Reagents and standards
The compounds selected for the study were 41 organic pollutants belonging to eight different classes: Pyrethroids, UVFs, UVSs, PCMs, biocides, APs, PAHs, and PCBs. The pyrethroids were: bifenthrine (BIF), cypermethrin (CYP), deltamethrin (DELT), and permethrin (PER) (purchased from Sigma-Aldrich (USA)). The 5 UVFs were: EHMC, octocrylene (OC), octyldimethyl p-amino benzoic acid (ODPABA), 4-methylbenzylidene camphor (4-MBC) (purchased from Sigma-Aldrich Merck Fluka), and 2-ethylhexylsalicylate (EHS) (purchased from ChemCruz). The UVSs were: 2-tert-butyl-6-(5-chloro-2H-benzotriazol-2-yl)-4-methylphenol (UV-326) and 2-(2-hydroxy-5-methylphenyl)benzotriazole (UV-P) (purchased from Sigma-Adrich, Merck, Fluka). The PCMs were: galaxolide (HHCB), celestolide (ADBI), cashmeran (DPMI), tonalide (AHTN) (purchased from Sigma-Adrich, Merck, Fluka), and tetramethyl acetyloctahydronaphthalene (OTNE) (obtained from Santa Cruz (USA)). The APs were: 4n-nonylphenol (4n-NP) (purchased from Sigma-Aldrich (St Quentin Fallavier, France)) and 4-tert-octylphenol (4-t-OP) (purchased from Cluzeau (Courbevoie, France)). The 2 biocides, irgarol (purchased from chemCruz) and methyl triclosan (MTCS) (purchased from Sigma-Aldrich). The 16 PAHs set as priority pollutants by the United States Environmental Protection Agency (United States Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), 2001) were: naphthalene (Naph), acenaphthylene (Acy), acenaphthene (Ace), fluorene (Flu), phenanthrene (Phe), anthracene (Ant), fluoranthene (Flt), pyrene (Pyr), benzo[a]anthracene (BaA), chrysene (Chr), benzo[b]fluoranthene (BbF), benzo[k]fluoranthene (BkF), benzo[a]pyrene (BaP), indeno[1,2,3-cd]pyrene (Ind), dibenz[a,h]anthracene (DahA), and benzo[g,h,i]perylene (BghiP). PAHs were obtained as a set of a mixed standard solution in cyclohexane at 10 ng/µL from Dr. Ehrenstorfer, GmbH. The PCBs were: PCB 52, PCB 101, PCB 153, PCB 138 and PCB 180. They were obtained as a set of a mixed solution in isooctane at 10 ng/µL from Sigma-Aldrich (St Quentin Fallavier, France). In addition, the following substances were used as surrogate standards: Acenaphthene-d10, Phenanthrene-d10, Chrysene-d12 (purchased from Supelco), 4-MBC-d4, and 4-n-NP-2,3,5,6-D4-OD (purchased from Cluzeau, Courbevoie, France). PCB 30, purchased from Dr. Ehrenstorfer, GmbH, was used as an internal standard. All the molecules were purchased at the analytical level (purity > 90%). Analytical grade heptane, ethanol, and methanol were supplied by Carlo Erba (Val de Reuil, France).
Standard solutions of individual compounds were prepared at a concentration of 1mg/mL. All standard solutions were stocked at -20°C. Working solutions were prepared by appropriate dilution of the stock solution in heptane.
Diatomaceous earth used as a dispersing agent and neutral alumina and copper used as sorbents for sample clean-up were all purchased from Sigma-Aldrich (St Louis, USA). Gloves were worn during all the sampling preparation to avoid contamination at low levels.
Study area and sampling
The Kadicha river in north Lebanon also known as “Abou Ali” is a small Mediterranean river affected by rapid urbanization and population growth. The river land use watershed is representative of modern anthropization in most of the Mediterranean rivers: mixing urban, discontinuous urban, and rural areas with agricultural, recreational activities and small industrial facilities. The residential wastewaters are discharged directly to the flood channel without prior treatment (Naja and Volesky, 2013). Besides, an open area dumpsite at the estuary of the river receiving urban solid waste releases approximately 24 000 metric tons of leachate per year in the estuary (or the lower part) of the river (Naja and Volesky, 2013). Recently, the downstream of this watershed have shown a population growth after the arrival of Syrian refugees (AEMS, 2017) which may lead to an increase in anthropogenic pressure.
