Jasmin K Schuster1, Tom Harner1, Anita Eng1, Cassandra Rauert1,2, Ky Su1, Keri C Hornbuckle3, Connor W Johnson3. 1. Air Quality Processes Research Section, Environment and Climate Change Canada, Toronto, Ontario M3H 5T4. Canada. 2. Queensland Alliance for Environmental Health Sciences (QAEHS), The University of Queensland, Woolloongabba, Queensland 4102, Australia. 3. Department of Civil and Environmental Engineering and IIHR-Hydroscience and Engineering, The University of Iowa, Iowa City, Iowa 52242, United States of America.
Abstract
The Global Atmospheric Passive Sampling (GAPS) network, initiated in 2005 across 55 global sites, supports the global monitoring plan (GMP) of the Stockholm Convention on Persistent Organic Pollutants (POPs) by providing information on POP concentrations in air on a global scale. These data inform assessments of the long-range transport potential of POPs and the effectiveness evaluation of chemical regulation efforts, by observing changes in concentrations over time. Currently, measurements spanning 5-10 sampling years are available for 40 sites from the GAPS Network. This study was the first time that POP concentrations in air were reported on a global scale for an extended time period and the first to evaluate worldwide trends with an internally consistent sample set. For consistency between sampling years, site- and sample specific sampling rates were calculated with a new, public online model, which accounts for the effects of wind speed variability. Concentrations for legacy POPs in air between 2005 and 2014 show different trends for different organochlorine pesticides (OCPs) and polychlorinated biphenyls (PCBs). The POPs discussed in this study were chosen due to being the most frequently detected, with detection at the majority of sites. PCB, endosulfan, and hexachlorocyclohexane (HCH) concentrations in air are decreasing at most sites. The global trends reflect global sources and recycling of HCH, ongoing emissions from old stockpiles for PCBs, and recent use restrictions for endosulfan. These chlorinated OCPs continue to present exposure threat to humans and ecosystems worldwide. Concentrations of other OCPs, such as chlordanes, heptachlor and dieldrin, are steady and/or declining slowly at the majority of sites, reflecting a transition from primary to secondary sources (i.e., re-emission from reservoirs where these POPs have accumulated historically) which now control ambient air burdens.
The Global Atmospheric Passive Sampling (GAPS) network, initiated in 2005 across 55 global sites, supports the global monitoring plan (GMP) of the Stockholm Convention on Persistent Organic Pollutants (POPs) by providing information on POP concentrations in air on a global scale. These data inform assessments of the long-range transport potential of POPs and the effectiveness evaluation of chemical regulation efforts, by observing changes in concentrations over time. Currently, measurements spanning 5-10 sampling years are available for 40 sites from the GAPS Network. This study was the first time that POP concentrations in air were reported on a global scale for an extended time period and the first to evaluate worldwide trends with an internally consistent sample set. For consistency between sampling years, site- and sample specific sampling rates were calculated with a new, public online model, which accounts for the effects of wind speed variability. Concentrations for legacy POPs in air between 2005 and 2014 show different trends for different organochlorine pesticides (OCPs) and polychlorinated biphenyls (PCBs). The POPs discussed in this study were chosen due to being the most frequently detected, with detection at the majority of sites. PCB, endosulfan, and hexachlorocyclohexane (HCH) concentrations in air are decreasing at most sites. The global trends reflect global sources and recycling of HCH, ongoing emissions from old stockpiles for PCBs, and recent use restrictions for endosulfan. These chlorinated OCPs continue to present exposure threat to humans and ecosystems worldwide. Concentrations of other OCPs, such as chlordanes, heptachlor and dieldrin, are steady and/or declining slowly at the majority of sites, reflecting a transition from primary to secondary sources (i.e., re-emission from reservoirs where these POPs have accumulated historically) which now control ambient air burdens.
