness. The studies focused on microbiological issues related
to assemblages of oil-degrading bacteria, as well as the effect
of oil quantity on biodegradation.

Research  that characterized  artificial microbial  assemblages
and  natural  oil-degrading consortia [5, 6] was based on two
efficacy protocol issues: optimization of test system response
through positive controls and  development of an  artificial sea-
water. Positive control treatments consisting of nutrients or
nutrients plus oil-degrading microorganisms were  developed
as CBA surrogates to establish baseline performance for the
Tier  III test  systems.  This was particularly important for test
system validation after tests with a number of CBAs failed to
elicit substantial changes  in the selected  efficacy  endpoints;
positive control treatments were found to increase biodegrada-
tion,  but not substantially. The concept of an artificial seawater
containing microorganisms capable of degrading both alkane
and aromatic oil components was  an important protocol con-
sideration  in order to avoid the necessity of shipping quantities
of natural  seawater to laboratories where CBAs were tested,
as well  as to  increase the consistency of the test media for
conducting the efficacy protocols.  Although the evaluation of

-------
Pump
in
1 r
r i
* i r
r <
. i '
ir V
1
                                               Water
                                               reservoir
                   Acidified
                   effluent
                   for
                   analysis  si"v'xx":&:'.
                                                                                         L
                                                                                         ^v--*'—•£—Y'J
                                                                                          Pump
                                                                        Stir plate
                                                   Water In   Water Out
                                         High tide —i
                                         Fluorocarbon
                                         beaker 	

                                         Low tide 	1
     Glass
     cylinder
     Sand
     Glass
      beaker
                          Exiting air
                                                                                          o
                                                                                        ooo
                                                                                     [OOOOO
                                                                                        ooo
                                                                                          o
                                                                                         —II
                                                                                  13-4mm (diam.) holes
                                                                                   View of bottom of
                                                                                   inner beaker
Figure 2. Tier III simulated oiled beach test system.
microbial CBA efficacy would not necessarily require that an
artificial seawater contain microorganisms, nutrient CBAs oper-
ate on  the  premise of stimulating  indigenous  oil-degrading
microorganisms and thus would require competent populations
of such organisms to perform effectively.

During the development of test system protocols, quantities of
oil capable of generating a 0.5 mm thick slick, if evenly spread
over the surface,  were typically added to both open-water and
beach test systems. Additional research was conducted com-
paring the results of oil bioremediation with a positive control of
selected oil-degrading  bacteria and nutrients, using one-tenth
the typical quantity of oil for open-water and one-fifth the oil for
beach test systems. Gravimetric results indicated this reduction
of oil resulted in  an approximately 3-fold increase  in oil loss
from the low-dosed open-water system and a 2-fold increase in
loss from the beach system [7, 8].


Environmental Safety of CBAs

Tier II
Concern for intrinsic product toxicity is addressed at the Tier II
level  [9] with two  7-day  chronic estimator exposures  of  a
crustacean  (Mysidopsis bahia, mysid)  and a  fish (Menidia
beryllina,  inland  silverside).  The  mysid test has  three  end-
points— survival, growth,  and fecundity — while the silverside
test focuses on survival and growth. In  this tier, CBA toxicity  is
also assessed  in the  presence  of a sublethal  water-soluble
fraction (WSF) of  oil  to  examine the potential of synergistic
interactions.  During  protocol evaluation,  test cost concerns
became a  major consideration; this  issue was addressed by
comparisons of endpoint sensitivities associated  with various
acute and short-term chronic toxicity tests  [9].

Evaluation  of the Tier II protocol with five CBAs [9] suggested
that  these  products exhibited  relatively low toxicity, because
none were toxic below 75  mg/L. Mysids were more sensitive
than silversides for the two  products that were tested with both
organisms.


