EPA 903-R-99-009
CBP/TRS 222-103
May 1999
A Probabilistic Ecological
Risk Assessment of Zinc
in Surface Waters
of the Chesapeake Bay Watershed
Chesapeake Bay Program
-------
A Probabilistic Ecological Risk Assessment
of Zinc in Surface Waters
of the Chesapeake Bay Watershed
May 1999
Chesapeake Bay Program
410 Severn Avenue, Suite 109
Annapolis, Maryland 21403
1-800-YOUR-BAY
http://www.chesapeakebay.net
Printed by the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency for the Chesapeake Bay Program
-------
May 1999
Final Report
A Probabilistic Ecological Risk Assessment of Zinc in Surface Waters of the Chesapeake Bay
Watershed
Lenwood W. Hall, Jr.
Mark C. Scott
William D. Killen
University of Maryland
Agricultural Experiment Station
Wye Research and Education Center
P.O. Box 169
Queenstown, Maryland 21658
-------
ABSTRACT
The goal of this study was to conduct a screening level probabilistic ecological risk assessment
for zinc in the Chesapeake Bay watershed by using the following distinct phases: problem
formulation, analysis and risk characterization. This probabilistic ecological risk assessment
characterized risk by comparing the probability distributions of environmental exposure
concentrations with the probability distributions of species response data determined from laboratory
toxicity studies. The overlap of these distributions was a measure of risk to aquatic life. Cpmparative
risk from zinc exposure was determined for various basins in the Chesapeake Bay watershed.
Zinc exposure data were available from 116 stations in 19 basins in the Chesapeake Bay
watershed from 1985 through 1996. Highest environmental concentrations of zinc (based on 90th
percentiles) were reported in selected locations in the Middle River, Potomac River, Choptank River
and Nanticoke River. Sources of zinc responsible for these exposures can not be identified with
certainty but human activities associated with urban runoff, industrial/municipal effluents, antifouling
paints and non-point source runoff (fertilizers) are likely candidates. As expected, the lowest
concentrations of zinc were reported in areas with the least amount of direct human activity such as
the lower mainstem Chesapeake Bay, Sassafras River and York River.
The ecological effects data used for this risk assessment were derived from zinc acute
laboratory toxicity tests conducted in both fresh and salt water. Freshwater acute toxicity data for
zinc were standardized to a hardness of 50 mg/L to allow for accurate rankings of species sensitivity.
The 10th percentile (concentration protecting 90% of the species) for all species derived from the
freshwater acute zinc toxicity data base was 142 ug/L. Within the acute freshwater zinc data base,
a 10th percentile of 212 ug/L was reported for the most sensitive trophic group (benthos) containing
-------
data from at least eight species. For acute saltwater zinc toxicity data, the acute 10th percentile for
all species v/as 79 ug/L. The lowest 10th percentile for the most sensitive trophic group within the
saltwater acute zinc data base was 10 ug/L for plants. The acute toxicity benchmarks described
above, with at least 8 data points by trophic group, were used to characterize ecological risks for
zinc in the 19 basins where exposure data were available.
Highest potential ecological risk from zinc water column exposures based on saltwater acute
effects for all species and the most sensitive trophic group (plants) was reported in the Middle River
area of the northern Chesapeake Bay watershed. Potential ecological risk from zinc exposure in the
Wye River was reported to be low when all species were considered but somewhat higher risk was
suggested when using the plant 10th percentile of 10 ug/L. However, based on the documented
recovery potential of plant populations to episodic stressors this risk is still judged to be low.
Potential ecological risk from zinc water column exposure in the other 17 basins was either low or
data were lacking to assess ecological risk.
-------
ACKNOWLEDGMENTS
We would like to acknowledge the U. S. Environmental Protection Agency's Chesapeake Bay
Program Office for funding this studythrough grant number CB993589010. The "Toxics of Concern
Workgroup" of EPA's Toxics Subcommittee is also acknowledged for their support. The following
individuals are acknowledged for providing data: G. F. Reidel, J. R. Scudlark and B. Gruessner.
111
-------
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Bags
ABSTRACT i
ACKNOWLEDGMENTS Hi
TABLE OF CONTENTS iv
LIST OF TABLES vi
LIST OF FIGURES , vii
1. INTRODUCTION 1
1.1 Problem Formulation 2
1.1.1 Stressor Characteristics 3
1.1.2 Analysis of Exposure Data 3
1.1.3 Analysis of Ecological Effects Data 4
1.1.4 Risk Characterization 5
1.1.5 Endpoints 5
1.1.6 Stressors Potentially Impacting Aquatic Communities 6
1.1.7 Conceptual Model 7
2. EXPOSURE CHARACTERIZATION 8
2.1 Introduction 8
2.2 Zinc Loading in the Chesapeake Bay Watershed 8
2.3 Chemical Properties of Zinc 9
2.4 Measured Concentrations of Zinc in the Chesapeake
Bay Watershed 10
2.4.1 Data Sources and Sampling Regimes 10
2.4.2 Methods of Zinc Analysis 12
2.4.3 Methods of Data Analysis 13
2.5 Measured Concentrations by Basin 15
2.6 Temporal Trends 15
2.6.1 Patuxent River 15
2.6.2 James and Susquehanna Rivers 16
2.7 Summary of Exposure Data 16
3. ECOLOGICAL EFFECTS 18
3.1 Mode of Toxicity 18
3.2 Methods of Toxicity Data Analysis 18
iv
-------
3.3 Effects of Zinc from Laboratory Toxicity Tests 20
3.3.1 Acute Toxicity of Zinc , 21
3.3.2 Chronic Toxicity of Zinc 22
3.4 Mesocosm/Microcosm Studies 22
3.5 Summary of Effects Data 23
4. RISK CHARACTERIZATION 24
4.1 Characterizating Risks 24
4.2 Risk Characterization of Zinc in the Chesapeake Bay Watershed 25
4.3 Uncertainty in Ecological Risk Assessment 26
4.3.1 Uncertainty Associated with Exposure Characterization 27
4.3.2 Uncertainty Associated with Ecological Effects Data ., 29
4.3.3 Uncertainty Associated with Risk Characterization 31
5. CONCLUSIONS AND RESEARCH NEEDS 32
6. REFERENCES 35
TABLES 51
FIGURES 79
APPENDICES
Appendix A - Zinc risk characterization by basin
-------
LIST OF TABLES
Bags
Table 1. Summary of 19 zinc data sources used for this risk assessment 51
Table 2. Summary of zinc exposure data for all basins and stations.
Maximum concentrations and 90th percentile values (minimum
of four detected concentrations) are presented by station and basin 52
Table 3. Freshwater acute zinc toxicity data presented in order from most
to least sensitive species 56
Table 4. The 10th percentile intercepts for freshwater and saltwater zinc
toxicity data by test duration and trophic group. These values represent
protection of 90% of the test species 66
Table 5. Saltwater acute zinc toxicity data presented in order from most to least
sensitive species 67
Table 6. Freshwater chronic zinc toxicity data presented in order from most to
least sensitive species 75
Table 7. Saltwater chronic zinc toxicity data presented in order from most to
least sensitive species 77
Table S.The percent probability of exceeding the acute zinc
freshwater or saltwater 10th percentile for all species and the percent
probability of exceeding the acute 10th percentile for the most
sensitive trophic group with n > 8 78
VI
-------
LIST OF FIGURES
Rage
Figure 1. Ewlogical risk assessment approach 79
Figure 2. Location of the 116 stations where zinc was measured from 1985 to 1996.
See key to map where stations are described 80
Figure 3. The zinc 90th percentile determined for basins with at least 4 detected
concentrations v 84
Figure 4. Seasonal pooled mean zinc concentrations and ranges (ug/L) from 15 stations
during Patuxent River sampling (May 1995 to February 1996) 85
Figure 5. Zinc measurements from the James River (1990 to 1993) 86
Figure 6. 2inc measurements from the Susquehanna River (1990 to 1993) 87
Figure 7. Distribution of acute zinc toxicity data (LC/EC 50s) for freshwater species 88
Figure 8. Distribution of acute zinc toxicity data (LC/EC 50s) for saltwater species 89
Figure 9. Distribution of chronic zinc toxicity data for freshwater species 90
Figure 10. Distribution of chronic zinc toxicity data for saltwater species 91
Vll
-------
SECTION 1
INTRODUCTION
The Chesapeake Bay Basinwide Toxics Reduction Strategy is a critical component of the
1987 Chesapeake Bay Agreement that contains various commitments in areas such as research,
monitoring and toxic substance management that are directed to overall chemical reduction in the
Chesapeake Bay watershed (Chesapeake Bay Executive Council, 19S8). A specific commitment in
the Toxic Reduction Strategy is the creation of a Toxics of Concern List (TOC) for the Chesapeake
Bay. This TOC list was designed to: (1) prioritize over 1000 chemicals that may be impacting
aquatic life or human health in Chesapeake Bay by using a risk based ranking system and (2) direct
future research efforts and management.
The first TOC list was completed in 1990 and was recently revised in 1996 (U. S. EPA, 1991;
U. S. EPA, 1996a). The proposed revised list is currently under review. The proposed revised TOC
list was developed using a chemical ranking system that incorporates sources, fate, exposure and
effects of chemicals on Chesapeake Bay living resources and human health (Battelle, 1989). The
TOC list contains both a list of primary toxics of concern as well as a secondary list (chemicals of
potential concern). For both the 1990 and 1996 TOC lists, zinc was identified as a toxic of potential
concern. Zinc is found naturally in the aquatic environment at low concentrations and is an essential
micronutrient for all living organisms. This metal enters the aquatic environment from both point and
non-point sources. Possible anthropogenic sources of zinc in the Chesapeake Bay watershed include
electroplaters, smelting and ore processors, mine drainage, domestic sewage, industrial effluents,
combustion of solid wastes, fossils fuels (e. g. coal fired power plants), road surface runoff, corrosion
of zinc alloys and galvanized surfaces, antifouling paints, pesticides, fertilizers and erosion of
-------
agricultural soils (Eisler, 1997).
AlUhaugh zinc has been identified as a Toxics of Concern in the Chesapeake Bay watershed,
a quantitative probabilistic ecological risk assessment has not been conducted for this metal. The
objectives cf this study were to (1) quantify the probability and significance of potential ecological
effects from zinc water column exposure in the Chesapeake Bay watershed and (2) rank basins in
the Chesapeake Bay watershed from high to low probability of ecological risks based on zinc
exposures. Procedures described in the following documents were used for this risk assessment:
Report of the Aquatic Risk Assessment and Mitigation Dialogue Group (SET AC, 1994), the EPA
Framework for Ecological Risk Assessment (U. S. EPA, 1992), a paper entitled "An Ecological
Risk Assessment ofAtrazine in North American Surface Waters" (Solomon et al., 1996) and a recent
report entitled "A Screening Level Probabilistic Ecological Risk Assessment of Copper and
Cadmium in the Chespeake Bay Watershed' (Hall et al., 1997b).
1.1 Probfiein Formulation
The following distinct phases are included in this ecological risk assessment: Problem
Formulation, Analysis and Risk Characterization (Figure 1). The problem formulation phase identifies
major issues to be addressed in the risk assessment and describes how analysis will be conducted. The
analysis phase reviews existing zinc data on exposure (environmental monitoring) and ecological
effects (laboratory toxicity studies). The risk characterization phase involves estimation of the
probability of adverse effects on aquatic populations and communities in potentially impacted areas
of the Chesapeake Bay watershed.
The problem formulation phase of this risk assessment identified the following major issues
to be addressed: stressor characteristics, exposure data, ecological effects data, risk characterization,
-------
endpoints, stressors impacting aquatic communities, and a conceptual model for risk assessment.
1.1.1 Stressor Characteristics
The chemical and physical properties of zinc are described in detail in the Exposure section
(Section 2) of this report. In the problem formulation phase of this risk assessment, the solubility,
persistence in water and sediment and bioconcentration potential were considered critical.
Zinc is a bluish-white metal that dissolves readily in strong acids and occurs in nature as a
sulfide, oxide or carbonate. Zinc and its salts are soluble in water, persistent and may bind to
particulates. Zinc mobility in aquatic systems is a function of the following factors: composition of
suspended and bed sediments, dissolved and paniculate iron and manganese concentrations, pH,
salinity, concentrations of complexing ligands and the concentration of zinc (U. S, EPA, 1987).
Aquatic biota bioconcentrate zinc in their tissues. Bioconcentration factors (BCFs) as high as 1,130
for freshwater insects and 4,000,000 for saltwater scallops have been reported (Eisler, 1997).
1.1.2 Analysis of Exposure Data
Determining estimation of exposures to aquatic biota is an important part of the risk
assessment process for ecosystems. Environmental exposures (ECs) may be determined by using
actual measured concentrations from monitoring studies, derivations from highest exposure scenarios
and reasonable-high-exposure computer simulations (SETAC, 1994). For deterministic ecological
risk assessments, the EC is expressed as a single value but the quantitative likelihood is unknown
because a probabilistic approach has not been used to determine the variability of measured
environmental concentrations. In recent years, an approach has been endorsed that estimates
exposures by taking natural variation into account by using distributions of ECs rather that single
point values (SETAC, 1994, Giddings et al., 1997). These probabilistic EC distributions can be used
-------
to estimate how frequently concentrations of a contaminant (e. g. zinc) exceed a given toxicity
benchmark (threshold) in the environment.
The zinc exposure data used in this risk assessment were obtained from surface water
monitoring studies from 19 different data sources in the Chesapeake Bay watershed from 1985 to
1996 (116 stations). Most of the exposure data were collected from Maryland waters of the
Chesapeake Bay watershed (Figure 2).
1.1.3 Analysis of Ecological Effects Data
An analysis of toxicity data for risk assessment should cover the range of sensitivity of species
to the contaminant being evaluted. This is particularly true for contaminants that have receptor-
mediated modes of toxicity. Receptor-mediated modes of toxicity usually result in high toxicity to
organisms that possess the receptor system and lower toxicity in non-receptor organisms (e. g. plants
- receptor species - are more sensitive to herbicides than non-receptor species such as animals).
Toxicity data from sensitive and non-sensitive species should be used in the characterization.
However, calculation of 10th percentiles for the most sensitive trophic group is useful for
conservative determinations of risk and this conservative determination assumes that protecting the
most sensitive species (taxonomic group) will also protect non-sensitive species (Giddings et al.,
1997).
A comprehensive review and synthesis of the zinc aquatic toxicity literature was conducted
by using literature searches (AQUIRE etc.through 1997) and various review documents such as the
U. S. EP A water quality criteria reports (U. S. EPA, 1987) and a recent review of zinc by Eisler
(1997). These data were used to determine the distribution of sensitivity of aquatic species to zinc.
Limited mesocosm data were also reviewed to address issues of ecological interaction and population
-------
recovery.
1.1.4 Risk Characterization
This probabilistic risk assessment characterizes risk by comparing probability distributions of
environmental exposure concentrations with the probability distributions of species toxicity data from
laboratory studies (SET AC, 1994). The overlap of these distributions is a measure of potential risk
to aquatic life in the Chesapeake Bay watershed. The probabilistic approach for characterizing effects
and exposure has been suggested as a way to account for the range of species sensitivities to many
contaminants (SET AC, 1994). This approach has a number of advantages over a quotient method
(comparing the most sensitive species with the highest environmental concentrations) because it
allows, if not exact quantification, a least a strong sense for the magnitude and likelihood of potential
ecosystem effects of zinc in Chesapeake Bay. An implied assumption of this approach is that
protecting a large percentage of species will also preserve ecosystem structure and function. The final
result of the risk characterization is expressed as the probability that exposure concentrations of zinc
(within a defined spatial and temporal range) will exceed concentrations protective of aquatic life in
the Chesapeake Bay watershed.
1.1.5 Endpoints
Endpoints are critical measures used in ecological risk assessment. Two types of endpoints
defined in the Framework for Ecological Risk Assessment are assessment endpoints and measurement
endpoints (U. S. EPA, 1992). Assessment endpoints have recognized societial value and are the
actual environmental values that are to be protected (e. g. fish populations). Measurement endpoints
are the measured responses to a stressor that can be correlated with or used to protect assessment
endpoints (Suter, 1990). With each higher level of testing, measurement endpoints differ while
-------
assessment jndpoints remain the same.
The assessment endpoints for this risk assessment are the long term viability of aquatic
communities in the Chesapeake Bay (fish, benthos etc.). Specifically, the protection of at least 90%
of the species 90% of the time (10th percentile from species susceptibility distributions) from acute
zinc exposure is the defined assessment endpoint. Measurement endpoints include all acute toxicity
data (survrral, growth and reproduction) generated from freshwater and saltwater laboratory toxicity
studies.
LL6 Stressors Potentially Impacting Aquatic Communities
When assessing the potential impact of zinc on aquatic communities in the Chesapeake Bay
watershed it is important to remember that both biotic (food quality and quantity) and abiotic factors
(water quality, other contaminants, physical habitat alteration) influence the status of biological
commun ties. Zinc is an example of a metal often measured in the Chesapeake Bay environment
concurrently with other metals such as cadmium and copper (Hall, 1985; Hall et al.,
1986,19?!7,1989,1991b,1992b). Co-occurance of zinc with cadmium and copper may therefore induce
additive or antagonistic toxicity (Eisler, 1997).
In ecological risk assessment, it is important to remember that individuals are part of the food
web and somewhat expendable - either consumed or being consumed. Individuals within the various
biological communities are more sensitive to contaminant stress than the community as a whole.
Therefore, individual losses due to a stressors such as zinc may or may not impact the viability
(persistence, abundance, distribution) of the population depending on all the factors influencing the
population.
-------
1.1.7 Conceptual Model
Problem formulation is completed with the development of a conceptual model where a
preliminary analysis of the ecosystem at risk, stressor characteristics, exposure pathways and
ecological effects are used to define the possible exposure and effects scenarios. The goal is to
develop a working hypothesis to determine how the stressor might affect exposed ecosystems. The
conceptual model is based on information about the ecosystem at risk and the relationship between
the measurement and assessment endpoints. Professional judgement is used in the selection of a risk
hypothesis. The conceptual model describes the approach that will be used for the analysis phase and
the types of data and analytical tools that will be needed. Specific data gaps and areas of uncertainty
will be described later in this report.
The hypothesis considered in this risk assessment was:
Zinc may cause permanent reductions at the species and community level for fish, benthos,
zooplankton or plants in the Chesapeake Bay watershed and these reductions may adversely
impact community structure and function.
-------
SECTION 2
EXPOSURE CHARACTERIZATION
2.1 Introduction
Ar. important component of a probabilistic ecological risk assessment for zinc is the potential
exposure of aquatic organisms. Exposure data are used in conjunction with effects data (see next
section) to conduct a risk characterization. The exposure analysis for zinc considers use rates,
sources, loadings, chemical properties and spatial/temporal scale of measured concentrations (data
sources, sampling regimes, analytical methods and data analysis).
2.2 Zinc Loading in the Chesapeake Bay Watershed
Unlike various pesticides, the sources for trace metals such as zinc are often difficult to
identify because zinc is found naturally in the aquatic environment and numerous point and non-point
sources exist. Anthropogenic activities that contribute to zinc loading in Chesapeake Bay watershed
are electroplaters, smelting and ore processors, mine drainage, domestic sewage, industrial effluents,
combustion of solid wastes, fossils fuels (e. g. coal fired power plants), road surface runoff, corrosion
of zinc iilloys and galvanized surfaces, pesticides, fertilizer, erosion of agricultural soils, industrial
effluents and atmospheric deposition (Eisler, 1997). Zinc is employed in the following major types
of industries that are located in the Chesapeake Bay watershed, paper mills, organic
chemical/petroleum, alkalis-chlorine-inorganic chemicals, fertilizers, petroleum refining, basic steel
works foundries, basic non-ferrous metal works foundries and steam generating power plants (Dean
et al., 1972).
