&EPA
           United States
           Environmental Protection
           Agency
            Environmental Research
            Laboratory
            Duluth MN 55804
EPA-600/3-80-008
January 1980
           Research and Development
Freshwater
M icro- Ecosystem
Development and
Testing of Substitute
Chemicals
                                           v

-------
                RESEARCH REPORTING SERIES

Research reports of the Office of Research and Development, U.S. Environmental
Protection Agency, have been grouped into nine series. These nine broad cate-
gories were established to facilitate further development and application of en-
vironmental technology.  Elimination  of  traditional grouping was consciously
planned to foster technology transfer and a maximum interface in  related fields.
The nine series are:

      1.   Environmental Health Effects Research
      2.   Environmental Protection Technology
      3.   Ecological Research
      4.   Environmental Monitoring
      5.   Socioeconomic Environmental Studies
      6.   Scientific  and Technical Assessment Reports (STAR)
      7.   Interagency Energy-Environment Research and Development
      8.   "Special"  Reports
      9.   Miscellaneous Reports

This report has been assigned to the ECOLOGICAL RESEARCH series. This series
describes research on the effects of pollution on humans, plant and animal spe-
cies, and  materials.  Problems  are assessed for their long- and short-term influ-
ences. Investigations include formation, transport, and pathway studies to deter-
mine the fate of pollutants and their effects. This work provides the technical basis
for setting standards to minimize undesirable changes in living organisms in the
aquatic, terrestrial, and atmospheric environments.
This document is available to the public through the National Technical Informa-
tion Service, Springfield, Virginia 22161.

-------
                                               EPA-600/3-80-008
                                               January  1980
FRESHWATER MICRO-ECOSYSTEM DEVELOPMENT AND TESTING
              OF SUBSTITUTE CHEMICALS
                         by
                 Allan R. Isensee
                        and
                 Ronald S. Yockim
         Pesticide Degradation Laboratory
            Beltsville, Maryland 20705
           Contract No. EPA-IA6-05-5811
                  Project Officer

                   John G. Eaton
         Environmental Research Laboratory
              Duluth, Minnesota 55804
         ENVIRONMENTAL RESEARCH LABORATORY
        OFFICE OF RESEARCH AND DEVELOPMENT
       U.S. ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
             DULUTH, MINNESOTA 55804

-------
                                  DISCLAIMER

     This report has been reviewed by  the  Environmental  Research Laboratory-
Duluth, U.S. Environmental Protection  Agency,  and  approved for publication.
Approval does not signify that  the contents necessarily  reflect the  views  and
policies of the U.S. Environmental Protection  Agency,  nor does mention of  trade
names or commercial products constitute  endorsement  or recommendation for  use.
                                     11

-------
                                    FOREWORD
     There is a growing  recognition  that  techniques  are  needed which are
capable of measuring  effects  that  are  beyond  the single  species level of
organization—yet reliable  and  readily useable  techniques  are few.   One is
faced with the need  to  choose the  best system for measuring a desired effect,
with little hard data on which  to  base such a decision.

     This report provides  such  data  for two model ecosystems containing the
same organisms, but  differing principally to  the extent  that one was a
flow-through system  and  the other  was  a recirculating  static system.
Conclusions are presented  on  the relative advantages  of  each for testing
chemicals of a range  of  degradability  and for simulating distinctly different
environmental situations.
                                      J. David Yount
                                      Deputy Director
                                      Environmental Research Laboratory-Duluth
                                      in

-------
                                    ABSTRACT

     This research project was  initiated  with  the  overall objective of
developing additional  and better  techniques for studying pesticides in aquatic
model ecosystems.

     To achieve  this objective,  a model  ecosystem  was designed and built that
utilizes the continuous  dosing,  flow-through system routinely used for chronic
fish toxicity  testing  in combination  with the  organisms used in static model
ecosystem testing.  A  previously  developed  recirculating static model ecosystem
(simulating a  sediment  or erosional pesticide  source) was simultaneously used
with the flowing water  system  (simulating an effluent pesticide source) to test
the behavior of  three  pesticides  (pentachloronitrobenzene (PCNB),  simazine,  and
trifluralin).

     Conditions  in the  static  system  favored pesticide degradation while the
flowing system insured  continuous pesticide exposure to the organisms.
Pesticides were  introduced  in  the systems at rates ranging from 0.1 to 100 ppm
(static; adsorbed to soil)  and  0.1 to 100 ppb  (flowing; directly into water).
Organisms included daphnids  (Daphnia  magna), algae (Oedogonium cardiacum),
snails (He1isoma sp.),  and mosquito fish  (Gambusia affinis).

     The total amount  of ^^C-labeled  PCNB (parent  compound plus
metabolites) accumulated by  all  organisms was  about the same in each of the  two
ecosystems (for  similar  treatment rates).  Pentachloronitrobenzene content in
organisms reached equilibrium  levels  with water in 3 to 7 days and decreased 50
to 95% when placed in  untreated  water for 10 days.  Variability between samples
was high, primarily at  the  lower  treatment  rates and for algae.  Analytical
problems and precipatation  difficulties  in the flowing system were responsible
for this variability.   Simazine  accumulation (parent compound plus metabolites,
l^C-labeled) by  snails  and  fish  was similar between systems for similar
treatment rates, while  algae and  daphnids accumulated higher amounts of
simazine in the  flowing  systems  than  in  the static.  Also, more degradation
products were  found in  fish  extracts  from the  static than in the flowing
systems.  Trifluralin  was extensively degraded in  the static system with very
little accumulation of   ^C by  the organisms.  Further, little of the
l^C accumulated was trifluralin.   Large  amounts of trifluralin were
accumulated by all organisms in  the flowing systems, most of it being the
parent compound.  Also  toxicity  to algae  and abnormal behavior responses of
fish to the highest trifluralin  level were  observed.

     The basic design  of the two  systems  is sufficiently different that they
cannot be routinely substituted  for each  other without first considering such
factors as test  compound degradability,  likely mode of introduction into water
                                       IV

-------
and the type of  toxicity  data  desired.   However,  the  flowing system is more
versatile in the types  of data  that  can  be  obtained  than either the static or
simple flowing chronic  testing  systems,  but requires  a higher level of design,
maintenance, and analytical  input  than  the  simpler  systems.
                                       v

-------
                                   CONTENTS
Foreword	iii
Abstract	iv
Figures	viii
Tables	ix

     1.  Introduction  	   1
     2.  Conclusions 	   2
     3.  Materials and Methods 	   3
     4.  Experimental Procedures 	   6
     5.  Results and Discussion  	   7

References	26
                                      vn

-------
                                    FIGURES
Number                                                                     Page
  1  Recirculating static model ecosystem.  Tank  is 41 x  20  x  24  cm and
        holds 16 liters of water 	
  2  Flowing water model ecosystem.  Tank is 63 x 32 x 41  cm and  holds  60
        liters of water  	    5
            s<
  3  Adult 0 Gambusia affinis with bent spine	24

  4  Adult + Gambusia affinis in vertical swimming  position   	   25
                                    Vlll

-------
                                     TABLES

Number                                                                     Page

  1  PCNB water concentrations  in  aquatic model  ecosystems .  .  	  8

  2  Accumulation of  ^C-PCNB by  algae  and  daphnids  in recirculating
       static model ecosystems  as  influenced  by  time and treatment ....  9

  3  Accumulation of  ^C-PCNB by  fish  and  snails in  recirculating
       static model ecosystems  as  influenced  by  time and treatment .... 10

