IEPA ATTACHMENT NO AL

United States

?

Office of Water

?

EPA-822-R-01-001

Environmental Protection Agency

?

4304

?

April 2001

EPA

2001 Update of Ambient

Water Quality Criteria

for Cadmium

---

EPA-822-R-01-001

April 2001

2001 UPDATE OF AMBIENT WATER QUALITY CRITERIA FOR

CADMIUM

(CAS Registry Number 7440-43-9)

U.S. Environmental Protection Agency

Office of Water

Office of Science and Technology

Washington, D.C.

---

NOTICES

This document has been reviewed by the Health and Ecological Criteria Division, Office of Science

and Technology, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, and is approved for publication.

Mention of trade names or commercial products does not constitute endorsement or

recommendation for use.

This document is available to the public through the National Technical Information Service

(NTIS), 5285 Port Royal Road, Springfield, VA 22161.

ii

---

ACKNOWLEDGMENTS

Document Update: 1984

John G. Eaton

(freshwater author)

Environmental Research Laboratory

Duluth, Minnesota

Charles E. Stephan

(document coordinator)

Environmental Research Laboratory

Duluth, Minnesota

John H. Gentile

(saltwater author)

Environmental Research Laboratory

Narragansett, Rhode Island

David J. Hansen

(saltwater coordinator)

Environmental Research Laboratory,

Narragansett, Rhode Island

Statistical Support: John W. Rogers

Clerical Support: Terry

L. Highland

Document Update: 2001

Gregory J. Smith

(freshwater contributor)

Great Lakes Environmental Center

Columbus, Ohio

Cindy Roberts

(document coordinator).

U.S. EPA

Health and Ecological Effects Criteria Division

Washington, D.C.

Statistical Support: Dan Tholen, Great Lakes Environmental Center, Traverse City, Michigan

iii

---

CONTENTS

Page

Notices

ii

Acknowledgments

iii

Contents

iv

Tables

Figures

vi

Introduction

1

Acute

Acute

Chronic

Toxicity

Toxicity

Toxicity

to

to

to

Freshwater

Saltwater

Freshwater

Animals

Animals

Animals

12

Chronic Toxicity to Saltwater Animals

16

Toxicity to Aquatic Plants

18

Bioaccumulation

18

Other Data

20

Unused Data

22

Summary

30

National Criteria

31

References

156

iv

---

TABLES

la. Acute

Toxicity of Cadmium to Freshwater Animals

40

lb. Acute

Toxicity of Cadmium to Saltwater Animals

56

1 c. Results

of Covariance Analysis of Freshwater Acute Toxicity Versus Hardness

65

ld. List

of Studies Used to Estimate Acute Cadmium Hardness Slope

66

2a.

Chronic Toxicity of Cadmium to Freshwater Animals

74

2b.

Chronic Toxicity of Cadmium to Saltwater Animals

77

2c.

Results of Covariance Analysis of Freshwater Chronic Toxicity Versus Hardness

78

2d.

List of Studies Used to Estimate Chronic Cadmium Hardness Slope

78

2e.

Cadmium Acute-Chronic Ratios •

79

3a.

Ranked Freshwater Genus Mean Acute Values with Species Mean Acute-Chronic Ratios 80

3b.

Ranked Saltwater Genus Mean Acute Values with Species Mean Acute-Chronic Ratios 86

3c.

Ranked Freshwater Genus Mean Chronic Values

92

3d.

Freshwater and Saltwater Cadmium Criteria Values

94

4a.

Toxicity of Cadmium to Freshwater Plants

97

4b.

Toxicity of Cadmium to Saltwater Plants

100

5a.

Bioaccumulation of Cadmium by Freshwater Organisms

101

5b.

Bioaccumulation of Cadmium by Saltwater Organisms

107

6a.

Other Data on Effects of Cadmium on Freshwater Organisms

109

6b.

Other Data on Effects of Cadmium on Saltwater Organisms

143

---

FIGURES

1. Comparison of All Table 1 Freshwater Acute Toxicity Test EC5Os and LC5Os with the

Hardness Slope Derived CMC (2001 CMC: solid line; 1984 CMC: dashed line)

33

2. Ranked Summary of Cadmium GMAVs (Freshwater)

34

3.

Ranked Summary of Cadmium GMAVs (Saltwater)

35

4. Comparison of All Table 2 Freshwater Chronic Values with the Hardness Slope Derived CCC

(2001 CMC: solid line; 1984 CMC: dashed line)

36

5. Chronic Toxicity of Cadmium to Aquatic Animals

37

6. Comparison of Freshwater Plant Toxicity Values (Table 4)) and Freshwater CMC and

CCC Values

38

7. Comparison of Saltwater Plant Toxicity Values (Table 4) and Saltwater CMC and

CCC Values

39

vi

---

INTRODUCTION'

This update document provides guidance to States and Tribes authorized to establish water

quality standards under the Clean Water Act (CWA) to protect aquatic life from acute and chronic

effects of cadmium. Under the CWA, States and Tribes are to establish water quality criteria to

protect designated uses. While this document constitutes U.S. EPA's scientific recommendations

regarding ambient concentrations of cadmium, this document does not substitute for the CWA or

U.S. EPA's regulations; nor is it a regulation itself. Thus, it cannot impose legally binding

requirements on U.S. EPA, States, Tribes, or the regulated community, and might not apply to a

particular situation based upon the circumstances. State and Tribal decision-makers retain the

discretion to adopt approaches on a case-by-case basis that differ from this guidance when

appropriate. U.S. EPA may change this guidance in the future.

Cadmium is a relatively rare element that is a minor nutrient for plants at low

concentrations (Lane and Morel 2000; Lee et al. 1995; Price and Morel 1990), but is toxic to

aquatic life at concentrations only slightly higher. It occurs mainly as a component of minerals in

the earth's crust at an average concentration of 0.18 ppm (Babich and Stotzky 1978). Cadmium

levels in soils usually range from approximately 0.01 to 1.8 ppm (Lagerwerff and Specht 1970). In

natural freshwaters, cadmium sometimes occurs at concentrations of less than 0.1 pig/L, but in

environments impacted by man, concentrations can be several micrograms per liter or greater

(Abbasi and Soni 1986; Allen 1994; Annune et al. 1994; Flick et al. 1971; Friberg et al. 1971;

Henriksen and Wright 1978; Nilsson 1970; Spry and Wiener 1991). Cadmium can enter the

environment from various anthropogenic sources, such as by-products from zinc refining, coal

combustion, mine wastes, electroplating processes, iron and steel production, pigments, fertilizers

and pesticides (Hutton 1983; Pickering and Gast 1972).

The impact of cadmium on aquatic organisms depends on a variety of possible chemical

forms of cadmium (Callahan et al. 1979), which can have different toxicities and bioconcentration

An understanding of the "Guidelines for Deriving Numerical National Water Quality Criteria for the

Protection of Aquatic Organisms and Their Uses" (Stephan et al. 1985), hereafter referred to as the Guidelines, is

necessary in order to understand the following text, tables, and calculations.

1

---

factors. In most well oxygenated freshwaters that are low in total organic carbon, free divalent

cadmium will be the predominant form. Precipitation by carbonate or hydroxide and formation of

soluble complexes by chloride, sulfate, carbonate, and hydroxide should usually be of little

importance. In saltwaters with salinities from about 10 to 35 g/kg, cadmium chloride complexes

predominate. In both fresh and saltwaters, particulate matter and dissolved organic material may

bind a substantial portion of the cadmium, and under these conditions cadmium may not be

bioavailable due to this binding (Callahan et al. 1979; Kramer et al. 1997).

Because of the variety of forms of cadmium (Callahan et al. 1979) and lack of definitive

information about their relative toxicities, no available analytical measurement is known to be ideal

for expressing aquatic life criteria for cadmium. Previous aquatic life criteria for cadmium (U.S.

EPA 1980) were expressed in terms of total recoverable cadmium (U.S. EPA 1983a), but this

measurement is probably too rigorous in some situations. U.S. EPA (1985) has also expressed

cadmium criteria as acid-soluble cadmium in the past, but now recommends use of dissolved metal

concentrations (operationally defined as the metal in solution that passes through a 0.45 pm

membrane filter) to set and measure compliance with water quality standards (Prothro 1993; U.S.

EPA 1993, 1994a).

The criteria presented herein supersede previous aquatic life water quality criteria for

cadmium (U.S. EPA 1999a) because these new criteria were derived based on the most recent

science. Whenever appropriate, a national criterion may be replaced by a site-specific criterion

(U.S. EPA 1994a), which may include not only site-specific criterion concentrations (U.S. EPA

1994b), but also site-specific durations of averaging periods and site-specific frequencies of

allowed exceedences (U.S. EPA 1991). All concentrations are expressed as cadmium, not as the

chemical tested. The latest literature search for information for this document was conducted in

June 1999; some newer information was also used.

Because the revisions being considered build from principles set forth in the 1985

Guidelines (Stephen et al. 1985), it is useful to have some understanding of how those Guidelines

are ordinarily applied: (1) Acute toxicity test data must be available for species from a minimum of

eight diverse taxonomic groups. The diversity of tested species is intended to assure protection of

various components of an aquatic ecosystem. (2) The Final Acute Value (FAV) is derived by

2

---

extrapolation or interpolation to a hypothetical genus more sensitive than 95 percent of all tested

genera. The FAV, which represents an LC50 or EC50, is divided by two in order to obtain an acute

criterion protective of nearly all individuals in such a genus. (3) Chronic toxicity test data (longer-

term survival, growth, or reproduction) must be available for at least three taxa. Most often the

chronic criterion is set by determining an appropriate acute-chronic ratio (the ratio of acutely toxic

concentrations to the chronically toxic concentrations) and applying that ratio to the acute value of

the hypothetical genus more sensitive than 95 percent of all tested genera. If sufficient data are

available to meet the eight diverse taxonomic group minimum, then the chronic value is derived

using the same procedure as used for the FAV derivation. (4) When necessary, the acute and/or

chronic criterion may be lowered to protect recreationally or commercially important species. (5)

When evaluating time-variable ambient concentrations generally, 1-hour average concentration are

considered to be appropriate for comparison with the acute criterion, and 4-day averages with the

chronic criterion. (6) The allowable frequency for exceeding a criterion is set at once every three

years, on the average.

ACUTE TOXICITY TO FRESHWATER ANIMALS

Acceptable data on the acute effects of cadmium in freshwater are available for 39 species

of invertebrates, 24 species of fish, one salamander species, and one frog species (Table la). These

65 species satisfy the eight different family requirements specified in the Guidelines. A tendency

for increased tolerance to toxicity with increasing size or age has been reported (Table la) in the

snail,

Physa gyrina

(Wier and Walter 1976), the coho salmon (Chapman 1975), and the common

carp (Suresh et al. 1993a). No such effect was observed with increasing age (Table la) in the

cladoceran,

Daphnia magna

(Stuhlbacher et al. 1993), the rainbow trout (Chapman 1975, 1978), or

in the striped bass (Hughes 1973; Palawski et al. 1985). Data are unavailable for a sufficient

number of species and life stages to allow general adjustment of test results or criteria on the basis

of size or life stage. Where relationships were apparent between life-stage and sensitivity, only

values for the most sensitive life-stage were considered.

---

Water Quality Parameters Affecting Toxicity

Although many factors might affect the results of tests of the toxicity of cadmium to aquatic

organisms (Sprague 1985), water quality criteria can quantitatively take into account only factors

for which enough data are available to show that the factor similarly affects the results of tests with

a variety of species. Hardness is often thought of as having a major effect on the toxicity of

cadmium, although the observed effect may be due to one or more of a number of usually

interrelated ions, such as hydroxide, carbonate, calcium, and magnesium. Acute tests were

conducted at three different levels of water hardness with

Daphnia magna

(Chapman et al.

Manuscript), demonstrating that daphnids were at least five times more sensitive to cadmium in

soft water than in hard water (Table l a). Data in Table la also indicate that cadmium was more

toxic to the tubificid worms

Limnodrilus hoffmeisteri

and

Tubifex tubifex,

the mussel

Vilosa vibex,

Daphnia pulex,

chinook salmon, goldfish, fathead minnow, guppy, striped bass, green sunfish and

bluegill in soft than in hard water. Carroll et al. (1979) found that calcium, but not magnesium,

reduced the acute toxicity of cadmium.

Other water quality characteristics could potentially influence the toxicity of cadmium to

aquatic species. Giesy et al. (1977) found that dissolved organics substantially reduced the toxicity

of cadmium to daphnids, but had little effect on its toxicity to fish. No consistent relationship

between toxicity and organic particle size was observed. Development of the "biotic ligand model"

(BLM - formerly the "gill model") in recent years has attempted to better account for the

bioavailability of metals to aquatic life. The BLM, which quantifies the capacity of metals to bind

to the gills of aquatic organisms, has been proposed as a reliable method for estimating the

bioavailable portion of dissolved metals in the water column based on site-specific water quality

parameters such as alkalinity, pH and dissolved organic carbon (McGeer et al. 2000; Meyer et al.

1999; Pagenkopf 1983; Paquin et al. 1999; U.S. EPA 1999b, 2000). Future development of the

BLM for cadmium may help better quantify the bioavailable fraction of cadmium. Nonetheless,

the model is in the preliminary development phase for cadmium and it will likely not be available

for a number of years still.

Hardness Correction

---

Currently, the primary quantitative correlation used to modify metal toxicity estimates is

water hardness (viz. the U.S. EPA 1995 water quality criteria for cadmium). Hardness (as calcium

or magnesium ions) almost certainly has some direct effect on cadmium toxicity (e.g., by

influencing membrane integrity). Calcium and magnesium ions compete with the metal for

binding sites on the gill (Carroll et al. 1979; Evans 1987; Morel and Hering 1993; Pagenkopf

1983). Hardness also serves as a general surrogate for pH, alkalinity, and ionic strength, because

waters of higher hardness usually have higher pH, alkalinity, and ionic strength. Other parameters

such as pH, alkalinity, dissolved organic carbon, humic matter, ionic strength (anions and cations)

and dissolved inorganic carbon also affect metal speciation and bioavailability, and thus metal

toxicity. The pH- is also important in determining the metal complexation capacity of dissolved

organic matter.

Hardness is used here as a surrogate for the ions which affect the results of toxicity tests on

cadmium. However, it should be emphasized that the hardness adjustment is not a precise measure,

but an estimation. The variability associated with different life stages, clones and test conditions of

the studies used to determine the hardness slope all contribute to the uncertainty of the hardness

correction. In selected cases, only one life stage was used in the analysis (e.g., only adult fathead

minnow data). Thus, in spite of all its limitations, hardness is currently the best surrogate available

for metal toxicity adjustment.

To account for the apparent relationship of cadmium acute toxicity to hardness, an analysis

of covariance (Dixon and Brown 1979; Neter and Wasserman 1974) as noted in the guidelines

(Stephan et al. 1985) was performed using the Statistical Analysis System (SAS Inc., Cary, NC)

software program to calculate the pooled slope for hardness using the natural logarithm of the acute

value as the dependent variable, species as the treatment or grouping variable, and the natural

logarithm of hardness as the covariate or independent variable. The pooled slope is a regression

slope from a pooled data set, where every variable is adjusted relative to its mean. The species are

adjusted separately, then pooled for a single conventional least squares regression analysis. The

slope of the regression line is the best estimate of the all-species relationship between toxicity and

hardness.- With analysis of covariance, different species will be weighted relative to the number of

data points they have. In this case, the

D. magna

and the fathead minnow each have 28 data points

---

out of the total of 97, and the next most frequent species has just eight data points.

This analysis of covariance model was fit to the data in Table la for the 12 species for

which definitive acute values (less than or greater than values were not used) are available over a

range of hardness such that the highest hardness is at least three times the lowest, and the highest is

also at least 100 mg/L higher than the lowest (other species in Table la either did not meet these

criteria or did not show any hardness-toxicity trend due to differences in exposure methods, species

age, etc.). For

D. magna,

only acute toxicity tests that were initiated with less than 24-hr old

neonates were used to estimate the hardness slope. For the fathead minnow, only tests conducted

with adults were used (not those conducted with the more sensitive fry life stage). A list of the

species and acute toxicity-hardness values used to estimate the acute hardness slope is provided in

Table ld. The slopes for all 12 species ranged from 0.1086 to 2.031, and the pooled slope for these

12 species was 1.174 (see Table 1c). An F-test was used to test whether a model with separate

species slopes for each species gives significantly better fit to the data than the model with parallel

slopes. This test showed that the separate slopes model is not significantly better, and therefore the

slopes are not significantly different than the overall pooled slope (P=0.27). The slopes and

confidence intervals associated with the 12 species indicated that

D. magna

(all available data) had

a very flat slope and a large confidence interval (and large standard error). If only the

D. magna

data from Chapman et al. (Manuscript) were used, the resultant

D. magna

slope was 1.182, with

smaller confidence intervals than for the all

D. magna

slope. Likewise, when only the adult fathead

minnow data were used (not the fry data), the resultant fathead minnow slope was 1.221 and

smaller confidence intervals were present. If this reduced data set is used (all species but using

only data from Chapman et al. (Manuscript) for

D. magna

and only adult fathead minnow data), the

pooled slope for these species was 1.0166 (see Table 1c). The test for equality of the 12 slopes

using the reduced data set (all species but only Chapman

D. magna

and adult fathead minnow data)

produced P=0.69. Under analysis of covariance, it therefore is reasonable to assume that the slopes

for these 12 species are the same, and that the overall slope is a reasonable estimate of the average

relationship between hardness and toxicity. Either P value indicated that it was reasonable to

assume that the slopes were the same, however, the second model was considered the better model

and was therefore selected. The pooled slope of 1.0166 is close to the slope of 1.0 that is expected

---

on the basis that cadmium, calcium, magnesium, and carbonate all have a charge of two (Meyer

1999). A plot of the acute effect level (EC50 or LC50) versus total hardness is provided in Figure

1.

The possible relationship of cadmium acute toxicity to water quality parameters other than

hardness were also considered. Both hardness and/or alkalinity were investigated by subjecting

any acute toxicity data in Table la having both hardness and alkalinity values available to a

multiple stepwise regression analysis using the SAS (Cary, NC) software program. The analysis

was run using the natural logarithm of the acute value as the dependent variable, species as the

treatment or grouping variable, and the natural logarithm of hardness and alkalinity as the

covariates or independent variables. As with the analysis of covariance evaluation discussed above,

the only data used in Table la (seven species) were those for which definitive acute values are •

available over a range of both hardness and alkalinity such that the highest hardness (and alkalinity)

is at least three times the lowest, and the highest is also at least 100 mg/L higher than the lowest.

The results obtained indicate that either variable works well alone in the regression model (R2

value

for each was 0.688), but the other variable cannot increase the strength of the model once the first

variable is included (when both were used the R2

value only increased to 0.689). This lack of

model improvement is due to the very strong correlation between hardness and alkalinity (effect of

colinearity), -thus these two independent variables should not be used together in the same

regression model. Based on these results and the availability of data for water quality parameters

other than hardness, the best approach at this time is to use only hardness (analysis of covariance

discussed above) as a surrogate for the ions which affect the results of toxicity tests on cadmium.

Conversion Factors

Although past water quality criteria for cadmium (and other metals) have been established

upon the loosely defined term of "acid soluble metals," U.S. EPA made the decision to allow the

expression of metal criteria on the basis of dissolved metal (U.S. EPA 1994a), operationally

defined as that metal that passes through a 0.45 micron filter. Because most of the data in existing

databases are from tests that were either nominal concentrations, or provided only total cadmium

measurements, some procedure was required to estimate their dissolved equivalents. The approach

---

taken by U.S. EPA involves the use of conversion factors (CF), that when applied to the total metal

concentration, gives a dissolved metal concentration. Thus, the CF corresponds to the percent of

the total recoverable metal that is dissolved. These CFs were determined by conducting a number

of "simulation tests" using solutions simulating those used in the toxicity tests that were most

important in the derivation of aquatic life criteria for each metal (static, flow-through, fed, and

unfed conditions that typified standard acute and chronic toxicity tests from which criteria are

derived). The intent was to mimic the way criteria would have been derived if dissolved metal had

been measured in each of the toxicity tests (Lussier et al. 1995; Stephan 1995; Univ. of Wisconsin-

Superior 1995). For certain metals like cadmium, these CFs are hardness dependent.

