Environ Monit Assess (2007) 128:329-341 DO1 10.1007/~10661-006-93I64 ORIGINAL ARTICLE - Radionuclide Concentrations in Benthic Invertebrates from Amchitka and Kiska Islands in the Aleutian Chain, Alaska Joanna Burger Michael Gochfeld Stephen C. Jewett Received: 8 March 2006 /Accepted: 8 May 2006 1 Published online: 21 October 2006 0 Springer Science + Business Media B.V. 2006 Abstract Concentrations of 13 radionuclides and there were no differences among species. The 1291, 60co, 152~~,90sr, 99~~,241~~, 238pu, 239249pu, only radionuclides where composite samples were 234~,235~, 236U, 238~were examined in seven above the Minimum Detectable Activity (MDA) were species of invertebrates from Amchitka and Kiska 137Cs, 241Am, 239.249~~, 234~, 235~, 236U, and 238U. Islands, in the Aleutian Chain of Alaska, using Green sea urchin (Strongylocentrotus polyacanthus), gamma spectroscopy, inductively coupled plasma giant chiton (Cyptochiton stefferi), plate limpets mass spectroscopy, and alpha spectroscopy. Amchitka (Tectura scum) and giant Pacific octopus (Enter- Island was the site of three underground nuclear test octopus dojleini) were only tested for 13'cs; octopus (1965-1971), and we tested the null hypotheses that was the only species with detectable levels of '37~s there were no differences in radionuclide concentra- (0.262 i 0.029 Bqkg, wet weight). Only rock jingle tions between Amchitka and the reference site (Kiska) (Pododesmus macroschisma), blue mussel (Mytilus trossufus) and horse mussel (Modiofus modiofus) were analyzed for the actinides. There were no J. Burger (lXI) interspecific differences in 241~mand 239U9~,and Division of Life Sciences, Rutgers University, almost no samples above the MDA for 238~~and 604 Allison Road, 236~.Horse mussels had significantly higher concen- Piscataway, NJ 08854-8082, USA e-mail: [email protected] trations of 234~(0.844 f 0.804 Bqlkg) and 238~ (0.730 h 0.646) than the other species (both isotopes J. Burger. M. Gochfeld S. C. Jewett are naturally occurring). There were no differences in Cobsortium for Risk Evaluation with Stakeholder actinide concentrations between Amchitka and Kiska. Participation (CRESP), and Environmental and Occupational Health Sciences Institute (FiOHSI), In general, radionuclides in invertebrates from Piscataway, NJ, USA Amchitka were similar to those from uncontaminated sites in the Northern Hemisphere, and below those M. Gochfeld from the contaminated Irish Sea. There is a clear Environmental and Occupational Medicine, UMDNJ-Robert Wood Johnson Medical School, research need for authors to report the concentrations Piscataway, NJ, USA of radionuclides by species, rather than simply as 'shellfish', for comparative purposes in determining S. C. Jewett geographical patterns, understanding possible effects, School of Fisheries and Ocean Sciences, University of Alaska, Fairbanks, and for estimating risk to humans from consuming AK 99775-7220, USA different biota. Springer DISCLAIMER Portions of this document may be illegible in electronic image products. Images are produced from the best available original document. Environ Monit Assess (2007) 128:329-341 Keywords Radionuclides Radiocesium. Actinides. well as exposure due to dumping by the Former Invertebrates .Octopus . Mussels Rock jingles - Soviet Union (Togawa et al., 1999; Yamada, Aono, & Aleutians Arnchitka Kiska Hirano, 1999; Lystsov, Murzin, & Nezhdanov, 1999; Matishov, Matishov, Anisimova, Dzhenyuk, & Zuev, 2001). Some of this biomonitorbg is ongoing near 1 Introduction decommissioned nuclear power plants and reprocess- ing plants (e.g., Sellafield in the United Kingdom, Radionuclides enter the environment from natural Sanchez-Cabeza & Molero, 2000; in Taiwan, Hung, geologic sources and from fallout from historic nucle- Huang, & Shao, 1998). There is also interest in ar weapons testing (Aarkrog, 2003; Duran, Povinec, assessing radionuclide concentrations in organisms Fowler, Airey, & Hong, 2004), from nuclear facility near nuclear waste facilities, including nuclear testing and submarine accidents (Baeza et al., 1994; Cooper et sites. al., 1998; Livingston & Povinec, 2000; UNSCEAR, In this paper we examine the concentrations of a 2000; Sanchez-Cabeza & Molero, 2000; Amundsen et suite of radionuclides in several invertebrates in the al., 2002; Aumento, Donne & Eroe, 2005), and &om marine environment around Amchitka Island in the discarded nuclear wastes (Fisher et al., 1999; IAEA, Aleutian chain of Alaska. This paper reports on part of 1999). Over 500 atmospheric nuclear weapons tests the biologic study