  4  Accumulation of  ^C-PCNB by  daphnids  and algae  in flowing  model
       ecosystems as  influenced by time  and treatment  	  ..... 11

  5  Accumulation of  ^C-PCNB by  snails  and fish in  flowing model
       ecosystems as  influenced by time  and treatment	12

  6  Simazine water concentrations in  aquatic model  ecosystems  ...... 14

  7  Accumulation of  ^C-simazine  by daphnids and algae in aquatic
       model ecosystems  as  influenced  by time and treatment  ....... 15

  8  Accumulation of  ^-simazine  by fish and  snails  in aquatic  model
       ecosystems ad  influenced by time  and treatment.	16

  9  Trifluralin water  concentrations  in aquatic model ecosystems	18

 10  Accumulation of  ^C-trifluralin by  Daphnia  magna in recirculating
       static model ecosystems  as  influenced  by  time and treatment .... 19

 11  Accumulation of  ^C-trifluralin by  Oedogonium cardiacum in
       model aquatic  ecosystems as influenced by time and treatment. ... 20

 12  Accumulation of  ^C-trif luralin by  Helisoma sp. in aquatic
       model ecosystems  as  influenced  by time and treatment.  .  .  	 21

 13  Accumulation of  ^C-trifluralin by  Gambusia affinis in aquatic
       model ecosystems  as  influenced  by time and treatment.  ....... 22
                                      IX

-------
                                    SECTION  1
                                  INTRODUCTION

     It is essential  that  we  obtain as  much  information as possible about the
fate and behavior of  a chemical  in  and  its  effects  on the  aquatic environment
before substantive quantities  are  released  into natural waters.   The model
ecosystem, which can  be built  to  simulate a  desired part of the  environment is
a useful tool in obtaining this  information.   At present,  fate and behavior
studies are being carried  out  using static  or single  dose  systems; flowing-
water systems are being employed  to obtain  effects  and toxicological data.  The
primary purpose of this project was to  determine if characteristics of both
flowing water and static  systems  could  be incorporated to  produce more
comprehensive model ecosystems.

-------
                                    SECTION  2
                                  CONCLUSIONS

     The results of experiments where  three pesticides were tested in two
aquatic model ecosystems have indicated  that  static  and flowing-water models
are each valuable tools  for determining  the fate  and behavior of pesticides
in the aquatic environment, but cannot be routinely  substituted for each
other since differences  in their basic design  can result in very different
results for the same compound.  The  static model  ecosystems (that simulate a
sediment or erosional pesticide source)  used  in  these experiments provided
excellent conditions for chemical and  biological  degradation while the
flowine-water model ecosystem (that  simulate  an  effluent pesticide source)
provided continuous chemical exposure  to the  organisms and  suppressed
degradation.  As a result trifluralin, which  is  subject to  rapid degradation,
showed a high level of accumulation  and  biological activity in the flowing
system, but was rapidly  degraded and not accumulated in the static system.
The two other pesticides tested, PCNB  and simazine,  were less subject to
degradation and as a result, far smaller differences between the systems were
observed.  Research on the behavior  of pesticides (or other chemicals) in the
aquatic environment may  require use  of more than  one type of model ecosystem,
depending on information being sought  and properties of the compound.  This
study also showed that both the static and  flowing systems  can be used in
toxicity and effects studies.  However,  if  the compound is  reasonably
degradable, then the flowine system  will eive  the most reliable information
for the least amount of  effort.  Toxicity information on less deeradahlp
compounds can be obtained equally well from either system.

     The cost and supply of radiolabeled compounds can be a determining
factor in choosing between systems  since the  flowing system uses 10 or more
times as much radiolabeled compound  as the  static.

-------
                                    SECTION 3
                             MATERIALS  AND METHODS
Ecosystems
     Two types of  systems were  designed  and  built for this study.  The
recirculating static ecosystem  is  a modification of static systems previously
used in this laboratory  (Figure 1).   The system as shown has a total volume of
16 liters, with the small compartment  occupying about one-fourth of the tank
volume.  The test  chemical  is  introduced (adsorbed to soil) to the large
compartment and carefully flooded  with water to avoid suspending the soil.  A
water depth of 1 cm is maintained  over the top of the glass partition.  The
percolator water pump is designed  to  maintain the same pesticide concentration
on both sides of the glass  partition  and to  transport fecal matter to the
larger chamber where daphnids may  use  it as  food.  The screen-gate combination
on top of the glass partition  provides additional experimental flexibility to
the model ecosystem.  With  the  gate  in place, daphnids are protected from
predation which allows development of a  stable population.  With the gate
removed, daphnids  are subject  to predation as they move into the fish
compartment and thus complete  the  daphnid to fish food chain.

     The flowing-water ecosystem (Figure 2)  also includes a partitioned tank
with the same organisms  as  in  the  static, but receives the test chemicals in
the incoming water.  The chemical  is  introduced in a proportional diluter,
similar to that described by Mount and Brungs (1967).  Flow rate was
approximately 2 tank volumes (120  liter) per 24 hr.  An activated charcoal
filter was built to remove  ^C-labeled compounds from the drainage water.

Organisms

     The organisms used  for all experiments  were daphnids (Daphnia magna),
snails (He1isoma sp.), algae (Oedogonium cardiacum), and mosquito fish
(Gambusia affinis).  An  attempt to replace mosquito fish with flagfish
(Jordanella floridae) failed when  we  were unable to rear these fish.  Flagfish
spawning and hatching of eggs  were successful; however fry growth rate was far
slower than anticipated  making  their  use in  our ecosystems impractical.

Experimental Chemicals

     The following pesticides  were tested in the ecosystems; the fungicide,
pentachloronitrobenzene  (PCNB), and herbicides, 2-chloro-4, 6-bis(ethylamino)-
S-triazine(simazine) and a_,a_,j»_,-trifluoro-2,6-dinitro-N,N-dipropyl-p_-toluidine-
Ttrifluralin).  All these pesticides  were ring 14C-labeled, 43.24, 90.91,
and 45.25 pCi/mg,  for PCNB, simazine.  and trifluraline, respectively, and the
chemical purity exceeded 97%.   The ^^C-labeled pesticides were mixed with
unlabeled pesticides of  equal  or greater purity for the actual treatments.

-------
                S. S Screen
m Opening
ass Gate




_/„
\,

\\\
^
•SN\X

Screer
/IGIa

^\\\^.v-\-,-X\-"\--
I ^ >w;
^S\^\-\\\s\\'

                                              Glass Partition
     Air In
                S. S. Screen
                           End View
                      en'ngJ  (Partition)
\\
1'irt
\
1
|lo V














0
0
0
0
0
0
0
o
o
o
o
o
o
\^







Fish



o
o
lll§

U°




N, 'Percolator Water Pump (_)
/ Water Level
^/




D ap hn ids
Glass Pa rtition

Algae


Snails




Soil
                           Side View
Figure 1.   Recirculating  static model  ecosystem.   Tank
             is 41 x  20 x 24  cm and holds  16 liters of
             water.

-------
                     Top view


                   9 mesh screen

                        I
                          Glass gat*
                                       32 mesh screen
                            Glass barrier
                                                To drain or
                                                   (••circulating pump
                   Side view
Figure 2.   Flowing water model ecosystem.  Tank is
             63 x  32 x  41 cm  and holds 60  liters of
             water.

