[Departement_IRSTEA]Eaux [TR1_IRSTEA]BELCA<br/>EA ECOLDUR CT3 | International audience | Microorganisms are ubiquitous in soil, air, and water ecosystems, where they are key players of ecosystem services. Microbial ecotoxicology is an emerging interdisciplinary area of research which aims at investigating the impact of human activities on the diversity, abundance, and activity of microorganisms. In return, the results of such investigations hold the promise to provide novel ways of assessing in a sensitive way the impacts of diverse environmental disturbances and subsequent ecosystem responses. Thus and although the term itself is yet rarely encountered in the scientific literature, microbial ecotoxicology already addresses an increasing political and societal demand. In the French scientific landscape, which often mimics the famous (but sometimes indigestible) “mille-feuilles” pastry, microbial ecotoxicologists are scattered across many different research centers belonging to different research organizations and universities. This research field has thus lacked any visibility and remained unorganized until now. Formal organization of scientific activities may be considered a typical “froggies” concern (or ailment). Nevertheless, it is rather surprising that scientific journals and significant international conferences specifically devoted to microbial ecotoxicology have been missing so far, especially considering the plethoric range of journals and congresses devoted to microbial ecology and ecotoxicology. With these considerations in mind, the idea of organizing the French research community of microbial ecologists around concepts of ecotoxicology made its way, with the aim of sharing the necessity to overcome artificial boundaries that prevent progress in this promising field.

Context and objectives Microorganisms are ubiquitous in soil, air, and water ecosystems, where they are key players of ecosystem services. Microbial ecotoxicology is an emerging interdisciplinary area of research which aims at investigating the impact of human activities on the diversity, abundance, and activity of microorganisms. In return, the results of such investigations hold the promise to provide novel ways of assessing in a sensitive way the impacts of diverse environmental disturbances and subsequent ecosystem responses. Thus and although the term itself is yet rarely encountered in the scientific literature, microbial ecotoxicology already addresses an increasing political and societal demand. In the French scientific landscape, which often mimics the famous (but sometimes indigestible) “mille-feuilles” pastry, microbial ecotoxicologists are scattered across many different research centers belonging to different research organizations and universities. This research field has thus lacked any visibility and remained unorganized until now. Formal organization of scientific activities may be considered a typical “froggies” concern (or ailment). Nevertheless, it is rather surprising that scientific journals and significant international conferences specifically devoted to microbial ecotoxicology have been missing so far, especially considering the plethoric range of journals and congresses devoted to microbial ecology and ecotoxicology. With these considerations in mind, the idea of organizing the French research community of microbial ecologists around concepts of ecotoxicology made its way, with the aim of sharing the necessity to overcome artificial boundaries that prevent progress in this promising field.

In the Mezquital valley, untreated wastewater (45 m(3) s(-1)) from Mexico City is used for the irrigation of around 900 km(2) of agricultural soil. High concentrations of metals including methylmercury (3.8+/-2.5 ng l(-1)) and lead (0.16+/-0.05 mg l(-1)) were measured in anoxic wastewater canals. Downstream, dissolved, and particulate polymetallic (Hg, Pb, Cr.) concentrations decreased by factors 10 to 1,000 in the Tula River (which received a mix of fresh and wastewater) due to the dilution and oxidation of surface water, and to the decrease of contaminants concentration in wastewater downstream irrigated soils. However, dissolved and particulate methylmercury concentrations (0.06 to 0.33 ng l(-1) and 1.6 to 4.5 g kg(-1), respectively) remained elevated in comparison to other natural hydrosystems. The monitoring of an irrigation event and the distribution of metals in a soil profile irrigated for more than 80 years showed that metals were retained in the draining tilled layer. The oxic conditions and slightly acidic pH (similar to 6.5) in this layer were found favorable for metal adsorption and co-precipitation with redox-sensitive elements (Fe, Mn) and suggestively for mercury demethylation. In the downstream Tula River and groundwater, almost all metallic concentrations remained below guideline thresholds. Only, dissolved As and Pb concentrations remained two to five times above thresholds for drinking water, highlighting a potential health risk for approximately 500,000 people who use groundwater as water supply.

