0.0 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
0.1 Program Objectives and Participants
0.1.1 The Pan-Arctic Region: Highlights of the Literature Review
0.1.1.1 Behavior and Fate of Oil in the Arctic
0.1.1.2 VECs and Ecotoxicity
0.1.2 Role of Ecosystem Consequence Analyses in NEBA Applications for the Arctic
0.1.2.1 Arctic Population Resiliency and Potential for Recovery
0.2 Priority Recommendations to Enhance NEBA Applications in the Arctic
0.2.1 Development of ARCAT Matrices
0.2.2 Influence of Oil on Unique Arctic Communities
0.2.3 Biodegradation in Unique Communities
0.2.4 Modeling of Acute and Chronic Population Effects of Exposure to OSRs
0.3 Further Information
1.0 THE PHYSICAL ENVIRONMENT
1.1 Introduction
1.1.1 The Arctic Ocean, Marginal Seas, and Basins
1.2 Knowledge Status
1.2.1 The Circumpolar Margins
1.2.2 Arctic Hydrography
1.2.3 Ice And Ice-Edges
1.2.4 Seasonality: Productivity and the Carbon Cycle in the Arctic
1.3 Future Research Considerations
1.3.1 Priority Recommendations to Enhance NEBA Applications in the Arctic
1.4 Further Information
2.0 ARCTIC ECOSYSTEMS AND VALUABLE RESOURCES
2.1 Introduction
2.2 Knowledge Status
2.2.1 Habitats of the Arctic
2.2.2 Arctic Food Webs
2.2.2.1 Pelagic Communities
2.2.2.2 Benthic and Demersal Communities
2.2.2.2 Sea-ice Communities
2.2.2.4 Mammals and Birds
2.2.2.5 Communities of Special Significance
2.2.3 Pelagic Realm
2.2.3.1 Phytoplankton
2.2.3.2 Zooplankton
2.2.3.3 Neuston
2.2.3.4 Other Pelagic Invertebrates
2.2.3.4.1 Krill
2.2.3.4.2 Amphipods
2.2.3.4.3 Cephalopods
2.2.3.4.4 Jellyfish
2.2.3.5 Fish
2.2.3.5.1 Pelagic Fish
2.2.3.5.2 Anadromous Fish
2.2.3.5.3 Demersal Fish
2.2.3.5.4 Deep-Sea Fish
2.2.3.6 Marine Mammals
2.2.3.6.1 Bowhead Whale (Balaena mysticetus)
2.2.3.6.2 White Whale (Delphinapterus Leucas)
2.2.3.6.3 Narwhal (Monodon monoceros)
2.2.3.6.4 Ice Seals
2.2.3.6.5 Walrus (Odobenus rosmarus)
2.2.3.6.6 Orca Whales (Orcinus orca)
2.2.3.6.7 Polar Bear (Ursus maritimus)
2.2.3.7 Birds
2.2.3.7.1 Black-legged kittiwakes (Rissa tridactyla)
2.2.3.7.2 Black Guillemots (Cepphus grille)
2.2.3.7.3 Thick billed Murres (Uria lomvia)
2.2.3.7.4 Northern Fulmar (Fulmarus glacialis)
2.2.3.7.5 Common Eider (Somateria mollissima)
2.2.3.7.6 Little Auk/Dovekie (Alle alle)
2.2.3.7.7 Glaucous gull (Larus glaucescens)
2.2.3.7.8 Arctic jaeger (Stercorarius parasiticus)
2.2.4 Benthic Realm
2.2.4.1 Intertidal Communities
2.2.4.2 Shelf and Deepwater Communities
2.2.4.3 Mollusca
2.2.4.4 Polychaetes
2.2.4.5 Amphipods
2.2.4.6 Decapod Crustaceans
2.2.4.7 Echinoderms
2.2.5 Sea-Ice Realm
2.2.5.1 Ice Algae
2.2.5.2 Sympagic Copepods
2.2.5.3 Ice Amphipods
2.2.5.4 Pelagic Copepods
2.2.5.5 Sympagic Fish
2.2.5.6 Mammals
2.2.5.7 Birds
2.2.6 VECs of Arctic Marine Environments
2.2.6.1 Seasonal Distribution Patterns of Arctic Marine Populations
2.3 Future Research Considerations
2.3.1 Priority Recommendations to Enhance NEBA Applications in the Arctic
2.4 Further Information
3.0 THE TRANSPORT AND FATE OF OIL IN THE ARCTIC
3.1 Introduction
3.2 Knowledge Status
3.2.1 Weathering of Oil Spilled in Ice
3.2.2 Oil in Ice Interactions
3.2.3 Oil on Arctic Shorelines
3.2.4 Oil-Sediment Interactions
3.3 Future Research Considerations
3.3.1 Priority Recommendations for Enhanced NEBA Applications in the Arctic
3.4 Further Information
4.0 OIL SPILL RESPONSE STRATEGIES
4.1 Introduction
4.1.1 Environmental Uniqueness of the Arctic Region in Relation to OSR
4.2 Knowledge Status - Impact of OSRs
4.2.1 Natural Attentuation
4.2.1.1 Potential Environmental Impact of Untreated Oil
4.2.1.2 Conclusions on Natural Attenuation
4.2.2 Mechanical Recovery and Containment
4.2.2.1 Environmental impacts from Mechanical Recovery and Containment
4.2.2.2 Conclusions
4.2.3 In-Situ Burning and Chemical Herders
4.2.3.1 Potential environmental and human health effects of ISB residues and unburnt oil
4.2.3.2 Environmental Impact of Herders
4.2.3.3 Conclusions on ISB and Herders
4.2.4 Improving Dispersion of Oil
4.2.4.1 Impact of Chemically Dispersed Oil
4.2.4.2 Conclusions on Chemical Dispersion
4.2.4.3 Dispersing Oil using Oil Mineral Aggregates (OMA)
4.2.4.4 Environmental Impact of OMA formation
4.2.4.5 Conclusions on OMA
4.3 Future Research Considerations
4.3.1 Priority Recommendations for Enhanced NEBA Applications in the Arctic
4.4 Further Information
5.0 BIODEGRADATION
5.1 Introduction
5.1.1 The Microbiology of the Arctic Oceans
5.1.1.1 Transport routes
5.1.1.2 Microbial populations in the Arctic Ocean
5.1.2 Microbial Adaptation to Arctic Conditions
5.1.2.1 Low temperature and microbial adaptions
5.1.2.2 Light and microbial phototrophs
5.1.2.3 Marine ice and microbial survival and metabolism
