Deterministic risk assessment of firefighting water additives to aquatic organisms

Acute Toxicity of Commercial Wildfire Retardants to Two Daphniid Species (Ceriodaphnia dubia and Daphnia magna)

In the face of global climate change, there has been an increase in wildfires around the world, highlighting the need for improved firefighting techniques, such as the use of fire retardants (FRs). These products can enter aquatic systems directly or through runoff, posing potential risks to aquatic biota. In this study, the acute toxicity (24-h/48-h EC50) of three distinct FRs (N-Borate, N-Phosphate+, and N-Phosphate-) was assessed on the immobility of freshwater microcrustaceans Ceriodaphnia dubia and Daphnia magna. The toxicity of the FRs varied up to two orders of magnitude, all of which presented risks to cladocerans even at dilutions much below those recommended by their manufacturers. Among the tested FRs, N-Phosphate- emerged as the most harmful to both species. Specifically, for C. dubia, the 24 h EC50 was 0.005% and the 48 h EC50 was 0.0019%, while for D. magna, 24 h EC50 was 0.003% and the 48 h EC50 was 0.0023%. With the increasing use of FRs for wildfire control, our study highlights the toxicity of newly formulated FRs to daphniid species and emphasizes the need for further evidence-based evaluations of their effects on freshwater ecosystems, which is crucial for choosing FRs that pose the lowest hazard to zooplankton communities.

Investigation of the potential effects of firefighting water additives on soil invertebrates and terrestrial plants

The intensity and frequency of forest fires is increasing across the globe due to climate change. Additives are often added to make water more effective at extinguishing fire and preventing re-ignition. This study investigated the toxicity of nine different firefighting water additives to four species of soil invertebrates (Folsomia candida, Porcellio laevis, Porcellio scaber, and Trichorhina tomentosa) and two plant species (Agropyron cristatum and Raphanus sativus). Considerable variation in toxicity was observed among the firefighting products. The toxicity of individual products also varied considerably amongst the tested species. A hazard assessment was conducted by comparing the concentration of firefighting water additive that caused a 50% effect (LC50 or EC50) or a concentration that caused no effect (NOEC) to the concentration recommended by the manufacturer. At a rate of application representative of a forest firefighting scenario, most firefighting water additives tested in this study posed a hazard to F. candida and the three isopod species. The majority of products did not pose a risk to the two plant species included in this study. Consideration of the toxicity of firefighting water additives to terrestrial biota should be considered along with the efficacy of the product to fight fires when deciding which products to use.

Potential risk to aquatic biota from aerial application of firefighting water additives

The frequency and severity of forest fires is increasing due to climate change. Consequently, there will be an increased use of forest firefighting additives, which increase the ability of water to extinguish fires and prevent reignition. Increased use will potentially result in increased exposure to aquatic ecosystems within forests. This study examined the toxicity of nine firefighting water additives that are currently on the market to three species of freshwater invertebrates that occupy different niches within freshwater ecosystems. The toxicity of the water additives varied up to three orders of magnitude. Pelagic and epibenthic invertebrates are affected at lower rates of application than endobenthic invertebrates. A field relevant application rate of three of the nine water additives tested represent a hazard to freshwater ecosystems under varies exposure scenarios represented by the depth of a theoretical water body (15-200 cm). This study highlights the importance of application buffers around water bodies and the selection of water additives that pose the lowest hazard to freshwater ecosystem, assuming that the efficacy of the additives in extinguishing fires is similar.

Effects of two firefighting chemical formulations, Phos-Chek LC95W and BlazeTamer380, on striped marsh frog (Limodynastes peronii) tadpole survival, growth, development and behaviour

Global wildfire events are projected to become more frequent and severe due to the continual threat of climate change, resulting in increasing demand for effective fire mitigation methods. Firefighting chemicals (FFCs), including retardants, foams and water enhancers, are often used to prevent the spread of wildfires. However, the impact of FFCs on wildlife and ecosystems is poorly understood. We investigated the effects of two common FFC formulations, Phos-Chek LC95W and BlazeTamer380, on tadpole survival, growth, development and swimming behaviour. Tadpoles of the striped marsh frog (Limnodynastes peronii) were exposed to two concentrations of either Phos-Chek (0.25 and 1 g/L) or BlazeTamer (0.05 and 0.2 g/L) for 16 days. The highest concentration of Phos-Chek was lethal to tadpoles, with mortalities gradually increasing over time and only 8% of animals surviving to day 16. Both FFCs influenced the growth and development of tadpoles, though effects were more severe in tadpoles exposed to the Phos-Chek formulation. Phos-Chek was found to completely stop tadpole growth and development over the 16-day exposure, whereas BlazeTamer significantly delayed growth and development in comparison to controls. Nevertheless, treatments had no apparent effect on tadpole movement patterns and swimming activity. Greater toxicity caused by the Phos-Chek treatment likely relates to the increased ammonia and altered water quality parameters. Runoff or accidental application of commonly used FFCs into small waterways may therefore have important ramifications for aquatic biota.