The estimated total basinwide annual loading of zinc and zinc compounds to the Chesapeake
Bay was 482,500 pounds based on data collected from 1987 to 1992 (U. S. EPA, 1994). The annual
8
-------
load of zinc from February 1994 through January 1995 for the Susquehanna River, Maryland (the
major source of freshwater in the Chesapeake Bay) was 438 metric tons (U. S. EPA, 1996b).
2.3 Chemical Properties of Zinc
Zinc always has an oxidation state of +2 in aqueous solution and therefore has a strong
tendency to react with acidic, alkaline and inorganic compounds (Merian, 1991). Due to its
amphoteric properties, zinc forms a variety of salts. Zinc chlorate, zinc chloride, the sulfates, and the
nitrates are readily soluble in water whereas the oxide, carbonate, phosphates, silicates, sulfides and
organic complexes have limited solubility in water (Merian, 1991). Zinc is one of the most mobile of
the heavy metals. Complexes of zinc with common ligands of surface waters are soluble in neutral
and acidic solutions, so that zinc is readily transported in most natural waters.
In natural waters and sediments zinc occurs in many forms. For example, at a pH = 6 in
freshwater, the dominant forms of dissolved zinc are the free ion (98%) and zinc sulfate (2%),
whereas at pH = 9, the dominant forms are the mon-hydroxide ion (78%), zinc carbonate (16%) and
the free ion (6%) (Turner et al., 1981). In seawater at pH = 8.1, the dominant species of soluble zinc
are zinc hydroxide (62%), the free ion (17%), the mono-chloride (6.4%) and zinc carbonate (5.8%)
(Zirino and Yamamoto, 1972). The percentage of dissolved zinc present in sea water as the free ion
increases to 50% at a pH of 7.0. The major fraction of dissolved zinc is in the form of zinc-organic
complexes in the presence of dissolved organic material such as humic acids (Lu and Chen, 1977).
Most of the zinc introduced into aquatic environments is sorbed onto hydrous iron and
manganese oxides, clay materials, and organic materials where it is eventually partitioned into
sediments (U. S. EPA, 1987). Zinc can be present in sediments is several forms, including
precipitated Zn(OH)2, precipitates with ferric and manganic oxyhydroxides, insoluble organic
-------
complexes, insoluble sulfides, and residual forms (Patrick et al., 1977). Zinc is mobilized and released
in a soluble form as sediments change from a reduced to an oxidized state (Lu and Chen, 1977).
Benthic organisms play an important role in partitioning zinc between the water column and sediment
(U. S. EPA, 1987). Aquatic biota have a moderate to high potential to bioconcentrate zinc depending
on the species. Bioconcentration factors (BCFs) as high as 4,000,000 have been reported in scallops
(Eisler, 1997).
The potential for sediment-bound zinc to cause risk to sediment dwelling aquatic biota exists;
however, the focus of this risk assessment was an evaluation of risk to aquatic biota from exposures
to surface water concentrations. Probabilistic risk assessment techniques for assessing risk of aquatic
species to sediment exposures is still developmental and contains a higher degree of uncertainty than
water column exposures. By using surface water concentrations in this risk assessment, the results
can be more closely related to regulatory issues such as the U. S. Environmental Protection Agency's
water quality criteria (U. S. EPA, 1987).
2.4 Measured Concentrations of Zinc in the Chesapeake Bay Watershed
2.4.1 Data Sources and Sampling Regimes
Dissolved zinc exposure data from 19 data sources were available from 1985 to 1996 at 116
stations (19 basins) in freshwater and saltwater tributaries and mainstem areas of the Chesapeake Bay
watershed ( Figure 2, Tables 1 and 2). The zinc data sources are described below.
Ambient Toxicity Testing Program (Hall et al.r 1991a, 1992a. 1994ar 1996f 1997fl)
These data were collected over a period of five years (1990 -1995) on a limited temporal
scale (August through October and April 1993) at the following locations: Elizabeth River, Potomac
River, Wye River and Patapsco River in 1990; Patapsco River, Potomac River, Wye River in 1991;
10
-------
Middle River, Nanticoke River and Wye River in 1992-3; Patapsco River (Baltimore Harbor),
Magothy River, Sassafras River and Severn River in 1994 and James and York Rivers in 1995.
Fall Line Monitoring Data (MDE. 1993r 1995^
These data were collected at one station each in the Susquehanna and James Rivers monthly
from 1990 to 1993.
NOAA Data (Riedel et al.. in press!
These data were collected quarterly (May, August, November and February) at >15 stations
during 1995 and 1996 in the Patuxent River.
Striped Bass Data fHallr 1985; Hall etal.. 1986r 1987. 1989r 1991b and 1992K1
Zinc was measured from 1985 through 1990 in following tributaries or mainstem areas during
April and May as part of an in-situ striped bass contaminant study: Chesapeake and Delaware (C and
D) Canal in 1985; Potomac River in 1986; Choptank River and C and D Canal in 1987; Potomac
River in 1988; Potomac River and Upper Chesapeake Bay in 1989 and Potomac River and Upper
Chesapeake Bay in 1990.
Maryland Coastal Plain Stream Data (Hall et al. 1994b. 1995^
Data were collected at 24 Maryland coastal plains stream stations at five different sampling
periods over a two year period (1992-93). Streams from the following basins were sampled:
Nanticoke, Choptank, Chester, West Chesapeake, Patuxent and Potomac.
Interstate Commission on the Potomac River Basin (Velinisky et'al., 1994)
Zinc data were collected from four sites (one or two samples per site) in the Anacostia River
during September of 1992).
District of Columbia Environmental Regulation Commission (Gruessner et al.r 1997)
11
-------
A total of 36 zinc measurements were reported from two sites in the Anacostia River from
September 1995 to September 1996.
University of Delaware Data (Culberson and Church, 1988)
Date, were collected at 20 stations in mainstem Chesapeake Bay from the mouth of the Bay
in Virginia lo the northern section in Maryland during August of 1985.
2.4.2 Methods of Zinc Analysis
Zinc data reported during the Ambient Toxicity Testing Program were collected from
subsurface depth integrated grab samples (a composite of bottom, mid-depth and surface samples).
All samples were filtered using a 0.40 urn polycarbonate membrane and preserved in ultrex grade
nitric acid. Zinc was analyzed using an atomic absorption-furnace (AA-F) method as outlined in U.
S. EPA (1S79). The limit of detection ranged from 2 to 10 ug/L.
Zinc from the Fall Line Monitoring Program was measured from grab samples at the James
River and Susquehanna River stations using ultra clean sampling procedures. Dissolved
concentrations of zinc were measured using an Inductively coupled plasma mass spectrometer (ICP-
MS) method as described in Fishman and Friedman (1989). The detection limit was 0.14 ug/L.
In the NOAA/COASTES study, zinc was measured from surface water grab samples using
an ultra-clean technique. All samples were filtered using 0.45 urn polypropylene capsule filters and
preserved using 0.2% ultrex grade hydrochloric acid. Zinc analysis was conducted by using an AA-F
method as described in Bruland et al. (1979). The detection limit was <0.3 ug/L.
The zinc data from the Striped Bass Study were collected from both subsurface grab samples
and composite samples (usually 24 h in duration). All samples were filtered using 0.40 urn
polycarbonate membranes and preserved using ultrex grade nitric acid. Zinc was analysed using an
12
-------
atomic absorption furnace (AA-F) method as outlined in U. S. EPA (1979). Detection limits for zinc
ranged from 3 to 20 ug/L (for five of the six studies detection limits were < 10 ug/L).
For the Maryland Coastal Plain Stream Data Base, zinc was measured from grab samples
taken seasonally. All samples were filtered using 0.40 um polycarbonate membranes and preserved
in ultrex grade nitric acid. Zinc was analysed using an AA-F method (U. S. EPA, 1979). The
detection limit was 3 ug/L.
Zinc data from the Interstate Commission on the Potomac River Basin were collected
from grab samples. All samples were filtered through pre-cleaned and tared 0.4 um Nuclepore filters.
Filtered water samples were acidified with double-distilled quartz HCL (0.04% volume/volume) and
kept frozen until analysis. Zinc was analysed by an Atomic Absorption Spectrometer with an HGA
graphite furnace. The detection limit was 0.14 ug/L.
Zinc measurements from the District of Columbia Environmental Regulation
Administration were from grab samples. These samples were filtered through 0.4 um Nuclepore
membranes. All samples were acidified with Ultrex grade nitric acid and kept refrigerated until
analysis. Zinc was analysed by dictation ion chromatography using the method described by Long and
Martin (1992). The detection limit was <0.8 ug/L.
Zinc measurements from the University of Delaware Data Base were taken from discrete
water column depths in the mainstem Chesapeake Bay. All samples were filtered with 0.4 um acid
cleaned nuclepore membranes, acidified to pH<2 and frozen until analysis. Zinc was analysed using
an AA-F method as described in Danielsson et al.(1978). The detection limit was <0.7 ug/L.
2.4.3 Methods of Data Analysis
Approaches for handling values below the detection limits include assigning these values as
13
-------
zero, one-half the detection limit or the detection limit (MacBean and Rovers, 1984; Giddings et al.
1997 ). For this risk assessment, zinc values below the detection limit were assumed to be log-
normally distributed. The distribution of exposure data was calculated based on the measured values
and the concentrations of the non-detects were assumed to be distributed along a lower extension of
this distribution. For example, if 80 out of 100 samples were reported as non-detects, the 20
measured viilues were assigned ranks from 81 to 100 and the frequency distribution was calculated
from these 20 values. In some cases in these data sets, actual concentrations were repprted even
though they were below the detection limits. When this occurred, the concentrations were used in
the analysis For cases where more than one value was available at the same time and station, the
highest value was used in the frequency distribution.
For data sets arranged by basin or station with four or more values above the detection limit,
log-normal distributions of exposure concentration were determined as follows. The observations in
each data set were ranked by concentration and for each observation the percentile ranking was
calculated as n/(N+l) where n is the rank sum of the observation and N is the total number of
observations including the non-detects. Percentile rankings were converted to probabilities and a
linear regression was performed using the logarithm of concentration as the independent variable and
normalized rank percentile as the dependent variable. Although non-detects observations were not
included in the regression analysis, they were included in the calculation of the observation ranks.
The 90th percentile concentrations (exceedence of a given value only 10% of the time) were
calculated for sampling stations (or basins) based on the calculated log-normal concentration
distributions.
14
-------
2.5 Measured Concentrations by Basin
The 90th percentile values for zinc in 19 basins presented in Table 2 showed that values
ranged from a high of 140 ug/L in the Middle River to 5.2 ug/L for the lower Bay (Table 2, Figure
3). Due to concentrations below the detection limit, 90th percentile values could not be calculated
for Baltimore Harbor, Magothy River, Sassafras River, Severn River and the York River . The high
90th percentile value in the Middle River was likely related to anthropogenic activities near marina
areas and/or urban runoff as copper and cadmium concentrations above background have also been
reported in this basin (Hall et al., 1997b). The second highest zinc 90th percentile of 70 ug/L was
reported in the Potomac River was likely related to the proximity of these sampling stations near
point source discharges from facilities such as Quantico Marine Base, the Possum Point Power Plant
or the Indian Head Military Facility. Elevated cadmium concentrations were also reported at these
stations (Hall et al., 1997b). The lower 90th percentiles in Lower Chesapeake Bay, Magothy River,
Sassafras River, Severn River and York River were likely related to less anthropogenic activity.
2.6 Temporal Trends
The NOAA data from the Patuxent River (quarterly sampling in 1995 and 1996) and the Fall
Line Monitoring Data from the James and Susquehanna River (monthly sampling in 1990 to 1993)
were used to examine temporal trends in zinc over single or multiple years (Riedel et al. in press,
MDE, 1993,1995). These were the only data sets that were appropriate for temporal analysis.
2.6.1 Patuxent River
The quarterly mean zinc concentrations (May, August, November - 1995 and February -
1996) from the 15 pooled stations in the Patuxent River showed that concentrations were elevated
during February (Figure 4). The mean zinc concentration for the February time period (2.57 ug/L)
15
-------
was approximately twice as high the other three sampling periods ( 0.99 to 1.34 ug/L). The highest
zinc concentrations (10.8 ug/L) in this data set was also reported in February. The elevated
concentrations of zinc during the winter were likely related to the increased flow during this time
period.
2.6.1 James and Susquehanna Rivers
Monthly measurements of zinc in the James River over 4 years (1990 to 1993) ranged from
below the detection limit to 30 ug/L (Figure 5). The highest value of 30 ug/L occurred in October
of 1990. Other peak values of 15 and 13 ug/L were reported May of 1992 and December of 1992,
respectively. There appears to be no consistent temporal trends of zinc concentrations in the James
River.
Monthly measurements of zinc in the Susquehanna River during 1990 through 1993 ranged
from belov/ the detection limit to 22 ug/L (Figure 6). The four peak concentrations of zinc (~ 20
ug/L) were reported in June of 1990, January of 1991, April of 1992 and September of 1993. There
is no apparent temporal trend with zinc exposure data from the Susquehanna River.
2.7 Summary of Exposure Data
Highest environmental concentrations of zinc (based on 90th perceniiles) in the Chesapeake
Bay watershed were reported in the Middle River, Potomac River, Choptank River and Nanticoke
River. Sources of zinc responsible for these exposures can not be identified with certainty but human
activities associated with urban runoff and marina facilities (Middle River), industrial effluents
(Potomac IXiver), fertilizers (Choptank and Nanticoke Rivers) and a power plant (Nanticoke River)
are likely candidates. Natural sources of zinc in some of these areas may also be a source. As
expected tie lowest concentrations of zinc were generally reported in areas with the least amount of
16
-------
direct human activity such lower mainstem Chesapeake Bay, Sassafras River and York River.
It is noteworthy that Baltimore Harbor, a highly industralized area, had low concentrations of zinc
in the water column. However, sediment concentrations of zinc for the various stations sampled for
water column measurement were relatively high and in some cases exceeded the Long et al. (1995)
Effects Range Median values (Hall et al., 1996). Quarterly measurements of zinc in the Patuxent
River showed somewhat elevated concentrations of zinc during the winter months that were related
to increased flow. There were no apparent temporal trends in zinc concentrations from monthly
measurements (1990-1993) in the James and Susquehanna Rivers.
17
-------
SECTION 3
ECOLOGICAL EFFECTS
3.1 Mode ofToxkity
Zinc is an essential micronutrient for all living organisms and is ubiquitous in the tissues of
plants and animals (U. S. EPA, 1987). Zinc is particularly critical for normal growth and reproduction
in aquatic biota. Numerous different enzymes require zinc for maximum catalytic activity, including
carbonic imhydrase, alkaline phosphate, alcohol dehydrogenase, acid phosphatase, lactic
>
dehydrogenase, carboxypeptidase and superoxide dismutase (Eisler, 1997). Zinc is critical in
controlling; zinc-dependent enzymes that regulate the biosynthesis and catabolic rate of RNA and
DNA (Pn.sad, 1979). Zinc deficiency effects have been reported in aquatic organisms at
concentrations between 0.65 and 6.5 ug/L (Eisler, 1997).
Bic availability of zinc is important to consider when assessing the toxicity to aquatic biota.
Zinc toxicily to aquatic biota is influenced by the chemical and physical forms of zinc, the toxicity of
each form, and the degree of interconversion for each form. In most cases aquatic fish and plants are
unaffected by suspended zinc; however, many invertebrates and some fish may be impacted if zinc-
containing, particulates are ingested (U. S. EPA, 1987). Zinc adversely impacts fish by causing
mortality, growth retardation, tissue alteration (destroys gill epithelium), respiratory and cardiac
changes and inhibition of spawning (Sorenson, 1991). Inhibition of photosynthesis and disruption
of plant growth resulting from impairment of enzyme systems are suspected to be the major adverse
effects from excessive zinc exposure in plants.
3.2 Methods of Toxicity Data Analysis
Hardness (concentrations of calcium and magnesium) is one water quality variable that
18
-------
significantly influences the toxicity of zinc in freshwater. As hardness increases, the toxicity of zinc
to biota generally decreases due to reduced bioavailability of the metal or alteration of the
osmoregulatory capacity of the organism. The U. S. Environmental Protection Agency addresses the
influence of hardness on zinc toxicity in their development of freshwater water quality criteria (U. S.
EPA, 1987). For the zinc toxicity data used in this risk assessment, hardness was also considered in
the ranking of sensitivities of various freshwater species. In order to realistically compare freshwater
toxicity data among species, all data were standardized to a hardness of 50 mg/L CaC03. Fifty mg/L
was selected because it is the mean hardness value of 24 coastal plains streams sampled five times
over a two year period in 1992-93 (Hall et al., 1994b; 1995). The following equation was used to
hardness adjust the freshwater acute and chronic toxicity data:
In LCjo^.brtto, = In LCJOotaeived - (b[l]ln hardness,*^^ - In
fized = 50 mg/L as CaCO3
Slope = b[l] = 0.8473 for zinc acute and chronic toxicity data (U. S. EPA, 1987)
It is also important to note that other water quality parameters such as pH and dissolved
organic carbon also influence zinc toxicity. These and other parameters have been the basis for the
Biotic Ligand model the U. S Environmental Protection Agency is considering for use in revising
water quality criteria for metals (Andrew Green, personal communication, International Lead and
Zinc Research Organization).
The 10th percentile of species sensitivity (protection of 90% of the species) from acute
exposures was the primary benchmark used for this risk assessment. The implied assumption when
using this benchmark is that protecting a large percentage of the species assemblage will preserve
ecosystem structure and function. This level of species protection is not universally accepted,
19
-------
especially if the unprotected 10% are keystone species and have commercial or recreational
significance. However, protection of 90% of the species 90% of the time (10th percentile) has been
recommend 3d by the Society of Environmental Toxicology and Chemistry (SET AC, 1994) and others
(Solomon et al., 1996). Recent mesocosm studies have reported that this level of protection is
conservative (Solomon et al.,1996; Giddings, 1992).
Zinc toxicity data were analyzed as a distribution on the assumption that the data represented
all species h the Chesapeake Bay ecosystem. An approximation was made since it is not possible to
test all species in the Chesapeake Bay. This approximation assumes that the number of species tested
(N) is one less than the number in the Chesapeake Bay. To obtain graphical distributions for smaller
data sets that are symmetrical (normal distributions) percentages were calculated from the formula
(100 x n/(N + 1)) where n is the rank number of the datum point and N is the total number of data
points in the set (Parkhurst et al., 1994). This formula compensates for the size of the data sets as
small (uncertain) data sets will give a flatter distribution with more chance of overlap than larger
(more certain) data sets. In cases where there were multiple data points for a given species, the
lowest value was used in the regression analysis of the distribution. When data were available for
multiple life stages of a species, the lowest values were generally reported for early life stage. Using
the lowest value therefore provides a conservative approach for protecting the most sensitive life
stage of a species. Data were plotted using Sigma Plot (Jandel Corporation, 1992).
3.3 Effects of Zinc from Laboratory Toxicity Tests
Acute and chronic zinc toxicity data used in this risk assessment were obtained from the
AQUIRE database through 1998, U. S. EPA water quality criteria document (U. S. EPA, 1987), a
recent review of zinc (Eisler, 1997) and manual searches of grey literature from academia, industry
20
-------
and government sources. Zinc acute and chronic toxicity data by water type (freshwater and saltwater
) are discussed below.
3.3.1 Acute Toxicity of Zinc
Acute freshwater zinc toxicity data were available for 101 species, primarily fish and benthos,
as shown in Table 3 and Figure 7. Hardness data were available for approximately half of these
species (n=55) and these data were used for the analysis of species sensitivity distribution and
calculation of 10th percentiles. The range of acute toxicity values was 32 ug/L for Ceriodaphnia to
260,000 ug/L for the climbing perch (Table 3). The acute 10th percentile for all freshwater species
was 142 ug/L (Table 4). This value is approximately twice as high as the U. S. EPA freshwater water
quality criteria (5th percentile) of 65 ug/L at 50 mg/L hardness (U. S. EPA, 1987). The order of
sensitivity from most to least sensitive trophic group using 10th percentiles was as follows:
zooplankton (4.3 ug/L), benthos (212 ug/L), fish (216 ug/L), amphibians (629 ug/L) and plants (789
ug/L). Data for amphibians (n=2) zooplankton (n=5), and plants (n=2) were limited and were
therefore not used for assessing risk to the most sensitive trophic. The 10th percentiles for fish (216
ug/L) and benthos were similar (212 ug/L).