The appropriate CFs were used only when determining the final cadmium criteria values,

and are hardness dependent in freshwater. Acute freshwater total cadmium concentrations were

converted to dissolved concentrations using the factor of 0.973 at a total hardness level of 50 mg/L

as CaCO3

, 0.944 at a total hardness level of 100 mg/L as CaCO3

, and 0.915 at a total hardness

level of 200 mg/L as CaCO

3

. The equation for the acute freshwater conversion factor is CF =

1.136672 - [(ln hardness) (0.041838)] where the (ln hardness) is the natural logarithm of the

hardness (Stephen 1995). Acute saltwater total cadmium values were converted to dissolved using

the factor of 0.994.

Criteria Development

The pooled slope of 1.0166 was used to adjust the freshwater acute values in Table la to

hardness = 50 mg/L, except where it was not possible because no hardness was reported. Species

Mean Acute Values (SMAV) were calculated as geometric means of the adjusted acute values

(only the underlined EC50/LC50 species values were used to calculate the respective SMAV). As

stated in the Guidelines (Stephen et al. 1985), flow-through measured study data are normally

given preference over non-flow-through data for a particular species. In certain cases flow-through

measured results were available, yet preference was given to the sensitive life stage for certain

species in calculating SMAVs. In addition, all underlined Table la data for

D. magna

and fathead

minnow fry were used to calculate the respective SMAVs

(D. magna

tests initiated with >24-hr old

neonates were not used to calculate the SMAV). Only data from Chapman (1975) were used for

8

---

coho salmon to avoid using test results from studies in which the life stage tested is known to be

less sensitive, or in which the life stage tested is unreported and the higher LC5Os may be due

primarily to the use of less sensitive life stages. The data for Palawski et al. (1985) were used for

striped bass because they were considered better data than those given in U.S. EPA (1985),

although the data from Hughes (1973) support the newer data. Only brook trout data reported by

Carroll et al. (1979), and not by Holcombe et al. (1983) were used in the calculation of the brook

trout Final Acute Value because the reported bull trout data (Stratus Consulting 1999) in the same

genus support the Carroll et al. (1979) results. Drummond and Benoit (Manuscript) reported that

stress greatly affected the sensitivity of brook trout to cadmium.

The SMAV for freshwater invertebrates ranged from 13.41 ii,g/L total cadmium for the

cladoceran,

D. magna

to 96,880 p.g/L total cadmium for the midge,

Chironomus riparius.

Of the

fish species tested, the brown trout,

Salmo trutta,

had the lowest SMAV of 1.613 ii.g/L total

cadmium, and the tilapia,

Oreochromis mossambica,

recorded the highest fish SMAV of 10,663

p.g/L total cadmium. As indicated by the data, both invertebrate and fish species display a wide

range of sensitivities to cadmium.

Fish species represent eight of the nine most sensitive species to cadmium (Table 3a).

Salmonids

(Salmo trutta, Salvelinus confluentus, Salvelinus fontinalis, Oncorhynchus kisutch,

Oncorhynchus mykiss

and

Oncorhynchus tshawytscha)

are six of the seven most sensitive species

listed in Table 1 a, and thus are more acutely sensitive to cadmium than any other freshwater animal

species thus far tested (Carroll et al. 1979; Chapman 1975, 1978, 1982; Cusimano et al. 1986;

Davies et al. 1993; Finlayson and Venue 1982; Phipps and Holcombe 1985; Spehar and Carlson

1984a,b; Stratus Consulting 1999). The cladoceran,

D. magna,

is the eighth most sensitive species

to cadmium, and thus the most acutely sensitive invertebrate species tested thus far.

Genus Mean Acute Values (GMAV) at a hardness of 50 mg/L were then calculated (Table

3a) as geometric means of the available freshwater Species Mean Acute Values and ranked. Of the

55 genera for which acute values are available, the most sensitive genus,

Salmo,

is over 60,062

times more sensitive than the most resistant,

Chironomus.

The first through fourth most sensitive

genera (a total n of 55) were used in the computation of the final acute value. The sensitivity of

these four most sensitive genera are within a factor of 2.4, and all are fish. Of the ten most

---

sensitive genera, six are fish, two are mussels, and two are cladocerans (Figure 2; Table 3a).

Hardness-adjusted acute values are available for more than one species in nine genera, and the

range of SMAVs within each genus is less than a factor of 4.0 for eight of the nine genera. The

ninth genus,

Ptychocheilus,

has two SMAVs that differ by a factor of 98.5, possibly due to

differences in the test conditions between species.

The freshwater Final Acute Value (FAV) for total cadmium at a hardness of 50 mg/L was

calculated to be 2.763 ug/L total cadmium (Table 3d) from the Genus Mean Acute Values in Table

3a using the

,

procedure described in the Guidelines. The Species Mean Acute Values for the

rainbow trout, brook trout, bull trout and brown trout are lower than the FAV of 2.763 ug/L total

cadmium, but the acute value for the brook trout and brown trout are from static tests, whereas

flow-through measured tests have been conducted with the remaining two salmonid species. The

freshwater Final Acute Value for total cadmium at a hardness of 50 mg/L was lowered to 2.108

ug/L to protect the commercially important rainbow trout (Table 3d). This value is above the

SMAV of 1.613 p,g/L for the brown trout and <1.791 ii.g/L for brook trout, but below all other

SMAVs listed in Table 3a (Figure 2). The resultant freshwater Criterion Maximum Concentration

(h ardness)1-3.924) If the CMC

(CMC) at a hardness of 50 rng/L for total cadmium (in ug/L) =

e

(‘t.0166[In

based on total cadmium values is converted to dissolved cadmium using the 0.973 factor at a

hardness of 50 mg/L determined by U.S. EPA (Stephan 1995; Univ. of Wisconsin-Superior 1995),

the freshwater CMC for dissolved cadmium (in gg/L) = 0.973

[e(.1. 0166[In(hardness)]-3.924),

Thus, the

1.0 ug/L CMC for dissolved cadmium at a hardness of 50 mg/L is below all of the SMAVs

presented in Table 3a (Figure 2). Conversion from total to dissolved was used because hardness

relationships were established based upon total cadmium concentrations as this minimized the

number of conversions required. In a few cases where only dissolved cadmium was reported in

freshwater (Table 1 a), conversion to total used the same appropriate factor.

ACUTE TOXICITY TO SALTWATER ANIMALS

Tests of the acute toxicity of cadmium to saltwater organisms have been conducted with 50

species of invertebrates and 11 species of fish (Table lb), representing the required eight different

10

---

taxonomic families. A pattern of increased tolerance to toxicity with increasing size or age has

been reported (Table lb) in the polychaete worm

Capitella capitata

(Reish and LeMay 1991; Reish

et al. 1976), the blue mussel (Ahsanullah 1976; Martin et al. 1981; Nelson et al. 1988), the copepod

Eurytemora affinis

(Gentile 1982; Sullivan et al. 1983), the amphipods

Marinogammarus obtusatus

(Wright and Frain 1981) and

Leptocheirus plumulosus

(McGee et al. 1998), the pink shrimp

Penaeus duorarum

(Nimmo et al. 1977b; Cripe 1994), the rivulus (Park et al. 1994; Lin and

Dunson 1993), the Atlantic silverside (Cardin 1982) and the striped mullet (Hilmy et al. 1985).

No such effect was observed with increasing age (Table ib) in the polychaete worm

Neanthes

arenaceodentata

(Reish and LeMay 1991; Reish et al. 1976), the mysid

Americamysis bahia,

formerly

Mysidopsis bahia

(De Lisle and Roberts 1988), the grass shrimp

Palaemonetes pugio

(Khan et al. 1988; Burton and Fisher 1990), and the mummichog

Fundulus heteroclitus

(Voyer

1975). Data are unavailable for a sufficient number of species and life stages to allow general

adjustment of test results or criteria on the basis of size or life stage. Where relationships were

apparent between life-stage and sensitivity, only values for the most sensitive life-stage were

considered.

Water Quality Parameters Affecting Toxicity

Frank and Robertson (1979) reported that the acute toxicity to juvenile blue crabs was

related to salinity. The 96-hr LC5Os were 320, 4,700, and 11,600 ug/L at salinities of 1, 15, and 35

g/kg, respectively (Table ib). Studies with

A. bahia

by Gentile et al. (1982) and Nimmo et al.

(1977a) also support a relationship between salinity and the acute toxicity of cadmium. O'Hara

(1973a) investigated the effect of temperature and salinity on the toxicity of cadmium to the fiddler

crab. The LC5Os at 20°C were 32,300, 46,600, and 37,000 ug/L at salinities of 10, 20, and 30 g/kg,

respectively. Increasing the temperature from 20 to 30°C lowered the LC50 at all salinities tested.

Toudal and Riisgard (1987) reported that increasing the temperature from 13 to 21°C at a salinity

of 20 g/kg also lowered the LC50 value of cadmium to the copepod,

Acartia tonsa.

Saltwater fish species were generally more resistant to cadmium than freshwater fish

species with SMAVs ranging from 75.0 lig/ for the striped bass (at a salinity of 1 g/kg) to 50,000

ug/L for the sheepshead minnow (Table 3b). In a study of the interaction of dissolved oxygen and

1

1

---

salinity on the acute toxicity of cadmium to the mummichog, Voyer (1975) found that 96-hr LC5Os

at a salinity of 32 g/kg were about one-half what they were at 10 and 20 g/kg. Sensitivity of the

mummichog to acute cadmium poisoning was not influenced by reduction in dissolved oxygen

concentration to 4 mg/L. This increase in toxicity with increasing salinity conflicts with other data

reported in Tables lb and 6b. Since there was no consistent salinity-toxicity trend observed for the

data, a salinity correction factor was not attempted.

Criteria Development

Of the 54 saltwater genera for which acute values are available, the most sensitive,

Americamysis,

is 3,270 times more sensitive than the most resistant,

Monopylephorus

(Table 3b).

The SMAVs for saltwater invertebrate species range from 41.29 pg/L for a mysid to 135,000 pg/L

for an oligochaete worm (Tables lb and 3b). The acute values for saltwater polychaetes range from

200 pg/L for

C. capitata

to 14,100 pg/L for

N. arenaceodentata

(Reish

and

LeMay 1991).

Saltwater molluscs have Species Mean Acute Values from 227.9 pg/L for the Pacific oyster to

19,170 pg/L for the mud snail. Acute values are available for more than one species in each of

seven genera, and the range of Species Mean Acute Values within each genus is no more than a

factor of 3.6 for six of the seven genera. The seventh genus,

Crassostrea,

has two SMAVs that

differ by a factor of 16.7, possibly due to different exposure conditions between species. Only the

data from Reish et al. (1976) were used for C.

capitata,

only data from Martin et al. (1981) and

Nelson et al. (1988) were used for

M edulis,

only data from Sullivan et al. (1983) were used for

E.

affinis,

only data from Cripe (1994) were used for

P. duorarum,

and only data from Park et al.

(1994) were used for

Rivulus marmoratus

to avoid using test results from studies in which the life

stage tested is known to be less sensitive or in which the life stage tested is unreported and the

higher LC5Os may be due primarily to the use of less sensitive life stages. The sensitivities of the

four most sensitive genera differed by a factor of 2.7, which includes two mysids, the striped bass

and the American lobster (Table 3b).

The saltwater Final Acute Value for total cadmium calculated from the Genus Mean Acute

Values in Table 3b is 80.55 pg/L. This Final Acute Value is below the SMAV for the mysid,

Mysidopsis bigelowi

(110 pg/L), but is aproximately three percent above the American lobster (78

12

---

vig/L), approximately seven percent higher than the striped bass (75.0 µg/L), and approximately 95

percent above the SMAV for the mysid,

A. bahia

(41.29 µg/L, geometric mean of two flow-through

measured tests). The resultant saltwater Criterion Maximum Concentration (CMC) for total

cadmium is 40 ug/L (FAV/2 or 80.55 µg/L/2). If the total cadmium CMC is converted to dissolved

cadmium using the. 0.994 factor determined experimentally by U.S. EPA, the saltwater CMC for

dissolved cadmium is 40 ug/L (Table 3d). The resultant 40 lig/L CMC for dissolved cadmium is

below all of the saltwater SMAVs presented in Table 3a (Figure 3).

CHRONIC TOXICITY TO FRESHWATER ANIMALS

Acceptable chronic toxicity tests have been conducted on cadmium in freshwater with 21

species, including seven invertebrates and 14 fishes in 16 genera (Table 2a). Several related values

are in Table 6a. Among the unused values in Table 6a, a 21-day

Daphnia magna

test in which the

test concentrations were not measured, Biesinger and Christensen (1972) found a 16 percent

reduction in reproduction at 0.17 µg/L. Bertram and Hart (1979) and Ingersoll and Winner (1982)

found chronic toxicity to

Daphnia pulex

at less than 1 and 10 µg/L, respectively. A 32-day flow-

through measured juvenile bluegill study conducted by Cope et al. (1994) determined a growth

NOEC value of >32.3 ug/L (Table 6a), which supports the 49.8 pg/L chronic value (Table 2a)

reported by Eaton (1974). The 200-hr LC10 of 0.7 ug/L obtained with rainbow trout (Table 6a) by

Chapman (1978) probably would be close to the result of an early life-stage test because of the

extent to which various life stages were investigated. Effects on other salmonids and many

invertebrates have been observed at 5 ug/L (adjusted for hardness when available) or less (Table

6a). These invertebrate species include protozoans (Fernandez-Leborans and Noville-Villajos

1993; Niederlehner et al. 1985),

C. dubia

(Winner 1988; Zuiderveen and Birge 1997),

D. magna

(Enserink et al. 1993; Winner and Whitford 1987), zooplankton (Lawrence and Holoka 1987),

amphipods (Borgmann et al. 1991; Phipps et al. 1995), midges (Anderson et al. 1980), and

mayflies (Spehar et al. 1978).

An acceptable

C. dubia

seven-day static-renewal toxicity test was conducted by Jop et al.

(1995) using reconstituted soft laboratory water. The <24-hr old neonates were exposed to 1, 5, 10,

13

---

19 and 41 gg/L measured cadmium concentrations in addition to a laboratory water control at 25°C.

The NOEC and LOEC were 10 and 19 gg/L cadmium, respectively, with a resultant chronic value

of 13.78 gg/L cadmium (Table 2a).

The effects of water hardness on the toxicity of cadmium to

D. magna

was evaluated by

Chapman et al. (Manuscript) under static-renewal conditions at a temperature of 20 ± 2°C. As part

of the experimental design, the total hardness level was adjusted to either 53, 103 or 209 mg/L (as

CaCO3)

in three distinct tests. Daphnids were individually exposed to six measured cadmium

concentrations (exposures ranged from 0.15 to 22.1 gg/L cadmium among the three tests) and a

control (0.08 gg/L cadmium) for 21 days. Based on an analysis of variance hypothesis testing

procedure, they reported reproductive (mean number of young per adult) chronic values of 0.1523,

0.2117 and 0.4371 gg/L cadmium at hardness levels of 53, 103 and 209 mg/L, respectively (Table

2a). These same data were also subjected to a regression analysis procedure, whereby the 20

percent reproductive (mean number of young per adult) inhibition concentration (IC20) was

estimated for each hardness level. The resultant IC20 values were 0.07, 0.23 and 0.33 gg/L

cadmium for the 53, 103 and 209 mg/L hardness levels, respectively. Overall, the results obtained

by the two different procedures are similar.

The effect of cadmium on the reproduction strategy of

D. magna

was investigated by Bodar

et al. (1988b). After a 25-day exposure of the 12 ± 12-hr old neonates to 0 (control), 0.5, 1.0, 5.0,

10.0, 20.0 and 50 gg/L cadmium at 20 ± 1°C, the authors compared the survival, number of

neonates per female, first day of reproduction and neonate size of the cadmium exposures to the

controls. The 25-day reproductive NOEC was 5.0 gg/L cadmium, and the reproductive LOEC was

10.01a.g/L cadmium. The resultant chronic value was 7.07 gg/L cadmium (Table 2a).

Borgman et al. (1989) also investigated the effect of cadmium on

D. magna

reproduction.

The 21-day static-renewal test was conducted at 20°C using measured exposure concentrations of

0.22 (control), 1.86, 4.10, 7.78 and 22.9 gg/L cadmium. Reproduction was significantly reduced at

the lowest measured exposure concentration of 1.86 gg/L cadmium. Thus, the reproductive NOEC

and LOEC were <1.86 and 1.86 gg/L cadmium, respectively, with a chronic value of <1.86 gg/L

cadmium (Table 2a).

Brown et al. (1994) exposed 270-day old rainbow trout to cadmium under flow-through

14

---

conditions for 65 weeks using borehole water with a total hardness of 250 mg/L (as CaCO

3). Mean

cadmium concentrations during the exposure of adult fish were 0.47 (control), 1.77, 3.39 and 5.48

ug/L. After 65 weeks of exposure, the three most mature males and females were selected from

each treatment, anesthetized and striped of their gametes when possible, with the milt and ova

combined in a bucket. The fertilized eggs from each treatment group were then divided into four

approximately equal-sized subsamples and exposed for seven weeks in 30-liter aquaria under flow-

through conditions to nominal concentrations of 0 (control), 2.0, 5.0 and 8.0 ug/L cadmium.

Second generation fry development was significantly affected when the parents were exposed to

1.77 pg/L cadmium, but not when exposed to 0.47 pg/L cadmium (control). However, second

generation embryo survival for all groups was less than 60 percent, which may have influenced the

fry development effect levels: A more representative endpoint was the ability of the first

generation adults to reach sexual maturity, with NOEC and LOEC values of 3.39 and 5.48 ug/L

cadmium, respectively. The resultant chronic value was 4.310 pg/L cadmium (Table 2a).

Brown et al. (1994) also exposed two-year old brown trout to cadmium under flow-through

conditions for 95 weeks using the same borehole water. Mean cadmium concentrations during the

exposure of adult fish were 0.27 (control), 5.13, 9.34 and 29.1 µg/L. After 60 weeks of exposure,

the three most mature males and females were selected from each treatment, anesthetized and

striped of their gametes, with the milt and ova combined in a bucket. The fertilized eggs from each

treatment group were then divided into four approximately equal-sized subsamples and exposed for

50 days in 30-liter aquaria under flow-through conditions to cadmium concentrations similar to

those in which the parents were exposed. After the 90 week exposure, the survival NOEC and

LOEC were 9.34 and 29.1 ug/L cadmium, respectively, with a resultant chronic value of 16.49

pg/L cadmium (Table 2a).

A 32-day fathead minnow early life stage toxicity test was conducted by Spehar and Fiandt

(1986) under flow-through conditions using sand filtered Lake Superior dilution water (Table 2a).

They reported a chronic value of 10.0 pg/L cadmium, which when coupled with their 96-hour

LC50 of 13.2 pg/L cadmium, gives an acute-chronic ratio of 1.320.

Ingersoll and Kemble (unpublished) investigated the chronic toxicity of cadmium to the

amphipod

Hyalella azteca.

The organisms were exposed under flow-through measured conditions

15

---

(control, low, middle and high exposures) at a mean temperature of 23°C and a total hardness of

280 mg/L (as CaCO3).

A 3-m nylon mesh substrate was provided during the test. The seven- to

eight-day old amphipods were exposed to water only mean total cadmium concentrations of 0.10

(control), 0.12, 0.32, 0.51, 1.9 and 3.2 gg/L for 42 days. The most sensitive endpoint was survival,

with an NOEC and LOEC of 0.51 and 1.9 gg/L cadmium, respectively, after both 28 and 42 days of

exposure. The resultant chronic value was 0.9844 gg/L total cadmium (Table 2a), which was

similar to the estimated 42-day survival IC25 value of 1.9 gg/L.