5.2 Knowledge Status
5.2.1 Biodegradation of Oil in Cold Marine Environments
5.2.1.1 Types of Crude Oils
5.2.1.2 Surface oil spills
5.2.1.2.1 Evaporation
5.2.1.2.2 Water solubility
5.2.1.2.3 Photooxidation
5.2.1.2.4 Sedimentation
5.2.1.2.5 Water-in-oil emulsification
5.2.1.2.6 Natural dispersion
5.2.1.2.7 Oil films
5.2.1.3 Microbial Oil-Degrading Populations in Cold Water Environments
5.2.1.3.1 Indigenous Microorganism Populations
5.2.1.3.2 Population Effects on Oil Degradation
5.2.1.4 Hydrocarbon biodegradation in cold marine environments
5.2.1.4.1 Seawater
5.2.1.4.2 Sediments and soils
5.2.1.4.3 Sea ice
5.2.1.5 Modeling of biodegradation
5.2.1.5.1 Biodegradation in oil spill models
5.2.1.5.2 Biodegradation modeling and temperature
5.2.1.6 Determination of Biodegradation
5.2.1.6.1 Analytical methods for oil compound analyses
5.2.1.6.2 Experimental apparatus
5.2.1.6.3 Biodegradation data processing
5.2.1.7 Persistent Oil Compounds
5.2.2 Accelerated Biodegradation
5.2.2.1 Biostimulation
5.2.2.1.1 Shoreline sediments
5.2.2.1.2 Seawater
5.2.2.1.3 Marine ice
5.2.2.2 Bioaugmentation
5.2.2.3 Understanding Processes in Accelerated Biodegradation
5.3 Future Research Considerations
5.3.1 Priority Recommendations for Enhanced NEBA Applications in the Arctic
5.4 Further Information
6.0 ECOTOXICOLOGY OF OIL AND TREATED OIL IN THE ARCTIC
6.1 Introduction
6.1.1 General Methods and Relevant Endpoints in Laboratory Testing
6.1.1.1 Test Exposure
6.1.1.2 Test Media Preparation
6.1.1.2.1 Water Soluble Fractions (WSF)
6.1.1.2.2 Water Accommodated Fractions (WAF, CEWAF)
6.1.1.2.3 Oil-in-Water Dispersions (Oil Droplets)
6.1.1.2.4 Oil Type/Weathering
6.1.1.2.5 Exposure Concentrations
6.1.1.2.6 Test Organisms
6.1.1.2.7 Test Endpoints and Exposures
6.1.1.2.8 Data Extrapolation and Population Models
6.2 Knowledge Status
6.2.1 Species represented in the data set
6.2.2 Arctic ecosystem compartments in the dataset
6.2.2.1 Pack ice
6.2.2.2 Pelagic
6.2.2.3 Benthic
6.2.3 Review by Taxa
6.2.3.1 Phytoplankton and seaweed
6.2.3.2 Mysids
6.2.3.3 Copepods
6.2.3.4 Amphipods
6.2.3.5 Benthic organisms
6.2.3.6 Fish
6.3 Discussion
6.3.1 Petroleum related components
6.3.1.1 Crude oil
6.3.1.2 Single PAH
6.3.2 Chemically dispersed oil versus physically dispersed oil
6.3.3 Are Arctic species more sensitive than temperate species?
6.4 Future Research Considerations
6.4.1 Priority Recommendations to Enhance NEBA Applications in the Arctic
6.5 Further Information
7.0 POPULATION EFFECTS MODELING
7.1 Introduction
7.2 Knowledge Status
7.2.1 Parameters Needed to Assess Potential Responses of VECs to Environmental Stressors
7.2.1.1 Transport and fate / exposure potential
7.2.1.2 Oil toxicity evaluations / sensitivity
7.2.1.3 Population distributions, stressors, and mortality rates
7.2.2 Copepod Population Ecology
7.2.2.1 Copepod Growth and Development
7.2.2.2 Summary of Arctic and Sub-Arctic Copepod Species
7.2.3 Copepod Populations
7.2.4 Arctic Fish Population Ecology
7.2.4.1 Arctic Fish Species Diversity
7.2.4.2 Representative Fish Species
7.2.5 Application of Population Models
7.3 Future Research Considerations
7.3.1 Priority Recommendations to Enhance NEBA Applications in the Arctic
7.4 Further Information
8.0 ECOSYSTEM RECOVERY
8.1 Introduction
8.2 Knowledge Status
8.2.1 Resilience and Potential for Recovery
8.3 Future Research Considerations
8.3.1 Priority Recommendations for Enhanced NEBA Applications in the Arctic
8.4 Further Information
9.0 NET ENVIRONMENTAL BENEFIT ANALYSES FOR OIL SPILL
9.1 Introduction
9.2 Knowledge Status
9.2.1 Importance of NEBA Development for Arctic Regions
9.2.2 Scope and Applicability
9.2.3 Information Required to Utilize the NEBA Process
9.2.3.1 Potential oil spill scenarios
9.2.3.2 Response resources available
9.2.4 Ecological Resources at Risk
9.2.5 Social and Economic Relevance
9.2.6 Historical uses of NEBA and Case Studies
9.2.6.1 Assessing response strategy effectiveness and estimating oil fate and transport
9.2.6.2 Assessing the potential impacts and resource recovery rates
9.2.7 Historical Spills that Used or Informed NEBA Processes
9.2.7.1 A. Experimental: Baffin Island tests in northern Canada
9.2.7.2 B. Experimental: TROPICS study
9.2.7.3 C. Tanker: Braer Spill
9.2.7.4 D. Tanker: Sea Empress spill
9.2.7.5 E. Well Blowout: Montara spill (also known as the West Atlas Spill)
9.2.8 Potential Challenges to Applying NEBA Processes in the Arctic Environment
9.3 Future Research Considerations
9.3.1 Priority Recommendations for Enhanced NEBA Applications in the Arctic
9.4 Further Information
APPENDIX: USE OF NEDRA IN CONNECTION TO OIL SPILL CONTINGENCY PLANNING IN NORWAY
10.0 SUPPORTING REPORTS