-------
                                    SECTION 4
                             EXPERIMENTAL PROCEDURES
 Ecosystem Preparation

      In  the  static  systems the pesticides were adsorbed to 400 grams  soil
 (Matapeake silt  loam,  pH 5.3,  organic matter content 1.5%; sand, silt, and clay
 content  of 38.4,  49.4,  and 12.2%,  respectively) at the rate of 1.0, 10.0, and
 100.0 Dpm for  PCNB  and  trifluralin and 0.1, 1.0,  and 10.0 ppm for simazine,
 then  flooded with 16  liters of water.  The amount of pesticide in water over
 flooded  soil was  found  (through preliminary tests) to be about 1/1,000 of the
 soil  concentration.   Therefore, these soil rates  were selected to approximate
 the water concentration in the flowing systems.  One day after flooding 24
 fish,  24 snails,  about  1 gram  algae and approximately 200 daphnids were added
 to each  tank.  The  serial diluter  was turned on to fill the tanks of  the
 flowing  system at least one week before the test  chemical was introduced.
 During this  time,  the  organisms were  added (same  number as for the static
 systems)  and the  diluter system was checked for proper operation.  Metering of
 the test  chemical  through the  diluter was started the same day as the organisms
 were  introduced  into  the static tanks.  The pesticides were introduced at the
 rate  of  1, 10, and  100  ppb for PCNB and trifluralin and 0.1,  1.0, and 10.0 ppb
 for simazine.

 ^sampling  and Analysis

      The  sampling  times  shown  in Tables 1-13 represent a treatment phase
 followed  by  a  desorption phase.  The  desorption phase was  achieved by
 transferring the  remaining fish,  snails,  and algae to untreated water (static
 systems)  or  by discontinuing the input of the  treatment chemical in the diluter
 (flowing  system).  Two  fish, two snails,  about 30 mg algae and 15 to 20 mg
 daphnids  were  taken at  each  sampling  time.   The daphnid samples were analyzed
 by standard  liquid scintillation methods.  Fish and snails were homogenized in
methanol  and the  ^C-content was determined by liquid scintillation
 analysis.  Algae  samples  were  either  combusted (PCNB experiments) or oxidized
 in a Packard Tricarb Oxidizer  (simazine and trifluralin experiments).   The
 14C02 (from  either source)  was  analyzed by scintillation methods.  Water
 samples were taken for  direct  liquid  scintillation analysis (duplicate 1-ml
 samples)  and/or extracted  with  organic solvent and then analyzed.  Water
 samples did  not always  coincide with  tissue sampling for the  PCNB and  simazine
 experiments,  but  did for  the trifluralin  experiments.  Snail  and fish
homogenates  were  spotted  on  silica  gel TLC  plates (20 x 20 cm GF-234,  E.  Merck,
 Darmstadt) and developed  with  the  following solvent systems:   PCNB,  n-heptane:
acetone.-methanol  (70:30:2  v/v/v);  simazine,  toluene:acetone (85:15 v7v);  tri-
 fluralin, ethyl acetate:cyclohexane  (1:1  v/v).  Each plate was autoradio-
graphed for  1 to  2 weeks  with Kodak No.  Screen  medical  x-ray  film,  NS-54T and
then the  labeled spots were  scraped and the ^C activity determined  by
standard  liquid scintillation methods.

-------
                                    SECTION  5
                             RESULTS AND  DISCUSSION
PCNB
     Two PCNB  experiments  were  conducted;  the  second  to improve techniques and
correct problems  that  developed  in  the  first experiment.   In the static
systems, PCNB  was  introduced  at  the  rate  of  1  and  10  ppm  (Experiment I) which
resulted in very  low -^C water  levels.  Treatment  rates of 10 and 100 ppm
in Experiment  II  yielded much higher -^C  water levels in  the water (Table
1).  Numerous  problems were encountered in the flowing systems,  namely,
mechanical malfunction of  the dilution  apparatus  and  precipitation of PCNB on
glassware of the  dosing system.   PCNB precipitated  from both carrier solutions
(ethanol:Triton X-100, 7:3, Experiment  I  and triethylene  glycol in Experiment
II) when they  contacted water,  resulting  in  lower  than anticipated water
concentrations.

     The data  for  the  recirculating  static systems  is presented in Tables 2 and
3.  Equilibrium water  concentrations were  reached  in  one  day and remained
nearly constant with time  (Table  1). Similar  soil  treatment rates (10 ppm)
resulted (with one exception) in  similar  water contents between the two
experiments.   Tissue contents of  PCNB generally reflected treatment rate, while
variations in  tissue content  with time  continued  to be high  in both
experiments.   These variations  are  higher  than those  obtained in some previous
studies in our laboratory  using  similar static systems with  pesticides of
similar physical-chemical  properties.

     The data  for  the  flowing systems is  presented  in Tables 4 and 5.  Water
content of PCNB was much lower  at the 100  ppb  treatment rate of Experiment II
than for Experiment I, which  was  undoubtedly due  to the mixing chamber
insolubility problems.  Variations  in water  concentrations with time were also
more variable  in Experiment II.   The concentration  of PCNB in the four species
of organisms is shown  in Tables  4 and 5.   Unfortunately,  few sampling times
coincided (samples were taken approximately  10 days apart for Experiment I and
on days 1, 3,  7,  15, and 30 for  Experiment II) so direct  comparisons are
difficult.  However; a general  trend of similar concentrations between the two
experiments (for  comparative  treatments)  is  evident for daphnids, snails, and
fish.  This similarity was unexpected considering  that water concentrations
were different (particularly  at  the  100 ppb  treatment level).  The 100 ppb
treatment rate of Experiment  II  was  not toxic  to  daphnids, as compared to
Experiment I, where the highest  concentration  prevented the  establishment of a
stable population.  Thus,  the water  concentration  established by chemical
analysis was confirmed by  biological response.  The PCNB  concentrations in

-------
                  TABLE  1.   PCNB   WATER CONCENTRATIONS IN AQUATIC MODEL ECOSYSTEMS

Experiment^
Static I

Static II

Flowing I


Flowing II


Treatment*
1
10
10
100
1
10
100
1
10
100
Days after start
1 3 4
5.7+4.4
11.1+1.8
2.4 2.2
10.0 7.8
1.3+0.3
5.8+5.0
42.1+6.1
1.4
3.2
2.9
7 11
0
15.7+1.0
11.0
7.8
0.8+0.4
5.1+1.1
56.7+3.7
0.8
1.0
5.3
of experiment
15 18
2.8+1.5
19.5+1.3
1.1
7.4
0.7+0.9
2.5+0.5
65.7+1.0
1.9
1.8
13.3

25
5.6+2.7
18.2+2.1
1.0
4.2
0.7+0.3
5.0+0.2
58.7+0.9
0.6
0.5
8.0

30




2.1+2
4.2+0
60 . 5+0
0.3
2.9
24.0






.0
.6
.7




*   V.
  ppb

"^ Experiments I and  II were  conducted  two  months  apart.

T Concentration of PCNB  adsorbed  to  400  grams  soil  (static,  ppm)  and theoretical concentration
  introduced into water  (flowing,  ppb).