In the Mezquital valley, untreated wastewater (45 m³ s⁻¹) from Mexico City is used for the irrigation of around 900 km²of agricultural soil. High concentrations of metals including methylmercury (3.8 ± 2.5 ng l⁻¹) and lead (0.16 ± 0.05 mg l⁻¹) were measured in anoxic wastewater canals. Downstream, dissolved, and particulate polymetallic (Hg, Pb, Cr…) concentrations decreased by factors 10 to 1,000 in the Tula River (which received a mix of fresh and wastewater) due to the dilution and oxidation of surface water, and to the decrease of contaminants concentration in wastewater downstream irrigated soils. However, dissolved and particulate methylmercury concentrations (0.06 to 0.33 ng l⁻¹and 1.6 to 4.5 μg kg⁻¹, respectively) remained elevated in comparison to other natural hydrosystems. The monitoring of an irrigation event and the distribution of metals in a soil profile irrigated for more than 80 years showed that metals were retained in the draining tilled layer. The oxic conditions and slightly acidic pH (~6.5) in this layer were found favorable for metal adsorption and co-precipitation with redox-sensitive elements (Fe, Mn) and suggestively for mercury demethylation. In the downstream Tula River and groundwater, almost all metallic concentrations remained below guideline thresholds. Only, dissolved As and Pb concentrations remained two to five times above thresholds for drinking water, highlighting a potential health risk for approximately 500,000 people who use groundwater as water supply.

[Departement_IRSTEA]Eaux [TR1_IRSTEA]BELCA [TR2_IRSTEA]TED | Five estrogenic hormones (unconjugated+conjugated fractions) and 10 beta blockers were analyzed in three wastewater treatment plant (WWTP) effluents and receiving river waters in the area of Lyon, France. In the different samples, only two estrogens were quantified: estrone and estriol. Some beta blockers, such as atenolol, acebutolol, and sotalol, were almost always quantified, but others, e.g., betaxolol, nadolol, and oxprenolol were rarely quantified. Concentrations measured in river waters were in the nanogram per liter range for estrogens and between 0.3 and 210 ng/L for beta blockers depending on the substance and the distance from theWWTP outfall. The impact of the WWTP on the receiving rivers was studied and showed a clear increase in concentrations near the WWTP outfall. For estrogens, the persistence in surface waters was not evaluated given the low concentrations levels (around 1 ng/L). For beta blockers, concentrations measured downstream of the WWTP outfall were up to 16 times higher than those measured upstream. Also, the persistence of metoprolol, nadolol, and propranolol was noted even 2 km downstream of the WWTP outfall. The comparison of beta blocker fingerprints in the samples collected in effluent and in the river also showed the impact of WWTP outfall on surface waters. Finally, a tentative environmental risk evaluation was performed on 15 sites by calculating the ratio of receiving water concentrations to predicted non-effect concentrations (PNEC). For estrogens, a total PNEC of 5 ng/L was considered and these substances were not linked to any potential environmental risk (only one site showed an environmental risk ratio above 1). Unfortunately, few PNECs are available and risk evaluation was only possible for 4 of the 10 beta blockers studied: acebutolol, atenolol, metoprolol, and propranolol. Only propranolol presented a ratio near or above 1, showing a possible environmental risk for 4 receiving waters out of 15.

