Exposure and Condition of Three Passerine Species
Along the Tittabawassee River: a Multiple Lines of
Evidence Approach
Timothy B. Fredricks
30th Annual Society of Environmental
Toxicology and Chemistry Meeting
21 November 2009
Contributors
• Coauthors
– Matthew J. Zwiernik, Rita M. Seston, Sarah J. Coefield, Dustin L.
Tazelaar, Patrick W. Bradley, Denise P. Kay, John L. Newsted,
Shaun A. Roark, John P. Giesy
• Special thanks to…
– Many field and laboratory technicians for their assistance
– Local landowners, parks, and the Shiawassee National Wildlife
Refuge for property access
– The Dow Chemical Company for funding via an unrestricted grant
Outline
• Background information
• Results
– Tissue-based exposures
– Dietary-based exposures
– Productivity endpoints
• Hazard assessment
• Conclusions
Study Areas
Receptor Species
House wren
Eastern bluebird
Tree swallow
Endpoints Examined
• Tissue-based exposures
– Eggs
– Nestlings
• Dietary-based exposures
– Bolus samples
– Food web collected
invertebrates
• Productivity measures
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
Clutch size
Hatching success
Growth/NS mass
Adult attentiveness
Number of fledglings
Fledging success
Productivity
Nest Box Occupancy and
Samples for Analytical
Endpoint
Clutches initiated
Fledged at least 1 nestling
Egg samples
Nestling samples
Bolus samples
Invert. food web (n=221)
House
wren
427
277
49
48
11
192
* For 2005-2007 among all study areas
Tree
swallow
245
176
50
45
13
210
Eastern
bluebird
122
75
35
30
14
161
Eastern
bluebird
eggsamples
samples
Tree
swallow
House
wren egg
Tissue-based
Exposure
Geometric mean concentration (95% UCL) of ΣPCDD/DF
Geometric mean concentration (95% UCL) of ΣPCDD/DF
TEQsWHO-Avian in egg (ng/kg ww)
TEQsWHO-Avian
in egg (ng/kg ww)
800
2000
1200
Legend
D
D
• Egg
B
600
1500
– Concentrations of TEQsWHO-Avian
2,3,7,8-TCDF
2,3,4,7,8-PeCDF
2,3,7,8-TCDD
1,2,3,7,8-PeCDD
Other
800
B
400
1000
D
B
400
D
CD
BC
B
200
500
A
A
AB
R-1
R-1
(6)
(7)
R-2
R-2
(6)
(7)
00
T-3
T-3
(9)
(6)
(8)
T-4
T-4
T-4
(7)
(6)
(6)
T-5
T-5
T-5
(6)
(3)
(2)
Sample site
site
Sample
T-6
T-6
T-6
(6)
(6)
(7)
S-7
S-7
S-7
(6)
(2)
(7)
S-9
S-9
S-9
(3)
(0)
(6)
Geometric mean concentration (95% UCL) of ΣPCDD/DF
TEQsWHO-Avian in nestlings(ng/kg ww)
Geometric mean concentration (95% UCL) of ΣPCDD/DF
in nestlings
WHO-Avian
GeometricTEQs
mean
concentration
(95%(ng/kg
UCL) ww)
of ΣPCDD/DF
Tissue-based Exposure
Tree
swallow
Eastern
bluebird
House
wren
8002000
2500
C
700
TEQsWHO-Avian in nestlings (ng/kg ww)
• Egg
D
– Concentrations of TEQsWHO-Avian
1500
5001000
1000
C
D
600
B
CD
• Nestling
400
– Concentrations of TEQsWHO-Avian
500
B
300
BC
500
BC
CD
200
C
B
B
100
A AB A
A
A
0 R-1
R-2
R-1 (6) R-1 R-2 (6)R-2
(6)
(6) (6)
(6)
B
B
A
0
0
T-3
T-3
T-3 (7)
(6) (6)
T-4
T-4
T-4 (7)
(6) (5)
T-5
(6)
T-5 T-5
(3) (0)
Sample
site
Sample
Sample
site site
T-6
T-6T-6(6)
(6) (5)
S-7
S-7S-7(6)
(6)(2)
S-9
S-9 (4)
S-9
(0)
(6)
Percent mass dietary composition
Dietary-based
Exposure