-------
       TABLE 2.   ACCUMULATION  OF  14C-PCNB*  BY ALGAE  AND DAPHNIDS  IN RECIRCULATING STATIC MODEL ECOSYSTEMS AS
                                              INFLUENCED  BY TIME AND TREATMENT


Experiment
I

I I

I

I I


t
Treatment
I
10
10
100
1
10
10
100
Days after start of experiment

Organisms 1 3 7 11 15 20 25 32 35 42 45 56 65
Algae# 1.1 0.2 0.4 0.1
0 2.6 3.5 2.2
Algae 1,0 2.1 2.2 2.0 3.1 0.8 1.3 0.9 0.4
6.2 36.1 24.9 7.4 25.6 7.4 14.6 6.8 5.0
Daphnids## 0 1.1 0.2 0
25.0 0.9 0.7 1.1 0.1
Daphnids 6.8 3.8 6.8 3.2
43.5 35.0 70.2 30.7 17.3 16.6

  Tissue  concentration  (ppm)  based  on  total    C analysis (PCNB plus metabolites).


* A desorption  phase  was  started  after day  32 (expt.  I)  and  day 42 (expt.  II)  by placing organisms in untreated water.


' Experiment  I  and  II were  conducted  two months apart.


* Concentration  (ppm) of  PCNB adsorbed to 400 grams soil.


* Oedogon i um  card iacum.

aft
v   Daphn ia magna.

-------
               TABLE 3.  ACCUMULATION  OF  '^C-PCNB   BY  FISH  AND  SNAILS  IN  RECIRCULATING  STATIC MODEL  ECOSYSTEMS AS
                                                    INFLUENCED BY  TIME  AND  TREATMENT


Experiment' Treatment'
1 1
10
1 1 10
100
_i
3 1 1
10
I I 10
100
Days after start of experiment^
Organism 1 3 8 11 15 20 25 32 35 36 42 45 56
Fish# 1.3+0.4 0.6+0.4 3.8+0.2 0.2+0.1 0 0
10.5+0.2 6.7+0.8 10.9 12.6+2.4 1.5 0.3
Fish 0.2+0 0.2+0 3.5+0.2 2.8+1.9 1.7+0.6 2.0+0.7 0.2+0.2
1.2+0.1 1.1+0.1 18.5+3.8 14.9+1.0 16.4+3.9 18.2+2.5 9.6+6.0
Snails## 2.3+1.1 2.0+1.3 0
8.4+2.7 0
Snails 3.7+1.1 4.6+4.1 0.6+0.4 1.7+1.40.3+0.1
44.0+11.5 14.0+4.4 5.8+1.9 5.6T2.5 1 .2+0.3

  Tissue concentration  (ppm) based on  total   C  analysis  (PCNB  plus  metabolites).

'  A desorption phase was started after day 32 (expt.  I) and  day 42  (expt.  II)  by placing  organisms in untreated  water.

* Experiment I  and  II were conducted two  months  apart.

'  Concentration (ppm) of PCNB adsorbed to 400 grams soil.

*  Gambusia affinis.
   Helisoml sp.
**
   Standard deviation.

-------
                   TABLE  4.   ACCUMULATION OF 14C-PCNB* BY DAPHNIDS AND ALGAE IN FLOWING MODEL ECOSYSTEMS AS
                                                  INFLUENCED BY TIME AND TREATMENT

Experiment'
1


1 1


1
j
j

II


Days after start of experiment
Treatment'
1
10
100
1
10
100
1
10
100
1
10
100
Organism 1 3 7 11 15 20 25
Daphnlds# 0.6 0.4+0.3
2.1+0.3## 1.3+0.1

Daphnlds 0.6+0.8 0.2+0.3 2.3 0.5+0.6
0.9+0.6 0.5+0.6 7.0+1.7 6.4+4.1
8.6+2.9 4.4+2.2 72.9+17.2 113.6+72.2
Algae 0 0.4
7.2+2.2 4.0+0.6
76.4+22.9 82.5+15.6
Algae 0.1 0 0.1 0.75+0.75 2.0+0.5
0.2+0.2 1.6 2.4+1.6 360.4+434 9.4+5.4
2.3+0.5 6.7 127.7+91.4 142.7+156.4 472.0+608
30 32
0.6
2.3+1.4

0.6+0.1
3.3+1.6

0.2
4.4+0.2
77.2+6.2
1.0
1.8+0.8
164.5+85.0
42
0
3.2+1 .




0
0.8
53.1+13
0.1+0
0.3+0.
11.3+8.


0






.2

1
6

  Tissue  concentration (ppm)  based on total    C analysis (PCNB plus metabolftes).


T A desorptlon  phase was started after day 30 by turning off the dosing apparatus In the serial  dlluter.


* Experiment  I  and  I I  were conducted two months apart.


' Theoretical water  concentration of PCNB in ppb.


* Daphnia magna.

HJt
ff Standard deviation.


   Oedogonium cardiacum.

-------
                       TABLE 5.  ACCUMULATION OF 14C-PCNB* BY SNAILS AND FISH  IN FLOWING MODEL  ECOSYSTEMS  AS
                                                     INFLUENCED BY TIME AND TREATMENT

Experiment' Treatment'
1 1
10
100
II 1
10
100
I I
o 10
100
II 1
10
100
Days after
Organism 1 3
Snall#


Snail 2.4+2.3
2.4+2.3
7.8+0.9
Fish**


Fish 0.8+1.0 0.3+0.4
0.5+0.7 0.2+0.3
5.6+1.8 2.7+1.7
7 11



4.4
0.9+0.5
28.1 + 10.0
0.2
1.6+1.6
63.1+30.1
0.7+0.5
2.4+1.0
26.6+11.7
15
0.1
5.7+2.
48.2+29



0.9
3.6+0.
59.9+0.
0.6+0.
4.3+0.
52.0+15
start of experiment
20
0.8+0.9
4## 5.8+2.4
.7## 82.2+22.3



1.3+0.9
5 4.2+0.9
6 64.7+12.8
2
8
.0
25






0.4
3.5+0.6
98.2+19.2
0.4+0.3
5.3+1.0
75.0+12.2
30



0.2+0.1
13.4+13.2
101.9+2.7



0.5+0.2
4.1+2.1
88.4+22.0
32
0.2
5.5+4.8
79.2+12.6



1.2+1.9
5.0+3.8
99.4+35.2



42
0.1+0.1
0.3+0.2
3.6+1.0
0.5+0.8
5.0+4.5
59.4+19.7
0
0
10.8+0.6
0.1+0.1
0.7+0.3
23.9+4.2

  Tissue concentration  (ppm)  based  on  total   ^C analysis (PCNB plus metabolites).

"*" A desorptlon  phase  was  started  after day 30 by turning off the dosing apparatus  in the serial  diluter.

'  Experiment  I  and  I I were  conducted  two months apart.

*  Theoretical water concentration of PCNB in ppb.

*  He Iisoma sp.
  Standard deviation.
#*
  Gambusia affinla.

-------
algae were very high and erratic  for Experiment  II,  possibly due to the mats of
floating algae directly receiving  treatment  water.   Any undissolved PCNB would
then be directly deposited  on  the  algae,  resulting  in unusually high
"accumulation" rates.

     Organisms in the  static  systems appeared  to reach equilibrium concen-
trations faster than in the flowing systems.   However, at similar water
concentrations, tissue  content  for daphnids,  snails  and fish were reasonably
close.

     Thin layer chromatographic  analysis  of  snails  and fish revealed that
considerable metabolism of  PCNB  had occurred,  but the number of metabolites and
amount of each was  nearly  the  same for  both  the  static and flowing systems.

