Poly and perfluorinated alkyl substances (PFASs) are ubiquitously detected all around the world. Herein, for the first time, concentrations of 16 selected legacy and emerging PFASs are reported for sediment and edible fish collected from the Saudi Arabian Red Sea. Mean concentrations varied from 0.57 to 2.6 μg kg−1 dry weight (dw) in sediment, 3.89–7.63 μg kg−1 dw in fish muscle, and 17.9–58.5 μg kg−1 dw in fish liver. Wastewater treatment plant effluents represented the main source of these compounds and contributed to the exposure of PFAS to biota. Perfluorooctane sulfonate (PFOS) was the most abundant compound in sediment and fish tissues analysed, comprising between 42 and 99% of the ∑16PFAS. The short chain perfluorobutanoate (PFBA) was the second most dominant compound in sediment and was detected at a maximum concentration of 0.64 μg kg−1 dw. PFAS levels and patterns differed between tissues of investigated fish species. Across all fish species, ∑16PFAS concentrations in liver were significantly higher than in muscle by a factor ranging from 3 to 7 depending on fish species and size. The PFOS replacements fluorotelomer sulfonate (6:2 FTS) and perfluorobutane sulfonate (PFBS) exhibited a bioaccumulation potential in several fish species and 6:2 FTS, was detected at a maximum concentration of 7.1 ± 3.3 μg kg−1 dw in a doublespotted queenfish (Scomberoides lysan) liver. PFBS was detected at a maximum concentration of 2.65 μg kg−1 dw in strong spine silver-biddy (Gerres longirostris) liver. The calculated dietary intake of PFOS, perfluorooctanoic acid (PFOA), perfluorononanoic acid (PFNA) and perfluorohexane sulfonic acid (PFHxS) exceeded the safety threshold established by the European Food Safety Authority (EFSA) in 2020 in doublespotted queenfish muscle, indicating a potential health risk to humans consuming this fish in Jeddah, Saudi Arabia. | publishedVersion

and perfluorinated alkyl substances (PFASs) are ubiquitously detected all around the world. Herein, for the first time, concentrations of 16 selected legacy and emerging PFASs are reported for sediment and edible fish collected from the Saudi Arabian Red Sea. Mean concentrations varied from 0.57 to 2.6 μg kg⁻¹ dry weight (dw) in sediment, 3.89–7.63 μg kg⁻¹ dw in fish muscle, and 17.9–58.5 μg kg⁻¹ dw in fish liver. Wastewater treatment plant effluents represented the main source of these compounds and contributed to the exposure of PFAS to biota. Perfluorooctane sulfonate (PFOS) was the most abundant compound in sediment and fish tissues analysed, comprising between 42 and 99% of the ∑₁₆PFAS. The short chain perfluorobutanoate (PFBA) was the second most dominant compound in sediment and was detected at a maximum concentration of 0.64 μg kg⁻¹ dw. PFAS levels and patterns differed between tissues of investigated fish species. Across all fish species, ∑₁₆PFAS concentrations in liver were significantly higher than in muscle by a factor ranging from 3 to 7 depending on fish species and size. The PFOS replacements fluorotelomer sulfonate (6:2 FTS) and perfluorobutane sulfonate (PFBS) exhibited a bioaccumulation potential in several fish species and 6:2 FTS, was detected at a maximum concentration of 7.1 ± 3.3 μg kg⁻¹ dw in a doublespotted queenfish (Scomberoides lysan) liver. PFBS was detected at a maximum concentration of 2.65 μg kg⁻¹ dw in strong spine silver-biddy (Gerres longirostris) liver. The calculated dietary intake of PFOS, perfluorooctanoic acid (PFOA), perfluorononanoic acid (PFNA) and perfluorohexane sulfonic acid (PFHxS) exceeded the safety threshold established by the European Food Safety Authority (EFSA) in 2020 in doublespotted queenfish muscle, indicating a potential health risk to humans consuming this fish in Jeddah, Saudi Arabia.

