Background: Substantial efforts have been made to monitor potentially hazardous anthropogenic contaminants in surface waters while for plant secondary metabolites (PSMs) almost no data on occurrence in the water cycle are available. These metabolites enter river waters through various pathways such as leaching, surface run-off and rain sewers or input of litter from vegetation and might add to the biological activity of the chemical mixture. To reduce this data gap we conducted a LC-HRMS target screening in river waters from two different catchments for 150 plant metabolites which were selected from a larger database considering their expected abundance in the vegetation, their potential mobility, persistence and toxicity in the water cycle and commercial availability of standards.
Results: The screening revealed the presence of 12 out of 150 possibly toxic PSMs including coumarins (bergapten, scopoletin, fraxidin, esculetin and psoralen), a flavonoid (formononetin) and alkaloids (lycorine and narciclasine). The compounds narciclasine and lycorine were detected at concentrations up to 3 µg/L while esculetin and fraxidin occurred at concentrations above 1 µg/L. Nine compounds occurred at concentrations above 0.1 µg/L, the Threshold for Toxicological Concern (TTC) for non-genotoxic and non-endocrine disrupting chemicals in drinking water.
Conclusions: Our study provides an overview of potentially biologically active PSMs in surface waters and recommends their consideration in monitoring and risk assessment of water resources. This is currently hampered by a lack of effect data including toxicity to aquatic organisms, endocrine disruption and genotoxicity and demands for involvement of these compounds in biotesting.

Figure 1

Figure 2

Figure 3

Figure 4
This is a list of supplementary files associated with this preprint. Click to download.
Loading...
Posted 09 Sep, 2020
On 06 Sep, 2020
On 03 Sep, 2020
On 02 Sep, 2020
On 02 Sep, 2020
On 09 Aug, 2020
Received 05 Aug, 2020
Received 22 Jul, 2020
Received 21 Jul, 2020
On 13 Jul, 2020
On 10 Jul, 2020
On 07 Jul, 2020
On 06 Jul, 2020
Invitations sent on 06 Jul, 2020
On 05 Jul, 2020
On 21 Jun, 2020
On 16 Jun, 2020
Posted 09 Sep, 2020
On 06 Sep, 2020
On 03 Sep, 2020
On 02 Sep, 2020
On 02 Sep, 2020
On 09 Aug, 2020
Received 05 Aug, 2020
Received 22 Jul, 2020
Received 21 Jul, 2020
On 13 Jul, 2020
On 10 Jul, 2020
On 07 Jul, 2020
On 06 Jul, 2020
Invitations sent on 06 Jul, 2020
On 05 Jul, 2020
On 21 Jun, 2020
On 16 Jun, 2020
Background: Substantial efforts have been made to monitor potentially hazardous anthropogenic contaminants in surface waters while for plant secondary metabolites (PSMs) almost no data on occurrence in the water cycle are available. These metabolites enter river waters through various pathways such as leaching, surface run-off and rain sewers or input of litter from vegetation and might add to the biological activity of the chemical mixture. To reduce this data gap we conducted a LC-HRMS target screening in river waters from two different catchments for 150 plant metabolites which were selected from a larger database considering their expected abundance in the vegetation, their potential mobility, persistence and toxicity in the water cycle and commercial availability of standards.
Results: The screening revealed the presence of 12 out of 150 possibly toxic PSMs including coumarins (bergapten, scopoletin, fraxidin, esculetin and psoralen), a flavonoid (formononetin) and alkaloids (lycorine and narciclasine). The compounds narciclasine and lycorine were detected at concentrations up to 3 µg/L while esculetin and fraxidin occurred at concentrations above 1 µg/L. Nine compounds occurred at concentrations above 0.1 µg/L, the Threshold for Toxicological Concern (TTC) for non-genotoxic and non-endocrine disrupting chemicals in drinking water.
Conclusions: Our study provides an overview of potentially biologically active PSMs in surface waters and recommends their consideration in monitoring and risk assessment of water resources. This is currently hampered by a lack of effect data including toxicity to aquatic organisms, endocrine disruption and genotoxicity and demands for involvement of these compounds in biotesting.

Figure 1

Figure 2

Figure 3

Figure 4
This is a list of supplementary files associated with this preprint. Click to download.
Loading...