摘要
Global regulations and many regional and national controls restrict the use of substances that exhibit the potential for environmental persistence and long-range transport.Nevertheless,many current-use pesticides(CUPs)continue to be newly discovered in remote regions,including the Arctic.The present review serves as an update,summarizing newly available information for CUPs in the Arctic environment and biota published from 2010 to 2018.Since 2010,at least seven new CUPs have been measured in Arctic media:2-methyl-4-chlorophenoxyacetic acid(MCPA),metribuzin,pendimethalin,phosalone,quizalofop-ethyl,tefluthrin and triallate.Considering the large number of pesticides in current use,the number measured in the Arctic is very limited,however,modelling studies have identified additional CUPs as potential Arctic contaminants that have yet to be investigated in the Arctic.Owing to their recent detection,reports of CUPs in the Arctic are limited,but growing.CUPs have been reported in a wide range of abiotic Arctic matrices,including air,snow,ice,freshwater and seawater,indicating their capacity for long-range atmospheric transport,however,concentrations are generally low in comparison to legacy pesticides and other persistent organic pollutants(POPs).Recent food-web studies indicate CUPs can enter Arctic terrestrial and marine food chains,however,in contrast to POPs,the highest concentrations of many CUPs were found in lower trophic-level organisms,and the lowest concentrations detected in animals at the highest trophic levels(i.e,ringed seals,polar bear,caribou,and wolves)indicating significant trophic dilution.The detection of CUPs in the remote Arctic ecosystem reinforces the need for continued monitoring of both known and potential Arctic pollutants to prevent impacts on human and environmental health as the global arsenal of pesticides used in agriculture continuously changes.
基金
We thank the Arctic Monitoring and Assessment Programme(AMAP)and the national programs in circumpolar countries for their funding and support of this work.We are especially grateful to Simon Wilson,Cynthia de Wit,and the numerous reviewers that were a part of this process.We are thankful to the northern communities in circumpolar regions for their cooperation and collection of biological samples that yielded much of the data reviewed here.We also thank Canada's Northern Contaminants Program(NCP)for providing air data from the station of Alert.The Danish contribution to the AMAP assessment report(Katrin Vorkamp and Frank Riget)was supported by the Danish Environmental Protection Agency,under the Cooperation for Environment in the Arctic(DANCEA),grants no.MST-112-191 and MST-113-00082.
