Chemical composition of WAF made with traditional CROSERF method and two passive dosing methods and comparison with predicted concentrations from PETROTOX model

Deep-sea Risk Assessment and species sensitivity to WAF, CEWAF and Dispersant

DOI:
10.7266/N7833QG1
 
UDI:
R5.x291.000:0008
Last Update:
Feb 13 2018 14:50 UTC
 
Dataset Author(s):
Gopal Bera Anthony Knap
Point of Contact:
Bera, Gopal
Texas A&M University / Geochemical and Environmental Research Group
833 Graham Road
College Station, Texas  77845
USA
gopal.bera@tamu.edu
Funding Source:
RFP-V
 
Extent Description:
Dataset contains laboratory based experiments, no field sampling involved.

Identified Submitted In-Review Available
3 3 3 3

Suggested Citation:

Gopal Bera Anthony Knap (2017) Chemical composition of WAF made with traditional CROSERF method and two passive dosing methods and comparison with predicted concentrations from PETROTOX model. Distributed by: Gulf of Mexico Research Initiative Information and Data Cooperative (GRIIDC), Harte Research Institute, Texas A&M University-Corpus Christi. doi:10.7266/N7833QG1

Abstract:

This study compared the Chemical Response to Oil Spills: Ecological Research Forum (CROSERF) Water Accommodated Fraction (WAF) procedure with two alternative techniques in which crude oil is passively dosed via partitioning from silicone tubing or O-rings. Using fresh Macondo surrogate oil (MC252), WAFs were prepared at a 10, 30, 100, 360 mg/L loading using each dosing approach. Following equilibration, the aqueous test media was analytically characterized by measurement of total polycyclic aromatic and aliphatic hydrocarbons using GC-MS and dissolved hydrocarbons using GC-FID biomimetic solid phase microextraction (BE). Total measured concentrations of speciated hydrocarbons were fit to an oil solubility model to estimate dissolved and droplet oil concentrations for each treatment. Detailed GCxGC compositional input obtained on this oil was used as input to the PETROTOX model to calculate dissolved toxic units (TUs) at each oil loading as an improved exposure metric for toxicity prediction.

Purpose:

The first objective of this study was to investigate the comparative dissolution kinetics and resulting aqueous exposures generated with fresh Macondo surrogate oil (MC252) at different loadings, employing the traditional CROSERF WAF method and PD techniques. The second objective was to compare measured concentrations of individual hydrocarbons in test media to dissolved concentrations predicted from the oil solubility model provided by. A third aim was to apply the PETROTOX model to predict the toxicity of the Macondo oil to a range of aquatic species and evaluate if passive sampling measurements of dissolved oil exposures provided an analytical surrogate for toxicity prediction.

Theme Keywords:

CROSERF, Passive dosing, PETROTOX, EOE, BE-SPME, PAHs Alkane

File Format:

xlsx

Filename:

Combined Data_Bera et al_PT.xlsx (108.25 KB)

Dataset Downloads:

4

Chemical composition of WAF made with traditional CROSERF method and two passive dosing methods and comparison with predicted concentrations from PETROTOX model



Identification Information
Distribution Information
Metadata Maintenance Information

Metadata: 
  File identifier: 
      R5.x291.000-0008-metadata.xml
  Language: 
      eng; USA
  Character set: 
    Character set code: 
      utf8
  Hierarchy level: 
    Scope code: 
      dataset
  Metadata author: 
    Responsible party: 
      Individual name: 
          Gopal Bera
      Organisation name: 
          Texas A&M University / Geochemical and Environmental Research Group
      Position name: 
          Assistant Research Scientist
      Contact info: 
        Contact: 
          Phone: 
            Telephone: 
              Voice: 
                  2283631191
              Facsimile: 
          Address: 
            Address: 
              Delivery point: 
                  833 Graham Road
              City: 
                  College Station
              Administrative area: 
                  Texas
              Postal code: 
                  77845
              Country: 
                  USA
              Electronic mail address: 
                  gopal.bera@tamu.edu
      Role: 
        Role code: 
          pointOfContact
  Date stamp: 
      2018-08-11T13:44:24+00:00
  Metadata standard name: 
      ISO 19115-2 Geographic Information - Metadata - Part 2: Extensions for Imagery and Gridded Data
  Metadata standard version: 
      ISO 19115-2:2009(E)
  Dataset URI: 
      https://data.gulfresearchinitiative.org/metadata/R5.x291.000:0008
Return To Index

