Survey of persistent pesticide residues in the edible tissues of wild and pond-raised louisiana crayfish and their habitat

Residue Analysis of 60 Pesticides in Red Swamp Crayfish Using QuEChERS with High-Performance Liquid Chromatography–Tandem Mass Spectrometry

“…In the early 1990s, studies on food safety of crayfish in Louisiana, U.S.A., the hometown of crayfish, were conducted to survey residues of persistent organochlorine pesticides in commercial crayfish products. Residues of 40 ng/g of dichlorodiphenyldichloroethane (DDD) and 11 ng/g of dichlorodiphenyldichloroethylene (DDE) were found in crayfish abdominal muscle . Similarly, Santerre et al analyzed crayfish from eight southern U.S. states for 34 organochlorine, organophosphate, and pyrethroid pesticides and found p , p ′-DDE in 3 out of 38 samples, with an average concentration of 47 ng/g.…”

“…Residues of 40 ng/g of dichlorodiphenyldichloroethane (DDD) and 11 ng/g of dichlorodiphenyldichloroethylene (DDE) were found in crayfish abdominal muscle. 5 Similarly, Santerre et al 6 analyzed crayfish from eight southern U.S. states for 34 organochlorine, organophosphate, and pyrethroid pesticides and found p,p′-DDE in 3 out of 38 samples, with an average concentration of 47 ng/g. Recently, in a water quality monitoring study of irrigation channels in southern Spain, crayfish were chosen as a selected aquatic species and were screened for 147 pesticides using International Organization for Standardization (ISO) standard methods with gas chromatography−mass spectrometry (GC−MS) detection.…”

Effects of aqueous and dietary exposure of dieldrin on survival, growth and bioconcentration in mallard ducklings

“…T h e U S Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) has been specifically requested by the U S General Accounting Office [l] and the U S Fish and Wildlife Service (FWS) to provide data concerning the adequacy of existing water quality criteria to protect wildlife and to provide information to revise criteria that are inadequate Water quality criteria have focused o n protection of fish and other aquatic life, with comparatively little attention being given to wildlife Section 101(a) of the Clean Water Act (1987) requires the maintenance of water quality for the protection and propagation of fish, shellfish, and wildlife Section 304(a) mandates the EPA administrator to develop and publish water quality criteria reflecting the latest *To whom correspondence may be addressed The current address of T W Stutzman is 1904 H Ave (H 7), LaGrande, OR 97850 Mention of trade names or commercial products does not constitute endorsement or recommendation for use scientific knowledge on all identifiable health and welfare effects of pollution on wildlife in any water body Although exlsting criteria for many chemicals may be protective of both aquatic life and wildlife, the unique physiological and behavioral characteristics of wildlife (e g , sensitivity of eggshell quality to DDT) may make some of the current criteria inadequate for protection Wildlife data are considered under existing guidelines for deriving criteria only for selenium mercury, polychlorinated biphenyls (PCBs), and DDT, although data from the FWS continue to confirm adverse effects on wildlife by selenium [2,3] Water consumption by waterfowl, coupled with swimming, wading, preening, and ingestion of contaminated aquatic organisms and sediments, can result in significant exposure to waterborne pollutants [4,5] Pollutant effects on waterfowl via these routes of exposure should be compared to existing water quality criteria concentrations and a firm scientific basis developed for establishing guidelines for ambient water quality criteria to be protective of wildlife It obviously would be impossible to test all 200 priority pollutants in all species of wildlife that use water resources Therefore, an algorithm was developed at a joint EPA/FWS workshop [6] for possible use in the generation of screening level wildlife criteria (SLWC) to prioritize hazard levels for chemicals of concern and to initially evaluate if existing freshwater criteria and advisory concentrations are protective of wildlife species The algorithm for SLWC was adapted from the procedure developed by the state of Wisconsin for establishing wild and domestic animal criteria [7] The objectives of the present study were to determine the effects of dieldrin on survival, behavior, growth, specific tissue dieldrin concentrations, and steady-state bioconcentration factors for mallard ducklings (Anas platyrhynchos) Tests were conducted in a flow-through test facility where drinking, swimming, wading, and preening activities occurred in continuously replenished toxicant-laden water and a clean-water system with dieldrin-contaminated food The chlorinated hydrocarbon pesticide dieldrin was selected due to its chemical stability and high bioconcentration potential and because it is representative of a class of chemicals known to be hazardous to wildlife for which established water quality criteria [8] may be inadequate…”