Entities:
Keywords:
Global Atmospheric Passive Sampling network; effectiveness evaluation; global distribution; persistent organic pollutants; temporal trends
The
Stockholm Convention on Persistent Organic Pollutants (POPs)
is an international treaty that aims to eliminate or restrict the
production and use of POPs. It listed an initial set of 12 chemicals
when it was signed in 2001 and then ratified in 2004. The defining
characteristics of POPs are persistence in the environment, adverse
effects to human health and/or the environment, and the potential
for long-range environmental transport and bioaccumulation.[1] Since ratification, 18 additional chemical groups
have been added to the Convention (Figure S1). The mandate of the Stockholm Convention on POPs is to (a) eliminate
dangerous POPs, (b) support the transition to safer alternatives,
(c) target additional POPs for action, (d) cleanup old stockpiles
and equipment containing POPs, and (e) work together for a POPs-free
future.[2]The effectiveness of the
treaty is partially evaluated through
the global monitoring plan (GMP) which compiles data from existing
monitoring networks. The GMP also identifies data gaps and supports
strategies for establishing new monitoring programmes, developed by
regional organizational groups. Information from the monitoring of
the GMP core media air, water, and human tissues (milk and blood)
is compiled to inform the effectiveness evaluation on a regular basis.[1,3] The next regional reporting of the GMP will be presented to the
Conference of the Parties in 2021 and will include the POP concentrations
in air reported here for Global Atmospheric Passive Sampling (GAPS)
years 2011 and 2014.The GAPS Network has been in operation
since 2005 to address monitoring
needs for listed POPs in air for the global monitoring plan (GMP)
under the Stockholm Convention and to provide new information (surveillance)
on emerging chemicals of interest to support domestic (Canadian) and
international risk assessment. Under the GAPS Network, passive air
samplers (PAS), with polyurethane foam (PUF) disks as the sampling
medium, are deployed for consecutive three-month periods at background,
polar, rural, agricultural and urban sites. Data for legacy POPs monitored
under the GAPS network is available for the deployment years 2005,
2006, 2007, 2009, 2011, and 2014. During these years, samples were
deployed at 111 sites that are categorized as polar (PO, n = 5), background
(BA, n = 62), rural (RU, n = 17), agricultural (AG, n = 10), and urban
(UR, n = 17) (Figure , Figure S2). Due to the global coverage
of the GAPS network, sites are located in all five United Nations
Environmental Program (UNEP) Regional Groups, with 46 sites part of
the Western European and Others Group (WEOG), 28 sites part of the
Group of Latin America and Caribbean countries (GRULAC), 25 sites
part of the Asia-Pacific Group, 9 sites part of the African Group,
and 3 sites part of the Central and Eastern European Group (CEE).
Long-term monitoring data covering 5–10 years is available
for 40 of these sites.
Figure 1
Map showing all 111 GAPS sites operated during 2005–2014,
differentiated by usage and remoteness as polar, background, rural,
agricultural and urban. 55 sites are currently still operational.
The 40 sites with data available for 5–10 years are indicated
(circle). The five UNEP working group regions are indicated using
shading. WEOG – Western Europe and other Groups region; GRULAC
– Group of Latin American and Caribbean Countries region, CEE
– Central and Eastern Europe region, Africa and Asia and Pacific
Group. Additional site information is presented in Figure S2 and the Supporting Information Excel file.
Map showing all 111 GAPS sites operated during 2005–2014,
differentiated by usage and remoteness as polar, background, rural,
agricultural and urban. 55 sites are currently still operational.
The 40 sites with data available for 5–10 years are indicated
(circle). The five UNEP working group regions are indicated using
shading. WEOG – Western Europe and other Groups region; GRULAC
– Group of Latin American and Caribbean Countries region, CEE
– Central and Eastern Europe region, Africa and Asia and Pacific
Group. Additional site information is presented in Figure S2 and the Supporting Information Excel file.The current study analyzed the global long-term
monitoring data
from the GAPS Network to determine temporal trends for a range of
legacy POPs including polychlorinated biphenyls (PCBs), endosulfan
and its degradation product endosulfan sulfate (SO4), α-
and γ-hexachlorocyclohexane (HCH), cis- and trans-chlordane, trans-nonachlor, heptachlor,
heptachlor epoxide, and dieldrin. A new method to estimate local sampling
rates, based on meteorological information, introduced by Herkert
et al., was used to convert the new data and re-estimate previously
reported POP data under the GAPS network to concentrations in air.[4−6] The temporal trend analysis in this study was performed using the
Theil-Sen Regression estimator. The accumulation of temporal trend
data from 40 sites on a global scale under one sampling campaign allows
insight into regional differences that may be driven by historical
use. Furthermore, compounds whose atmospheric levels are impacted
by re-emission from secondary sources are identified through groupings
based on the extensive temporal trend information.
Experimental
(Materials and Methods)
Sampling
The methodology for the
sample preparation,
extraction, and analysis are described in detail in previous publications.[7−10] In short, precleaned polyurethane foam (PUF) disk samplers were
deployed for three-month periods between the years 2005 and 2014 at
111 global sampling sites following the protocol of the GAPS network.