Using nominal dose metrics to describe exposure conditions in laboratory-based microplastic uptake and effects studies may not adequately represent the true exposure to the organisms in the test system, making data interpretation challenging. In the current study, a novel overhead stirring method using flocculators was assessed for maintaining polystyrene (PS) microbeads (Ø10.4 μm; 1.05 g cm−3) in suspension in seawater during 24 h and then compared with static and rotational exposure setups. Under optimized conditions, the system was able to maintain 59% of the initial PS microbeads in suspension after 24 h, compared to 6% using a static system and 100% using a rotating plankton wheel. Our findings document for the first time that overhead stirring as well as other, commonly used exposure systems (static) are unable to maintain constant microplastic exposure conditions in laboratory setups whereas rotation is very effective. This suggests toxicological studies employing either static or overhead stirring systems may be greatly overestimating the true microplastic exposure conditions. | publishedVersion

Using nominal dose metrics to describe exposure conditions in laboratory-based microplastic uptake and effects studies may not adequately represent the true exposure to the organisms in the test system, making data interpretation challenging. In the current study, a novel overhead stirring method using flocculators was assessed for maintaining polystyrene (PS) microbeads (Ø10.4 μm; 1.05 g cm⁻³) in suspension in seawater during 24 h and then compared with static and rotational exposure setups. Under optimized conditions, the system was able to maintain 59% of the initial PS microbeads in suspension after 24 h, compared to 6% using a static system and 100% using a rotating plankton wheel. Our findings document for the first time that overhead stirring as well as other, commonly used exposure systems (static) are unable to maintain constant microplastic exposure conditions in laboratory setups whereas rotation is very effective. This suggests toxicological studies employing either static or overhead stirring systems may be greatly overestimating the true microplastic exposure conditions.

Legislations and commitments regulate Baltic Sea status assessments and monitoring. These assessments suffer from monitoring gaps that need prioritization. We used three sources of information; scientific articles, project reports and a stakeholder survey to identify gaps in relation to requirements set by the HELCOM's Baltic Sea Action Plan, the Marine Strategy Framework Directive and the Water Framework Directive. The most frequently mentioned gap was that key requirements are not sufficiently monitored in space and time. Biodiversity monitoring was the category containing most gaps. However, whereas more than half of the gaps in reports related to biodiversity, scientific articles pointed out many gaps in the monitoring of pollution and water quality. An important finding was that the three sources differed notably with respect to which gaps were mentioned most often. Thus, conclusions about gap prioritization for management should be drawn after carefully considering the different viewpoints of scientists and stakeholders. | publishedVersion

Legislations and commitments regulate Baltic Sea status assessments and monitoring. These assessments suffer from monitoring gaps that need prioritization. We used three sources of information; scientific articles, project reports and a stakeholder survey to identify gaps in relation to requirements set by the HELCOM's Baltic Sea Action Plan, the Marine Strategy Framework Directive and the Water Framework Directive. The most frequently mentioned gap was that key requirements are not sufficiently monitored in space and time. Biodiversity monitoring was the category containing most gaps. However, whereas more than half of the gaps in reports related to biodiversity, scientific articles pointed out many gaps in the monitoring of pollution and water quality. An important finding was that the three sources differed notably with respect to which gaps were mentioned most often. Thus, conclusions about gap prioritization for management should be drawn after carefully considering the different viewpoints of scientists and stakeholders.

peer reviewed | This works estimated the relationships between heavy metals in milk from individual cows, drinking water, silage and soil as well as the links between those elements and the milk composition. © 2019Various industrial activities lead to environmental pollution by heavy metals. Toxic heavy metals enter the food chain of dairy cows through feed and water, then transferred into milk. This study investigated the correlations of heavy metal contents between individual cows’ milk, water, silage and soil. The relationships between heavy metal contents in individual cows’ milk with milk protein, fat, lactose, solid nonfat (SNF), and total solids (TS) were analysed. Concentrations of Pb, As, Cr, and Cd in milk, silage and water were measured by Inductively Coupled Plasma Mass Spectrometry (ICP-MS). Lead, Cr, and Cd in soil were measured by Atomic Absorption Spectrometry (AAS), and As was detected by Atomic Fluorescence Spectrometry (AFS). One-way non-parametric tests and Spearman correlation analyses were performed using SAS 9.4 software. Levels of Pb and Cd in milk from the unpolluted area were significantly lower (P < 0.01) than those from industrial area. Significantly higher (P < 0.01) As residue was recorded in milk from unpolluted area. Positive correlation of Pb was observed between milk and silage, and As in milk was positively correlated with As in water. Content of As in milk was slightly (r = 0.09) correlated with As in silage, even though strong positive correlation (r = 0.78) was observed between silage and water. Positive correlations were observed for Cr and Cd between milk and silage, as well as milk and soil. Positive correlations were observed in Pb-protein, Cr-protein, and Cd-lactose; other positive correlation coefficients were nearly equal to zero. The results suggest that industrial activities lead to possible Pb and Cd contamination in milk. Drinking water could be the main source of As contamination in cows. No clear relationship was found between milk composition and heavy metals contents in milk. Water and soil on the farm had a partial contribution to heavy metal contamination in milk. © 2019 | Project of Risk Assessment on Raw Milk (GJFP2019008)

