A systematic review and ecological risk assessment for organic ultraviolet filters in aquatic environments

Megan Carve; Dayanthi Nugegoda; Graeme Allinson; Jeff Shimeta

doi:10.1016/j.envpol.2020.115894

A systematic review and ecological risk assessment for organic ultraviolet filters in aquatic environments

Environ Pollut. 2021 Jan 1;268(Pt B):115894. doi: 10.1016/j.envpol.2020.115894. Epub 2020 Oct 17.

Authors

Megan Carve¹, Dayanthi Nugegoda², Graeme Allinson², Jeff Shimeta²

Affiliations

¹ Centre for Environmental Sustainability and Remediation (EnSuRe), School of Science, RMIT University, Melbourne, Victoria, 3000, Australia. Electronic address: megan.carve@rmit.edu.au.
² Centre for Environmental Sustainability and Remediation (EnSuRe), School of Science, RMIT University, Melbourne, Victoria, 3000, Australia.

PMID: 33120145
DOI: 10.1016/j.envpol.2020.115894

Abstract

Organic ultraviolet filters (OUVFs) are used in a wide range of manufactured products including personal care (e.g. sunscreens) and plastic items. This review summarizes the available data regarding the toxic effects of OUVFs on marine and freshwater organisms and generates the predicted no-effect concentration (PNEC) values necessary for assessing ecological risk. Through a systematic search of the literature, 89 studies were identified and ecotoxicological data extracted. Collectively, these studies described toxicity testing with 39 OUVF from 10 structural classes, with derivatives of benzophenones (49%) and camphors (16%) most studied. There was a bias towards selecting freshwater species (61%), and evaluating single OUVF effects (87%) rather than OUVF mixtures. Short-term (acute) experimentation (58%) was marginally more common than long-term (chronic) testing (42%). Reproductive, developmental, genetic, and neurological toxicity were the most commonly identified effects in aquatic organism, and were associated with molecular interactions with steroid receptors, DNA, or the production of reactive oxygen species. Species sensitivity distribution and/or assessment factors were used to calculate PNECs for 22 OUVFs and the risk quotients for 12 OUVFs. When using maximum concentrations, high risk was observed for six OUVFs in marine environments (4-methylbenzylidene-camphor, octocrylene, padimate-O, benzophenone-1, and oxybenzone, ethylhexyl-4-methoxycinnamate), and for four OUVFs in freshwater environments (ethylhexyl-4-methoxycinnamate, octocrylene, avobenzone and oxybenzone). When using median concentrations, a risk to marine environments was observed for oxybenzone. The results of this review underline that there is limited knowledge of the pathological effects of OUVFs and their metabolites in aquatic environments, and this inhibits the development of informed water-quality guidelines.

Keywords: Emerging pollutant; Predicted no effect concentration (PNEC); Taxonomic trends; Toxicity; UV filter; Ultraviolet light stabilizer.

Publication types

Systematic Review

MeSH terms

Aquatic Organisms
Fresh Water
Risk Assessment
Sunscreening Agents* / toxicity
Water Pollutants, Chemical* / analysis
Water Pollutants, Chemical* / toxicity

Substances

Sunscreening Agents
Water Pollutants, Chemical