Details for the deployment dates and sampling locations of the individual
samples are reported in the Supporting Information (SI Excel-All data). The coefficient of variance for accumulated
compound mass in duplicate PUF–PAS field samples was previously
determined and reported as <35% by Gouin et al. (2005).[11]
Sample Extraction, Analysis, and QA/QC
Samples were
spiked with surrogate standards (13C-PCB-105, d6-α-HCH, and d8-p,p’-DDT) before extraction. Details
on method recovery margins for 2005–2007 samples are reported
previously,[7,9,10] average recoveries
for 2009–2014 were 95 ± 30%. Samples for the years 2005–2007
were Soxhlet-extracted with petroleum ether.[7−9] Samples for
the years 2009–2014 were extracted with petroleum ether/acetone
using accelerated solvent extraction (ASE 350, Dionex corporation,
Sunnyvale, CA, USA).[10,12] Extracts were concentrated using
rotary evaporation and passed through an anhydrous sodium sulfate
column. Extracts were analyzed for PCB 28/52/101/118/138/153/180 (reported
as ∑7PCBs), endosulfan I/II/SO4, α-
/γ-HCH, cis-/trans-chlordane, trans-nonachlor, heptachlor, heptachlor epoxide, and dieldrin
using a Hewlett-Packard 6890 gas chromatograph–5973 mass spectrometer
(GC-MS) for samples from 2005 to 2007 and an Agilent Technologies
(Mississauga, ON, Canada) 7890B gas chromatograph coupled with an
Agilent 7000C tandem quadrupole mass spectrometer (GC-MS/MS) for samples
from 2009 to 2014. Details on the GC-MS and GC-MS/MS methods are provided
elsewhere.[7,9,10] Updates in
the extraction and analysis methods have undergone internal quality
control to ensure the continuity of the results of the GAPS network.Field blanks were deployed at all sites for all sampling years.
Method detection limits (MDL) were estimated for each sampling year
from the average concentration of the field blanks plus 3 times the
standard deviation of the field blanks. All samples were blank corrected.
The instrumental detection limit was used when all field blanks were
nondetect for a compound. The complete data and sample specific MDL
are reported in the SI-Excel Table “All data”. As a
result of improvements in instrument sensitivity over the past several
years, MDL values have reduced substantially: by up to 1–2
orders of magnitude for some targeted chemicals. Consequently, this
can introduce biases in the temporal trends assessment if MDL values
are substituted (e.g., by 1/2 MDL), as discussed by Helsel et al.[13] Therefore, the treatment of data under the GAPS
Network for trends assessment is moving away from substitution (as
was done in earlier papers, e.g., Pozo et al. 2006,[9] Rauert et al. 2018[10]) and instead
excludes data that fall below MDL, as was done in this paper. The
MDL values are reported and flagged but not included in the temporal
trends assessment. Other monitoring programs have also adopted this
practice[14−16] or apply more sophisticated approaches for substituting
values below MDL (e.g., Monte Carlo methods) in order to reduce biases
introduced by MDL substitution.[17−19]Geometric means (GM) and
geometric standard deviation were calculated
in Excel. Statistical tests suitable for the non-normally distributed
GAPS data set were performed in R[20] using
the packages “dplyr”[21] and
“openair”.[22,23] The Kruskal–Wallis
Test was performed as a nonparametric alternative to the ANOVA test,
coupled with the pairwise Wilcoxon Rank Sum Test as a nonparametric
alternative to the t test. The package “pcaMethods”[24] was used to perform principle component analysis
(PCA) with the “NIPALS” method for missing values.
Sampling Rates (R) and Concentration Conversion
The
mass loads per sampler were transformed to concentrations in air by
using sample and compound specific effective air volumes. Previously
reported concentrations in air from GAPS data were based on site-specific
sampling rates (R) that were determined from depuration compounds
(DC).[9] Site-specific values in this study
were estimated from the model and online tool by Herkert et al.[4−6] The online tool estimates the modeled R values based on the GAPS
depuration compound data and a meteorological model. The use of the
online tool to estimate R values reduces sample processing steps and
eliminates the high costs associated with isotopically labeled chemical
standards. The model has been used and validated in other passive
air sampling campaigns by Zhao et al. 2020[25] and Bohlin-Nizzetto et al. 2020.[26] Concentrations
in air reported in this study are estimated from modeled R values
(data reported in previous studies for the years 2005–2009
were corrected based on the new R values). Effective air volumes were
calculated with the modeled R values following the method described
by Shoeib and Harner.[27] Details for this
approach are in the Text S1 and Figure S3.