Add notes to:

Or add a reference to download later

Note added.

Min

6.2 Knowledge Status

Table 6-1 presents a summary of Arctic-relevant studies included in this review (link). These studies are summarized in the following sub-sections.

6.2.1 Species represented in the data set

Amphipods are the most studied in toxicity testing with 11 different species. This is not surprising since amphipods are a very diverse and abundant taxa with species represented in all aquatic habitats of the arctic and they are relatively easy to catch and maintain in a laboratory. Fish and bivalves share an equal number of 8 species per group. The predominant number of studies are the Arctic or Polar cod (Boreogadus saida) and the North East Atlantic cod (Gadus morhua) followed by the decapods (4 species), gastropods (4), copepods (3), isopod (2), Mysidacea (2) and lastly pycnogonidae (1) Cnidaria (1) and echinoderms (1). Although only three copepods species have been used in laboratory testing, a considerable number of studies have been identified: 14 papers with toxicity tests performed at low temperature, 4 at warmer temperature, and 9 papers are in preparation. A few studies (5) report community level effects, either as a mesocosm or field study with relatively few studies (9) that examined the impact on the early life stages (4 with copepods, 3 with fish species, and one with amphipod).

6.2.2 Arctic ecosystem compartments in the dataset

6.2.2.1 Pack ice

Five different animal species (1 fish, 1 copepod and 3 amphipod species) have been used in toxicity testing comprising a total number of 31 studies. Five papers have investigated the biological effects of petroleum related compounds on sea ice bacteria and algae.

6.2.2.2 Pelagic

Toxicity data evaluating the effects of oil and treated oil on pelagic communities were dominated by studies on three species of copepods (14 studies) and fish (20 studies). Two studies dealt with the effects of oil on water-column phytoplankton. None of the studies included euphausiids (krill).

6.2.2.3 Benthic

The benthic compartment has the most diverse group of species used in ecotoxicological research with 32 different animal species dominated by crustaceans (17 species) and molluscs (11 species). Three macroalgae species have also been reported. Eight studies at the community level (whole community, meiofauna, microalgae and bacteria) could be identified.

6.2.3 Review by Taxa

6.2.3.1 Phytoplankton and seaweed

The growth of different Arctic marine phytoplankton and macroalgae exposed to oil in seawater and Corexit (formulation not provided in paper) dispersant were evaluated by Hsiao (1978). Primary production rates varied with type and concentration of crude oil and species composition. Diatom growth (Chaetoserus septentrionalis, Navicula bahusiensis and Nitzschia delicatissima) was inhibited at 10 days of exposure at 10 ppm; whereas, growth in green flagellate (Chlamydomonas pulsatilla) was stimulated by two different oil treatments. Primary production of natural populations of phytoplankton from different locations in the Beaufort Sea ranged from stimulation to inhibition. Primary production of macroalgae (Laminaria saccharina and Phyllophora truncate) collected from the Beaufort Sea was inhibited by the different oil treatments.

The effects of oil and dispersed oil exposure on the macroalgae Stictyosiphon tortilis, Dictyosiphon foeniculaceus, and Pilayella littoralis were evaluated during a surface and subsea field release of weathered oil dispersed with Corexit® 9527 (Cross et al. 1987a). There were no detectable adverse effects on biomass, diversity, or reproductive condition of the shallow subtidal macroalgae. Similarly Cross (1987) found no decrease in cell densities, chlorophyll a concentrations or productivity in the ice algal communities dominated by the pennate diatoms Nitzschia grunowii and N. frigida; there was some evidence of slightly increased production in the untreated oil exposures. Exposure concentrations in the sea ice were estimated to be 0.15 to 0.28 ppm in the oil-only exposures and 5.8 to 36.5 ppm in the dispersed oil exposures. Cross (1987) notes that the first measures of production and biomass were made approximately two days after dispersed oil application and any immediate and transitory effects would not have been detected for any of the oil treatments.

In more controlled laboratory conditions, Van Baalen and O’Donnell (1984) grew cultures of the sympagic diatoms Nitzchia sp and Chaetoceros sp. collected from the ice edge in the Bering Sea the presence of two crude oils and two fuel oils. Growth inhibition was observed for Nitschia sp. at concentrations >50 ppm for both the crude oil and fuel oil treatments. Chaetoceros sp. growth was inhibited at concentrations between 50 and 500 ppm. For both species, effects were greater in the 0°C treatments than in the 10 °C treatments.

Results of studies with Arctic phytoplankton and macroalgae are somewhat equivocal. However, based on these studies there appears to be inhibition of sea ice algae and phytoplankton in the presence of oil and dispersed oil. However, this effect does not appear to persist if petroleum concentrations decrease. Effects may persist in sea ice if petroleum is incorporated into the sea ice.