Acute zinc saltwater toxicity data were available for 82 species as shown in Table 5 and
Figure 8. As reported above for freshwater acute data, most of the saltwater acute toxicity data were
with fish and benthos. Zinc toxicity ranged from 19 ug/L for a diatom to 119,300 ug/L for a fish
species (Table 5). The acute 10th percentile for all species was 79 ug/L (Table 4). This value is similar
to the U. S. EPA water quality criteria (5th percentile) of 95 ug/L (U. S. EPA, 1987). The order of
sensitivity from most to least sensitive trophic group using 10th percentiles was plants (10 ug/L),
zooplankton (46 ug/L), fish (69 ug/L) and benthos (102 ug/L). The plant 10th percentile of 10 ug/L
21
-------
was substantially lower than the 10th percentiles for other trophic groups.
3.3.2 Chronic Toxicity of Zinc
Chronic zinc toxicity data were available for 14 freshwater species (Table 6 and Figure 9).
Hardness was reported for 12 of the 14 species tested (data used for calculation of 10th percentiles).
Chronic values ranged from 25 ug/L for a cladoceran to > 5,243 ug/L for a caddisfly for non-hardness
adjusted data. A hardness adjusted value of 5.5 ug/L was reported for a cladoceran. The chronic 10th
percentile for all freshwater species was 11 ug/L. This value is substantially lower than the U. S. EPA
chronic freshwater criteria (5th percentile) of 59 ug/L at a hardness of 50 mg/L (U. S. EPA, 1987).
The order of sensitivity from most to least sensitive trophic groups based on 10th percentiles was
zooplankton (0.8 ug/L), fish (56 ug/L) and benthos (74 ug/L).
Saltwater chronic toxicity data were limited to six species and actual chronic values were only
reported for the Pacific oyster (30 ug/L) and two mysid species (152 ug/L) (Table 7 and Figure 10).
The 10th percentile for the saltwater chronic toxicity data was 8.7 ug/L (Table 4). This 10th
percentile is much lower that the U. S. EPA saltwater chronic criteria (5th percentile) of 86 ug/L (U.
S. EPA, 1987). However, value is similar to the freshwater chronic value of 11 ug/L reported above.
3.4 Mesoc osm/Microcosm Studies
Zinc mesocosm studies with reported MATC (maximum acceptable toxicant concentrations),
LOEC (lowest observed effect concentrations) or NOEC (no observed effect concentrations) values
were very limited. Genter et al. (1987) exposed algal communities to zinc concentrations of 0
(control), 50, 500 and 1,000 ug/L for 30 days in outdoor flow-through stream mesocosms.
Treatmentu as low as 50 ug/L were reported to significantly change community composition from
diatoms to green or blue green-algae. However, this species shift does not necessarily imply that the
22
-------
functions of aquatic communities have been impaired. In another study, Center et al. (1989) exposed
algal and protozoa communities to zinc concentration ranging from 0 to 10,000 ug/L for 7 days.
Results from this study showed that none of the algal or protozoan species had reduced biovolume
density in high zinc concentrations (10,000 ug/L) even though the total number of protozoan species
decreased.
3.5 Summary of Effects Data
The 10th percentile for all species derived from the freshwater acute zinc toxicity data base
was 142 ug/L. Most of the data used for the calculation of this 10th percentile were from toxicity
studies with fish and benthos. Cladocerns were reported to be the most sensitive freshwater species
to zinc exposure (LCSOs of 35 and 21 (hardness adjusted) ug/L). A ranking of sensitivity among
trophic groups from most to least sensitive showed the following order: zooplankton, benthos, fish,
amphibians and plants. The 10th percentiles for zooplankton, amphibians and plants were not used
for risk characterization for the most sensitive trophic group because these data were very limited.
The freshwater chronic 10th percentile for all species was 11 ug/L. As reported above for acute
freshwater data, zooplankton were the most sensitive trophic group subjected to chronic zinc
exposures.
The saltwater acute zinc 10th percentile for all species was 79 ug/L. Diatoms (phytoplankton)
were reported to be the most sensitive species (ECSOs of 19 to 26 ug/L). The ranking of sensitivity
among trophic groups from most to least sensitive was as follows based on acute 10th percentiles:
plants, zooplankton, fish and benthos. The acute saltwater 10th percentile for plants (10 ug/L) was
lower than for other trophic groups. The chronic 10th percentile for all saltwater species (8.7 ug/L)
was based on a limited set of toxicity data from six benthic species.
23
-------
SECTION 4
RISK CHARACTERIZATION
4.1 Chara< terizating Risks
Risk quotients are one simple and commonly used method for characterizing risks to aquatic
biota. Risk quotients are simple ratios of exposure and effects concentrations where the susceptibility
of the most sensitive species is compared with the median, mean or highest environmental exposure
concentration. Safety factors such as the division of the effect concentration by a number ranging
from one 1:o 100 are often applied to allow for unquantified uncertainty in effect and exposure
concentrations. If the exposure concentration equals or exceeds the effects concentration in the risk
quotient approach then an ecological risk is suspected. The quotient method is a valuable first tier
assessment that allows a determination of a worst case effects and exposure scenario for a particular
contaminant. However, some of the major limitations of the quotient method for ecological risk
assessment are that it fails to consider variability of exposures among individuals in a population,
ranges of sensitivity among species in the aquatic ecosystem and the ecological function of these
individual species. The probabilistic approach addresses these various concerns as it expresses the
results of an exposure or effects characterization as a distribution of values rather than a single point
estimate. (Quantitative expressions of risks to aquatic communities are therefore determined by using
all relevant single species toxicity data in conjunction with exposure distributions. A detailed
presentation of the principles used in a probabilistic ecological risk assessment are presented by
Solomon <;t al. (1996).
The following sections will summarize the results of the risk characterization phase of this
probabilistic ecological risk assessment of zinc in the Chesapeake Bay watershed. The toxicity
24
-------
benchmark used for the risk characterization will be either the freshwater or saltwater acute 10th
percentile, depending on whether freshwater or saltwater is present within the basin. The acute 10th
percentile was selected for the following reasons: (1) based on laboratory experimental data,
dissolved and bioavailable zinc are only in the water column of the aquatic environment for short
periods of time (due to complexation with natural organic particulates) which are more closely
related to acute exposures that chronic exposures; (2) the low acute to chronic ratio (~2) reported
for zinc by the U. S. EPA (1987) suggests that exposure duration does not significantly increase
toxicity and (3) toxicity data are much more numerous and represent a wider range of trophic
groups for acute studies than chronic studies. In addition to using the acute 10th percentile for all
species in freshwater or saltwater, the trophic group with the lowest acute 10th percentile with at
least 8 data points (8 species) was also used as an additional benchmark (more conservative
approach) to assess possible ecological risk. The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency uses a
minimum value of 8 species for development of acute numeric water quality criteria (Stephan et al.,
1985).
4.2 Risk Characterization of Zinc in the Chesapeake Bay Watershed
Potential ecological risk from zinc exposure was characterized by using freshwater acute
effects data for freshwater areas and saltwater effects data for saltwater areas (Table 8, Appendix A).
There were five saltwater and nine freshwater basins where data were sufficient for characterizing
risk. The highest potential ecological risk area for zinc exposures in the Chesapeake Bay watershed
was reported in the Middle River (Table 8). The percent probability of exceeding the acute saltwater
10th percentile for all species was 21%. For the most sensitive trophic group (based on acute
saltwater exposures), the probability of exceeding the 10th percentile for plants was even higher
25
-------
(79%). The 1 Middle River was the only basin where the potential ecological risk from zinc exposure
was judged to be significant. The second highest risk area for zinc exposures in the Bay watershed
was the Wyt: River (Table 8). The probability of exceeding the 10th percentile for all species and the
probability of exceeding the 10th percentile of the most sensitive trophic group with at least eight
species (baasd on acute saltwater exposures) was 2.7 and 42%, respectively. The 2.7% exceedence
for all species in the Wye River basin is relatively low risk. The 42% exceedence for plant species
does suggest a somewhat higher potential risk to this trophic group although 90% of the plants
species would not be at risk based on the probabilistic risk analysis used. The third highest risk area
for zinc exposures was the Potomac River. The percent probability of exceeding the 10th percentile
for all specie and most sensitive trophic group with at least eight species (benthos = 212 ug/L) was
3.3 and 1.6 %, respectively. The percent exceedence for both of these benchmarks or overall
ecological risk in the Potomac River is low. For all other 11 basins in Table 8, ecological risk from
zinc exposure was generally low using either the acute saltwater or freshwater 10th percentiles.
4.3 Uncertainty in Ecological Risk Assessment
All scientific endeavors have uncertainty and ecological risk assessment is no exception.
Development of exposure benchmarks, such as the 90th percentile for environmental concentrations,
or toxicity benchmarks, such as the 10th percentile for species susceptibility, may seem to be exact.
However, iiese values involve uncertainty when extrapolating risks from laboratory data to aquatic
ecosystem?. Uncertainty plays a particularly important role in ecological risk assessment as it impacts
problem formulation, analysis of exposure and effects data and risk characterization. Evaluation of
uncertainty in this risk assessment was critical in determining data gaps (research needs) as described
in the final section of the report. Addressing these various research needs in future efforts will reduce
26
-------
uncertainty.
Uncertainty associated with metals risk assessment such as zinc have some fundamental
differences when compared to pesticides (European Commission, 1996). The following differences
exist:
(1) Unlike most organics, metals such as zinc (micronutrients) and some organometallic compounds
(e. g. methylmercury) are a class of chemicals that occur naturally in the environment. Therefore,
natural background concentrations and exposure to these concentrations should be factored in risk
characterization.
(2) The availability of zinc for uptake by organisms under field conditions is limited, will vary from
site to site and is highly dependent on the speciation of the metal. Exposure and effects data should
therefore be based on similar levels of availability (in this case disssolved concentrations).
(3) The same toxic form of zinc can originate from a variety of different substances (e. g. Zn+2 from
ZnS04, ZnCl2 etc.). Therefore, it is necessary to take into account all metal species that are emitted
to the environment which may result in concentrations of the toxic form.
Uncertainty in ecological risk assessment has three basic sources: (1) lack of knowledge in
areas that should be known; (2) systematic errors resulting from human or analytical error and (3)
non-systematic errors resulting from the random nature of the ecosystem ( e.g. Chesapeake Bay
watershed). The following sections will address specific uncertainty from the above three sources
as associated with exposure data, effects data and risk characterization.
4.3.1 Uncertainty Associated with Exposure Characterization
Zinc exposure data used for this risk assessment were obtained from 19 different data sources
from 1985 to 1996 as described in Section 2. The spatial scale of these data (116 stations in 19
27
-------
basins/mainstem areas) was somewhat limited considering that there are at least 50 major rivers and
numerous smaller tributaries that discharge into the Chesapeake Bay. Exposure data from basins in
Virginia waters of Chesapeake Bay were particularly limited as only the James River, York River and
the lower mainstem Bay were represented. The temporal scale (sampling frequency) of the available
data for the Bay watershed was even more limited. In many cases there were only a few
measurements made for these metals at various stations. Rain event sampling for these metals in
tributaries and streams was generally not considered in the sampling designs of the various monitoring
studies. Although rain event sampling is more relevant for pesticides that are applied on agricultural
crops and enter aquatic systems during runoff, such events may be important for zinc loading
resulting from fertilizer (chicken manure based fertilizer) used on crops or zinc loading from urban
stormwater discharges or municipal/ industrial overflow. Roman-Mas et al. (1994) have
recommenced a sampling interval of 5% of the duration of the storm flow as adequate to characterize
pesticide concentration distributions in runoff with an error of less than 5% (for example during an
event with storm flow lasting 100 h sampling should be every 5 h). The sampling frequency of the
present exposure data for zinc is clearly inadequate for rain event sampling.
The zinc analysis associated with the various laboratories introduces uncertainty because
analytical procedures differed among the laboratories (see Section 2). For example, samples were
collected for analysis using either grab, depth integrated or composite techniques. In all cases
samples were filtered with either 0.4 or 0.45 urn membranes but the membranes were made of
different material ( polycarbonate, polypropylene or nucleopore ). The method of metal analysis was
somewhat consistent among laboratories as an Atomic Absorption - Furnace method (AA-F or HGA)
was used for all data sets except for the Fall Line Data (Inductively Coupled Plasma Mass
28
-------
Spectrometer - ICP-MS) and the District of Columbia Environmental Regulation Administration data
(chelation ion chromatography). The detection limits varied among the different laboratories (
generally 0.14 to 10 ug/L; for one study 20 ug/L was used).
4.3.2 Uncertainty Associated with Ecological Effects Data
There is uncertainty when extrapolating laboratory toxicity data to responses of natural taxa
found in the Chesapeake Bay watershed due to the relatively small number of species that can be
cultured and tested in laboratory toxicity studies. In the case of zinc in the Chesapeake Bay
watershed, freshwater and saltwater acute toxicity were available for 55 (hardness adjusted data) and
82 species, respectively, for use in the calculation of the 10th percentile. Although these data seem
adequate for all species, the distribution among the various trophic groups was weighted more with
fish and benthos. Acute zinc toxicity data were particularly limited for plants (phytoplankton and
macrophytes), zooplankton and amphibians in freshwater. Chronic data, although not used in this
risk assessment, were limited for both types of water but particularly for saltwater species (n = 6).
In addition to more data with an expanded list of species, more ecologically relevant zinc toxicity data
are needed to reduce uncertainty and address comparisons of laboratory and field data. Metal
speciation, dissolved organic carbon, suspended particulates and bedded sediments should be
considered with laboratory to field extrapolations.
Variability in the results of toxicity tests for a given species tested in different experiments or
by different authors is a potential source of random and systematic errors. In this assessment, the
most conservative (lowest) effect value was used when multiple data points were available for a given
species. The range of toxicity data among trophic groups differed for each water type. For example,
the acute zinc freshwater 10th percentile values among trophic groups ranged from 4.3 ug/L
29
-------
(zooplantkton) to 789 ug/L (plants) - a factor of 183x. Acute saltwater 10th percentiles by trophic
group ranged from 10 ug/L (plants) to 102 ug/L (benthos). This 10 fold difference for saltwater
species is much less than the factor of 183x reported above for freshwater 10th percentiles. Using the
distribution of species susceptibility accounts for this range of data points. Distributions will be
flatter, with greater chance of overlap with exposure distributions, when the range is large.
Acute freshwater and saltwater zinc toxicity data were primarily used in the risk
characterization as previously discussed. The use of acute data for predicting ecosystem effects is
often questioned and assumed to be an area of significant uncertainty. However, Slooffet al. (1986)
in their rewew of single species and ecosystem toxicity for various chemical compounds, have
reported that there is no solid evidence that predictions of ecosystem level effects from acute tests
are unreliable. The result of Slooffet al. (1986) coupled with the use of a distribution of acute
toxicity data reduces some of the uncertainty associated with using acute data.
Although single species laboratory toxicity tests are valuable in risk assessment, microcosm
and mesocosm data provide the following useful information for assessing the impact of a stressor
on aquatic communities in an ecosystem: (1) aggregate responses of multiple species; (2) observation
of population and community recovery after exposure and (3) indirect effects resulting from changes
in food supply. Unfortunately, microcosm and mesocosm studies that determined No Observed
Effect Concentrations (NOEC) were limited. The lack of these type data, where the interaction of
biotic communities have been assessed under zinc exposure, was a source of uncertainty in this risk
assessment since microcosm/mesocosm toxicity benchmarks were not available for risk
characterization.
30
-------
4.3.3 Uncertainty Associated with Risk Characterization
The Society of Environmental Toxicology and Chemistry (SET AC, 1994) reported that many
of the uncertainties associated with the variability in the exposure and effects characterizations
discussed above are incorporated in the probabilistic approach used in this risk assessment. A
distribution of exposure and effects data are used for quantitative analysis of risks.
Ecological uncertainty includes the effects of confounding stressors such as other
contaminants (e. g. zinc often occurs concurrently with other metals such as copper and cadmium)
and the ecological redundancy of the functions of affected species. In the Chesapeake Bay watershed,
numerous contaminants may be present simultaneously in the same aquatic habitats; therefore, "joint
toxicity"may occur. For zinc, additive toxicity is likely if other metals such as copper and cadmium
are present. The concurrent presence of various contaminants along with zinc makes it difficult to
determine the risk of zinc in isolation.
Ecological redundancy is known to occur in aquatic systems. Field studies have shown that
resistant taxa tend to replace more sensitive species under stressful environmental conditions
(Solomon et al., 1996; Giddings, 1992) The resistant species may replace the sensitive species if it
is functionally equivalent in the aquatic ecosystem and the impact on overall ecosystem function is
reduced by these species shifts. For this risk assessment, information on the ecological interactions
among species would help to reduce this area of uncertainty.
31
-------
SECTION 5
CONCLUSIONS AND RESEARCH NEEDS
Potential ecological risk from zinc water column exposure was higher in the Middle River than
any of the other basins in the Chesapeake Bay watershed. Ecological risk from zinc exposure in the
Wye River was insignificant when all acute species data were used but the most sensitive trophic
group (plants) suggested that some risk may occur with the most sensitive 10% of plant species.
Based on tie documented recovery of plant populations to episodic stressors, however, the zinc
exposure to plant populations is still judged to be low in the Wye River since 90% of the plant species
would not be affected. Ecological risk from zinc water column exposure was judged to be low or data
were lacking for assessing risks in the other 17 basins.
The following research is recommended to supplement existing data for assessing the
ecological lisks of zinc in the Chesapeake Bay watershed:
(1) A probabilistic ecological risk assessment for zinc exposure in sediment is recommended to
complement this water column risk assessment. Most of the zinc introduced into the aquatic
environment is sorbed onto hydrous iron, manganese oxides, clay materials and organic materials
where it u, eventually partitioned into sediments. Therefore, assessing risk of sediment dwelling
organisms exposed to zinc would expand our knowledge on the potential ecological risk of this metal
in the environment.
(2) Exposure assessments for zinc using randomly selected stations are needed on a broad spatial and
temporal ucale in the Chesapeake Bay watershed. On a spatial scale, zinc data are needed for the
32
-------
major rivers (tributaries) and representative freshwater streams where these data are lacking,
particularly in Virginia waters of the Chesapeake Bay watershed ( e.g. Rappahannock River and
lower eastern shore). Exposure assessments with increased sampling frequency covering all seasons
of the year at representative locations in the Bay watershed (including some of the basins in this
report where data are lacking) are also needed to improve our ability to determine risk of aquatic
biota to zinc. Specifically, rain event sampling (e.g. samples every 2 to 4 h during the duration of the
event) and subsequent measurement of metals in streams or tributaries near known sources of zinc
are needed (agricultural fields using chicken manure based fertilizer). These data may provide insight
on why zinc concentration were higher than ambient concentrations in agricultural areas such as the
Choptank, Nanticoke and Wye Rivers. All exposure assessments of zinc should be conducted by
laboratories using the most updated analytical methods (with documented and approved Quality
Assurance/Quality Control procedures) with detection limits below the toxicity thresholds for the
most sensitive species.
(3) An extensive spatial and temporal exposure assessment of zinc (including rain event sampling) is
recommended in the Middle River area over multiple years. Since the Middle River was the highest
risk area for zinc based on limited data collected in 1993, the obvious question is whether this area
still has concentrations that may pose a risk to aquatic biota. Biological communities should also be
sampled in the Middle River area to see if they are impaired when compared to communities in
similar habitats.
(4) Acute zinc toxicity data for various trophic groups in freshwater and saltwater are needed for
33
-------
improving the present toxicity data base. Specifically, acute freshwater and saltwater toxicity data for
zinc (with measured concentrations) are needed with plants such as phytoplankton and aquatic
macrophytes. Acute freshwater data are also needed for amphibians and zooplankton. Chronic data
for all trophic groups would also be useful.
