Etat et tendances des niveaux d’imposex chez les gastéropodes marins (TBT dans les mollusques et crustacés)

In assessing a suite of marine contaminants both ‘relative’ and ‘absolute’ aspects have been analysed:

• ‘trend assessment’ or spatial distribution assessment to focus on relative differences and changes on spatial and temporal scales – provides information about the rates of change and whether contamination is widespread or confined to specific locations; and
• the ‘status’ assessment of the significance of the (risk of) pollution, defined as the status where chemicals, are at a hazardous level, usually require assessment criteria that take account of the possible severity of the impacts and hence require criteria that take account of the natural conditions (background concentrations) and the contaminants’ ecotoxicology. For example, Environmental Assessment Criteria (EAC) are tools in this type of assessment.

In assessing data generated through the Co-ordinated Environmental Monitoring Programme (CEMP), OSPAR states that the primary assessment value used in the assessment of contaminant concentrations in sediment and biota “corresponds to the achievement, or failure to achieve, statutory targets or policy objectives for contaminants in these matrices” (OSPAR publication 2009-461). These assessment criteria were specifically compiled for the assessment of CEMP data on hazardous substances contributing to the QSR 2010 (OSPAR 2009a,b). Their use was considered an interim solution for the purposes of the QSR 2010 and were to be used until more appropriate assessment methodology could be agreed upon and implemented. These ‘interim’ criteria have also been used in the annual CEMP assessments since 2010, and will continue to be used until OSPAR agrees on the adoption of improved assessment criteria and subject to the conditions set out in the agreement.

OSPAR IA 2017 Indicator Assessment values are not to be considered as equivalent to proposed European Union Marine Strategy Framework Directive (MSFD) criteria threshold values. However, they can be used for the purposes of their MSFD obligations by those Contracting Parties that wish to do so.

Provenance and limitations of BACs

Background assessment criteria (BACs) have been developed by OSPAR to test whether measured concentrations are near background levels for naturally occurring substances and close to zero for man-made substances, the ultimate aim of the OSPAR Hazardous Substances Strategy. Mean concentrations significantly below the BAC are said to be ‘near background’ (for naturally occurring concentrations). BACs are statistical tools defined in relation to the background concentrations or low concentrations, which enable statistical testing of whether measured concentrations could be considered to be near background levels.

Background concentrations (BC) are assessment tools intended to represent the concentrations of certain hazardous substances that would be expected in the North-East Atlantic if certain industrial developments had not happened. They represent the concentrations of those substances at ‘remote’ sites, or in ‘pristine’ conditions based on contemporary or historical data respectively, in the absence of significant mineralisation and/or oceanographic influences. In this way, they relate to the background values referred to in the OSPAR Hazardous Substances Strategy. BCs for artificial substances should be regarded as zero. It is recognised that natural processes such as geological variability or upwelling of oceanic waters near the coast may lead to significant variations in background concentrations of contaminants, for example trace metals. The natural variability of background concentrations should be taken into account in the interpretation of CEMP data, and local conditions should be taken into account when assessing the significance of any exceedance.

Low concentrations (LC) are values used to assist the derivation of BACs where there have been difficulties in assembling a dataset on concentrations in remote or pristine areas from which to derive background concentrations. LCs were prepared on the basis of datasets from areas that could generally be considered remote but which could not be guaranteed to be free from influence from long-range atmospheric transport of contaminants. LCs have also been used to assess concentrations in sediments from Spain due to the specific bulk composition of sediments from the coasts of the Iberian Peninsula. It is recognised that natural background concentrations may be lower than LCs and that they may not be directly applicable across the entire OSPAR Maritime Area.

BACs are calculated according to the method set out in Section 4 of the CEMP Assessment Manual (OSPAR, 2008b). The outcome of this method is that, on the basis of what is known about variability in observations, there is a 90% probability that the observed mean concentration will be below the BAC when the true mean concentration is at the BC. Where this is the case, the true concentrations can be regarded as ‘near background’ (for naturally occurring substances) or ‘close to zero’ (for man-made substances).

