EPA Report
April 1979
An Evaluation of the Kepone Contamination
of the Plankton of the James River
by
Robert A. Jordan, Patricia A. Goodwin,
Charles E. Sutton, V. Joseph Lascara,
Peter A. Van Veld and Richard K. Carpenter
Grant Number R804993010
Project Officer
Tudor T. Davies
Gulf Breeze Environmental Research Laboratory
Gulf Breeze, Florida 32561
Gulf Breeze Environmental Research Laboratory
Office of Research and Development
U. S. Environmental Protection Agency
Gulf Breeze, Florida 32561
-------
LIBRARY COPY
CQ
cJ»
-4
ABSTRACT
The objective of this study was to determine the extent of
the contamination of the zooplankton and phytoplankton of the
James River with Kepone. During the period June 1977 - May 1978
all zboplankton samples taken within the sixty mile section of
the James River between Hopewell and Hampton Roads showed detec-
table levels of Kepone, ranging from 0.10 - 16 ppm on a dry weight
basis. Kepone levels in phytoplankton samples ranged from non-
detectable to 2.06 ppm, while levels in suspended detritus ranged
from .016 - 1.71 ppm. These results indicated that Kepone was
available via the food chain to filter feeding mollusks and to
active plankton feeders, including finfish.
The Kepone levels in zooplankton samples taken in April and
May 1978 were lower than the levels in the 1977 samples, reflect-
ing either a seasonal depression of Kepone uptake, or possibly a
temporally declining trend of Kepone contamination of the plank-
ton. Samples of amphipods of the species Corophium lacustre,
obtained from the James River in the summers of 1976, '77, and
'78, exhibited an apparent order of magnitude decline in Kepone
levels between 1977 and 1978.
Calculated estimates of the total mass of Kepone present in
the zooplankton ranged from 2.4 - 214 g, for the study area as
a whole. These amounts are small, relative to the estimated
total of 100,000 pounds distributed throughout the sediments,
water, and biota of the James River, but they are in a biolog-
ically available form with a rapid turnover rate.
PROPERTY OF
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AQBICY
-------
CONTENTS
Abstract
Figures
Tables
Introduction
Objectives
Methods
Results
1977 Seasonal Series
1978 Intensive Survey
Estimates of the Magnitude T>f the Zooplankton
Kepone Reservoir
Conclusion
References
-------
FIGURES
Number
1 Sample separation procedure, 13 September
1977
2 Micro-Soxhlet extraction unit used for ex-
tracting Kepone-' f rom plankton samples . .
3 * Locations of 1977 plankton sampling stations
4 Kepone concentrations in James River zoo-
plankton, June-October 1977
Kepone concentrations in James River zoo-
plankton, November-December 1977. . . ,
Kepone concentrations in James River phyto-
plankton, September-October 1977. . . .
7 Kepone concentrations in James River detritus,
September-December 1977
8 Locations of April-May 1978 plankton sampling
stations
9 Kepone concentration ranges, James River mixed
zooplankton populations, 20 April-7 May
1978
10 Graphical summary of Kepone concentrations in
James River mixed zooplankton, 29 April-
7 May 1978
11 Kepone concentration vs zooplankton: detritus
ratio in coarse seston fraction, May
1978
12 Kepone in zooplankton per unit volume of James
River water, August-October 1977, micro-
grams /nP
13 Kepone in zooplankton per unit volume of James
River water, November-December 1977, micro-
grams /m^
14 Kepone in zooplankton per unit volume of James
River water, 29 April-7 May 1978, micro-
grams /m-* '
-------
TABLES
Number
1 Chronological Summary of the 1977 James River
Kepone Plankton study
Quantitative Zooplankton Data-1977, No. of In-
dividuals per m^
3 Indirect Calculation of Kepone Concentrations in
Phytoplankton and Suspended Sediment, Brandon
Ft. (MP 54), 24-25 Aug. 1977
4 Summary of Results of James River Kepone Plank-
ton study, April-June 1978
5 Quantitative Zooplankton Data-May 1978, No. of
Individuals per m3
6 Indirect Calculation ^bf Kepone Concentrations
in Phytoplankton and Suspended Sediment,
Station J8, 2 May 1978
7 Estimates of Kepone in Zooplankton, per Unit
Volume of River Water (1977)
8 Estimates of Kepone in Zooplankton, per Unit
Volume of River Water (1978)
9 Estimated Total Mass of Kepone in James River
Zooplankton
10 Kepone levels in Corophium lacustre Taken from
Fouling Plates Incubated at Three Stations
in the James River
-------
Introduction
The plankton of the James River represents a potential mo-
bile pool of contaminants, including Kepone, that are susceptible
to accumulation from the water by living organisms. Kepone pres-
ent in contaminated plankton would be subject to dispersal by
currents throughout the James River and possibly into Chesapeake
Bay, and during its period of residence within the open water it
would be available for assimilation by plankton-consuming crus-
taceans, shellfish, and finfish.
Laboratory studies have'shown that Kepone can be accumulated
by unicellular algae (Walsh et al. 1977) and by crustaceans (Schim-
mel and Wilson 1977) from solution in water, and that it can be
transferred from lower to higher levels in an estuarine food chain
(Bahner et al. 1977). A field investigation was required to deter-
mine if detectable levels of Keponewere actually present in sam-
ples of James River plankton, and therefore if this community was
in fact significant in the maintenance and movement of Kepone in
this estuary.
Objectives
The present study was intended to provide determinations of
concentrations of Kepone in zooplankton and phytoplankton samples
taken from stations located in the segment of the river between
Hopewell and Hampton Roads. A secondary objective was to evalu-
ate temporal trends of Kepone concentrations in plankton samples
taken during different seasons within this zone.
Methods
During the study both direct and indirect estimates of
Kepone levels in James River plankton were obtained. Direct
estimates were made by analyzing plankton concentrates, obtained
by separating zooplankton or phytoplankton organisms from the
detritus and inorganic sediment suspended in the river. Indirect
estimates were obtained during the suspended sediment cruises in
August 1977 and April-May 1978 (see Suspended sediment section
of this contract report). Samples of the total seston, separated
from the river water by centrifugation during these cruises,
were analyzed for Kepone, and the proportions of plankton and
detritus in the samples were determined by microscopic examina-
tion. When, over a series of seston samples the Kepone concentra-
tion varied directly with the plankton proportion, the Kepone concen-
tration in the plankton could be estimated using simultaneous
equations.
The plankton samples used for the direct Kepone determina-
tions were obtained from net tows. Depending on the sampling
conditions encountered, the nets used were of 76, 110, or 202
micron mesh and were attached to 12.5 cm dia. Clarke-Bumpus or
-------
18.5 cm dia. bongo frames. The raw samples usually contained
plankton and detritus, but little or no inorganic sediment. The
samples intended for Kepone analysis were stored on ice in ace-
tone-rinsed glass jars for transport to the laboratory. In the
laboratory the organisms were separated from the detritus, in
most instances by rinsing the samples through screens of plankton
netting. Occasionally the plankton and detritus settled at dif-
ferent rates, permitting separation based on this property. Clad-
ocerans tended to accumulate at the surface film in undisturbed
samples, so when these zooplankters were present they could be
skimmed off, leaving mostly copepods and detritus in the remain-
der of the sample. Finally," Targe diatoms such as Coscinodiscus
sp. tended to adhere to glass surfaces, and this behavior was
exploited in separating several of the samples. Most of the
attempts at sample separation using these techniques yielded
sample fractions that were composed almost exclusively of zoo-
plankton. These fractions were saved for Kepone analysis. When-
ever fractions that were exclusively phytoplankton or exclusively
detritus were obtained, they were also saved for analysis. Figure
1 shows the separation procedure employed on one of the sampling
dates.
