Abstract Preliminary investigations using radioactively labelled DDT indicate that 50-90% of the DDT at a low concentration in water is codistilled with as little as 5-20% loss of water by evaporation over a 48 hour period. Under a constant air flow as much as 15of this loss is recovered by water and particulate material of a second solution placed in series. Particulate matter in the second solution concentrates DDT 1.000 to 50,000 times the level in the ambient water, depend¬ ing both on the surface area and nature of the particles. Experiments with the bay mussel Mytilus edulis suggest that filter feeders can readily incorporate DDT from water and particulate matter. These results indicate that codistilla- tion and air currents may be important in transporting significant quantities of DDT to the marine environment where it may enter the food chain. The variation of levels of DDT on glassware, suspended particles and in the sea water suggests that an equilibrium exists between the DDT adsorbed on various materials and that found in the surrounding water. Introduction Earlier studies have indicated a high codistillation rate of DDT with water (Acree 1963). In addition, signifi- cant levels of DDT residues have been found in the atmosphere (Risebrough et al. 1968; Abbott et al. 1965). These results suggest that evaporation and subsequent transport by air currents may be important processes in the transfer of DDT from the site of application to distant areas. Of special interest is the possible role of these mechanisms in the contamination of the marine environment. Further, Odem. Woodwell, and Wurster (1969) reported high levels of DDT on particles of organic detritus, and suggested that this might be an important mode for the entrance of DDT into marine animals. The preliminary studies presented here support the hypothesis that codistillation and air currents are important in transporting DDT to the marine environment where it can be concentrated on particles and enter the food chain through filter feeders. Materials and Methods The experimental apparatus was composed of three one- gallon jars as shown in Figure 1. Jar 1 was sealed and served as a control for the system. Two one-gallon jars and two oil traps were connected in series by glass tubing as pictured in Fig. 1. An air stream of 2-3 liters/minute entered the otherwise sealed system from a pressurized line and blew across the water surface in jars 2 and 3. After washing all jars and glass tubing with ethanol and rinsing clean with filtered sea water, one liter of sea water was successively filtered through O.8u, O.45u, and 0.22u Millipore filters and added to each jar. Particles of known weight were placed in jar 3 and kept circulated by means of a magnetic stirer. In order to compare the affinity of DDT for natural particles, three materials were used. Celite, a diatomaceous earth (Johns Mansfield Co.), approximated inorganic detritus. Organic detritus was simulated by taking material from a phytoplakton tow, freezing it in an acetone dry-ice bath, and drying to a powder in a 52°C oven. Fine sand ranging from 0.2-0.4mm was collected in the Monterey Marina, frozen, and dried to permit direct comparison with the "detritus" discussed earlier. Celite and the "detritus" were of comparable size and weight, while the inorganic nature of both celite and sand allowed comparisons between these materials. 20mg of particles were used in all runs except one. In that case O.2gm sand, with a volume equal to that of 20mg dry detritus, was used to provide a comparison for approximately equal surface areas of the two materials. O.lml of 14 parts per million C1+ DDT in ethanol (phenyl ring C14 (U) 54uC/mg, Aldrich Chemical Co., Milwaukee, Wis.) was added to jars 1 and 2 making the concentrations in the sea water of these jars equal to 1,4 parts per billion, 194 slightly above the upper range of the solubil ity of DDT in water (Bowman, Acree, Corbett 1960). Jar 3 contained no C14 DDT. After 48 hours the level of DDT was determined for the system. DDT in the water of jars 1 and 2 was removed in three extractions of 50ml reagent grade hexane. For each extraction the separatory funnel was shaken vigorously for one minute then left standing for ten minutes. A lml aliquot of each hexane extract was placed in 1Oml Toluene scintillation fluid (4gm PPO, O.lgm POPOP in toluene to make 1 liter solution) and counted in a liquid scintillation counter (Nuclear-Chicago Unilux II) for 10 minutes. Counts from each extraction were summed and the activity of the total water sample was calcu- lated. This procedure had earlier been demonstrated to remove greater than 99% of the DDT from the water. To check adsorption on the glass, the jars were washed with 25ml hexane and a lml aliquot was counted. The particles in jar 3 were separated from the water by centrifugation (about 4000x g for 10-15 minutes) and the DDT content of both was determined. The supernatent from the centrifugation was pipeted off and extracted with hexane according to the same procedure used for the water in jars I and 2. The particles were resuspended in ethanol, put in scintillation fluid and counted. Filtration was not used to isolate particles since C+ DDT was found to be absorbed readily by Millipore filters. 3 Results and Discussion The table of Fig. 1 lists the levels of the DDT in the system after 48 hours. DDT concentrations for the water do not include the amount adsorbed on the glassware. This adsorption accounts for the drop from the initial concen¬ tration in the control (jar 1). Although there was much variability in the adsorption of DDT on the glass jars, most of the Yalues range from 10-35% of the total amount present in the jar. This percentage remained fairly constant in spite of changes in the actual concentrations of DDT in the jars, indicating that an equilibrium might exist between the DDT in the water and that adsorbed on the glass. Further investigations are necessary to confirm the presence of this equilibrium. The DDT remaining in the water of jar 2 varied from 2.1 to 0.5 ppb. At the same time the volume of water re¬ maining in the jar also varied. These variations are believed to be a result of small fluctuations in velocity and humidity of the air flow, acting over the 48 hour period. A direct correlation exists between evaporation of water and loss