BACs are calculated on the basis of variability within the CEMP dataset currently available through databases held by the ICES Data Centre and will be refined by the relevant assessment group as further CEMP monitoring data are collected.

Provenance and limitations of EAC

Environmental assessment criteria (EAC) were developed by OSPAR and ICES for assessing the ecological significance of sediment and biota concentrations. Some EACs were specifically compiled for assessing CEMP data on hazardous substances contributing to the QSR 2010 (OSPAR Agreement 2009-2, OSPAR 2009b). The EAC do not represent target values or legal standards under the OSPAR Convention and should not be used as such. The EACs were set such that hazardous substance concentrations in sediment and biota below the EAC should not cause chronic effects in sensitive marine species, nor should concentrations present an unacceptable risk to the environment and its living resources. However, the risk of secondary poisoning is not always considered. EAC continue to be developed by OSPAR for use in data assessments.

As concentrations below EAC are considered to present no significant risk to the environment, in most cases EAC are considered analogous to the Environmental Quality Standards applied to concentrations of contaminants in water or biota, for example under the European Union (EU) Water Framework Directive (EU, 2000).

Caution should be exercised in using these generic environmental assessment criteria in specific situations. Their use does not preclude the use of common sense and expert judgement when assessing environmental effects and/or the potential for them to occur. Furthermore, the EAC do not take into account specific long-term biological effects such as carcinogenicity, genotoxicity and reproductive disruption due to hormone imbalances, and do not include combination toxicology.

Countries submit monitoring data to ICES DOME. This imposex assessment was based on data from the ICES database from 2010 to 2015.

Methods for analyses of imposex trends and status

Tributyltin (TBT) is on the OSPAR List of Chemicals for Priority Action (OSPAR, 2004). Monitoring of TBT concentrations in sediment, and its biological effects, are mandatory elements of CEMP (OSPAR, 2010). Thus, TBT differs from the indicators for other compounds, which are only defined as concentrations of the harmful compound in the animal's tissues. Technical Annex 3 to the JAMP Guidelines (OSPAR, 2008a) sets out the guidance for monitoring TBT-specific biological effects (imposex/intersex) in the gastropod species Nucella lapillus, Nassarius reticulatus, Buccinum undatum, Neptunea antiqua and Littorina littorea. At present, only Nucella lapillus (dog whelk) and Nassarius reticulatus (netted dog whelk) are monitored for assessment of status and temporal trends (Table a) using the methods described here and in the contaminants online assessment tool (http://dome.ices.dk/osparmime2016/main.html). In addition, Ocenebra erinaceus (European sting winkle) is monitored in two locations in the Northern Bay of Biscay; these are only monitored for trend assessment, as BAC or EAC are not available for this species for assessment of status.

Imposex is measured using the Vas Deferens Sequence index (VDS), a seven-stage measurement based on the degree of penis and vas deferens (a male sex organ) in females (Table b). VDS = 0 indicates normal genitals, VDS = 5, and VDS = 6 indicates that the female is incapable of reproducing.

Meta-analysis of imposex status and trends

The meta-analyses summarise status and temporal trends for each assessment area, based on monitoring site-wise estimates. The meta-analyses only consider:

• Baseline and representative monitoring sites (impacted monitoring sites, i.e., those close to a point sources, have been omitted because they are ‘unrepresentative’ of contaminant levels at the regional scale). The monitoring sites that were considered to be impacted were the monitoring sites close to the Sullom Voe Oil Terminal (Shetland, United Kingdom) and one monitoring site in Mallaig Harbour (Scotland, United Kingdom); and
• Assessment area with at least three monitoring sites  with good geographic spread (the minimum number that can be considered to provide an evidence base at the OSPAR regional level).

Imposex status

Two assessment criteria are used to assess the status of imposex in snails: BACs and EAC.

Mean values significantly below the BAC are said to be near background, and values below the EAC indicate no chronic effects of TBT on snails. Both criteria are available for Nucella lapillus, while only EAC is available for Nassarius reticulatus(Table c).