The Kadicha river is characterized by a Mediterranean climate with a moderately warm and dry summer and autumn, and moderately cold, windy, and wet winters with almost 80–90% of total precipitation occurring between November and March (Massoud et al., 2006). The Kadicha river flows into the Mediterranean Sea, with a basin draining a total of 484 km2 (SOER, 2001). The river basin has a length of 44.5 km and an average annual discharge of 262 million m3 (SOER, 2001). The sampling sites are presented in Figure 1. The land use of the river basin mapped out using the QGIS software showed that the upstream of the river is dominated by agricultural surfaces with some discontinuous urban tissues while the downstream is mainly urbanized. The river's waters are mainly used for domestic supply, hydroelectric production, irrigation, and recreational activities. Groundwater is the main source of drinking water for residents within the basin.
Twelve sampling sites were selected to realize the possible compromise between representativeness of potentially polluted sites and operational feasibility. The selected sites are described in Table 1 in terms of geographic location and anthropogenic pressures. Three sites (Koussba (Ks), Bshennine (Bs), and Bkeftine (Bk)) were in the rural upstream area designated RU. Four sites (Meryata (Myt), Ardeh (Ar), Al Merdechyeh (Mr), and Zgharta (Zgh)) were in the discontinuous urbanized upstream area designated DUU. These 2 areas are influenced by agricultural activities with DUU area gathering a higher density of population than RU area (Table 1). Five sites were in the coastal plain occupied by the city of Tripoli: 3 sites (Abou Samra (T-Ab1 and T-Ab2) and Al Marjeh (T-Mj)) in the urbanized downstream area designated UD and 2 sites (EAA-1 and EAA-2) in the estuary designated EST. Tripoli is highly urbanized with a population estimated to 500000 inhabitants (UNEP, 2009). This population has increased after the Syrian crisis. According to UNHCR, the number of Syrian refugees in Tripoli registered as of 30 June 2016, including 7 percent of non-registered displaced Syrians living in informal settlements, reached 52350 (or 13644 families) (AEMS, 2017). The sewage of Tripoli city is discharged into surface water streams or directly through short sea outfalls without prior treatment (Naja and Volesky, 2013). The population density at each sampling site was estimated according to the site Population Data.net (https://www.populationdata.net/cartes/liban-densite-2004/).
Table 1
Characteristics and land use context of the 12 sampling sites RU Rural Upstream, DUU Discontinuous Urbanized Upstream, UD Urbanized Downstream, and EST Estuary.
Site
|
Code
|
Zone
GPS coordinates
|
Anthropogenic activities
|
Population density (inhabitants/Km2)
Urban pressure
|
Koussba
|
Ks
|
RU
34°18’22.72’’N 35˚51’50.09’’E
|
agricultural and recreational activities - no direct discharge
|
100 - 250
No pressure
|
Bshennine
|
Bs
|
RU
34°20’25,69’’N 35°51’18,24’’E
|
agricultural and farm activities - direct discharge of waste of a pig farm
|
100 - 250
No pressure
|
Bkeftine
|
Bk
|
RU
34°23’58.03’’N 35°52’20.57’’E
|
agricultural activities - open area dumpsite
|
250 - 500
No pressure
|
Meryata
|
Myt
|
DUU
34˚24'43.33''N 35˚55'46.31''E
|
agricultural activities - direct discharge of collected olive mill effluent and sewers
|
500 -1000
Low
|
Ardeh
|
Ar
|
DUU
34˚24'10.21''N 35˚54'32.56''E
|
direct discharge of collected sewers from villages upstream: Ardeh, HarfArdeh, Hewarah, and Echech
|
500 - 1000
Low
|
Al Merdechyeh
|
Mr
|
DUU
34˚24’2.8’’N 35˚54’3.28’’E
|
recreational activities - direct discharge from restaurants
|
500 - 1000
Low
|
Zgharta
|
Zgh
|
DUU
34°24’14.21’’N 35°53’14.23’’E
|
agricultural activities - direct discharge of residential wastewater
|
1000 - 2500
High
|
Tripoli Abou Samra
|
T-Ab2
|
UD
34°25’9.81’’N 35°51’21.25’’E
|
direct discharge of wastewater of the residents
|
1000 – 2500*
High
|
Tripoli Al Marjeh
|
T-Mj
|
UD
