SUPPLEMENTAL DATA
Table S1. Estimated parameters for models used to calculate survival and growth effects on Hyalella azteca after four-week exposures to sulfonamide antibiotics
Week 4 Growth b
Sulfonamide Week 1 Survival a m’ n
Sulfaguanidine c
0.0716 1.31
Sulfathiazole d 0.0452 0.497
Sulfamerazine e 0.0630 1.36
Week 2 Survival m’
0.0740 2.07 n
0.0467 0.628
0.0822 1.31
Week 3 Survival m’ n
0.0648
0.0442
2.67
0.590
Week 4 Survival m’ n
0.0727
0.0380
0.0549
2.26
0.574
0.494 max
0.516
0.727
0.651
1.03 n
0.469
0.301 0.0045
0.0602
*
0.112
*
0.482
0.614
*
4.25
*
Sulfasalazine No effects on survival or growth at any tested concentration a
Survival parameters: m’
= control mortality, n = constant. b
Growth parameters: max = maximum mass when sulfonamide concentrations are zero, n (growth) = constant. c
Two experiments conducted in total. Data pooled from two experiments for all toxicity calculations.

d
Three experiments conducted in total. Data pooled from three experiments for weeks one-three and from two experiments for week four; one experiment eliminated from week four calculations due to high control mortality. e
Six experiments conducted in total. Data pooled from two experiments for weeks one and two; LC25s (lethal concentrations associated with 25% mortality) and LC50s (lethal concentrations associated with 50% mortality) could not be calculated from four experiments because insufficient mortality occurred. Data pooled from three experiments for week three; individual LC25s and
LC50s reported for two experiments (*) because 95% confidence intervals for model parameters did not overlap with all experiments;
LC25s and LC50s could not be calculated from one experiment because insufficient mortality occurred. Survival data pooled from five experiments for week four; one experiment eliminated from week four calculations due to high control mortality. Growth data pooled from two experiments; EC25s (effective concentrations associated with 25% reduction in growth) and EC50s (effective concentrations associated with 50% reduction in growth) could not be calculated from three experiments because insufficient growth inhibition occurred; one experiment eliminated from week four calculations due to high control mortality.

Table S2. An overview of maximum sulfonamide concentrations measured in environmental waters found in the published literature
Compartment Location Description Reference # SAs analysed/
# SAs detected
Maximum Concentrations
(μg/L)
(nM)
Surface water Australia
Canada
China
Rivers
Agricultural streams
Agricultural streams
Lake (close proximity to swine operation)
Seine River France
Germany Rivers
Rivers
Luxembourg Rivers
Spain Receiving waters for
3/3
9/3
6/5
4/1
2/2
2/1
14/2
4/3
3/3
2.0
0.020
0.41
0.011
0.54
0.48
0.085
0.022
0.025
7.9
0.072
1.5
0.042
2.1
1.9
0.34
0.087
0.099
[S1]
[S2]
[S3]
[S4]
[S5]
[S6]
[S7]
[S8]
[S9]

Groundwater
United
States
China
Denmark
WWTPs
Rivers 6/2
Rivers 9/9
Streams receiving human, 7/4 industrial, agricultural wastewaters
Rivers
Suburban, agricultural streams
6/4
4/3
Rivers 6/4
Close proximity to swine 4/1 operation
Downstream of landfill
(waste disposal from pharmaceutical
6/5
0.0090
12
1.9
0.032
48
7.5
[S10]
[S11]
[S12]
0.15
0.022
0.22
0.0060
1600
0.48
0.079
0.79
0.023
7500
[S13]
[S14]
[S15]
[S4]
[S16]