Simazine

     Lower soil application rates  were  used  for  the  static system (0.1, 1.0 and
10.0 ppm) to avoid  possible toxicity to the  algae.   In the flowing system,
simazine was dissolved  in  an  ethanol:water mixture  (1:13) and metered into the
mixing chamber with a  peristaltic  pump.  Dosing  rates of 0.1, 1.0 and 10.0 ppb
were used.  Water contents  shown in Table 6  reflect  a dosing apparatus
malfunction on day  one, which  resulted  in a  high simazine input to 1.0 ppm
tanks.

     The amount of  simazine accumulated by  the various organisms is presented
in Tables 7 and 8.  For the flowing system  (day  one)  all organisms contained
much more simazine  at  the  1.0  ppb  rate  than  at the  10.0 ppb rate, reflecting
the dosing apparatus malfunction.   The  simazine  in  these organisms desorbed
rapidly as the water concentration declined  to normal levels.  The organisms in
the static systems  generally  reached an equilibrium  tissue concentration by day
one and did not accumulate  appreciable  amounts of simazine after that day
although a slight increase  in  tissue level did occur.

     The snail tissue  levels  do  not appear  to  be significantly different
between the two systems, which may reflect  the snail  feeding habits and the
simazine present on the various  substrates.  The  algae and daphnia show higher
tissue levels of simazine  in  the  continuous  dosing  system than those found in
the recirculating static,  possibly reflecting  the larger amount of simazine
available during the thirty days.   The  concentration  of simazine in fish
(static system) increased with water level  and did  not change much over time.
In the flowing system, however,  tissue  content in fish was very erratic, both
between treatment rates and with  time.   We know  of  no explanation for these
results.

     Most of the organisms  readily lost simazine when placed in untreated water
(static) or when the dosing apparatus was turned off  (flowing).  The rate of
simazine loss was somewhat  slower  in the  flowing system probably due to
residual simazine desorbing from  tank surfaces.
                                       13

-------
  TABLE 6.  SIMAZINE WATER CONCENTRATIONS  IN AQUATIC  MODEL  ECOSYSTEMS

Experiment
Static


Flowing
Treatment^
0.1
1.0
10.0
1.0
10.0
100.0

1
0.7+0
8.1+_0.8
100.0+3.8
10.2_+4.8
43.8+3.4*
5.7+5.4^
Day of
3
0.9+0
10.410.4
137.3^5.5
1.0+^0.2
5.7+0*6
55.1+1.0
test
7
1.4+0.1
14.2_+0.2
160.5+^17.8
1 . 1 +_0 . 3
7.2+0.8
56.3+1.8

*   u
  ppb.

  Concentration of simazine adsorbed to 400 gram soil  (static,  ppm)  and
  theoretical concentration introduced into water  (flowing,  ppb).

T Diluter malfunction.
                                    14

-------
    TABLE 7.  ACCUMULATION  OF  14C-SINVCINE  BY DAPHNIDS AND ALGAE IN AQUATIC M3DEL ECOSYSTEMS  AS
                                     INFLUENCED BY  TINE AND TREATMENT


Organism Experiment
Daphnldsf Static


F 1 cm 1 nq


Algaa*/ Static



Treatment* 1 3
0.1 0* 0
<0>/
1.0 0.01 0.01
(1)
10. 0 0.21 0.20
(1)
0.1 0.19 0.19
(32)
1.0 0.35 0.09
(53)
10.0 0.23 0.19
(4)
0.1 0 0
(6)
1.0 0.02+0.07 0.04+0.02
~~ (T)
10.0 0.19+0.09 0.35+0.05

Days after
7
0.1
(7)
0.03
(2)
0.21
(1)
0
(0)
0.14
(19)
0.17
(3)
0.01
(4)
0.03+O.01 0
(21
0.46+0.08 0

start of experiment
15 30 35f 42
0.01 0
0.02 0.02
0.22 0.31
0.13 0.41
0.17 1.09
0.81 3.11
0.01 0.01+0.01 0 0
.06+0.02 0.11+0.01 0.05+0.02 0.05+0.02
.38+0.06 0.91+0.12 0.40+0.04 0.75+0.39
           Flo«lng          0.1           0        0     0.20+0.19 0.09+0.08 0.04+0.07 0.04+0.04      0
                                                 (3)       ( 1*82)        ~~         ~~         ~~

                            1.0         0.10   0.02+0.03 0.18+0.25 0.22_+0.06 0.28+0.06 0.06+0.06     0.07
                                                 ("9")        (T5)        _         _         —

                           10.0         0.06   0.23+0.03 1.15+0.39 1.72+0.64 1.54+0.44 1.27+0.31  0.92+0.46
                                                 (T)        (TO)        _         _         _        _
  Concentration  of  slmailne adsorbed to 400 grams soil (static, ppm) and theoretical  concentration
   Introduced  Into  Its  water (flowing,  ppb).
  DaphnI a magna.
' Bloaccumulation  ratios  {In  parenthesis)    tissue concentration/water concentration.

   Oedc^ion ! urn cardlacum.
                                                      15

-------
     TABLE 8.  ACCUMULATION OF  14C-SIMAZINE* BY  FISH  AND  SNAILS  IN  AQUATIC MODEL  ECOSYSTEMS AS

                                      INFLUENCED  BY TINE AND TREATMENT
Days after start of experiment
Organism Experiment Treatment 1
FlshS Static 0.1 0.01+0.02#
1.0 0.25+0.08

10.0 2.98+1.69
Flowing 0.1 2.07+0.69
1.0 2.74+0.94

10.0 2.21+1.66
Snails'* Static 0.1 0

1.0 0.01+0.01
10.0 0.06+0.01
Flowing 0.1 0.65+0.92

1.0 1.21+1.67

10.0 0.40+0.62

3
0.04+0.04
0.20+0.03
(19)
2.94+0.73
2.71+3.70
(455)
11.50+6.25
(6765)
0.23+0.22
0
(0)
0.01+0
Cm
0.13+0.03
(T)
0.02+0.02
(T)
0.1 1+0.16
(6T>
0.04+0.04
(1)
7
0.06+0.06
(4T>
0.45+0.13
(32)
2.61+0.05
1.64+2.76
(1477)
2.58+3.76
(354)
0.68+1.1 1
0
(7)
0.01+0.01
0.22+0.05
(21
0.01+0.02
(0)
0.17+0.08
(1)
0.28+0.07
(4)
15
0.12+0.06
1.22+0.75

4.61+0.88
0.03+0.05
0

1.21+1.19
0

0.02+0.02
0.21+0.03
0.05+0.05

0.01+0.02

0.23+0.09

30
0.1 1+0.07
0.36+0.04

4.51+0.84
0.01+0.02
0.71+0.41

1.60+2.41
0

0.02+0
0.23+0.04
0.01+0.01

0.06+0.07

0.16+0.06

35*
0.03+0.03
0.09+0.01

2.00+0.82
0.04+0.05
0.86+1.46

0.27+0.07
0

0.01
0.09
0.06

0.03

0.13

42
0
0.03

0.09
0.01
0.12

0.02
0

0
0.04
0.01

0.07

0.07


  Tissue concentration (ppm) based on total  14C analysis  (slmazlne  plus  metabolites),


* Concentration of slmazlne adsorbed to 400 gram soil  (static,  ppm) and  theoretical  concentration
  Introduced Into water (flowing, ppb).


  After day 30 the organisms were placed  In untreated  water.
*
  Gambusla af finis.
* Standard deviation.


   B loaccumu I at Ion rat lo = t Issue concentrat Ion/water concentrat Ion.

