Neale Peta A, O'Brien Jake W, Glauch Lisa, König Maria, Krauss Martin, Mueller Jochen F, Tscharke Ben, Escher Beate I
Australian Rivers Institute, School of Environment and Science, Griffith University, Southport, QLD, 4222, Australia.
QAEHS - Queensland Alliance for Environmental Health Sciences, The University of Queensland, Brisbane, Queensland, 4102, Australia.
Water Res X. 2020 Oct 1;9:100072. doi: 10.1016/j.wroa.2020.100072. eCollection 2020 Dec 1.
Bioassays show promise as a complementary approach to chemical analysis to assess the efficacy of wastewater treatment processes as they can detect the mixture effects of all bioactive chemicals in a sample. We investigated the treatment efficacy of ten Australian wastewater treatment plants (WWTPs) covering 42% of the national population over seven consecutive days. Solid-phase extracts of influent and effluent were subjected to an test battery with six bioassays covering nine endpoints that captured the major modes of action detected in receiving surface waters. WWTP influents and effluents were compared on the basis of population- and flow-normalised effect loads, which provided insights into the biological effects exhibited by the mixture of chemicals before and after treatment. Effect removal efficacy varied between effect endpoints and depended on the treatment process. An ozonation treatment step had the best treatment efficacy, while WWTPs with only primary treatment resulted in poor removal of effects. Effect removal was generally better for estrogenic effects and the peroxisome proliferator-activated receptor than for inhibition of photosynthesis, which is consistent with the persistence of herbicides causing this effect. Cytotoxicity and oxidative stress response provided a sum parameter of all bioactive chemicals including transformation products and removal was poorer than for specific endpoints except for photosynthesis inhibition. Although more than 500 chemicals were analysed, the detected chemicals explained typically less than 10% of the measured biological effect, apart from algal toxicity, where the majority of the effect could be explained by one dominant herbicide, diuron. Overall, the current study demonstrated the utility of applying bioassays alongside chemical analysis to evaluate loads of chemical pollution reaching WWTPs and treatment efficacy.
生物测定作为化学分析的一种补充方法,有望用于评估废水处理工艺的效果,因为它能够检测样品中所有生物活性化学物质的混合效应。我们连续七天对覆盖澳大利亚42%人口的十家污水处理厂的处理效果进行了调查。对进水和出水的固相提取物进行了一组测试,其中包括六项生物测定,涵盖九个终点,这些终点反映了受纳地表水中检测到的主要作用模式。基于人口和流量归一化的效应负荷对污水处理厂的进水和出水进行了比较,这有助于了解处理前后化学物质混合物所表现出的生物效应。效应去除效率在不同的效应终点之间有所不同,并且取决于处理工艺。臭氧化处理步骤的处理效果最佳,而仅进行一级处理的污水处理厂对效应的去除效果较差。雌激素效应和过氧化物酶体增殖物激活受体的效应去除通常比对光合作用的抑制效果更好,这与导致这种效应的除草剂的持久性一致。细胞毒性和氧化应激反应提供了所有生物活性化学物质(包括转化产物)的总和参数,除了光合作用抑制外,其去除效果比特定终点的去除效果差。尽管分析了500多种化学物质,但除了藻类毒性外,检测到的化学物质通常只能解释不到10%的实测生物效应,在藻类毒性方面,大部分效应可由一种主要除草剂敌草隆来解释。总体而言,当前研究证明了将生物测定与化学分析结合应用于评估进入污水处理厂的化学污染负荷和处理效果的实用性。