(5) Microcosm/mesocosm toxicity data that include the calculation of NOEC, LOEC and chronic
values for zinc in freshwater and saltwater environments are needed to provide insight on the
interaction of aggregate species assemblages during zinc exposure, recovery potential of exposed
species and possible indirect effects on higher trophic groups. These studies should be designed to
simulate environmentally realistic pulsed exposures of these zinc concentrations documented to occur
in the environment.
(6) Assessments of biological communities (Index of Biotic Integrity for fish, invertebrates etc.) in
aquatic systems that receive the highest exposures of zinc are recommended to determine if the
predicted ecological risk (impaired biological communities) from this metal in the water column can
be confirmed with actual field data.
(7) Investigations are needed to determine how to incorporate the essentiality of relevant metals (such
as zinc) for aquatic organisms into the risk assessment process.
34
-------
SECTION 6
REFERENCES
Abbasi, S.A., P.C. Nipaney, and R. Soni. 1988. Studies on environmental management of
mercury (II), chromium (VI), and zinc (II) with respect to the impact on some arthropods
and protozoans. Int. J. Environ. Stud. 32:181-187.
Academy of Natural Sciences. 1960. The sensitivity of aquatic life to certain chemicals commonly
found in industrial wastes. ANS report, Philadelphia, PA.
Ahsanullah, M. 1976. Acute toxicity of cadmium and zinc to seven invertebrate species from
Western Port, Victoria. Aust. J. Mar. Freshwater Res. 27:187-196.
Ahsanullah, M. and A.R. Williams. 1991. Sublethal effects and bioaccumulation of cadmium,
chromium, copper, and zinc in the marine amphipod Allorchestes compressa. Mar. Biol.
108:59-65.
Andros, J.D. and R.R. Garton. 1980. Acute lethality of copper, cadmium and zinc to northern
squawfish. Trans. Am. Fish. Soc. 109:235-238.
Bailey, H.C. and D.H.W. Liu. 1980. Lwnbriculus variegatus, a benthic oligochaete, as a bioassay
organism. In: Aquatic toxicology. Eaton, J.C., P.R. Parrish and A.C. Hendricks (Eds.).
ASTM STP 707. American Society for Testing and Materials, Philadelphia, PA. pp. 205-
215.
Banerjee, V. and K. Kumari. 1988. Effects of zinc, mercury, and cadmium on erythrocyte and
related parameters in the fish Anabas testudineus. Environ. Ecol. 6(3):737-739.
Battelle. 1989. Implementation of a chemical ranking system. Draft report to the U.S.
Environmental Protection Agency Criteria and Standards Division, Washington, DC.
Bengeri, K.V. and H.S. Paul 1987. Influence of pH on the toxicity and accumulation of zinc in
the freshwater fish Lepidocephalichthyes guntea. C.A. Sel.-Environ. Pollut. 15:107-
19100G; Pollut. Res. 5(3-4): 147-151 (1986)
Bengtsson, B.E. and B. Bergstrom. 1987. A flow through fecundity test with Nitocra spinipes
(Harpacticoidea Crustacea) for aquatic toxicity. Ecotoxicol. Environ. Saf. 14:260-268.
Benoit, D.A. and G.W. Holcombe. 1978. Toxic effects of zinc on fathead minnows Pimephales
promelas in soft water. J. Fish Biol. 13:701-708.
Bosnak, A.D. and E. L. Morgan. 1981. Acute toxicity of cadmium, zinc, and total residual
35
-------
chlorine to epigean and hypogean isopods (Asellidae). Natl. Speleological Soc. Bull.
43:12-18.
Bruland, K.W., R.P. Franks, G.A. Knauer and J.H. Martin. 1979. Sampling and anlytical methods
for the determination of copper, cadmium, zinc and nickel at the nanogram per liter level in
seawater. Anal. Chim. Act. 105:223-245.
Bryan, G.W. and L.G. Hummerstone. 1973. Adaptation of the polychaete, Nereis diversicolor to
estuirine sediments containing high concentrations of zinc and cadmium. J. Mar. Biol.
Assoc. U.K. 53:839-857.
Bryant, V., D.M. Newbery, D.S. McKlusky and R. Campbell. 1985. Effect of temperature and
salinity on the toxicity of nickel and zinc to two estuarine invertebrates (Gorophium
volu1ator,Macomabalthicd). Mar. Ecol. Prog. Ser. 24:139-153.
Buhl, K.J. a,nd S.J. Hamilton. 1990. Comparative toxicity of inorganic contaminants released by
placer mining to early life stages of salmonids. Ecotoxicol. Environ. Saf. 20(3):325-342.
Buhl, K.J. and S.J. Hamilton. 1996. Toxicity of inorganic contaminants, individually and in
environmental mixtures, to three endangered fishes. Arch. Environ. Contam. Toxicol.
30(l):84-92.
Burton, D.T. and D.J. Fisher. 1990. Acute toxicity of cadmium, copper, zinc, ammonia, 3,3-
Diclilorobenzidine, 2,6-Dichloro-4-nitroaniline, Methylene Chloride, and 2,4,6-
Trichlorophenol. Bull. Environ. Contam. Toxicol. 44(5):776-783.
Cairns, J.s Jr. and A. Scheier. 1959. The relationship of bluegill sunfish body size to tolerance for
sorre common chemicals. Proc. Ind. Waste Conf. Purdue Univ. 13:243-252.
Cairns, J., Jr., W.T. Waller and J.C. Smrchek. 1969. Fish bioassays contrasting constant and
fluctuating input of toxicants. Rev. Biol. (Lisb.) 7:75-91.
Calabrese, A. and D.A. Nelson. 1974. Inhibition of embryonic development of the hard clam,
Mercenaria mercenaria by heavy metals. Bull. Environ. Contam. Toxicol. 11:92-97.
Cardin, J.A. 1985. Acute toxicity data for zinc and the saltwater fish, Fundulus heteroclitus,
Menidia menidia, and Pseudopleuronectes americanus. (Memorandum to D.J. Hansen,
U.S. EPA, Narragansett, RI.)
Carlson, A.R. and T.H. Roush. 1985. Site-specific water quality studies of the Straight River,
Minnesota: Complex effluent toxicity, zinc toxicity, and biological survey relationships.
EPA-600/3-85-005. National Technical Information Service, Springfield, VA.
36
-------
Carson, W.G. and W.V. Carson. 1972. Toxicity of copper and zinc to juvenile Atlantic salmon in
the presence of humic acid and lignosulfonates. Fisheries Research Board of Canada
Manuscript Report Series No. 1181. Biological Station, St. Andrews, N.B., Canada.
Chapman, G.A. 1975. Toxicity of copper, cadmium and zinc to Pacific northwest salmonids.
Interim Report. U.S. EPA, Corvallis, OR. Available from: C.E. Stephan, U.S. EPA,
Duluth, MN.
Chapman, G.A. 1978. Effects of continuous zinc exposure on sockeye salmon during adult-to-
smolt freshwater residency. Trans. Am. Fish. Soc. 107:828-836.
Chapman, G.A., S. Ota and F. Recht. Manuscript. Effects of water hardness on the toxicity of
metals to Daphnia magna. Available from: C.E. Stephan, U.S. EPA, Duluth, MN.
Cherry, D.S., J.H. Rodgers, Jr., R.L. Graney and J. Cairns, Jr. 1980. Dynamics and control of
the Asiatic clam in the New River Virginia. Bulletin 123. Virginia Water Resources
Research Center, Blacksburg, VA.
Chesapeake Bay Executive Council. 1988. Chesapeake Bay Toxics Reduction Strategy.
Chesapeake Bay Agreement Report. Chesapeake Bay Liaison, Annapolis, MD.
Connor, P.M. 1972. Acute toxicity of some heavy metals to some marine larvae. Mar. Pollut.
Bull. 3:190-192.
Conroy, P.T., J.W. Hunt and B.S. Anderson. 1996. Validation of a short-term toxicity test
endpoint by comparison with longer term effects on larval red abalone Haliotis rufescens.
Environ. Toxicol. Chem. 15:1245-1250.
Correa, M. 1987. Physiological effects of metal toxicity on the tropical freshwater shrimp
Macrobrachium carcinus (Linneo, 1758). Environ. Pollut. 45(2): 149-155.
Couillard, Y., P. Ross, and B. Pinel-Alloul. 1989. Acute toxicity of six metals to the rotifer
Brachionus calyciflorus, with comparisons to other freshwater organisms. Toxic. Assess.
4(4):451-462.
Cripe, G.M. 1994. Comparative acute toxicities of several pesticides and metals to Mysidopsis
bahia and postlarval Penaeus duorarvm. Environ. Toxicol. Chem. 13(11):1867-1872.
Cui, K., Y. Liu, and L. Hou. 1987. Effects of six heavy metals on hatching eggs and survival of
larval of marine fish. Oceanol. Limnol. Sin. /Haiyang Yu Huzhao 18(2): 138-144 (CHI)
(ENG ABS)
Culberson, C.H. and T.M. Church. 1988. Oceanographic data report number 6: Date from the CDR
37
-------
cruises July 1985-July 1987. DEL-SG-05-90. Delaware Sea Grant College Program,
University of Delaware, Newark, DE.
Dalai, R. ai>,d S. Bhattacharya. 1994. Effect of cadmium, mercury, and zinc on the hepatic
microsomal enzymes of Charma punctatus. Bull. Environ. Contam. Toxicol. 52(6):893-
897.
Danielsson et al. 1978. UDE analysis of metals. Report. University of Delaware, College of Marine
Studies, Lewes, DE.
Dave, G., B. Damgaard, M. Grande, I.E. Martelin, B. Rosander, and T. Viktor. 1987. Ring test
of an embryo-larval toxicity test with zebrafish (Brachydanio rerio) using chromium and
zinc as toxicants. Environ. Toxicol. Chem. 6(1):61-71.
Dawson, DA., E.F. Stebler, S.L. Burks, and J.A. Bantle. 1988. Evaluation of the developmental
toxicity of metal-contaminated sediments using short-term fathead minnow and frog
embryo-larval assays. Environ. Toxicol. Chem. 7(l):27-34.
Dean, J. G., F. L. Bosqui and V. H. Lanouette. 1972. Removing heavy metals from waste water.
Environmental Sci. Tech. 6: 518-522.
De March, B.G.E. 1988. Acute toxicity of binary mixtures of five cations (Cu2+, Cd2+, Zn2+,
Mg2+, and K+) to the freshwater amphipod Gammarus lacustris (Sars). Can. J. Fish. Aquat.
Sci. 45(4):625-633.
Deoray, B. M. and S. B. Wagh. 1987. Acute toxicity of Thiodan, Nuuan and Dithane M-45 to
freshwater fish, Barilius benelisis (Ham). Environ Pollut. 24: 107-119.
Devi, V.U. 1987. Heavy metal toxicity to fiddler crabs, Uca annulipes latreille and Uca
triangularis (Milne Edwards): Tolerance to copper, mercury, cadmium. Bull. Environ.
Contam. Toxicol. 39:1020-1027.
Dinnel, P. A., J. M. Link, Q. J. Stober, M W. Letourneau and W. E. Roberts. 1989. Comparative
sensitivity of sea urchin sperm bioassays to metals and pesticides. Arch. Environm. Contam.
Toxicol. 18: 748-755.
Dinnel, P.A., Q.J. Slober, J.M. Link, M.W. Letourneau, W.E. Roberts, S.P. Felton and R.E.
Nakatani. 1983. Methodology and validation of a sperm cell toxicity test for testing toxic
substances in marine waters. FRI-UW-8306. Fisheries Research Institute, School of
Fisheries, University of Washington, Seattle, WA.
Duncan, D.A. and J.F. Klaverdamp. 1983. Tolerance and resistance to cadmium in white suckers
(Ccitostomus commersoni) previously exposed to cadmium, mercury, zinc or selenium.
38
-------
Can. J. Fish. Aquat. Sci. 40:128-138.
Dorfman, D. 1977. Tolerance of Fundulus heteroditus to different metals in saltwater. Bull.
N.J. Acad. Sci. 22:21-23.
Dorgelo, J., H. Meester, and C. Van Velzen. 1995. Effects of diet and heavy metals on growth
rate and fertility in the deposit-feeding snail Potamopyrgus jenkinsi (Smith) (Gastropoda:
Hydrobiidae). Hydrobiologia 316(3): 199-210.
Eisler, R. 1977a. Toxicities of selected heavy metals to the soft-shell clam, Mya arenaria. Bull.
Environ. Contam. Toxicol. 17:137-145.
Eisler, R. 1997. Zinc hazards to plants and animals with emphasis on fishery and wildlife resources.
In: Ecological issues and environmental impact assessment. P. N. Cheremisinoff (Eds). Gulf
Publishing Company, Houston, Texas, pp 443-537.
Eisler, R. and R.J. Hennekey. 1977. Acute toxicities of Cd2+, Cf*, Kg**, Nt , and 2ft to
estuarine macrofauna. Arch. Environ. Contam. Toxicol. 6:315-323.
European Commission. 1996. Technical guidance document in support of commission directive
93/67/EEC on risk assessment for new notified substances and commission regulation (EC)
No 1488/94 on risk assessment for existing substances. Report. ISBN 92-827-8012-0.
Luxembourg.
Finlayson, B.J. and K.M. Verrue. 1982. Toxicities of copper, zinc and cadmium mixtures to
juvenile chinook salmon. Trans. Am. Fish Soc. 111.645-650.
Fisher, N. S., M. Bohe and J.L. Teussie. 1984. Accumulation and toxicity of Cd, Zn,Ag and Hg
in four marine phytoplankters. Mar. Ecol. Prog. Ser. 18:201-213.
Fishman, M. and L. C. Friedman. 1989. Methods for the determination of inorganic substances in
water and fluvial sediments. Techniques of the Water-Resources Investigations of the United
States Geological Survey.
Genter, R. B., D. S. Cherry, E. P. Smith and J. Cairns. 1987. Algal-periphyton population and
community changes from zinc stress in stream mesocosms. Hydrobiologia 153: 261-275.
Genter, R. B., J. R. Pratt, N. Bowers and J. Cairns, Jr. 1989. Algal and protozan community
responses to individual and combined treatments of zinc and phosphate. Current Practices
Environ. Sci and Engin. 4: 133-149.
Giddings, J.M. 1992. Aquatic mesocosm test for environmental fate and ecological effects of
diazinon. Report. No. 92-3-4155, Springborn Laboratories, Inc., Wareham, MA.
39
-------
Giddings, J. M, L. W. Hall, Jr., K. R Solomon, W. Adams, D. Vogel, L. Davis and R. Smith. 1997.
An ecological risk assessment of diazinon in the Sacramento and San Joaquin River basins.
Report for Novartis Crop Protection Inc., Greensboro, N. C.
Govindarajan, S., C.P. Valsaraj, R. Mohan, V. Hariprasad, and R. Ramasubramanian. 1993.
Toxicity of heavy metals in aquaculture organisms: Penaeus indicus, Perna viridis,
Artcmia salina and Skeletonema costatum. Pollut. Res. 12(3): 187-189.
Gruessner, B., D. J. Velinisky, G. D. Foster, J. Scudlark and R. Mason. 1997. Dissolved and
Paniculate Transport of Chemical Contaminants in the Northeast and Northwest Branches
of the Anacostia River. ICPRB report # 97-10, Department of Consumer and Regulatory
Affairs, Washington, D. C.
Hall, L.W. Jr. 1985. "In-situ" investigations for assessing striped bass, Morone saxatilis, larval
survival as related to contaminants and changes in water quality parameters. Final Report.
U.S1. Fish and Wildlife Service, National Fisheries Center, Leetown, WV.
Hall, L.W. Jr., R.D. Anderson, R. W. Alden, III and P. Adolphson. 1997a. Ambient toxicity in
Chesapeake Bay Year 5 Report. Report. U. S. Environmental Protection Agency, Chesapeake
Bay Program Office, Annapolis, MD.
Hall, L.W Jr., R.D. Anderson, W.D. Killen, Jr., M.C. Scott, J.V. Kilian, R.W. Alden HI, P.
Adolphson and R.A. Eskin. 1996. Ambient toxicity testing in Chesapeake Bay. Report.
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Chesapeake Bay Program Office, Annapolis, MD.
Hall, L.W. Jr., S.J. Bushong, M.C. Ziegenfuss and W.S. Hall. 1987. Mobile on-site and in-situ
striped bass contaminant studies in the Choptank River and Upper Chesapeake Bay - Annual
contaminant and water quality evaluations in east coast striped bass habitats. Final Report.
U. S. Fish and Wildlife Service, National Fisheries Center, Leetown, WV.
Hall, L.W., Jr., S.A. Fischer, W.D. Killen, Jr., M.S. Scott, M.C. Ziegenfuss and R.D. Anderson.
1994b. A pilot study to evaluate biological, physical, chemical and land-use characteristics
in [Maryland coastal plain streams. Final Report CBRM-AD-94-1 Maryland Department of
Natural Resources, Annapolis, MD.
Hall, L.W. Hall, Jr., W.S. Hall and S.J. Bushong. 1986. In-situ investigations for assessing striped
bass, Morone saxatilis, prolarval and yearling survival as related to contaminants and water
quality parameters in the Potomac River - Contaminant and water quality evaluations in east
coast striped bass habitats. Final Report. U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, National Fisheries
Center, Leetown, WV.
Hall, L. W. Jr., M. C. Scott and W. D. Killen. 1997b. A screeing level probabilistic ecological risk
assessment of copper and cadmium in the Chesapeake Bay watershed. Final report. U. S.
40
-------
Environmental Protection Agency, Chesapeake Bay Program Office, Annapolis, MD.
Hall, L.W. Jr., M.C. Scott, W.D. Killen, Jr. and R.D. Anderson. 1995a. A pilot study to evaluate
biological, physical, chemical and land-use characteristics in Maryland coastal plain streams:
Year 2. Final Report CBRM-AD-95-8 Maryland Department of Natural Resources,
Annapolis, MD.
Hall, L.W. Jr., M.C. Ziegenfuss, R.D. Anderson, W.D. Killen, Jr., R.W. Alden ffl and P. Adolphson.
1994a. A pilot study for ambient toxicity testing in Chesapeake Bay - Year 3 Report.
CBP/TRS 116/94 U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Chesapeake Bay Program Office,
Annapolis, MD.
Hall, L.W. Jr., M.C. Ziegenfuss, S.J. Bushong, J.A. Sullivan and M.A. Unger. 1991b. Striped bass
contaminant and water quality studies in the Potomac River and Upper Chesapeake Bay in
1989: Annual contaminant and water quality evaluations in each coast striped bass habitats.
Final Report. U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, National Fisheries Center, Leetown, WV.
Hall, L.W. Jr., M.C. Ziegenfuss, S.J. Bushong, M.A. Unger and R.L. Herman. 1989. Studies of
contaminant and water quality effects on striped bass prolarvae and yearlings in the Potomac
River and Upper Chesapeake Bay in 1988. Trans. American Fish. Soc. 118:619-629.
Hall, L.W.Jr, M.C. Ziegenfuss, S.A. Fischer, R.W. Alden IU, E. Deaver, J. Gooch and N. Debert-
Hastings. 199la. A pilot study for ambient toxicity testing in Chesapeake Bay. Volume 1 -
Year I Report CBP/TRS 64/91. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Chesapeake Bay
Program Office, Annapolis, MD.
Hall, L.W. Jr., M.C. Ziegenfuss, S.A. Fischer, R.D. Anderson, W.D. Killen, Jr., R.W. Alden III, E.
Deaver, J. Gooch and N. Shaw. 1992a. A pilot study for ambient toxicity testing in
Chesapeake Bay - Year 2 Report. CBP/TRS 82/92 U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
Chesapeake Bay Program Office, Annapolis, MD.
Hall, L.W. Jr., M.C. Ziegenfuss, S.A. Fischer, J.A. Sullivan and D.M. Palmer. 1992b. In-situ
striped bass contaminant and water qualaity studies in the Potomac River and Upper
Chesapeake Bay in 1990. Final Report. U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, National Fisheries
Center, Leetown, WV.
