Hostname: page-component-586b7cd67f-t8hqh Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-24T10:41:05.962Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

THE EFFECTS OF AN EXPERIMENTAL INJECTION OF METHOXYCHLOR ON AQUATIC INVERTEBRATES: ACCUMULATION, STANDING CROP, AND DRIFT

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  31 May 2012

J. F. Flannagan
Affiliation:
Freshwater Institute, Environment Canada, Winnipeg, Manitoba R3T 2N6
B. E. Townsend
Affiliation:
Freshwater Institute, Environment Canada, Winnipeg, Manitoba R3T 2N6
B. G. E. de March
Affiliation:
Freshwater Institute, Environment Canada, Winnipeg, Manitoba R3T 2N6
M. K. Friesen
Affiliation:
Freshwater Institute, Environment Canada, Winnipeg, Manitoba R3T 2N6
S. L. Leonhard
Affiliation:
Freshwater Institute, Environment Canada, Winnipeg, Manitoba R3T 2N6

Abstract

A single 0.3 ppm injection of methoxychlor into the Athabasca River, Alberta on 4 June 1974 for 15 min caused catastrophic drift for a distance of over 400 km, and a subsequent large decrease in the drifting population. This decrease, when expressed as a percentage reduction from pretreatment drift, is in close agreement with percentage reduction of standing crop recorded by other sampling methods. The time required for the pesticide to affect different species varied considerably but was not related to the mode of feeding. Methoxychlor residues above ambient levels in water were recorded in all the invertebrate populations sampled. Caged animals had significantly different residues than the natural populations. The use of caged animals as indicators of environmental damage is therefore questioned.

Type
Articles
Copyright
Copyright © Entomological Society of Canada 1979

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Anderson, J. B. and Mason, W. T. Jr. 1968. A comparison of benthic macroinvertebrates collected by dredge and basket samplers. J. Wat. Pollut. Control Fed. 40: 252259.Google Scholar
Bartlett, M. S. 1947. The use of transformations. Biometrics 3: 3952.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Burdick, G. E., Dean, H. J., Harris, E. J., Skea, J., Frisa, C., and Sweeney, C.. 1968. Methoxychlor as a blackfly larvicide, persistence of its residues in fish and its effects on stream arthropods. N.Y. Fish and Game J. 15: 121142.Google Scholar
Burton, W. and Flannagan, J. F.. 1973. An improved Ekman-type grab. J. Fish. Res. Bd Can. 30: 287290.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Burton, W. and Flannagan, J. F.. 1976. An improved river drift sampler. Can. Fish. Mar. Serv. Res. Dev. Tech. Rep. 641. 8 pp.Google Scholar
De March, B. E., Flannagan, J. F., and Cobb, D. G.. Statistical analyses of benthic data from the Athabasca blackfly control program, Tech. Rep. Can. Fish. Mar. Serv. Res. Div. (in prep.).Google Scholar
Flannagan, J. F. 1973. Sorting benthos using floatation media. Fish. Res. Bd Can. Tech. Rep. 354. 14 pp.Google Scholar
Fredeen, F. J. H. 1972. Reactions of the larvae of three rheophilic species of Trichoptera to selected insecticides. Can. Ent. 104: 945953.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Fredeen, F. J. H. 1974. Tests with single injections of methoxychlor blackfly (Diptera: Simuliidae) larvicides in large rivers. Can. Ent. 106: 285305.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Fredeen, F. J. H. 1975. Effects of a single injection of methoxychlor blackfly larvicide on insect larvae in a 161 km (100 mile) section of the North Saskatchewan River. Can. Ent. 107: 807817.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Fredeen, F. J. H., Saha, J. G., and Royer, L. M.. 1971. Residues of DDT, DDE and DDD in fish in the Saskatchewan River after using DDT as a blackfly larvicide for twenty years. J. Fish. Res. Bd Can. 28: 105109.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Fredeen, F. J. H., Saha, J. G., and Balba, M. H.. 1975. Residues of methoxychlor and other chlorinated hydrocarbons in water, sand, and selected fauna following injections of methoxychlor blackfly larvicide into the Saskatchewan River, 1972. Pestic. Monit. J. 8(4): 241246.Google Scholar
Kapoor, I. P., Metcalf, R. L., Nystrom, R. F., and Sangha, G. K.. 1970. Comparative metabolism of methoxychlor, methiochlor and DDT in mouse, insects and in a model ecosystem. J. agric. Fd Chem. 18(6): 11451152.Google Scholar
Leonhard, S. L. 1978. Crayfish as “toxicological tools” in field and laboratory studies. Proc. 3rd int. Crayfish Symp. (Kuopio, Finland, 1976).Google Scholar
Lockhart, W. L., Metner, D. A., and Solomon, J.. 1977. Methoxychlor residue studies in caged and wild fish from the Athbasca River, Alberta, following a single application of blackfly larvicide. J. Fish. Res. Bd Can. 34: 626632.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Merna, J. W. and Eisele, P. J.. 1973. The effects of methoxychlor on aquatic biota. Ecol. Res. Ser. (U.S. Environ. Prot. Agency) EPA-R3-73-046. p. 59.Google Scholar
Powers, C. F. and Robertson, A.. 1967. Design and evaluation of an all-purpose benthos sampler. Spec. Rep. Gt Lakes Res. Div., Univ. Mich. 30: 126131.Google Scholar
Solomon, J. and Lockhart, W. L.. 1977. Rapid preparation of micro-sample and gas-liquid chromatographic determination of methoxychlor residues in animal tissues and water. J. Ass. off. anal. Chem. 60(3): 690695.Google ScholarPubMed
Wallace, R. R. and Hynes, H. B. N.. 1975. The catastrophic drift of stream insects after treatment with methoxychlor (1,1,1-trichloro-2,2-bis (p-methoxyphenyl)ethane). Environ. Pollut. 8: 255268.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Wallace, R. R., Hynes, H. B. N., and Merritt, W. F.. 1976. Laboratory and field experiments with methoxychlor as a larvicide for Simuliidae (Diptera). Environ. Pollut. 10: 251269.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Water Surveys of Canada. 1975. Surface water data, Alberta 1974. Information Canada, Ottawa. 208 pp.Google Scholar
Waters, T. F. 1964. Recolonization of denuded stream bottom areas by drift. Trans. Am. Fish. Soc. 93: 311315.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Waters, T. F. 1965. Interpretation of invertebrate drift in streams. Ecology 46: 327334.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Waters, T. F. 1966. Production rate, population density and drift of a stream invertebrate. Ecology 47: 595604.CrossRefGoogle Scholar