National Status and Trends: Contaminant body burdens and histopathology of fish and shellfish from Alaska

In response to the growing concerns among Chugach communities, contaminant body burden and histopathological condition of chum and sockeye salmon (Oncorhynchus keta and Oncorhynchus nerka) and the shellfish cockles and softshell clams (Clinocardium nuttallii and Mya arenaria) were assessed. The fish and shellfish were collected from traditional subsistence harvest areas in the vicinity of Nanwalek, Port Graham and Seldovia, AK, and were analyzed for trace metals and residues of organic contaminants. Additionally, the fish and shellfish were histologically characterized for the presence, prevalence and severity of tissue pathology, disease, and parasite infections. Data served under this project include measurements of trace elements, polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons (PAHs), polychlorinated biphenyls, DDTs, chlorinated hydrocarbons and histopathology parameters, which include an array of about 30 parasitic taxa (e.g. bucephalus, chlamydia, ciliates, cestodes and nematodes) and 11 diseases (e.g. tumors, neoplasm and necrosis). This project provides invaluable baseline data that is georeferenced and served on the internet through the NOAA's National Status and Trends data portal.

Specific objectives of the study were to: the health risks associated with consumption of subsistence food items collected in the traditional harvest ground in the Chugach Native communities of south-central Alaska. To achieve this goal the following objectives were accomplished: 1) Characterize the potential contamination of sessile (shellfish) vs. mobile (salmon) components of the subsistence fishery, using body burdens and histopathology as metrics; 2) Assess any potential correlations between body burdens and histopathology data; 3) Evaluation of the health condition of the fish with analyses of tissue pathogens and occurrences of diseases.

998

Apeti, D.A., S.I. Hartwell, W.E. Johnson and G.G. Lauenstein. 2012. National Status and Trends Bioeffects Progam: Field Methods. NOAA National Centers for Coastal Ocean Science, Center for Coastal Monitoring and Asssessment. NOAA NCCOS Technical Memorandum 135. Silver Spring, MD.27 pp. Apeti, D.A., W.E. Johnson, K.L. Kimbrough, and G.G. Lauenstein. 2012. National Status and Trends Mussel Watch Proram: Sampling Methods 2012 Update. NOAA Technical Memorandum 134. NOAA National Centers for Coastal Ocean Science, Center for Coastal Monitoring and Asssessment. Silver Spring, MD. 39 pp. Kim, Y., Ashton-Alcox, K.A. and Powell. E.N. 2006. Histological Techniques for Marine Bivalve Molluscs: Update. Silver Spring, MD. NOAA Technical Memorandum NOS NCCOS, 27. 76 pp. Meyers, T. R., and J. D. Hendricks. 1985. Histopathology. In G.M. Rand and S.R. Petrocelli (editors), Fundamentals of aquatic toxicology, p. 283-331. Hemisphere, Washington, DC. McDonald, S. J., D. S. Frank, J. A. Ramirez, B. Wang, and J. M. Brooks. 2006. Ancillary Methods of the National Status and Trends Program: Update 2000-2006, NOAA Technical Memorandum, NOS NCCOS 28. Lauenstein, G. G. and A. Y. Cantillo (1993) Sampling and analytical methods of the National Status and Trends Program National Benthic Surveillance and Mussel Watch Kimbrough K.L. and G.G. Lauenstein. 2006a. Organic Contaminant Analytical Methods of the National Status and Trends Program: 2000-2006. U.S. Dept. Comm. NOAA Technical Memorandum 30, NOS NCCOS, Silver Spring, MD. Kimbrough, K.L. and G.G. Lauenstein. 2006b. Trace Metal Analytical Methods of the National Status and Trends Program: 2000-2006. US Dept. Comm., NOAA Technical Memorandum 29, NOS NCCOS, Silver Spring, MD. Hartwell, S.I., A.D. Apeti,., L.W. Claflin, W.E. Johnson, and K.L. Kimbrough. 2009. Sediment Quality Triad Assessment in Kachemak Bay: Characterization of Soft Bottom Benthic Habitats and Contaminant Bioeffects Assessment. North Pacific Research Board Final Report 726, 138pp.

PRINCIPAL INVESTIGATORS: Dennis Apeti, NOAA Ocean Service, National Status and Trends Program; S. Ian Hartwell, NOAA Ocean Service, National Status and Trends Program; Mark Myers, NOAA National Marine Fisheries Service, Northwest Fisheries Science Center; Jeff Hetrick, Chugach Regional Resource Commission, Alvtiiq Pride Shellfish Hatchery SAMPLE COLLECTION INVESTIGATORS: Dennis Apeti, NOAA Ocean Service, National Status and Trends Program; S. Ian Hartwell, NOAA Ocean Service, National Status and Trends Program; Mark Myers, NOAA National Marine Fisheries Service, Northwest Fisheries Science Center; Jeff Hetrick, Chugach Regional Resource Commission, Alvtiiq Pride Shellfish Hatchery SAMPLES PROCESSING INVESTIGATORS: -Fish necropsis: Dennis Apeti, NOAA Ocean Service, National Status and Trends Program, S. Ian Hartwell, NOAA Ocean Service, National Status and Trends Program; Mark Myers, NOAA National Marine Fisheries Service, Northwest Fisheries Science Center Necropsis was conducted at the NOAA/UAF Kasitsna laboratory. http://www.nurp.noaa.gov/Spotlight/KasitsnaBay.htm. -Contaminant analyses: Organic and inorganic chemicals in fish and shellfish tissues: TDI Brooks Inc., College Station, TX. http://ccma.nos.noaa.gov/about/coast/nsandt/download.aspx. -Histopatology characterization in fish: Mark Myers, NOAA National Marine Fisheries Service, Northwest Fisheries Science Center. http://www.nwfsc.noaa.gov/. -Histopathology characterization in shellfish: Rutgers University, Haskin Shellfish Research Laboratory. http://hsrl.rutgers.edu/