Hamilton, S.J. 1995. Hazard assessment of inorganics to three endangered fish in the Green
river, Utah. Ecotoxicol. Environ. Saf. 30(2): 134-142.
Hansen, D.J. 1983. U.S. EPA, Gulf Breeze, FL. (Memorandum to W.A. Brungs, U.S. EPA,
Narragansett, RI.)
Harmon, V.L. and C.J. Langdon. 1996. A 7-d toxicity test for marine pollutants using the pacific
41
-------
mys\dMysidopsisintii. 2. Protocol evaluation. Environ. Toxicol. Chem. 15:1824-1830.
Hatakeyama, S. and Y. Sugaya. 1989. A freshwater shrimp (Paratya compressa inprovisa) as a
sensitive test organism to pesticides. Environ. Pollut. 59(4):325-336.
Hemalatha, S. and T.K. Banerjee. 1993. Acute toxicity of the heavy metal-zinc (a trace element)
on the mucous cells of the air sac (a modified gill structure) of the air-breathing catfish.
J. Freshwater Biol. 5(3):233-240.
Hilmy, A.M., N.A. El Domiaty, AY. Daabees, and H.A.A. Latife. 1987. Toxicity in Tilapia
zilli and Clarias lazera (Pisces) induced by zinc, seasonally. Comp. Biochem. Physiol.
86C(2):263-265.
\
Holcombe G.W. and R.W. Andrew. 1978. The acute toxicity of zinc to rainbow and brook trout.
Comparison in hard and soft water. EPA-600/3-78-094. National Technical Information
Ser/ice, Springfield, VA.
Holcombe G.W., D.A. Benoit and E.N. Leonard. 1979. Long-term effects of zinc exposures, on
brook trout (Salvelimsfontinalis). Trans. Am. Fish. Soc. 108:76-87.
Hunt, J.W. and B.S. Anderson. 1989. Sublethal effects of zinc and municipal effluents on larvae
of the red abalone Haliotis rufescens. Mar. Biol. 101(4):545-552.
Jandel Corporation. 1992. SigmaPlot Scientific Graphing System, Version 5, San Rafael, CA.
Johnson, M. 1985. Acute toxicity data for zinc and larvae of the American lobster, Homarus
amcricanus. (Memorandum to DJ. Hansen, U.S. EPA, Narragansett RI.)
Joshi, S.N. and P. Chamoli. 1987. Toxicity of zinc sulfate to the Hill stream fish Noemacheilus
montanus. Aquat. Sci. Fish. Abstr. (Part 1) 17(8):11826-1Q17; Environ. Ecol. 5(1):170-
172(1987)
Kayser, H 1977. Effects of zinc sulfate on the growth of mono-and multi-species cultures of
sorie marine plankton algae. Helgol. Wiss. Meeresunters. 30:682-696.
Keller, A.E. and S.G. Zam. 1991. The acute toxicity of selected metals to the freshwater mussel,
Anvdonta imbecilis. Environ. Toxicol. Chem. 10(4):539-546.
Khangarot, B. S. 1991. Toxicity of metals to a freshwater tubificid worm, Tubifex tubifex (Muller).
Bull Environ. Contam. Toxicol. 46: 906-912.
Khangarot, B.S., A. Sehgal and M.K. Bhasin. 1983. "Man and the biosphere"- studies on Sikkim
Himalayas. Part 1: Acute toxicity of copper and zinc to common carp Cyprimis carpio
42
-------
(Linn.) in soft water. Acta Hydrochim. Hydrobiol. 11:667-673.
Khangarot, B.S. and P.K. Ray. 1987a. Sensitivity of toad tadpoles, Bufo melanostictus
(Schneider), to heavy metals. Bull. Environ. Contam. Toxicol. 38(3):523-527.
Khangarot, B.S. and P.K. Ray. 1987b. Zinc sensitivity of a freshwater snail, Lymnaea luteola L,
in relation to seasonal variations in temperature. Bull. Environ. Contam. Toxicol.
39(l):45-49.
Lewis, M. 1978. Acute toxicity of copper, zinc and manganese in single and mixed salt solutions
to juvenile longfin dace, Agosiachrysogaster. J. FishBiol. 13:695-700.
Lewis, W.M. 1993. Acute and chronic responses ofMenidia beryllina, Rivulus marmoratus,
and Cyprinodon variegatus to malathion and zinc chloride. M.S. Thesis, Florida Inst. of
Technol.:71p.
Lin, H.C. and W.A. Dunson. 1993. The effect of salinity on the acute toxicity of cadmium to the
tropical, estuarine, hermaphroditic fish, Rivulus marmoratus. Arch. Environ. Contam.
Toxicol. 25:41-47.
Long, S. E. and T. D. Martin. 1992. Method 200.10 Determination of trace elements in marine waters
by on-line chelation preconcentration and ICP-MS. In: Methods of the Determination of
Metals in Environmental Samples. C. K. Smoley (eds) Environmental Monitoring Systems
Laboratory, U. S. Environmental Protection Agency, CRC Press, Boca Raton, FL.
Long, E. R., D. D. McDonald, S. L. Smith and R. D. Cable. 1995. Incidence of adverse biological
effects within ranges of chemical concentrations in marine and estuarine sediments. Environ.
Manag. 19:81-97.
Lu, J. C. S. and K. Y. Chen. 1977. Migration of trace metals in interfaces of seawater and polluted
surficial sediments. Environ. Sci. Technol. 11: 174-182.
Lussier, S. and J. Cardin. 1985. Results of acute toxicity tests conducted with zinc at ERL-
Narragansett. (Memorandum to DJ. Hansen, U.S. EPA, Narragansett RI.)
Lussier, S. and J.H. Gentile. 1985. Acute toxicity data for zinc and the mysids, Mysidopsis bahia
and Mysidopsis bigelowi. (Memorandum to D. J. Hansen, U.S. EPA, Narragansett, RI.)
Lussier, S.M., J.H. Gentile and J. Walker. 1985. Acute and chronic effects of heavy metals and
cyanide on Mysidopsis bahia (Crustacea: Mysidacea). Aquat. Toxicol. 7:25-35.
MacBean, E. A. and F. A. Rovers. 1984. Alternatives for handling detection limit data in impact
asssessment. Groundwater Monitoring Review 4: 42-44.
43
-------
Maclnnes, J.R. and A. Calabrese. 1978. Response of embryos of the American oyster,
Crassostrea virginica to heavy metals at different temperatures. In: Physiology and
beha.vior of marine organisms. McLusky, D.S. and A.J. Berry (Eds.). Pergamon Press,
New York, NY. p. 195.
MacRae, T. H. And H. S. Pandey. 1991. Effects of metals on early life stages of the brine shrimp,
Artemia: a developmental toxicity assay. Arch. Environm. Contam. Toxicol. 20: 247-252.
Madoni, P., G. Esteban, and G. Gorbi. 1992. Acute toxicity of cadmium, copper, mercury and zinc
to ciliates form activated sludge plants. Bull. Environ. Contam. Toxicol. 49: 900-905.
Madoni, P., D. Davoli, G. Gorbi, and L. Vescovi. 1996. Toxic effect of heavy metals on the
activated sludge protozoan community. Water Res. 30(1): 135-141.
Martin, T.R. and D.M. Holdich. 1986. The acute lethal toxicity of heavy metals to percarid
crustaceans (with particular reference to freshwater asellids and gammarids). Water Res.
20:1137-1147.
Martin, M.. J.W. Hunt, B.S. Anderson, and S.L. Turpen. 1989. Experimental evaluation of the
mysid Holmesimysis costata as a test organism for effluent toxicity testing. Environ.
Toxicol. Chem. 8(11): 1003-1012.
Maryland Department of the Environment (MDE). 1993. Chesapeake Bay Fall Line toxics
monitoring program: 1990-1991 Loadings. Report CBP/TRS 98/93. U.S. Environmental
Projection Agency, Chesapeake Bay Program Office, Annapolis, MD.
Maryland Department of the Environment (MDE). 1995. Chesapeake Bay Fall Line toxics
monitoring program: 1992 interim report. Report CBP/TRS 131/95. U.S. Environmental
Pro section Agency, Chesapeake Bay Program Office, Annapolis, MD.
Merian, E. ,;991. Metals and Their Compounds in the Environment. VCH Publishers, New York, NY,
Mount, D.I. and T.J. Norberg. 1984. A seven-day life-cycle cladoceran toxicity test. Environ.
To>icol. Chem. 3:425-434.
Nebeker, A.V., C. Savonen, R.J. Baker and J.K. McCrady. 1984. Effects of copper, nickel and
zinc on the life cycle of the caddisfly Clistoronia magnified (Limnephilidae). Environ.
Toricol. Chem. 3:645-649.
Nebeker, A.V., A. Stinchfield, C. Savonen and G.A. Chapman. 1986. Effects of copper, nickel
and zinc on three species of Oregon freshwater snails. Environ. Toxicol. Chem. 5:807-
811.
44
-------
Nelson, D.A., I.E. Miller, and A. Calabrese. 1988. Effect of heavy metals on bay scallops, surf
clams, and blue mussels in acute and long-term exposures. Arch. Environ. Contam.
Toxicol. 17(5):595-600.
Nipper, M.G., C. Badaro-Pedroso, V.F. Jose, and S.L.R. Melo. 1993. Toxicity testing with
coastal species of southeastern Brazil. Mysids and copepods. Bull. Environ. Contam.
Toxicol. 51:99-106.
Norberg-King, T.J. 1989. An evaluation of the fathead minnow seven-day subchronic test for
estimating chronic toxicity. Environ. Toxicol. Chem. 8(11): 1075-1089.
Palawski, D., J.B. Hunn and F.J. Dwyer. 1985. Sensitivity of young striped bass to organic and
inorganic contaminants in fresh and saline waters. Trans. Am. Fish. Soc. 114:748-753.
Pardue, W.J. and T.S. Wood. 1980. Baseline toxicity data for freshwater Bryozoa exposed to
copper, cadmium, chromium and zinc. J. Tenn. Acad. Sci. 55:27-31.
Parkhurst, B.R., W. Warren-Hicks, T. Etchison, J.B. Butcher, R.D. Cardwell and J. Volison. 1994.
Methodology for aquatic risk assessment. Draft final report RP91-AER-1 prepared for the
Water Environment Research Foundation, Alexandria, VA.
Patrick, R., J. Cairns, Jr. and A Scheier. 1968. The relative sensitivity of diatoms, snails, and fish
to twenty common constituents of industrial wastes. Prog. Fish-Cult. 30:137-140.
Pattrick, R., J., R. P. Gambrell and R. A. Khalid. 1977. Physicochemical factors regulating solubility
and bioavailability of toxic heavy metals in contaminanted dredged sediment. J. Environ. Sci.
Hth. A12: 475-492.
Pavicic, J., M. Skreblin, I. Kregar, M. Tusek-Znidaric and P. Stegnar. 1994. Embryo-larval tolerance
of Mytilus galloprovincialis, exposed to elevated sea water metal concentrations-I Toxic
effects of Cd, Zn and Hg. Comp. Biochem. Physiol. 107: 249-257.
Pierson, K.B. 1981. Effects of chronic zinc exposure on the growth, sexual maturity,
reproduction, and bioaccumulation of the guppy, Poecilia reticulata. Can. J. Fish. Aquat.
Sci. 38:23-31.
Prasad, A. S. 1979. Clinical, biochemical, and pharmacolical role of zinc. Annual Review of
Pharmacology and Toxicology 20:393-426.
Qureshi, S.A. and A.B. Saksena. 1980. The acute toxicity of some heavy metals to Tilapia
mossambica (Peters). Aqua 1:19-20.
45
-------
Rabe, F.W. and C.W. Sappington. 1970. Biological productivity of the Coeur d'Alene Rivers as
related to water quality. Project A-024-Ida. Water Resources Research Institute,
Moscow, ED.
Rao, M.B. and N. Jayasree. 1987. Toxicity of copper and zinc to adults and juveniles of the
freshwater prosobranch snail Bellamya dissimilis (Muller) In: K.S. Rao and S. Shrivasta
(Eds.), Perspectives in Hydrobiology, Symp., Ujjain, India. Feb. 8-10, 1986:75-80.
Rao, I.J. and M.N. Madhyastha 1987. Toxicities of some heavy metals to the tadpoles of frog,
Microhyla ornata (Dumeril & Bibron). Toxicol. Lett. 36(2):205-208.
Rachlin, J.W. and M. Farran. 1974. Growth response of the green alga Chlorella vulgaris to
selected concentrations of zinc. Water Res. 8:575-577. ,
Rachlin, J.W., I.E. Jensen and B Warkentine. 1982. The growth response of the green alga
Chlorella saccharophila to selected concentrations of the heavy metals Cd, Cu, Pb and Zn.
In: Trace substances in environmental health-XVI. Hemphill, D.D. (Ed.). University of
Missouri, Columbia, MO. pp. 145-154.
Rachlin, J.W., T.E. Jensen and B Warkentine. 1983. The growth response of the diatom
Naviculaa incerta to selected concentrations of the metals: Cadmium, copper, lead and zinc.
Bull. Torrey Bot. Club 110:217-223.
Rachlin, J W. and A. Perlmutter. 1968. Response of an inbred strain of platyfish and the fathead
minnow to zinc. Prog. Fish-Cult. 30:203-207.
Rehwoldt, R., G. Bida, B. Nerri and D. Alessandrello. 1972. The effect of increased temperature
upon the acute toxicity of some heavy metal ions. Bull. Environ. Contam. Toxicol. 8:91-
96
Rehwoldt, R., L. Lawrence, C. Shaw and E. Wirhowski. 1973. The acute toxicity of some heavy
metal ions toward benthic organisms. Bull. Environ. Contam. Toxicol. 10:291-294.
Reish, D.J. 1993. Effects of metals and organic compounds on survival and bioaccumulation in
two species of marine gammaridean amphipod. J. Nat. Hist. 27(4):781-794.
Reish, D.I. and R.S. Carr. 1978. The effect of heavy metals on the survival, reproduction,
development and life cycles of two species of polychaetous annelids. Mar. Pollut. Bull.
9:24-29.
Reish, D.J. and J.A. LeMay. 1991. Toxicity and bioconcentration of metals and organic
compounds by polychaeta. Ophelia (Suppl.) 5:653-660.
46
-------
Reish, D.J., J.M. Martin, F.M. Piltz and J.Q. Word. 1976. The effect of heavy metals on
laboratory populations of two polychaetes with comparisons to the water quality
conditions and standards in southern California marine waters. Water Res. 10:299-302.
Riedel, G. F., S. A. Williams, G. S. Riedel and C. C. Gilmour. in press. Spatial and temporal
distributions of trace elements in an urbanized watershed and estuary: the Patuxent River.
Environ Sci. Tech.
Rodgers, J.H., Jr., D.S. Cherry, R.L. Graney, K.L. Dickson and J. Cairns, Jr. 1980. Comparison
of heavy metal interactions in acute and artificial stream bioassay techniques for the
Asiatic clam (Corbiculaflumined). In: Aquatic toxicology. Eaton, J.G., P. R. Fairish and
A.C. Hendricks (Eds.). ASTM STP 707. American Society for Testing and Materials,
Philadelphia, PA. pp. 266-280.
Roman-Mas, A, R.W. Stogner, U.K. Doyle and S.J. Klaine. 1994. Assessment of agricultural non-
point source pollution and best management practices for the Beaver Creek watershed, West
Tennessee. In G.L. Pederson, (Ed.) Proceedings of the American Water Resources
Asssociation National Symposium on Water Quality, pp. 11-21.
Rosko, J.J. and J.W. Rachlin. 1975. The effect of copper, zinc, cobalt and manganese on the
growth of the marine diatom Nitzschia closteriwn. Bull. Torrey Bot. Club 102:100-106.
Schubauer-Berigan, M.K., J.R. Dierkes, P.D. Monson, and G.T. Ankley. 1993. pH-dependent
toxicity of Cd, Cu, Ni, Pb, and Zn to Ceriodaphma dubia, Pimephaks promelas, Hyalella
azteca and Lumbriculus variegatus. Environ. Toxicol. Chem. 12:1261-1266.
Sinley, J.R., J.P. Goettl, Jr. and P.H. Davies. 1974. The dffects of zinc on rainbow trout (Salmo
gairdnerf) in hard and soft water. Bull. Environ. Contam. Toxicol. 12:193-201.
Sloof, W., J.A.M. van Oers and D. De Zwart. 1986. Margins of uncertainty in ecotoxicological
hazard assessment. Environ. Toxicol. Chem. 5:841-852.
Snell, T.W., B.D. Moffat, C. Janssen, and G. Persoone. 1991a. Acute toxicity tests using rotifers
IV. Effects of cyst age, temperature, and salinity on the sensitivity of Barachioms
calyciflorus. Ecotoxicol. Environ. Saf. 21(3):308-317.
Snell, T.W., B.D. Moffat, C. Janssen, and G. Persoone. 1991b. Acute toxicity tests using
rotifers. JH. Effects of temperature, strain, and exposure time on the sensitivity of
Brachionusplicatilis. Environ. Toxicol. Water Qual. 6:63-75.
Society of Environmental Toxicology and Chemistry (SETAC). 1994. Aquatic Risk Assessment
and Mitigation Dialogue Group. Final Report. SETAC Foundation for Environmental
Education, Inc., Pensacola, FL.
47
-------
Solomon, K.R. et al. 1996. Ecological risk assessment of atrazine in North American surface
watjrs. Environ. Tox. Chem. 15:31-76.
Sorensen, E.M.B. 1991. Metal poisoning in fish. CRC Press, Boca Raton, FL.
Soundrapandian, S. and K. Venkataraman. 1990. Effect of heavy metal salts on the life history of
Daphnia similis Claus (Crustaces: Cladocera). Proc. Indian Acad. Sci. Anim. Sci.
99(:>):411-418.
Spehar, R.L. 1976a. Cadmium and zinc toxicity to Jordanellafloridae. EPA-600/3-76-096.
National Technical Information Service, Springfield, VA.
Spehar, S..L. 1976b. Cadmium and zinc toxicity to flagfish, Jordanellafloridae. J. *Fish. Res.
Board Can. 331939-1945.
Stephan, C.E., D. I. Mount, D. J. Hansen, J. H. Gentile, G. A. Chapman and W. A. Brungs. 1985.
Guidelines for deriving numerical national water quality criteria for the protection of aquatic
organisms and their uses. Report # PB85-227049, National Technical Information Service,
Springfield, VA.
Still well, Ji.F. 1977. Zinc effects on cell division and calcification in the coccolithophorid,
Cricosphaera carterae. Sci. Biol. J. Nov.-Dec.:436-443.
Suter, G.W. n. 1990. Endpoints for regional ecological risk assessment. Environ. Mange. 14:19-
23.
Svobodovji, Z. and B. Vykusova. 1988. Comparing the sensitivity of rainbow trout and Rasbora
hstsromorpha to various toxic substances. Bui. Vyzk. Ustav Ryb. Hydrobiol. Vodnany
24(2): 14-19 (CZE) (ENG ABS).
Turner, D R., M. Whitfield and A. G. Dickson. 1981. The equilibrium speciation of dissolved
components in freshwater and sea water at 25 C and 1 atm. pressure. Geochim. Cosmochim.
Acta 45. 855-881.
U. S. Environmental Protection Agency (U.S. EPA). 1979. Methods for chemical analysis
of water and wastes. EPA 600/4-79-020. Cincinnati, OH.
U. S. Evironmental Protection Agency (U. S. EPA). 1987. Ambient Water Quality Criteria
for Zinc - 1987. EPA 440/5-87-003. Office of Water, Criteria and Standards Division.
Washington, D. C.
U. S. Environmental Protection Agency (U.S. EPA). 1991. Chesapeake Bay Toxics of Concern
List Information Sheets. Report prepared by the Chesapeake Bay Programs Toxics
48
-------
Subcommittee Living Resources Subcommittee's Joint Criteria and Standards Workgroup.
Annapolis, MD.