Temporal Trend Analysis for the Data Set
Temporal trend
analysis was performed for POPs (PCBs, endosulfan I/II/SO4, α- /γ-HCH, cis-/trans-chlordane, trans-nonachlor, heptachlor, heptachlor
epoxide, and dieldrin) for 40 sites where data were available for
a range of 5–10 years (Figure S1, Supporting
Information Excel-Temporal trends). Dichlorodiphenyltrichloroethane
(DDT) was excluded at this time due to analytical and detection challenges
for its isomers and metabolites. The number of sites that fulfilled
this condition were 4 polar, 28 background, 3 rural, 1 agricultural,
and 4 urban sites. The Theil-Sen Regression estimator from the R package
“openair” was used as a robust, nonparametric method
to estimate the median regression slopes at individual sites and the
overall global decline trend over the complete data set.[22,23] The Theil-Sen Regression estimator has been used in other studies
such as White et al. (2020) for the temporal trend analysis of POP
levels in air from passive air sampling data.[19] The Theil-Sen method estimates the slopes between all pairs of data
points and returns the median of these slopes. The Theil-Sen Regression
was only performed for sites with more than 6 data points (i.e., the
natural logarithm of the POP concentration in air) above MDL. Data
below the MDL were excluded from the statistical analysis. Details
on the percentage of data used for the temporal trend analysis for
each site and compound are reported in the SI (SI Excel-Temporal trends). First order kinetics was assumed to
calculate the halving time or doubling time of POPs concentrations
in the atmosphere from the slopes derived from the Theil-Sen Regression.
Results and Discussion
Global Distribution of POPs Classes
The POPs discussed
in this study were chosen due to being the most frequently detected,
with detection at the majority of sites. The ranking of the detection
frequency in 340 samples collected in the most recent GAPS years (2011
and 2014) is PCBs (97%, GM 4.0 ± 5.1 pg/m3) > endosulfan
I (91%, GM 15.3 ± 4.4 pg/m3) > α-HCHs (83%,
GM 4.8 ± 5.1 pg/m3) > dieldrin (76%, GM 4.5 ±
3.5 pg/m3) > cis-chlordane (72%, GM
1.9
± 4.3 pg/m3) > γ-HCHs (69%, GM 4.1 ±
3.6
pg/m3) > trans-chlordane (60%, GM 1.4
± 5.5 pg/m3) > trans-nonachlor
(54%,
GM 2.8 ± 4.2 pg/m3) > heptachlor epoxide (54%,
GM
0.36 ± 7.7 pg/m3) > endosulfan SO4 (43%, GM 1.2
±
8.1 pg/m3) > endosulfan II (40%, GM 3.9 ± 8.0 pg/m3) > heptachlor (34%, GM 0.36 ± 7.7 pg/m3)
(Table , Figure , Figures S4–S7). The variability in the detection frequency
and concentrations reflect the history of use for the individual POPs
in different areas.
Table 1
Geometric Mean Concentration
of Legacy
POPs at Different Site Types for GAPS 2011/2014a
(Including geometric standard
deviation, minimum and maximum) and the median halving/ times (including the range based on the
25th -75th percentile of temporal trend slopes). Doubling times are
marked in and with an * in the table.
Figure 2
Global concentrations of ∑7PCB, α-HCH,
γ-HCH, endosulfan I, endosulfan II, and endosulfan SO4 for GAPS 2011/2014. The plot depicts the single data points using
bee-swarm boxplots to illustrate the median, 25th and 75th percentile
(whiskers marking the 10th and 90th percentile). The concentrations
are resolved by sampling site type and UNEP regional group. (Site
types: PO= polar, BA = background, RU = rural, AG = agricultural,
UR = urban; UNEP regional groups: Africa = African Group, Asia = Asia
and Pacific Group, CEE = Central and Eastern European Group, GRULAC
= Group of Latin America and Caribbean countries, WEOG = Western European
and Others Group).
(Including geometric standard
deviation, minimum and maximum) and the median halving/ times (including the range based on the
25th -75th percentile of temporal trend slopes). Doubling times are
marked in and with an * in the table.Global concentrations of ∑7PCB, α-HCH,
γ-HCH, endosulfan I, endosulfan II, and endosulfan SO4 for GAPS 2011/2014. The plot depicts the single data points using
bee-swarm boxplots to illustrate the median, 25th and 75th percentile
(whiskers marking the 10th and 90th percentile). The concentrations
are resolved by sampling site type and UNEP regional group. (Site
types: PO= polar, BA = background, RU = rural, AG = agricultural,
UR = urban; UNEP regional groups: Africa = African Group, Asia = Asia
and Pacific Group, CEE = Central and Eastern European Group, GRULAC
= Group of Latin America and Caribbean countries, WEOG = Western European
and Others Group).PCBs are ubiquitous industrial
pollutants which have been produced
and in use since the 1930s. Production peaked in the 1960s, and the
total global production is estimated at 1–1.5 million tonnes.
Initial bans and regulations began in the 1970s, starting with the
ban in Japan in 1972. The last official production ended in 1998.