6.2.3.2 Mysids

The mysid (Mysis oculata) is an epibenthic shallow-water invertebrate that is common throughout the coastal waters of the Arctic (Photo 6-3). Mysis relicta is a boreal pelagic mysid found in colder waters of Baltic and Barents Sea. Both species represent a component of fish diets, as well as some marine mammals and birds. Mysids are considered sensitive indicators of aquatic toxicity and the temperate mysid,Americamysis bahia is one of the most common laboratory test species.

Photo 6-3: Mysid from Kongsfjorden (Ida Beathe Overjordet)

Photo 6-4: Calanus finmarchicus (Bjørn Hansen)

Photo 6-5: Calanus glacialis (Bjørn Hansen)
Photo 6-5: Calanus glacialis (Bjørn Hansen)

Acute lethal toxicity levels were derived for young-of-the-year mysids (M. oculata) exposed to oil in water dispersions (OWD) and WSF of Norman wells crude oil (Riebel and Percy 1990). The 96-hour LC₅₀s for continuous exposures to OWD were 4.51 to 7.57 ppm nominal. In the water-soluble fractions, LC₅₀ values were approximately 0.5 ppm nominal. No apparent physical effects were observed in the OWD treatment. The 96-h LC₅₀ for the mysid M. relicta was 2.7 ppm, in continuous exposures to water-soluble fractions of Cook Inlet crude oil.

6.2.3.3 Copepods

As noted above, there have been a number of studies focusing on the sensitivity of Arctic copepods to oil and treated oil. Copepods are an Arctic keystone species, transferring energy from lower to higher trophic levels of the Arctic and sub-Arctic food web (Photos 6-4, 6-5).

Hansen et al. (2011) evaluated the survival and WAF-mediated induction of the gene encoding glutathione S-transferase (GST) for the Arctic copepod Calanus glacialis and the boreal copepod C. finmarchicus exposed to water-accommodated fractions of oil. The 96-h LC₅₀values differed between the two species with the Arctic copepod being less sensitive than the temperate-boreal species. However, LC₅₀s were similar when copepods were observed for a longer period of time. The lipid-rich copepods survived longer than lipid-poor copepods at the same exposure concentration. In terms of GST expression, both species showed concentration-dependent and exposure time-dependent trends. The Arctic copepod appeared to respond slower and with a lower intensity indicating that a delayed response and that longer test duration is required to observe effects.

Photo 6-6. C. glacialis (Jack D Word)

Gardiner et al. (2013) found similar results in tests with water-accommodated fractions and chemically dispersed WAF preparations, conducting 12-day spiked exposures with C. glacialis (Photo 6-6). The mean LC₅₀ for WAF with fresh Alaska North Slope crude was 4 ppm TPH, similar to the range of values (2.5 – 9.6 ppm) of Hansen et al. (2011) and Nordtug et al. (2013). The mean LC₅₀ for the dispersed WAF was 22 ppm and 62 ppm for early season and late seasonC. glacialis. Similar to Hansen et al. (2011) the low lipid reserves likely affected the sensitivity of copepods in the early season. Gardiner et al. (2013) found that when expressed as total PAH or parent naphthalene, the relative toxicity of the WAF and dispersed WAF was more similar, showing that TPH is a gross measure of exposure concentration and includes numerous constituents that do not contribute to toxicity.

Hansen et al. (2012) used a newly develop droplet generator to create physical dispersions of oil with droplets of a similar size distribution as those from chemically dispersed oil. When the toxicity of the physical dispersions to C. finmarchicus were compared to those of the chemical dispersion, the 96-h LC₅₀s differed by a factor of 1.6, whereas the LC₁₀ (that concentrations the causes 10% mortality) and LC₉₀ (that concentration that causes 90% mortality) differed by factors of 2.9 and 0.9, showing that at high effects levels, there was little difference between the physically and chemically dispersed oil and indicating that the full dose-response curve should be considered in risk assessments.

Jensen and Carroll (2010) evaluated the effects of continuous sublethal WSF exposures on reproduction and feeding for C. glacialis and C. finmarchicus. A reduction in feeding was observed for C. finmarchicus at concentrations of 7 ppb total PAH and a decrease in egg hatching success was observed forC. glacialis.

Photo 6-7. In situ burning test (Liv-Guri Faksness)

Faksness et al. (2012) conducted one of the few toxicity testing programs with the residuals of in-situ burning (Photo 6-7). Seawater samples and oil collected immediately after in-situburning were evaluated for chemical composition and toxicity. Acute toxicity tests with the marine copepod C. finmarchicus showed no increase in toxicity in the underlying water after in-situ burning.

A number of studies have evaluated the effects of pyrene on copepods including survival, egg hatching, development time and dynamic energy budget for C. glacialis and C. finmarchicus (Hjorth and Nielsen 2011; Grenvald et al. 2013; Klok et al. 2012, 2014). Copepod survival and gene expression have also been evaluated for exposures with naphthalene. Recent efforts are focusing on coupling copepod toxicity data with models for uptake and population level effects (Hansen et al., in preparation) and in many ways the data on copepods are perhaps the most complete for Arctic species.

An additional study conducted with C. finmarchicus by Melbye et al. (2001) focused on the uptake of hydrocarbons from dispersed oil droplets using a flow-through system with a drop generator. This study was designed to specifically examine the uptake and bioaccumulation of the oil droplets. The dispersion was created by using an ultrasonic probe and mixing 6.05 g of Totalfina oil in 500 mL of seawater for 10 minutes. Water and organism tissues were collected and monitored over specific intervals throughout 14 days of testing. The copepods were field collected from the Trondheim fjord. This species was chosen for uptake studies of dispersed oil because it actively filters water for particles in the 10 – 50µm size range.