Ingersoll and Kemble (unpublished) also exposed the midge

Chironomus tentans

to

cadmium under the same conditions listed above for the amphipod, except that a thin 5 mm layer of

sand was provided as a substrate. The <24-hr old larvae were exposed to water only mean

measured total cadmium concentrations of 0.15 (control), 0.50, 1.5, 3.1, 5.8 and 17.4 gg/L for 20

days. The mean weight, biomass, percent emergence and percent hatch endpoints all had 20-day

NOEC and LOEC values of 5.8 and 17.4 gg/L cadmium, respectively (Table 2a). The resultant

chronic value was 10.05 gg/L total cadmium. The data were also subjected to regression analysis

with resultant IC25 values of 10.3, 10.7, 8.3 and 4.0 gg/L for weight, biomass, percent emergence

and percent hatch, respectively. All four IC25 values were similar to the 10.05 gg/L chronic value

determined for each endpoint.

Hardness Correction

Chronic values are available over a wide range of hardness for three species (Tables 2a and

2d). To account for the apparent relationship of cadmium chronic toxicity to hardness, an analysis

of covariance (same as the analysis performed on the acute data) was performed to calculate the

pooled slope for hardness using the natural logarithm of the chronic value as the dependent

variable, species as the treatment or grouping variable, and the natural logarithm of hardness as the

covariate or independent variable. This analysis of covariance model was fit to the data in Table 2a

for the'three species for which definitive chronic values are available over a range of hardness such

that the highest hardness is at least three times the lowest, and the highest is also at least 100 mg/L

higher than the lowest (other species in Table 2a did not meet these criteria). The slopes for the

three species ranged from 0.5212 to 1.579, and the pooled slope for these three species was 0.9685

16

---

with P=0.90 (Table 2c). As with the acute slope determination, the all

D. magna

data set was too

divergent, and only the Chapman et al. (Manuscript)

D. magna

data were used with the two other

species (brown trout and fathead minnow) to estimate the overall slope. If this reduced data set is

used (all species but using only data from Chapman et al. (Manuscript) for

D. magna),

the pooled

slope for these species was 0.7409 with P=0.35 (see Table 2c). A plot of the chronic effect level

versus total hardness is provided in Figure 4.

Criteria Development

The slope of 0.7409 was used to adjust each chronic value to a hardness of50 mg/L.

Generally, replicate adjusted chronic values for a species agreed well, as did values for species

within a genus. The two values for Atlantic salmon are very different, but one agrees well with the

value for the other tested species in the same genus. Twenty-one Species Mean Chronic Values

(SMCV) were then calculated from the underlined values in Table 2a. When both early life stage

(ELS) and life cycle (LC) data were available for a species, the SMCV was calculated using only

the LC data per the Guideline recommendations. From these 21 SMCVs, sixteen Genus Mean

Chronic Values were calculated and ranked (Table 3c).

A freshwater Final Chronic Value was calculated from the sixteen Genus Mean Chronic

Values using the procedure used to calculate a Final Acute Value. This approach was appropriate

since a number of chronic tests have been conducted with a large variety of species and these

species met the eight different taxonomic family Guideline requirement. Thus, the freshwater Final

e(

,

Chronic Value for total cadmium at a hardness of 50 mg/L is (in µg/L)

0.7409[Inthardness)]-4.719)or

equal to 0.16 µg/L. For dissolved cadmium, the Final Chronic value at a hardness of 50 mg/L is (in

µg/L) = 0.938

[e.7409[1n(hardness)]-4.719),,j

or equal to 0.15 µg/L. The equation for the chronic freshwater

conversion factor is CF = 1.101672 - [(In hardness) (0.041838)] where the (ln hardness) is the

natural logarithm of the hardness (Stephen 1995). At a hardness of 50 mg/L, all Genus Mean

Chronic Values are above the dissolved Final Chronic Value (Figure 5).

Another option for calculating the Final Chronic Value is to use the Final Acute-Chronic

Ratio in conjunction with the Final Acute Value. However, the acute-chronic ratios ranged from

0.9021 for the chinook salmon to 433.8 for the flagfish (greater than a factor of ten), with other

17

---

values scattered throughout this range (Tables 2e and 3c). These ratios do not seem to follow any

of the patterns (Table 3c) recommended in the Guidelines, and so it does not seem reasonable to

use a freshwater Final Acute-Chronic Ratio to calculate a Final Chronic Value.

CHRONIC TOXICITY TO SALTWATER ANIMALS

Three chronic toxicity tests have been conducted with the saltwater invertebrate,

Americamysis bahia,

formerly classified as

Mysidopsis bahia

(Table 2b). Nimmo et al. (1977a)

conducted a 23-day life-cycle test at 20 to 28°C and salinity of 15 to 23 g/kg. Survival was 10

percent at 10.6 ug/L, 84 percent at the next lower test concentration of 6.4 ug/L, and 95 percent in

the controls. No unacceptable effects were observed at 6.4 pg/L or any lower concentration. The

chronic toxicity limits, therefore, are 6.4 and 10.6 µg/L, with a chronic value of 8.237 ttg/L. The

96-hr LC50 was 15.5 ug/L, resulting in an acute-chronic ratio of 1.882.

Another life-cycle test was conducted on cadmium with

A. bahia

under different

environmental conditions, including a constant temperature of 21°C and salinity of 30 g/kg

(Gentile et al. 1982; Lussier et al. 1985). All organisms died in 28 days at 23 ug/L. At 10 ug/L a

series of morphological abberations occurred at the onset of sexual maturity. External genitalia in

males were abberant, females failed to develop brood pouches, and both sexes developed a

carapace malformation that prohibited molting after the release of the initial brood. Although

initial reproduction at this concentration was successful, successive broods could not be born

because molting resulted in death. No malformations or effects on initial or successive

reproductive processes were noted in the controls or at 5.1 pg/L. Thus, the chronic limits for this

study are 5.1 and 10 ug/L for a chronic value of 7.141 ug/L (Table 2b). The LC50 at 21°C and

salinity of 30 g/kg was 110 ug/L which results in an acute-chronic ratio of 15.40 from this study.

These two studies showed excellent agreement between the chronic values but considerable

divergence between the acute values and acute-chronic ratios. Several studies have demonstrated

an increase in acute toxicity of cadmium with decreasing salinity and increasing temperature (Table

6b). The observed differences in acute toxicity to the mysids might be explained on this basis.

Nimmo et al. (1977a) conducted their acute test at 20 to 28°C and salinity of 15 to 23 g/kg, whereas

18

---

the other test was performed at 21°C and salinity of 30 g/kg.

A third

A. bahia

chronic study was conducted by Carr et al. (1985) at a salinity of 30 g/kg,

but the temperature varied from 14 to 26°C over the 33 day study (Table 2b). At test termination,

>50 percent of the organisms had died in cadmium exposures

.8

µg/L. After 18 days of exposure,

growth in the 4 jig/L, the lowest concentration treatment group was significantly reduced when

compared to the controls. The resultant chronic limits for this study are <4 and 4 pg/L cadmium.

Acute data were not presented by the authors. The lower chronic value observed for this study as

compared to the two studies described above may have been due to unexpected temperature

fluctuations over the study period (due to mechanical problems).

Gentile et al. (1982) also conducted a life-cycle test with another mysid,

Mysidopsis

bigelowi,

and the results were very similar to those for

A: bahia.

Thus, the chronic value was 7.141

jig/L and the acute-chronic ratio was 15.40.

Because they covered such a wide range, it would be inappropriate to use any of the

available freshwater acute-chronic ratios in the calculation of the saltwater Final Chronic Value.

The two saltwater species for which acute-chronic ratios are available (Table 3b) have Species

Mean Acute Values in the same range as the saltwater Final Acute Value, and so it seems

reasonable to use the geometric mean of these two ratios. When the saltwater Final Acute Value of

80.55 ug/L is divided by the mean acute-chronic ratio of 9.106, a saltwater Final Chronic Value of

8.9 jtg/L is obtained. The dissolved cadmium FCV is computed using the CF (0.994 x 8.846 µg/L),

and is equal to 8.8 µg/L.

TOXICITY TO AQUATIC PLANTS

Thirty-three acceptable tests are available with freshwater plant species exposed to

cadmium which lasted from 4

to'

28 days (Table 4a). Growth reduction was the major toxic effect

observed with freshwater aquatic plants, and several values are in the range of concentrations

causing chronic effects on animals. The influence that plant growth media might have had on the

19

---

toxicity tests is unknown, but is probably minor at least in the case of Conway (1978) who used a

medium patterned after natural Lake Michigan water. The freshwater plant and animal data

presented in this document were compared and the lowest toxicity values for fish and invertebrate

species are lower than the lowest values for plants. A plot of the freshwater plant values is

provided in Figure 6a. Thus, water quality criteria which protect freshwater animals should also

protect freshwater plants. A final plant value was not calculated.

Toxicity values are available for five species of saltwater diatoms and two species of

macroalgae (Table 4b). Concentrations causing fifty percent reductions in the growth rates of

diatoms range from 60 ug/L for

Ditylum brightwelli

to 22,390 ug/L for

Phaeodactylum

tricornutum,

the most resistant to cadmium. The brown macroalga (kelp) exhibited mid-range

sensitivity to cadmium, with an EC50 of 860 ug/L. The most sensitive saltwater plant tested was

the red alga,

Champia parvula,

with significant reductions in the growth of both the

tetrasporophyte plant and female plant occurring at 22.8 pg/L. The saltwater plant and animal data

were also compared, and the most sensitive plant species

(C. parvula)

is more resistant than the

chronically most sensitive animal species tested. A plot of the saltwater plant values is provided in

Figure 7. Therefore, water quality criteria for cadmium that protect saltwater animals should also

protect saltwater plants. A final plant value was not calculated.

BIOACCUMULATION

Bioconcentration factors (BCFs) for cadmium in freshwater (Table 5a) range from 3 for

brook trout muscle (Benoit et al. 1976) to 6,910 for the soft tissue of the snail

Viviparus georgianus

(Tessier et al. 1994b). Usually, fish accumulate only small amounts of cadmium in muscle as

compared to most other tissues and organs (Benoit et al. 1976; Jarvinen and Ankley 1999;

Sangalang and Freeman 1979). However, specific studies summarized by Jarvinen and Ankley

(1999) showed that the skin, spleen, gill, fin, otolith and bone also have low bioconcentration.

factors. Sangalang and Freeman (1979) found that cadmium residues in fish reach steady-state

only after exposure periods greatly exceeding 28 days.

D. magna,

and presumably other

invertebrates of about this size or smaller, often reach steady-state within a few days (Poldoski

1979). Cadmium accumulated by fish from water is eliminated slowly (Benoit et al. 1976: Kumada

20

---

et al. 1980), but Kumada et al. (1980) found that cadmium accumulated from food is eliminated

much more rapidly. If all variables, except temperature, were kept the same, Tessier et al. (1994a)

found that increased exposure temperatures generally increased the soft tissue bioconcentration

factor observed for the snail,

V. georgianus,

but not for the mussel,

Elliptio complanata.

Poldoski

(1979) reported that humic acid decreased the uptake of cadmium by

D. magna,

but Winner (1984)

did not find any effect. Ramamoorthy and Blumhagen (1984) reported that fulvic and humic acids

increased uptake of cadmium by rainbow trout.

The only BCF reported for a saltwater fish is a value of 48 from a 21-day exposure of the

mummichog (Table 6b). However, among ten species of invertebrates, the BCFs range from 22 to

3,160 for whole body and from 5 to 2,040 for muscle (Table 5b). The highest BCF was reported

for the polychaete,

Ophryotrocha diadema

(Klockner 1979). Although a BCF of 3,160 was

attained after sixty-four days exposure using the renewal technique, tissue residues had not reached

steady-state.

BCFs for four species of saltwater bivalve molluscs range from 113 for the blue mussel

(George and Coombs 1977) to 2,150 for the eastern oyster (Zaroogian and Cheer 1976). In

addition, the range of reported BCFs is rather large for some individual species. BCFs for the

oyster include 149 and 677 (Table 6b), as well as 1,220, 1,830 and 2,150 (Table 5b). Similarly,

two studies with the bay scallop resulted in BCFs of 168 (Eisler et al. 1972) and 2,040 (Pesch and

Stewart 1980) and three studies with the blue mussel reported BCFs of 113, 306, and 710 (Tables

5b and 6b). George and Coombs (1977) studied the importance of metal speciation on cadmium

accumulation in the soft tissues of

Mytilus edulis.

Cadmium complexed as Cd-EDTA, Cd-alginate,

Cd-humate, and Cd-pectate (Table 6b) was bioconcentrated at twice the rate of inorganic cadmium

(Table 5b). Because bivalve molluscs usually do not reach steady-state, comparisons between

species may be difficult and the length of exposure may be the major determinant in the size of the

BCF.

BCFs for five species of saltwater crustaceans range from 22 to 307 for whole body and

from 5 to 25 for muscle (Tables 5b and 6b). Nimmo et al. (1977b) reported whole-body BCFs of

203 and 307 for two species of grass shrimp,

Palaemonetes pugio

and

P. vulgaris.

Vernberg et al.

(1977) reported a factor of 140 for

P. pugio

at 25°C (Table 6b), whereas Pesch and Stewart (1980)

reported a BCF of 22 for the same species exposed at 10°C, indicating that temperature might be an

21

---

important variable. The commercially important crustaceans, the pink shrimp and lobster, were not

effective bioaccumulators of cadmium with factors of 57 for whole body and 25 for muscle,

respectively (Tables 5b and 6b).

Mallard ducks are a native wildlife species whose chronic sensitivity to cadmium has been

studied. These birds can be expected to ingest many of the freshwater and saltwater plants and

animals listed in Tables 4a and 4b. White and Finley (1978a,b) and White et al. (1978) found

significant damage at a cadmium concentration of 200 mg/kg in food for 90 days. Di Giulio and

Scanlon (1984) found significant effects on energy metabolism at 450 mg/kg, but not at 150 mg/kg.

These are concentrations which would cause damage to mallard ducks. More recent information

may be available, but these data would not have been identified during the literature search

conducted for this update.

The bioaccumulation data provided in this document is for information purposes only.

Calculation of a Final Residue Value for cadmium will not be presented at this time.

OTHER DATA

Data presented in Table 6 are not acceptable for inclusion in Tables 1-5, but provide useful

information on the effects of cadmium to aquatic organisms. Several studies were reported in

Table 6 and not in Table 1 either because the organisms were fed during acute studies (Lewis and

Horning 1991; Ingersoll and Winner 1982; Mount and Norberg 1984; Pascoe et al. 1986;

Schubauer-Berigan et al. 1993; Williams and Dusenbery 1990; Wiliams et al. 1986; Winner 1984)

or the tests used unusual or uncharacterized dilution water (Hall et al. 1986; Hickey and Vickers

1992; Khangarot and Ray 1989a).

Although a number of the values in Tables 6a and 6b have already been discussed, the

following section presents information supporting data presented in Tables 1-5, plus other useful

trends or relationships. The effects of prior cadmium exposure to the resistence of the marine

copepod,

Acartia clausi;

was investigated by Moraitou-Apostolopoulou et al. (1979). They

observed that an

A. clausi

population collected from a metal impacted area displayed a greater

tolerance to lethal cadmium concentrations when compared to a population obtained from a non-

polluted site. The pollution acclimated population also had greater longevity than the non-adapted

22

---

population when exposed to sublethal levels of cadmium.

The cumulative mortality resulting from exposure to cadmium for more than 96 hours is

clearly evident from the studies with phytoplankton (Fargasova 1993; Findlay et al. 1996),

duckweed (Outridge 1992), protozoa (Niederlehner et al. 1985), zooplankton (Lawrence and

Holoka (1987), snails (Spehar et al. 1978), zebra mussels (Kraak et al. 1992a,b), crayfish (Thorp et

al. 1979), macroinvertebrates (Giesy et al. 1979), polychaetes (Reich et al. 1976), bivalve molluscs,

crabs, and starfish (Eisler and Hennekey 1977), scallops, shrimp, and crabs (Pesch and Stewart

1980), and a mysid (Gentile et al. 1982; Nimmo et al. 1977a).

In unmeasured flow-through sockeye salmon cadmium exposures, Servizi and Martens

(1978) reported 7-day LC50 values that ranged from 8 to 4,500 gg/L for fry and alevins,

respectively. The range and life stage sensitivity pattern observed by the authors were similar to

other salmonid studies reported in Table 1 a.

Nimmo et al. (1977a) in studies with the mysid,

Americamysis bahia,

reported a 96-hr

LC50 of 15.5 1.1g/L (Table 1) and a 17-day LC50 of 11 gg/L (Table 6) at 25 to 28°C and salinity of

10 to 17 g/kg in the 96-hr study and 15 to 23 g/kg in the 17-day study. In another series of studies

with this mysid (Gentile et al. 1982), the 96-hr LC50 was 110 pg/L (Table 1) and the 16-day LC50

was 28 gg/L (Table 6b) at 20°C and salinity of 30 g/kg. These data suggest that short-term acute

toxicity might be strongly influenced by environmental variables, whereas long-term effects, even

mortality, are not.

Considerable information exists concerning the effect of salinity and temperature on the

acute toxicity of cadmium. Unfortunately, the conditions and durations of exposure are so different

that adjustment of acute toxicity data for salinity is not possible. Rosenberg and Costlow (1976)

studied the synergistic effects of cadmium and salinity combined with constant and cycling

temperatures on the larval development of two estuarine crab species. They reported reduction in

survival and significant delay in development of the blue crab with decreasing salinity. Cadmium

was three times as toxic at a salinity of 10 g/kg than at 30 g/kg. Studies with the mud crab resulted

in a similar cadmium-salinity response. In addition, the authors report that cycling temperature

may have a stimulating effect on survival of larvae compared to constant temperature.

Theede et al. (1979) investigated the effect of temperature and salinity on the acute toxicity

of cadmium to the colonial hydroid,

Laomedea loveni.

At 17.5 °C cadmium concentrations

23

---

inducing irreversible retraction of half of the polyps ranged from 12.4 ug/L at a salinity of 25 g/kg

to 3.0 ug/L at 10 g/kg (Table 6). At a temperature of 17.5°C, the toxicity of cadmium increased as

salinity decreased from 25 g/kg to 10 g/kg.

A similar acute toxicity-salinity relationship was observed by Hall et al. (1995) for the

copepod,

Eurytemora affinis,

whereby the 96-hour toxicity increased four-fold (from 213 to 51.6

ug/L cadmium) when the salinity was decreased from 15 to 5 g/kg at a test temperature of 25°C.

Hall et al. (1995) also observed an approximate three-fold toxicity increase to the sheepshead

minnow when the salinity was lowered in similar fashion at the same temperature. Likewise, the

21-day toxicity of cadmium to the blue crab,

Callinectes sapidus,

increased over nine-fold when

the salinity was lowered from 25 to 2:5 g/kg, and the temperature was held constant at 22-23°C

(Guerin and Stickle 1995). In contrast, Snell and Personne (1989b) observed little difference in the

24-hour toxicity of cadmium to the rotifer,

Brachionus plicatilis,

exposed under 15 and 30 g/kg

salinity regimes and a temperature of 25°C.

The effect of environmental factors on the acute toxicity of cadmium is also evident from

tests with the early life stages of saltwater vertebrates. Alderdice et al. (1979a,b,c) reported that

salinity influenced the effects of cadmium on the volume, capsule strength, and osmotic response

of embryos of the Pacific herring. Studies with embryos of the winter flounder indicated a

quadratic salinity-cadmium relationship (Voyer et al. 1977), whereas Voyer et al. (1979) reported a

linear relationship between salinity and cadmium toxicity to Atlantic silverside embryos.

