Skip to main content

Advertisement

SpringerLink
Log in

Controlling the Invasive Diatom Didymosphenia geminata: An Ecotoxicity Assessment of Four Potential Biocides

  • Published:
Archives of Environmental Contamination and Toxicology Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

In 2004, an invasive mat-forming freshwater diatom, Didymosphenia geminata (didymo), was found in New Zealand causing concern with regard to potential consequences for local freshwater ecosystems. A four-stage research program was initiated to identify methods to control D. geminata. This article reports the results of Stage 2, in which four potential control compounds [Gemex™ (a chelated copper formulation), EDTA, Hydrothol®191, and Organic Interceptor™ (a pine oil formulation)] selected in Stage 1 were evaluated for their biocidal efficacy on D. geminata and effects on non-target organisms using both artificial stream and laboratory trials. Artificial stream trials evaluated the mortality rates of D. geminata and fishes to three concentrations of the four biocides, whereas laboratory toxicity trials tested the response of green alga and cladocera to a range of biocide concentrations and exposure times. In artificial stream trials, Gemex and Organic Interceptor were the most effective biocides against D. geminata for a number of measured indices; however, exposure of fishes to Organic Interceptor resulted in high mortality rates. Laboratory toxicity testing indicated that Gemex might negatively affect sensitive stream invertebrates, based on the cladoceran sensitivity at the proposed river control dose. A decision support matrix evaluated the four biocides based on nine criteria stipulated by river stakeholders (effectiveness, non-target species impacts, stalk removal, degradation profile, risks to health and safety, ease of application, neutralization potential, cost, and local regulatory requirements) and Gemex was identified as the product warranting further refinement prior to an in-river trial.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • Biggs BJF, Kilroy C (2000) Stream periphyton monitoring manual. National Institute of Water & Atmospheric Research Ltd., Christchurch, NZ, p 222. Available from http://www.mfe.govt.nz/withyou/funding/smf/results/5092_periphytonmanual.pdf

  • Chen X, Stewart PS (2000) Biofilm removal caused by chemical treatments. Water Res 34:4229–4233

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Clearwater SJ, Jellyman PG, Biggs BJF, Hickey CW, Blair N, Clayton JS (2007) Didymosphenia geminata experimental control trials: Stage Two Phase Two (testing the effectiveness of Gemex™, a chelated copper formulation). National Institute of Water & Atmospheric Research Ltd., Hamilton, NZ, p 89. Available from http://www.biosecurity.govt.nz/files/pests/didymo/didymo-control-stage-2-oct07.pdf

  • Clearwater SJ, Jellyman PG, Biggs BJF, Hickey CW, Blair N, Clayton JS (2010) Pulse-dose application of chelated copper to a river for Didymosphenia geminata control: effects on macroinvertebrates and fish. Environ Toxicol Chem (in press)

  • Errecalde O, Seidl M, Campbell PGC (1998) Influence of a low molecular weight metabolite (citrate) on the toxicity of cadmium and zinc to the unicellular green algae Selenastrum capricornutum: and an exception to the free-ion model. Water Res 32:419–429

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • James TK, Rahman A, Trolove M, Frith H (2002) Efficacy of a certified organic herbicide based on pine essence. NZ Plant Protect 55:207–212

    Google Scholar 

  • Jellyman PG, Clearwater SJ, Clayton JS, Kilroy C, Hickey CW, Blair N, Biggs BJF (2010) Rapid screening of multiple compounds for control of the invasive diatom Didymosphenia geminata. J Aquat Plant Manage (in press)

  • Jonsson GS, Jonsson IR, Bjornsson M, Einarsson SM (2000) Using regionalisation in mapping the distribution of the diatom species Didymosphenia geminata (Lyngbye) M. Smith in Icelandic rivers. Verh Int Verein Theor Angew Limnol 27:340–343

    Google Scholar 

  • Kilroy C (2004) A new alien diatom, Didymosphenia geminata (Lyngbye) Schmidt: Its biology, distribution, effects and potential risks for New Zealand fresh waters. National Institute of Water & Atmospheric Research Ltd., Christchurch, NZ, p 34. Available from http://www.biosecurity.govt.nz/files/pests/didymo/didymo-preliminary-org-ia-nov-04.pdf

  • Kilroy C (2005) Tests to determine the effectiveness of methods for decontaminating material contaminated with Didymosphenia geminata. National Institute of Water & Atmospheric Research Ltd., Christchurch, NZ, p 30. Available from http://www.biosecurity.govt.nz/files/pests/didymo/didymo-decon-feb-05-rev-aug-06.pdf

  • Kilroy C, Biggs BJF, Blair N, Lambert P, Jarvie B, Dey K, Robinson K, Smale D (2005) Ecological studies on Didymosphenia geminata. National Institute of Water & Atmospheric Research Ltd., Christchurch, NZ, p 36. Available from http://www.biosecurity.govt.nz/files/pests/didymo/didymo-ecology-jan-06.pdf

  • Kilroy C, Larned ST, Biggs BJF (2009) The non-indigenous diatom Didymosphenia geminata alters benthic communities in New Zealand rivers. Freshwater Biol 54:1990–2002

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Larned ST, Arscott DB, Blair N, Jarvie B, Jellyman DJ, Lister K, Schallenberg M, Sutherland S, Vopel K, Wilcock B (2007) Ecological studies of Didymosphenia geminata in New Zealand, 2006–2007. National Institute of Water & Atmospheric Research Ltd., Christchurch, NZ, p 127. Available from http://www.biosecurity.govt.nz/files/pests/didymo/didymo-ecology-dec-07.pdf