The data dictionary may be found at: http://ccma.nos.noaa.gov/about/coast/nsandt/dictionaries/ba_mw_chemistry_dictionary.aspx

National Status and Trends Program - reference data dictionary http://ccma.nos.noaa.gov/about/coast/nsandt/dictionaries/ba_mw_chemistry_dictionary.aspx

These data were prepared by an agency of the United States Government. Neither the United States Government nor any agency thereof, nor any of their employees, make any warranty, expressed or implied, or assumes any legal liability or responsibility for the accuracy, completeness, or usefulness of any information, apparatus, product, or process disclosed in this report, or represents that its use would not infringe privately owned rights. Reference therein to any specific commercial product, process, or service by trade name, trademark, manufacturer, or otherwise does not necessarily constitute or imply its endorsement, recommendation, or favoring by the United States Government or any agency thereof. Any views and opinions of authors expressed herein do not necessarily state or reflect those of the United States Government or any agency thereof. Although all data have been used by NOAA, no warranty, expressed or implied, is made by NOAA as to the accuracy of the data and/or related materials. The act of distribution shall not constitute any such warranty, and no responsibility is assumed by NOAA in the use of these data or related materials.

None

NOAA requests that all individuals who download NOAA data acknowledge the source of these data in any reports, papers, or presentations. If you publish these data, please include a statement similar to: "Some or all of the data described in this article were produced by the NOAA's Ocean Service through its National Status and Trends Program (NSandT)"

MEASUREMENT QUALITY OBJECTIVES: Sample collection followed established protocols for the National Status and Trends Program. The measurement quality objectives of NSandT specify accuracy and precision requirements of 30% for organic analytes and 15% for inorganic analytes in tissue samples. QA procedures include running blanks, spiked samples, and standard reference materials with each batch of samples. Any batch failing to meet the specifications is reanalyzed or rejected. The QA Criteria may be found in NOAAs Tech Memo NOS NCCOS 30 and 29. The standard NSandT analytical protocols are described in Kimbrough et al. (2006a and 2006b). The histological analyses of shellfish were performed at Rutgers University's Haskin Shellfish Laboratory. A detailed account of the protocol is described in the NOAA's NOS/NCCOS technical memorandum number 27 (Kim et al. 2006). From each site 5 individual organisms of legal harvestable size (38 mm) were randomly selected and prepared for the analysis. The animal was placed in Davidson's fixative for 1 week and then transferred to 70% alcohol for storage. For all bivalves, the fixed tissue samples were embedded in paraffin after dehydration and clearing. The tissue-paraffin block was then placed in a freezer overnight before sectioning. The paraffin-embedded tissue blocks were first sliced at 20 micrometers to expose an entire tissue cross-section, and then sectioned at 5 micrometers. Tissue sections were deparaffinized and hydrated using a xylene-ethanol series. Following hydration, slides were stained in a pentachrome series, dehydrated in a series of acetic acid dips followed by acetone, cleared in xylene and mounted in Permount. Each slide was examined microscopically. Shellfish histopathology characterization consisted of quantifying infection intensity of parasites, the occurrence and extent of tissue pathologies, and the intensity of diseases all of which were determined using quantitative or semi-quantitative measures. Fish histopathology analysis of salmon was performed at the NOAA's Environmental Conservation of the Northwest Fisheries Science Center, NOAA Fisheries, in Seattle, Washington. Histopathologic diagnosis on fish liver, head and trunk kidney, and gill tissues. Sections of liver, head and trunk kidney (1cm in thickness) and two gill arches collected from individual salmon will be preserved in Davidson's fixative. Lesions and parasites in tissue sections were identified and classified according to the criteria specified in comparative pathology (Meyers and Hendricks, 1985; Cotran et al., 1999)

Data are believed to be complete

Sample collection followed established protocols for the National Status and Trends Program. The analytical instruments were calibrated by standard laboratory procedures. In total, approximately 5% of all analyses were QC analyses. Processing quality was considered acceptable if the following criteria were met: blanks were less than three times the minimum detection limit; accuracy, as determined by analysis of reference materials, was within 30% for organic analytes and within 20% for inorganic analytes; and precision, as determined by replicate analyses, was within 30% for organic analytes and within 20% for inorganic analytes. Additional specifications and guidelines are presented in Valente and Strobel (1993). Contact the project manager for additional information on the Quality Assurance Project Plan