CAGED FISH AS MONITORS OF POLLUTION: EFFECTS OF CHLORINATED EFFLUENT FROM A WASTEWATER TREATMENT PLANT 1

• Published in: JAWRA Journal of the American Water Resources Association
• Main Authors: Grizzle, John M., Horowitz, Stephen A., Strength, D. Ralph.
• Format: Article in Journal/Newspaper
• Language: English
• Published: Wiley 1988
• Subjects: Pond Inlet
• Online Access: http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.1752-1688.1988.tb03009.x; https://api.wiley.com/onlinelibrary/tdm/v1/articles/10.1111%2Fj.1752-1688.1988.tb03009.x; https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/pdf/10.1111/j.1752-1688.1988.tb03009.x

ABSTRACT: Fish confined to cages were used to determine the effects of effluent from a wastewater treatment plant (WWTP). Control fish were kept in cages in an aquaculture pond. Acute effects of the effluent entering the final oxidation pond of the WWTP were determined by confining channel catfish ( Ictalurus punctatus ) at the pond inlet; the mean total residual chlorine (TRC) concentration was 0.9 mg/l during this exposure. After 8 h, 42 percent of the fish had died and survivors had severe lesions of the skin and gills. During the first two weeks of exposure, channel catfish at the outlet of the final oxidation pond (mean TRC=0.1 mg/l) were predisposed to bacterial infection but lost the parasitic trematodes that were on the gills when the fish were placed in cages. After several weeks, exposed fish had histologic lesions, enlarged livers, and reduced growth. The presence of unidentified carcinogen(s) in the effluent of this WWTP was indicated by papillomas developing on caged black bullheads ( Ictalurus melas ) and hepatic‐enzyme induction in channel catfish. In situ exposure of caged fish was advantageous because storage and pretreatment of water samples were not required, and exposure levels corresponded to those present in the environment. The use of cages for containment of fish during field exposure allowed confinement to the location of interest and convenient sampling of the fish. Unlike wild fish, the caged fish could be compared to control fish with the same pre‐exposure history.