When a sample fraction was judged to be sufficient in purity
and quantity for analysis, it was concentrated on a pre-weighed
glass fiber filter (Gelman Type A/E) that had been subjected to
the Kepone extraction procedure for cleaning. The concentrated
sample was then stored in a freezer. Prior to analysis each
sample fraction was dried to constant weight in a desiccator.
The sample and filter were placed in a Whatman cellulose extrac-
tion thimble and extracted for a minimum of 18 hours in a micro-
Soxhlet extraction apparatus, which initially contained 40 ml of
a 50/50 mixture of diethyl ether and petroleum ether. Five sam-
ples and a blank could be extracted concurrently on the setup
illustrated in Fig. 2. Heat was supplied by three heat lamps
controlled by separate dimmer switches.
Following the extraction step, the entire volume of the
solvent mixture was cleaned by column chromatography utilizing
florisil as the packing (EPA 1975). The clean solution was an-
alyzed by gas chromatography, and the concentration of Kepone
present in the original sample was calculated from the resulting
chromatogram.
At each field sampling station plankton samples in addition
to those intended for Kepone analysis were obtained and preserved
in 570 buffered formalin, containing the stain Phloxine B, for
subsequent microscopic examination. Water temperature, salinity,
dissolved oxygen, and Secchi Disk transparency measurements were
also performed with each set of plankton samples.
-------
from /ou met xow
Suspend in water, allow to settle
/
110 u sieve (forcefully)
.<
'
76u sieve (gently)
^- -*
suspend, allow to settle +76u sieve (gently) -
d
(D
swirl to coat beaker sides
11 Op
/r
:
sieve
(to *)
**
$
(to +)
\\
\ <*
i OJ
&
'
.
V, 76u 'sieve (forcefully)
^ '
.
suspend, allow to settle
sieve
3
.r TO
n.
^
* 76 u sieve (gently)
n>
en
H-
' f=
n>
&
(to )
P
5'
Skeletonema
(save)
swirl to coat beaker sides 76u sieve (forcefully)
'
*76p sieve (forcefully)
\9>
^Ji
m
«.
S.
(to
P
01
n
(D
Pelecypod larvae
(save)
Coscinodiscus
(save)
Figure 1. Sample separation procedure, 13 September 1977.
-------
JBQQB0L
DIMMER SWITCH
HEAT CONTROL
WATER FLOW
HEAT LAMP
Figure 2. Micro-Soxhlet extraction unit used for extracting Kepone from plankton samples.
-------
Results
1977 Seasonal Series
The sampling effort and Kepone analysis results for 1977 are
summarized chronologically in Table 1. Figure 3 shows the sta-
tions referred to in this table, and indicates their positions
relative to river mile points. Table 2 contains the results of
zooplankton counts performed on the 1977 preserved samples.
A brief examination of Table 1 indicates that Kepone was
detected in all of the 1977'samples. The majority of the samples
analyzed contained mixtures of two or more taxa of zooplankton.
These samples generally contained higher concentrations of Kepone
than did the samples of phytoplankton, which in turn contained
higher concentrations than the detritus samples.
The 1977 zooplankton Kepone results are summarized in two
figures. Figure 4 presents the spatial distribution of the
Kepone levels determined for the period 23 June to 19 October
1977, during which there were ten sampling runs, scattered widely
in time. Bottom water salinities are also indicated. The re-
sults for the period 28 November^to 13 December, during which
seven stations were covered within two weeks, appear separately
in Fig. 5.
During both of these sampling periods the zooplankton Kepone
levels tended to be highest within the section of the river ex-
tending from Weyanoke Point (Station Red 76, MP60) downstream to
Jamestown Island (Station Black 55, MP40). The maximum concen-
tration, approximately 16 ppm, was determined in two samples, a
mixture of copepod nauplii and copepods of the genus Acartia ob-
tained on 10 August at station Red 64 (approximately MP45),and
a subsample containing copepods of the genus Eurytemora obtained
on 28 November at station Red 76 (MP60). A subsample of clado-
cerans (Bosmina sp.) from the same set of net tows that yielded
the copepod subsample containing 16 ppm Kepone had a Kepone level
of only 1.3 ppm. One other set of net tows, taken on 13 Septem-
ber at station Red 66 (approximately MP45), provided two separate
zooplankton fractions, copepods (Acartia sp.) and pelecypod lar-
vae (probably Rangia cuneata), that differed substantially in
their Kepone concentrations. These two sets of results indicate
that the Kepone levels in the other zooplankton samples, most of
which consisted of mixtures of two or more types of organisms,
were influenced by the taxonomic composition of the samples.
This observation complicates the interpretation of the dif-
ferences in zooplankton Kepone levels among different sections of
the James River, since within comparisons of these zones taxon-
omic composition was not held constant. The zone in which the
highest zooplankton Kepone levels were found (MP40-60) is also
-------
Figure 3. Locations of 1977 plankton sampling
stations.
-------
TABLE 1 (cont.)
Date
Nov.
28
Nov.
28
Nov.
28
Dec.
6
Dec.
6
Dec.
13
Station
Chippokes Pt.
Buoy Red 72
Weyanoke Pt.
Buoy Red 76
Westover
Buoy Red 94
Jamestown Island
Buoy Black 55
Hog Pt.
Buoy B & W J35
Burwell Bay
Buoy J14
Type of Sample
~" ; **-
Zooplankton-copepods, cladocerans
Detritus
Zooplankt on -cladocerans
Zooplankton-copepods
Detritus (coarse)
Detritus (fine)
Zooplankton-copepods, cladocerans
Detritus
Zooplankton-copepods
Detritus
Zooplankton-copepods
Zooplankton-copepods
Detritus (coarse)
Detritus (fine)
Kepone
cone .
(ppm)
2.86
.75
1.27
15.58
1.71
.63
2.02
.53
6.31
.54
4.08
3.46
.034
.12
Dec. James R. Bridge
13 Buoy B & W Jl
Zooplankton-copepods, nauplii 3.16
-------
TABLE 2. QUANTITATIVE ZOOPLANKTON DATA-L977
NO. OF'INDIVIDUALS PER M3
Station
Date
Organism
Copepod nauplii
Barnacle nauplii
Polychaete larvae
Pelecypod larvae
Acartia sp.
Eurytemora sp.
Cyclopoid copepods
Harpacticoid copepods
Bosmina sp.
Cladocerans (other)
Rotifers
Total
Red 64
10 Aug.
5260
40
400
1690
10
170
7570
Red 66
13 Sept.
96,060
330
1470
92,070
6270
160
810
80
197,250
Red 76
22 Sept
912
11
11
388
878
23
513
11
11
2758
(continued)
-------
TABLE 2 (cont.)
Station
Date
Organism
Copepod nauplii
Barnacle nauplii
Polychaete larvae
Pelecypod larvae
Acartia sp.
Eurytemora sp .
Cyclopoid copepods
Harpacticoid copepods
Bosmina sp.
Cladocerans (other)
Rotifers
Red 94
27 Sept.
127,,
5
5
90
47
330
B1.55
27 Sept.
1155
44
11
44
3454
44
2024
J16
5 Oct.
1195
925
10
156
1995
1101
31
J16
11 Oct
1155
402
88
100
352
13
502
Total
604
6776
5413
2612
(continued)
-------
TABLE 2 (cont.)
Station Bl.55 Red 72 Red 76 Red 94
Date 19 Oct. 28 Nov. 28 Nov- 28 Nov.