Germany
Spain
United
States
Agricultural China
Taiwan
United
States
Wastewater Australia production)
Close proximity to agricultural activity
Monitoring wells with varying levels of human activity
City of Barcelona
Groundwater and spring water
2/2
4/1
9/9
6/1
Private wells near CAFO 4/2
Swine wastewater 4/3
Swine wastewater 7/3
Swine wastewater storage 2/2 lagoons
WWTP influent/effluent 3/3
0.47
0.41
1.9
1.6
[S6]
[S17]
0.0099
0.22
0.039
0.87
0.22
22
77
400
0.57
0.79
82
290
1400
2.2
[S11]
[S13]
[S18]
[S4]
[S19]
[S20]
[S21]

WWTP influent/effluent 3/3
Hospital effluent 3/1
Canada
China
Germany
WWTP effluent
STP influent/effluent
WWTP effluent
STP effluent
Luxembourg WWTP influent/effluent 4/4
Spain Municipal STP 1/1
WWTP 9/8
16/6
3/3
14/3
2/1
Switzerland WWTP influent/effluent 5/2
WWTP influent/effluent 6/3 United
States
WWTP influent/effluent 7/2
3.0
0.30
0.87
0.70
2.5
2.0
0.16
0.64
0.24
0.86
0.68
12
1.2
3.4
2.5
9.7
7.9
0.61
2.5
0.95
3.4
2.4
[S1]
[S1]
[S22]
[S23]
[S7]
[S6]
[S8]
[S24]
[S11]
[S25]
[S15]
1.2 4.9 [S26]
SA = sulfonamide antibiotic; CAFO = confined animal feeding operation; WWTP = wastewater treatment plant; STP = sewage treatment plant.

SUPPLEMENTAL DATA REFERENCES
1.
Watkinson AJ, Murby EJ, Kolpin DW, Costanzo SD. 2009. The occurrence of antibiotics in an urban watershed: From wastewater to drinking water. Sci Total
Environ 407:2711-2723.
2.
Forrest F, Lorenz K, Thompson T, Keenliside J, Kendall J, Charest J. 2011. A scoping study of livestock antimicrobials in agricultural streams of Alberta.
Canadian Water Resources Journal 36(1):1-16.
3.
Lissemore L, Hao C, Yang P, Sibley PK, Mabury S, Solomon KR. 2006. An exposure assessment for selected pharmaceuticals within a watershed in Southern
Ontario. Chemosphere 64:717-729.
4.
Tong L, Li P, Wang Y, Zhu K. 2009. Analysis of veterinary antibiotic residues in swine wastewater and environmental water samples using optimized SPE-
LC/MS/MS. Chemosphere 74:1090-1097.
5.
Tamtam F, Mercier F, Le Bot B, Eurin J, Dinh QT, Clément M, Chevreuil M. 2008.
Occurrence and fate of antibiotics in the Seine River in various hydrological conditions. Sci Total Environ 393:84-95.
6.
Hirsch R, Ternes T, Haberer K, Kratz K-L. 1999. Occurrence of antibiotics in the aquatic environment. Sci Total Environ 225:109-118.
7.
Hartig C, Storm T, Jekel M. 1999. Detection and identification of sulphonamide drugs in municipal waste water by liquid chromatography coupled with electrospray ionization tandem mass spectrometry. J Chromatogr A 854:163-173.