*»
   Hel Isoma sp.
                                                  16

-------
     Thin layer chromatographic  analysis  of fish and snail extracts indicated
that different breakdown processes were occurring in the two systems.  In the
fish homogenates  from  the  static and  flowing systems, 30-70% and 8-16%,
respectively, of  the total  *^C was hydroxysimazine.  In the flowing
system, a major unidentified metabolite,  which  moved near the solvent front,
accounted for the  rest  of  the  -^C.  The snails  contained both the
unidentified metabolite and hydroxysimazine in  the same proportion in both
systems,.

Trifluralin

     The concentration  of  trifluralin in  water  reflected its treatment rate for
both the static and flowing systems (Table 9).   These values are based on
extraction analysis of  the  water (ethyl acetateihexane, 70:30).  The direct
count analysis of  water on  day 15 and 30, highest rates only, indicate that
much of the  -^C in the  static system  was  not trifluralin, while most of
the  ^C in the flowing  system was.

     Significantly different bioaccumulation ratios (BR) were observed between
the static and the  continuous dosing  systems (Tables 10-13).  Ratios were
generally much lower for the static systems and were similar to the values
obtained from a previous study on the distribution of dinitroaniline herbicides
in the aquatic environment  (Kearney,  et al. 1977).  Bioaccumulation ratios of
several thousand were obtained with the continuous dosing system; values which
are sufficiently  high  to indicate a potential environmental risk.  Differences
in the design of  the two ecosystems and the degradation characteristics of
trifluralin  largely explain the  variation in results.  In the static system,
trifluralin  in solution would degrade within a  few days, leaving more polar
products in  solution.   These degradation  products would be accumulated less by
the organisms than the  unaltered trifluralin.  However, it should be pointed
out that the BR were based  on total ^C .in tissue and extracted water.
Therefore, in the  static system, the  actual ratios between trifluralin in water
and tissue may have been about the  same as for  the flowing system, but the
concentration of  trifluralin in  water and tissue would have been much lower and
changing with time.  In the continuous dosing system, organisms were exposed to
a continuous supply of  unaltered trifluralin, which would allow for maximum
accumulation to occur.  The results support this concept since the highest BR
values for the static  systems were obtained on  day 1 and 3 then decreased with
time, whereas for  the  continuous dosing systems, BR values increased with time.
The tic data also  supports  this  idea; the fish  and snails from the static
system contained  little trifluralin and several metabolites while the tissue
samples from the  continuous dosing  systems contained almost entirely
trifluralin.

     The effects  data  also  illustrated the differences in the two systems.  No
noticeable effects were observed in the static  systems, while in the continuous
dosing systems (at the  high rates) fish were observed with yellow bellies,
unusual swimming  behavior,  (i.e. swimming upside down, laying upside down on
the bottom,  jerking, general  inability to maintain a proper orientation in the
water column) darkening of  the tail pigmentation, and what appeared to be a
                                       17

-------
       TABLE 9.  TRIFLURALIN WATER  CONCENTRATIONS*  IN AQUATIC
                           MODEL ECOSYSTEMS

Day of test
1
Static 1 0.23
10 3.40
3
0.70
2.50
7
0.40
2.87
15
0.83
8.37
30
0.86
9.10
                 100            36.93    31.33    55.10   148.80^    160.10
                                                     (223.92)   (337.77)

 Flowing          1            0.12    0.17     0.20     0.45       0.83

                  10            0.47    0.91     1.40     2.58       2.48

                 100            9.27    16.23    19.60    29.83      21.62
                                                      (25.33)    (21.73)
*   t.
  ppb.

t Concentration of  trifluralin  adsorbed  to  400 grams  soil  (static,
  ppm) and theoretical concentration  introduced  into  water  (flowing,
  ppb).

T Values in parenthesis are  one ml  direct counts  others  are 50 ml
  extraction values.
                                   18

-------
   TABLE 10.  ACCUMULATION OF 14C-TRIFLURALIN* BY DAPHNIA MAGNA IN
RECIRCULATING STATIC MODEL ECOSYSTEMS AS INFLUENCED BY TIME
AND TREATMENT

Trpaf.mp.nl-t
1
1 0.15+0.06*
(617)§
10 1.9+0.27
(576)
100 19.55+0.80
(536)
Days after start of
3
0.05+0.07
(84)
2.69+0.18
(1107)
19.64+1.9
(628)
7
0.49+0.25
(1293)
0.84+0.11
(300)
13.99+2.44
(254)
experiment
15
0
(0)
0.22+0.11
(27)
6.40+0.93
(43)

30
0.08+0.
(69)
0.43+0.
(47)
5.19+0.
(33)


11
0
20

  Tissue concentration (ppm) based on total ^4C analysis (trifluralin
  plus metabolites).

t Concentration of trifluralin (ppm) adsorbed to 400 grams soil.

t Standard deviation.

§ Bioaccumulation ratio = tissue concentration/water concentration
  in parenthesis).
                                     19

-------
                     TABLE  11.   ACCUMULATION OF 14C-TRIPLURAL IN* BY OEDOGONIUM CARDIACUM
                         IN  MODEL  AQUATIC ECOSYSTEMS AS INFLUENCED BY TIME  AND  TREATMENT
  Experiment  Treatment^
                                                           Days after  start  of  experiment
                                                                      15
                                                       30
                                           50
  Static
 Flowing
                10
               100
                10
               100
 0.17+0.27S  0.15+0.18
   (775)#       (589)
0.15+0.18     0.03+0.06    0.24+0.13    0.14+0.22
  (175)          (190)
 1.65+J.09   0.56+0.17   0.70+0.40    1.83+1.03     2.12+0.80    1.24+0.91     0.90+0.36
   (377)        (170)       (281)         (218)          (2T7)

38.05+^15.12  5.05jK).93  15.23jr2.87   31.56jr6.06    35.38jtj4.il   25.43+7.87   16.64+_5.45
   (791)        (138)       (276)         (210)          (147)

 0.04jK).08   0.90jH.45   3.98+_8.44    1.26jH .28     1.46j|j1.30    0.55jK).42   12.5(Hj22.75
   <2"50>       (5294)      (34811)       (4480)          (1929)        ~~            ~~

 0.11jK).12   1.38j|j1.71  33.12jH22.85  11.07jljS.92     3.11jtj2.13    2.70jK).76   38.43jH65.25
   (474)       (1467)      (24678)       (5760)          (1983)

 2.61j(j0.55  41.47jr5.23  90.79j|j32.42 112.30jij88.33   102.15jr78.76  26.65jH2.17   7.82jjj3.18
   (196)       (2553)      (5062)        (3858)          (3961)
  Tissue  concentration (ppm) based  on  total   ^C analysis (trlfluralln  plus metabolites).

^ Concentration  of trlfluralln adsorbed  to 400 grams soil (static,  ppm)  and  theoretical concentration  Introduced
  Into water  (flowing, ppb).

* After day 30 the organisms were placed  in untreated water.

* Standard deviation.

^ BloaceumuI at Ion ratio = tissue concentration/water concentration.