As reported in Melbye et al. (2001), C. finmarchicus accumulated hydrocarbons in the concentration range of 200 to 1000 ppb, based on analysis of the stock solution. The uptake of physically dispersed oil did increase from 7 to 14 days but results also showed that a significant portion of the oil was adsorbed to the outside surface of the copepods.

6.2.3.4 Amphipods

Photo 6-8 Amphipod (Jack D Word)

Amphipods are an essential component of the ice, benthic, and pelagic communities, forming a link between lower trophic levels (e.g. algae and copepods) and upper trophic levels (Photo 6-8). Amphipods have also been used as sensitive indicators of toxicity in both sediments and waters, particularly hyperiid and gammarid amphipods. Existing data include benthic, epibenthic, and sea ice amphipods. Studies with hyperiid amphipods, an important prey resource, were not identified. The sea ice amphipod Gammarus wilkitzkii has been tested with water-soluble fractions of crude oil. Hatlen et al. (2009) evaluated mortality, respiration, molting and oxidative stress of water-soluble fractions of crude oil on the Arctic ice amphipod, G. wilkitzkii in continuous exposures using rock-column oil-generator column. No mortality or molting effects were observed at test concentrations ranging from 120 to 764 ppb total PAH; however, respiration effects and oxidative stress was observed indicating sub-lethal effects. Camus and Olsen (2008) exposed eggs of the ice amphipod G. wilkitzkii to water-soluble fractions of crude oil for 30 days using continuous-flow oil generator columns. A significant increase in embryo aberrations was observed in the highest test concentration (55 ppm total PAH in overlying water on Day 0). Other sublethal endpoints, such as energy allocation and oxidative stress, have been evaluated for G. wilkitzkii in similar exposures. Olsen et al. (2008) evaluated the energy budget of ovigerous females of G. wilkitzkii in continuous exposures to water soluble fractions of crude oil. Sublethal exposures ranged from 5 to 55 ppm total PAH, decreasing over the 30-day exposure period. Protein levels were significantly higher in the 10 ppm total PAH dose, potentially indicating a stress response. Other measures of energy allocation were unaffected by the WSF preparations.

Two other sympagic (ice-associated) amphipods (Gammaracanthus loricatus and Onismus nanseni) were tested in a similar water-soluble fraction generator column (Carls and Korn 1985) with Cook Inlet crude oil. The 8-day LC₅₀ concentrations were 3.7 ppm and >1.7 ppm total PAH, respectively. As has been shown with other Arctic species, there was a delayed response in the tests with ice amphipods, with 8-day or longer exposures better representing toxicity.

Benthic amphipods are commonly used in toxicity testing in many regulatory programs and can be sensitive indicators of impacts to nearshore or shelf benthic communities. There have been numerous toxicity studies evaluating the effects of oil, dispersed oil, and individual PAHs on amphipods. Benthic amphipods G. zaddachi, O. affinis, Anonyx nugax had LC₅₀s ranging from 2.3 to 8 ppm total PAH in water dispersions.

Tests with single PAH compounds have included total naphthalene and 2-methylnapthalene. Carls and Korn (1985) report 96-h and 8-d median lethal concentrations for O. nanseni, A. nugax, and G. loricatusranging from 2.2 to 3.5 ppm. Olsen et al. (2011) report 2-methylnaphalene 96-h LC₅₀ values of 1.34 and 1.92 ppm for the amphipods Gammarus sp. and A. nugax. In each case the relative sensitivity to single PAH compounds was remarkably similar to other species within the phylum (Pandalus borealis, Sclerocrangon boreas, Mysis sp.).

6.2.3.5 Benthic organisms

Photo 6-9: Decapod crab larvae (Ida Beathe Overjordet)

Photo 6-10: Larval shrimp (Bjørn Hansen)

Echinoderms, molluscs, and epibenthic decapods (Photo 6-9) play an important role in supporting upper trophic levels (e.g. the clams Serripes sp. and Mya sp.), support fisheries (Pandalus borealis), and are known to be sensitive indicators of toxicity (Strongylocentrotus droebachiensis). Olsen et al. (2011) report data for a number of benthic organisms tested with 2-methylnaphthalene including Chlamys islandica (scallop) adult S. droebachiensis (sea urchin), Acmea tessulata (gastropod snail), Littorina littorea (gastropod snail), Margarites helisina (gastropod snail), Pandalus borealis (shrimp; Photo 6-10), and Nympon gracile (sea spider). Among the most sensitive were S. droebachiensis and A. tessulata whereas the snail M. helisina and the sea spider were the least sensitive. The amphipods Gammarus sp. and A. nugax and the fish B. saida were also included in this evaluation. The amphipods were similarly sensitive to other benthic invertebrates, while the B. saida was among the most sensitive to 2-methylnaphthalene. This study represents one of the most comprehensive datasets for benthic and epibenthic species and is used to compare arctic and temperate species using species sensitivity distributions.

The effects of oil in sediment and dispersed oil have also been evaluated with the clams Mya truncata (Camus et al. 2003; Mageau et al. 1987) and Serripes groenlandica (Mageau et al. 1987), the sea urchin S. droebachiensis(Mageau et al. 1987) and the crab Hya araneus (Camus et al. 2002) and Chionocetes bairdi (Perkins et al. 2003).

6.2.3.6 Fish

Photo 6-11: Arctic cod (Brian Hester)

Photo 6-12: Arctic cod in acclimation tank (Lionel Camus)

Relatively few Arctic fish species have been tested with oil and treated oil. Understandably, the majority of available data are for the Arctic cod, Boreogadus saida. Arctic cod are ubiquitous throughout the Arctic, representing a critical link between the zooplankton community and higher trophic levels (e.g. seals, beluga whales). B. saida is a truly pan-Arctic, occupying nearshore, pelagic, and sea ice habitats, residing both at depth and near the surface waters, depending upon age and season (Photos 6-11, 6-12). The sensitivity of Arctic cod has been evaluated for both oil and dispersed oil. Gardiner et al. (2013) conducted spiked exposures one-year-old B. saida with WAF and dispersed WAF to emulate open-water pelagic conditions. Median-lethal concentrations were reported for TPH, total PAHs, and parent naphthalene. Data were then used to compare the relative sensitivity of Arctic and temperate species using species sensitivity distributions. Carls and Korn (1985) also report median lethal concentrations to 8-day continuous exposures of water soluble fractions (total PAH) and naphthalene.