Several studies have reported chronic sublethal effects of cadmium on saltwater fishes

(Table 6b). Significant reduction in gill tissue respiratory rate was reported for the cunner after a

30-day exposure to 50 ug/L (MacInnes et al. 1977). Dawson et al. (1977) also reported a

significant decrease in gill-tissue respiration of striped bass at 0.5 ug/L above ambient levels after a

30-day, but not a 90-day, exposure. A similar study with the winter flounder (Calabrese et al.

1975) demonstrated a significant alteration in gill tissue respiration rate measured

in vitro

after a

60-day exposure to 5 1.1g/L.

UNUSED DATA

Based on the requirements set forth in the guidelines (Stephen et al. 1985), the following

24

---

studies are not acceptable for the following reasons and are classified as unused data.

Studies Were Conducted with Species That Are Not Resident in North America

Abbasi and Soni (1986)

Abel and Papoutsoglou (1986)

Abel and Garner (1986)

Abel and Barlocher (1988)

Ahsanullah et al. (1981)

Ahsanullah and Williams (1991) Amiard-

Triquet et al. (1987)

Annune et al. (1994)

Arshaduddin et al. (1989)

Austen et al. (1997)

Avery et al. (1996)

Azeez and Banerjee (1987)

Baby and Menon (1987)

Bambang et al. (1994)

Bednarz and Warkowska-Dratnal

(1983/1984)

Birmelin et al. (1995)

Bresler and Yanko (1995)

Brooks et al. (1996)

Brunetti et al. (1991)

Calevro et al. (1998)

Canli and Furness (1993, 1995)

Cassini et al. (1986)

Castille and Lawrence (1981)

Centeno et al. (1993)

Chan (1988)

Chandini (1988, 1988, 1989, 1991)

Chandra and Garg (1992)

Charpentier et al. (1987) Chattopadhyay

et al. (1995)

Cheung and Lam (1998)

Coppellotti (1994)

D'Agostino and Finney (1974) Dallinger

et al. (1989)

Darmono (1990)

Darmono et al. (1990)

Datta et al. (1987)

Demon et al. (1989)

Den Besten et al. (1989, 1991)

De Nicola Giudici and Guarino (1989)

De Nicola Giudici and Migliore (1988)

Denton and Burdon-Jones (1986 1986)

Devi (1987, 1996)

Devi and Rao (1989)

Devineau and Triquet (1985)

Dorgelo et al. (1995)

Douben (1989)

Drbal et al. (1985)

Duquesne and Coll (1995)

Evtushenko et al. (1986)

Evtushenko et al. (1990)

Ferrari et al. (1993)

Fisher et al. (1996)

Fisher et al. (1996)

Forget et al. (1998)

Francesconi (1989)

Francesconi et al. (1994)

Forbes (1991)

Gaur et al. (1994)

Gerhardt (1992, 1995)

Ghosh and Chakrabarti (1990)

Glynn (1996)

Glynn et al. (1992, 1994)

Gopal and Devi (1991)

Green et al. (1986)

Greenwood and Fielder (1983)

Gupta and Rajbanshi (1991)

Gupta et al. (1992)

Hader et al. (1997)

Hansten et al. (1996)

Heinis et al. (1990)

Herkovits and Coll (1993)

Hiraoka et al. (1985)

Hu et al. (1996)

Huebner and Pynnonen (1992)

Husaini et al. (1991)

I

k

uta (1987)

Jenkins and Sanders (1985)

Karlsson-Norrgren and Runn (1985)

Kasuga (1980)

Keduo et al. (1987)

Khangarot and Ray. (1987)

Khristoforova et al. (1984)

Kobayashi (1971)

Krassoi and Julli (1994)

Krishnaja et al. (1987)

Kuhn and Pattard (1990)

Kuroshima (1987)

Kuroshima and Kimura (1990)

Kuroshima et al. (1993)

Lam (1996, 1996)

Lam et al. (1997)

Lee and Xu (1984)

Loumbourdis et al. (1999)

McCahon et al. (1988)

McCahon and Pascoe (1988, 1988, 1988)

McCahon et al. (1989)

McClurg (1984)

Ma et al. (1999)

25

---

Malea (1994)

Markich and Jeffree (1994, 1994)

Martinez et al. (1996)

Metayer et al. (1982)

Michibata et al. (1986)

Michibata et al. (1987)

Migliore and Giudici (1987)

Moller et al. (1994)

Mostafa and Khalil (1986)

Muino et al. (1990)

Musko et al. (1990)

Nakagawa and Ishio (1988, 1989)

Nassiri et al. (1997)

Negilski (1976)

Nir et al. (1990)

Noraho and Gaur (1995)

Notenboom et al. (1992)

Nott and Nicolaidou (1994)

Nugegoda and Rainbow (1995)

Ojaveer et al. (1980)

Pantani et al. (1997)

Papathanassiou (1995)

Pavicic et al. (1994)

Perez-Coll and Herkovits (1996)

Pynnonen (1995)

Rainbow and Kwan (1995)

Rainbow et al. (1980)

Rainbow and White (1989)

Ralph and Burchett (1998)

Ramachandran et al. (1997)

Rao and Madhyastha (1987)

Rebhun and Ben-Amotz (1984)

Reish et al. (1988)

Ringwood (1990, 1992)

Ritterhoff et al. (1996)

Romeo and Gnassia-Barelli (1995)

Safadi (1998)

Sastry and Shukla (1994)

Sastry and Sunita (1982)

Saxena et al. (1990, 1993)

Schafer et al. (1994)

Sehgal and Saxena (1987)

Shanmukhappa and Neelakantan (1990)

Shivaraj and Patil (1988)

Simoes Goncalves (1989)

Stuhlbacher and Maltby (1992)

Takamura et al. (1989)

Temara et al. (1996a,b)

Ten Hoopen et al. (1985)

Thaker and Haritos (1989)

Thebault et al. (1996)

Theede et al. (1979)

Tomasik et al. (1995)

Tyurin and Khristoforova (1993)

Udoidiong and Akpan (1991)

Valencia et al. (1998)

Van Gernert (1985)

Vashchenko and Zhadan (1993)

Verriopoulos and Moraitou-

Apostolopoulou (1981, 1982)

Visviki and Rachlin (1991)

Vogiatzis and Loumbourdis (1998)

Vranken et al. (1985)

Vuori (1994)

Vyniazal (1990, 1995)

Walsh et al: (1995)

Warnau et al. (1995a,b,c, 1996a,b, 1997)

Westernhagen and Dethlefsen (1975)

Westernhagen et al. (1975, 1978)

Wildgust and Jones (1998)

White and Rainbow (1986)

Wicklund and Runn (1988)

Wicklund et al. (1988)

Wu et al. (1997)

Wundram et al. (1996)

Zanders and Rojas (1992, 1996)

Zou and Bu (1994)

Brown and Ahsanullah (1971) conducted tests with a brine shrimp species, that are too atypical to

be used in deriving national criteria.

Cadmium Was a Component of a Drilling Mud, Effluent, Mixture, Sediment or Sludge

Allen (1994, 1995)

?

Austen and McEvoy (1997)

?

Bendell-Young et al. (1986)

Amiard-Triquet et al. (1988)

?

Bartsch et al. (1999)

?

Besser and Rabeni (1987)

Andres et al. (1999)

?

Beiras et al. (1998)

?

Biesinger et al. (1986)

Arnac and Lassus (1985)

?

Bendell-Young (1994)

?

Bigelow and Lasenby (1991)

26

---

Bodar et al. (1990)

Buckley et al. (1985)

Burden and Bird (1994)

Busch et al. (1998)

Campbell and Evans (1991)

Camusso et al. (1995)

Carlisle and Clements (1999)

Casini and Depledge (1997)

Cuvin-Aralar (1994)

Cuvin-Aralar and Aralar (1993)

Dallinger et al. (1997)

de March (1988)

Elliott et al. (1986)

Farag et al. (1994, 1998)

Gully and Mason (1993)

Hall et al. (1984, 1987, 1988)

Hardy and Raber (1985)

Hare et al. 1991, (1994)

Haritonidis et al. (1994)

Hartwell (1997)

Haynes et al. (1989)

Hendriks (1995)

Hickey and Clements (1998)

Hickey and Martin (1995)

Hickey and Roper (1992)

Hogstrand et al. (1991)

Hollis et al. (1996)

Hooten and Carr (1998)

Hylland et al. (1996)

Inza et al. (1998)

Jak et al. (1996)

Janssens de Bisthoven et al. (1992)

Jop (1991)

Keenan and Alikhan (1991)

Kelly and Whitton (1989)

Kettle and deNoyelles (1986)

Khan and Weis (1993)

Khan et al. (1989)

Kiffney and Clements (1996)

Klerks and Bartholomew (1991)

Kock et al. (1995)

Koivisto et al. (1997)

Kolok et al. (1998)

Kraak et al. (1993, 1994)

Krantzberg (1989a,b)

Krantzberg and Stokes (1988, 1989)

Kumar (1991)

Lee and Luoma (1998)

Lithner et al. (1995)

Lucker et al. (1997)

Macdonald and Sprague (1988)

Maloney (1996)

Manz et al. (1994)

Marr et al. (1995a, b)

Mathew and Menon (1992)

Mersch et al. (1996)

Nalewajko (1995)

Nelson (1994)

Odin et al. (1996, 1997)

Palawski et al. (1985)

Pedersen and Petersen (1996)

Pellegrini et al. (1993)

Playle et al. (1993)

Polar and Kucukcezzar (1986)

Poulton et al. (1995)

Prevot and Soyer-Gobillard (1986)

Qichen et al. (1988)

Rachlin and Grosso (1993)

Reynoldson et al. (1996)

Richelle et al. (1995)

Roch and McCarter (1984)

Roesijadi and Fellingham (1987)

Sanchiz et al. (1999)

Schaeffer et al. (1991)

Smokorowski et al. (1997)

Stephenson and Macki (1989)

Stern and Stern (1980)

Talbot (1985, 1987)

Tessier et al. (1993)

Vuori (1993)

Vymazal (1984)

Wall et al. (1996)

Walsh and Hunter (1992)

Wang et al. (1996)

Warren et al. (1998)

Weimin et al. (1994)

Wong et al. (1982)

Woodling (1993)

Woodward et al. (1995)

These Reviews Only Contain Data That Have Been Published Elsewhere

Bamthouse et al. (1987)

?

Dierickx and Bredael-Rozen (1996)

?

Enserink et al. (1991)

Bay et al. (1993)

?

Dyer et al. (1997)

?

Florence et al. (1992)

Cairns et al. (1985)

?

Eisler (1981)

?

Guilhermino et al. (1997)

Chapman et al. (1968)

?

Bisler et al. (1979)

?

Hare (1992)

27

---

Hornstrom (1990)

Jonnalagadda and Rao (1993)

Khangarot and Ray (1987)

Kooijman and Bedaux (1996)

Kraak et al. (1994a,b)

LeBlanc (1984)

Mark and Solbe (1998)

Meyer (1999)

Nendza et al. (1997)

Oikari et al. (1992)

Papoutsoglou and Abel (1993)

Pesonen and Andersson (1997)

Phillips and Russo (1978)

Ramesha et al. (1996)

Rice (1984)

Skowronski et al. (1998)

Spry and Wiener (1991)

Thomann et al. (1997)

Thompson et al. (1972)

Toussaint et al. (1995)

Trevors et al. (1986)

Van Leeuwen et al. (1987)

Vymazal (1990)

Wright and Welbourn (1994)

Wong (1987)

Organisms Were Exposed to Cadmium in Food or by Injection or Gavage

Reinfelder and Fisher (1994, 1994)

Reddy et al. (1997)

Rhodes et al. (1985)

Van den Hurk et al. (1998)

Wallace and Lopez (1997)

_Wang and Fisher (1996)

Wen-Xiong and Fisher (1996)

Wong (1989)

Bodar et al. (1988)

Brouwer et al. (1992)

Chou et al. (1986)

Davies et al. (1997)

Decho and Luoma (1994)

Gottofrey and Tjalve (1991)

Handy (1993)

Kluttgen and Ratte (1994)

Kuroshima (1992)

Lasenby and Van Duyn (1992)

Lawrence and Holoka (1991)

Lomagin and U1'yanova (1993)

Malley and Chang (1991)

Melgar et al. (1997)

Mount et al. (1994)

Munger and Hare (1997)

Postma et al. (1994)

Postma and Davids (1995)

No Interpretable Concentration, Time, Response Data or Examined Only a Single Concentration

Berglind (1985)

Bitton et al. (1994)

Block and Part (1992)

Block et al. (1991)

Blondin et al. (1989)

Bowen and Engel (1996)

Bressan and Brunetti (1988)

Castano et al. (1996)

Christoffers and Ernst (1983)

Clausen et al. (1993)

Fargasova (1994)

Fernandez-Pinas et al. (1995)

George et al. (1983)

Iftode et al. (1985)

Ilangovan et al. (1998)

Issa et al. (1995)

Jana and Sahana (1988)

Kluytmans et al. (1988)

Kraak et al. (1993b)

Kosakowska et al. (1988)

Lussier et al. (1999)

Mateo et al. (1993)

Palackova et al. (1994)

Pereira et al. (1993)

Prasad et al. (1998)

Rachlin and Grosso (1991)

Reader et al. (1989)

28

---

Reddy and Fingerman (1994)

Reid and McDonald (1991)

Ribo (1997),

Rombough (1985)

Rosas and Ramirez (1993)

Sauvant et al. (1997)

Skowronski et al. (1991)

Sunila and Lindstrom (1985)

Trehan and Maneesha (1994)

Verbost et al. (1987)

Visviki and Rachlin (1994)

Wang et al. (1995)

Woodall et al. (1988)

Wundram et al. (1996)

Xue and Sigg (1998)

No Useable Data on Cadmium Toxicity or Bioconcentration

Battaglini et al. (1993)

?

Gomot (1998)

?

Rouleau et al. (1998)

Borchardt (1983)

?

Harvey and Luoma (1985)

?

Sobhan and Sternberg (1999)

Craig et al. (1998)

?

Kraal et al. (1995)

Gargiulo et al. (1996)

?

Penttinen et al. (1995)

Organisms Were Selected, Adapted or Acclimated for Increased Resistance to Cadmium

Anadu et al. (1989)

?

Herkovits and Perez-Coll (1995)

?

Nagel and Voigt (1995)

Bodar et al. (1990)

?

Kaplan et al. (1995)

?

Thomas et al. (1985)

Currie et al. (1998)

?

McNicol and Scherer (1993)

?

Van Steveninck et al. (1992)

Ramo' et al. (1987)

?

Madoni et al. (1994)

Data were not used if the results were only presented graphically (Laegreild et al. 1983; Laube

1980; Remade et al. 1982), if the organisms were not exposed to cadmium in water (Foster 1982;

Hatakeyama and Yasuno 1981a; O'Neill 1981), or if there was no pertinent adverse effect (Carr and Neff

1982; DeFilippis et al. 1981; Dickson et al. 1982; Fisher and Fabris 1982; Fisher and Jones 1981; Tucker

and Matte 1980; Watling 1981; Weis et al. 1981).

Either the Materials, Methods or Results Were Insufficiently Described

Abbasi and Soni (1989)

Ball (1967)

Belabed et al. (1994)

Bendell-Young (1999)

Bitton et al. (1995)

Bjerregaard and Depledge (1994)

Bolanos et al. (1992)

Burnison et al. (1975)

Calevro et al. (1998)

Canton and Slooff (1979)

Carpene and Boni (1992)

D'Aniello et al. (1990)

Davies et al. (1994)

Department of the Environment (1973)

Errecalde et al. (1998)

Fennikoh et al. (1978)

Fernandez-Leborans and Antonio-Garcia

(1988)

Galic and Sipos (1987)

Glubokov (1990)

Gorman and Skogerboe (1987)

29

---

Guanzon et al. (1994)

Guerin et al. (1994)

Hofslagare et al. (1985)

Janssen and Persoone (1993)

Jaworska et al. (1997)

Kay et al. (1986)

Kessler (1985)

Khangarot et al. (1987)

Koyama et al. (1992)

Landner and Jemelov (1969)

Lee and Oshima (1998)

Liao and Hsieh (1990)

Maas (1978)

Mansour (1993)

Ministry of Technology (1967)

Moza et al. (1995)

Munger et al. (1999)

Naylor et al. (1992)

Nwadukwe and Erondu (1996)

Pascoe and Shazili (1986)

Pauli and Berger (1997)

Penttinen et al. (1998)

Peterson (1991)

Peterson et al. (1984)

Rayms-Keller et al. (1998)

Rombough (1985)

Sandau et al. (1996)

Sekkat et al. (1992)

Shcherban (1977)

Sheela et al. (1995)

Sovenyi and Szakolczai (1993)

Stom and Zubareva (1994)

Stubblefield et al. (1999)

Tarzwell and Henderson (1960)

Verma et al. (1980)

Vykusova and Svobodova (1987)

Wani (1986)

Witeska et al. (1995)

Yamamoto and Inque (1985)

Zhang et al. (1992)

High control mortalities occurred in testing reported by Asato and Reish (1988), Hong and Reish

(1987), Sauter et al. (1976) and Wright (1988). The 96-hr values reported by Buikema et al. (1974a,b) were

subject to error because of possible reproductive interactions (Buikema et al. 1977). Bringmann and Kuhn

(1982) and Dave et al. (1981) cultured daphnids in one water and tested them in a different water. The

acceptability of the dilution water or medium used in some studies (e.g., Brkovic-Popovic and Popovic

1977a,b; Cearley and Coleman 1973, 1974; Nasu et al. 1983) was open to question because of its origin or

content.