Dietary concentrations
at Tittabawassee River SAs
House wren
1000
(n=948)
Tree swallow
(n=21,182)
Lepidoptera
Brachycera
• Dietary composition (% by mass)
• Bolus-based vs. Food web-based diets
52%
Nematocera
ΣPCDD/DF TEQs (ng/kg)
800
17%
6%
Other
Hemiptera
Trichoptera
20%
600
Orthoptera
35%
9%
Maximum
Araneae
Other
14%
Hymenoptera
Hemiptera
Tricoptera
10%
Opiliones
Brachycera
Ephemeroptera
7%
Coleoptera
Odonata
400
Eastern bluebird
(n=576)
Orthoptera
200
Mean
44%
Median
Minimum
0
Bolus
Lepidoptera
Insect
28%
Bolus
Other
Insect
Bolus
Insect
Tree swallowColeoptera
Eastern bluebird
House wren
12%
Araneae
Oligochaeta
Productivity Measures
• Overall nest success
HW-66%
TS-73%
EB-64%
• Similar or greater downstream
– TS greater productivity at S-7 and S-9
– HW lesser fledging success at S-7 and S-9
– Hatching success similar for all species
HW-77–82%
TS-76–86%
EB-70–84%
Toxicity Reference Values
• TRVs
Selection
Criteria
selected
(ng TEQ/kg)
– Chemical compound
NOAEC LOAEC
Source
– Measurement endpoint (ecologically relevant)
Dietary
– Limited co-contamination risk
All Species
14
140
Nosek et al. 1992
– Dose-response relationship
Egg
– Wildlife species
TS/HW 710
7,940
USEPA 2003
EB
1,000
10,000
Thiel et al. 1988
Hazard Assessment
House
wren
egg-based
HQs
bolus-based
HQs
Tree
swallow
egg-based
HQs
House wrenTree
and swallow
Eastern
bluebird
bolus-based
Eastern
bluebird
egg-based
HQs HQs
6035
3.0 1.2
1.50
0.5 0.5
0.5 1.5
• Hazard Quotients (HQs)
HQ= [[ ]] [[
measured ]
measured
or
LOAEC ]
NOAEC
HQ=1 HQ=1
1.0
– Bolus-based
– Egg-based
0.3
0.75
0.2
0.50
95% UCL
5530
2.0
0.3
0.3
50251.5
1010
0.6
95% LCL
Maximum
0.2
0.2
Maximum
0.5
95% UCL
HQ=1
0.1
95% LCL
0.1
0.1
0.25
Minimum
0.0
0.00 0.0
0.0
0.8
95% LCL
Minimum
1.0
0.4
55
0.5
0.2
HQ=1
0.0
R-1
R-1
(7)
HW
(6)
R-2
R-2
EB(7)
(6)
R-1
R-1 and R-2R-2
R-1 and R-2
(6)
(6)
T-3
T-3
(8)
(9) HW
T-4
T-4
(6) EB
(7)
T-3Sample
to
T-6 site
T-4
T-3
to T-6
Sample
site
T-5
T-5
(2)
(6)
T-3
T-5
(6) Study area
(6)
(3)
Sample area
Sample site
T-6
T-6
(7)
HW
(6)
0.0
S-7
S-9
S-7
(7) EB S-9
(6)
(6)
(3)
S-7
T-6to S-9 S-7
S-7 to S-9
(2)
(6)
00
0.0
S-9
(0)
Hazard quotient (95% CI)
Hazard quotient (95% CI)
Hazard
quotient(95%
(range)
Hazard quotient
CI)
Hazard quotient (range)
Hazard quotient (95% CI)
1.00
95% UCL
LOAEC
0.4
0.4 0.4
Hazard quotient (95% CI)
1.25
NOAEC
LOAEC HQ=1
2.5 1.0
Hazard quotient (range)
Hazard quotient (range)
NOAEC
NOAEC
NOAEC
NOAEC
LOAEC
LOAEC
LOAEC
Summary
• Multiple lines of evidence
– Dietary-based
• Greatly exceeded the NOAEC (30-50x)
• Slightly exceeded the LOAEC (2-3x)
– Tissue-based
• HW slightly exceeded the NOAEC
– Productivity-based
• No indication of adverse effects
Conclusion
• Overall
Based on a multiple lines of evidence assessment of several
passerine species there is limited evidence of increased risk
to birds breeding within the Tittabawassee and Saginaw
River floodplains downstream of Midland, Michigan.
Questions?
Timothy B. Fredricks
FREDRI29@MSU.EDU