Chronic exposures have been conducted both with water-soluble fractions and oil-dosed food. Nahrgang et al. (2009) conducted a series of studies with B. saida, exposing the fish to water-soluble fractions of oil, injecting fish with benzo (a) pyrene, and feeding prey items exposed to crude oil. Following chronic (4 weeks) exposure to water soluble fractions, biomarkers showed evidence of PAH uptake and genotoxicty. Christiansen (2000) and Christiansen and George (1995) evaluated the effects of oil-contaminated prey on cod appetite, growth and osmoregulation. Food contaminated with 200 or 400 ppm crude oil did not affect appetite but resulted in decreased growth; foods contaminated with concentrations of 500 ppm were rejected.

Capelin (Mallotus villosus) is a keystone fish species, particularly in the Barents Sea. As with B. saida, M. villosus represent the trophic link between zooplankton and larger fish, birds, and marine mammals. Despite their importance, there were few studies evaluating the toxicity of oil or dispersed oil with capelin. Khan and Payne (2005) exposed capelin to oil and dispersed oil (Hibernia and Corexit 9527) in continuous flow-through tests of 96-h. Similarly, Frantzen et al. (2012) evaluated the toxicity of crude oil to M. villosus embryos. Concentrations of 46 ppb total PAHs increased embryo mortality rates and decreased hatching success.

Photo 6-13: Myoxocephalus sp. (William Gardiner)

Sculpin (Myoxocephalus sp.) are among the most common demersal fish species in the Arctic. Toxicity tests have been conducted with oil and dispersed oil (Photo 6-13). Gardiner et al. (2013) conducted spiked exposures to WAF and dispersed WAF with larvalMyoxocephalus sp. Median lethal concentrations were generally lower than those for the Arctic cod; however, the sensitivity was similar when older cohorts of larval sculpin were compared. Carls and Korn (1985) exposed the sculpin, Oncocottus hexacornis to water-soluble fractions of Cook Inlet crude, with median lethal concentrations >1.7 ppm total PAH.