Identification info: Data identification: Citation: Citation: Title: Chemical composition of WAF made with traditional CROSERF method and two passive dosing methods and comparison with predicted concentrations from PETROTOX model Alternate title: Date: Date: Date: 2017-12-20 Date type: Date type code: creation Abstract: This study compared the Chemical Response to Oil Spills: Ecological Research Forum (CROSERF) Water Accommodated Fraction (WAF) procedure with two alternative techniques in which crude oil is passively dosed via partitioning from silicone tubing or O-rings. Using fresh Macondo surrogate oil (MC252), WAFs were prepared at a 10, 30, 100, 360 mg/L loading using each dosing approach. Following equilibration, the aqueous test media was analytically characterized by measurement of total polycyclic aromatic and aliphatic hydrocarbons using GC-MS and dissolved hydrocarbons using GC-FID biomimetic solid phase microextraction (BE). Total measured concentrations of speciated hydrocarbons were fit to an oil solubility model to estimate dissolved and droplet oil concentrations for each treatment. Detailed GCxGC compositional input obtained on this oil was used as input to the PETROTOX model to calculate dissolved toxic units (TUs) at each oil loading as an improved exposure metric for toxicity prediction. Purpose: The first objective of this study was to investigate the comparative dissolution kinetics and resulting aqueous exposures generated with fresh Macondo surrogate oil (MC252) at different loadings, employing the traditional CROSERF WAF method and PD techniques. The second objective was to compare measured concentrations of individual hydrocarbons in test media to dissolved concentrations predicted from the oil solubility model provided by. A third aim was to apply the PETROTOX model to predict the toxicity of the Macondo oil to a range of aquatic species and evaluate if passive sampling measurements of dissolved oil exposures provided an analytical surrogate for toxicity prediction. Status: Progress code: completed Point of contact: Responsible party: Individual name: Gopal Bera Organisation name: Texas A&M University / Geochemical and Environmental Research Group Position name: Assistant Research Scientist Contact info: Contact: Phone: Telephone: Voice: 2283631191 Facsimile: Address: Address: Delivery point: 833 Graham Road City: College Station Administrative area: Texas Postal code: 77845 Country: USA Electronic mail address: gopal.bera@tamu.edu Role: Role code: pointOfContact Descriptive keywords: Keywords: Keyword: CROSERF Keyword: Passive dosing Keyword: PETROTOX Keyword: EOE Keyword: BE-SPME Keyword: PAHs Alkane Type: Keyword type code: theme Descriptive keywords: Keywords: Keyword: inapplicable Type: Keyword type code: place Language: eng; USA Topic category: Topic category code: environment Extent: Extent: Description: Dataset contains laboratory based experiments, no field sampling involved. Supplemental Information: EOE: Time (hours), EOE (mg/L), Oil loading (mg/L), Dissolved concentration (ug/L), Standard concentration (mg/L), Emission, Average, Standard deviation, Standard error BE-SPME: BE-SPME (uM/mL PDMS), Oil loading (mg/L), Average, Standard deviation GCGC of MC252: Starting Carbon number, Ending Carbon number, Composition (%), n-P, i-P, n-CC5, n-CC6, i-N, Di-N, n-Olefins, i-Olefins, Poly-N, AIS, MoAr, NMAr, DiAr, NDiAr, PolyAr, ArS Note: GCxGC analysis of oil only provides % composition of each chemical classes to a total of 100%. This % composition of chemical classes are used as input for PETROTOX model. Separate analyses were done on oil to find their PAHs PIANO SHC concentration. These concentrations were used in PETROTOX model again to