Organism
Copepod nauplii 138 10,613 13,027 16,059
Barnacle nauplii 768
Polychaete larvae 264
Pelecypod larvae 26
Acartia sp. 229
Eurytemora sp. 2118 4342 10,472
Cyclopoid copepods 965 460 271
Harpacticoid copepods 12 47
Bosmina sp. 1318 1277 7419
Cladocerans (other) 158
Rotifers 282 945 158
Total 1411 15,343 20,077 34,537
(continued)
-------
TABLE 2 (cont.)
Station
Date
Organism
Copepod nauplii
Barnacle nauplii
Polychaete larvae
Pelecypod larvae
Acartia sp.
Eurytemora sp.
Cyclopoid copepods
Harpacticoid copepods
Bosmina sp.
Cladocerans (other)
Rotifers
B1.55
6 Dec.
238
10
278
159
10
J35 J14
6 Dec. 13 Dec.
80
35
23 23
776 822
46
160
11
Jl
13 Dec
1312
62
211
220
960
141
1902
Total
695
1096
880
4808
-------
77-|20' "77* 10'
77-00'
76-50'
76-40'
76-30'
76- ZO'
76-10'
76'|00'
30'
57'
20'
10'
00'
50'
.78 ppm
(Sol. .145 %0)
I0.30ppm
(Sol. 2.I8%0)
2.07ppm
(Sal. .745 %0) /11
4. II ppm
(Sal. .955 %0)
5.10 ppm
(Sal. 5.31 %0)
9.75 ppm
(Sal. 5.59 %0)
7. lOppm
(Sal. 9.38%o)
Figure 4.
6.01 ppm
(Sal. I8.88%0)
2.62 ppm
(Sal. I7.85%0)
Kepone concentrations in James River
zooplankton, June-October 1977.
77«|zO' 77-JIO'
77-00'
76*50'
76-Uo'
76-30'
76*|2Q'
76-|lO'
37^
JO'
Ji:
20'
76-[00'
-------
77-20'
77-10'
77-00
76°50'
76-40
76-30'
76-20'
76- 10
76-00'
yr
301
20'
37;
10'
32!
oo1
50'
l.27ppm (CLADOCERANS)
I5.58ppm (COPEPODS)
{Sal. .096%o)
3.16 ppm
(Sal. I4.55%o
3.46ppm
(Sal. 9.22%0)
Figure 5. Kepone concentrations in James River
zooplankton, November-December 1977.
T7-J20'
771
77* 00'
76-50"
76-I401
76'30'
76-20'
76-10
20'
10
37
00'
36-
50'
76-100'
-------
where suspended sediment levels are characteristically higher than
elsewhere in the river, and where the highest levels of Kepone
have appeared in the bottom sediments (Nichols and Trotman 1977).
On this basis it is tempting to conclude that the 1977 zooplankton
samples exhibited a Kepone distribution that closely reflected
the spatial pattern of Kepone in the bottom sediments. However,
because of the limited number and incomplete taxonomic breakdown
of the plankton samples,this conclusion is weakly supported, and
it would be more appropriate to summarize the data in terms of a
concentration range for the study area as a whole: approximately
1 ppm - 16 ppm for mixed zooplankton assemblages for both the
June - October and November'- ^December periods. More extensive
sampling, with separation of the samples into more clearly de-
fined taxonomic entities, would be required to accurately define
the spatial pattern of the contamination of the James River zoo-
plankton with Kepone.
In Figure 6 the Kepone concentrations determined for the
phytoplankton subsamples obtained in 1977 are summarized. These
concentrations were representative of Kepone levels in the large
diatoms (70 - 100 microns), of the genera Skeletonema and Coscin-
odiscus (Table 1). Three of these samples were obtained in the
middle zone of the river, where the bottom sediment Kepone levels
have been highest, and their Kepone concentrations were higher
than in the sample from a lower river station, J16.
Table 3 presents an indirect calculation of the Kepone con-
centrations in the suspended sediment and phytoplankton fractions
of total seston samples obtained by centrifugation in August 1977.
The results of analyses of five seston samples were used, three
of which were taken at low slack tide and had relatively low
Kepone levels, and two of which were taken at high slack tide and
were relatively high in Kepone. The phytoplankton and sediment
proportions of each sample were derived from microscopic examin-
ations of preserved aliquots. Average values for the two sample
groups were employed in constructing two equations, which were
solved simultaneously for the Kepone concentrations in the sus-
pended sediment and phytoplankton. The phytoplankton value,
1.12 ppm, agreed closely with the concentrations obtained direct-
ly for the phytoplankton subsamples obtained from the 1977 net
tows (Fig. 6). The indirect estimate, however, represented the
Kepone concentration in a smaller size range of phytoplankton
(2-20 microns), which consisted of microflagellates, crypto-
phytes, chlorophytes, and small dinoflagellates, as well as diatoms,
The indirect calculation also yielded an estimate of the
Kepone concentration in the suspended sediment fraction of the
seston. This fraction consisted of mineral particles and organic
detritus particles and aggregates, with a median size of 2.5
microns and a size range of .5 - 100 microns. The Kepone concen-
tration estimate, .03 ppm, was lower than the values obtained by
-------
77-20
77°IO'
77-00'
76-50'
76-40'
76-30'
76° 2O'
76-10'
76*00'
yr
30'
37°
20'
37°
10'
sr
oo
5S
50'
2.06ppm
(Sal. 5.31 %0)
l.45ppm
(Sal. 8.50%0)
.49ppm
(Sal. I7.85%0)
Figure 6.
Kepone concentrations in James River
phytoplankton, September-October 1977.
77°|20' 77°|lO'
77°|00'
. 76>I4°
76°30'
76°20'
76-10'
6°|00'
sz:
30'
51!
20'
37
00'
36°
50'
-------
TABLE 3. INDIRECT CALCULATION OF KEPONE
CONCENTRATIONS IN PHYTOPLANKTON AND
SUSPENDED SEDIMENT, BRANDON PT. (MP54),
24-25 AUG. 1977
Average g
Average g Kepone Phytoplank.
per g sestn
Initial Data
Samples
Three, taken at
low slack tide
Two, taken at
high slack tide
Mass balance equations
Low slack
.0597-10-6g Kepone=( . 02753gPhytopl .
+(.9725g
Average g
sediment
per g seston oer g seston
- ~
.0597-l--t>
.165-10-6
02753
.1243
.9725
.8757
High slack
7l65.10-6g KePone=(.1243gPhytoPl.)(|gpiy^gp^-.)
+ (.8757g sed.)(S K
Solution
Low slack
-02753X = .0597-10'6 - .9725Y
X = 2.1685-10-6 - 35.325Y
substituting into high slack:
.165-10-b = (.1243) (2.1685-10-6 - 35.325Y) + .8757Y
.1045-10-6 = 3.5153Y
Y= .02973-10'6
X= 2.168-10-6 _ (35.325)(.02973-10"6)
X= 1.1183-10-6
Result
Kepone concentration in sediment = .030 ppm
Kepone concentration in phytoplankton =1.12 ppm
-------
77° ZO'
77-10'
77-00'
76-40
30'
El
20'
3Z!
10'
00'
so'
1.71 ppm (coarse)
.63ppm (fine)
(Sal. .096%0)
.32ppm
(Sol. .955%0)
C
.53 ppm
(Sal. .037%0)
.75 ppm
Figure 7.
.034ppm (coarse^
.12 ppm (fine)
(Sal. 9.22 %0)
Kepone concentrations in James River
detritus, September-December 1977.
77-
7-jlO'
77-00'
76'
[so1
76-40'
-------
TABLE 1. CHRONOLOGICAL SUMMARY OF THE 1977
JAMES RIVER KEPONE PLANKTON STUDY
Date
June
23
July
19
Aug.