Table 6-1. Toxicological Investigations

Taxa	Habitat	Chemical	Exp	Endpoint	Authors	Year
Cnidaria (1 species)
Halitholus cirratus	P	Dispersed oil	A	Locomotion	Percy, Mullin	1977
Echinodermata (1 species)
Strongylocentrotus droebachiensis*	B, NS	Dispersed oil	Field	Physiological, behavioral	Mageau et al.	1987
		2-MN	A	Survival	Olsen et al.	2011
		Dispersed oil	Field	Bioaccumulation	Humphrey et al.	1987
		Condensate	A,C	Survival, respiration, reproduction	Kosheleva et al.	1997
Pycnogonidae (1 species)
Nymphon gracile	B, NS	2-MN	A	Survival	Olsen et al.	2011
Amphipoda (11 species)
Anonyx nugax*	B, DW	WSF, Naphthalene	A	Survival	Carls, Korn	1985
		2-MN	A	Survival	Olsen et al.	2011
		Oil in sediment		Body burden	Neff, Durell	2012
Corophium clarencense	B, NS	Oil in sediment	A	Acute, avoidance	Percy	1977
Gammaracanthus loricatus	SI	WSF, Naphthalene	A	Survival	Carls, Korn	1985
Gammarus oceanicus*	B, NS	WAF	C	Respiration, osmoregulation	Aunaas et al.	1991
		food tainted	A	Avoidance	Percy	1976
		2-MN	A	Survival	Olsen et al.	2011
Gammarus setosus*	B, NS	WAF	C	Cellular energy allocation	Olsen et al.	2007
Gammarus setosus*	B, NS	Pyrene	C	Bioaccumulation, biotransformation, excretion	Carrasco Navarro	2013
Gammarus wilkitzkii*	SI	WSF	C	Cellular energy allocation	Olsen et al.	2008
		WSF	C	Embryo development	Camus and Olsen	2008
		WSF	C	Oxidative stress, molting	Hatlen et al.	2009
		None	C	Baseline oxidative stress	Krapp	2009
Gammarus zaddachi*	B, NS	Oil in sediment	A	Survival	Atlas et al. 1977	1977
Onisimus affinis*	B, NS	Oil in sediment	A	Avoidance	Percy	1977
		Dispersed oil	A	Respiration	Percy	1977
		Tainted food	A	Avoidance	Percy	1976
		Oil in sediment	A	Survival	Atlas et al. 1977	1977
		Oil Dispersion	A	Locomotion	Percy, Mullin	1977
		WSF	C	Survival, movement, foraging	Budosh	1981
Onisimus litoralis*	B, NS	WAF	C	Cellular energy allocation	Olsen et al.	2007
Onisimus litoralis*	B, NS	None		Baseline oxidative stress	Nygård et al.	2010
Onisimus nanseni*	SI	WSF, Naphthalene	A	Survival	Carls, Korn	1985
Orchomenella pinguis	NS	Oil in Sediment	Field	Population	Bach et al.	2009
Orchomenella pinguis	NS	Oil in Sediment	Field	Population	Bach, Dahllöf	2012
Isopoda (2 species)
Mesidotea sibirica	NS	Oil in Sediment	A	Avoidance	Percy	1977
Mesidotea entomon	NS	Oil in Sediment	C	Avoidance	Percy	1977
Mesidotea entomon	NS	Tainted Food	C	Avoidance	Percy	1976
Mysidacea (2 species)
Mysis oculata	B, NS	WSF, oil dispersion	A	Survival	Riebel, Percy	1990
Mysis relicta	B, NS	WSF	A	Survival	Carls, Korn	1985
Copepoda (3 species)
>Calanus glacialis*	P, SI, DW	WAF	A	Survival, gene induction	Hansen et al.	2011
		WAF, CEWAF, Naphthalene, Dispersants	A	Survival	Gardiner et al.	2013
		Dispersants	A	Survival	Hansen et al.	in prep
		WSF	A	Survival	Jager, Hansen	in prep
		Pyrene	A	Feeding, reproduction	Jensen et al.	2008
		Pyrene	C	Egg, hatching, fecal pellet	Hjorth, Nielsen	2011
		WSF	C	Feeding, reproduction	Jensen, Carroll	2010
		Pyrene	C	Survival, hatching, development	Grenvald et al.	2013
		Pyrene, WSF	C	Dynamic energy budget	Klok et al.	2012
Calanus finmarchicus*	P, DW	WAF	A	Survival, gene induction	Hansen et al.	2011
		OWD, Dispersed Oil	A	Survival, feeding, adhesion	Hansen et al.	2012
		ISB residue	A	Survival	Faksness	2012
		Dispersed oil	A	Survival, reproduction, hatching success	Olsen et al.	2013a,b
		WSF, dispersed oil	A	Survival, biomarkers, adhesion	Hansen et al.	2009
		Naphthalene	A	Gene expression (GST, p450, HSP)
		Dispersants	A	Survival	Hansen et al.	in prep
		WSF	A	Survival, biomarkers	Jager, Hansen	in prep
		WSF	A	Survival, development	Hansen et al.	in prep
		OWD, Dispersed Oil	A	Reproduction, hatching success	Hansen et al.	in prep
		OWD, Dispersed Oil	A	Body burden, fouling, adhesion, filtration rates	Nordtug et al.	in prep
		Monoaromatics	A	Survival	Nordtug et al.	in prep
		WSF	A	Survival	Hansen et al.	in prep
		WSF, dispersed oil	A	Survival, body burden	Hansen et al.	in prep
		Phenanthrene, BaP	C	Bioaccumulation	Jensen et al.	2012
		Pyrene	C	Egg, hatching, fecal pellet	Hjorth, Nielsen	2011
		Pyrene	C	Survival, hatching, development	Grenvald et al.	2013
Microsetella norvegica	P	Pyrene	A	Survival, feeding, RNA/DNA	Hjorth, Dahllöf	2008
Decapoda (4 species)
Myas araneus	B	Oil in sediment	C	Heart rate, respiration, oxidative stress	Camus et al.	2002
Pandalus borealis*	B, DW	2- MN	A	Survival	Olsen et al.	2011
Pandalus borealis*	B, DW	WAF	C	Survival, Lysosomal stability, DNA	Bechmann et al.	2010
Sclerocrangon boreas	B, NS	2-MN	A	Survival	Olsen et al.	2011
Chionoecetes bairdi*	B	WAF	A	Survival	Perkins et al.	2003
Bivalvia (7 species)
Astarte borealis		Dispersed oil	Field	Bioaccumulation	Humphrey et al.	1987
Chlamys islandica	B, NS	BaP	A	Injected dose; membrane stability, oxidative stress	Camus et al.	2002
		2-MN	A	Survival	Olsen et al.	2011
		Dispersed oil	C	Immune function	Hannam et al.	2010
		Dispersed oil	C	Immunotoxicity, oxidative stress	Hannam et al.	2009
		Dispersed oil	C	Enzymes, lysosomes, DNA	Baussant et al.	2009
		Dispersed oil		Survival, growth, biomarker	Frantzen et al.	2013
		None	A	Biomarker baseline	Nahrgang et al.	2012
Liocyma fluctuosa	B, NS	WAF	C	Cellular energy allocation	Olsen et al.	2007
Macoma calcarea*	B, NS	Dispersed oil	Field	Bioaccumulation	Humphrey et al.	1987
Macoma calcarea*	B, NS	Dispersed oil	Field	Histology, biochemistry	Neff et al.	1987