Tier III
Important ecotoxicological considerations for CBA use in  ma-
rine  environments include  the possibility of toxic metabolite
production  or enhanced toxicity of oil through  increased oil
bioavailability. These are addressed at the Tier III level, which
allows CBA and oil  to  interact in  flow-through test systems;
toxicity is monitored [10] with a mysid 7-day chronic estimator
test on the  effluent from the open-water, beach, and marsh test
systems. The relatively conservative  dilution modeled by the
test  systems increases  the sensitivity of the protocol for  pre-
dicting toxicity. To assess  the nature of toxicity from CBA/oil
interactions, one would  first ascertain that the toxicity of efflu-
ent from test systems containing oil and a CBA exceeded that
of the effluent from  control systems containing only oil. If it
does,  and  this toxicity is more than would be  expected from
similar exposures to CBA alone (from Tier II tests), generation

-------
of toxic metabolites  or  oil/CBA synergistic effects would  be
suggested.

The Tier III environmental  safety protocol was evaluated  by
testing the toxicity of effluents exiting from the open-water test
system  treated with six different CBAs. For five  of the  six
CBAs, the effluent  as prepared for toxicity testing was not
toxic; the sixth CBA  open-water  effluent was toxic, but the
effects were less than would have been expected from Tier II
intrinsic toxicity tests [10, 11]. Effluent exiting the marsh test
system  exceeded the toxicity  expected from the CBA alone
and was reproducible.


Environmental Safety Related Research
Several peripheral but fruitful lines of investigation came from
our pursuit of acceptable criteria for  adequate effectiveness or
safety of CBAs. The concepts  addressed by this  research are
discussed below with the appropriate citations.

The selection of efficacy endpoints based on analytical chemis-
try (gravimetric and selected  GC/MS  analytes) emphasizes
aesthetic as well as toxicological considerations of oil spills.  An
ecological-based evaluation dependent on the ability of benthic
organisms  to  recolonize oiled beaches after  bioremediation
represents another measurement of  CBA success. An applica-
tion of such an endpoint was attempted by adapting a 10-day
amphipod  (Leptocheirus plumulosus)  sediment  toxicity test.
This test evaluated toxicity associated with the use of CBAs on
oiled beaches, including potentially toxic metabolites, after the
28-day  CBA efficacy test [11,  12]. This test organism actually
proved to be too sensitive, as exposure to oiled sediment, with
or without  bioremediation agents, inhibited  burrowing at the
end of the test.

Salt marsh areas represent productive, sensitive ecosystems
that are particularly vulnerable to the effects of oil spills due to
their  coastal  location. These complex, stratified  communities
are probably not amenable to most physical approaches  for
removal of spilled oil, such as scraping of the intertidal  sedi-
ment, and thus could be viewed as potential candidates  for
bioremediation approaches. The role of microbial communities
in the maintenance of salt marshes exceeds that of most other
marine  environments where spills could occur, such as sandy
beaches,  indicating a need for characterization of microbial
communities. To investigate the effects of hydrocarbon pollu-
tion on  bacterial diversity in the rhizosphere and  rhizoplane of
selected wetland ecosystem  plants,  fatty  acid  profiles and
molecular probes for  selected conserved genes  were utilized
[13, 14].

The Tier II environmental safety protocol includes  an estima-
tion of  CBA toxicity  in  the presence  of an oil WSF.  Such
studies traditionally require mixing oil to water in a 1:9 ratio for
a period of time, discarding the oil  and using the WSF. Our
investigation of the toxicity of crude  oil WSFs with different  oil-
to-water ratios suggests that traditional methods may be  un-
necessarily wasteful of  oil and that  similar toxic  effects could
be observed with ratios  as high as 1:499 [15].


Most toxicity test organisms  are selected for  their ease in
culturing or collecting,  sensitivity,  and suitability  for testing
protocols (e.g., test system  size,  tolerance to salinity or par-
ticles, etc.). They generally have some ecological importance
for their role in food webs, but seldom have commercial signifi-
cance. One task focused  on the development and  test of
sensitivity of blue crab larvae (Callinectes sapidus) for toxicity
testing, providing an economically relevant toxicity test species
that could be  used to evaluate oil or CBA toxicity. The blue
crab larvae were more sensitive than two other test organisms,
grass  shrimp  (Palaemonetes  pugio)  larvae and mysids
(Mysidopsis bahia), when tested with an  anionic  surfactant,
sodium dodecyl sulfate [16].