predict the aqueous concentrations and compared with concentrations measured by GCMS (PTvsmeasured). PAHs PIANO SHC: Class, Abbreviation, Analytes, Result (mg/kg) PTvsMeasured: C#, Analyte, Oil loading (mg/L), Cdis = predicted dissolved concentration (ug/L), Caq Obs = measured concentration (ug/L), Microdroplet concentration (ug/L), Ctotal predicted total concentration (ug/L) Note: Microdroplet concentration is concentration of droplets (mg/L) created during mixing of oil and water. Evo, slow means mixing of oil and water was done slowly at 300 rpm (rotation per min). Samples for GCMS were taken after the experiments were over i.e. 72 hrs. TU vs oil loadings: Oil loading (mg/L), Toxic units (unitless), CTLBB = critical target lipid body burden, TU(GCXGC) = toxic unit calculated from GCXGC composition of oil, TU(VOC) = toxic unit calculated for VOC from measurements of speciated compounds of oil, TU(PAH) = toxic unit calculated for PAH from measurements of speciated compounds of oil Note: Oil Loading is the amount of oil (mg) added to the aqueous phase (L). This is for oil MC252. Toxic Units (TUs) are acute toxicity units and are calculated by PETROTOX model. For calculation, please see Redman and Parkerton (2015). Redman AD, Parkerton TF. 2015. Guidance for improving comparability and relevance of oil toxicity tests. Mar Pollut Bull 98:156-170.|Estimated Oil Equivalents (EOE): Estimated total oil equivalents (EOE) measures aromatic hydrocarbons (mainly mono- and di-aromatic) that contain unsaturated bonds in their structure. EOE was calculated from total scanning fluorescence (TSF), which was measured with an Aqualog Horiba Fluorometer (Model Aqualog-UV-800). First, the TSF was measured for MC252 and the optimal wavelengths for maximum intensity (MI) were established (Excitation=257 nm and Emission=357 nm). Depending on the range of sample concentrations, a 5–7 point calibration curve was made using diluted MC252 in dichloromethane with concentrations ranging from 2 mg/L to 0.1 mg/L. Then, 10 mL samples were extracted with dichloromethane (DCM) and the extract was measured for TSF. MI at established optimal wavelengths was used to estimate the EOE from the calibration curve. Polycyclic-aromatic-hydrocarbons (PAHs) and aliphatic hydrocarbons The analytical procedure used for the measurement of PAHs and aliphatic hydrocarbons (ALHs) were based on established standard operating procedures utilized by Geochemical Environmental Research Group (GERG), Texas A
Return To Index

Distribution info: Distribution: Distributor: Distributor: Distributor contact: Responsible party: Organisation name: Gulf of Mexico Research Initiative Information and Data Cooperative (GRIIDC) Contact info: Contact: Phone: Telephone: Voice: 3618253604 Address: Address: Delivery point: 6300 Ocean Drive City: Corpus Christi Administrative area: TX Postal code: 78412 Country: USA Electronic mail address: griidc@gomri.org Online Resource: Online Resource: Linkage: URL: https://data.gulfresearchinitiative.org Role: Role code: distributor Distributor format: Format: Name: xlsx Version: inapplicable File decompression technique: Distributor transfer options: Digital transfer options: Transfer size: 0.1083 Online: Online Resource: Linkage: URL: https://data.gulfresearchinitiative.org/data/R5.x291.000:0008 Protocol: https Name: Data Landing Page Description: GRIIDC dataset landing page Function: Online function code: information
Return To Index

Metadata maintenance: Maintenance information: Maintenance and update frequency: unknown Maintenance note: This ISO metadata record was automatically generated from information provided to GRIIDC for dataset: R5.x291.000:0008 on 2019-11-19T17:54:42-06:00
Return To Index