10
Sept.
6
Sept.
13
Sept.
22
Sept.
27
Sept.
27
Oct.
5
Oct.
11
Oct.
19
Nov.
16
Station
Jordan Pt.
Buoy Red 106
off Bailey Creek
Fl Gill
off Chickahominy R.
mouth, Buoy Red 64
off Chickahominy R.
mouth, Buoy Red 64
Jamestown Island
Buoy Black C53
off Chickahominy R.
mouth, Buoy Red 66
Weyanoke Pt.
Buoy Red 76
Westover
Buoy Red 94
Jamestown Island
Buoy Black 55
Burwell Bay
Buoy J16
Burwell Bay
Buoy J16
Jamestown Island
Buoy Black 55
Cobham Bay
Depth
(m)
- =0-
10
0
1
0
9
0
9
0
8
0
4
0
7.5
0
4
0
12
0
2.5
0
2
0
1.5
0
2
Sal.
.140
.745
.140
.145
3.27
3.71
4.48
5.33
6.65
8.50
4.41
5.31
1.31
2.18
.564
.955
8.42
9.38
16.02
18.88
17.02
17.85
5.49
5.59
Temp.
26.0
25.4
25.9
25.8
31.2
30.4
29.8
29.1
29.4
28.8
24.8
24.8
25.0
25.2
24.0
24.0
25.4
25.1
19.9
19.8
18.6
18.3
14.5
14.6
D.O.
(mg/1)
4.28
4.04
4.10
4.38
6.17
5.67
7.28
5.50
8.98
7.10
7.58
7.22
5.64
5.94
6.39
5.56
7.80
7.00
8.15
7.88
8.59
7.88
9.15
9.55
Secchi
Depth
(m)
.45
-
.50
.71
.97
.70
.63
.47
.85
1.29
.97
.46
(continued)
-------
TABLE 1 (cont.)
Date
June
23
Station
Jordan Pt.
Buoy Red 106
Type of Sample
Zooplankton-cladocerans
Kepone
cone .
(ppm)
2.07
off Bailey Creek
Fl Gill
July off Chickahominy R.
19 mouth, Buoy Red 64
Aug. off Chickahominy R.
10 mouth, Buoy Red 64
Sept. Jamestown Island
6 Buoy Black C53
Sept. off Chickahominy R.
13 mouth, Buoy Red 66
Sept. Weyanoke Pt.
22 Buoy Red 76
Sept. Westover
27 Buoy Red 94
Sept. Jamestown Island
27 Buoy Black 55
Oct. Burwell Bay
5 Buoy J16
Oct. Burwell Bay
11 Buoy J16
Oct. Jamestown Island
19 Buoy Black 55
Nov. Cobham Bay
16
Zooplankton-cladocerans
ZoopIankton-copepods
.78
2.64
Zooplankton-copepods & nauplii 16.13
Phytoplankton-Coscinodiscus sp. 1.45
Zooplankton-copepods 5.10
Zooplankton-pelecypod larvae 1.43
Phytoplankton-Coscinodiscus sp., 2.06
Skeletonema costatum
Zooplankton-copepods, cladocerans 10. 30
Phytoplankton-Skeletonema 1.35
costatum
Zooplankton-cladocerans, rotifers 4.11
Detritus .32
Zooplankton-copepods, nauplii 7.10
Detritus .28
Zooplankton-copepods, nauplii 6.01
Zooplankton-copepods, nauplii 2.62
Phytoplankton-Coscinodiscus sp., .49
Skeletonema costatum
Zooplankton-copepods, nauplii 9.75
Detritus
(continued)
.40
-------
TABLE 1 (cont.)
Date
Nov.
28
Nov.
28
Nov-
28
Dec.
6
Dec .
6
Dec.
13
Dec.
13
Station
Chippokes Pt.
Buoy Red 72
Weyanoke Pt .
Buoy Red 76
Westover
Buoy Red 94
Jamestown Island
Buoy Black 55
Hog Pt.
Buoy B & W J35
Burwell Bay
Buoy J14
James R. Bridge
Buoy B & W Jl
Depth
(m)
- r.
0
10
0
6
0
6
0
7
0
4.5
0
9.0
Sal.
.094
.096
.035
.037
.271
.410
1.74
2.31
7-06
9.22
14.55
14.55
Temp.
(°C)
8.4
8.4
7.8
7.8
9.5
9.4
9.7
9.6
5.2
5.0
5.4
5.6
D.O.
(tng/1)
10.91
10.75
10.68
10.89
10.80
11.00
10.56
12.16
11.92
9.30
10.30
10.30
Secchi
Depth
(m)
.41
-
.28
-
.53
1.10
(continued)
-------
direct analyses of detritus subsamples (Fig. 7), which were rep-
resentative of the relatively coarse material retained by plank-
ton netting.
The results of both the direct and indirect procedures indi-
cated that the Kepone concentrations in phytoplankton exceeded
the concentrations in the remainder of the seston, and that the
concentrations in both seston fractions were lower than the con-
centrations in zooplankton samples. The presence of Kepone in
the phytoplankton and suspended detritus indicated that the food
chain was a possible route for; incorporation of Kepone into the
zooplankton, which in turn was a potential source for Kepone con-
tamination of higher trophic levels.
1978 Intensive Survey
In late April and early May of 1978 an intensive effort was
conducted to evaluate the Kepone content of the James River ses-
ton during a spring freshet, when an exceptionally large flux of
suspended sediment was anticipated. In conjunction with the
suspended sediment sampling, an intensive plankton sampling pro-
gram was undertaken, involving the collection of numerous samples
in rapid succession.
The locations of the sampling stations are shown in Fig. 8.
Table 4 presents the hydrographic and plankton data chronologic-
ally, and Table 5 presents the counts of organisms per m^ of
river water. Three or four plankton sampling runs were conducted
at each station. The results of the Kepone analyses of the zoo-
plankton samples are summarized in Fig. 9, in terms of the ranges
of Kepone concentrations obtained for mixed zooplankton assem-
blages .
As in 1977, Kepone was detected in the zooplankton from all
the stations sampled, but the concentrations, which ranged from
0.16 - 1.1 ppm for the study area as a whole, were lower than
the concentrations in the 1977 zooplankton samples. The two
stations located farthest downstream in the river, J25 and J8,
where bottom salinities ranged from 2-10 °/oo, exhibited the
narrowest ranges of zooplankton Kepone levels. At the other
four stations, where the water was almost fresh, the Kepone con-
centrations varied appreciably from sample to sample, in a pat-
tern that appeared to relate more to the tide stage than to the
time of day (Fig. 10).
As in the 1977 study, the differences in Kepone concentra-
tions within a set of samples seemed to be due to differences in
the taxonomic composition of the samples. For example, the sample
obtained at 2250 hr at station J20, which had the lowest Kepone
concentration observed at this station (Fig. 10), also had the
highest proportion of harpacticoid copepods (Table 5). This
-------
Locations of April-May 1978 plankton
sampling stations.
-------
TABLE 4. SUMMARY OF RESULTS OF JAMES RIVER
KEPONE PLANKTON STUDY, APRIL-JUNE 1978
Secchi
Date
Apr.
29
Apr.
30
Apr.