Conclusions
The  open-water and beach test systems were evaluated  for
their ability to  assess  CBA efficacy using both  commercial
products and positive controls. There are substantial barriers to
effective performance of oil-spill CBAs,  among them  dilution
rates, nutrient and biomass limitations,  and a limited  time in
which a  CBA  can remain in contact with  the  oil  spill. Some
CBAs effected significant changes  in one or  more targeted
hydrocarbons  relative to the control. Oil losses from  treated
beach  test systems were greater than from open-water sys-
tems, but no substantial  decreases in oil residue weights were
associated with CBA treatments.

The CBAs used to evaluate the environmental safety protocols
generally exhibited low intrinsic toxicity (Tier II)  and low or no
toxicity in effluent from  the efficacy  open-water test system.
One notable  exception  was an increase in  effluent  toxicity
associated with the application of a CBA to oil in the marsh test
system. Although use of these toxicity testing procedures does
not ensure that identical  results would occur in the field, or that
all possible environmental effects would be  predicted (e.g.,
mutagenicity, teratogenicity, or community/ecosystem level ef-
fects), this protocol provides a consistent means for evaluating
safety of CBAs under standard conditions that  model some of
the important parameters of an open-water spill scenario.

Efficacy  information generated from  these protocols coupled
with  assessments of toxicity for CBAs should  provide useful
information to  an on-scene coordinator considering the selec-
tion of various CBAs.

Acknowledgments
Validation of the effectiveness protocol for Tier III open-water
and beach test systems, as well as the ecotoxicology for Tier II
and  Tier III, was  performed through cooperative  agreement
CR-818991 between the University of West Florida Center for
Environmental Diagnostics and the U.S. Environmental Protec-
tion Agency (EPA) Laboratory at Gulf Breeze. The EPA Project
Officer was P.  H. Pritchard.  K. Ranga Rao  was Principal
Investigator. Some aspects of this  research  were  also sup-
ported through cooperative agreement  CR-822236 with  the
EPA. Anthony Mellone  coordinated  the analytical  chemistry
component of  the project for UWF. The  following people con-
tributed ideas and technical assistance during the development
of this project:  Ahmet Bulbulkaya, Wanda Boyd, Mike Bundrick,
Peter Chapman, Jim Clark,  Carol Daniels, Barbara Frederick,
Tim  Gibson,  Wallace  Gilliam, Jeff  Kavanaugh, Joanne
Konstantopolis, Tony Mellone, Len Mueller, Neve Norton, Jim
Patrick, Parmely Pritchard, Bob  Quarles, George Ryan, Mike
Shelton, Scott Spear, Phil Turner,  Ling Wan,  Vicki Whiting,
Diane Yates, and Shiying Zhang.

