CICEET Progress Report for the period 3/01/09 Through 8/31/09

Project Title: An in situ sediment porewater sampler for organic micropollutants based on solid phase microextraction (SPME) technology
Principal Investigator(s): Keith A. Maruya, Eddy Y. Zeng and Steven M. Bay
Project Start Date: 11/14/05
Report Compiled By: Keith Maruya
Contributing Team Members: David Tsukada (SCCWRP technician), Dario Diehl (SCCWRP field coordinator); Wenjian Lao (SCCWRP analytical chemist); Valerie Raco-Rands (SCCWRP data analyst) Steven Bay (SCCWRP toxicologist); Chris Beegan (End User Representative, California Water Resources Control Board)

Figures

Figure 1

Figure 2

1. Complete impervious surface (IS) data
2. Apply impervious surface data to land use categorization to derive IS coefficients
3. Develop and test online GIS planning tool

Progress on each objective is reported below:

Progress on Tasks
(1) Complete data analysis for Exp. 2B.
(2) Draft/submit manuscript on co-exposure experiments (Year 2 results).
(3) Complete analysis of SPME, sediment and tissue samples from the 2008 dry season deployments.
(4) Complete wet season deployments (winter 2008-09).
(5) Analyze retrieved SPME samplers from 2008-09 wet season deployments.
(6) Process and analyze field collected media for 2008-09 wet season deployments.
(7) Prepare and submit 6 month progress report.

Tasks to Meet Objectives:
(1) Analyze sediment, porewater, tissue and SPME data for Exp 2B.
(2) Draft and submit manuscript on Year 2 results.
(3) Analyze SPME samplers, sediments and tissues from the 2008 dry season deployments.
(4) Schedule and initiate wet season deployments at the Tijuana River NERR and Ballona Creek estuary.
(5) Analyze SPME samplers from the 2008-09 wet season deployments.
(6) Analyze sediments and tissues from the 2008-09 wet season deployments.
(7) Collate most recent project information for preparation of 6 month progress report.

Progress on Tasks
Little progress has been made on Tasks 1-2 due to a shift in effort to complete Year 3 field deployments (Tasks 3-6). Tasks 3-5 were completed in 6/09 and Task 6 was recently completed (8/09) for the Tijuana River NERR. The planned deployment of the sampler technology in the Ballona Creek estuary was abandoned in favor of a second dry season deployment in the Duwamish estuary (see below). With submission of this report, Task 7 was completed on 9/1/09.

As an example of our field trials at three distinct locations, SPME porewater samplers were deployed at six sites in the lower Duwamish River estuary (WA) for 21 days in June-July 2008. Total PAH concentrations determined by GC-MS of the retrieved SPME fibers housed in these samplers ("sediment surface") showed excellent agreement between SPME samplers suspended in the water column ("cage") (Figure 1). Bulk sediment chemistry and toxicity results from synoptically collected material are pending.

As a result of the success demonstrated by this deployment, a second dry season deployment for the Duwamish estuary was planned and initiated in 7/09 at the request of and in collaboration with project collaborators (B. Duncan of EPA Region 10 and M. Kelley of Texas A&M). A refinement of previous field deployments for this technology demonstration was the inclusion of caged bivalves as well as SPME water column samplers at each of the Duwamish field sites. These refinements will allow for comparisons of body tissue and SPME measured aqueous concentrations as well as estimation of contaminant flux, transfer and partitioning among bed sediment, water column and filter-feeding biota.

Please describe knowledge dissemination activities during this reporting period.
Publications:
Maruya KA, Zeng EY, Tsukada D, Bay SM. 2009. A passive sampler based on solid phase microextraction (SPME) for quantifying hydrophobic organic contaminants in sediment porewater. Environ Toxicol Chem 28:733-740.

Workshops and trainings:
Project team members D. Tsukada and D. Diehl successfully trained collaborators G. Rosen (SPAWAR, San Diego, CA), B. Duncan (EPA Region 10, Seattle, WA) and M. Kelley (Texas A&M, College Station, TX) on the proper handling, deployment, retrieval, storage and shipment of SPME porewater samplers. The simplicity and robustness of our sampler design was confirmed by the high percentage of intact SPME fibers returned by our collaborators, none of whom had prior experience with deployment of samplers incorporating SPME technology.

Have the results/data gathered during this reporting period indicated that a change to your original approach is necessary? If so, who was involved in the decision-making process? Please explain.
A simple fixture that positions multiple SPME porewater samplers at the desired depth beneath the sediment-water interface was designed, fabricated and tested during the initial dry season events. Retrieval of intact and undamaged samplers using this fixture was excellent; however a small number of fixtures themselves were lost during the three week deployment period. To extend the sampler’s capability to subtidal applications at depths greater than a few meters, the project team (Maruya, Tsukada, Diehl) set out to design, fabricate and evaluate a “deep water” fixture that could be deployed remotely without the use of expensive manpower (i.e. divers) or a large vessel. Several, low cost prototypes were fabricated and tested at depths to 15 m using a 2 person field crew aboard a small craft. These on-going efforts have been met with limited success to date.

Please describe collaboration activities with target stakeholders during this period. Has interaction with stakeholders during this period brought about any changes to the project? Have the stakeholders confirmed the relevance of the technology or approach you are working on?
Field trials of the sampler technology (Tasks 3 and 6) has been planned and performed in collaboration with several researchers and stakeholders, including those named in section B. Initial collaborator feedback has been largely positive with no major design changes recommended for our sampler. This is due in large part to its simple, modular design which allows flexibility in attachment to various fixtures and platforms (Figure 2), as well as its survivability in tidally influenced estuarine systems. Preliminary results comparing bulk sediment chemistry, alternative porewater measurements and biological effects endpoints (e.g. mortality of test organisms) suggest that the sampler technology is effective in identifying trends among samples exhibiting a wide range of contaminant bioavailability. A prime indication of its promise is the repeat invitation the project team received to continue participation in the lower Duwamish assessment of bioavailable PAH in contaminated sediments.

Please describe technical and non-technical objectives for the next reporting period and outline your work plan to meet identified objectives.
Objectives for Next Reporting Period:
(1) Draft/submit manuscript on co-exposure experiments (Year 2 results)
(2) Analyze SPME and supporting chemistry and toxicity data for 2008 dry season deployments.
(3) Analyze SPME and supporting chemistry and toxicity data for 2008-09 wet season deployments.
(4) Analyze retrieved SPME samplers and bivalve tissue from the 2009 dry season Duwamish estuary deployment.
(5) Prepare and submit final project report (due 12/1/09).

Work Plan Outline to Meet Project Objectives:
(1) Manuscript is 50% completed. Estimated journal submission date is 11/09.
(2) Compile 2008 dry season SPME and supporting data into the SCCWRP Chemistry database and analyze using statistical and graphical tools. Estimated completion date is 10/09.
(3) Compile 2008-09 wet season SPME data into the SCCWRP Chemistry database and analyze using statistical and graphical tools. Estimated completion date is 11/09.
(4) Prepare and analyze SPME samplers and bivalve tissues co-deployed in the lower Duwamish estuary. Estimated completion date is 11/09.
(5) Prepare final project report. Estimated submittal date is 12/1/09.

Please describe any activities, accomplishments, or obstacles not addressed in other sections of this report that you feel are important for CICEET to know about.
None