30
May
1
May
1
May
1
May
2
May
2
May
2
May
2
May
3
May
3
May
4
Station
Burwell Bay
Buoy Black &
White J25
Burwell Bay
Buoy Black &
White J25
Burwell Bay
Buoy Black &
White J25
Burwe 1 1 Bay
Buoy J20
Burwell Bay
Buoy J20
Burwell Bay
Buoy J20
Burwell Bay
Buoy J20
White Shoals
Buoy Black &
White J8
White Shoals
Buoy Black &
White J8
White Shoals
Buoy Black &
White J8
White Shoals
Buoy Black &
White J8
Fort Eustis
Buoy C25
Fort Eustis
Buoy C25
Time
(EST)
1258
0830
1726
1137
1705
2250
0440
1340
1725
2210
0331
2020
0312
Depth Depth
(m) (m)
0
9.5
-------
TABLE 4. (continued)
Date Station
Type of Sample
Kepone
cone.
(ppm)
Apr. Burwell Bay Zooplankton-copepod nauplii (90%)
29 Buoy Black & Zooplankton-copepods (90%)
White J25
Apr. Burwell Bay Zooplankton-copepod nauplii (97%,)
30 Buoy Black & Zooplankton-copepods (50%)
White J25
Apr. Burwell Bay
30 Buoy Black &
White J25
May Burwell Bay
1 Buoy J20
May Burwell Bay
1 Buoy J20
May Burwell Bay
1 Buoy J20
May Burwell Bay
2 Buoy J20
Zooplankton-copepods (50%,), copepod
nauplii (20%), cladocerans (25%)
Zooplankton-cladocerans (60%,),
copepods (40%)
Zooplankton-cladocerans (5070),
copepods & jiauplii (507.)
Zooplankton-cladocerans (3070), rotifers
(30%), copepods (30%)
Zooplankton-cladocerans (457,),
copepods (457o)
Phytoplankton-Melosira sp.
Zooplankton-cladocerans (50%),
copepods (507o)
Zooplankton-amphipods
Zooplankton-cladocerans (507,),
copepods (30%), rotifers (20%)
May White Shoals Zooplankton-barnacle nauplii (5070)
2 Buoy Black & copepod nauplii (307,), copepods (207,)
White J8
May White Shoals Zooplankton-barnacle & copepod
2 Buoy Black & nauplii (507,), copepods & cladocerans
White J8 (50%)
May White Shoals Zooplankton-copepods (957,), nauplii &
2 Buoy Black & cladocerans (5%)
White J8 Zooplankton-barnacle nauplii (95%),
copepods & copepod nauplii (57>)
Zooplankton-amphipods
*N.D. not detectable
(continued)
.16
.55
.29
.36
.43
.47
.37
.80
.29
N.D*
.19
.19
.93
.30
.34
.38
.94
.10
-------
TABLE 4. (continued)
Secchi
Date
May
4
May
5
May
5
May
5
May
5
May
6
May
6
May
6
May
7
May
31
May
31
June
15
Station
Fort Eustis
Buoy C25
Jamestown Is.
Buoy Black 55
Jamestown Is .
Buoy Black 55
Jamestown Is.
Buoy Black 55
Jamestown Is.
Buoy Black 55
off Chick. R.
Buoy Red 64
off Chick. R.
Buoy Red 64
off Chick. R.
Buoy Red 64
off Chick. R.
Buoy Red 64
Chesapeake B.
entrance Buoy
R12
Hampton Roads
Buoy N18
James River
Bridge
Time
(EST)
0950
0220
1054
1656
2229
0755
1325
2134
0457
0730
1222
1052
Depth Depth
(m) (m)
0 .32
5.5
0
-9-.
0 .29
8
0 .24
9
0
7.5
0 .24
5
0 .29
5.5
0
5
0
4.5
0 2.55
8.5
0 1-00
4
0 .82
6
Sal.
(°/oo)
.145
.138
.085
.089
.089
.078
.082
.078
.082
.099
.068
.073
.080
.087
.071
.073
.064
.066
17.3
26.6
14.1
14.8
7.03
17.4
Temp.
(°C)
14
14
13
13
13
13
13
13
13
13
13
13
16
14
14
14
14
14
19
17
20
20
23
22
.6
.4
.8
.7
.9
.8
.9
.9
.7
.7
.5
.4
.6
.2
.2
.2
.3
.0
.2
.9
.9
.3
.6
.0
D.O.
(mg/1)
8
8
8
8
8
8
8
8
8
7
8
8
8
8
8
8
8
7
8
7
6
6
7
5
.43
.27
.49
.47
.25
.10
.41
.94
.13
.82
.60
.23
.54
.74
.83
.07
.36
.72
.53
.33
.84
.24
.53
.52
Tide
Fl.
Ebb
Fl.
Ebb
Fl.
Ebb
Fl.
Fl.
Ebb
Buoy Jl
(continued)
-------
TABLE 4. (continued)
Kepone
cone .
Date Station Type of Sample (ppm)
May White Shoals Zooplankton-copepods (98%), nauplii & .39
3 Buoy Black & cladocerans (2%)
White J8
May Fort Eustis Zooplankton-cladocerans (5070), copepods .97
3 Buoy C25 (40%), amphipods (10%)
Polychaetes .29
May Fort Eustis Zooplankton-cladocerans (5070), copepods .30
4 Buoy C25 (50%)
Phytoplankton-Melosira sp. (95%) N.D.
May Fort Eustis Zooplankton-copepods (50%), cladocerans .62
4 Buoy C25 (50%)
May Jamestown Is. Zooplankton-copepods (707,), cladocerans .83
5 Buoy Black 55 (30%)
May Jamestown Is. Zooplankton-cladocerans (6070), copepods .48
5 Buoy Black 55 (40%)
Phytoplankton-Melosira sp. N.D.
May Jamestown Is. Zooplankton-copepods (60%), cladocerans .29
5 Buoy Black 55 (40%)
Zooplankton-copepods (50%,), cladocerans 1.12
and nauplii (5070)
Phytoplankton-Melosira sp. N.D.
Detritus .09
May Jamestown Is. Zooplankton-copepods (70%), cladocerans .22
5 Buoy Black 55 (25%), amphipods (5%)
May off Chick. R. Zooplankton-cladocerans (7070), copepods .20
6 Buoy Red 64 (30%)
May off Chick. R. Zooplankton-cladocerans (50%), copepods .20
6 Buoy Red 64 (50%)
Phytoplankton-Melosira sp. N.D.
May off Chick. R. Zooplankton-cladocerans (90%), copepods .75
6 Buoy Red 64 (10%)
(continued)
-------
TABLE 4. (continued)
Kepone
cone .
Date Station Type of Sample (ppm)
May off Chick. R. Zooplankton-cladocerans (70%), copepods .16
7 Buoy Red 64 (30%)
May Chesapeake B. Zooplankton-copepods (9870), cladocerans N.D.
31 entrance Buoy (2%)
R12
May Hampton Roads Zooplankton-copepods (8070), cladocerans .15
31 Buoy N18 and nauplii (20%)
June James River Zooplankton-copepod nauplii (457o), .34
15 Bridge copepods (1070)
Buoy Jl
-------
TABLE 5. QUANTITATIVE ZOOPLANKTON DATA-MAY 1978,
NO. OF INDIVIDUALS PER MJ
Station
Date
Time (EST)
Organism
Copepod nauplii
Barnacle nauplii
Polychaete larvae
Acartia sp.
Eurytemora sp.
Cyclopoid copepods
Harpacticoid copepods
Bosmina sp.
Cladocerans (other)
Rotifers
Amphipods
Total
J20
1 May
1137
3"893
27
55
55
603
1700^
1316
1700^
27
877
J20
1 May
1705
4525
65
582
1164
517
2457
1875
J20
1 May
2250
157
22
22
247
4418
1166
381
1
J20
2 May
0440
1132
113
736
2321
906
1698
113
2944
10,253 11,185
6414
9963
(continued)
-------
TABLE 5 (cont.)
Station
Date
Time (EST)
Organism
Copepod nauplii
Barnacle nauplii
Polychaete larvae
Acartia sp.