By the time PCBs were listed under the Stockholm Convention in 2004,
they were restricted and banned globally. The applications of PCBs
ranged from coolants and insulation fluids of transformers and capacitors;
hydraulic fluid; lubricants; plasticizers in paint, cement, and copy
paper; and additives in polyvinyl chloride, from electric cable coatings
to sealants and caulking.[28] Their wide
use means that there is still an extensive number of remaining sources
for PCBs in use and awaiting disposal. In addition to primary sources
of PCB residuals, secondary sources for PCBs are believed to contribute
to ambient air burdens by remission from environmental “sinks”
where they have been accumulated over time (e.g., soils). This explains
why they are the most ubiquitous POPs detected in this study. During
the GAPS years 2011 and 2014, the highest concentrations were monitored
at urban sites in the regional groups Asia and WEOG (Figure ). This distribution pattern
has not changed from the GAPS 2005–2007 data (Figure S4, S5).Technical HCH was one of the most commonly
used organochlorine
insecticides after the 1940s. The technical mixture consisted of different
HCH isomers with the most abundant being α-HCH (55–80%),
β-HCH (5–14%), γ-HCH (8–15%), δ-HCH
(2–16%), and ε-HCH (3–5%).[29] γ-HCH was identified as the only isomer that has
specific insecticidal properties. Consequently, the use of technical
HCH was discontinued in many countries during the 1950s and the product
was replaced with lindane, which is the pure version of γ-HCH
(99%). In some regions, like India and China, the switch to lindane
came later, in the 1980s and 1990s. Lindane and the isomers α-and
β-HCH were added to the list of restricted pollutants under
the Stockholm Convention in 2009. Previous legislation focused mainly
on the regulation of lindane, but the inclusion of the isomers α-and
β-HCH emphasizes the need to address the global waste stockpiles
of the lindane byproducts as well.α-HCH was detected
not only with higher frequency than γ-HCH
in the GAPS 2011/2014 samples but also at overall higher concentrations
at 60% of the sites. HCH concentration ranges were in general similar
between polar, background, rural, and urban sites, with the exception
of elevated α- HCH levels at polar sites. α-HCH was detected
at higher levels at the polar sites in the Arctic compared to γ-HCH
(Figure ). This is
also visible in the elevated fraction of α-HCH in polar samples
(82 ± 9%) where both isomers were detected (Figure S8). The former Soviet Union was historically a source
region for HCHs to the Arctic via long-range atmospheric transport.[30] Its consumption of technical HCH for agricultural
use between 1950 and 1990 was substantially higher than lindane (total
use of α-HCH ∼ 1270 kt vs γ-HCH ∼ 270 kt).[30,31] The GAPS Network has not successfully established representative
long-term sampling sites in Russia, which represents a large portion
of the CEE region, to investigate levels and trends of HCHs and other
POPs in air. Europe led in the overall consumption of lindane (63%)
between 1950 and 2000 followed by Asia (16%) and North America (14%),
while the use in Africa (6%) and Oceania (0.2%) was lower.[32,33] This is reflected in overall higher concentrations of γ-HCH
at European GAPS sites when compared to those of the other regions.
There is a clear regional difference with α-HCH dominating concentrations
in North-American WEOG sites (82%) compared to γ-HCH dominating
concentrations at GRULAC sites (75%) (Figure ). When comparing the average α- and
γ-HCH patterns for GAPS 2011/2014 to GAPS 2005–2007,
we find that concentrations in the Asia region were an order of magnitude
higher than those in the other regions (Figure
S4). We interpreted this difference as an artifact due to the
termination of a large number of agricultural GAPS sites in the Asia
region since 2007.Endosulfan is an insecticide that is used
as a technical mixture
of the isomers endosulfan I and endosulfan II with mostly agricultural
application. The production as a commercial pesticide started in the
1950s, and it is estimated that the global consumption of endosulfan
from 1950–2000 adds up to 308 kt.[34,35] The highest consumption is reported for North America and parts
of South America, Russia, India, and Australia.[36] Its use as a pesticide was banned in the European Union
in 2006/2007 and it was listed under the Stockholm Convention on POPs
in 2011, with exemptions. The endosulfan I fraction of both endosulfan
isomers in the technical mixture is about 66–70%. Of the two
isomers, endosulfan I is more stable. Endosulfan SO4 is
a major degradation product of endosulfan and is considered of toxicological
concern. While endosulfan has higher environmental degradation rates
than other POPs, endosulfan SO4 is more stable and contributes
to its joint persistence.[36] This is reflected
by the higher detection frequency of endosulfan SO4 compared
to endosulfan II in this study, even though overall levels are about
an order of magnitude lower than ∑endosulfan I/II levels. The
highest endosulfan concentrations for GAPS 2011/2014 were observed
at agricultural sites followed by urban > rural > background
> polar
sites (Figure ). This
is consistent with the distribution for GAPS 2005–2007 (Figure S4). The fraction of endosulfan I was calculated
for all samples, where both endosulfan I and endosulfan II were detected.