  • Lindstrom E, Rorslett B (1991) The effects of heavy metal pollution on periphyton in a Norwegian soft-water river. Verh Int Verein Theor Angew Limnol 24:2215–2219

    Google Scholar 

  • MacDonald GE, Skilling DG, Bewick TA (1993) Effects of endothall and other aquatic herbicides on chlorophyll fluorescence, respiration and cellular integrity. J Aquat Plant Manage 31:50–55

    Google Scholar 

  • Mack RN, Simberloff D, Lonsdale WM, Evans H, Clout M, Bazzaz FA (2000) Biotic invasions: causes, epidemiology, global consequences, and control. Ecol Applic 10:689–710

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Meyer JS, Clearwater SJ, Doser TA, Rogaczewski MJ, Hansen JA (2007) Effects of water chemistry on the bioavailability and toxicity of waterborne cadmium, copper, nickel, lead and zinc to freshwater organisms. SETAC Press, Pensacola FL

    Google Scholar 

  • Ricciardi A, Rasmussen JB (1999) Extinction rates of North American freshwater fauna. Conserv Biol 13:1220–1222

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Sala OE, Chapin FS, Armesto JJ, Berlow E, Bloomfield J, Dirzo R, Huber-Sanwald E, Huenneke LF, Jackson RB, Kinzig A, Leemans R, Lodge DM, Mooney HA, Oesterheld M, Poff NL, Sykes MT, Walker BH, Walker M, Wall DH (2000) Biodiversity: global biodiversity scenarios for the year 2100. Science 287:1770–1774

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Sax DF, Gaines SD (2008) Species invasions and extinction: the future of native biodiversity on islands. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA 105:11490–11497

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Shaw TL (1979) A fast indicator for detecting gross pollution by hazardous chemicals. NZ J Marine Fresh 13:393–394

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Sherbot DMJ, Bothwell ML (1993) Didymosphenia geminata (Gomphonemaceae). A review of the ecology of D. geminata and the physicochemical characteristics of endemic catchments on Vancouver Island. National Hydrology Research Institute, Saskatoon, Canada, p 66

    Google Scholar 

  • Thellen C, Blaise C, Roy Y, Hickey C (1989) Round robin testing with the Selenastrum capricornutum microplate toxicity assay. Hydrobiologia 188:259–268

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Tidepool (1994) Toxcalc users guide version 5.0. Tidepool Scientific Software, McKinleyville

  • USEPA (2009) Reregistration eligibility decision (RED) for coppers. Revised May 2009. US Environmental Protection Agency, Prevention, Pesticides and Toxic Substances (7508P). EPA 738-R-09-304. US EPA, Washington, DC, p 176

  • Vander Zanden MJ, Olden JD (2008) A management framework for preventing the secondary spread of aquatic invasive species. Can J Fish Aquat Sci 65:1512–1522

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • WSDE (2001) Supplemental environmental impact statement assessment of aquatic herbicides: Volume 2. Endothall, Section 4 Environmental effects. Washington State Department of Ecology, Tacoma, p 140

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgments

We thank MAF Biosecurity New Zealand, particularly Christina Vieglais, for funding this work. The generosity of Pioneer Generation Ltd. allowed this research to be conducted, as they donated the land, water, and many essential resources (including staff assistance, power, and facilities). Water Dynamics Ltd. and Jeremy Walsh are thanked for the design and installation of the MEF. Max Bothwell, Rex Lowe, and Jan Stevenson provided advice and expertise during the trials. Bill Jarvie, Stu Sutherland (NZ Fish & Game), Aaron Horrell (Clutha Fisheries Trust), and Peter Murdoch are thanked for their invaluable field assistance. Karen Robinson, Catherine Chagué-Goff, and Lindsay Hawke processed field samples and Brendon Waugh assisted with toxicity testing. Field trials were conducted under resource consent N066-002 and Animal Ethics permit No. 2006/84. Finally, we would like to acknowledge the support of The Waiau Trust, Te Ao Marama Inc., and Environment Southland throughout this project.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. National Institute of Water and Atmospheric Research Ltd., 10 Kyle Street, Riccarton, P.O. Box 8602, Christchurch, New Zealand

    P. G. Jellyman, C. Kilroy & B. J. F. Biggs

  2. School of Biological Sciences, University of Canterbury, Private Bag 4800, Christchurch, New Zealand

    P. G. Jellyman

  3. National Institute of Water and Atmospheric Research Ltd., Gate 10, Silverdale Road, P.O. Box 11115, Hamilton, New Zealand

    S. J. Clearwater, J. S. Clayton & C. W. Hickey

  4. National Institute of Water and Atmospheric Research Ltd., Kelman Street, P.O. Box 12, Alexandra, New Zealand

    N. Blair

Authors
  1. P. G. Jellyman
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. S. J. Clearwater
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. J. S. Clayton
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. C. Kilroy
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  5. N. Blair
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  6. C. W. Hickey
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  7. B. J. F. Biggs
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to P. G. Jellyman.

Electronic supplementary material

Below is the link to the electronic supplementary material.

Supplementary material 1 (DOC 68 kb)

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Jellyman, P.G., Clearwater, S.J., Clayton, J.S. et al. Controlling the Invasive Diatom Didymosphenia geminata: An Ecotoxicity Assessment of Four Potential Biocides. Arch Environ Contam Toxicol 61, 115–127 (2011). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00244-010-9589-z

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00244-010-9589-z

Keywords

Search

Navigation