Five estrogenic hormones (unconjugated + conjugated fractions) and 10 beta blockers were analyzed in three wastewater treatment plant (WWTP) effluents and receiving river waters in the area of Lyon, France. In the different samples, only two estrogens were quantified: estrone and estriol. Some beta blockers, such as atenolol, acebutolol, and sotalol, were almost always quantified, but others, e.g., betaxolol, nadolol, and oxprenolol were rarely quantified. Concentrations measured in river waters were in the nanogram per liter range for estrogens and between 0.3 and 210 ng/L for beta blockers depending on the substance and the distance from the WWTP outfall. The impact of the WWTP on the receiving rivers was studied and showed a clear increase in concentrations near the WWTP outfall. For estrogens, the persistence in surface waters was not evaluated given the low concentrations levels (around 1 ng/L). For beta blockers, concentrations measured downstream of the WWTP outfall were up to 16 times higher than those measured upstream. Also, the persistence of metoprolol, nadolol, and propranolol was noted even 2 km downstream of the WWTP outfall. The comparison of beta blocker fingerprints in the samples collected in effluent and in the river also showed the impact of WWTP outfall on surface waters. Finally, a tentative environmental risk evaluation was performed on 15 sites by calculating the ratio of receiving water concentrations to predicted non-effect concentrations (PNEC). For estrogens, a total PNEC of 5 ng/L was considered and these substances were not linked to any potential environmental risk (only one site showed an environmental risk ratio above 1). Unfortunately, few PNECs are available and risk evaluation was only possible for 4 of the 10 beta blockers studied: acebutolol, atenolol, metoprolol, and propranolol. Only propranolol presented a ratio near or above 1, showing a possible environmental risk for 4 receiving waters out of 15.

7th International PCB Workshop - Chemical mixtures in a complex world, Arcachon, FRANCE, MAY 27-31, 2012 | International audience | Human activities are emitting persistent organic pollutants (POPs) to the environment. These compounds have raised concerns about the risk of transfer through the food chain via animal products. They are characterized by a strong persistence in environmental matrices and a lipophilicity which may lead to their accumulation in fat tissues. In EU Regulations (no. 1881/2006, 1259/2011), maximum acceptable levels for polychlorinated dibenzo-p-dioxins, polychlorinated dibenzofurans (PCDD/Fs), and dioxin-like or nondioxin-like polychlorinated biphenyls (PCBs) in food of animal origin have been set. Transfer rates from contaminated fodder to milk have been established: for PCBs, the rate of transfer varies from 5 to 90 % and for PCDD/Fs from 1 to 40 %. The differential transfer of the compounds towards milk is related to the hydrophobicity of the pollutants and to their metabolic susceptibility. According to numerous authors, soil is the major reservoir for POPs, and its involuntary ingestion by farm animals reared outdoors may be the main cause of animal product contamination (meat, milk, or eggs). Recent studies seem to indicate that soil is a real risk matrix in terms of transfer of pollutants to the food chain. A POP crisis management is extremely difficult, since it impacts many farmers located in the contaminated area. The question arising is to know if livestock contaminated by POPs may be decontaminated and further used for their initial purpose. Recent data demonstrate that the decontamination process appear feasible and depends on initial level of contamination or the physiological status of the animals.

Human activities are emitting persistent organic pollutants (POPs) to the environment. These compounds have raised concerns about the risk of transfer through the food chain via animal products. They are characterized by a strong persistence in environmental matrices and a lipophilicity which may lead to their accumulation in fat tissues. In EU Regulations (no. 1881/2006, 1259/2011), maximum acceptable levels for polychlorinated dibenzo-p-dioxins, polychlorinated dibenzofurans (PCDD/Fs), and dioxin-like or nondioxin-like polychlorinated biphenyls (PCBs) in food of animal origin have been set. Transfer rates from contaminated fodder to milk have been established: for PCBs, the rate of transfer varies from 5 to 90 % and for PCDD/Fs from 1 to 40 %. The differential transfer of the compounds towards milk is related to the hydrophobicity of the pollutants and to their metabolic susceptibility. According to numerous authors, soil is the major reservoir for POPs, and its involuntary ingestion by farm animals reared outdoors may be the main cause of animal product contamination (meat, milk, or eggs). Recent studies seem to indicate that soil is a real risk matrix in terms of transfer of pollutants to the food chain. A POP crisis management is extremely difficult, since it impacts many farmers located in the contaminated area. The question arising is to know if livestock contaminated by POPs may be decontaminated and further used for their initial purpose. Recent data demonstrate that the decontamination process appear feasible and depends on initial level of contamination or the physiological status of the animals.