Time series of imposex measurements are assessed for status against the EAC if: there are at least three years of data, and there is at least one year with data in the period 2009–2014.

The status of each time series is summarised by two values: (1) the ratio between the estimated mean VDS in the final monitoring year and the EAC (this is modelled on the square root scale to better satisfy the distributional assumptions, but is presented on the original scale for interpretation), and (2) the ratio between the estimated mean VDS in the final monitoring year and the BAC.

Subsequently, these values were summarised by assessment area using meta-analysis. Assessment area status relative to the EAC is assessed by fitting the following linear mixed model by restricted maximum likelihood (McCullagh and Nelder, 1989):

• Response: status (sqrt(mean VDS / EAC));
• Fixed model: OSPAR contaminants assessment area
• Random model: status estimation variation + residual variation.

In the case of the ratio of VDS to EAC, there was a large spread among Iberian Sea monitoring sites. This has two causes. First, some sites monitor Nucella (EAC = 2), while others monitor Nassarius (EAC = 0.3), with the higher (poorer) estimates of status being those for Nassarius (i.e. with the lower EAC). Thus, the two species give a different indication of status, suggesting that the EAC for the two are not properly aligned relative to the actual impact on the animal’s health. This issue has not been addressed; it also affects the Skagerrak, but to a lesser degree. Second, the time series in the Iberian Sea are short and only pooled data have been submitted. Therefore, confidence intervals based on individuals are not possible).

Imposex temporal trends

The ICES database contains a mixture of time series, some with individual measurements only, some with pooled measurements (i.e. data on several individuals combined into one number), and some with a mixture of individual and pooled measurements. In all cases a temporal trend was not fitted if the most recent data were from 2008 or before.

For the time series containing individual measurements only, the trend in each is summarised by the estimated odds ratio of the VDS of an individual whelk being above the EAC in a given year relative to the previous year. Values of 1 indicate no trend; i.e. the odds of an individual being above the EAC in a given year are the same as in the year before. Values <1 indicate that the odds of being above the EAC in a given year are lower than in the year before, so there is a decline in the level of imposex. Conversely, values >1 indicate an increase in the level of imposex. (Odds ratio, rather than log odds ratio, was used because a few time series with extreme trends have less influence on the odds ratio scale). Time series with individual measurements were assessed for trends if there were at least three years of data (not necessarily consecutive years).

For the time series containing pooled measurements only, a linear trend line was fitted if there were at least four years of data. The trend was then transformed to make comparison among series possible.

For time series that contained a mixture of individual and pooled measurements, the time series was truncated to use the individual-measurement method if there were enough data (i.e., three years); otherwise, a linear trend was fitted.

Regional trends are assessed by fitting the following linear mixed model by restricted maximum likelihood (McCullagh and Nelder, 1989):

• response: trend (odds ratio);
• fixed model: OSPAR contaminants assessment area;
• random model: trend estimation variation + residual variation.

The fixed model means that a separate trend is estimated for each OSPAR contaminants assessment area. The random model has two terms:

• trend estimation variation, i.e., the variation in the trend estimates from the analysis of the original time series, assumed known and fixed; and
• residual variation, i.e. the variation that cannot be explained by any of the fixed effects or the other random effects.

General guidelines for assessment in CEMP

Methods for data screening, treatment of quality assurance information, temporal trend assessment and assessment against criteria used previously by CEMP are described in the CEMP Assessment Manual (OSPAR, 2008b) and in the help files for the contaminants online assessment tool.

Criteria used to assess environmental concentrations of hazardous substances are set out in the OSPAR agreement on CEMP Assessment Criteria for the QSR 2010 (OSPAR, 2009b). The derivation of these criteria for hazardous substances is discussed in a Background Document on CEMP Assessment Criteria for the QSR 2010 (OSPAR, 2009a, 2011). These criteria reflect a two-stage process in which data are compared to concentrations yielding limited risk of biological effects (EAC), and then against BCs or zero, expressed as BACs. The latter reflects the OSPAR Hazardous Substances Strategy, in that concentrations should be at or close to background levels for naturally occurring substances (and zero for man-made substances).