Eurytemora sp.
Cyclopoid copepods
Harpacticoid copepods
Bosmina sp.
Cladocerans (other)
Rotifers
Amphipods
Total
J8 J8
2 May 2 May
1340 1725
10,904 19,705
10,719 7955
123
185 730
246 766
185- 255
123 2299
123 255
308
620
J8
2 May
2210
3004
4318
J8
3 May
0331
13,400
2108
2948
652
425
538
198
28
198
989
676
833
2030
260
182
22,916 32,585 12,129 20,478
(continued)
-------
TABLE 5 (cont.)
Station
Date
Time (EST)
Organism
Copepod nauplii
Polychaete larvae
Acartia sp.
Eurytemora sp.
Cyclopoid copepods
Harpacticoid copepods
Bosmina sp.
Cladocerans (other)
Rotifers
Amphipods
Total
C25
3 May
2020
2333'
99
298
3176
3127
2134
2432
50
4169
C25
4 May
0312
1363
45
45
545
3771
136
1181
45
4726
C25
4 May
0950
2586
58
842
3370
87
1743
87
4968
17,818
11,857 13,741
(continued)
-------
TABLE 5 (cont.)
Station
Date
Time (EST)
Organism
Copepod nauplii
Polychaete larvae
Acartia sp.
Eurytemora sp.
Cyclopoid copepods
Harpacticoid copepods
Bosmina sp.
Cladocerans (other)
Rotifers
Amphipods
Total
BL55
5 May
0220
382
116
565
1164
133-
432
33
665
17
3507
BL55
5 May
1054
681
47
258
869
24
657
94
2630
BL55
5 May
1656
744
138
165
1984
165
1681
303
2866
8046
BL55
5 May
2229
752
90
873
1023
813
1023
30
1114
120
5838
(continued)
-------
TABLE 5 (cont.)
Station
Date
Time (EST)
Organism
Copepod nauplii
Polychaete larvae
Barnacle nauplii
Acartia sp.
Eurytemora sp.
Cyclopoid copepods
Harpacticoid copepods
Bosmina sp.
Cladocerans (other)
Rotifers
Amphipods
Dipteran larvae
Total
Red 64
6 May
0755
107
36
1002
72
609
143
895
2864
Red 64
6 May
1325
525
93
93
803
31
1267
93
2132
62
5099
Red 64
6 May
2134
150
38
338
488
375
544
150
807
38
19
2947
Red 64
7 May
0457
86
29
86
547
547
403
86
201
29
29
2043
(continued)
-------
TABLE 5 (cont.)
Station J25 J25
Date 30 Apr. 30 Apr.
Time (EST) 0830 1726
Organism
Copepod nauplii 1684 32211
Polychaete larvae 135
Barnacle nauplii 282 270
Acartia sp. 87 169
Eurytemora sp. 87 809
Cyclopoid copepods 22 337
Harpacticoid copepods 11 776
Bosmina sp. 101
Cladocerans (other)
Rotifers 22 911
Amphipods
Dipteran larvae
Total 2195 35,719
-------
77'2O'
77'[|Q'
6°J50'
76*Uo'
76*30'
76'|2O' 76'|lO' 76'[OO'
3O'
5Z!
10'
cw'
50'
.22- U2ppm
(Sal. .07-.IO%0)
.!9-.93ppm
(Sal. .2-.8%0)
*^
.30 - .39ppm
(Sal. 2- 10%0)
.lp-.75ppm
(Sab.07-.09%0)
.30-.97ppm
(Sal. .I3-.I7%0)
.36-.43ppm
(Sal. 7-8%0)
Figure 9.
Kepone concentration ranges, James River
mixed zooplankton populations, 29 April-
7 May 1978.
771
7T-00'
76'ISO1
37'
301"
37
20'
7
00'
5S!
5O1
76-4O'
76*30'
-------
KEPONE CONCENTRATION (PPM)
o r\)
01
OD to
o
o
m
m
-n
m
m
-n
m
-n
m
m
-n
m
-n
m
m
-n
m
n
n
m
CO
p
c_
ro
en
CO
c_
ro
o
CO
a
c_
00
CO
p
o
t\>
en
CO
a
CD
en
en
CO
3"
o>
1258
0830
1726
1137
1705
2250
0440
1340
1725
2210
0331
2020
0312
0950
0220
1054
1656
2229
0755
1325
2134
0457
29
30
30
1
1
1
2
2
2
2
3
3
4
4
5
5
5
5
6
6
6
7
Apr.
Apr.
Apr.
May
May
May
May
May
May
May
May
May
May
May
May
May
May
May
May
May
May
May
'" o
o
X)
u>
rr
O
3
H
I '
CU
VD
CO
H-
CTO
C
(D
O
n
o
3
n
rr
rr
H-
O
3
01
H-
3
to
m
w
**
H-
l-i
g
H-
X
fl>
Cu
-------
suggested that the harpacticoids were relatively low in Kepone,
and the large numbers that occurred in this sample diluted the
Kepone present in the cladocerans and other groups of copepods.
Several of the net tows taken during the 1978 study yielded
more than one sample fraction for Kepone analysis (Table 4). The
samples taken at station J25 suggested that adult copepods were
higher in Kepone than were copepod nauplii (0.55 vs 0.16 ppm at
1258 hr, 0.36 vs 0.29 ppm at 0830 hr). The samples from station
J8 suggested that barnacle nauplii were the zooplankters with the
highest kepone levels at the higher salinity stations (0.94 ppm,
vs 0.38 ppm for copepods and-Q.10 ppm for amphipods). The samples
obtained at the freshwater stations were generally mixtures of
copepods and cladocerans, and the differences in Kepone levels
among the samples showed no distinct relationship to differences
in proportions of these two gross taxonomic groups.
Zooplankton samples were taken at three additional stations
downstream from the area included in the intensive survey, in
May and June 1978 (Table 4). Kepone was not detected in a sample
from the Chesapeake Bay entrance, but was present at 0.15 ppm in
a sample from Hampton Roads, and at 0.34 ppm in a sample from
immediately upstream of the James River Bridge.
The analyses of phytoplankton subsamples obtained during the
1978 study yielded Kepone concentrations below the level of de-
tection of the method (Table 4). One detritus subsample, from
station Black 55, was analyzed and had a Kepone concentration of
0.09 ppm.
An attempt was made to obtain an indirect estimate of the
Kepone concentration in the phytoplankton, by using the same
method employed in August 1977 (Table 6). The result, 0.76 ppm,
is similar to the earlier indirect estimate (Table 3), but it
seems high relative to the distinctly lower Kepone levels in the
zooplankton in the 1978 study. The indirect estimate for the
Kepone level in suspended sediment, 0.016 ppm, is of the same or-
der of magnitude as the direct estimate for detritus and as the
levels found in most of the total seston samples in the 1978 study
(see suspended sediment section of this report).