Various industrial activities lead to environmental pollution by heavy metals. Toxic heavy metals enter the food chain of dairy cows through feed and water, then transferred into milk. This study investigated the correlations of heavy metal contents between individual cows’ milk, water, silage and soil. The relationships between heavy metal contents in individual cows’ milk with milk protein, fat, lactose, solid nonfat (SNF), and total solids (TS) were analysed. Concentrations of Pb, As, Cr, and Cd in milk, silage and water were measured by Inductively Coupled Plasma Mass Spectrometry (ICP-MS). Lead, Cr, and Cd in soil were measured by Atomic Absorption Spectrometry (AAS), and As was detected by Atomic Fluorescence Spectrometry (AFS). One-way non-parametric tests and Spearman correlation analyses were performed using SAS 9.4 software. Levels of Pb and Cd in milk from the unpolluted area were significantly lower (P < 0.01) than those from industrial area. Significantly higher (P < 0.01) As residue was recorded in milk from unpolluted area. Positive correlation of Pb was observed between milk and silage, and As in milk was positively correlated with As in water. Content of As in milk was slightly (r = 0.09) correlated with As in silage, even though strong positive correlation (r = 0.78) was observed between silage and water. Positive correlations were observed for Cr and Cd between milk and silage, as well as milk and soil. Positive correlations were observed in Pb-protein, Cr-protein, and Cd-lactose; other positive correlation coefficients were nearly equal to zero. The results suggest that industrial activities lead to possible Pb and Cd contamination in milk. Drinking water could be the main source of As contamination in cows. No clear relationship was found between milk composition and heavy metals contents in milk. Water and soil on the farm had a partial contribution to heavy metal contamination in milk.

peer reviewed | Elasmobranchs can bioaccumulate considerable amounts of persistent organic pollutants (POPs) and utilize several reproductive strategies thereby influencing maternal transfer of contaminants. This study provides preliminary data on the POP transfer from pregnant females to offspring of three species (Atlantic stingrays, bonnethead, blacktip sharks) with different reproduction modes (aplacental, placental viviparity). Polychlorinated biphenyl (PCB) levels were generally higher than any other POPs. Stingrays and blacktip shark embryos contained the lowest POP concentrations while bonnetheads and the blacktip adult female had the highest concentrations. Results suggest that are more readily transferred from the mother to the embryo compared to what is transferred to ova in stingrays. Statistically significant differences in levels of selected POPs were found between embryos from the left and right uterus within the same litter as well as between female and male embryos within the same litter for bonnetheads, but not for the blacktip sharks.

Elasmobranchs can bioaccumulate considerable amounts of persistent organic pollutants (POPs) and utilize several reproductive strategies thereby influencing maternal transfer of contaminants. This study provides preliminary data on the POP transfer from pregnant females to offspring of three species (Atlantic stingrays, bonnethead, blacktip sharks) with different reproduction modes (aplacental, placental viviparity). Polychlorinated biphenyl (PCB) levels were generally higher than any other POPs. Stingrays and blacktip shark embryos contained the lowest POP concentrations while bonnetheads and the blacktip adult female had the highest concentrations. Results suggest that POPs are more readily transferred from the mother to the embryo compared to what is transferred to ova in stingrays. Statistically significant differences in levels of selected POPs were found between embryos from the left and right uterus within the same litter as well as between female and male embryos within the same litter for bonnetheads, but not for the blacktip sharks.