34°25’46’’N 35°50’55.17’’E
|
direct discharge of wastewater of the residents
|
1000 – 2500*
High
|
Estuary
|
EAA-1
|
EST
34°27’21.26’’N 35°50’29.6’’E
|
direct discharge of leachate generated by the open dump area
|
2500 - 5000
Very high
|
Estuary
|
EAA-2
|
EST
34°27’28’.67’’N 35°50’28.29’’E
|
direct discharge of leachate generated by the open dump area
|
2500 - 5000
Very high
|
Surface sediments (0-20 cm) were collected for 3 days in February 2017 (the mid of the wet season) and September 2017 (the end of the dry season) following the Aquaref methods (AQUAREF, 2016). Stainless steel cylindrical shovel, previously rinsed with dichloromethane and acetone was used to collect sediments placed in aluminum containers. Sediments were homogenized, air-dried, and sieved to collect the fraction below 2mm. Then sediments (< 2mm) were lyophilized and stored in a dark environment until analysis. Particle size distribution analysis was performed by a LA950V2 with 2 minutes of ultrasound to ensure complete separation of all particles. All data is provided by the LA950 software. Total Organic Carbon (TOC) was analyzed in sediments with a HighTOC II analyzer.
Sediment extraction
Extraction of analytes from sediment samples was achieved by pressurized liquid extraction (PLE) using an accelerated solvent extractor ASE 350 unit from Dionex equipped with 22 mL stainless-steel cells. A mass of 2 g of sediments previously homogenized with 1.5 g of diatomaceous earth was extracted. Purification of the extracts was performed simultaneously to the extraction (in-cell clean-up) by placing sorbents inside the cell (activated alumina and copper) according to the procedures reported by Pintado-Herrera et al., (2016). Surrogates acenaphthene d10, phenanthrene d10, chrysene d12, 4-MBC d4, and 4n-NP-2,3,5,6-d4,OD were spiked at 50 ng/g to sediment samples 24 h before extraction to account for losses during the extraction procedure. A mixture of 1:1 acetone and heptane was selected as the extraction solvent, using four static extraction cycles of 6 minutes each (purge time = 300 s, flush volume = 60%), 125°C, and 1500 psi. These parameters are reported by US EPA (US EPA, 2007). PLE extracts (80 mL) were evaporated to dryness using a Multivap (Büchi, Switzerland) and redissolved in 1 mL of heptane which was filtered through PTFE centrifuge filters (0.22 µm pore size). The internal standard PCB 30 was added at 50 ng/mL to correct possible fluctuations during GC-MS/MS analysis.
GC-MS/MS analysis
The separation, identification, and quantification of the 41 molecules were performed using gas chromatography coupled to triple quadrupole mass spectrometry. Capillary gas chromatography analysis was carried out on a Macherey-Nagel column (30 m × 0.25 mm i.d. × 0.25 m film thickness), keeping the carrier gas flow (helium) at 1.7 mL.min-1, and the transfer line and the temperature of the source at 300 and 250 ° C respectively. The column temperature ramp was as follows: 78 °C for 0.1 min, increased at 13°C/min to 140 ° C, then at 8°C/min to 180°C then increased at 5˚C/min to 220˚C and then at 3˚C/min to 300˚C held for 10 minutes. Injection volume was 2 µL in splitless mode and the solvent delay was set to 5 minutes. The mass detector was operated in multiple reaction monitoring (MRM) mode using electron ionization (EI) source set at 70 eV and argon as collision gas (1.5 bar). MS/MS parameters were optimized by injecting standard solutions, using full scan mode (m/ z 50–650) on a first step to select precursor ions (Q1) that were later fragmented into product ions (Q3) testing different collision energies (CE) (from 10 to 30 eV). All the data were processed using the Xcalibur software. The noise type selected was the root mean square (RMS). The parameters of the multiresidue method are shown in Table 2.
Table 2
Molecules, precursor, quantification and confirmation ions, the collision energy (CE), and retention times. 2 isomers of the compounds CYP, DELT, and PER.