of DDT. However, while the decrease of water was 5-207, the DDT showed a 50-90% loss. The rate of codistillation as defined by Acree et al. (1963) was calculated for jar 2. The rates varied from 0.006 to 0.014 ugm/ml water and are virtually identical to the range of rates reported by Acrée d N E 88 — 55 8 8 9 9 88 6 999 o 80 2 0» 1 0 O 0 25. S c — 25 1 9 9 9 8 - a 5 9 u 8 9 for similar concentrations of DDT over a 24 hour period. After 48 hours jar 3 contained up to 15% of the DDT removed from jar 2. This percentage representing 2-117 of the total DDT in the control, is the sum of the amounts recovered from particles, water, and glassware of jar 3. Late in the investigation it was discovered that the centrifugation procedure removed a substantial amount of the C DDT from the water. DDT thus adsorbed to the plastic centrifuge tubes was then partially removed with the part- icles. Consequently, DDT levels for the particles appeared higher and levels for the water appeared lower than was actually the case. The last run of the experiment was designed to estimate this effect. Sand was used because it settled without centrifugation. The water was decanted and the particles were removed from the jar with a spatula, placed in a scintillation vial with ethanol, and counted directly. Although this method of collecting particles was not entirely effective, it is believed that at least 90% of the material was recovered. After thorough mixing the decanted water was divided into two equal portions. One sample was extracted directly with hexane, while the other was centrifuged before the extraction procedure, as in previous experiments. Aliquots of both extracts were then counted in the scintillation counter and compared. The centrifuge tubes were then rinsed with ethanol as if particles were being collected, to provide a correction factor to adjust the previous data. Radioactivity in these rinses gave an estimation of the extent to which earlier particle counts were biased by C DDT from the water. Table 1 shows the corrected values for the levels of C DDT in the water and particles. In all cases the cor- rected figures represent minimum values for DDT concentrations. Although the values presented here represent only approximations, some preliminary conclusions may be drawn. Celite and sand, both composed primarily of inorganic silichus material, concentrate DDT to about the same degree -- greater than 1000 times the concentration in the surrounding water. The detritus, containing more organic material,cocentrates DDT to an even greater extent, at least 50,000 times above the level in the ambient water. On a volume basis also the detritus concentrated DDT to a higher level. In this case the detritus contained three times as much DDT as the sand. These results indicate that the nature of the material as well as the available surface area may be important in determining how much DDT is eventually concentrated. Since it had been demonstrated that particulate matter picked up DDT to a significant extent, experiments were designed to show that this could serve as a pathway for the incorporation of DDT into filter feeding marine organisms. labelled DDT was fed to the bay mussel Mytilus edulis. Results showed that in 12 hours, the mussels had taken up a large amount of the radioactivity that was available to them 19. 89. 88 8. 1 — L ODO 0 —0 2- 60 0 E 0 0 3 99 O 2o a — 8 1 OL 2 o5 oo 88 oo c ava- 5 ooo — D - 8 3 2 9 + s 55 11 90 3 —0 gu OL 0 0 HL 1 c H7 80- 0- o n ot 0 9 HEE 5 0-0— D1 c 0 - 0898 o from the particles (20-50%). However, an experiment in which C DDT detritus was incubated in unlabelled sea water indicated a large percentage of the radioactivity from the particles was leached into the water. Thus it cannot be concluded definitely at this time that the uptake in Mytilus was from the particles only. These results suggest the exist- ence of an equilibrium between the particles and the water, both of these serving as potential donors of DDT to the organisms. Implications The experiments discussed here demonstrate the signifi- cnace of DDT adsorption on glassware even at concentrations below the limits of solubility. Clearly the removal of large percentages of the added DDT from the water affects the reliability of sample aliquots and alters the concentration that experimental animals are actually exposed to. This is a factor that cannot be overlooked in experiments dealing quantitatively with DDT. More directly, the results presented here illustrate the extreme mobility of DDT. Although the experimental conditions did not attempt to duplicate exactly those accuring in nature, they demonstrate clearly that codistillation and air currents can remove high percentages of DDT from one location and transfer it to water and particulate matter in another. Pro- 20 jecting these conclusions to the agricultural use of DDT would suggest that the insecticide may readily leave the area of application, be carried by the wind systems, and enter the marine environment. This mechanism of transfer and contamination has, in fact, been suspected for some time. Finally, DDT entering sea water from the air is concentrated in suspended organic and inorganic particulate matter. In this way translocated DDT is made available to filter feeding organisms and thus can enter the marine food chains, both from being on particulate matter and from direct uptake from the water. In conclusion, it appears that the marine ecosystem may be serving as a receptocle for large amounts of DDT and its residues. s References Abbott, D. C., R. B. Harrison, J. O'G. Tatton, and J. Thomson. 1965. Organochlorine Pesticides in Atmospheric Environ- ment. Nature, 208:1317-1318. Acree, F. Jr., M. Beroza, M. C. Bowman. 1963. Codistillation of DDT With Water. Jour. Agric. Food Chem., 11:278-280. Bowman, M. C., F. Acree Jr., M. K. Corbett. 1960. Solubility of Carbon-14 DDT in Water. Jour. Agric. Food Chem., 8:406- 408. Bowman M. C., F. Acree Jr., C. H. Schmidt, M. Beroza. 1959. Fate of DDT in Larvicide Suspensions. Jour. Econ. Ent.. 52:1038-1042. 52 Odum, W. E., G. M. Woodwell, C. F. Wurster. 1969. DDT Residues Absorbed from Organic Detritus by Fiddler Crabs. Science, 164:576-577. Risebrough, R. W., R. J. Huggett, J. J. Griffin, E. D. Goldberg. 1968. Pesticides: Transatlantic Movements in the Northeast Trades. Science, 159:1233-1236. 808