U. S. Environmental Protection Agency (U.S. EPA). 1992. Framework for ecological risk
assessment. Risk Assessment Forum, EPA 630/R92/001. Washington, DC.
U. S. Enviromental Protection Agency (U. S. EPA). 1994. Chesapeake Bay Basin Toxics Loading
and Release Inventory: Technical Update - Point Source Loads by Facility. CBP/TRS
114/94, Annapolis, Maryland.
U. S. Environmental Protection Agency (U.S. EPA). 1996a. Chesapeake Bay Toxics of Concern
List.Prepared by the Chesapeake Bay Program Toxics Subcommittee's Living Resources
Subcommittee's Joint Criteria and Standards Workgroup. Annapolis, MD.
U. S. Environmental Protection Agency (U. S. EPA). 1996b. Chesapeake Bay Fall Line Toxics
Monitoring Program 1994 Final Report. CBP/TRS 144/96, Annapolis, Maryland.
Uma Devi, V. 1995. Bioaccumulation and metabolic effects of zinc on marine fouling dreissinid
bivalve, Mytilopsis sallei (Recluz). Water Air Soil Pollut. 81: 295-304.
Van Leeuwen, C.J., E.M.M. Grootelaar, and G. Niebeek. 1990. Fish embryos as teratogenicity
screens: A comparison of embryotoxicity between fish and birds. Ecotoxicol. Environ.
Saf. 20(l):42-52.
Vardia, H.K., P.S. Rao, and V.S. Durve. 1988. Effect of copper, cadmium and zinc on fish-food
organisms, Daphnia lumhohzi and Cypris subglobosa. Proc. Indian Acad, Sci. Anim. Sci.
97(2): 175-180.
Vasseur, P., P. Pandard, and D. Burnel. 1988. Influence of some experimental factors on metal
toxicity to Selenastrum capricornutum. Toxic Assess 3: 331-444.
Velinsky, D. J., J. Cornwell and G. Foster. 1994. Effects of dredging on water quality of the
Anacostia River. Report submitted to Water Quality Control Branch, Environmental
Regulation Administration, Washington, D. C.
Verriopoulos, G. and M. Moraitou-Apostolopoulou. 1989. Toxicity of zinc to the marine
copepod Tisbe holothuriae, the importance of the food factor. Arch. Hydrobiol.
114(3):457-463.
Vranken, G. R., C. Tire and C. Heip. 1988. The toxicity of paired metal mixtures to the nematode
Monhystera disjuncta (Bashian, 1865). Mar. Environ. Res. 26: 161-179.
Watling, H. R. 1983. Comparative study of the effects of zinc, cadmium, and copper on the larval
49
-------
growth of three oyster species. Bull. Environ. Contam. Toxicol. 28: 195-201.
Wang, W. 1986. Toxicity tests of aquatic pollutants by using common duckweed. Environ.
Pollut. (Series B) 11:1-14.
Williams, P.I. and D.B. Dusenbery. 1990. Aquatic toxicity testing using the nematode,
Caetiorhabditis elegans. Environ. Toxicol. Chem. 9(10): 1285-1290.
Willis, M. 1988. Experimental studies of the effects of zinc on Ancylus fluviatilis (Mueller)
(Mo lusca: Gastropoda) from the Afon Crafhant, N. Wales. Arch. Hydrobiol.
112(2):299-316.
Willis, M. 1989. Experimental studies on the effects of zinc on Erpobdella octulata (L.)
(Annelida:Hirudinea) from the Afon Crafhant, N. Wales. Arch. Hydrobiol. 116(4):449-
469.
Wong, M.H., S.H. Kwan and F.Y. Tarn. 1979. Comparative toxicity of manganese and zinc on
Chlorella pyrenoidosa, Chlorella salina and Scemdesmus quadricauda. Microbios. Lett.
12:37-46.
Wu, Y., H. Zhao, and L. Hou. 1990. Effects of heavy metals on embryos and larvae of flat fish
Parilichthys olivaceus. Oceanol. Limnol. Sin. /Haiyang Yu Huzhao 21(4):386-392
(CKI); Aquat. Sci. Fish. Abstr. 21(4):4343-5Q21.
Wu, Z. and G. Chen. 1988. Studies of acute intoxication by some harmful substances on
Penaeusorientalist. Mar. Sci./HaiyangKexue (4):36-40 (Cffl) (ENG ABS).
Wurtz, C.B. and C.H. Bridges. 1961. Preliminary results from macroinvertebrate bioassays. Proc.
Pa. Acad. Sci. 35:51-56.
Wurtz, C.B. 1962. Zinc effects on fresh water mollusks. Nautilus 76:53-61.
Zhang, W, X. Xu, X. Dai, and Z. Zhu. 1992. Acute toxicity and accumulation of Zn+2 on
yot.ng freshwater grouper (Cichlasoma managuense) and bullfrog (Rana catesbeiand)
tadpole. Freshwater Fish. /Danshui Yuye 6:12-14 (Cffl) (ENG ABS).
Zirino, A. And S. Yamamoto. 1972. A pH-dependent model for the chemical speciation of copper,
zinc, cadmium and lead in seawater. Limnol. Oceangr. 17: 661-671.
Zou, E. 1997. Effects of sublethal exposures of zinc chloride on the reproduction of the water flea,
Molina irrasa (Cladocera). Bull. Environ. Contam. Toxicol. 58: 437-441.
50
-------
TABLES
-------
Table 1. Summary of the 19 zinc exposure data sources used for this risk assessment.
Reference
Data ID
Total # Sample Period
samples '
Detection Limit
Halletal., 199 la
Halletal., 1992a
Halletal, 1994a
Halletal., 1996
Halletal., 1997a
MDE, 1993,1995
Hall, 1985
Halletal., 1986
Halletal., 1987
Halletal., 1989
Halletal., 1991 b
Halletal., 1992b
AMBTOX90
AMBTOX91
AMBTOX93
AMBTOX94
AMBTOX95
Fall Line Monitoring
Reidel et al. in press NOAA/COASTES
Striped Bass Study'85
Striped Bass Study '86
Striped Bass Study'87
Striped Bass Study '88
Striped Bass Study'89
Striped Bass Study '90
Velinsky et al., 1994 ICPRB
Gruessner et al., 1997 DC ERA
Culberson & Church, 1988 UDE
12 Aug-Sep 1990
13 Aug-Sep 1991
14 Octl992&Aprl993
12 Oct 1994
8 Oct 1995
164 monthly 1990-93
60 quarterly 1995-96
51 Apr 1985
39 Apr 1986
40 Apr 1987
49 Apr-May 1988
71 Apr-May 1989
36 Apr-May 1990
Hall et al., 1994b, 1995 MD Coastal Plain (CPS) 120 Apr, Jun, Oct 1992-93
7 September 1992
36 Sept 1995-Sep 1996
20 Aug 1985
10
10
0.14
<0.3
10
20
10
10
10
<0.8
<0.7
51
-------
Table 2. Summary of zinc exposure data for all basins and stations. Maximum and 90th percoitile concentrations
(minimum of 4 detected concentrations) are presented by station and basin.
Basin
Data ID
Baltimore Harbor
AMBTOX90,?!
AMBTOX94
AMBTOX94
AMBTOX94
AMBTOX94
AMBTOX94
AMBTOX94
Baltimore Hart tor
C&D Canal
Striped Bass S tudies
Striped Bass Studies
Striped Bass Studies
C&D Canal
Chester
CPS
CPS
Chester
Choptank
Striped Bass Studies
CPS
CPS
Choptank
James
AMBTOX90
AMBTOX9S
AMBTOX95
AMBTOX95
AMBTOX95
Fall Line Monitoring
James
Lower Bav Mainstem
UDE
UDE
UDE
UDE
UDE
UDE
UDE
Lower Bay Mai astern
Middle Bav Mainstem
UDE
UDE
UDE
UDE
Concentration (ug/L)
Station
PatapscoR.
Bear Creek
Curtis Bay
Middle Branch
Northwest Harbor
Outer Harbor
Sparrows Point
Stations combined
Chesapeake City
Delaware City
Courthouse Pt.
Stations combined
URL
USE
Stations combined
Martinak
KGC
UTK
Stations combined
Elizabeth River
JRANN
JRBNN
Willoughby Bay
Lynnhaven River
02035000
Stations combined
CB1
CB2
CB3
CBS
CB6
CB7
CB8
Stations combined
CB9
CB10
CB11
CB12
# Samples
5
1
11
37
16
II
71
2
1
4
20
2
1
24
2
1
1
1
1
11
77
1
7
1
I
1
1
# Detections
0
0
0
0
0
0
Q
0
19
16
IS
53
2
2
4
20
2
2
24
2
0
0
0
0
21
26
1
7
1
1
1
1
Maximum
BLD
BLD
BLD
BLD
BLD
BLD
BLD
BLD
80
55
2S
80
23
22
30
80
10
2
80
15
BLD
BLD
BLD
BLD
20.
30
1.7
2.8
0.8
3.6
0.7
2.8
12
3.6
3.7
6.4
2.2
3.6
90* pereentile
-
-
-
-
.
-
-
-
\
49
78
&
53
.
;
35
70
.
-
66
.
.
.
-
-
8
8
.
.
.
.
.
.
-
5.2
.
.
-
.
52
-------
Basin
Data ID
UDE
UDE
UDE
Middle Bay Mainstem
Upper Bay Mainstem
Striped Bass Studies
Striped Bass Studies
Striped Bass Studies
Striped Bass Studies
Striped Bass Studies
Striped Bass Studies
UDE
UDE
UDE
UDE
UDE
UDE
Upper Bay Mainstem
Magothv
AMBTOX94
AMBTOX94
Magothy
Middle
AMBTOX93
AMBTOX93
Middle
Nanticoke
AMBTOX93
AMBTOX93
CPS
CPS
CPS
CPS
CPS
CPS
CPS
Nanticoke
Patuxent
CPS
CPS
CPS
NOAA/COASTES
NOAA/COASTES
NOAA/COASTES
NOAA/COASTES
NOAA/COASTES
NOAA/COASTES
Concentration (ng/L)
Station
CB13
CB14
CRIP
Stations combined
Grove
Howell
Spesutie
Elkton
Kentmore
Havre de Grace
CB15
CB16
CB17
CB18
CB19
CB20
Stations combined
Gibson Island
South Ferry
Stations combined
Frog Mortar
Wilson Point
Stations combined
Bivalve
Sandy Hill Beach
DMP
FBB
FBI
NDB
TLB
TWM
UMH
Stations combined
CAB
LYC
SEW
LPXT0173
PTXCF8747
PTXCF9575
PTXDE2792
PTXDE5339
PTXDE9401
it Samples
1
1
1
7
19
18
19
6
5
6
1
79
1
1
2
3
2
6
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
18
2
2
2
4
4
4
4
4
4
# Detections
1
1
1
7
18
18
17
6
5
5
1
75
1
1
2
3
a
6
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
18
2
2
2
3
4
4
2
2
3
Maximum
9.2
2.8
2£
9.6
31
16
69
24
28
13
5.6
1.0
29
3.4
1.5
26
69
BLD
BLD
BLD
38
1H
134
23
48
49
21
19
29
23
36
41
49
24
13
9.9
0.79
1.1
1.1
0.98
0.46
0.98
90* percentile
-
-
;
12
19
16
32
26
34
16
\
-
-
-
.
;
23~
-
;
-
-
-
140
.
-
-
.
.
.
.
.
-
56
.
.
.
.
1.6
1.3
.
.
.
53
-------
Basin
Data ID
NOAA/COASTES
NOAA/COASTES
NOAA/COASTES
NOAA/COASTES
NOAA/COASTES
NOAA/COASTES
NOAA/COASTES
NOAA/COASTES
NOAA/COASTES
Patuxent Basin
Potomac
AMBTOX90
AMBTOX90
AMBTOX90
AMBTOX90
AMBTOX90
CPS
CPS
CPS
CPS
CPS
CPS
DC ERA
DC ERA
ICPRB
ICPRB
ICPRB
ICPRB
Striped Bass Studies
Striped Bass Studies
Striped Bass Studies
Striped Bass Studies
Striped Bass Studies
Striped Bass Studies
Potomac
Sassafras
AMBTOX94
AMBTOX94
CPS
Sassafras
Susquehanna
Fall Line Monitoring
Severn
AMBTOX94
AMBTOX94
Severn
Concentration (u,g/L)
Station
PTXDF0407
PTXED4892
PTXED9490
PXT0402
PXT0494
PXT0603
PXT0809
PXT0972
WBPXT0045
Stations combined
Freestone Point
Indian Head
Morgantown
Possum Point
Dahlgren
BTM
CHP
COF
DYN
FOR
MTW
Anacostia 01 649500
Anacostia01651000
Anacostia T 120
Anacostia T800
Anacostia T500
Anacostia T 1100
Cherry Hill
Maryland
Mid
Virginia
Quantico
Widewater
Stations combined
Betterton
Turners Creek
MLC
Stations combined
01578310
Junction Rt. 50
Annapolis
Stations combined
# Samples
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
66
1
1
5
1
5
2
2
2
2
2
2
18
18
2
2
2
1
13
25
26
32
13
n
190
1
1
2
7
93
1
1
2
n Detections
3
4
4
4
4
4
3
3
4
57
1
1
0
1
1
2
2
2
2
2
2
18
18
2
2
2
1
13
25
26
32
13
12
180
0
0
2
2
59
1
1
2
Maximum
1.1
2.4
1.8
2.0
6.6
7.7
1.6
2.1
11
24
27
22
BLD
20
7.4
26
8.9
6.9
29
16
23
21
16
3.5
4.8
2.3
2.1
110
310
220
184
90
12Q
310
BLD
BLD
11
15
22
BLD
BLD
BLD
90* percentile
-
3.4
2.5
2.9
11
8.5
.
.
21
7.1
\ .
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
26
14
_
.
.
.
73
86
73
96
75
142
70
_
.
.
-
9.3
.
-
.
54
-------
Basin
Data ID
West Chesapeake
CPS
CPS
CPS
West Chesapeake
Wve
AMBTOX90.91.93
AMBTOX93
Wye
York
AMBTOX95
AMBTOX95
AMBTOX95
AMBTOX95
York
Concentration (ng/L)
Station
BEB
BRB
NRV
Stations combined
Manor House
Quarter Creek
Stations combined
YRACA
YRBCA
PRAWP
PRBWP
Stations combined
# Samples
2
2
2
6
7
2
9
1
1
1
1
4
# Detections
2
2
2
6
2
2
4
0
0
0
Q
0
Maximum
29
29
22
29
28
22
29
BLD
BID
BLD
BID
BLD
90* percentile
.
.
;
35
-
-
36
%
-
.
.
.
-
55
-------
Table 3. Freshwater acute zinc toxicity data presented in order from most to least sensitive species. Symbols used include:
*NR=not reported, S=static test. N=nominal concentration, F=flow-thru test, M=measured concentration, R= renewal test
Species
Cladoceran,
Ceriodaphnia
reticulata
Green algae,
Selenastrum
capricornutum
Cladoceran,
Daphnia magna
u, Chinook salmon,
* Onchorhynchus
tshawytscha
Cutthroat trout,
Salmo clarki
Rainbow trout,
Oncorhynchus mykiss
Cladoceran,
Ceriodaphnia dubia
Cladoceran,
Daphnia pulex
Arctic grayling,
Thymallus arcticus
Method
S,N
S,N
S,N
F,M
S,M
F,M
S,M
S,N
S
Chemical
zinc
chloride
zinc
sulfate
zinc
zinc
sulfate
zinc
sulfate
zinc
chloride
zinc
sulfate
zinc
zinc
chloride
Hardness
(mg/L as
CaCO3)
45
*NR
45
21
*NR
23
289.8
280-300
45
soft*
LC50
(ug/L)
32
50
68
84
90
93
95
107
112
Hard adj. Duration
LC50 & Effect
(ug/L)
34.99 48 hr
LC50
72 hr
EC50,
GRO
74.35 48 hr
LC50
175.2 96 hr
LC50
96 hr
TLm
179.6 96 hr
LC50
21.4 48 hr
LC50
117.0 48 hr
LC50
96 hr
LC50
Reference
Carlson & Roush
1985
Vasseuretal. 1988
Mount & Norberg
1984
Finlayson & Verrue
1982
Rabe & Sappington
1970
Chapman 1975
Schubsuer°Bsrigan
et al. 1993
Mount & Norberg
1984
Buhl & Hamilton
1990
-------
Fathead minnow,
Pimephales promelas
Loach,
Noemacheilus
montanus
Cladoceran,
Daphnia similis
Ciliate,
Chilodonella
uncinata
Big claw river
shrimp,
Macrobrachium
carcinus
Mussel,
Anodonta imbecillis
Snail,
Bellamya bengalensis
Scud,
Hyalella azteca
Cyprinid fish,
Barilius bendelisis
Striped Bass,
Morone saxatilis
R
S
S
S
S
S
R
S, M
S
S,N
zinc
sulfate
zinc
chloride
zinc
sulfate
zinc
sulfate
zinc
sulfate
zinc
sulfate
zinc
zinc
chloride
46.5
*NR
*NR
*NR
*NR
39
*NR
290
*NR
285
204
140
165
<170
200
268
280
290
400
430
216.9 96 hr
LC50
96 hr
LC50
96 hr
LC50
24 hr
LC50
96 hr
LC50
330.8 96 hr
LC50
96 hr
LC50
65.4 96 hr
LC50
*NR
98.4 96 hr
LC50
Norberg-King 1989
Joshi & Chamoli
1987
Soundrapandian &
Venkataraman 1990
Madoni et al. 1996
Correa 1987
Keller &Zam 1991
Rao & Jayasree
1987
Schubauer-Berigan
et al. 1993
Deoray & Wagh
1987
Palawski et al. 1985
-------
Snail, S,N
Physa heterostropha
zinc 100 434
sulfate (10.6 C)
241.2 96 hr Wurtz 1962
LC50
in
00
Cladoceran,
Daphnia lumholzi
Shrimp,
Paratya compressa
Atlantic salmon,
Salmo solar
Sockeye salmon,
Onchorhynchus
nerka
Longfin dace,
Agosia chrysogaster
Coho salmon,
Oncorhynchus
kisutch
Nematode,
Caenorhabditis
elegans
Snail,
Helisoma
campanulatum
Snail,
Physa gyrina
R
S
F,M
F,M
R,M
F,M
S
S,N
F,M
zinc
zinc
zinc
sulfate
zinc
chloride
zinc
sulfate
zinc
chloride
zinc
chloride
zinc
sulfate
zinc
chloride
*NR
*NR
14
22
217
25
*NR
100
(22.8 C)
36
437.5
722
740
749
790
905
1000
1,270
1,274
96 hr
LC50
48 hr
LC50
2,176
1,502 96 hr
LC50
227.8 96 hr
LC50
1,628 96 hr
LC50
96 hr
LC50
705.9 96 hr
LC50
1,683 96 hr
LC50
Vardia et al. 1988
Hatakeyama&
Sugaya 1989
Carson & Carson
1972
Chapman
1975,1978a
Lewis 1978
Chapman & Stevens
1978
Williams &
Dusenbery 1990
Wurtz 1962
Nebekeretal. 1986
-------
Ln
Diatom,
Navicula semimtlum
Rotifer,
Brachionus
calyciflorus
Water flea,
Moina macrocopa
Flagfish,
Jordanella floridae
Brook trout,
Salvelinus fontinalis
Mozambique tilapia,
Tilapia mossambica
Pond snail,
Lymnaea luteola
Colorado squawfish,
Ptychocheilus Indus
Guppy,
Poecilia reticulata
Ciliate,
Colpidium campylum
Leech,
Erpobdella
octoculata
S
S,N
F,M
F,M
S,N
R
S
S,M
S
R
zinc
chloride
zinc
sulfate
zinc
sulfate
zinc
sulfate
zinc
chloride
zinc
sulfate
zinc
chloride
zinc
sulfate
zinc
chloride
zinc
sulfate
58
36.2
*NR
44
46.8
115
200.6
175-230
191.2
182-201
30
*NR
*NR
1,320
1,320
1,320
1,500
1,550
1,600
1,680
1,700
1,740
1,850
2,050
1,164 120 hr
EC50
1,735 24 hr
LC50
48 hr
LC50
1,672 96 hr
LC50
1,639 96 hr
LC50
790 96 hr
LC50
518 96 hr
LC50
546 96 hr
LC50
2,682
24 hr
EC50,
IMM
96 hr
LC50
Academy of Natura
Sciences 1960
Couillard et al. 198<
Hatakeyama &
Sugaya 1989
Spehar 1976a,b
Holcombe &
Andrew
1978
Qureshi & Saksena
1980
Khangarot & Ray
1987b
Hamilton 1995
Pierson 1981
Madoni et al. 1992
Willis 1989
-------
White Sucker,
Catostomus
commersoni
F,M zinc 18
chloride
ON
O
Scud, F
Gammarus lacustrts
Tubificid worm, S,N
Limnodrilus
hoffmeisteri
Ciliate, S
Evplotes sp.