Class
|
Molecule
|
Retention time (min)
|
Precursor ion (m/z)
|
CE (ev)
|
Quantification ion (m/z)
|
CE (ev)
|
Confirmation ion (m/z)
|
UV Filters
|
EHMC
|
21.93
|
178
|
15
|
177
|
15
|
161
|
EHS
|
13.17
|
120
|
15
|
92
|
15
|
63
|
OC
|
28.75
|
248
|
25
|
165
|
25
|
220
|
ODPABA
|
21.00
|
165
|
15
|
164
|
15
|
118
|
4-MBC
|
17.43
|
254
|
10
|
239
|
10
|
211
|
UV stabilizers
|
UV-P
|
17.66
|
225
|
20
|
168
|
20
|
196
|
UV-326
|
26.59
|
300
|
15
|
119
|
15
|
191
|
PCMs
|
HHCB
|
13.84
|
243
|
15
|
213
|
15
|
171
|
ADBI
|
11.74
|
229
|
15
|
173
|
15
|
131
|
OTNE
|
11.13
|
191
|
15
|
121
|
15
|
93
|
AHTN
|
13.97
|
243
|
15
|
159
|
15
|
187
|
DPMI
|
11.13
|
191
|
15
|
135
|
15
|
107
|
Pyrethroids
|
BIF
|
24.87
|
181
|
10
|
166
|
10
|
165
|
|
|
CYP
|
32.26 ; 32.73
|
163
|
10
|
91
|
10
|
127
|
|
Delt
|
36.60 ; 37.19
|
253
|
10
|
174
|
10
|
172
|
|
PER
|
29.71 ; 30.09
|
183
|
15
|
168
|
15
|
153
|
Biocides
|
Irgarol
|
17.52
|
253
|
15
|
196
|
15
|
182
|
MTCS
|
18.43
|
302
|
20
|
252
|
20
|
217
|
Alkylphenols
|
4n-NP
|
14.26
|
107
|
25
|
77
|
25
|
95
|
4-t-OP
|
10.22
|
135
|
15
|
107
|
15
|
77
|
PAHs
|
Naph
|
5.15
|
128
|
20
|
102
|
20
|
126
|
Acy
|
8.43
|
152
|
28
|
150
|
28
|
126
|
Ace
|
8.86
|
153
|
25
|
152
|
25
|
151
|
Flu
|
10.21
|
165
|
30
|
163
|
30
|
164
|
Phe
|
13.15
|
178
|
30
|
176
|
30
|
152
|
Ant
|
13.35
|
178
|
30
|
176
|
30
|
152
|
Flt
|
17.71
|
202
|
30
|
200
|
30
|
201
|
Pyr
|
18.63
|
202
|
35
|
200
|
35
|
201
|
BaA
|
24.94
|
228
|
30
|
201
|
30
|
200
|
Chr
|
25.17
|
228
|
30
|
226
|
25
|
202
|
BbF
|
31.49
|
252
|
55
|
224
|
55
|
250
|
BkF
|
31.66
|
252
|
55
|
224
|
55
|
250
|
BaP
|
33.40
|
252
|
35
|
250
|
35
|
224
|
Ind
|
39.79
|
276
|
45
|
274
|
45
|
272
|
BghiP
|
41.08
|
276
|
40
|
274
|
40
|
272
|
DahA
|
40.04
|
278
|
40
|
276
|
40
|
250
|
PCBs
|
PCB52
|
15.53
|
292
|
20
|
222
|
20
|
257
|
PCB101
|
18.38
|
326
|
20
|
256
|
20
|
291
|
PCB153
|
21.59
|
360
|
22
|
290
|
22
|
325
|
PCB138
|
22.69
|
360
|
20
|
290
|
20
|
325
|
PCB180
|
25.69
|
394
|
22
|
324
|
22
|
359
|
Quality assurance/quality control
Quality assurance/quality control procedures were applied to ensure that results are reliable. Method blanks (solvent) were extracted and analyzed as a control in the same way as the samples and no target compounds were detected in the blanks. A standard solution of target compounds was analyzed at the beginning and after each sample sequence to monitor the instrumental and potential contamination during GC-MS/MS detection.