-------
Research  Products Cited
1.   National Environmental Technology Application Corporation
    (NETAC). 1993. Evaluation Methods Manual for Oil Spill
    Response Bioremediation Agents. (August, 1993) University
    of  Pittsburgh  Applied Research Center,  Pittsburgh, PA
    15238.
2.   National Environmental Technology Application Corporation
    (NETAC). 1991. Oil Spill Bioremediation Products Testing
    Protocol Methods P   Manual.  (October, 1991)  University
    of  Pittsburgh  Applied Research Center,  Pittsburgh, PA
    15238.
3.   Lepo, J. E., B.  Frederick,  G.  P. Norton,  T.  Mellone, M.
    Shelton, S. Spear,  P.  H.  Pritchard, and C.  R.  Gripe.
    Evaluation  of  Protocols to  Assess  Efficacy  and
    Environmental  Safety of  Commercial  Oil-Spill  Bio-
    remediation Agents: Open-Water Test System—Efficacy
    Test. Manuscript in preparation.
4.   Lepo, J. E., B.  Frederick,  G.  P. Norton,  T.  Mellone, M.
    Shelton, S. Spear,  P.  H.  Pritchard, and C.  R.  Gripe.
    Evaluation  of  Protocols to  Assess  Efficacy  and
    Environmental   Safety   of  Commercial  Oil-Spill
    Bioremediation Agents:  Beach Test System — Efficacy
    Test. Manuscript in preparation.
5.   Lepo, J. E.  1993. Evaluation of Tier III  Bioremediation
    Agent Screening  Protocol  for  Open  Water  Using
    Commercial Agents. University of West Florida/U.S.
    Environmental   Protection  Agency,  Gulf  Breeze
    Environmental Research Laboratory. EPA/600 1-93/001.
6.   Norton, G. P., D. F. Yates, M. P. Hancock, and J. E. Lepo.
    1994. Isolation and Characterization of Marine Bacteria for
    Use as Surrogate  Indigenous  Petroleum  Hydrocarbon
    Degrading Microflora. Annual Meeting, American Society
    for  Microbiology,  Las Vegas, NV.  23 -  27 May 1994.
    Abstract no. Q-45.
7.   Lepo, J. E., S.  Zhang,  N.  Norton, J. Kavanaugh, C. R.
    Gripe, P. H. Pritchard. Effect of Oil  Dosing in Beach and
    Open-Water Microcosms on the Degree of  Biodegradation.
    Manuscript in preparation.
8.   Zhang,  S.  G.  P.  Norton,  and  J.  E. Lepo. 1995.  The
    Biodegradation of  Differing Amounts of Crude Oil in Open
    Water and Beach Laboratory Simulations. Annual Meeting,
    American Society  for Microbiology, Washington, DC. 21  -
    26 May 1995. Abstract no. Q-61
9.   Kavanaugh, J .L., C. R. Gripe, C. B. Daniels, A. Bulbulkaya,
    P. K. Turner, and J. E. Lepo. Evaluation of Protocols to
    Assess Efficacy and Environmental Safety of Commercial
    Oil Spill Bioremediation Agents: Agent Toxicity.  Manuscript
    in preparation.
10. Kavanaugh, J. L., C. R. Gripe, C. B. Daniels, W. Boyd, V.
    K. Whiting, and  J. E. Lepo. Evaluation of Protocols to
    Assess Efficacy and Environmental Safety of Commercial
    Oil-Spill Bioremediation Agents: Open-Water Test System
    —Toxicity Test. Manuscript in preparation.
11. Kavanaugh, J. L., C. R. Gripe, C. B. Daniels, W. T. Gilliam,
    R. Araujo and J. E.  Lepo.  1996.  Some Aspects of the
    Environmental  Safety   of   Commercial   Oil  Spill
    Bioremediation Agents. Biotechnology Risk Assessment:
    Proceedings of  the Biotechnology  Risk Assessment
    Symposium, June 6-8, 1995, Pensacola,  FL. Morris Levin,
    Chris  Grim,  and J. Scott Angle,  Editors.  University of
    Maryland Biotechnology Institute, College Park, MD. Pp.
    391-407.
12. Lepo, J.  E.,  C.  R. Gripe,  and P.  H.  Pritchard.  1994.
    Effectiveness and  Safety  of  Strategies  for  Oil  Spill
    Bioremediation: Potential and Limitations. Symposium on
    Bioremediation of  Hazardous  Wastes: Research,
    Development and Field Evaluations. San Francisco,  CA,
    June 28 - 30, 1994. EPA/600/R94/075, pp. 80-86.
13. Frederick, B.  A., D. F. Folse, and J.  E. Lepo.  1994.
    Physiological  and Genetic  Adaptation of Salt-Marsh
    Rhizosphere Communities To Oil Stress. Annual Meeting,
    American Society for Microbiology,  Las  Vegas, NV. 23 -
    27 May 1994. Abstract no. N-182.
14. Frederick, B. A., D.  E. Weber, and J. E. Lepo.  1993.
    Ecological Impact of Oil Spills on Spartina alterniflora and
    on the Diversity of Their Microflora  in Artificial Sediments.
    Annual Meeting, American Society for Microbiology, Atlanta,
    GA. 16-20 May 1993. Abstract no. Q-278.
15. Kavanaugh, J. L., J. E. Lepo, C. R. Gripe,  A. Bulbulkaya,
    C. B.  Daniels  and T. Mellone.  The Toxicity of Crude Oil
    Water Soluble Fractions  Prepared with Different Oil-to-
    Water Ratios. Manuscript in preparation.
16. Whiting, V.K., G.M. Gripe, and J. E. Lepo. 1996. Effect of
    Sodium  Dodecyl Sulfate on  Newly Hatched  Blue  Crab,
    Callinectes sapidus, and Other Routinely  Tested Estuarine
    Crustaceans. Arch. Contam. Toxicol. 31:293-295.

-------