A comparison of in situ vs. ex situ filtration methods on the assessment of dissolved and particulate metals at hydrothermal vents

The objective of this study was to assess the impact of the filtration method (in situ vs. ex situ) on the dissolved/particulate partitioning of 12 elements in hydrothermal samples collected from the Lucky Strike vent field (Mid-Atlantic Ridge; MAR). To do so, dissolved ( <0.45 mu m) and particulate Mg, Li, Mn, U, V, As, Ba, Fe, Zn, Cd, Pb and Cu were measured using different techniques (HR-ICP-MS, ICP-AES and CCSA). Using in situ filtration as a baseline, we showed that ex situ filtration (on-board and on shore after freezing) resulted in an underestimation of the dissolved pool, which was counterbalanced by an overestimation of the particulate pool for almost all the elements studied. We also showed that on-board filtration was acceptable for the assessment of dissolved and particulate Mn, Mg, Li and U for which the measurement bias for the dissolved fraction did not exceed 3%. However, in situ filtration appeared necessary for the accurate assessment of the dissolved and particulate concentrations of V, As, Fe, Zn, Ba, Cd, Pb and Cu. In the case of Fe, on-board filtration underestimated the dissolved pool by up to 96%. Laboratory filtration (after freezing) resulted in a large bias in the dissolved and particulate concentrations, unambiguously discounting this filtration method for deep-sea chemical speciation studies. We discuss our results in light of the precipitation processes that can potentially affect the accuracy of ex situ filtration methods.

Integrated indicator framework and methodology for monitoring and assessment of hazardous substances and their effects in the marine environment

Many maritime countries in Europe have implemented marine environmental monitoring programmes which include the measurement of chemical contaminants and related biological effects. How best to integrate data obtained in these two types of monitoring into meaningful assessments has been the subject of recent efforts by the International Council for Exploration of the Sea (ICES) Expert Groups. Work within these groups has concentrated on defining a core set of chemical and biological endpoints that can be used across maritime areas, defining confounding factors, supporting parameters and protocols for measurement. The framework comprised markers for concentrations of, exposure to and effects from, contaminants. Most importantly, assessment criteria for biological effect measurements have been set and the framework suggests how these measurements can be used in an integrated manner alongside contaminant measurements in biota, sediments and potentially water. Output from this process resulted in OSPAR Commission (www.ospar.org) guidelines that were adopted in 2012 on a trial basis for a period of 3 years. The developed assessment framework can furthermore provide a suitable approach for the assessment of Good Environmental Status (GES) for Descriptor 8 of the European Union (EU) Marine Strategy Framework Directive (MSFD).