Calibration curves were constructed in heptane for each compound in the range of 0-1000 ng/mL for PAHs and 0-100 ng/mL for the other compounds. Instrumental limits of detection (iLOD) and quantification (iLOQ) for each target compound were calculated based on the signal to noise ratio of 3 (iLOD) and a signal-to-noise ratio of 10 (iLOQs) near the target peak by using calibration curve solutions in the range of 0-50 ng/mL. The method limits of detection (MDL) were estimated by multiplying the iLOD by the volume of the final extract of sediment (1mL) and then dividing it by the mass of extracted sediments (2 g). The method limits of quantification (MQL) were estimated by multiplying the MDLs with a factor of 10/3. These parameters are reported in Table 3.
The repeatability of the analysis method was studied by calculating the coefficients of variation obtained for 5 simultaneous extractions of the same sediment in identical conditions. The coefficients of variation for all the molecules were below 25% except for the (ADBI) (27%). The recoveries of acenaphthene d10, phenanthrene d10, chrysene d12, 4-MBC d4 and 4n-NP-2,3,5,6-D4-OD were 126, 118, 115, 116 and 114 % respectively.
The calculation of the matrix effects is essential to quantify molecules at trace levels in the environmental matrix. The matrix effects of the analytical method were evaluated using solvent and matrix-matched calibration curves. The matrix effects were negligible (between -20 and 20%) for 11 compounds. However, the other molecules presented a high matrix effect (between -100 and 191%). Due to these high matrix effects, the quantification of all analytes was done with matrix-matched calibration curves using five orders of magnitude (2.5, 12.5, 25, 50, and 100 ng/g and up to 1000 for PAHs).
Table 3
Instrumental (pg) and method (ng/g dry weight) limits of detection and quantification of the target compounds.
Class
|
Molecule
|
iLOD (pg)
|
iLOQ (pg)
|
MDL(ng/g)
|
MQL(ng/g)
|
UV filters
|
EHMC
|
5.09
|
16.97
|
1.27
|
4.24
|
EHS
|
6.01
|
20.03
|
1.50
|
5.01
|
OC
|
7.94
|
26.47
|
1.99
|
6.62
|
ODPABA
|
4.74
|
15.80
|
1.19
|
3.95
|
4-MBC
|
1.15
|
3.83
|
0.29
|
0.96
|
UV stabilizers
|
UV-P
|
1.89
|
6.30
|
0.47
|
1.58
|
UV-326
|
2.95
|
9.83
|
0.74
|
2.46
|
Polycyclic musks
|
HHCB
|
2.00
|
6.67
|
0.50
|
1.67
|
ADBI
|
3.80
|
12.67
|
0.95
|
3.17
|
OTNE
|
10.65
|
35.50
|
2.66
|
8.88
|
AHTN
|
2.97
|
9.90
|
0.74
|
2.48
|
DPMI
|
9.35
|
31.17
|
2.34
|
7.79
|
Pyrethroids
|
BIF
|
2.00
|
6.67
|
0.50
|
1.67
|
CYP
|
10.00
|
33.33
|
2.50
|
8.33
|
DELT
|
6.24
|
20.80
|
1.56
|
5.20
|
PER
|
32.23
|
107.43
|
8.06
|
26.86
|
Biocides
|
Irgarol
|
0.20
|
0.67
|
0.05
|
0.17
|
MTCS
|
2.00
|
6.67
|
0.50
|
1.67
|
APs
|
4n-NP
|
6.20
|
20.67
|
1.55
|
5.17
|
4-t-OP
|
1.50
|
5.00
|
0.38
|
1.25
|
PAHs
|
Naph
|
0.84
|
2.80
|
0.21
|
0.70
|
Acy
|
1.51
|
5.03
|
0.38
|
1.26
|
Ace
|
0.43
|
1.43
|
0.11
|
0.36
|
Flu
|
1.21
|
4.03
|
0.30
|
1.01
|
Phe
|
2.00
|
6.67
|
0.50
|
1.67
|
Ant
|
2.17
|
7.23
|
0.54
|
1.81
|
Flt
|
1.53
|
5.10
|
0.38
|
1.28
|
Pyr
|
2.00
|
6.67
|
0.50
|
1.67
|
BaA
|
4.14
|
13.80
|
1.04
|
3.45
|
Chr
|
2.64
|
8.80
|
0.66
|
2.20
|
BbF
|
1.96
|
6.53
|
0.49
|
1.63
|
BkF
|
1.41
|
4.70
|
0.35
|
1.18
|
BaP
|
3.13
|
10.43
|
0.78
|
2.61
|
Ind
|
2.00
|
6.67
|
0.50
|
1.67
|
DahA
|
2.16
|
7.20
|
0.54
|
1.80
|
BghiP
|
4.00
|
13.33
|
1.00
|
3.33
|
PCBs
|
PCB 52
|
0.88
|
2.93
|
0.22
|
0.73
|
PCB 101
|
0.80
|
2.67
|
0.20
|
0.67
|
PCB 153
|
0.54
|
1.80
|
0.14
|
0.45
|
PCB 138
|
0.87
|
2.90
|
0.22
|
0.73
|
PCB 180
|
0.40
|
1.33
|
0.10
|
0.33
|
Data treatment, statistics, and risk assessment
Each sediment was extracted into two replicates then injected twice. Concentration values lower than MDL were treated as zero and concentrations values lower than MQL were replaced with the intermediate value between MDL and MQL.