The endosulfan I fraction was higher than that in the technical endosulfan
mixture (66–70%) for GAPS 2005–2007 (83 ± 12%)
and GAPS 2011/2014 (82 ± 14%). The endosulfan I fraction decreases
from polar sites > background > rural > urban/agricultural
sites (Figure S9). The increasing endosulfan
I fraction
indicates an aging of the endosulfan mixture due to distance from
source areas.Dieldrin is an insecticide that was used for agricultural
application
and pest control. Commercial production of Dieldrin started in the
late 1940s and peaked in the 1960s. In the 1950s, it was used extensively
in the USA to target fire ants, but it had negative impacts on wildlife.
The first restrictions of dieldrin started in the 1970s, but it was
still in use in some countries until the 1990s.[37−39] The range of
monitored dieldrin levels in air is smaller compared to those of other
compounds in this study (Table , Figure S6). We found no significant
difference in concentrations between the UNEP regional groups. The
concentration range for the site types was (highest to lowest) urban
> rural/agricultural > background > polar (Figure
S6). Dieldrin was predominantly used for pest control (i.e.,
wood treatment against termites, cloth treatment against moths), which
is reflected in the highest detected levels at urban sites.Chlordane and heptachlor are contact insecticides that were predominantly
used for ant and termite control, landscaping, and limited agricultural
applications since the 1950s. While chlordane and heptachlor were
used globally, applications varied by regions. First restrictions
and bans occurred in the 1980s.[40] Technical
grade chlordane contains more than 140 compounds with composition
of 24% trans-chlordane, 19% cis-chlordane,
21.5% chlordene isomers, 10% heptachlor, 7% nonachlor, and 16.5% other
compounds.[41] Heptachlor was released in
the environment as a byproduct in the use of technical grade chlordane
mixtures as well as a pesticide on its own.[42] The heptachlor degradation product heptachlor epoxide is more stable
in the environment.[43]The detection
frequency and overall concentrations for cis-chlordane, trans-chlordane, and trans-nonachlor was
higher than for heptachlor and heptachlor
epoxide (Table , Figure S7). cis-chlordane, trans-chlordane, trans-nonachlor, and heptachlor
show a similar distribution pattern across site types and regions
with the highest concentrations in urban areas and in the Asia region.
The technical chlordane mixture was used as treatment for structural
wood and home lawn and garden in urban areas.[42] The concentrations of the more stable degradation product heptachlor
epoxide are not substantially different between site types and regional
groups (Figure S7).The focus of this
paper is the reporting of trends and not the
absolute concentrations of POPs or a comparison with other monitoring
programs. An in depth compilation of POP concentrations on a global
scale, which will include the GAPS data and data from other global
programs, is forthcoming. Results for the 5 United Nations regional
reports of the Global Monitoring Plan (third Phase) have been recently
made available on the Stockholm Convention Web site,[44] and work on a unified global report will begin soon by
an international expert group.
Temporal Trend Analysis
Temporal trend analysis was
performed using the Theil-Sen method for 40 sites with sufficient
data from 2005–2014 (Figure ). The range of halving (t1/2)/doubling (t2) times was estimated based on the temporal
trend slopes following first order kinetics. The 25th–75th
percentile range for t1/2/ t2(*) were 2.3–11 years for ∑7PCBs, 4.4–170
years for α-HCH, 4.1–30 years for γ-HCH, 2.1–4.6
years for endosulfan I, 1.6–6.7 years for endosulfan II, 5.0–27*
years for endosulfan SO4, 3.3–14 years for dieldrin, 5.9–23*
years for cis-chlordane, 15–7* years for trans-chlordane, 58–4.9* years for trans-nonachlor, 2.2–8.0 years for heptachlor, and 2.9–5.8
years for heptachlor epoxide (Table , Figure , Figures S10–S12).
Figure 3
Temporal trend slopes
for ∑7PCB, α-HCH,
γ-HCH, endosulfan I, endosulfan II, and endosulfan SO4 for GAPS 2005–2014. The temporal trend slopes were estimated
with Theil-Sen regression for the 40 GAPS sites with sufficient data.
The plot depicts the single data points and the boxplots marking the
median, 25th and 75th percentile (whiskers marking the 10th and 90th
percentile). The windows for halving/doubling times estimated from
the temporal trend slopes following first order kinetics are marked
in the graph.
Temporal trend slopes
for ∑7PCB, α-HCH,
γ-HCH, endosulfan I, endosulfan II, and endosulfan SO4 for GAPS 2005–2014. The temporal trend slopes were estimated
with Theil-Sen regression for the 40 GAPS sites with sufficient data.