Occurrence characteristics and health risk assessment of per- and polyfluoroalkyl substances from water in residential areas around fluorine chemical industrial areas, China

Recently, identifying the contamination status and assessing the health risk of per- and polyfluoroalkyl substances (PFASs) in surface water and groundwater have been of great significance. Eighteen individual PFASs were analyzed in thirty-three surface/groundwater samples during one period in a fluorine chemical park (Park A) and during two periods in Park B. The mean total concentration of 18 PFASs (∑PFASs) in Park A (9104.63 ng·L^-1) was significantly higher than that in the wet season (WS) (801.68 ng·L^-1) or DS (714.64 ng·L^-1) in Park B. The perfluorobutane sulfonate (PFBS) was the predominant substance in the two parks, and the maximum concentration in groundwater exceeded 10,000 ng·L^-1. The contamination status in the wet season (WS) was higher than that in the dry season (DS) in Park B. The ∑PFASs in Park A presented an increasing tendency following the groundwater flow direction, whereas this rule was limited to all periods in Park B. Two relative source contributions (RSCs) of 20% or 100% allowed assessing the PFASs risk to different age groups, and the results revealed that some PFASs (4 ≤ C ≤ 7 or 9 ≤ C ≤ 12) were identified as having a low risk quotient (RQ), except for perfluorooctane sulfonate (PFOS) and PFOA (C = 8). The RQ_mix value mainly relies on PFOA and PFOS, with a larger contribution rate of 80-90%. All assessed cases (case 1, case 2, case 3, and case 4) in all age groups revealed that infants were vulnerable to PFASs influence, followed by children, teenagers, and adults.

Perspective: common errors in dose-response analysis and how to avoid them

Dose-response experiments are conducted to determine the toxicity of chemicals on organisms. The relationship between dose and response is described by different statistical models. The four-parameter log-logistic model is widely used in pesticide sciences to derive biologically relevant parameters such as ED₅₀ and resistance index (RI). However, there are some common errors associated with the calculation of ED₅₀ and RI that can lead to erroneous conclusions. Here we discuss five common errors and propose guidance to avoid them. We suggest (i) all response curves must be fitted simultaneously to allow for proper comparison of parameters across curves, (ii) in the case of nonparallel curves absolute ED₅₀ must be used instead of relative ED₅₀ , (iii) standard errors or confidence intervals of the parameters must be reported, (iv) the e parameter in asymmetrical models is not equal to ED₅₀ and hence absolute ED₅₀ must be estimated, and (v) when the four-parameter log-logistic model returns a negative value for the lower asymptote, which is biologically meaningless in most cases, the model should be reduced to its three-parameter version or other types of model should be applied. The mixed-effects model and the meta-analytic approach are suggested as appropriate to average the parameters across repeated dose-response experiments. © 2021 Society of Chemical Industry.

Deterministic risk assessment of firefighting water additives to terrestrial organisms

Firefighting water additives are used to increase the rate at which fires can be extinguished. The majority of ecotoxicological research has focused on firefighting formulations containing perfluorinated compounds as additives, due to the persistence and bioaccumulative nature of the perfluorinated constituents. A number of relatively new additives have come on the market to replace the products containing perfluorinated compounds. The potential effect of these new additives on the environment has been largely unstudied. This study investigated the toxicity of six firefighting water additives: Eco-Gel™, ThermoGel 200L™, FireAde™, Fire-Brake™, Novacool Foam™, and F-500™ to terrestrial biota. Terrestrial organisms could be exposed to firefighting water additives through leaching into soil and/or runoff following a firefighting event or through direct aerial application during a forest fire. Toxicity to three plant species was assessed through seedling germination and emergence tests: Fagopyrum esculentum (buckwheat), Raphanus raphanistrum subsp. sativus (radish), and Rudbeckia hirta (black-eyed Susan). The effects of firefighting water additives on three soil invertebrates, the collembolan Folsomia candida, the earthworms Eisenia andrei, and Dendrodrilus rubidus, were also investigated using static acute tests to estimate EC₅₀/LC₅₀s. The concentration that resulted in a 50% reduction in survival (LC₅₀) for the acute toxicity tests conducted with F. candida ranged from 3 (Eco-Gel) to 0.175% (Novacool) by volume. Comparatively, the acute toxicity of two firefighting water additives to D. rubidus could not be determined, as a 50% reduction in survival was not observed. A number of firefighting water additives were found to pose a hazard to terrestrial organisms based on a worst-case exposure scenario of direct application at the greatest recommended application rate for a class A fire (e.g., wood, paper). The firefighting water additive F-500 was found to pose a hazard (HQ ≥ 1) for all species tested, except for the acute test conducted with D. rubidus. Comparatively, Eco-Gel posed a hazard for only the acute and chronic tests with F. candida. This study represents the first comparative deterministic risk assessment of firefighting water additives to terrestrial ecosystems.