In the 1978 suspended sediment Kepone survey, surface and
bottom samples were taken by centrifugation hourly over a period
of approximately 25 hours at each of the stations indicated in
Fig. 8. The Kepone levels in these seston concentrates varied
from sample to sample, and the samples from station J8 varied
over the widest range. During the centrifugation of each sample,
a volume of river water was passed through a 63 micron sieve to
concentrate a sample of the large size fraction of the seston,
which was preserved for subsequent microscopic analysis. Since
the zooplankton samples obtained from the net tows exhibited
higher Kepone levels than the total seston samples, it was sus-
-------
TABLE 6. INDIRECT CALCULATION OF KEPONE
CONCENTRATIONS IN PHYTOPLANKTON AND
SUSPENDED SEDIMENT, STATION
J8, 2 MAY 1978
Sample
Bottom seston
Surface" seston
Initial data
g Kepone
per g seston
.09-10-6
.16-10~6
g Phytoplankton
per g seston
.0993
.1938
g sediment
per g seston
.9007
.8062
Mass balance equations
Bottom seston
.09-10-b g Kepone = (.0993g Phytopl. )(|Spftyi85r. )
+ (.9007g g
Surface seston
.16-10-6 g Kepone = (.1938g Phytopl. )
+ (.8062g sed.) (
Bottom seston
Solution
.0993X=.09-10"6 - .9007Y
X=.9063-10-6 - 9.070Y
substituting into surface seston;
.16-10-6 = (.1938) (.9063-10-6 - 9.070Y)+ .8062Y
.01564-10'6 = .9516Y.
Y = .01644-10"6
X = .9063-10"6 - (9.070) (.01644'10~6)
X = .757-10-6
Result
Kepone concentration in sediment = .016 ppm
Kepone concentration in phytoplankton = .76 ppm
-------
pected that the zooplankton present in the large particle fraction
of a seston sample could have been the source of some or most of
the Kepone extracted from the sample. Thus the composition of the
63 micron sieve samples could be examined in an attempt to inter-
pret the variation in Kepone levels observed among the total ses-
ton samples. Selected sieve samples were examined to determine
the ratios of zooplankton to detritus, in terms of the relative
areas of microscope fields covered by these two categories. In
Fig. 11, Kepone concentration in the total seston has been plotted
vs zooplankton: detritus ratio in the >63 micron fraction for
two stations. A positive relationship is suggested by the plot
for station J8, but not for station Red 64. The reason for this
difference may be the fact that station J8 was the station where
the Kepone concentrations in the mixed zooplankton varied the
least from sample to sample (Fig. 10). This was therefore the
station where the variation in total zooplankton content of the
seston would be expected to relate the most directly to the var-
iation in sestonic Kepone. At the other stations, such as Red
64, where the zooplankton Kepone levels were more variable, prob-
ably due to variations in the taxonomic composition of the plank-
ton, a gross estimate of the total zooplankton abundance would
be less closely related to the Kepone content.
Estimates of the Magnitude of the Zooplankton Reservoir
The zooplankton counts per unit volume of river water (Tables
2 and 5) and the concentrations of Kepone per unit mass of zoo-
plankton (Tables 1 and 4) were used in an attempt to estimate the
total mass of Kepone that was present in the zooplankton in the
study area., during the sampling periods. Estimates of the dry
weights of individual zooplankters were obtained from the liter-
ature (Nakai 1955), and these were used to convert the zooplank-
ton counts for the taxonomic groups actually included in the
Kepone analyses, to estimates of mass per cubic meter (Tables 7
and 8). Most of these estimates were within the range of values
determined during a survey of lower Chesapeake Bay zooplankton
(Jacobs 1978). Multiplication by the measured Kepone concentra-
tions in the zooplankton yielded Kepone concentrations per cubic
meter of river water (Tables 7 and 8, Figs. 12 - 14). The final
step was to factor in estimates of the water volumes present in
the sections of the James River included in the study area (Cronin
1971), and calculate the total mass of Kepone present in the zoo-
plankton in each river section (Table 9).
These estimates are conservatively low, since only the zoo-
plankton taxa actually analyzed for Kepone were included in the
calculations. Even if they underestimate the actual quantity
by one or two orders of magnitude, however, the conclusion would
be the same: The zooplankton compartment, evaluated during the
study period, contained a minute fraction of the estimated
100,000 pounds of Kepone (Bellanca and Gilley 1977) present in
the river system. Nonetheless, the zooplankton Kepone represents
-------
Si
Q.
$±
H
t 1 ^^
^ LL!
o °°
<-> _l
UJ <
£P
* ?
Sta. J8
.8-1 ° Surface
.7 -
.6 -
.5 -
.4 -
.3 -
.2-
.1 -
9 Bottom
a
D
D
a D
0-iiiiiii-t-iiiiiiiii
0 .5 1 1.5 2 2.5 3 3.5 4 4.5 5 5.5 6 6.5 7 7.5 8
ZOO PLANKTON'- DETRITUS RATIO IN SESTON > 63//
riC.
O ^-~
< o-
H ""
UJ O
0 h-
Z CO
O UJ
(J C/)
UJ -J
z ^
2 ^
^ ?
2 -, Sta. Red 64
,15 -
. 1 -
.05-
0 -
(
a Surface
a Bottom
o
a
a
i i i i i i i
) 5 1 1.5 2 2.5 3 3.5
ZOOPLANKTON: DETRITUS RATIO IN SESTON > 63//
Figure 11. Kepone concentration vs zooplankton: detritus ratio in
coarse seston fractions, May 1978.
-------
TABLE 7. ESTIMATES OF KEPONE IN ZOOPLANKTON, PER UNIT VOLUME OF RIVER WATER (1977)
Station
Red 64
Red 66
Red 76
Red 94
B1.55
J16
J16
B155
Red 72
Red 76
Date
10 Aug.
13 Sept.
22 Sept.
27 Sept.
27 Sept.
5 Oct.
11 Oct.
19 Oct.
28 Nov.
28 Nov.
Type of
Sample
copepods ,
nauplii
copepods
copepods ,
cladocerans
cladocerans,
rotifers
copepods ,
nauplii
copepods ,
nauplii
copepods ,
nauplii
copepods,
nauplii
copepods,
cladocerans
cladocerans
Kepone
Content
of
Zoopl .
(PPW=
16.13
5.10
10.30
4.11
7.10
6.01
2.62
9.75
2.86
1.27
Zoopl.
Counts,,
(No./mJ)
7000
7240
1813
467
1254
5216
2424
1147
4448
1277
Zoopl.
Dry wt.
(mg/nH)
11.1
28.3
8.63
0.82
1.33
16.29
5.71
2.60
22.1
6.38
Kepone
in Zoopl
(ug/m )
.18
.14
.09
.003
.009
.098
.015
.025
.063
.008
(continued)
-------
TABLE 7. (continued)
Kepone
Content
of
Station
Red 76
Red 94
B1.55
J35
J14
Jl
Date
28 Nov.
28 Nov.
6 Dec.
6 Dec .
13 Dec.
13 Dec.
Type of
Sample
copepods
copepods,
cladocerans
copepods
copepods
copepods
copepods,
nauplii
Zoopl.
(ppm=
10-3ug/mg)
15.58
2.02
6.31
4.08
3.46
3.16
Zoopl.
Counts
(No./m3)
4802
18,320
447
1005
845
2475
Zoopl.
Dry wt.
(mg/m3)
24.0
91.6
2.24
4.68
4.20
5.44
Kepone
in Zoopl.
(ug/m3)
.37
.18
.014
.019
.015
.017
-------
TABLE 8. ESTIMATES OF KEPONE IN ZOOPLANKTON, PER UNIT VOLUME OF RIVER WATER (1978)
Kepone
Content
of
Time
Station Date (EST)
J25
J25
J20
J20
J20
J20
J8
J8
J8
J8
30 Apr.
30 Apr.
L May
1 May
1 May
2 May
2 May
2 May
2 May
3 May
0830
1726
1137
1705
2230
0440
1340
1725
2210
0331*
Zoopl .
Type of (ppm=
Sample 10~3ug/mg)
copepod nauplii
copepods
copepods, nauplii
cladocerans
copepods, nauplii
cladocerans
cladocerans, rotifers
copepods ,
cladocerans ,
copepods
cladocerans,
rotifers, copepods
copepods, nauplii
copepods, nauplii
barnacle nauplii,
cladocerans
copepods, nauplii
cladocerans
copepods, nauplii
.16
.55
.43
.37
.80
.19
.93
.30
.34
.38
.39
Zoopl.