The plot depicts the single data points and the boxplots marking the
median, 25th and 75th percentile (whiskers marking the 10th and 90th
percentile). The windows for halving/doubling times estimated from
the temporal trend slopes following first order kinetics are marked
in the graph.The methods to identify global
temporal trends for POPs are consistent
within the data from the GAPS network, and trends can be compared
between sites and POPs. The challenges of comparing and assessing
absolute temporal trend values from different monitoring campaigns
have been discussed in depth by Kalina et al.[45] and Sharma et al.[46] Kalina et al. stressed
the importance of 10+ year sampling periods for passive air samplers
with long deployment windows for statistically significant temporal
trends to compare to continuous active air sampling programs.[45] Sharma et al. highlights the important steps
for interstudy time-trend reviews, i.e., QA/QC criteria, availability
of raw data, and type of time trend analysis.[46] The criteria and recommendations in these studies are not all met
here due to the nature of GAPS sampling and sample archiving. There
is still a scarcity of temporal trend data for POPs in air, and application
of a stringent filter as recommended by Sharma et al. will highly
reduce the available data. Therefore, we focused on an overview of
available data from literature (Table S1) and a general comparison to the temporal trends observed in our
study. However, moving forward, a concerted effort should be made
to enhance the comparability of the data acquired between different
POP monitoring networks.The decline rates for ∑7PCBs and the individual
congeners are mostly consistent across this study (Figure , Figures
S10, S13). Studies in the high Arctic[47] and the Great Lakes Basin[48,49] report slower decline
trends (and partially even increasing trends for PCBs) than those
reported here. The temporal trends are in good agreement with data
from Europe[50] and Africa.[19] Kalina et al. reported temporal trends for individual PCBs
from the MONET network for four of the sites monitored under the GAPS
network, which agreed well.[45] Breivik et
al. estimated the annual decrease in an emissions model for PCBs from
old sources as ∼10% for the mid-2000s, which would correspond
with a halving time of ∼6.5 years.[51] This is in agreement with the halving time values from this study
and indicates that the concentrations of PCBs in air and their decline
are still driven by primary sources.The majority of sites showed
decreasing concentrations of α-
and γ-HCH in air (Figure , Figures S14, S15). α-HCH
levels declined at a slower rate than γ-HCH. The first bans
for the use of the technical HCH mixture and therefore the major source
for α-HCH were implemented by many countries in the 1950s, much
earlier than those for lindane in the 1980s.[29] The reemission of α-HCH from secondary sources might buffer
the decline rates and lead to seemingly increased atmospheric halving
times.[52] For instance, Jantunen and Bidleman[53] reported that the reversal of air-sea gas exchange
for HCHs in the arctic region, which was attributed to air concentrations
declining faster than ocean water concentrations, resulting in a fugacity
gradient favoring volatilisation. Increased melting of sea ice further
enhances the outgassing effect.[53] This
seems to be further confirmed by low or no decline for HCHs in air
at the polar sites, reflecting the large reservoir of α- and
γ-HCH in the Arctic Ocean. The halving times of α- and
γ-HCH reported in this study are in agreement with values reported
for the Arctic,[47] Great Lakes Area,[48,49] the Tibetan Plateaus,[54] Europe,[45] and Africa[19] (Table S1).Endosulfan I levels declined
at an overall higher rate than endosulfan
II levels (Figure , Figures S16, S17), despite being the
more stable of the two isomers. This can be explained by the overall
higher levels of endosulfan I in the environment, which leads to more
statistically robust data than the lower levels of endosulfan II.
However, Endosulfan SO4 levels were only declining at few
sites and increasing at others, which reflects the persistence of
the degradation product (Figure , Figure S18). Temporal trends
for endosulfan SO4 have only been reported for the Great
Lakes area[39] and Africa.[19] The temporal trends reported for Africa for endosulfan
I/II and endosulfan SO4 show the opposite trends with slower
decline rates and increasing trends for the parent compounds and shorter
halving times for the degradation product. This could be due to a
different usage pattern across Africa that is not captured by the
sole African long-term sampling site under the GAPS network. Overall
halving times for endosulfan I/II were shorter than those reported
in the Arctic but in agreement with values reported in the Great Lakes
area[48] and Antarctica[55] (Table S1)Dieldrin levels
declined overall in this study (Figures S11, S19), though at low rates. Studies in Africa,[19] Great Lakes Area,[48,49] and the Arctic[47] show similar trends. Similarly, the temporal
trends for cis-chlordane, trans-chlordane,
and trans-nonachlor showed a combination of slow
decline in most locations and increasing concentrations elsewhere
across the sampling sites (Figure S12, Figures
S20–S24). The reemission of legacy POPs from secondary
sources might buffer the decline rates in the atmosphere. The increasing
impact of secondary sources on the atmospheric levels of legacy POPs
is difficult to identify in a 10 year passive air study. Longer-term
measurements coupled with global fate modeling are needed to quantify
the shift from a primary to secondary source controlled environment.[52]When comparing temporal trend slopes for
GAPS 2005–2014
between compound groups with the Wilcoxon test, there are some significantly
different groupings (Table S2). While there
is obvious overlap in the temporal decline ranges for most compounds,
the resulting trends for trans-chlordane and trans-nonachlor are significantly different from all other
compounds except each other. On the basis of the common source and
similarities in degradation rates,[56] the
expected grouping would include trans-chlordane, trans-nonachlor, and cis-chlordane (Figure S12). However, the temporal trends for trans-chlordane and trans-nonachlor are
showing less declining tendencies than for cis-chlordane.