Inappropriate Medium or Medium Contained Too Much of a Complexing Agent for Algal Studies

Baillieul and Blust (1999)

Brand et al. (1986)

Chen et al. (1997)

Couillard (1989)

Hockett and Mount (1996)

Huebert et al. (1993)

Huebert and Shay (1991, 1992, 1993)

Jenkins and Mason (1988)

Jenkins and Sanders (1986)

Jenner and Janssen-Mommen (1993)

Kessler (1986)

Lue-Kim et al. (1980)

Macfie et al. (1994)

Meteyer et al. (1988)

Muller and Payer (1979)

Nasu et al. (1988)

Rebhun and Ben-Amotz (1986, 1988)

Stary and Kratzer (1982)

Stary et al. (1983)

Sloof et al. (1995)

Sunda and Huntsman (1996)

Thongra-ar and Matsuda (1993)

Thorpe and Costlow (1989)

Tortell and Price (1996)

Vasseur and Pandard (1988)

Wright et al. (1985)

Questionable Treatment of Test Organisms or Inappropriate Test Conditions or Methodology

30

---

Babich and Stotsky (1982)

Brown et al. (1984)

Bryan (1971)

Chan et al. (1981)

Dorfman (1977)

Eisler and Gardner (1973)

Greig (1979)

Hung (1982)

Hutcheson (1975)

Moraitou-Apostolopoulou et al. (1979)

Parker (1984)

Pecon and Powell (1981)

Rehwoldt et al. (1972, 1973)

Ridlington et al. (1981)

Servizi and Martens (1978)

Sunda et al. (1978)

Wikfors and Ukeles (1982)

Bioconcentration Studies Conducted in Distilled Water, Not Conducted Long Enough,

Not Flow-through or Water Concentrations Not Adequately Measured

Allen (1995)

Amiard et al. (1993)

Amiard-Triquet et al. (1986)

Balogh and Salanki (1984)

Baudrimont et al. (1997)

Beattie and Pascoe (1978)

Bentley (1991)

Berglind (1986)

Bemds (1998)

Bervoets et al. (1995, 1996)

Bjerregaard (1982, 1985, 1991)

Block and Glynn (1992)

Brown et al. (1986)

Burrell and Weihs (1983)

Carmichael and Fowler (1981)

Carr and Neff (1982)

Chan et al. (1992)

Chander et al. (1991)

Chawla et al. (1991)

Chitguppa et al. (1997)

Chou and Uthe (1991)

Collard and Matagne (1994)

Craig et al. (1999)

Davies et al. (1981)

De Conto Cinier et al. (1997)

De Conto Cinier et al. (1998)

De Nicola et al. (1993)

Denton and Burdon-Jones (1981)

Elliott et al. (1985)

Engel (1999)

Everaarts (1990)

Fair and Sick (1983)

Frazier and George (1983)

Freeman (1978, 1980)

Giles (1988)

Gottofrey et al. (1988)

Graney et al. (1984)

Gupta and. Devi (1993)

Haines and Brumbaugh (1994)

Hansen et al. (1995)

Hardy and O'Keeffe (1985)

Hashim et al. (1997)

Hatakeyama (1987)

Herwig et al. (1989)

Hollis et al. (1997)

Irato and Piccinni (1996)

John et al. (1987)

Katti and Sathyanesan (1985)

Kerfoot and Jacobs (1976)

Khoshmanesh et al. (1996, 1997)

Klaverkamp and Duncan (1987)

Koelmans et al. (1996)

Kohler and Riisgard (1982)

Kwan and Smith (1991)

Langston and Zhou (1987)

Les and Walker (1984)

McLeese and Ray (1984)

Maeda et al. (1990)

Malley et al. (1989)

Maranhao et al. (1999)

Mersch et al. (1993)

Mizutani et al. (1991)

Muramoto (1980)

Mwangi and Alikhan (1993)

Nolan and Duke (1983)

Norey et al. (1990)

Oakley et al. (1983)

Olesen and Weeks (1994)

Papathanassiou (1986)

Pawlik and Skowronski (1994)

Pawlik et al. (1993)

Pelgrom et al. (1994)

Pelgrom et al. (1997)

Playle and Dixon (1993)

Presing et al. (1993)

Po§tma et al. (1996)

Poulsen et al. (1982)

Rai et al. 1995

Rainbow (1985)

Ramirez et al. (1989)

Ray et al. (1981)

31

---

Reichert et al. (1979)

Reinfelder et al. (1997)

Riisgard et al. (1987)

Ringwood (1989, 1992, 1993)

Roseman et al. (1994)

Rubinstein et al. (1983)

Santojanni et al. (1998)

Sedlacek et al. (1989)

Sidoumou et al. (1997)

Simoes Goncalves et al. (1988)

Sinha et al. (1994)

Skowronski and Przytocka-Jusiak (1986)

Srivastava and Appenroth (1995)

Stary et al. (1982)

Sunil et al. (1995)

Suzuki et al. (1987)

Swinehart (1990)

Taylor et al. (1988)

Tessier et al. (1996)

Thomas et al. (1983)

Van Leeuwen et al. (1985)

Van Ginneken et al. (1999)

Vymazal (1995)

Wang and Fisher (1998)

Watling (1983a)

White and Rainbow (1982)

Williams et al. (1998)

Windom et al. (1982)

Winner and Gauss (1986)

Winter (1996)

Woodworth and Pascoe (1983)

Xiaorong et al. (1997)

Yager and Harry (1964)

Zauke et al. (1995)

Zia and McDonald (1994)

The bioconcentration tests of Eisler (1974), Jennings and Rainbow (1979b), O'Hara (1973b),

Phelps (1979), and Sick and Baptist (1979), which used radioactive isotopes of cadmium, were not used

because of the possibility of isotope discrimination. Reports on the concentrations of cadmium in wild

aquatic organisms, such as Anderson et al. (1978), Bouquegneau and Martoja (1982), Boyden (1977),

Bryan et al. (1983), Frazier (1979), Gordon et al. (1980), Greig and Wenzloff (1978), Hazen and Kneip

(1980), Kneip and Hazen (1979), McLeese et al. (1981), Noel-Lambot et al. (1980), Pennington et al.

(1982), Ray et al. (1981), Smith et al. (1981), and Uthe et al. (1982) were not used for the calculation of

bioaccumulation factors due to an insufficient number of measurements of the concentration of cadmium in

the water.

SUMMARY

Freshwater Species Mean Acute Values (SMAV) for cadmium are available for species in 55

genera and hardness adjusted values range from 1.613 gg/L for brown trout to 96,880 gg/L for a midge.

Freshwater invertebrate SMAVs range from 13.41 gg/L for

D. magna

to 96,880 gg/L for a midge and

SMAVs for 24 fish species from 1.613 gg/L for the brown trout to 10,663 tg/L for the tilapia. The

antagonistic effect of hardness on acute toxicity has been demonstrated with 12 species. Acceptable

chronic tests have been conducted on cadmium with 14 freshwater fish species and seven invertebrate

species with hardness adjusted Species Mean Chronic Values (SMCV) ranging from 0.2747 gg/L for

Hyalella azteca

to 27.1714/L for

Ceriodaphnia dubia.

Acute-chronic ratios are available for six species

and range from 0.9021 for the chinook salmon to 433.8 for the flagfish.

Freshwater aquatic plants are affected by cadmium at concentrations ranging from 2 to 20,000

32

---

pg/L. These values are in the same range as the acute toxicity values for fish and invertebrate species, and

are considerably above the chronic values. Bioconcentration factors (BCFs) for cadmium in freshwater

range from 7 to 6,910 for invertebrates and from 3 to 2,213 for fishes.

Saltwater cadmium SMAVs are available for species in

‘

54 genera and SMAVs for 50 species of

invertebrates range from 41.29 ug/L for a mysid to 135,000 ug/L for an oligochaete worm. SMAVs

for 11 fish species range from 75.0

nil,

for striped bass to 50,000 ug/L for sheepshead minnow. The acute

toxicity of cadmium generally increases as salinity decreases. The effect of temperature seems to be

species-specific. Chronic tests have been conducted with two mysid

species, Americamysis bahia

and

Mysidopsis bigelowi,

with SMCVs of 6.173 ug/L and 7.141 ug/L, respectively. Acute-chronic ratios are

available for each species, 5.384 for

A. bahia

and 15.40 for

M bigelowi.

The acute values appear to reflect

effects of varying salinity and temperature levels, whereas the few available chronic values apparently do

not.

Studies with macroalgae and microalgae revealed effects at 22.8 to 22,390 ug/L, respectively.

These values are in the same range as acute toxicity values for fish and invertebrate species, and are above

the chronic values. BCFs determined with a variety of saltwater invertebrates range from 5 to 3,160. BCFs

for bivalve molluscs were generally above 1,000 in long exposures, with no indication that steady-state had

been reached.

A comparison of the criteria developed in this document with the previous National recommended

water quality criteria (which is based on the 1995 update for freshwater and the 1984 update for saltwater)

indicates that the updated 2001 freshwater CMC of 1.0 ug/L dissolved cadmium has remained

approximately the same (the value was lowered each time to protect the commercially important rainbow

trout), but the freshwater chronic CCC has been lowered to 0.15 ug/L dissolved cadmium in this document

from 1.3 ug/L in the 1995 document. This 2001 update contains a database of 55 freshwater genera for

acute toxicity (43 genera were in the 1995 update), and 15 genera for freshwater chronic toxicity (12 genera

were provided in the 1995 document). As a result of the additional data, the acute and chronic hardness

derived slopes are different in this update relative to previous versions. This update did not use an adjusted

"n" value to calculate the Final Chronic Value (the 1995 update modified the total "n" for the chronic value

to be the same as the acute "n" value). Included in this updated document are toxicity results for certain

threatened and endangered species that were not available earlier. Saltwater cadmium criteria remained

relatively the same between the 1999 National recommended water quality criteria and 2001 documents.

The new saltwater CMC of 40 ug/L dissolved cadmium presented in this document is only slightly lower

than the 42 pg/L cadmium found in the previous national recommended water quality criteria. The chronic

33

---

CCC dropped slightly to 8.8 pg/L cadmium in this document from the 9.3 pg/L value previously

recommended. There are 54 genera in the acute saltwater database of this document (the 1984 document

had 33 genera), and the same two saltwater chronic genera are presented in both documents (a third

A.

bahia

chronic value was added to this document).

NATIONAL CRITERIA

The available toxicity data, when evaluated using the procedures described in the "Guidelines for

Deriving Numerical National Water Quality Criteria for the Protection of Aquatic Organisms and Their

Uses" indicate that, except possibly where a locally important species is unusually sensitive, freshwater

aquatic life should be protected at a total hardness of 50 mg/L as CaCO

3 if the four-day average

concentration (in µg/L) of dissolved cadmium does not exceed the numerical value given by 0.938

[e

(0.7409[1n(hardness)]-4.719)

]

more than once every three years on the average, and if the 24-hour average

dissolved concentration (in ug/L) does not exceed the numerical value given by 0.973

[e

(1.0166[1n(hardness)]-3.924)

]

more than once every three years on the average. For example, at hardnesses

of 50, 100, and 200 mg/L as CaCO3

the four-day average dissolved concentrations of cadmium are 0.15,

0.25 and 0.40 pg/L, respectively, and the 24-hour average dissolved concentrations are 1.0, 2.0, and 3.9

µg/L.

The procedures described in the "Guidelines for Deriving Numerical National Water Quality

Criteria for the Protection of Aquatic Organisms and Their Uses" indicate that, except possibly where a

locally important species is unusually sensitive, saltwater aquatic life should be protected if the four-day

average dissolved concentration of cadmium does not exceed 8.8 p.g/L more than once every three years on

the average and if the 24-hour average dissolved concentration does not exceed 40 ptg/L more than once

every three years on the average. However, the limited data suggest that the acute toxicity of cadmium is

salinity-dependent; therefore the 24-hour average concentration might be underprotective at low salinities

and overprotective at high salinities.

U.S. EPA believes that the use of dissolved cadmium will provide a more scientifically correct

basis upon which to establish water-column criteria for metals. The criteria were developed on this basis.

The use of dissolved criteria reduces the amount of conservatism that was present in earlier cadmium

criteria. It is recognized that a considerable proportion of dissolved cadmium in organic-rich waters may

be less toxic than freely dissolved cadmium. On the other hand, some particulate forms of cadmium might

34

---

contribute to cadmium loading of organisms, possibly through ingestion.

A return interval of three years continues to be the Agency's general recommendation. The

resilience of ecosystems and their ability to recover differ greatly, however, and site-specific criteria may

be established if adequate justification is provided.

The use of criteria in designing waste treatment facilities requires the selection of an appropriate

wasteload allocation model. Dynamic models are preferred for the application of these criteria. Limited

data or other factors may make their use impractical, in which case one should rely on a steady-state model.

The Agency recommends the interim use of 1Q5 or 1Q10 for Criterion Maximum Concentration (CMC)

design flow and 7Q5 or 7Q10 for the Criterion Continuous Concentration (CCC) design flow in steady-

state models for unstressed and stressed systems respectively. These matters are discussed in more detail in

the Technical Support Document for Water Quality-Based Toxics Control (U.S. EPA 1991).

35

---

0

O

O

O

g

'<>

00

to.

?

k 0 0 $O

?

1995 CMC

0> e

•

2001 CMC

o

104

O

o$

O

O$

o

O

10

O

4200

0

o

o* 8

°

o

*

r

O

t

°

O

0

.

<>

8O

O

O

0

1

-.2

O

Comparison of Freshwater Acute Values

10

6

with Hardness Slope Derived CMC

0.1

10

100

1000

Total Hardness (mg/L CaCO3)

Figure 1. Comparison of All Table 1 Freshwater Acute Toxicity Test EC5Os and LC5Os with the Hardness Slope Derived CMC.

(2001 CMC: solid line; 1995 CMC: dashed line)

---

Ranked Summary of Cadmium GMAVs

q

Freshwater

104 7

1

03

.0A00

00M

.0111

nq

°

nqnqn

EmoN■

105 -E.

DA

10

?

0 OD

so

.000000111•11130

10 —

Freshwater Final Acute Value* = 2.1 pg/L dissolved cadmium @ 50 mg/L total hardness

Criteria Maximum Concentration = 1.0 pg/L dissolved cadmium @ 50 mg/L total hardness.

0.1

?

0

0.2

? 0.4

? 0.6

%

Rank GMAVs

0.8?

1

q

Freshwater Invertebrates

■

Freshwater Fish

A

Freshwater Amphibians

* (lowered to protect rainbow trout)

Figure 2. Ranked Summary of Cadmium GMAVs (Freshwater

1

---

1.06

Ranked Summary of Cadmium GMAVs

Saltwater

105

10 -!

0 a

DEMO

•

C31101:1

qqq

°

q

°

13•01111

000

DO°

DO

qn

°

q

Saltwater Final Acute Value = 80.1 pg/L total cadmium

Criteria Maximum Concentration = 40 pg/L dissolved cadmium

10

0 0 0.2

1?

1

0.4 0.6 0.8

D

Saltwater Invertebrates

%

Rank of GMAVs

•

Saltwater Fish

1.0

Figure 3. Ranked Summary of Cadmium GMAVs (Saltwater).

10

3 7

102 -?

qqq

0.00

38.

---

e

o

e

O

70

102

a)

O

10

O

O

1995 CCC

O

--A--

0

I?

I?

I

O

2001 CCC

Comparison of Freshwater Chronic Values

with the Hardness Slope Derived CCC

10

100

1000

Total Hardness (mg/L CaCO3)

Figure 4. Comparison of All Table 2 Freshwater Chronic Values with the Hardness Slope Derived CCC.

(2001 CCC: solid line; 1995 CCC: dashed line)

---

0.01

0

•

■■

■

q

?

A •

Saltwater

•

Final Chronic

■ i•

Value = 8.8 pg/L dissolved cadmium

Freshwater Final Chronic Value = 0.15 pg/L dissolved cadmium @ 50 mg/L total hardness

102

—

?

Chronic Toxicity of Cadmium to Aquatic Animals

0 0?

0.2

?

0.4

?

0.6

?

0.8

?

1.0

1:1

Freshwater Invertebrate

% Rank Genus Mean Chronic Value

?

■ Freshwater Fish

A

Saltwater Invertebrate

Figure 5. Chronic Toxicity of Cadmium to Aquatic Animals.

---

■■

■

CMC=1.0 pg/L dissolved cadmium @ 50 mg/L total hardness

••••■

?

10

5

-E

75)

•

10

4

7.

O

t;

•

?0

3

77.

10

2

=

1-3

(2.)

10

1

?

■

Freshwater Plant Toxicity Values

■

■■

■

■

■■

■

■

■

■

■■

■■

?

■

■

■

CCC=0.15 pg/L dissolved cadmium @ 50

mg/I:total hardness

0.1

5?

10?

15?

20

?

25

?

30?

35

Freshwater Plant Test

Figure 6. Comparison of Freshwater Plant Toxicity Values (Table 4) and Freshwater CMC and CCC Values.

---

0

5

7-

0)

?

-

-7

1 0 4

0

7:1

103

0

10

0

Saltwater Plant Toxicity Values

■

■?

•

IS?

_

CII/IC=40 pg/L dissolved cadmium

0.)

UJ?

10 --,

...7

?

CCC=8.8 pg/L

dissolved cadmium

•_E=

?

I -.-,

E

IV

?

_

0

0.1

I?

I?

I?

1?

I

?

I

6?

8?

10? 12

Saltwater Plant Test

Figure 7. Comparison of Saltwater Plant Toxicity Values (Table 4) and Saltwater CMC and CCC Values.

U

---

Table la. Acute Toxicity of Cadmium to Freshwater Animals

Species Mean

Hardness

LC50 or EC50

Acute Value at

(mg/L as

LC50 or EC50?

LC50 or EC50

Adj. to TI-I=50

TH=50

Species

Chemical

CaCO3),_

(Total trg/L)b?(Diss. ug/L)

(Total .tg/L)

(Total µg/L)`'

Reference

FRESHWATER SPECIES

Planarian,

Dendrocoelwn

la•tewn

R, M, T

Cadmium

chloride

87

24,702? 23,220

. 14,067

14,067

Ham et al. 1995

Worm (adult),

Lumbri •ulus

variegatus

S, M, T

Cadmium

nitrate

290

(280-300)

780

130.6

130.6

Schubauer-Berigan et al.

1993

Tubificid worm,

Branchiura sowerbyi

S, M

Cadmium

sulfate

5.3

240

2 350

2,350

Chapman et al. 1982

Tubificid worm,

Limnodrilus

hoffineisteri

S, M

Cadmium

sulfate

5.3

170

1,665

Chapman et al. 1982

Tubificid worm

F, M, T

152

2,400

775.0

775.0

Williams et al. 1985

(30-40 mm)

Limnodrilus

hoffineisteri

Tubificid worm,

Quistadrilus

multisetosus

S, M

Cadmium

sulfate

5.3

320

3_,133

3,133

Chapman et al. 1982

Tubificid worm,

Rhvacodrilus

montana

S, M

Cadmium

sulfate

5.3

630

6

169

6,169

Chapman et al. 1982

Tubificid worm,

Spirosperma

,

ferox

S, M

Cadmium

sulfate

5.3

350

3 427

3,427

Chapman et al. 1982

Tubificid worm,

Spirosperma

nikolskyi

S,

M

Cadmium

sulfate

5.3

450

4 406

4,406

Chapman et al. 1982

Tubificid worm,

Stylodrilus

heringlianus

S, M

Cadmium

sulfate

5.3

550

5 386

5,386

Chapman et al. 1982

Tubificid worm,

Tubifex tubifex

S, M, T

Cadmium

chloride

128

(119-137)

3,200

1 231

Reynoldson et al. 1996

Tubificid worm,

Tubifex tubifex

S, M, T

Cadmium

chloride

128

(119-137)

1,700

,

653.8

Reynoldson et al. 1996

Tubificid worm,

Tubifex tubifex

,S, U

Cadmium

chloride

1,032

Fargasova 1994a

Tubificid worm,

S, M

Cadmium

5.3

320

33 133

1,361

Chapman et al. 1982

---

Table la. Acute Toxicity of Cadmium to Freshwater Animals (Continued)

Species Mean

Hardness

?

LC50 or EC50

?

Acute Value at

(mg/L as?

LC50 or EC50

?

LC50 or EC50?

Adj. to TH=50

?

TH=50

Species

?

Method'?

Chemical

?

CaCO,)

?

(Total ug/L)b?(Diss. tigiL)

?

(Total ug/L)?

(Total ug/L)b?Reference

FRESHWATER SPECIES

Tubificid worm,

Varichaeta pacifica

S, M

Cadmium

sulfate

5.3

380

_

3 ,721

3,721

Chapman et al. 1982

Leech,

Glossiponia

complanta

R, M, T

Cadmium

chloride

122.8

480

.192.5

192.5

Brown and Pascoe 1988

Snail,

Aplexa

hypnorum

F, M

Cadmium

chloride

45.3

93

102.8

Holcombe et al. 1984

Snail (adult),

Aplexa hypnorum

F, M, T

Cadmium

chloride

44.4

93

-

?

104.9

103.9

Phipps and Holcombe 1985

Snail (adult),

S, M

200

1,370

334.7"

Wier and Walter 1976

Physa gyrina

Snail (immature),

S, M

200

410

100.2

100.2

Wicr and Walter 1976

Physa gyrina

Mussel (juvenil),

S,M,T

82

46.4

28.06

Keller Unpublished

Actinonaia pectarasa

Mussel (juvenile),

S,M,T

84

69

40.72

33.80

Keller Unpublished

Actinonaia pectorosa

Mussel (juvenile),

S,M,T

40

38

47.68

47.68

Keller Unpublished

Lampsilis straminea

claibornensis

Mussel,

Lampsilis teres

S,M,T

40

11

13.80

Keller Unpublished

—

Mussel (juvenile),

S,M,T

40

33

-

?

41.40

23.90

Keller Unpublished

Lampsilis

teres

Mussel,

Utterbackia imbecilis

S, M, T

Cadmium

chloride

90

114.7

63.10

Keller Unpublished

Mussel,

Utterbackia

imbecilis

S, M, T

Cadmium

chloride

90

111.8

6131

Keller Unpublished

Mussel (juvenile),

Utterbackia imbecilis

S,M,T

Cadmium

chloride

92

81.9

44.06

Keller Unpublished

Mussel (juvenile),

S,M,T

Cadmium

86

93.0

53.59

Keller Unpublished

---

Table la. Acute Toxicity of Cadmium to Freshwater Animals (Continued)

Species Mean

Hardness

LC50 or EC50

Acute Value at

Species

Method°

Chemical

(mg/L as

CaCO3)_

LC50 or EC50?