Mya truncata	B, NS	Oil in sediment	C	Survival, feeding RNA/DNA	Hjorth, Dahloff	2008
		Dispersed oil	Field	Respiration, membrane stability, oxidative stress	Camus et al.	2003
		Dispersed oil	Field	Behavior	Mageau et al.	1987
Mytilus edulis*	B, NS	Phenanthrene	C	Lysosomal stability	Camus et al.	2000
		Dispersant	C	Freezing tolerance, osmoregulation	Aasset, Zachariassen	1983
		Dispersed oil	C	Enzymes, lysosomes, DNA	Baussant et al.	2009
		Dispersed oil	Field	Histology, biochemistry	Neff et al.	1987
Serripes groenlandicus*	B	Dispersed oil	Field	Behavior	Mageau et al.	1987
Serripes groenlandicus*	B	Dispersed oil	Field	Bioaccumulation	Humphrey et al.	1987
Gastropoda (4 species)
Acmaea tessulata	B, NS	2-MN	A	Survival	Olsen et al.	2011
Littorina littorea	B, NS	2-MN	A	Survival	Olsen et al.	2011
Littorina obstusata	B, NS	Condensate	A, C	Reproduction	Kosheleva et al.	1997
Margarites helicina	B, NS	2-MN	A	Survival	Olsen et al.	2011
Fish (8 species)
Anarhichas minor	B	b-naphthoflavone	C	EROD (gills)	Jönsson	2003
Anarhichas minor	B	Dispersed oil	C	Growth, biomarker
Boreogadus saida*	P, SI, DW	2-MN	A	Survival	Olsen et al.	2011
		WSF, Naphthalene	A	Survival	Carls, Korn	1985
		WAF, CEWAF, Naphthalene	A	Survival	Gardiner et al.	2013
		Injected BaP	A	DNA adducts	Aas et al.	2004
		Injected BaP	A	Gene expression, PAH metabolites, enzyme activity	Nahrgang et al.	2009
		WSF	C	Gene expression, metabolites, DNA damage, reproduction	Nahrgang et al.	2010
		Tainted food	C	Gene expression, PAH metabolites, enzyme activity	Nahrgang et al.	2010a
		Tainted food, WSF	C	Biomarkers	Nahrgang et al.	2010b
		WSF	C	Whole fish metabolism	Christiansen	2009
		Tainted food	C	Growth, food selection, appetite	Christiansen, George	1995
		Tainted food	C	Osmoregulation	Christiansen	2000
		Tainted food	C	Biomarker, CYP1A	Gorge et al.	1995
		Injected BaP	C	Excretion, radiography	Christiansen et al.	1996
		Injected BaP	C	Excretion, radiography	Ingebritsen et al.	2000
		Dispersed oil, nonylphenol	C	Biomarker, baseline	Jönsson et al.	2010
		None		Biomarker, baseline	Nahrgang et al.	2010c
Clupea herengus	P, NS	Dispersed oil	C	Survival, development	Ingarsdóttir et al.	2012
Cyclopterus lumpus	B, NS	Dispersed oil	A,C	Survival, biomarker	Frantzen et al.	in prep
Gadus morhua*	P	Dispersed oil	C	Biomarkers	Skadsheim et al.	2009
		WSF, dispersed oil	C	Transcriptional effects	Olsvik et al.	2010
		WSF, dispersed oil	C	Transcriptional effects	Olsvik et al.	2011a,b
		WSF, dispersed oil	C	Transcriptional effects	Olsvik et al.	2012
		WSF, dispersed oil	C	Survival, food assimilation	Nordtug et al.	2011
		Condensate	A,C	Hematology, respiration	Kosheleva et al.	1997
		None		Biomarker baseline	Nahrgang et al.	2013
Mallotus villosus*	P	WSF	C	Survival, development	Frantzen et al.	2012
Myoxocephalus sp.*	B, NS	WAF, CEWAF, Naphthalene	A	Survival	Gardiner et al.	2013
Oncocottus hexacornis	B, NS	WSF	A	Survival	Carls, Korn	1985
Algae (12 species)*
Chaetoceros septentrionalis	P	WSF, dispersed oil	A	Growth	Hsiao	1978
Navicula bahusiensis	P	WSF, dispersed oil	A	Growth	Hsiao	1978
Chlamydomonas pulsatilla	P	WSF, dispersed oil	A	Growth	Hsiao	1978
Nitzchia delicatissima	P	WSF, dispersed oil	A	Growth	Hsiao	1978
Halosphaera viridis	P	Gas condensate	A,C	Photosynthesis, abundance	Kosheleva et al.	1997
Phizosolenia sp.	P	Gas condensate	A,C	Photosynthesis, abundance	Kosheleva et al.	1997
Nizschia sp.	SI	WSF	A	Photosynthesis	Van Baalen, O’Donnell	1984
Chaeotoceros sp.	SI	WSF	A	Photosynthesis	Van Baalen, O’Donnell	1984
Ice algae *	SI	Dispersed Oil	Field	Density, Chl a, production	Cross	1987
Stictyosiphon sp.	B	Dispersed oil	Field	Growth	Hsiao	1978
Pilayella littoralis	B	Dispersed oil	Field	Growth	Hsiao	1978
Dictyosiphon foeniculaceus	B	Dispersed oil	Field	Growth	Hsiao	1978
Laminaria saccharina	B	Oil, dispersant	Field	Growth	Hsiao et al.	1978
Phyllophora truncata	B	Oil, dispersant	Field	Growth	Hsiao et al.	1978
Phytoplankton community	B	Pyrene, UV	C	Nutrient uptake	Petersen, Dahllöf	2007
Communities
Sediment community	B, NS	Oil in water	C	Respiration	Olsen et al.	2007
Sediment community	B, NS	Oil in water	C	Diversity	Gulliksen, Tassen	1982
Hard bottom macrofauna	B, NS	Dispersed oil	Field	Diversity, density, community structure, avoidance	Cross et al.	1987
Under-ice sediment	B, NS	Dispersed oil	Field	Diversity, abundance, density	Cross, Marten	1987
Benthic algae and bacteria	B, NS	Pyrene, UV	C	Respiration, diversity	Petersen et al.	2008
Pyrene, UV	C	Diversity, abundance	Brakstad et al.	2008
Pelagic microbial community	P	WAF, CEWAF	C	Respiration, diversity	McFarland et al.	in prep
Benthic bacterial community	B, NS	Oil, PAHs	A	Nitrogen fixation	Knowles, Wishart	1970
Oil	C	Nitrogen fixation, denitrification, CO2, methane	Griffiths et al.	1982
Ice bacterial community	SI	Oil	C	Diversity, abundance	Brakstad et al.	2008
Oil	C	Diversity	Gerdes et al.	2005
Compilations
Multiple species	Various	WAF, naphthalene, 2-MN	A	Survival	DeHoop et al.	2012
Multiple species	Various	WAF, naphthalene, CEWAF	A	Survival	Word and Gardiner	2013

ABBREVIATIONS
Habitat		Chemicals		Exposure
P:	Pelagic	2-MN	2-methyl-naphthalene	A:	Acute
B:	Benthic and Epibenthic	BaP	Benzo(a)pyrene	C:	Chronic
SI:	Sea ice
NS:	Nearshore
DW:	Deepwater	*	Valuable Ecosystem Component

Download report