Protozoa, S
Aspidisca cicada
Green algae,
Chlorella vulgaris
Ciliate, S
Paramecium
caudatum
Protozoa, S
Uronema nigricans
Razorback sucker, S
Xyrauchen texanus
Protozoa, S
Euplotes affinis
zinc
zinc
sulfate
zinc
chloride
zinc
chloride
zinc
sulfate
zinc
chloride
zinc
chloride
zinc
chloride
zinc
chloride
*NR
100
*NR
*NR
*NR
*NR
*NR
199.4
196-203
*NR
2,240
>2,274
2,390
2,400
2,400
2,500
2,900
2,920
3,100
96 hr
LC50
> 1,264 11 day,
LC50
24 hr
LC50
24 hr
EC50
96 hr
EC50
24 hr
EC50,
IMM
24 hr
EC50,
IMM
904 96 hr
LC50
24 hr
EC50
IMM
2,200 5,228 96 hr Duncan &
LC50 Klaverkamp 1983
De March 1988
Wurtz and Bridges
1961
Madonietal. 1996
Madonietal. 1992
Rachlin and Farran
1974
Madoni et al. 1992
Madoni et al. 1992
Buhl & Hamilton
1996
Madoni et al. 1992
-------
Common Carp,
Cyprinus carpio
River Limpet,
Ancylus fluviatilis
Cyclopoid copepod,
Cyclops sp.
Bluegill,
Lepomis macrochirus
Northern squawfish,
Ptychochellus
Oregonensis
Clawed toad,
Xenopus laevis
Ciliate,
Vorticella
convallaria
Diatom,
Nitzschia linearis
Bryozoan,
Pectinatella
magnified
Fish,
Lepidocephalichthyes
guntea
R,N
S
S
F,M
F,M
R
S
S
S,N
S
zinc
sulfate
zinc
sulfate
zinc
zinc
chloride
zinc
chloride
zinc
sulfate
zinc
chloride
zinc
chloride
zinc
zinc
sulfate
19
*NR
*NR
45
24.4
20-30
100
*NR
294.6
204.4
190-220
*NR
3,120
3,200
3,310
3,314
3,498
3,600
3,790
4,300
4,310
4400
7,083 96 hr
LC50
96 hr
LC50
48 hr
LC50
3,623 96 hr
TLm
6,423 96 hr
LC50
2,001 96 hr
EC50,
ABN
24 hr
LC50
957 120 hr
LC50
1,307 96 hr
LC50
96 hr
LC50
Khangarot et al.
1983
Willis 1988
Abbasictal. 1988
Cairns & Scheier
1959
Andros & Carton
1980
Dawsonetal. 1988
Madoni et al. 1996
Patrick et al. 1968
Pardue & Wood
1980
96 hr Bengeri & Patil
1987
-------
Bonytail,
Gila elegans
Bryozoan.
Plumatella
emarginata
Bryozoan,
Lophopodella carteri
Golden shiner,
Notemigonus
crysoleucas
Asiatic clam,
Corbicula fluminea
Worm, oligochaete
Lwnbriculus
variegatus
Green alga,
Chlorella
saccharophila
Goldfish,
Carassius auratus
Amphipod,
Gammarus sp.
Ostracod,
Cypris subglobosa
Isopod,
Lircetts alabamae
S
S..N
S,N
S.N
S,M
S,N
S,M
S,N
S,M
R
F.M
zinc
chloride
zinc
zinc
zinc
sulfate
zinc
sulfate
zinc
chloride
zinc
sulfate
zinc
sulfate
zinc
zinc
zinc
sulfate
191.2
182-201
204.4
190-220
204.4
190-220
50
64
30
*NR
50
50
*NR
152
4,800
5.300
5,630
6,000
6,040
6,300
7,100
7,500
8,100
8,352
8,375
1,540
1.607
1,707
6,000
4,900
9,712
7,500
8,100
3,265
96 hr
LC50
96 hr
LC50
96 hr
LC50
96 hr
TLm
96 hr
LC50
9 day,
LC50
96 hr
EC50
96 hr
TLm
96 hr
TLm
96 hr
LC50
Hamilton, S.J. 1995
Pardue & Wood
1980
Pardue & Wood
1980
Cairns et al. 1969
Cherry et al. 1980
Rodgers et al. 1980
Bailey & Liu 1980
Rachlin et al. 1982
Cairns et al. 1969
Rehwoldt et al. 1973
Vardiaetal. 1988
Bosnak & Morgan
1981
-------
CO
Isopod,
Asellus communis
Diatom,
Navicula incerta
Duckweed,
Lemna minor
Zebra danio,
zebrafish
Brachydanio rerio
Southern platyfish,
Xiphophorus
maculatus
Tilapia,
Tilapia zillii
Snail,
Amnicola sp.
White perch,
Morone americana
American eel,
Anguilla rostrata
Tubificid worm,
Tubifex tubifex
Worm,
Nais sp.
S,N
S,M
R
S,N
S
S,M
S,M
S,N
R
S,M
zinc
sulfate
zinc
chloride
zinc
chloride
zinc
sulfate
zinc
sulfate
zinc
zinc
nitrate
zinc
nitrate
zinc
sulfate
zinc
100
*NR
*NR
*NR
166
*NR
50
55
55
*NR
50
8,755
10,000
10,000
10,000
12,000
13,000
14,000
14,400
14,500
17,780
18,400
4,866 96 hr
LC50
96 hr
EC50
96 hr
EC50
168 hr
LC50
4,341
96 hr
LC50
14,000 96 hr
TLm
13,280 96 hr
TLm
13,380 96 hr
TLm
96 hr
EC50,
IMM
18,400 96 hr
TLm
Wurtz & Bridges
1961
Rachlin et al. 1983
Wang 1986
Van Leeuwen et al.
1990
Rachlin &
Perlmutter 1968
Hilmy et al. 1987
Rehwoldt et al. 1973
Rehwoldt et al. 1972
Rehwoldt et al. 1972
Khangarot 1991
Rehwoldt et al. 1973
-------
Banded killifish,
Fundulus diaphanus
Amphipod,
Crangonyx
psuedogracilis
Common indian toad,
Bufo melanosticlus
Pumpkinseed,
Lepomis gibbosus
Isopod,
Asellus bicrenata
Frog,
Microhyla ornata
Catfish,
Clarias lazera
Damselfly,
Argia sp
Harlequinfish, red
rasbora, Rasbora
heteromorpha
Ciliate,
Aspidisca lynceus
Protozoa,
Euplotes patella
S,M
R,N
S
SSM
F,M
R
S
S,N
S
S
S
zinc
nitrate
zinc
sulfate
zinc
sulfate
zinc
nitrate
zinc
sulfate
zinc
sulfate
zinc
sulfate
zinc
sulfate
zinc salt
zinc
chloride
zinc
chloride
55
50
188.3
165-215
55
220
*NR
*NR
20
*NR
*NR
*NR
19,200
19,800
19,860
20,100
20,110
22,410
26,000
40,930
46,400
50,000
50,000
17,710 96 hr
TLm
19,800 96 hr
EC50,
IMM
6,457 96 hr
LC50
18,540 96 hr
TLm
5,731
96 hr
LC50
NR 96 hr
LC50
88,960 120hr
LC50
48 hr
LC50
24 hr
LC50
24 hr
EC50,
IMM
Rehwoidt et al. 1972
Martin & Koldich
1986
Khangarot & Ray
1987a
Rehwoidt et al. 1972
Bosnak & Morgan
1981
Rao & Madhyastha
1987
Hilmyetal. 1987
Wurtz & Bridges
1961
Svobodova &
Vykusova 1988
Madoni et al. 1996
Madoni et al. 1992
-------
Bullfrog,
Rana catesbeiana
Indian catfish, R
Heteropneustes
fossilis
Jaguar guapote,
Cichlasoma
managuense
Snake-head catfish, R
Channa punctatus
Green alga,
Chlorella
pyrenoidosa
Green alga,
Chlorella salina
Green alga,
Scenedesmus
quadricauda
Climbing perch, S
Anabas testudineus
zinc
zinc
chloride
zinc
zinc
chloride
zinc
sulfate
zinc
sulfate
zinc
sulfaste
zinc
chloride
*NR
*NR
*NR
*NR
*NR
*NR
*NR
*NR
70,000
75,000
77,980
80,000
>200,000
>200,000
>200,000
260,000
96 hr
LC50
96 hr
LC50
96 hr
LC50
96 hr
LC50
96 hr
LC50
96 hr
LC50
96 hr
LC50
24 hr
LC50
Zhang et al. 1992
Hemalatha&
Banerjee 1993
Zhang et al. 1992
Dalai &
Bhattacharya 1994
Wong et al. 1979
Wongetal. 1979
Wong et al. 1979
Banerjee & Kumari
1988
-------
Table 4. The 10* percentile intercepts for freshwater and saltwater zinc toxicity data by test
duration and trophic group. These values represent protection of 90% of the test species.
Water typo
Freshwater*
Freshwater*
Saltwater
Saltwater
Acute or Chronic Trophic Group
acute All species
amphibians
zooplankton
benthos
fish
plants
chronic All species
zooplankton
benthos
fish
acute All species
zooplankton
benthos
fish
plants
chronic All species
n
55
2
5
20
26
2
12
3
2
7
82
10
51
12
9
6
10* Percentile (ug/L)
142
629
4.3
212
216
789
11
0.8
\
74
56
79
46
102
69
10
8.7
* Hardness adjusted values are used (50 mg/L).
66
-------
Table 5. Saltwater acute zinc toxicity data presented in order from most to least sensitive species. Symbols used include: *NR=not
reported, S=static test, N=nominal concentration, F=flow-thru test, M=measured concentration. R=renewal test
Species
Diatom,
Schroederetta schroederi
Purple sea urchin,
Strongylocentrotus
purpurat
Diatom,
Thalassiosira rotula
Sand dollar,
Dendrasler excentricus
Inland silverside,
Menidia beryllina
Red abalone,
Haliotis rufescens
Calanoid copepod,
Temora stylifera
Mysid,
Acanthomysis costata
Brine shrimp,
Artetniafranchiscana
Method Chemical
zinc
sulfate
S zinc
chloride
zinc
sulfate
S zinc
chloride
R zinc
chloride
F,U zinc
sulfate
S,N zinc
sulfate
R, M zinc
sulfate
S zinc
sulfate
LC50
(ug/L)
19.01
23
25.8
28
30
37
40
46
65
Duration
& Effect
96 hr
EC50
GRO
120 hr
EC50,
DVP
120 hr
EC50
GRO
1.3 hr
EC50,
REP
96 hr
LC50
48 hr
EC50
48 hr
LC50
168 hr
LC50
72 hr
LC50
Reference
Kayser 1977
Dinnel et al. 1989
Kayser 1977
Dinnel et al. 1989
Lewis 1993
Conroyetal. 1996
Nipper etal. 1993
Martin et al. 1989
MacRae & Pandey
1991
-------
ON
00
Coccolithophorid,
Cricosphaera carterae
Mediterranean mussel, S
Mytilus galloprovincialis
Lobster, S,N
Homanis americanus
Cabezon, S
Scorpaenichthys
marmoratus
Quahog clam, S,N
Mercenaria mercenaria
Eastern oyster, S,N
Crassostrea virginica
Pacific oyster, S,M
Crassostrea gigas
Diatom,
Nitzschia closterium
Copepod, S,N
Acartia tonsa
Fleshy prawn, S
Penaeus chinensis
zinc 76.69
sulfate
zinc 145
sulfate
zinc 175
chloride
zinc 191
chloride
zinc 195
chloride
zinc 205.7
chloride
zinc 206.5
chloride
zinc 271
sulfate
zinc 294.2
chloride
zinc 300
sulfate
96 hr
EC50
GRO
48 hr
EC50,
DVP
96 hr
LC50
96h
EC50,
IMM
48 hr
LC50,
MOR
48 hr
EC50,
DVP
96 hr
EC50
GRO
96 hr
LC50
96 hr
LC50
Stillwell 1977
Pavicic et al. 1994
Johnson 1985
Dinnel et al. 1989
Calabrese & Nelson
1974
Maclnnes & Calabrese
1978
Dinnel et al. 1983
Rosko and Rachlin
1975
Lussier & Cardin 1985
Wu & Chen 1988
-------
Opossum shrimp,
Mysidopsis bahia
Rea sea urchin,
Strongylocentrotus
francisc
Dinoflagellate,
Procentrwn micans
Calanoid copepod,
Acartia lilljeborgi
Shrimp,
Mysidopsis juniae
Green sea urchin,
Strongylocentrotus
droebach
Hermit Crab,
Pagurus longicarpus
Harpacticoid copepod,
Tisbe holothuriae
Striped bass,
Morone saxatilis
Mysid,
Mysidopsis bahia
Red tongue sole,
Cynoglossusjoyneri
s
s
S,N
S,N
S
S,N
S
S,N
F.M
S
zinc
chloride
zinc
chloride
zinc
sulfate
zinc
sulfate
zinc
sulfate
zinc
chloride
zinc
chloride
zinc
sulfate
zinc
chloride
zinc
chloride
zinc
sulfate
303
313
319.1
320
340
383
400
421
430
499
500
96 hr
LC50
1.3 hr
EC50,
REP
96 hr
EC50
GRO
48 hr
LC50
96 hr
LC50
1.3 hr
EC50,
REP
96 hr
LC50
48 hr
LC50
96 hr
LC50
96 hr
LC50
96 hr
LC50
Cripe 1994
Dinnel et al. 1989
Kayser 1977
Nipper etal. 1993
Nipper etal. 1993
Dinnel et al. 1989
Eisler & Hennekey
1977
Verriopoulos &
Moraitou-
Apostolopoulou 1989
Palawski et al. 1985
Lussier et al. 1985
Cui et al. 1987
-------
Scud,
Allorchestes compressa
Dungeness crab,
Cancer magister
Mysid,
Mysidopsis bigelawi
Diatom,
Thalassiosira pseudonana
Harpacticoid copepod,
Nitocra spinipes
Polychaete worm,
Neanthes arenaceodentata
Amphipod,
Corophium volutator
Green crab,
Carcims maenas
Pink shrimp,
Penaeus duorarum
Sheepshead minnow,
Cyprinodon variegatus
Polychaete worm,
Ophryotrocha diadema
R,M
S
S,M
S
F
S,N
S,N
S,N
S
R
S,N
zinc
chloride
zinc
chloride
zinc
chloride
zinc
chloride
zinc
chloride
zinc
sulfate
zinc
sulfate
zinc
sulfate
zinc
chloride
zinc
chloride
zinc
sulfate
580
586
591.3
823.1
850
900
1,000
1,000
1,050
1,000=
10,000
1,400
96 hr
LC50
96 hr
EC50,
IMM
96 hr
LC50
72 hr
EC50
GRO
96 hr
LC50
96 hr
LC50
96 hr
LC50
48 hr
LC50
96 hr
LC50
96 hr
LC50
96 hr
LC50
Ahsanullah 1976
Dinnel ci al. 1989
Lussier & Gentile 198S
Fisher etal. 1984
Bengtsson &
Bergstrom 1987
Reish et al. 1976
Bryant etal. 1985
Connor 1972
Cripe 1994
Lewis 1993
Reish & Carr 1978
-------
Polychaete worm,
Nereis diversicolor
Copepod,
Acartia clausi
Brine shrimp,
Artemia salina
Polychaete worm,
Capitella capitata
Polychaete worm,
Neanthes grubei
Polychaete worm,
Ophryotrocha labronica
Scud,
Corophium insidiosum
Squid,
Loligo opalescens
Indian prawn,
Penaeus indicus
Bay scallop,
Argopecten irradians
Blue mussel,
Mytilus edulis planulatus
Atlantic silverside,
Menidia menidia
R,N
S,N
*NR
S,N
S
s
*NR
S
*NR
R
R,M
S,N
zinc
sulfate
zinc
chloride
zinc
zinc
sulfate
zinc
chloride
zinc
chloride
zinc
chloride
zinc
chloride
zinc
zinc
chloride
zinc
chloride
zinc
chloride
1,500
1,507
1,700
1,700
1,800
1,800
1,900
> 1,920
1,990
2,250
2,500
2,728
96 hr
LC50
72 hr
LC50
48 hr
LC50
96 hr
LC50
96 hr
LC50
96 hr
LC50
96 hr
LC50
96 hr
EC50,
IMM
48 hr
LC50
96 hr
LC50
96 hr
LC50
Bryan & Hummerstone
1973
Lussier & Cardin 1985
Govindarajan et al.
1993
Reish et al. 1976
Reish&LeMayl991
Reish &LeMay 1991
Reish 1993
Dinnel et al. 1989
Govindarajan et al.
1993
Nelson etal. 1988
Ahsanullah 1976
Cardin 1985
-------
IS)
Cone worm,
Pectinaria californiensis
Surf clam,
Spisula solidissima
Green mussel,
Perna viridis
Dinoflagellate,
Gymnodinium splendens
Copepod,
Eurytemora qffinis
Rotifer,
Brachiomts plicatilis
Winter flounder,
Pseudopleuronectes
americanus
Mollusk,
Neotrigonia margaritacea
Soft-shell clam,
Mya arenaria
Polychaete worm,
Neanthes vaali
Tidewater silverside,
Menidia peninsulae
s
R
*NR
S,N
*NR
S,N
R,M
S,N
R.M
S,N
zinc
chloride
zinc
chloride
zinc
zinc
sulfate
zinc
chloride
zinc
zinc
chloride
zinc
chloride
zinc
chloride
zinc
chloride
zinc
sulfate
2,800
2,950
3,100
3,716
4,074
>4,800
4,922
>5,000
5,200
5,500
5,600
96 hr
LC50
96 hr
LC50
24 hr
LC50
96 hr
EC50
GRO
24 hr
LC50
96 hr
LC50
96 hr
LC50
96 hr
LC50
Reish&LeMay 1991
Nelson et al. 1988
Govindarajan et al.
1993
Kayser 1977
Lussier & Cardin 1985
Snelletal. 1991b
Cardin 1985
Ahsanullah 1976
Eisler 1977a
Ahsanullah 1976
Hansen 1983
-------
UJ
Nematode,
Monhystera disjuncta
Hirarne flounder,
Paralichthys olivaceus
Polychaete worm,
Ctenodrilus serratus
Polychaete worm,
Nereis virens
Santa Domingo
falsemussel,
Mytilopsis sallei
Starfish,
Patiriella exigua
Diatom,
Navicula incerta
Crab,
Paragrapsus
quadridentatus
Daggerblade grass shrimp,
Palaemonetes pugio
Green alga,
Dunaliella tertiolecta
s
*NR
S,N
S,N
R
R,M
F,M
S
S
zinc
zinc
zinc
sulfate
zinc
chloride
zinc
sulfate
zinc
chloride
zinc
chloride
zinc
chloride
zinc
chloride
zinc
chloride
5,700
6,700
7,100
8,100
8,360
> 10,000
10,100
10,500
11,300
13,000
96 hr
EC50,
DVP
48 hr
LC50
96 hr
LC50
96 hr
LC50
96 hr
LC50
96 hr
LC50
96 hr
EC50
GRO
120 hr
LC50
48 hr
LC50
72 hr
EC50
GRO
Vranken et al. 1988
Wuetal. 1990
Reish & Carr 1978
Eisler & Hennekey
1977
UmaDevi 1995
Ahsanullah 1976
Rachlin et al. 1983
Ahsanullah 1976
Burton & Fisher 1990
Fisher etal. 1984
-------
Mummichog,
Fundulus heteroclitus
Fiddler crab.