LC50 or EC50

(Total ug/L)b?(Diss. ug/L)

Adj. to TH=50

(Total ug/L)

TH=50

(Total ug/L)`

Reference

FRESHWATER SPECIES

Mussel (juvenile),

Utterbackia imbecilis

S, M, T

Cadmium

chloride

39

9

11.59

Keller and Zam 1991

Mussel (juvenile),

Utterbackia imbecilis

S, M, T

Cadmium

chloride

90

107

58.87

42.92

Keller and Zam 1991

Mussel,

S, M, T

40

30

37.64

Keller Unpublished

Vilosa vibex

Mussel,

S, M, T

186

125

32.88

35.18

Keller Unpublished

Vilosa vibex

Cladoceran,

Alona affinis

S, U

Cadmium

nitrate

109

546

247.2

247.2

Ghosh et al. 1990

Cladoceran (<24 hr),

Ceriodaphnia dubia

S, U

Cadmium

chloride

90

(80-100)

54

29.71

Bitton et al. 1996

Cladoceran (<24 hr),

Ceriodaphnia dubia

R, M, T

Cadmium

chloride

80

(70-90)

54.5

33.80

-

Diamond et al. 1997

Cladoceran (<24 hr),

Ceriodaphnia dubia

S, U

Cadmium

chloride

90

(80-100)

55.9?

-

30.75

31.37

Lee et al. 1997

Cladoceran (<24 hr)

Ceriodaphnia

reticulata

5, U

Cadmium

chloride

240

184

37.35

Elnabarawy et al. 1986

Cladoceran (<6 hr)

Ceriodaphnia

reticulata

S, U

Cadmium

chloride

120

110

45.17

41.07

Hall et al. 1986

Cladoceran, '

Daphnia magna

S, U

Cadmium

chloride

<1.6b

Anderson 1948

Cladoceran,

Daphnia magna

S, U

Cadmium

chloride

45

65

.72.35

-

Biesinger and Christensen

1972

Cladoceran (<24 hr),

Daphnia magna

S, U

Cadmium

nitrate

27.07

Canton and Adema 1978

Cladoceran (<24 hr),

Daphnia magna

S, U

Cadmium

nitrate

28.36

Canton and Adema 1978

Cladoceran (<24 hr),

S, U

Cadmium

35.45

Canton and Adema 1978

---

Table la. Acute Toxicity of Cadmium to Freshwater Animals (Continued)

Species Mean

Hardness

LC50 or EC50

Acute Value at

(mg/L as

LC50 or EC50

?

LC50 or EC50

Adj. to TH=50

T1-1=50

Species

Methods

Chemical

CaCO3)._

(Total ug/L)b?fDiss.

ug/L)

(Total ug/L)

(Total ug/L)`

Reference

FRESHWATER SPECIES

Cladoceran (<24 hr),

Daphnia magna

R, M

Cadmium

Chloride

105

30

14.11

Canton and Slooff 1982

Cladoceran (<24 hr),

Daphnia magna

R, M

Cadmium

Chloride

209.2

30

7.002

Canton and Slooff 1982

Cladoceran,

Daphnia magna

S, U

Cadmium

chloride

120

20

8.213

Hall et al. 1986

Cladoceran,

Daphnia magna

S, U

Cadmium

chloride

120

40

16.43

-

Hall et al. 1986

Cladoceran (<24 hr),

Daphnia magna

S, U

Cadmium

chloride

240

178

36.13

Elnabarawy et al. 1986

Cladoceran,

Daphnia magna

S, M, T

Cadmium

chloride

170

(160-180)

3.6

(genotype A)

1.038

-

Baird ct al. 1991

Cladoceran,

Daphnia magna

S, M, T

Cadmium

chloride

170

(160-180)

9.0

(genotype A-I)

2.594

Baird et al. 1991

Cladoceran,

Daphnia magna

S, M, T

Cadmium

chloride

170

(160-180)

9.0

(genotype A-2)

2.594

Baird et al. 1991

Cladoceran,

Daphnia magna

S, M, T

Cadmium

chloride

170

(160-180)

4.5

(genotype B)

1.297

Baird et al. 1991

Cladoceran,

Daphnia magna

5, M, T

Cadmium

chloride

170

(160-180)

27.1

(genotype E)

7.810

Baird et al. 1991

Cladoceran,

Daphnia magna

S, M, T

Cadmium

chloride

170

(160-180)

115.9

(genotype S-1)

33.40

-

Baird et al. 1991

Cladoceran (<24 hr),

Daphnia magna

S, M, T

Cadmium

chloride

170

(160-180)

24.5

(Clone F)

7.061

Stuhlbacher et al. 1992

Cladoceran (<24 hi),

Daphnia magna

S, M, T

Cadmium

chloride

170

(160-180)

129.4

(Clone S-1)

•

?

37.29

Stuhlbacher et al. 1992

Cladoceran (3 d),

Daphnia magna

S, M, T

Cadmium

chloride

170

(160-180)

25.4

(Clone F)

7.3201

Stuhlbacher et al. 1993

Cladoceran (3 d),

Daphnia magna

S, M, T

Cadmium

chloride

170

(160-180)

228.8

(Clone S-1)

65.94`

Stuhlbacher et al. 1993

Cladoceran (6 d),

S, M, T

Cadmium

170

49.1

14.15'

-

Stuhlbacher et al. 1993

---

Table la. Acute Toxicity of Cadmium to Freshwater Animals (Continued)

Species Mean

Hardness

LC50 or EC50

Acute Value at

(mg/L as

LC50 or EC50

LC50 or EC50

Adj. to TH=50

TH=50

Species

Method

Chemical

CaCOL

(Total tig/L)b

(Diss. ug/L)

(Total ug/L)

(Total ug/L)`

Reference

FRESHWATER SPECIES

Cladoceran (6 d),

Daphnia magna

S, M, T

Cadmium

chloride

170

(160-180)

250.1

(Clone S-1)

72.081

Stuhlbacher et al. 1993

Cladoceran (10 d),

Daphnia magna

S, M, T

Cadmium

chloride

170

(160-180)

131.2

(Clone F)

37.811

Stuhlbacher et al. 1993

Cladoceran (10 d),

Daphnia magna

S, M, T

Cadmium

chloride

170

(160-180)

319.3

(Clone S-1)

92.021

-

Stuhlbacher et al. 1993

Cladoceran (20 d),

Daphnia magna

S, M, T

Cadmium

chloride

170

(160-180)

139.9

(Clone F)

40.321

Stuhlbacher et al. 1993

Cladoceran (20 d),

Daphnia magna

S, M, T

Cadmium

chloride .

170

(160-180)

326.3

(Clone S-1)

. 94.041

Stuhlbacher et al. 1993

Cladoceran (30 d),

Daphnia magna

S, M, T

Cadmium

chloride

170

(160-180)

146.7

(Clone F)

42.281

-

Stuhlbacher et al. 1993

Cladoceran (30 d),

Daphnia magna

S, M, T

Cadmium

chloride

170

(160-180)

355.3

(Clone S-1)

102.41

Stuhlbacher et al. 1993

Cladoceran,

Daphnia magna

S, U

Cadmium

chloride

360

Fargasova 1994a

Cladoceran,

Daphnia magna

S, U

Cadmium

sulfate

250

280

54.52

Crisinel et al. 1994

Cladoceran (<24 hr),

Daphnia magna

S, U

Cadmium

chloride

170

(160-180)

9.5

2.738

Guilhermino et al. 1996

Cladoceran,

Daphnia magna

S, M, T

Cadmium

sulfate

46.1

112

(clone S-1)

104

121.6

-

Barata et al. 1998

Cladoceran,

Daphnia magna

S, M, T

Cadmium

sulfate

90.7

106

(clone S-1)

91.4

57.86

Barata et al. 1998

Cladoceran,

Daphnia magna

S, M, T

Cadmium

sulfate

179

233

(clone S-1)

179

63.72

Barata et al. 1998

Cladoceran,

Daphnia magna

S, M, T

Cadmium

sulfate

46.1

30.1

(clone A)

27.8

32.69

Barata et al. 1998

Cladoceran,

Daphnia magna

S, M, T

Cadmium

sulfate

90.7.

23.4

(clone A)

20.2

12.77

Barata et al. 1998

Cladoceran,

S, M, T

Cadmium

179

23.6

18.1

6.454

Barata et al. 1998

---

Table la. Acute Toxicity of Cadmium to Freshwater Animals (Continued)

Species Mean

Hardness

LC50 or EC50

Acute Value at

(mg/L as

LC50 or EC50?

LC50 or EC50

Adj. to TH=50

TH=50

Sp

ecies

Method°

Chemical

CaCO3L

(Total ug/L)b?(Diss. ug/L)

(Total ug/L)

(Total !IRV'

Reference

FRESHWATER SPECIES

Cladoceran (<24 hr),

Daphnia magna

S, M, T

Cadmium

Chloride

51

9.9

9.703

Chapman et al. Manuscript

Cladoceran (<24 hr)

S, M, T

Cadmium

104

33

15.67

Chapman et al. Manuscript

Daphnia magna

Chloride

Cladoceran (<24 hr),

Daphnia magna

S, M, T

Cadmium

Chloride

105

34

15.99

Chapman et al. Manuscript

Cladoceran (<24 hr),

Daphnia magna

S, M, T

Cadmium

Chloride

197

63

15.63

Chapman et al. Manuscript

Cladoceran (<24 hr),

Daphnia magna

S, M, T

Cadmium

Chloride

209

49

.

?

11.45

Chapman et al. Manuscript

Cladoceran (<24 hr),

Daphnia magna

F, M, T

Cadmium

Chloride

130

58

21.96

13.41

Attar and Maly 1982

Cladoceran (<24 hr),

Daphnia pulex

S, U

Cadmium

nitrate

90.23

Canton and Adema 1978

Cladoceran,

Daphnia pulex

S, U

Cadmium

chloride

57

47

41.14

Bertram and Hart 1979

Cladoceran (<24 hr),

Daphnia pulex

S, U

Cadmium

chloride

240

319

64.75

Elnabarawy et al. 1986

Cladoceran (<24 hr),

Daphnia pulex

S, U

Cadmium

chloride

120

80

32.85

Hall et al. 1986

Cladoceran (<24 hr),

Daphnia pulex

S, U

Cadmium

chloride

120

100

41.07

Hall et al. 1986

Cladoceran (<24 hr),

Daphnia pulex

S, M, T

Cadmium

chloride

53.5

70.1

65.44

Stackhouse and Benson

1988

Cladoceran,

Daphnia pulex

S, U

Cadmium

chloride

85

(80-90)

66

38.48

Roux et al. 1993

Cladoceran,

Daphnia pulex

S, U

Cadmium

chloride

85

(80-90)

99

57.72

Roux et al. 1993

Cladoceran,

Daphnia pulex

S, U

Cadmium

chloride

85

(80-90)

70

40.82

46.36

Roux et al. 1993

Cladoceran,

S, U

Cadmium

82

71.25

43.09

43.09

Hatakeyama and Yasuno

---

Table la. Acute Toxicity of Cadmium to Freshwater Animals (Continued)

Species Mean

Hardness

LC50 or EC50

Acute Value at

(mg/L as

LC50 or EC50?

LC50 or EC50

Adj. to TH=50

TH=50

Species

Method'

Chemical

CaCO,L

(Total tig/L)

b?(Diss.

ug/L)

(Total itg/L)

(Total jig/L)°

Reference

FRESHWATER SPECIES

Cladoceran,

Simocephalus

serrulatus

S, M

Cadmium

chloride

11.1

7.0

32.33

Giesy et al. 1977

Cladoceran,

Simocephalus

serrulatus

S, M

Cadmium

chloride

43.5

(39-48)

24.5

28.23

30.21

Spehar and Carlson

1984a,b

Copepod,

Cyclops varicans

S, U

Cadmium

nitrate

109

493

223.2

223.2

Ghosh et al. 1990

Isopod,

Asellus bicrenata

Cadmium

chloride

220

2,129"

472.1

472.1

Bosnak and Morgan 1981

Isopod,

Lirceus alabamae

F, M

Cadmium

chloride

152

150'

48.44

48.44

Bosnak and Morgan 1981

Amphipod (4 mm),

Crangonyx

pseudogracilis

R, U

Cadmium

chloride

50

1,700

1 700

1,700

Martin and Holdich 1986

Amphipod,

Gammarus

pseudolimnaeus

S, M

Cadmium

chloride

43.5

(39-48)

68.3

78.69

78.69

Spehar and Carlson

1984a,b

Crayfish (1.8 g),

Orconectes immunis

F, M, T

Cadmium

chloride

44.4

>10,200

>11,509

>11,509

Phipps and Holcombe 1985

Crayfish,

Orconectes limosus

S, M

Cadmium

chloride

400

Boutet and Chaisemartin

1973

Crayfish,

Orconectes virilis

F, M, T

Cadmium

chloride

26

6,100

11,859

1.1,859

Mirenda 1986

Crayfish (juvenile),

Procambarus clarkii

S, M

Cadmium

chloride

30

1,040

1 748

1,748

Naqvi and Howell 1993

Mayfly,

Ephemerella grandis

F, M

Cadmium

chloride

28,000

Clubb et al. 1975

Mayfly,

Ephemerella grandis

S, U

Cadmium

sulfate

44

2,000

2 278

2,278

Warnick and Bell 1969

Stonefly,

Pteronarcella badia

F, M

Cadmium

chloride

1.8,000.

Clubb et al. 1975

Midge (4' instar),

R, M, T

Cadmium

124

140,000

55,607

Pascoe ct al. 1990

---

Table la. Acute Toxicity of Cadmium to Freshwater Animals (Continued)

Species Mean

Hardness

LC50 or EC50

Acute Value at

(mg/L as

LC50 or EC50?

LC50 or EC50

Adj. to TH-50

TH-50

Species

Method'

Chemical

CaCaa_

(Total tig/L)b?(Diss.

ug/L)

(Total ug/L)

(Total tig/L1`

Reference

FRESHWATER SPECIES

Midge (10-12 mm),

F, M, T

152

300,000

96,880

96,880

Williams et al. 1985

Chironomus riparius

Bryozoan,

Pectinatella

magnifica

S, U

205

(190-220)

700

166.8

166.8

Pardue and Wood 1980

Bryozoan,

Lophopodella carteri

S, U

205

(190-220)

150

35.74

35.74

Pardue and Wood 1980

Bryozoan,

Plumatella

emarginata

S, U

205

(190-220)

1,090

259.7

259.7

Pardue and Wood 1980

Coho salmon (I year),

Oncorhynchus kisutch

S, U

Cadmium

chloride

90

10.4

5.722

Lorz et al. 1978

Coho salmon

(juvenile),

S, U

Cadmium

chloride

41

3.4

4.160

Buhl and Hamilton 1991

Oncorhynchus kisutch

Coho salmon (adult),

Oncorhynchus kisutch

F, M

Cadmium

chloride

22

17.5d?

.

40.32'

Chapman 1975

Coho salmon (parr),

Oncorhynchus kisutch

F, M

Cadmium

chloride

22

2.7

6.221

6.221

Chapman 1975

Chinook salmon

(9-13 wk),

S, U

Cadmium

chloride

211

26

6.016

Hamilton and Buhl 1990

Oncorhynchus

tshawytscha

Chinook salmon

(18-21 wk),

S, U

Cadmium

chloride

343

57

8.048

Hamilton and Buhl 1990

Oncorhynchus

tshawytscha

Chinook salmon

(alevin),

F, M

Cadmium

chloride

23

>26d

>57.26"

Chapman 1975, 1978

Oncorhynchus

tshawytscha

Chinook salmon

(swim-up),

F, M

Cadmium

chloride

23

1.8

3.964

Chapman 1975, 1978

Oncorhynchus

Chinook salmon

F, M

Cadmium

23

3.5

7.707

Chapman 1975, 1978

---

Table 1a. Acute Toxicity of Cadmium to Freshwater Animals (Continued)

Species Mean

Hardness

LC50 or EC50

Acute Value at

(mg/L as

LC50 or EC50

?

LC50 or EC50

Adj. to TH=50

TH=50

Species

Method'

Chemical

CaCO3)_

(Total us/L)"?

(Diss. ug/L)

(Total ug/L)

(Total ug/L)`

Reference

FRESHWATER SPECIES

Chinook salmon

(smolt),

F, M

Cadmium

chloride

23

>2.9

>6.386

Chapman 1975, 1978

Oncorhynchus

tshawytscha

Chinook salmon

(juvenile),

F, M

Cadmium

chloride

25

1.41

2.853

Chapman 1982

Oncorhynchus

tshawytscha

Chinook salmon

(juvenile),

F, M

Cadmium

sulfate

21

(20-22)

1.1

2.657

4.305

Finlayson and Verrue 1982

Oncorhynchus.

tshawytscha

Rainbow trout,

S, U

6

Kumada et al. 1973

Oncorhynchus mykiss

Rainbow trout,

S, U

-

7

Kumada et al. 1973

Oncorhynchus mykiss

Rainbow trout,

Oncorhynchus mykiss

S, U

Cadmium

chloride

6.0

Kumada et al. 1980

Rainbow trout,

Oncorhynchus mykiss

S, M

Cadmium

chloride

43.5

(39-48)

2.3

2.650

Spehar and Carlson

1984a,b

Rainbow trout

(juvenile),

S, U

Cadmium

chloride

41

1.5

1.835

Buhl and Hamilton 1991

Oncorhynchus mykiss

Rainbow trout

(alevin),

F, M

Cadmium

chloride

23

>27d

>59.46d

Chapman 1975, 1978

Oncorhynchus mykiss

Rainbow trout

(swim-up),

F, M

Cadmium

chloride

23

1.3

2.863

Chapman 1975, 1978

Oncorhynchus mykiss

Rainbow trout (parr),

Oncorhynchus mykiss

F, M

Cadmium

chloride

23

1.0 '

2.202

Chapman 1978

Rainbow trout

F, M

Cadmium

23

4.1

9.029

Chapman 1975

(smolt),

chloride

>2.9

>6 386

-

Oncorhvnchus mykiss

Rainbow trout

(2

mo),

F, M

Cadmium

6.6

Hale 1977

---

Table

la.

Acute Toxicity

of Cadmium to Freshwater Animals (Continued)

Species Mean

Hardness

LC50 or EC50

Acute Value at

(mg/L as

LC50 or EC50?

LC50 or EC50

Adj. to TH=50

TH=50

Species

Method'

Chemical

CaCOL

(Total ug/L)°

?

(Digs. ug/L)

(Total ug/L)

(Total iig/L)'

Reference

FRESHWATER SPECIES

Rainbow trout,

Oncorhynchus mykiss

F, M

Cadmium

sulfate

31

1.75

2.845.

Davies 1976

Rainbow trout (8.8 g),

Oncorhynchus mykiss

F, M, T

Cadmium

chloride

44.4

3

3.385

Phipps and Holcombe 1985

Rainbow trout (fry),

Oncorhynchus mykiss

F, M, T

Cadmium

chloride

9.2

<0.5

<2.795

Cusimano et al. 1986

Rainbow trout

(263 mg),

F, M, T

Cadmium

chloride

30.7

0.71

(pH=7.5 @ 8°C)

1.166

Stratus Consulting 1999

Oncorhynchus mykiss

Rainbow trout

(659 mg),

F, M, T

Cadmium

chloride

29.3

.

?