-------
                 TABLE 12.  ACCUMULATION OF 14C-TRIPLURAL IN* BY HELISAOMA  sp.  IN  AQUATIC  MODEL
                                    ECOSYSTEMS AS  INFLUENCED BY TIME AND TREATMENT
 Experiment   Treatment"!"
                                                             Days after  start of  experiment
                                                                         15
                                                     30
                                                                                                  35'
                                                                               50
  Static
  Flow ing
                10
               100
                10
               100
0.23+0.065  0.09+0.07       0        0.01+0.02    0.03+0.04   0.06+0.05     0.01+0.04
 (1067)#      (361)        (0)           (0)           (23)

0.49+0.29   0.53+0.45   0.02+0.03    0.27+0.21    0.12+0.13   0.09+0.05     0.03+0.04
  (149)       (161)        (6)          (32)          (13)

5.57+2.14   4.42+2.62   2.39+0.83    3.46+0.82    3.73+J .76   2.09+0.96     0.94+0.28
  (155)       (125)        (43)         (23)          (19)

0.15+0.14   0.14+0.27   0.22+0.40    0.33+0.26    0.12+0.29   0.28+0.18     0.17+0.08
 (1250)       (824)       (1260)       (1017)         (19)

0.43+0.22   0.07+0.48   3.30+_5.29    4.85+5.34     l.54+_2.32   0.63+0.33     0.31+0.09
 (15~83)       (7"52)       (2"285)       (2Tl8)        (5T5)         ~           ~~

2.45+2.40  17.99+J7.07 31.07+21.72  32.52+J6.66   18.74+J2.37  4.89+31.47    4.30+2.01
  (260)      (1087)      (1494)       (1085)          (878)        ~           ~
  Tissue  concentration (ppm) based on total   C analysis (trlfluralln plus metabolites).

^ Concentration  of  trlfluralln adsorbed to 400 grams soil  (static,  ppm) and  theoretical  concentration  Introduced
   Into water  (flowing,  ppb).

* After day 30 the  organisms were placed in untreated water.

' Standard deviation.

^ Bloaccumulatlon ratio =  tissue concentration/water concentration.

-------
                 TABLE 13.   ACCUMULATION OF 14C-TRIFLURALIN* BY GAMBUSIA AFFINIS IN AQUATIC MODEL
                                    ECOSYSTEMS AS INFLUENCED BY TIME AND TREATMENT
 Experiment   Treatment^
                                                             Days after start of experiment
                                                                        15
                              30
                                                                                                 35'
                                                       50
  Static
 Flowing
                10
               100
                10
              100
 0.15+0.33§  2.2H2.23
  (1184)#     (4495)

 1.124-0.88   2.68+0.84
   (3TO)      (10T2)

25.37+3.82  35.95+5.34
   (686)      (1167)

 1.05+1.04   0.56+0.45
  (8750)      (3294)

 1.07+J.15   2.39+J.91
  (3591)      (2576)

11.10+J.64  30.94+7.68
  (1211)      (1897)
 0.26+0.42    4.57+4.48    2.14+1.50   0.69+0.74    0.17+0.03
   (6T7)        (6191)       (2583)

 1.05+0.89    4.16+5.27    2.67+3.22   0.39_+0.25    0.50+0.50
   (4%)         (T93)       (276)

19.18+5.59   11.63+^1.49   10.74+2.43   4.08+J .33    1.83+1.69
   (3T5)         (78)         (68)

 1 .22+] .62    0.91+0.93    2.58+2.61   1.85+1.37    0.72+0.65
   (5769)        (1668)       (3036)

 7.99+1.12    5.43+J .98   12.72+J5.24  2.07+1.00    1.02+0.59
   (5706)        (2344)       (6709)

77.65+25.38 120.59+23.96  82.29+J9.46 31.20+9.04
  (3914)       (4069)        (3919)
  Tissue concentration  (ppm)  based  on  total   4C analysis (trlfluralin plus metabolites).

^ Concentration of  trlfluralin  adsorbed  to 400 grams soil  (static, ppm) and theoretical concentration  introduced
  into water (flowing,  ppb).

  After day 30 the  organisms  were  placed  in untreated water.

' Standard deviation.

^ Bloaccumulatlon ratio = tissue concentration/water concentration.

-------
broken back  (Figures  3  and  4).   The  possibility that some of these effects may
be related to  the  presence  of  ethanol  was  not  ruled out,  however, previous
experiments  in which  ethanol was used  at  this  concentration did not produce
these effects.

     At  the  start  of  the  experiment  pregnant mosquito fish were placed in egg
laying chambers within  the  continuous  dosing test chambers.  This was an
attempt  to determine  the  feasibility of using  mosquito fish to obtain
information  on biological  effects  in this  system.  At day thirty the adults
were harvested and the  fry  left  in their  respective chambers with untreated
water passing  through.   Sixty  days later,  after the fry had grown to near
maturity, they were harvested  and  analyzed.

     Fry were  born in all  tanks  except one control and one of the 100 ppb
tanks.   The  average trifluralin  content of these fish was 0.13, 0.27, and 5.03
ppm for  the  1.0,  10.0 and  100.0  ppb  treatment  rates, respectively.  Analysis of
the 100  ppb  treatment fish  by  tic  indicated  that 80% of the ^C was
trifluralin.   These results indicate that  trifluralin is  slowly metabolized
and/or lost  from  fish.

     The testing  of three  pesticides in the  two model ecosystems has
demonstrated their relative utility, strengths, and weaknesses.  We found that
the two  systems cannot  be  routinely  substituted for each  other since
differences  in their  basic  design  can  result in very different results for the
same compound  (trifluralin  in  this study).  The degradability of the test
compound must  be  considered in choosing between these two designs.  Compounds
that degrade slowly and are therefore  persistent in the environment would
likely behave  similarly (accumulation  rates, total amounts accumulated and
effects  on organisms) in  the two model ecosystems (PCNB and simazine in this
study).  On  the other hand, compounds  that degrade faster (half life 2 weeks to
2 months) would likely  behave  differently  between the two systems.  Degradation
products would continuously be swept out of  the flowing system so organisms
would be exposed  mostly to  the parent  compound.  In the static systems, the
amount of parent  compound  present  in water would decrease with time as the
amount and number  of  degradation products  increased.  Thus, with degradable
pesticides,  aquatic organisms would  be exposed to a changing mixture of
compounds in the  static system and primarily to the parent compound in the
flowing  system.   The  response  of the organisms would then depend on the
relative effect of the  parent  compounds vs the metabolites on the organisms.
For the  static  system,  the  theoretical ratio between the  concentration of
parent compound in water  and the concentrate in organism, at any one time,
should be about the same  as the  ratio  obtained in the flowing system.  However,
the determination  of  that  ratio  in the static  system is far more difficult due
to the changing concentrations and presence  of other degradation products.

     Another major factor  dictating  the choice of systems is the likely mode of
introduction into  the environment.  The static ecosystem  simulates an erosional
or sediment  source of compounds, such  as when  a rainfall  event causes runoff
from an agricultural  area  recently treated with pesticides.  Under these
conditions pesticides would be transported into water adsorbed to suspended
                                       23

-------
Figure 3.   Adult 0 Gambusia affinis with bent spine.
                       24

-------
Figure 4.  Adult + Gambusia affinls in vertical swimming .position.
                           25

-------
soil particles.  The  flowing  ecosystem simulates  an effluent source of
compounds such as industrial  or manufacturing  effluent,  where the supply  is
reasonably constant and directly  introduced  into  a waterway.

     Chronic toxicity and effects  studies  are  generally better run in flowing
as compared to the static systems.   The  principal reason is that the identity
and concentration of  the toxicant  is more  clearly defined and controlled  in  the
flowing system.  This is primarily  true  for  degradable compounds.  The toxicant
concentration would remain constant  with  time  in  the flowing system but would
change rapidly in static.  Static  systems  could  be used for toxicity testing if
the concentration of  the parent compound was  frequently determined as well as
the identity and concentration of metabolites.   However, it seems obvious that
such an approach would require far more  effort and the results may not be as
reliable (due to the  presence of metabolites)  as  the flowing system.  On  the
other hand, for less  degradable compounds  and  acute toxicity tests,  the static
system could function as well or better  than  the  flowing system.