All statistical analyses were performed with the software package SPSS (Statistical Package for Social Sciences) version 22.0. To assemble sites into homogeneous groups (DUU, RU, UD, and EST) based on the obtained concentrations of each class of contaminants, one-way analysis of variance ANOVA followed by a Tuckey’s HSD and fishers LSD multiple comparison test (MCT) were conducted. To test for significant levels of differences between one sampling group of sites to another, one way ANOVA test was performed. Independent samples T-test was conducted to investigate differences between the two months' surveys (February and September). Differences were considered significant at p-value < 0.05. Pearson correlation test was performed to evaluate the correlation between concentrations of each contaminant and total organic carbon (TOC) and fine particle size. Correlations between contaminants concentrations and TOC content in sediments were investigated to reveal if both legacy and emerging contaminants tend to accumulate in sediments of higher TOC content due to their lipophilic properties. Moreover, the Pearson correlation test was performed to evaluate the correlation between contaminant concentrations and population density for all the studied sites, to select molecules as markers of urbanization activities. The population density reported in Table 1 was used for Pearson correlation tests. Correlations were considered significant at p-value < 0.05.
For identifying PAHs sources in the environment different ratio plots such as anthracene and phenanthrene (Ant/Ant + Phe), fluoranthene and pyrene (Flt/Flt + Pyr), and indeno[1,2,3-cd]pyrene and benzo[g,h,i]perylene (Ind/Ind + BghiP) (Yunker et al., 2002) were calculated when these molecules were found. The ratio of HHCB/AHTN as proposed by Zeng et al., (2008) was calculated as an indicator of differences in application and use in specific regions and as a tracer of their degradation and transformation during transport in aquatic systems.
The evaluation of the potential risk was performed based on the hazard quotients (HQ). HQ were calculated for measured compounds with available ecotoxicological data, according to the United States Environmental Protection Agency (USEPA) by dividing the measured environmental concentration (MEC) obtained from this study for each sampling site by the predicted no effect concentration (PNEC) obtained from the literature. The references of PNEC values used for this manuscript are those reported by Pintado-Herrera et al., (2017a). The interpretation of the hazard quotients was followed as recommended by Wentsel et al., (1996): HQ < 1 indicates that the compound has no ecological risk; 1≤ HQ <10 indicates small potential risk; 10≤ HQ <100 indicates significant potential adverse effects and HQ ≥ 100 indicates adverse effects. The total HQ of emerging compounds (ΣHQ), was calculated by adding HQ of every emerging contaminant for every sampling site. Similarly, total HQ of legacy contaminants (ΣHQ) was calculated by summing up HQ of PCBs, PAHs with low molecular weight (LPAHs), and PAHs with high molecular weight (HPAHs) for every sampling site. This additive model is used to evaluate the ecotoxicological risk posed by each group of the studied contaminants in each of the four sampling areas (RU, DUU, UD, and EST areas). However, this method does not take into consideration unpredictable synergism or antagonism effects of compounds (Cristale et al., 2013).