Counts
(No./m3)
1684
207
34,403
9294
6660
5853
8718
22,362
31,965
11,931
20,296
Zoopl .
Dry wt .
(mg/m3)
1.35
.38
74.90
28.65
23.58
20.43
28.24
33.42
47.87
30.60
24.98
Kepone
in Zoopl.
(ug/m3)
.0002
.0002
.032
.011
.019
.0039
.026
.010
.016
.012
.010
cladocerans
(continued)
-------
TABLE 8. (continued)
Kepone
Content
of
Station
C25
C25
C25
B1.55
B1.55
B155
B155
Red 64
Red 64
Date
3 May
4 May
4 May
5 'May
5 May
5 May
5 May
6 May
6 May
Time
(EST)
2020
0312
0950
0220
1054
1656
2229
0755
1325
Zoopl .
Type of (ppm=
Sample 10~3ug/mg)
cladocerans,
copepods
cladocerans ,
copepods
cladocerans,
copepods
copepods ,
cladocerans
copepods,
cladocerans
copepods, nauplii
cladocerans
copepods,
cladocerans
copepods ,
cladocerans
copepods,
.97
.30
.62
.83
.48
1.12
.22
.20
.20
Zoopl.
Counts
(No./m3)
11,217
5723
6187
2443
1949
5180
3852
1862
2380
Zoopl.
Dry wt .
(mg/m3)
51.52
28.30
30.70
11.83
9.65
22.31
17.54
9.13
11.75
Kepone
in Zoopl
(ug/m3)
.050
.0085
.019
.010
.0046
.025
.0039
.0018
.0023
cladocerans
(continued)
-------
TABLE 8. (continued)
Kepone
Content
of
Station
Red 64
Red 64
Date
6 May
7 May
Time
(EST)
2134
0457
Type of
Sample
copepods ,
cladocerans
copepods ,
Zoopl.
(ppm=
10-3.ug/mg)
.75
.16
Zoopl.
Counts
(No./m3)
1933
1698
Zoopl.
Dry wt .
(mg/m3)
8.88
7.37
Kepone
in Zoopl
(ug/m3)
.0067
.0012
cladocerans
-------
Figure 12. Kepone in zooplankton per unit volume of
James River water, August-October 1977,
micrograms/m .
-------
Figure 13. Kepone in zooplankton per unit volume of
James River water, November-December
1977, micrograms/m^.
-------
Figure 14. Kepone in zooplankton per unit volume of
James River water, 29 April-7 May 1978,
micrograms/m .
-------
TABLE 9. ESTIMATED TOTAL MASS OF KEPONE IN
JAMES RIVER ZOOPLANKTON
River Segment
James R. Bridge to
Burwell Bay
(CMP 10-20 in
Cronin 1971)
Burwell Bay to
Hog Pt.
(MP 20-30 in
Cronin 1971)
Hog Pt. to
Jamestown Island
(MP 30-35 in
Cronin 1971)
Jamestown Island
to Sturgeon Pt.
(MP 35-50 in
Cronin 1971)
Sturgeon Pt. to
Appomattox R.
(MP 50-70 in
Cronin 1971)
Total
MLW
Water vol.
(106 m3)
522
309
118
336
184
Aug. -
Oct. 77
g
7.84-
51.19
4.64-
30.32
1.07-
2.96
46.99-
60.41
.55-
69.53
61.09-
214.41
Nov. -
Dec. 77
g
7.84-
8.88
5.88-
1.66
21.14
33.11-
69.53
69.63-
107.09
Apr. -
May 78
g
.10
16.72
1.21
15.47
.46
2.96
.40
8.39
.22
1.23
2.39
44.77
-------
TABLE 10. KEPONE LEVELS IN COROPHIUM LACUSTRE
TAKEN FROM FOULING PLATES INCUBATED AT
THREE STATIONS IN THE JAMES RIVER
Sampling period Kepone (ppm)
dry wt. basis
June, August 1976 6.1
(combined)
June 1977 4.7
June 1978 0.43
August 1978 0.32
-------
a biologically available pool of the contaminant with a turnover
time on the order of weeks, in contrast to the sediment pool,
which contains most of the Kepone and which is becoming gradually
buried or diluted by uncontaminated sediment (Nichols and Trotman
1977).
The total zooplankton Kepone estimates present in Table 9
appear to decline with time, especially between the Nov. - Dec.
1977 and Apr. - May 1978 sampling periods. Whether this repre-
sents a long term trend or a seasonal fluctuation cannot be de-
termined without continued sampling. However, there is a set of
Kepone analyses of crustaceans- -sampled from the James River in
three separate years, that can be examined in relation to this
question. The organism analyzed was Corophium lacustre, a tube
dwelling epibenthic amphipod collected on artificial substrates
at three stations located between mile points 30 and 40 (Fig. 3).
The Kepone concentrations in these samples, expressed on a dry-
weight basis, appear in Table 10. They are similar to the con-
centrations in the 1977 and 1978 zooplankton samples, and show
an order of magnitude decline between June 1977 and June 1978.
Conclusion
It would be satisfying to conclude this report optimistical-
ly with the statement that the Kepone contamination of the James
River plankton is declining rapidly with time. However, the
amount of sampling performed in this study was not sufficient
to support such a sweeping generalization. The most significant
finding was that the plankton throughout the study area has been
contaminated with Kepone, and that Kepone, therefore, has in
fact been available via the food chain route to the shellfish
and finfish in the system. The instantaneous magnitude of the
zooplankton Kepone reservoir during the study was on the order
of hundreds of grams, but this was in a form readily available
for transfer to other groups of organisms.
References
Banner, L. H., A. J. Wilson, Jr., J. M. Sheppard, J--,M- Patrick,
Jr., L. R. Goodman, and G. E. Walsh. 1977. Kepone^ bioconcen-
tration, accumulation, loss, and transfer through estuarine
food chains. Ches. Sci. 18(3): 299-308.
Bellanca, M. A. and W. F. Gilley. 1977. The current efforts of
Virginia agencies to monitor Kepone in the environment. IN:
The Kepone Seminar II, Easton, Md. Sept. 19-21, 1977. Pub-
lished by U.S. E.P.A. Region III.
Cronin, W. B. 1971. Volumetric, areal, and tidal statistics of the
Chesapeake Bay estuary and its tributaries. Special Report No.
20, Ref. 71-2, Johns Hopkins University, Chesapeake Bay Insti-
tute, 135 pp.
-------
Jacobs, F. 1978. Zooplankton distribution, biomass, biochemical
composition and seasonal community structure in lower Chesa-
peake Bay. Ph.D. Thesis, University of Virginia. 105 pp.
Nakai, Z. 1955. The chemical composition, volume, weight, and
size of the important marine plankton. IN: Spec. Publ. No-
5, Fisheries Agency, Ministry of Agriculture and Forestry,
Tokai Regional Fisheries Research Laboratory. Translated from
Japanese.
Nichols, M. M. and R. C. Trotman. 1977. Kepone in James River
sediments. IN: The Kepone Seminar II, Easton, Md. Sept. 19-
21, 1977. Published by U.S. E.P.A., Region III.
Schimmel,~S. C. and A. J. Wilson, Jr. 1977. Acute toxicity of
Kepone** to four estuarine animals. Che s. Sci. 18(2): 224-7.
Walsh, G. E., K. Ainsworth, and A. J. Wilson. 1977. Toxicity and
uptake of Kepone in marine unicellular algae. Ches. Sci. 18
(2):222-3.
------- |