0.47

(pH=7.5 @

8°C)

0.8092

Stratus Consulting 1999

Oncorhynchus mykiss

Rainbow trout

(1150 mg),

F, M, T

Cadmium

chloride

31.7

0.51

(pH=7.5 @

8°C)

0.8105

Stratus Consulting 1999

Oncorhynchus mykiss

Rainbow trout

(1130 mg),

F, M, T

Cadmium

chloride

30.2

0.38

(pH=7.5 @ 12°C)

0.6344

Stratus Consulting 1999

Oncorhynchus mykiss

Rainbow trout

(299 mg),

F, M, T

Cadmium

chloride

30.0

1.29

(pH=6.5 @ 8°C)

2.168

Stratus Consulting 1999

Oncorhynchus mykiss

Rainbow trout

(289 mg),

F, M, T

Cadmium

chloride

89.3

2.85

(pH=7.5 @ 8°C)

1.581

2.108

Stratus Consulting 1999

Oncorhynchus mykiss

Brown trout,

Salmo trutta

S, M

Cadmium

chloride

43.5

(39-48)

1.4

1.613

1.613

Spehar and Carlson

1984a,b

Brook trout,

Salvelinus fontinalis

F, M

Cadmium

chloride

47.4

5,080'

5,363'

Holcombe et al. 1983

Brook trout,

Salvelinus fontinalis

S, M

Cadmium

sulfate

42

<1.5

<1.791

<1.791

Carroll et al. 1979

Bull trout (76.1 mg),

Salvelinus confluentus

F, M, T

Cadmium

chloride

30.7

0.91

(pH=7.5

@ 8°C)

1.494

Stratus Consulting 1999

Bull

trout (200

mg),

F, M, T

Cadmium

29.3

0.99

1.705

Stratus Consulting 1999

---

Table la. Acute Toxicity of Cadmium to Freshwater Animals (Continued)

Species Mean

Hardness

LC50 or EC50

Acute Value at

(mg/L as

LC50 or EC50

?

LC50 or EC50

Adj. to TH=50

TH=50

Species

Method°

Chemical

CaCO3),_

(Total ug/L)"

?

(Diss. ug/L)

(Total ug/L)

(Total ug/L)°

Reference

FRESHWATER SPECIES

Bull trout (221 mg),

Salvelinus confluentus

F, M, T

Cadmium

chloride

31.7

1.00

(pH=7.5 @

8°C)

1.589

Stratus Consulting 1999

Bull trout (218 mg),

Salvelinus confluentus

F, M, T

Cadmium

chloride

30.2

0.90

(pH=7.5 @ 12°C)

1.503

Stratus Consulting 1999

Bull trout (84.2 mg),

Salvelinus confluentus

F, M, T

Cadmium

chloride

30.0

2.89

(pH=6.5 @ 8°C)

4.858

Stratus Consulting 1999

Bull trout (72.7 mg),

Salvelinus confluentus

F, M, T

Cadmium

chloride

89.3

6.06

(pH=7.5 @ 8°C)

3.361

2.152

Stratus Consulting 1999

Goldfish,

Carassius auratus

S, U

Cadmium

chloride

20

2,340

5,940

-

Pickering and Henderson

1966

Goldfish,

Carassius auratus

S, M

Cadmium

chloride

20

2,130

5,407

McCarty et al. 1978

Goldfish,

Carassius auratus

S, M

Cadmium

chloride

140

46,800

16,431

McCarty et al. 1978

Goldfish (8.8 g),

Carassius auratus

F, M, T

Cadmium

chloride

44.4

748

844.0

844.0

Phipps and Holcombe 1985

Common carp

(yolk absorbed),

R, U

Cadmium

chloride

140

Ramesha et al. 1997

Cyprinus carpio

Common carp (fry),

Cyprinus carpio

R U

Cadmium

chloride

2,840

Ramesha et al. 1997

Common carp

(advanced fry),

R, U

Cadmium

chloride

2,910

Ramesha et al. 1997

Cyprinus carpio

Common carp

(fingerling),

R, U

Cadmium

chloride

4,560

Ramesha et al. 1997

Cyprinus carpio

Common carp (fry),

Cyprinus carpio

S, U

Cadmium

nitrate

100

4,300

22.125

Suresh et al. 1993a

Common carp

(fingerling),

S, U

Cadmium

nitrate

100

17,100

,45288

4,238

Suresh et al. I993a

Cyprinus carpio

Red shiner

S, M, T

Cadmium

85.5

6,620

33 837

3,837

Carrier and Beitinger 1988a

---

Table la. Acute Toxicity of Cadmium to Freshwater Animals (Continued)

Species Mean

Hardness

LC50 or EC50

Acute Value at

(mg/L as

LC50 or EC50

LC50 or EC50

Adj. to TH=50

TH=50

Species

Method'

Chemical

CaCO 1_

(Total

ttg/L)b

(Diss. ug/L)

(Total iig/L)

(Total i.ig/L)`

Reference

FRESHWATER SPECIES

Fathead minnow,

Pimephales promelas

S, U

Cadmium

chloride

20

1,050d

2,665d

Pickering and Henderson

1966

Fathead minnow,

Pimephales promelas

S, U

Cadmium

chloride

20

630d

-

1,599d

Pickering and Henderson

1966

Fathead minnow,

Pimephales promelas

S, U

Cadmium

chloride

360

72,600d

9,758d

Pickering and Henderson

1966

Fathead minnow,

Pimephales promelas

S, U

Cadmium

chloride

360

73,500d

9,879d

Pickering and Henderson

1966

Fathead minnow,

Pimephales promelas

F, M

Cadmium

sulfate

201

11,200d

2,722d

Pickering and Gast 1972

Fathead minnow,

Pimephales promelas

F, M

Cadmium

sulfate

201-

12,000d

2,917d

Pickering and Gast 1972

Fathead minnow,

Pimephales

promelas

F, M

Cadmium

sulfate

201

6,400d

4,600d

1,556d

Pickering and Gast 1972

Fathead minnow,

Pimephales promelas

F, M

Cadmium

sulfate

201

2,000d

1A00d

486.2d

Pickering and Gast 1972

Fathead minnow,

Pimephales promelas

F, M

Cadmium

sulfate

201

4,500d

2,800d

1,094d

Pickering and Gast 1972

Fathead minnow (fry),

Pimephales promelas

S, M

Cadmium

chloride

40

21.5

26.97

Spehar 1982

Fathead minnow (fry),

Pimephales promelas

S, M

Cadmium

chloride

48

11.7

12.20

Spehar 1982

Fathead minnow (fry),

Pimephales promelas

S, M

Cadmium

chloride

39

19.3

-

24.85

Spehar 1982

Fathead minnow (fry),

Pimephales promelas

S, M

Cadmium

chloride

45

42.4

47.19

Spehar 1982

Fathead minnow (fry),

Pimephales promelas

S, M

Cadmium

chloride

47

54.2

57.72

Spehar 1982

Fathead minnow (fry),

Pimephales promelas

S, M

Cadmium

chloride

44

29.0

33.02

Spehar 1982

Fathead minnow

S, M

Cadmium

103

3,060d

1,468d

Birge et al. 1983

---

Table la. Acute Toxicity of Cadmium to Freshwater Animals (Continued)

Species Mean

Hardness

LC50 or EC50

Acute Value at

(mg/L as

LC50 or EC50

LC50 or EC50

Adj. to TH=50

?

'

TH=50

Species

Method'

Chemical

CaCO31_

(Total

Ag/L) b

(Diss. tig/1)

(Total ttg/L)

(Total i.ig/L)`

Reference

FRESHWATER SPECIES

Fathead minnow

(adult),

S, M

Cadmium

chloride

103

2,900"

1,391"

Birge et al. 1983

Pimephales promelas

Fathead minnow

(adult),

S, M

Cadmium

chloride

103

3,100d

1,487`

Birge et al. 1983

Pimephales promelas

Fathead minnow

S, M

Cadmium

262.5

7,160"

1,327"

Birge et al. 1983

(adult),

chloride

(254-271)

Pimephales promelas

Fathead minnow,

Pimephales promelas

S, M

Cadmium

chloride

43.5

(39-48)

1,280d

1,475"

Spehar and Carlson

1984a,b

Fathead minnow

(14-30 d),

S;U

Cadmium

chloride

120

>150h

>61.60"

Hall et al. 1986

Pimephales promelas

Fathead minnow

(0.8 - 2.0 g)

S, M, T

Cadmium

sulfate

85.5

3,580d

.?

2,075"

Carrier and Beitinger 1988a

Pimephales promelas

Fathead minnow

(<24 hr),

S, U

Cadmium

nitrate

60

210

174.5

Rifici et al. 1996

Pimephales promelas

Fathead minnow

( 1-2 d),

S, U

Cadmium

nitrate

60

180

149.5

Rifici et al. 1996

Pimephales promelas

Fathead minnow (<24

S, M, T

Cadmium

290

73 (pH=6-6.5)

12.22

Schubauer-Berigan et al.

hr),

Pimephales promelas

nitrate

(280-300)

60 (pH=7-7.5)

65 (pH=8-8.8)

10.05

1993

10.88

Fathead minnow

(juvenile),

S, M, T

Cadmium

chloride

141

3,420"

2,590

1,192"

Sherman et al. 1987

Pimephales promelas

Fathead minnow

(juvenile),

S,

M, T

Cadmium

chloride

141

3,510"

2,430

•

1,223d

Sherman et al. 1987

Pimephales promelas

Fathead minnow

(0.6 g),

Fathead minnow

F, M, T

F, M, T

Cadmium

chloride

Cadmium

44.4

44

1,500"

13.2

-

1,693"

15.03

29.21

Phipps and Holcombe 1985

Spehar and Fiandt 1986

---

Table la. Acute Toxicity of Cadmium to Freshwater Animals (Continued)

Species Mean

Hardness?

LC50 or EC50?

Acute Value at

(mg/L as

?

LC50 or EC50

?

LC50 or EC50?

Adj. to TH=50?

TH=50

Species

?

Chemical?

CaCOL?

(Total 1.tg/L)b?(Diss.

tig/L)

?

(Total ug/L)?

(Total pg/L)°?

Reference

FRESHWATER SPECIES

Colorado squawfish

?

S, U

?

Cadmium

?

199?

78?

.19.15

?

Buhl 1997

(larva),

?

chloride

Ptychocheilus lucius

Colorado squawfish?

S, U?

Cadmium

?

199?

108?

26.52?

22.54?

Buhl 1997

(juvenile),

?

chloride

Ptychocheilus lucius

Northern pike

F, M

Cadmium

25

1,092

2 209

Andros and Garton 1980

minnow (juvenile),

chloride

(20-30)

Ptychocheilus

oregonensis

Northern pike

F, M

Cadmium

25

1,104

2 234

2,221

Andros and Garton 1980

minnow (juvenile),

chloride

(20-30)

Ptychocheilus

oregonensis

Bonytail (larva),

Gila elegans

S, U

Cadmium

chloride

199

148

36.34

Buhl 1997

Bonytail (juvenile),

Gila elegans

S, U

Cadmium

chloride

I99

168

41.25

38.72

Buhl 1997

White sucker,

Catostomus

commersoni

F, M

Cadmium

chloride

18

1,110

.?

,

3_,136

3,136

Duncan and Klaverkamp

1983

Razorback sucker

(larva),

S, U

Cadmium

chloride

199

139

34.13

Buhl 1997

Xyrauchen texanus

Razorback sucker

(juvenile),

S, U

Cadmium

chloride

199

160

39.29

36.62

Buhl 1997

Xyrauchen texanus

Channel catfish

(7.4 g),

F, M, T

Cadmium

chloride

44.4

4,480

5

055

5,055

Phipps and Holcombe 1985

Ictalurus punctatus

Flagfish,

Jordanellafloridae

F, M

Cadmium

chloride

44

2,500

2 847

2,847

Spehar 1976a,b

Mosquitofish,

F, M

Cadmium

11.1

900

4

157

Giesy et al. 1977

---

Table la. Acute Toxicity of Cadmium to Freshwater Animals (Continued)

Species Mean

Hardness

LC50 or EC50

Acute Value at

(mg/L as

LC50 or EC50?

LC50 or EC50

Adj. to TH=50

TH=50

Species

Method°

Chemical

CaC0•)_

(Total ug/L)h?(Diss.

sg/L)

(Total

µg/L)

(Total ug/L)'

Reference

FRESHWATER SPECIES

Mosquitofish,

Gambusia affinis

F, M

Cadmium

chloride

11.1

2,200

10,161

6,499

Giesy et al. 1977

Guppy,

Poecilia reticulata

S, U

Cadmium

chloride

20

1,270

3 224

Pickering and Henderson

1966

Guppy (3-4 wk),

Poecilia reticulata

R, M, T

Cadmium

chloride

105

3,800

1

787

Canton and Slooff 1982

Guppy (3-4 wk),

Poecilia reticulata

R, M, T

Cadmium

chloride

209.2

11,100

2 591

2,462

Canton and Slooff 1982

Threespine

stickleback,

S, U

Cadmium

chloride

115

6,500

2,787

-

Pascoe and Cram 1977

Gasterosteus

aculeatus

Threespine

R, M

Cadmium

107

23,000

10,613

5,439

Pascoe and Mattey 1977

stickleback,

chloride

(103-111)

Gasterosteus

aculeatus

Striped bass (larva),

Morone saxatilis

S, U

Cadmium

chloride

34.5

1

1.458'

Hughes 1973

Striped bass

(fingerling),

S, U

Cadmium

chloride

34.5

2

2.917'

Hughes 1973

Morone saxatilis

Striped bass

(63 d),

S, U

Cadmium

chloride

40

4

5.019

Palawski et al. 1985

Morone saxatilis

Striped bass

(63 d),

S, U

Cadmium

chloride

285

10

1.704

2.925

Palawski et al.

1985

Marone saxatilis

Green sunfish,

Lepomis cyanellus

S, U

Cadmium

chloride

20

2,840

7,208

Pickering and Henderson

1966

Green sunfish,

Lepomis cyanellus

S, U

Cadmium

chloride

360

66,000

8,871

Pickering and Henderson

1966

Green sunfish

(juvenile),

Green sunfish,

S, M, T

F, M

Cadmium

sulfate

Cadmium

85.5

335

11,520

20,500

6,677

22 965

2,965

Carrier and Beitinger 1988b

Jude 1973

---

Table la. Acute Toxicity of Cadmium to Freshwater Animals (Continued)

Species Mean

Hardness

LC50 or EC50

Acute Value at

(mg/L as

LC50 or EC50

?

LC50 or EC50

Adj. to TH=50

TH=50

Species

Method'

Chemical

CaCOL

(Total 1.1g/L)"?

(Disc. ug/L)

(Total ug/L)

(Total ug/L)`

Reference

FRESHWATER SPECIES

Bluegill,

Lepomis macrochirus

S, U

Cadmium

chloride

20

1,940

4,924

Pickering and Henderson

1966

Bluegill,

Lepomis macrochirus

S, M, T

Cadmium

chloride

18

2,300

6,498

Bishop and McIntosh 1981

Bluegill,

Lepomis macrochirus

S, M, T

Cadmium

chloride

•

?

18

2,300

6,498

Bishop and McIntosh 1981

Bluegill,

Lepomis macrochirus

F, M

Cadmium

chloride

207

21,100

4 978

Eaton 1980

Bluegill (1.0 g),

Lepomis macrochirus

F, M, T

Cadmium

chloride

44.4

6,470

7,300

6,028

Phipps and Holcombe 1985

Tilapia

Oreochromis

mossambica

R, U

Cadmium

chloride

28.4

6,000d

10,663

10,663

Gaikwad 1989

African clawed frog,

Xenopus laevis

R, U

Cadmium

chloride

116

(112-120)

3,597

1 529

1,529

Sunderman et al. 1991

Salamander

(3 mo larva),

F, M, T

Cadmium

chloride

45

468.4

521.4

521.4

Nebeker et al. 1995

Ambystoma gracile

a S=static, R=renewal, F=flow-through, M=measured, U=unmeasured, T=total measured concentration, D=dissolved metal concentration measured.

b Results are expressed as cadmium, not as the chemical.

c Freshwater Species Mean Acute Values are calculated at a hardness of 50 mg/L using the pooled slope. SMAVs calculated using Lotus spreadsheet, values presented may be different than those

calculated with a hand held calculator due to rounding.

Note: Each SMAV was calculated from the associated underlined number(s) in the preceding column.

d Not used in calculations because data are available for a more sensitive life stage.

e Not used in calculations (see text).

f Not used in calculations because data are available for a more sensitive test condition.

g Average of values calculated using log-probit and Spearman-Karber statistical methods.

h "Greater than" and "less than" values were not used in calculations.

---

Species

Table lb. Acute Toxicity of Cadmium to Saltwater Animals

Species Mean

Salinity

?LC50 or EC50?

LC50 or

EC50'(Diss.?

Acute Value

Method°?

Chemical

?

(g/kg)

?

(Total ug/L)b?pg/L)

? (Total ug/L)

SALTWATER SPECIES

Reference

Polychaete worm (adult),

Neanthes arenaceodentata

S, U

Cadmium

chloride

12,000

Reish et al. 1976

Polychaete worm (juvenile),

Neanthes arenaceodentata

S, U

Cadmium

chloride

12,500

Reish et al. 1976

Polychaete worm,

Neanthes arenaceodentata

S, U

Cadmium

chloride

14,100

12,836

Reish and LeMay 1991

Polychaete worm,

Nereis grubei

S, U

Cadmium

chloride

4 700

4,700

Reish and LeMay 1991

Sand worm,

Nereis Wrens

S, U

Cadmium

chloride

11,000

Eisler 1971

Sand worm,

Nereis virens

S, U

Cadmium

chloride

9 300

10,114

Eisler and Hennekey 1977

Polychaete worm (adult),

Capitella capitata

S, U

Cadmium

chloride

7,500'

Reish et al. 1976

Polychaete worm,

Capitella capitata

S, U

Cadmium

chloride

2,800'

Reish and LeMay 1991

Polychaete worm (larva),

Capitella capitata

S, U

Cadmium

chloride

200

200

Reish et al. 1976

Polychaete worm,

Peclinaria californiensis

S, U

Cadmium

chloride

2 600

2,600

Reish and LeMay 1991

Oligochaete worm,

Limnodriloides verrucosus

R, U

Cadmium

sulfate

10,000

10,000

Chapman et al. 1982

Oligochaete worm,

Monopylephorus cuticulatus

R, U

Cadmium

sulfate

135,000

135,000

Chapman et al. 1982

Oligochaete worm,

Tubificoides gabriellae

R, U

Cadmium

sulfate

24,000

24,000

Chapman et al. 1982

Oyster drill,

Urosalpinx cinerea

S, U?

•

Cadmium

chloride

6 600

6,600

Eisler 1971

---

Table lb. Acute Toxicity of Cadmium to Saltwater Animals (Continued

LC50?

Species Mean

Salinity

? or EC50?

LC50 or EC50 Miss.

?

Acute Value (Total

Species

?

Method'

?

Chemical

?

(g/kg)?

(Total pg/L)b?ug/L)

?

jig/L)`

?

Reference

SALTWATER SPECIES

Mud snail,?

S, U?

Cadmium?

10.

500?

Eisler 1971

Nassarius obsoletus .?

chloride

Mud snail,

?

S, U?

Cadmium?

35,000

?

19,170?

Eisler and Hennekey 1977

Nassarius obsoletus

?

chloride

Blue mussel,?

S, U

?

Cadmium

?

25,000'?

Eisler 1971

Mytilus edulis?

chloride

Blue mussel,

?

S, M?

Cadmium

?

1,620'?

Ahsanullah 1976

Mytilus edulis

?

chloride

Blue mussel,

?

F, M?

Cadmium?

3,600'?

-

? Ahsanullah 1976

Mytilus edulis?

chloride

Blue mussel,?

F, M?

Cadmium?

4,300'?

Ahsanullah 1976

Mytilus edulis?

chloride

Blue mussel (embryo),?

S, U

?

Cadmium

?

1 200

?

Martin et al. 1981

Mytilus edulis

?

chloride

Blue Mussel (juvenile),

? R, U?

