Lynn S. McCarty

Hexabromocyclododecane: Current Understanding of Chemistry, Environmental Fate and Toxicology and Implications for Global Management

Hexabromocyclododecane (HBCD) is a globally produced brominated flame retardant (BFR) used primarily as an additive FR in polystyrene and textile products and has been the subject of intensified research, monitoring and regulatory interest over the past decade. HBCD is currently being evaluated under the Stockholm Convention on Persistent Organic Pollutants. HBCD is hydrophobic (i.e., has low water solubility) and thus partitions to organic phases in the aquatic environment (e.g., lipids, suspended solids). It is ubiquitous in the global environment with monitoring data generally exhibiting the expected relationship between proximity to known sources and levels; however, temporal trends are not consistent. Estimated degradation half-lives, together with data in abiotic compartments and long-range transport potential indicate HBCD may be sufficiently persistent and distributed to be of global concern. The detection of HBCD in biota in the Arctic and in source regions and available bioaccumulation data also support the case for regulatory scrutiny. Toxicity testing has detected reproductive, developmental and behavioral effects in animals where exposures are sufficient. Recent toxicological advances include a better mechanistic understanding of how HBCD can interfere with the hypothalamic-pituitary-thyroid axis, affect normal development, and impact the central nervous system; however, levels in biota in remote locations are below known effects thresholds. For many regulatory criteria, there are substantial uncertainties that reduce confidence in evaluations and thereby confound management decision-making based on currently available information.

Relationships between exposure and dose in aquatic toxicity tests for organic chemicals

There is continuing debate about the merits of exposure-based toxicity metrics such as median lethal concentration (LC50) versus organism-based metrics such as critical body residue (CBR) as indicators of chemical toxicity to aquatic organisms. To demonstrate relationships and differences between these 2 metrics, the authors applied a simple one-compartment toxicokinetic mass-balance model for water-exposed fish for a series of hypothetical organic chemicals exhibiting baseline narcotic toxicity. The authors also considered the influence of several toxicity-modifying factors. The results showed that the results of standard toxicity tests, such as the LC50, are strongly influenced by several modifying factors, including chemical and organism characteristics such as hydrophobicity, body size, lipid content, metabolic biotransformation, and exposure durations. Consequently, reported LC50s may not represent consistent dose surrogates and may be inappropriate for comparing the relative toxicity of chemicals. For comparisons of toxicity between chemicals, it is preferable to employ a delivered dose metric, such as the CBR. Reproducible toxicity data for a specific combination of chemical, exposure conditions, and organism can be obtained only if the extent of approach to steady state is known. Suggestions are made for revisions in test protocols, including the use of models in advance of empirical testing, to improve the efficiency and effectiveness of tests and reduce the confounding influences of toxicity-modifying factors, especially exposure duration and metabolic biotransformation. This will assist in linking empirical measurements of LC50s and CBRs, 2 different but related indicators of aquatic toxicity, and thereby improve understanding of the large existing database of aquatic toxicity test results.

Putting science into persistence, bioaccumulation, and toxicity evaluations

In recent decades, advances have been made in the processes used to identify substances as persistent, bioaccumulative, and toxic (PBT). Key processes have been identified, and scientifically sound assessment methods have been developed. Regulatory agencies around the world have sought practical methods for implementing policies to protect both environment and human health. In the present paper, we review the various contributions that Mackay (in collaboration with his students and colleagues) has made to the development of scientifically sound methods for the identification of PBT substances and persistent organic pollutants. These contributions include efforts to clearly define the terminology and to develop scientifically defensible assessment models and evaluation frameworks.

The chemical exposure toxicity space (CETS) model: Displaying exposure time, aqueous and organic concentration, activity, and onset of toxicity.

Abstract A 1‐compartment toxicokinetic model is used to characterize the chemical exposure toxicity space (CETS), providing a novel graphic tool that can aid in the design of aquatic toxicity tests for fish and for interpreting their results. The graph depicts the solution to the differential equation describing the uptake kinetics of a chemical by a modeled fish under conventional bioassay conditions. The model relates the exposure concentration in the water to a dimensionless time and the onset of toxicity as determined by an estimated or assumed critical body residue or incipient lethal aqueous concentration. These concentration graphs are specific to each chemical and exposure and organism parameters and clearly demonstrate differences in toxicity between chemicals and how factors such as hydrophobicity influence the toxic endpoint. The CETS plots can also be used to assess bioconcentration test conditions to ensure that concentrations are well below toxic levels. Illustrative applications are presented using a recent set of high‐quality toxicity data. Conversion of concentrations to chemical activities in the plots enables results for different baseline toxicants to be superimposed. For chemicals that have different modes of toxic action, the increased toxicity then becomes apparent. Implications for design and interpretation of aquatic toxicity tests are discussed. The model, and pictorial visualization of the time‐course of aquatic toxicity tests, may contribute to improvements in test design, implementation, and interpretation, and to reduced animal usage. Environ Toxicol Chem 2017;36:1389–1396.