Preliminary assessment of polybrominated diphenyl ethers (PBDEs) in the Scottish aquatic environment, including the Firth of Clyde

Abstract

This paper presents preliminary data on polybrominated diphenyl ethers (PBDEs) in the Scottish aquatic environment. Sediment and biota (fish liver, fish muscle and mussels) from a number of locations around Scotland were analysed for PBDEs with samples being from both remote and from potentially contaminated areas such as the former sewage sludge dump site at Garroch Head in the Clyde. PBDEs were measured in both cultivated, rope grown mussels and wild mussels collected from 5 sites around Scotland in 2006. Total PBDE concentrations (sum of tri- to hepta-BDEs) ranged from <limit of detection (LoD) to 2.36 microg kg(-1) wet weight, with the highest concentrations being found in mussels close to Aberdeen harbour. Most PBDE congeners were below detection limits but where they were detected, BDE47 and BDE99 were the main congeners. PBDEs were detected at low concentrations in flatfish muscle from 11 localities around Scotland, with total PBDE concentrations ranging from <LoD to 1.67 microg kg(-1) wet weight, with BDE47 being the dominant congener. Total PBDEs concentrations ranged from <LoD to 1.22 microg kg(-1) wet weight in brown trout muscle from 4 mountain lochs with the highest in fish from Lochnagar, a high level loch in the eastern Cairngorms. In contrast to the marine fish, BDE99 was the main congener in the brown trout. PBDEs were also measured in fish liver collected from the former sewage sludge dump site at Garroch Head in the Clyde, with total PBDE concentrations ranging from 4.1-536.1 microg kg(-1) wet weight. Concentrations were highest prior to the cessation of sewage sludge dumping in 1998. Total PBDE concentrations (sum of tri- to hepta-BDEs) in sediment cores collected in 2003 from Garroch Head and at a site 2.3 km south of Garroch Head ranged from <LoD to 23.4 microg kg(-1) dry weight. BDE209 was found at very high concentrations in the cores (2.3 to 98 125 microg kg(-1) dry weight). Highest PBDE concentrations were found in the top 4 cm of all cores, reflecting their more recent use.

Increasing polybrominated diphenyl ether (PBDE) contamination in sediment cores from the inner Clyde Estuary, UK

“…The concentration of BDE-209 was higher than that of the summed concentrations of tri-, tetra-, penta-, hexa-and hepta-homologue groups in all the sediments as exemplified by the typical PBDE homologue group concentrations presented in Fig μg/kg (BDE-209) (Webster et al 2008). However, substantially lower values of <LOD (Σ17PBDEs except BDE-209) and 3.5 to 5.5 μg/kg (BDE-209) for a sediment grab (Pladda) located on the southern tip of the Isle of Arran were also documented (Webster et al 2008).…”

“…However, substantially lower values of <LOD (Σ17PBDEs except BDE-209) and 3.5 to 5.5 μg/kg (BDE-209) for a sediment grab (Pladda) located on the southern tip of the Isle of Arran were also documented (Webster et al 2008). Similarly highly polluted river and coastal sites in the UK such as the river Tees <0.3-368 (BDE-47) and <0.6-898 (BDE-99) have higher concentrations of individual PBDE congeners than those observed in this current study of the inner Clyde (Allchin et al 1999;Law et al 2006).…”

Gender-specific modulation of immune system complement gene expression in marine medaka Oryzias melastigma following dietary exposure of BDE-47

“…Because of their usage and persistence, PBDEs are found ubiquitously in marine environments globally from the Antarctic, Scotland to Australia as well as in Asia including Korea and Hong Kong (Moon et al 2007; Cheung et al 2008; Hale et al 2008; Webster et al 2008; Toms et al 2008). Among the many PBDE congeners, 2,2′,4,4′-tetra-bromodiphenyl ether (BDE-47) predominates in marine biota, comprising over 50 % of the total PBDEs detected in marine fish (Akutsu et al 2001; Boon et al 2002; Brown et al 2006; Meng et al 2008; She et al 2002; Voorspoels et al 2003).…”

Migraine and the Risk of Suicide

“…Screening for opioid misuse is the cornerstone of protecting patients from drug related complications including death. Several effective screening tools exist like the Revised Screener and Opioid Assessment for Patients with Pain (SOAPP‐R) or Opioid Risk Tool (ORT), but there is a dearth of validated tests or tools to reliably predict patients who are not suitable for opioid therapy or those who need increased vigilance during therapy . Some self‐reported questionnaires run the risk of false responses given by misusers, while some instruments are lengthy and impractical in clinical scenarios.…”

“…Several effective screening tools exist like the Revised Screener and Opioid Assessment for Patients with Pain (SOAPP-R) or Opioid Risk Tool (ORT), but there is a dearth of validated tests or tools to reliably predict patients who are not suitable for opioid therapy or those who need increased vigilance during therapy. 35,40,41 Some self-reported questionnaires run the risk of false responses given by misusers, while some instruments are lengthy and impractical in clinical scenarios. In any case, screening should not be limited to single questionnaires and must include collateral information in the shape of testing of biologic material such as blood and urine, opioid treatment agreements, prescriptions of smaller quantities of opioids and frequent follow-ups, providing different pharmacological agents for breakthrough pain, and input from prescription monitoring programs like the Internet System for Tracking Over-Prescribing (I-STOP).…”