Cadmium?

2.5?

960

?

1,073?

Nelson et al. 1988

Mvtilus edulis?

chloride

Bay scallop (juvenile),

?

S, U

?

Cadmium?

1

480

?

1,480?

Nelson et al. 1976

Argopecten irradians

?

chloride

Pacific oyster (embryo),?

S, U?

Cadmium

?

611

Martin et al. 1981

Crassostrea gigas

?

chloride

Pacific oyster (larva),

?

S, U?

Cadmium?

85?

• 227.9

?

Watling 1982

Crassostrea gigas

?

chloride

Eastern oyster (larva),

?

S, U?

Cadmium

?

-

?

3 800

?

3,800

?

Calabrese et al. 1973

Crassostrea virginica

?

chloride

Soft-shell clam,

?

S, U?

Cadmium

?

2 200?

Eisler 1971

Mva arenaria

?

chloride

Soft-shell clam,?

S, U

?

Cadmium?

_,5002

?

Eisler and Hennekey 1977

Mva arenaria

?

chloride

Soft-shell clam,?

S, U?

Cadmium

?

850?

1,672?Eisler 1977

Mya arenaria

?

chloride

Squid (larva),?

S, M,

T •

Cadmium

?

30 -?

>10.200

?

>10,200?

Dinnel et al. 1989

Loligo opalescens?

chloride

Copepod,

?

S, U

?

Cadmium?

,708

1

?

1,708

?

Gentile 1982

---

Table lb. Acute Toxicity of Cadmium to Saltwater Animals (Continued)

LC50?

Species Mean

Salinity

?

or EC50

?

LC50 or EC50 (Diss.

?

Acute Value (Total

Species

?

Method'

?

Chemical

?

(g/kg)?

(Total ug/L)b?yg/L)?

ug/Lr

?

Reference

SALTWATER SPECIES

Copepod,

Eurytemora affinis

S, U

Cadmium

chloride

-

1,080'

-

Gentile 1982

Copepod (naupilus),

Eurytemora affinis

S, U

Cadmium

chloride

147.7

147.7

Sullivan et al. 1983

Copepod,

Acartia clausi

S, U

Cadmium

chloride

144

144

Gentile 1982

Copepod,

Acartia tonsa

S, U

Cadmium

chloride

90

?

-

Sosnowski and Gentile 1978

Copepod,

Acartia tonsa

S, U

Cadmium

chloride

122

Sosnowski and Gentile 1978

Copepod,

Acartia tonsa

S, U

Cadmium

chloride

220

Sosnowski and Gentile 1978

Copepod,

Acartia tonsa

S, U

Cadmium

chloride

337

-

Sosnowski and Gentile 1978

Copepod (adult),

Acartia tonsa

S, U

Cadmium

chloride

15

93

(18NC)

-

Toudal and Riisgard 1987

Copepod (adult),

Acartia tonsa

S, U

Cadmium

chloride

20

151 (13NC)

Toudal and Riisgard 1987

Copepod (adult),

Acartia tonsa

S, U

Cadmium

chloride

20

29 (21NC)

?

-

118.7

Toudal and Riisgard 1987

Copepod,

Amphiascus tenuiremis

5, M, T

Cadmium

nitrate

30.7

224

224

Green et al. 1993

Copepod,

Nitocra spinipes

S, U

Cadmium

chloride

1

800

Bengtsson 1978

Copepod,

Nitocra spinipes

F, U

Cadmium

chloride

3

430

Bengtsson and Bergstrom 1987

Copepod,

Nitocra spinipes

F, U

Cadmium

chloride

7

660

?

-

Bengtsson and Bergstrom 1987

Copepod,

Nitocra spinipes

F, U

Cadmium

chloride

15

780

794.5

Bengtsson and Bergstrom 1987

---

Table lb. Acute Toxicity of Cadmium to Saltwater Animals (Continued)

Salinity

LC50

or EC50

LC50 or EC50 (Diss.

Species Mean

Acute Value (Total

Species

Method'

Chemical

(g/kg)

(Total 1.1g/L)"

yg/L)

yg/L)c

Reference

SALTWATER SPECIES

Mysid (7 d),

Americamysis bahia

S, M, T, D

Cadmium

chloride

6

14.7

2.8

De Lisle and Roberts 1988

Mysid (7 d),

Americamysis bahia

S, M, T, D

Cadmium

chloride

14

38.0

3.6

De Lisle and Roberts 1988

Mysid (7 d),

Americamysis bahia

S, M, T, D

Cadmium

chloride

22

70.4

4.1

De Lisle and Roberts 1988

Mysid (7 d),

Americamysis bahia

S, M, T, D

Cadmium

chloride

30

77.3

2.9

De Lisle and Roberts 1988

Mysid (7 d),

Americamysis bahia

S, M, T, D

Cadmium

chloride

38

90.3

2.3

De Lisle and Roberts 1988

Mysid (<24 hr),

Americamysis bahia

S, M, T

10

30.9 (20NC)

<11.1 (30NC)

Voyer and Modica 1990

Mysid (<24 hr),

Americamysis bahia

S, M, T

30

82.0 (20NC)

32.8 (25NC)

-

Voyer and Modica 1990

<1 . 1.1 (30NC)

-

Mysid,

Americamysis bahia

F, M

Cadmium

chloride

10-17

15.5

Nimmo et al. 1977a

Mysid,

Americamysis bahia

F, M

Cadmium

chloride

30

110

41.29

Gentile et al. 1982; Lussier et al.

1985

Mysid,

Mysidopsis bigelowi

F, M

Cadmium

chloride

30

110

-

110

Gentile et al. 1982

losopd,

Jaeropsis

sp.

S, U

Cadmium

chloride

35

410.0

410.0

Hong and Reish 1987

Isopod,

Limnoria tripunctata

S, U

Cadmium

chloride

35

7

120

-

7,120

Hong and Reish 1987

Amphipod (adult),

Ampelisca abdita

F, M

Cadmium

chloride

2

900

2,900

Scott et al. Manuscript

Amphipod (adult),

Marinogammarus obtusatus

S, M

Cadmium

chloride

13,000'

Wright and Frain 1981

Amphipod (young),

Marinogammarus obtusatus

S, M

Cadmium

chloride

3

500

3,500

Wright and Frain 1981

---

Table lb. Acute Toxicity of Cadmium to Saltwater Animals (Continued)

LC50?

Species Mean

Salinity? or EC50?

LC50 or EC50 (Diss.

?

Acute Value (Total

Species

?

Method'?

Chemical?

(g/kg)? (Total ttg/L)b?tig/L)

?

pg/L)c

?Reference

SALTWATER SPECIES

Amphipod,?

S U

?

Cadmium?

35

?

630

?

630?

Hong and Reish 1987

Chelura terebrans

?

chloride

Amphipod, -?

S, U?

Cadmium?

35

?

1 270

?

-?

Hong and Reish 1987

Corophium insidiosum?

chloride

Amphipod (8-12 mm),? S, U

?

Cadmium?

680?

-

?

929.3?Reich 1993

Corophium insidiosum?

chloride

Amphipod (juvenile),

?

S, M, T

?

Cadmium?

20

(4NC)

49,400"?

Gossiaux et al. 1992

Diporeia

spp.

?

chloride?

20

(10NC)

17,500d?

-

20 (I5NC)?

6 700?

-?

6,700

Amphipod,?

S, U?

Cadmium

?

35

?

570?

Hong and Reish 1987

Elasmopus bampo

?

chloride

Amphipod (8-12 mm),?

S, U?

Cadmium

?

900?

716.2?Reish 1993

Elasmopus bampo?

chloride

Amphipod (3-5 mm),

?

R, M, T?

Cadmium?

30?

41,900?

Meador 1993

Eohaustorius estuarius

?

chloride

?

(held II d before

testing)

36,100

(held 17 d before

testing)

14,500?

27,992

(held 121 d before

testing)

Amphipod,

?

S, U?

Cadmium?

35

Grandidierella japonica?

chloride

Amphipod (500 pm),?

S, U?

Cadmium?

8

Leptocheirus plumulosus

?

chloride

Amphipod (700 pm),?

S, U?

Cadmium?8

Leptocheirus plumulosus

?

chloride

1 170

360

650

1,170

Hong and Reish 1987

McGee et al. 1998

McGee et al. 1998

Amphipod (1,000 pm),?

S, U?

Cadmium

?

8?

880

?

590.5?McGee et al. 1998

Leptocheirus plumulosus

?

chloride

Pink shrimp (subadult),

? F, M?

Cadmium

?

3,500'?

-

?

Nimmo et al. 1977b

Penaeus duorarum

?

chloride

Pink shrimp?

S, U?

cadmium?

25?

310.5?

310.5?

Cripe 1994

(2'd

post larva),?

chloride

Penaeus duorarum

---

Table lb. Acute Toxicity of Cadmium to Saltwater Animals (Continued)

LC50

?

Species Mean

Salinity

?

or EC50?

LC50 or EC50 (Diss.

?

Acute Value (Total

Species

?

Method'

?

Chemical

?

(g/kg)? (Total ug/L)b?j.tg/L)

?

ug/L)`?

Reference

SALTWATER SPECIES

Grass shrimp (adult),

?

S, U?

Cadmium

?

20?

1 830

?

Khan et al. 1988

Palaemonetes pugio

?

chloride?

(Big Sheepshead

Creek)

Grass shrimp (adult),

?

S, U

?

Cadmium?

20?

3

280

?

Khan et al. 1988

Palaemonetes pugio

?

chloride

?

(Pine Creek)

Grass shrimp (juvenile).

?

S, M, T

?

Cadmium?

10?

1 300

?

1,983?

Burton and Fisher 1990

Palaemonetes pugio

?

chloride

Grass shrimp,

?

S, U?

Cadmium

?

420?

Eisler 1971

Palaemonetes vulgaris

?

chloride

Grass shrimp,

?

F, M?

Cadmium

?

760

?

760.

?

Nimmo et al. 1977b

Palaemonetes vidgaris

?

chloride

Sand shrimp,

?

S, U?

Cadmium

?

320?

320?

Eisler 1971

Crangon septemspinosa

?

chloride

American Lobster (larva),

? S, U?

Cadmium

?

78

?

78

?

Johnson and Gentile 1979

Homarus americanus

?

chloride

Hermit crab,?

S, U?

Cadmium

?

320

?

Eisler 1971

Pagurus longicarpus

?

chloride

Hermit crab,

?

S, U?

Cadmium

?

1 300?

645.0?

Eisler and Hennekey 1977

Pagurus longicarpus?

chloride

Rock crab (zoea),

?

F, M?

Cadmium

?

250?

250?

Johns and Miller 1982

Cancer irroratus

?

chloride

Dungeness crab (zoea),

? S, U

?

Cadmium?

247

?

Martin et al. 1981

Cancer magister

?

chloride

Dungeness crab (zoea),

?

S, M, T?

Cadmium

?

30?

200?

222.3

?

Dinnel et al. 1989

Cancer magister

?

chloride

Blue crab (juvenile),

?

S, U?

Cadmium

?

35?

11,600?

Frank and Robertson 1979

Callinectes sapidus?

chloride

Blue crab (juvenile),

?

S, U?

Cadmium?

15?

4 700

?

-? Frank and Robertson 1979

Callinectes sapidus

?

chloride

Blue crab (juvenile),?

S, U?

Cadmium

?

1?

320?

2,594?

Frank and Robertson 1979

Callinectes sapidus

?

chloride

Green crab,

?

S, U

?

Cadmium

?

4 100?

•

?

4,100?

Eisler 1971

Carcinus maenas

?

chloride

---

Table lb. Acute Toxicity of Cadmium to Saltwater Animals (Continued)

LC50?

Species Mean

Salinity? or EC50?

LC50 or EC50 (Diss.

?

Acute Value (Total

Species?

Method'

?

Chemical

?

(g/kg)

? (Total ug/L)b?pg/T--.1

?

1.1g/L)'

?

Reference

SALTWATER SPECIES

Fiddler crab,

?

S, U?

Cadmium?

20?

46,600?

O'Hara 1973a

Uca pugilator

?

chloride

Fiddler crab,

?

S, U?

Cadmium

?

30? 37,000?

O'Hara 1973a

Uca pugilator?

chloride

Fiddler crab,?

S, U?

Cadmium?

10?

32,300?

O'Hara 1973a

Uca pugilator?

chloride

Fiddler crab,?

S, U?

Cadmium

?

23,300?

O'Hara 1973a

Uca pugilator

?

chloride

Fiddler crab,?

S, U?

Cadmium

?

10,400?

O'Hara 1973a

Uca pugilator?

chloride

Fiddler crab,

?

S, U?

Cadmium?

6 800?

21,238

?

O'Hara 1973a

Uca pugilator

?

chloride

Starfish,

?

S, U?

Cadmium?

820?

-?

-

?

Eisler 1971

Asterias jarbesi?

chloride

Starfish,?

S, U?

Cadmium

?

7 100?

2,413

?

Eisler and Hennekey 1977

Asierias forbesi

?

chloride

Green sea urchin (embryo),

?

S, M, T?

Cadmium

?

30?

1 800?

1,800?

Dinnel et al. 1989

Strongylocentrotus

?

chloride

droebachiensis

Purple sea urchin (embryo),?

S, M, T?

Cadmium

?

30

?

500

?

-

?

500?

Dinnel et al. 1989

Strongylocentrotus purpuratus?

chloride

Sand dollar (embryo),?

S, M, T

?

Cadmium

?

30? 7

400?

7,400?

Dinnel et al. 1989

Dendraster excentricus?

chloride

Coho salmon (smolt);

? F, M, T?

Cadmium?

28.3?

1 500

?

1,500?

Dinnel et al. 1989

Oncorhynchus kisutch?

chloride

Sheepshead minnow,

? S, U?

Cadmium

?

50,000

?

50,000

?

Eisler 1971

Cyprinodon vuriegatus

?

chloride

Mummichog (adult),

? S, U?

Cadmium?

49,000?

Eisler 1971

Fundulus heteroclitus

?

chloride

Mummichog (juvenile),

? S, U?

Cadmium?

20?

114,000

?

Voyer 1975

Fundulus heteroclitus

?

chloride

Mummichog (juvenile),? S, U

?

Cadmium

?

20?

92,000?

Voyer 1975

---

Table lb. Acute Toxicity of Cadmium to Saltwater Animals (Continued)

LC50

Species Mean

Salinity

or EC50

LC50 or EC50 (Dirs.

Acute Value

_(Total

Species

Method'

Chemical

(g/kg)

(Total µg/L)"

jtg/L)

pg/L)'

Reference

SALTWATER SPECIES

Mummichog (juvenile),

Fundulus heteroclitus

S, U

Cadmium

chloride

20

78,000

Voyer 1975

Mummichog (juvenile),

Fundulus heteroclitus

S, U

Cadmium

chloride

10

73,000

Voyer 1975

Mummichog (juvenile),

Fundulus heteroclitus

S, U

Cadmium

chloride

10

63,000

Voyer 1975

Mummichog (juvenile),

Fundulus heteroclitus

S, U

Cadmium

chloride

32

31,000

Voyer 1975

Mummichog (juvenile),

Fundulus heteroclitus

S, U

Cadmium

chloride

32

30,000

Voyer 1975

Mummichog (juvenile),

Fundulus heteroclitus

S, U

Cadmium

chloride

32

29,000

-

Voyer 1975

Mummichog (adult),

Fundulus heteroclitus

S, U

Cadmium

chloride

22,000

Eisler and Hennekey 1977

Mummichog (12-20 mm),

Fundulus heteroclitus

F, M, T

Cadmium

sulfate

14?

•

18,200

-

18,200

Lin and Dunson 1993

Striped killifish (adult),

Fundulus majalis

S, U

Cadmium

chloride

-

21,000

21,000

Eisler 1971

Rivulus (30 d juvenile)

Rivulus marmoratus

S, M, T

Cadmium

chloride

10

18,800'

Park et al. 1994

Rivulus (120 d adult),

Rivulus marmoratus

S, M, T

Cadmium

chloride

10

32,200'

Park et al. 1994

Rivulus (11-18 mm),

Rivulus marmoratus

F, M, T

Cadmium

sulfate

14

23,700'

Lin and Dunson 1993

Rivulus (11-18 mm),

Rivulus marmoratus

F, M, T

Cadmium

sulfate

14

18,500'

-

Lin and Dunson 1993

Rivulus (7 d larva),

Rivulus marmoratus

S, M, T

Cadmium

chloride

10

800

800

Park et al. 1994

Atlantic silverside (adult),

Menidia menidia

S, U

Cadmium

chloride

2,032'

Cardin 1982

Atlantic silverside (juvenile),

Menidia menidia

S, U

Cadmium

chloride

28,532'

Cardin 1982

Atlantic silverside (juvenile),

S, U

Cadmium

13,652'

Cardin 1982

---

Table lb. Acute Toxicity of Cadmium to Saltwater Animals (Continued)

Salinity

LC50

or EC50

LC50 or EC50 (Disc.

Species Mean

Acute Value (Total

Species

Method'

Chemical

(g/kg)

(Total ug/L)b

ug/L)

pg/L)'

Reference

SALTWATER SPECIES

Atlantic silverside (larva),

Menidia menidia

S, U

Cadmium

chloride

1,054

Cardin 1982

Atlantic silverside (larva),

Menidia menidia

S, U

Cadmium

chloride

577

779.8

Cardin 1982

Striped bass (63 d),

Morone saxatilis

S, U

Cadmium

chloride

1

75.0

75.0

Palawski et al. 1985

Cabezon (larva),

Scorpaenichthys marmoratus

S, M, T

Cadmium

chloride

27

>200

>200.0

Dinnel et al. 1989

Shiner perch

(87 mm adult),

F, M, T

Cadmium

chloride

30.1

11,000

11,000

Dinnel et al. 1989

Cymatogaster aggregata

Striped mullet

(50 mm juvenile),

S, U

Cadmium

chloride

37.3

28,000'

Hilmy et al. 1985

Mugil cephalus

Striped mullet

(10 mm fry),

S, U

Cadmium

chloride

37.3

7

079

7,079

Hilmy et al. 1985

Mugil cephalus

Winter flounder (larva),

Pseudopleuronectes

americanus

S, U

Cadmium

chloride

602'

Cardin 1982

Winter flounder (larva),

Pseudopleuronectes

americanus

S, U

Cadmium

chloride

14,297

14,297

Cardin 1982

a S=static, R=renewal, F=flow-through, M=measured, U=unmeasured, T=total measured concentration, D=dissolved metal concentration measured.

b Results are expressed as cadmium, not as the chemical.

c Not used in calculations because data are available for a more sensitive life stage.

d Not used in calculations because data are available for a more sensitive test condition.

e Not used in calculations because this lower value was obtained in artificial sea water.

---

Table lc. Results of Covariance Analysis of Freshwater Acute Toxicity Versus Hardness

Species

n

Slope

le Value

95% Confidence Limits

Degrees of Freedom

Limnodrilus hoffmeisteri

2

0.7888

cannot calculate

0

Tubilex tubilex

3

0.6238

0.929

-1.5619, 2.8095

1

Vaasa vibex

2

0.9286

cannot calculate

0

Daphnia magna

(all data)

28

0.1086

0.002

-0.7975, 1.0147

26

Daphnia magna

5

1.1824*

0.915

0.5195, 1.8454

3

(Chapman et al. Manuscript)

Daphnia pulex

8

1.0633*

0.792

0.5191, 1.6074

6

Chinook salmon

6

1.2576*

0.947

0.8461, 1.6691

4

Goldfish

4

1.4608

0.570

-2.3973, 5.3190

2

Fathead minnow (all data)

28

2.0305*

0.450

1.1247, 2.9362

26

Fathead minnow (adults only)

18

1.2209*

0.699

0.7962, 1.6456

16

Guppy

3

0.8752

0.949

-1.6995, 3.4499

I

Striped bass

4

0.8089

0.722

-0.7182, 2.3359

2

Green sunfish

4

0.8986