     The cost and supply of radiolabeled compounds can also influence the
choice between the static or  flowing systems.  Use of radiolabeled compounds in
ecosystem research is indispensable  if  the identity and  concentration of
degradation products  is desired.  In our studies  the flowing systems used at
least 10 times more labeled material than  did  the static systems.  Therefore,
if there is a limited supply  of labeled  compound  for a study,  the use of  the
flowing system may be in question.

     The daphnid population was found  to be more  stable  in the static than in
the flowing system primarily because the food  supply was better.  An addition
of "green water" to the flowing tanks  improved the daphnid population
considerably.  Therefore, the addition of  food to the flowing  systems,  possibly
through the continuous dosing system,  would probably increase  the daphnid
population to near static system levels.
                                      26

-------
                                  REFERENCES

Kearney, P. C., A. R. Isensee, and A. Kontson.   1977.  Distribution  and
     Degradation  of Dinitroaniline Herbicides  in an Aquatic Ecosystem.
     Pesticide Biochemistry and Physiology.   7:  242-249.

Mount, D.  I.,  and W. A. Brungs.   1967-  A  Simplified Dosing Apparatus  for  Fish
     Toxicology Studies.  Water Research.   1:  21-29.
                                       27

-------
                                              TECHNICAL REPORT DATA
                                    (Please read Instructions on the reverse before completing)
1. REPORT NO.
  EPA-600/3-SO-OOS
                                                                              3. RECIPIENT'S ACCESSION NO.
4. TITLE AND SUBTITLE
 Freshwater  Micro-Ecosystem  Development and  Testing
 of  Substitute  Chemicals
                                                                           i. REPORT DATE
                                                                            January  1980  issuing  date
                                                                           6. PERFORMING ORGANIZATION CODE
7. AUTHOR(S)

 Allan  R.  Isensee  and  Ronald S.  Yockim
                                                                              8. PERFORMING ORGANIZATION REPORT NO.
9 PERFORMING ORGANIZATION NAME AND ADDRESS

 Pesticide Degradation  Laboratory
 Beltsville,  Maryland   20705
                                                                           10. PROGRAM ELEMENT NO.

                                                                              1BA601
                                                                           11. CONTRACT/GRANT NO.

                                                                              EPA-IA6-05-5811
12. SPONSORING AGENCY NAME AND ADDRESS
 Environmental  Research Laboratory - Duluth,  MN
 Office of Research  and Development
 U.S.  Environmental  Protection  Agency
 Duluth,  Minnesota   55804
                                                                               13. TYPE OF REPORT AND PERIOD COVERED
                                                                           14. SPONSORING AGENCY CODE
                                                                                  EPA/600/03
15. SUPPLEMENTARY NOTES
16. ABSTRACT
     Thi
a tudy ing
     To
system r
teg t ing.
was  s imu
pes t ic id
     Con
exposure
to soil)
cardiacu
     ThT
same  in
equ i I ibr
b e t we e n
difficul
metabo I i
daphnids
were  fou
sys tern w
tr i f lu ra
parent c
obse rved
     The
w i thout
toxic i ty
the  stat
input th
s research project was initiated with  the overall object ive of developing Additional and
 pesticides  in aquatic model  ecosystems.
achieve this objective, a mode 1 ecosystem was  designed and built that utilizes  the continue
outinely used for chronic fish toxicity testing  in combinat ion with  the organisms used  in a
  A  previously developed recirculating  static  model ecosystem (simulating a sediment or ero
Itaneously used with  the f1owing water  system  (simulating an effluent pesticide source) to
es (pentachloronitrobenzene  (PCNB),  simazine,  and trifluralin).
ditions in the static sys tern  favored pesticide degradat ion while the  f lowing  sys tern i nsu red
 to  the organisms.  Pesticides were  introduced in the systems at rates ranging  from O.I to
 and 0.1 to  100 ppb (flowing;  directly  into water).  Organisms included daphnids (Daphn i a m
m) t  snails (_H_e_l isoma  sp-), and mosquito fish (Garobusia affj.nis).
 total amount "of^C-labeled  PCNB (parent compound plus metabolites) accumulated by all org
each of the  two ecosystems (for similar treatment rates).  Pentachloronitrobenzene content
ium  levels with water in 3 to 7 days and decreased 50 to  951 when placed in untreated water
samples was  high, primarily  at the lower treatment rates  and for algae.  Analytical problem
ties in the  flowing system were responsible for  this variability.  Simazine accumulation  (p
tea, '^C-labelpd) by  snails  and fish was similar between  systems for  similar  treatment  rate
 accumulated higher amounts  of aimazine in the flowing systems than  in the  static.  Also, m
nd in fish extracts from the  static  than in the  flowing systems.  Trifluralin was extensive
ith  very little accumulation  of '^C  by  the organisms.  Further,  little of the ^C accumulat
lin.  Large  amounts of trifluralin we re accumu1 ated by all organisms  in the flowing sys terns
ompound.  Also toxicity to algae and abnorma1  behavior responses of  fish to the highest tri
                                                                                            tter  techniques  for

                                                                                            us  dos ing,  flow—through
                                                                                            tatic model ecosystem
                                                                                            s iona 1 pesticide source)
                                                                                            test  the behavior of thrte

                                                                                             continuous pesticide
                                                                                            100 ppm (static; adsorbed
                                                                                            3gna) , algae  (Oedogonium

                                                                                            anisma was  about the
                                                                                            in  organisms  reached
                                                                                             for  10 days.  Variability
                                                                                            is  and precipitation
                                                                                            a rent compound plus
                                                                                            a,  wh ile algae and
                                                                                            ore degradation  products
                                                                                            ly  degraded in the static
                                                                                            ed  was
                                                                                            ,  most of it  being the
                                                                                            fluralin level were
            basic design of the  two systems is sufficiently different  that they  cannot  be  routinely substituted for  each other
           first considering such factors as test compound degradability, likely mode of introduction into water and  the type of
            data desired.  However, the  flowing system is more versatile in the  types of data that can be  obtained than either
            c  or simple f 1 owing  chronic  testing systems, but requires  a higher  level of design,  maintenance, and analytical
            n  the simpler systems.
17.
                                          KEY WORDS AND DOCUMENT ANALYSIS
                        DESCRIPTORS
 Aquatic  biology
 Toxicology
 Pesticides
 Fish
 Invertebrates
 Biogradability
                                                             b. IDENTIFIERS/OPEN ENDED TERMS  C.   COSATI Field/Group
                                                           Bioconcentration
                                                           Bioaccumulation
                                                           Model ecosystem
                                                           Microcosm
                                                                                           48  B
                                                                                           57  HPY
                                                                                           68  DEC
                                                                                           73  D
18. DISTRIBUTION STATEMENT
 Release  to  public
                                                              19. SECURITY CLASS (This Report}
                                                                Unclassified
                                                                                              21. NO. OF PAGES
                                                                                                      36
                                                          20. SECURITY CLASS (This page)
                                                             Unclassified
                                                                                                  22. PRICE
 EPA Form 2220-1 (Rev. 4-77}     PREVIOUS  EDITION is OBSOLETE
                                                                                          .'.US novCHNMrHF pniNIINO OF TOE I960 -6 S7_ 1 46 /^ ^
                                                           28

-------