On one hand, the lower levels of these compounds, which were often
close to the MDL, led to statistically less robust data. On the other
hand, the decline trends for compounds with lower levels in air could
now be buffered by revolatilisation of these compounds from secondary
sources, since restrictions on primary emissions have been in place
in many countries for several decades. For these compounds, whose
levels in air are now controlled by secondary emissions, first order
decline kinetics is no longer a valid approach for describing temporal
trends. It may be more appropriate to describe trends using a model
that considers waning emissions from primary sources as well as contributions
from secondary emissions and environmental degradation rates.[3,52]The temporal trends for endosulfan I were also considered
statistically
significantly different (p < 0.05) from those
of most other compounds (Table S2). The
range of temporal trends was skewed to steeper declining tendencies
(Figure ). The restrictions
for endosulfan are more recent compared to those of the other compounds
in this study. The steeper decline rates and shorter half-lives might
reflect the effects of the recent restrictions of endosulfan. In addition
to that, endosulfan has a lower environmental persistence score than
the majority of compounds discussed in this study.[57]Principle component analysis (PCA) was applied to
the temporal
trend slopes at the individual sites (n = 29, sites with <50% detection
frequency were excluded from the PCA) (Figure S25). The score graph shows that the scores for PC1 (51%) were mostly
impacted by the diverging temporal trend patterns of endosulfan I/II
and endosulfan SO4/trans-chlordane/trans-nonachlor. The scores for PC2 (16%) were mostly impacted by the
diverging temporal trend patterns of endosulfan I/II/SO4 and cis-chlordane/trans-nonachlor. A closer
look at the loadings assigned to the GAPS sites (Figure S25) did not show a clear grouping based on site type
or regional group. However, any patterns might be obscured due to
the vast majority of sites in the categories “Background”
and “WEOG”.The GAPS study has provided the most
comprehensive view of global
concentrations of persistent organic pollutants in the environment.
The use of consistent sampling and analytical methods across more
than 111 sites, 18 chemicals, and a wide variety of different ecosystems
produced more than 18000 data points between 2005 and 2014 to reveal
declining concentrations of legacy POPs around the world. Despite
the success of the study and of the Stockholm Convention demands for
discontinued use of these toxic compounds, major questions remain.
There are still long-term data gaps for some regions (i.e., Russia,
China). Data mining methods and global fate modeling are needed to
identify the separation of secondary source emissions from legacy
primary source stocks and from unreported new uses (i.e., production
of PCBs as byproducts of paint production). Moving forward, a serious
emphasis should be placed on enhancing the comparability of the data
acquired between different POP monitoring networks to breach information
gaps between regions.
Authors: Hayley Hung; Athanasios A Katsoyiannis; Eva Brorström-Lundén; Kristin Olafsdottir; Wenche Aas; Knut Breivik; Pernilla Bohlin-Nizzetto; Arni Sigurdsson; Hannele Hakola; Rossana Bossi; Henrik Skov; Ed Sverko; Enzo Barresi; Phil Fellin; Simon Wilson Journal: Environ Pollut Date: 2016-02-10 Impact factor: 8.071
Authors: M Ekram Azim; Michelle Letchumanan; Azzam Abu Rayash; Yuko Shimoda; Satyendra P Bhavsar; George B Arhonditsis Journal: Ecotoxicol Environ Saf Date: 2011-05-04 Impact factor: 6.291
Authors: John Vijgen; P C Abhilash; Yi Fan Li; Rup Lal; Martin Forter; Joao Torres; Nandita Singh; Mohammad Yunus; Chongguo Tian; Andreas Schäffer; Roland Weber Journal: Environ Sci Pollut Res Int Date: 2010-11-22 Impact factor: 4.223
Authors: Karla Pozo; Tom Harner; Sum Chi Lee; Frank Wania; Derek C G Muir; Kevin C Jones Journal: Environ Sci Technol Date: 2009-02-01 Impact factor: 9.028
Authors: Duo Zhang; Panithi Saktrakulkla; Rachel F Marek; Hans-Joachim Lehmler; Kai Wang; Peter S Thorne; Keri C Hornbuckle; Michael W Duffel Journal: Environ Sci Technol Date: 2022-05-02 Impact factor: 11.357