Uca annulipes
Spot,
Leiostomus xanthurus
Starfish,
Asteriasforbesil
Fiddler crab,
Uca triangularis
Mud snail,
Nassarius obsoletus
Clam,
Macoma balthica
Rivulus,
Rivulus marmoratvs
S,N
R
' S,N
S,N
R
S,N
S,N
F
zinc
chloride
zinc
sulfate
zinc
sulfate
zinc
chloride
zinc
sulfate
zinc
chloride
zinc
sulfate
zinc
sulfate
17,500
31.930
38,000
39,000
39,050
50,000
60,000
119,300
96 hr
TLm
96 hr
LC50
96 hr
LC50
96 hr
LC50
96 hr
LC50
96 hr
LC50
96 hr
LC50
Dorfinan 1977
Devi 1987
Hansen 1983
Eisler & Hennekey
1977
Devi 1987
Eisler & Hennekey
1977
Bryant et al. 1985
Lin&Dunson 1993
-------
•xl
in
Table 6. Freshwater chronic zinc toxicity data presented in order from most to least sensitive species. Symbols used include:
LC=life cycle test, ELS= early life stage test, R=renewal test, S=static test, F=flow-thru test, M=measured concentration,
N=nominal concentration, REP=reproduction endpoint, GRO=growth endpoint, MOR=mortality endpoint, HAT=hatching
endpoint, DVP=development endpoint
Species
Cladoceran,
Moina irrasa
Flagfish,
Jordanellafloridae
Cladoceran,
Daphnia magna
Snail,
Potamopyrgus
jenkinsi
Fathead minnow,
Pimephales promelas
Guppy,
Poecilia reticulata
Sockeye salmon,
Onchorhynchus nerka
Rainbow trout,
Salmo gairdneri
Method Chemical
R Zinc
chloride
LC zinc
sulfate
LC zinc
chloride
R zinc
chloride
LC zinc
sulfate
LC zinc
sulfate
ELS zinc
chloride
ELS, F zinc
sulfate
Hardness
(mg/Las
CaCO3)
<5
44
211
*NR
46
30
32-37
25
Chronic
Value*
(ug/L)
NOEC
25
LOEC
51
46.73
59.7
106.3
<173
>242
191
Hardness
adjusted
Chronic
value
(ug/L)
176
57
14
114
267
332
344
Duration
& Effect
3 week,
REP
30 day,
GRO
77-112
day,
GRO
8wk,
MOR
134 day
GRO
21 month
MOR
21 month
.MOR
Reference
Zou 1997.
Spehar 1976a,b
Chapman et al.
manuscript
Dorgelo, J. et al.
1995
Benoit & Holcombe
1978
Pierson 1981
Chapman 1978
Sinleyctal. 1974
-------
Cladoceran,
Ceriodaphnia
reticulata
Chinook salmon,
Oncorhynchus
tshawytscha
Snail,
Physa gyrina
Brook trout,
Salvelinus fontinalis
Zebra danio zebrafish,
Brachydanio rerio
Caddisfly,
Clistoronia magnified
R.M
ELS.F
F,M
LC,F
R
LC
zinc
zinc
chloride
zinc
chloride
zinc
sulfate
zinc
chloride
372.5
25
36
45.9
*NR
31
221.4 5.5
371.1 668
NOEC 753
570
854.7 919
1,102
>5,243 >7,860
7 day,
MOR
4 month,
MOR
30 day
MOR
4-27
month,
MOR
< 16 day,
HAT
76 day
DVP
Carlson & Roush
1985
Chapman 1975
Nebekeretal. 1986
Holcombe et al. 1979
Dave et al. 1987
Nebecker et al. 1984
* If chronic value was not reported a NOEC or LOEC was used.
-------
Table 7. Saltwater chronic zinc toxicity data presented in order from most to least sensitive species . Symbols used include:
LC=life cycle test, ELS= early life stage test, R=renewal test, S=static test, F=flow-thru test, M=measured concentration,
N=nominal concentration, REP=reproduction endpoint, GRO=growth endpoint, MOR=mortality endpoint, HAT=hatching
endpoint, DVP=development endpoint
Species
Mysid,
Acanlhomysis costata
Red abalone,
Haliotis rufescens
Pacific oyster,
Crassostrea gigas
Scud,
Allorchestes
compressa
Mysid,
Mysidopsis bahia
Mysid,
Mysidopsis intii
Method
R,M
F
S,N
F
R.M
R,M
Chemical
zinc sulfate
zinc sulfate
zinc
zinc sulfate
zinc sulfate
zinc sulfate
Chronic Value*
(ug/L)
NOEC
18
NOEC
19
30
LOEC
99
152 MATC
152 MATC
Duration
& Effect
7 day, MOR
9 day,
DVP
6dayEC50,
DVP
28 day, MOR
7 day, MOR
7 day, MOR
Reference
Martin et al. 1989
Hunt & Anderson
1989
Waiting 1983
Ahsanullah &
Williams 1991
Harmon and
Langdon 1996
Harmon and
Langdon 1996
* If chronic value was not reported a NOEC or LOEC was used.
-------
Table 8. The percent probability of exceeding the zinc acute freshwater (FW) or saltwater
(J!W)10th percentile for all species and the percent probability of exceeding the acute
10th percentile for the most sensitive trophic group with n>8.
Location
Middle .Wver (SW)
PotomasRiver(FW)
Wye River (SW)
Choptaiik River (FW)
Nanticoke River (FW)
C and E) Canal (FW)
James EJver (FW)
Patuxer t River (SW)
Upper mainstem Bay (FW)
Chester River (FW)
Susquehanna River (FW)
Lower mainstem Bay (SW)
West Chesapeake (FW)
Middle mainstem Bay (SW)
Acute 10* Percentile (^g/L)
( ) - most sensitive trophic group 10th
percentile
79
142
79
142
142
142
142
79
142
142
142
79
142
79
(10 -plants)
(2 12 -benthos)
(10 - plants)
(212 - benthos)
(212 -benthos)
(212 -benthos)
(212 -benthos)
(10 - plants)
(212 -benthos)
(212 - benthos)
(212 -benthos)
(10 - plants)
(212 -benthos)
(10 - plants)
% Probability >
10th percentile
21
3.3
2.7
1.2
0.8
0.6
0.3
0.3
<0.1
-------
FIGURES
-------
Figure 1. Ecological risk assessment approach.
PROBLEM FORMULATION
• Stressor Characteristics
• Exposure Data
• Ecological Effects Data
• Risk Characterization
• Endpoints
• Stressors Potentially Impacting Aquatic Communities
• Conceptual Model
ANALYSIS
Characterization of Exposure: Water column monitoring data
on zinc in the Chesapeake Bay watershed.
Characterization of Ecological Effects: Laboratory toxicity
studies.
RISK CHARACTERIZATION
Probabilistic comparison of species sensitivity and surface
water exposure distributions.
79
-------
Figure 2. Location of the 116 stations where zinc concentrations were measured from 1985 to
1996. See key to map where stations are described.
95
w
25
80—
111-11
3 L 104
103
0 25 Miles
—'TJgg-^gaarwKS'ai
80
-------
Key to map for Figure 2 Stations where zinc was measured from 1985 to 1996. Latitude and longitude
coordinates are given in decimal degrees. Station number corresponds to station location on Figure 2.
Abbreviated station names are in parentheses.
Station niimh«- Station
1 Susquehanna River Fall Line (15783 10)
2 James River Fall Line (2035000)
3 Elizabeth River
4 Freestone Point
5 Indian Head
6 Morgantown
7 Patapsco River
8 Possum Point
9 Wye River (Manor House)
10 Bell Branch (BEB)
1 1 Bacon Ridge Branch (BRB)
12 Burnt Mill Creek (BTM)
13 Bear Creek
14 Curtis Bay
15 Middle Branch
16 North West Harbor
17 Outer Harbor
18 Sparrows Point
19 Cabin Branch (CAB)
20 CB1
21 CB10
22 CB11
23 CB12
24 CB13
25 CB14
26 CB15
27 CB16
28 CB17
29 CB18
30 CB19
31 CB2
32 CB20
33 CB3
34 CBS
35 CB6
36 CB7
37 CBS
38 CB9
39 Martinak
40 Chaptico Creek (CHP)
41 Coffee Hill (COF)
42 CR1D
43 Davis Millpond (DMP)
44 Dynards Run (DYN)
45 Dahlgren
46 Faulkners Branch - Bradley Rd. (FBB)
T ntitiiHp
39.6586
37.6708
36.8081
38.5833
38.6000
38.3337
39.2167
38.5362
38.9028
38.9917
38.9992
38.3322
39.2358
39.2064
39.2528
39.2767
39.2089
39.2081
38.7694
36.9950
38.2467
38.3717
38.5633
38.7517
38.9183
38.0717
39.1883
39.2567
39.3683
39.5500
37.0833
39.4300
37.1883
37.3650
37.5267
37.6200
37.8217
38.1000
38.8750
38.3817
38.3614
38.5700
38.6708
38.3164
38.3012
38.6989
T rmpitiufo
7671744
78.0861
76.2933
77.2667
77.2167
77.0157
76.5000
77.2920
76.1298
76.6333
76.6136
76.6369
76.4% 1
76.5803
76.5883
76.5742
76.5247
76.5075
76.6528
75.9467
76.2617
76.3233
76.4317
76.4350
76.3883
76.3233
76.2883
76.2400
76.1433
76.0800
76.0950
76.0333
76.1633
76.0750
76.0433
76.1200
76.1750
76.2200
75.8417
76.7822
76.7578
76.3833
75.7639
76.7344
77.0660
75.7853
81
-------
Station tmmkpr RtAtirin
47 Faulkners Branch -IscherRd. (FBI)
48 Forest Hall (FOR)
49 Kings Creek (KGC)
50 LPXT0173
51 Lyons Creek (LYC)
52 Mill Creek (MLC)
53 Mattawoman Creek (MTW)
54 Gibson Island
55 South Ferry
56 Frog Mortar
57 Wilson Point
58 North Davis Branch (NDB)
59 North River (NRV)
60 Bivalve
61 Sandy Hill Beach
62 Cherry Hill
63 Maryland
64 Mid
65 Virginia
66 Quantico
67 Widewater
68 PTXCF8747
69 PTXCF9575
70 PTXDE2792
71 PTXDE5339
72 PTXDE9401
73 PTXDF0407
74 PTXED4892
75 PTXED9490
76 PXT0402
77 PXT0494
78 PXT0603
79 PXT0809
80 PXT0972
81 Sewell Branch (SEW)
82 Betterton
83 Turners Creek
84 Junction RL 50
85 Annapolis
86 Tull Branch (TLB)
87 Twiford Meadow (TWM)
88 Trib. to Marshyhope Creek (UMH)
89 Grove
90 Howell
91 Spesutie
92 Delaware City
93 Chesapeake City
94 Courthouse Point
95 Elkton
96 Kentmore
38.7214
38.3989
38.7897
39.1333
38.7689
39.2825
38.6161
39.0600
39.0767
39.3083
39.3083
38.6783
38.9878
38.3214
38.3567
38.5667
38.5167
38.5222
38.4917
38.5278
38.4333
38.3133
38.3265
38.3800
38.4243
38.4940
38.3413
38.5828
38.6582
38.7118
38.8062
38.9500
39.1083
39.2350
38.6083
39.3742
39.3631
39.0056
38.9669
38.7194
38.7236
38.7631
39.4000
39.3583
39.3917
39.5417
39.5167
39.5000
39.5667
39.3750
75.8261
76.7492
76.0094
76.8183
76.6239
76.1436
77.0486
76.4350
76.5014
76.4028
76.4125
75.7478
76.6233
75.8894 l
75.8558
77.2583
77.2583
77.2667
77.3083
77.2750
77.3250
76.4222
76.3713
76.5150
76.6008
76.6645
76.4858
76.6783
76.6845
76.6858
76.7075
76.6950
76.8617
77.0583
76.5867
76.0503
75.9842
76.5067
76.4717
75.7719
75.7625
75.7431
76.0500
76.0833
76.1250
75.7250
75.8000
75.8750
75.8500
75.9583
82
-------
Stntinn nnmhw Station
97 Havre de Grace
98 Trib. to Red Lion Branch (URL)
99 Trib. to Southeast Creek (USE)
100 Trib. to Tuckahoe Creek (UTK)
101 WBPXT0045
102 Quarter Creek
103 Lynnhaven River
104 WilloughbyBay
1 05 James River above Newport News (JRANN)
1 06 James R. below Newport News (JRBNN)
107 York River above Cheatham Annex (YRACA)
108 York R. below Cheatham Annex (YRBCA)
1 09 Pamunkey River below West Point (PRB WP)
1 1 0 Pamunkey R. above West Point (PRAWP)
111 Anacostia River (T800)
112 Anacostia River (T500)
113 Anacostia River (Tl 100)
114 Anacostia River (T 120)
115 Anacostia River (01 649500)
116 Anacostia River (01 65 1000)
T Jititiirte
39.5417
39.1767
39.1308
38.8831
38.8085
38.9167
36.8972
36.9528
37.0103
36.9758
37.3050
37.2833
37.5319
37.5464
38.9322
38.9378
38.9453
38.9350
38.9603
38.9525
T immtnAf.
7670667
,75.8992
75.9794
75.9269
76.7507
76.1667
76.0886
76.2819
76.5883
76.4389
76.6104
76.5767
76.8036
76.8122
76.9394
76.9419
76.9406
76.9397
76.9261
76.9667
83
-------
Figure 3. The zinc 90th percentiles determined for basins with at least 4 detected concentrations.
150
140
130
120
00
0)100
^ 90
-------
Figure 4. Seasonal pooled mean zinc concentrations and ranges (fJg/L) from 15 stations during Patuxent River
sampling (May 1995-February 1996).
00
2.5
2
c
N
1
0.5
0
Patuxent River Zn Concentrations
NOAA/COASTES Sampling
(.39-5.04)
MAY 95
(<.33-5.82)
(<.33-5.04)
(<33-10.8)
AUG 95 NOV 95
Pooled Station Means By Season
-----'-- J..-.-.J- ...
FEB96
-------
Figure 5. Zinc concentrations from the James River (1990 - 1993).
Zinc Concentrations in James River
35
00
30 -
O)
zi.
25 -
•^ 20 -
03
C
0
o
c
o
O
o
c
Kl
15 -I
10 -
5 -
0 -
o
o>
—i—
o
O
0>
CD
—i—
CM
—i—
CD
^
CM
O)
CM
CD
CO
CD
CO
0>
Date
-------
Figure 6. Zinc concentrations from the Susquehanna River (1990 -1993).
Zinc Concentrations in Susquehanna River
35
30
>-x 25
:§ 20
*C 15
CD
O
f~
O
O
0 5
C
" o
O)
o
r-
^
o
o
T
o
o
CO 05
CM
O)
O) ^
V~ T—
O ^
CM
O)
-I—I—1—I-
co
O)
CO
CD
CO
O)
CO
O)
O)
O T-
O T-
Date
-------
Figure 7. Distribution of acute zinc toxicity data (LC / ECSOs) for freshwater species.
Zinc Effects - Freshwater Acute Tests
100 1000 10000
Zinc Concentration (pg/L)
100000
• amphibians
O benthos
v fish
v zooplankton
• plant
— regression line
88
-------
Figure 8. Distribution of acute zinc toxicity data (LC / ECSOs) for saltwater species.
Zinc Effects - Saltwater Acute Tests
99
90 -
£ 70 -
05
I 50 J
= 30 -I
I
Q- 10 -j
10
100 1000 10000
Zinc Concentration (M9/L)
100000
1000000
• benthos
O fish
T zooplankton
v plant
regression line
89
-------
Figure 9. Distribution of chronic zinc toxicity data for freshwater species.
Zinc Effects - Freshwater Chronic Tests
99 -r-
90 -
CO
I 50
I
0)
0- 10
1 --
10 100 1000
Zinc Concentration (M9/L)
10000 100000
• benthos
O fish
y zooplankton
regression line
90
-------
Figure 10. Distribution of chronic zinc toxicity data for saltwater species.
Zinc Effects - Saltwater Chronic Tests
99
90 -
eo
§ 70
50
cc
| 30
I
0>
0- 10 -\
10 100
Zinc Concentration (pg/L)
1000
benthos
regression line
91
-------
APPENDIX A
Zinc risk characterization by basin
-------
Middle River Basin Exposures
99 T-
'•J3
0
O 10-]
0)
Q_
1 --
Probability of
exceedence =
Probability of
exceedence = 79%
10 100
Zinc Concentration (M9/L)
1000
A-l
-------
Potomac Basin Exposures
99.9
O
CL
X
0)
•D
(D
C
OJ
-------
Wye River Basin Exposures
Probability of
exceedence = 42%
Probability of
exceedence = 2.7%
100
1000
Zinc Concentration (M9/L)
A-3
-------
Choptank River Basin Exposures
99.9
V)
(0
o
CL
X
0
TJ
0
C
CO
0
2
0
Q.
99 -|
90 -
70 -
50 -
30 -
10 -
1 -
0.1
Probability of
exceedence = 0.3%
I I
Probability of
exceedence = 1.2%
10 100
Zinc Concentration (pg/L)
1000
A-4
-------
Nanticoke River Basin Exposures
99.9
0)
13
(/>
o
Q.
X
0)
T3
0)
-^
c
0)
s
0)
Q_
99 -
90 -
70
50
30
10 -
1 -
0.1
Probability of
exceedence = 0.8%
Probability of
exceedence
= 0.2%
10 100
Zinc Concentration (M9/L)
1000
A-5
-------
C&D Canal Exposures
99.9
(0
o
CL
X
0
•o
0
c
(0
•=
"c
0
l_
0
CL
99 -
90 -
70 -
50 -
30 -
10 -
1 -
0.1
Probability of
exceedence = 0.6
Probability of
exceedence = 0.1
10 100
Zinc Concentration (|jg/L)
1000
A-6
-------
James River Basin Exposures
99.9
CO
o
CL
X
0)
"O
0)
J£
c
5
»4—
o
JD
'-?
I
'o
a
M
15
£
.*
•.=
I
s.
£o
Probability of
exceedence
= 0.2%
(0
0)
^3
JU
'•?
0>
y
0)
Q.
£o
1 10 100
Zinc Concentration (pg/L)
1000
A-7
-------
Patuxent River Basin Exposures
o
Q.
X
-------
Upper Chesapeake Bay Mainstem Exposures
99.9
13
CO
o
Q.
X
0)
O
CD
.*:
c
03
-------
Chester River Basin Exposures
CO
o
GL
X
-------
Susquehanna Fall Line Exposures
99.9
D
CO
O
Q.
X
Q)
O
Q>
Q.
3
|
I
0)
Q.
1 10 100
Zinc Concentration (|jg/L)
1000
A-ll
-------
Lower Chesapeake Bay Mainstem Exposures
99.9
8>
3
(0
O
Q.
X
0)
c
0)
2
0)
CL
99 -
90 -
70 -
50
30
10 -I
Probability of
exceedence = 1.4%
1 10
Zinc Concentration (pg/L)
100
A-12
-------
West Chesapeake Basin Exposures
99.9
o
0.
X
0)
I
I
<+-
o
0)
(D
Q_
99 -
90 -
70
50
30
10 -
1 -
0.1
ID
g>
'Q
O
M
15
OJ
10 100
Zinc Concentration (|jg/L)
o
£
£
.0
o
0)
(D
Q.
O
1000
A-13
-------
Middle Chesapeake Bay Mainstem Exposures
99.9
99 -I
(0
s>
13
<0
O 90
X
0)
•o
------- |