Location of monitoring sites

Imposex is currently monitored at more than 200 sites (Table d and Figure a) on up to three marine gastropod species.

Monitoring sites were selected using a range of approaches, although there is an emphasis on monitoring sites which are in, or near, harbours, ports and marinas.

Differences in methodology used for the IA 2017 compared to the QSR 2010

For the IA 2017, a meta-analysis is used to synthesise the individual time series results and provide an assessment of status and temporal trends at the assessment area level. Meta-analyses take into account both the estimate of status or trend in each time series and the uncertainty in that estimate. They provide a more objective regional assessment than was possible in the QSR 2010, where a simple tabulation of the trend and status at each monitoring site was presented.

EEA. 2013. Late lessons from early warnings: science, precaution, innovation. European Environmental Agency (EEA), Report no. 1/2013, 762 pp. ISBN 978-92-9213-356-6. www.eea.europa.eu

European Union, EU, 2000. Directive 2000/60/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council establishing a framework for the Community action in the field of water policy

Langston, W.J., Pope, N.D., Davey, M., Lanston, K.M., O’Hara, S.C.M., Gibbs, P.E., Pascoe, P.L., 2015. Recovery from TBT pollution in English Channel environments: A problem solved? Marine Pollution Bulletin, 95 (2015) 551-564.

Law, R.J., Bolam, T., James, D., Barry, J., Deaville, R., Reid, R.J., Penrose, R., Jepson, P.D. 2012. Butyltin compounds in liver of harbour porpoises (Phocoena phocoena) from the UK prior to and following the ban on the use of tributyltin in antifouling paints (1992-2005 & 2009). Marine Pollution Bulletin 64, 2576-2580.

McCullagh, P., Nelder, J.A. 1989. Generalized Linear Models (second edition). Chapman & Hall, London.

Nicolaus, E.E.M., Barry, J., 2015. Imposex in the dog whelk (Nucella lapillus): 22-year monitoring around England and Wales. Environmental Monitoring and Assessment 2015; 187:736.

OSPAR Commission. 2004. List of Chemicals for Priority Action (Revised 2013). OSPAR Agreement 2004-12. Available via ‘Programmes and Measures / Agreements’ on www.ospar.org

OSPAR Commission. 2008a. JAMP Guidelines for Contaminant-Specific Biological Effects (Replaces Agreement 2003-10). OSPAR Agreement 2008-09. Available via ‘Programmes and Measures / Agreements’ on www.ospar.org

OSPAR Commission. 2008b. CEMP Assessment Manual. Co-ordinated Environmental Monitoring Programme Assessment Manual for contaminants in sediment and biota. OSPAR Publication 379/2008. ISBN 978-1-906840-20-4. Available via ‘Publications’ on www.ospar.org

OSPAR, 2009a. CEMP assessment report: 2008/2009 Assessment of trends and concentrations of selected hazardous substances in sediments and biota. OSPAR Publication 390/2009. ISBN 978-1-906840-30-3. Available via ‘Publications’ on www.ospar.org

OSPAR Commission. 2009a. Background Document on Assessment Criteria used for assessing CEMP Monitoring Data for the Concentrations of Hazardous Substances in Marine Sediments and Biota in the Context of QSR 2010. OSPAR Publication 461/2009. ISBN 978-1-907390-08-1. Available via ‘Publications’ on www.ospar.org

OSPAR Commission. 2009b. Agreement on CEMP Assessment Criteria for the QSR 2010. OSPAR Agreement 2009-2. Available via ‘Programmes and Measures / Agreements’ on www.ospar.org

OSPAR Commission. 2010. OSPAR Coordinated Environmental Monitoring Programme (CEMP). OSPAR Agreement 2010-1 (amended in 2011, 2012, 2013). OSPAR Agreement 2010-1. Available via ‘Programmes and Measures / Agreements’ on www.ospar.org

OSPAR Commission. 2011. Background document on organic tin compounds. OSPAR Publication 535/2011. ISBN 978-1-907390-76-0. Available via ‘Publications’ on www.ospar.org