8.
Pailler J-Y, Krein A, Pfister L, Hoffman L, Guignard C. 2009. Solid phase extraction coupled to liquid chromatography-tandem mass spectrometry analysis of sulfonamides, tetracyclines, analgesics and hormones in surface water and wastewater in Luxembourg. Sci Total Environ 407:4736-4743.
9.
Gros M, Petrović M, Ginebreda A, Barceló D. 2010. Removal of pharmaceuticals during wastewater treatment and environmental risk assessment using hazard indexes.
Environ Int 36:15-26.
10.
Raich-Montiu J, Folch J, Campañó R, Granados M, Prat MD. 2007. Analysis of trace levels of sulfonamides in surface water and soil samples by liquid chromatography-fluorescence. J Chromatogr A 1172:186-193.
11.
Díaz-Cruz MS, García-Galán MJ, Barceló D. 2008. Highly sensitive simultaneous determination of sulfonamide antibiotics and one metabolite in environmental waters by liquid chromatography-quadrupole linear ion trap-mass spectrometry. J
Chromatogr A 1193:50-59.
12.
Kolpin DW, Furlong ET, Meyer MT, Thurman EM, Zaugg SD, Barber LB, Buxton
HT. 2002. Pharmaceuticals, hormones, and other organic wastewater contaminants in U.S. streams, 1999-2000: A national reconnaissance. Environ Sci Technol
36:1202-1211.
13.
Lindsey ME, Meyer M, Thurman EM. 2001. Analysis of trace levels of sulfonamide and tetracycline antimicrobials in groundwater and surface water using solid-phase extraction and liquid chromatography/mass spectrometry. Anal Chem 73:4640-4646.
14.
Veach AM, Bernot MJ. 2011. Temporal variation of pharmaceuticals in an urban and agriculturally influenced stream. Sci Total Environ 409:4553-4563.

15.
Yang S, Carlson K. 2004. Routine monitoring of antibiotics in water and wastewater with a radioimmunoassay technique. Water Res 38:3155-3166.
16.
Holm JV, Rügge K, Bjerg PL, Christensen TH. 1995. Occurrence and distribution of pharmaceutical organic compounds in the groundwater downgradient of a landfill
(Grindsted, Denmark). Environ Sci Technol 29(5):1415-1420.
17.
Sacher F, Lange FT, Brauch H-J, Blankenhorn I. 2001. Pharmaceuticals in groundwaters: Analytical methods and results of a monitoring program in Baden-
Württemberg, Germany.
J Chromatogr A 938:199-210.
18.
Batt AL, Snow DD, Aga DS. 2006. Occurrence of sulfonamide antimicrobials in private water wells in Washington County, Idaho, USA. Chemosphere 64:1963-
1971.
19.
Jen J-F, Lee H-L, Lee B-N. 1998. Simultaneous determination of seven sulfonamide residues in swine wastewater by high-performance liquid chromatography. J
Chromatogr A 793:378-382.
20.
Campagnolo ER, Johnson KR, Karpati A, Rubin CS, Kolpin DW, Meyer MT,
Esteban JE, Currier RW, Smith K, Thu KM, McGeehin M. 2002. Antimicrobial residues in animal waste and water resources proximal to large-scale swine and poultry feeding operations. Sci Total Environ 299:89-95.
21.
Watkinson AJ, Murby EJ, Costanzo SD. 2007. Removal of antibiotics in conventional and advanced wastewater treatment: Implications for environmental discharge and wastewater recycling. Water Res 41:4164-4176.

22.
Maio X-S, Bishay F, Chen M, Metcalfe CD. 2004. Occurrence of antimicrobials in the final effluents of wastewater treatment plants in Canada. Environ Sci Technol
38:3533-3541.
23.
Xu W, Zhang G, Li X, Zou S, Li P, Hu Z, Li J. 2007. Occurrence and elimination of antibiotics at four sewage treatment plants in the Pearl River Delta (PRD), South
China. Water Res 41:4526-4534.
24.
Carballa M, Omil F, Lema JM, Llompart M, García-Jares C, Rodriguez I, Gómez M,
Ternes T. 2004. Behavior of pharmaceuticals, cosmetics and hormones in a sewage treatment plant. Water Res 38:2918-2926.
25.
Göbel A, Thomsen A, McArdell CS, Joss A, Giger W. 2005. Occurrence and sorption behaviour of sulfonamides, macrolides, and trimethoprim in activated sludge treatment. Environ Sci Technol 39:3981-3989.
26.
Karthikeyan KG, Meyer MT. 2006. Occurrence of antibiotics in wastewater treatment facilities in Wisconsin, USA. Sci Total Environ 361:196-207.