carried out by the Consortium for were conducted from 1945-1980, primarily in the Risk Evaluation with Stakeholder Participation Northern Hemisphere (UNSCEAR, 2000). The dis- (CRESP). CRESP is a multi-university, multi-disci- posal of large quantities of radioactive wastes in the plinary organization, assisting the U.S. Department of Arctic Seas by the former Soviet Union has prompted Energy (DOE) in pursuing remediation of nuclear interest in radionuclides in the Bering Sea ecosystem wastes generated during the Cold War manufacture and (Fisher et al., 1999). Some radionuclide concentra- testing of nuclear weapons. Even though the inverte- tions, such as the plutonium found in mussels in some brate community in the Aleutians is mostly inconspic- regions, however, are due mainly to upwelling of uous, compared to other regiona(O'Clair, 1977), some mid-depth waters from the Pacific Ocean, not to invertebrates could prove valuable as indicators of radioactive dumping in the region local (Farrington, radionuclide exposure because they are relatively Davis, Tripps, Phelphs, & Galloway, 1987). The sedentary, and occupy different trophic groups. More- potential for human health and environmental effects over some are consumed as part of regional subsis- fiom consumption of radionuclides in marine organ- tence diets (APIA, 2002; Patrick, 2002; Hamrick & isms is clear, particularly for I3'cs and 239~~(Moscati Smith, 2003). & Erdrnann, 1974; Shenber, Elshamis, Elkikli, & We test the null hypotheses that 1) there were no Elayan, 1999). interspecific differences in radionuclide concentrations, Increasingly, the public, regulators, managers and and 2) there were no differences in radionuclide policy makers are interested in assessing the health of concentrations between Amchitka and a reference site ecosystems, the food chain, and human foods. Because (Kiska Island). Amchitka was the site of three under- of the importance of fish and shellfish consumption ground nuclear tests from 1965 to 1971. Although throughout the world, and the occurrence of atrno- radionuclide concentrations were assessed in marine spheric deposition of radionuclides into marine envi- biota in the early 1970s (Memtt & Fuller, 1977), little ronments, a number of monitoring programs for testing has occurred since then, although Dasher et al. radionuclides have been established in Asia (Duran et (2002) assessed radionuclide concentrations in terres- al., 2004), in the Sea of Japan (Togawa, Povinec, & trial biota. Pettersson, 1999; JCAC, 2003, 2004), in the Irish Sea These data can be used to assess whether the (RPII, 2003, 2004), in the French Mediterranean subsistence foods and commercial fish are safe for (Charmasson, Barker, Calmet, Pruchon, & Thebault, consumption, to establish a baseline for future com- 1999), and in the Black Sea (Bologa, 2000). Other parison, and to determine whether the concentrations biomonitoring programs have been established to found in fish and birds at Amchitka are similar to those evaluate possible exposure from nuclear facility found in other regions of the Northern Hemisphere. operations (Poon & Au, 2002; Shinohara, 2004), as This work is part of a larger multi-disciplinary project by CRESP to provide the infbmation to assure the Page, Biswas, Lahr, & Pulpan, 1991; Eichelberger, protection of human health and the environment, Freymuella, Hill & Patrick, 2002; Jew* 2002; and to provide a baseline for monitoring in the context Patrick, 2002). of a long-term stewardship plan for Arnchitka Arnchitka Island was a military base oppming the (Fowas, Burger, Kosson, Gwhfeld, & Barnes, Japanese occupation of Kiska Island in Wdd War II. 2005, Powers, Burger, Usson, & Godrfeld, 2006; In the 1960s Amchitka was chosen for underground Burger, Gochfeld, Kosson, & Powers, 2006). Further, nuclear tests over the objdons of local people and radionuclide concentrations in benthic organisms fdgngovernments (O'Nei11,1994, Kohlhoff, 2002). living at high latitudes have been poorly investigated The remoteness of Amhitka, the tectonic activity (Matishov & Mtishov, 2004), and the pentstudy (which might 'hide' a nuclar test signahrre in seismic coniriiutes to the overall knowledge of radionuclides noise), and its proximity to the Soviet Union were in invertebrates from this region. hrsin its selection (?bhlhoff, 2002). There were three nuclear htsin 1965, 1969, and 197 1. Carmikin (abut 5 Mt in 1971) was the last and largest U. S. 2 Study W~Band Methods underground test. The three Amchitka test shots accounted for about 16% of the total energy released 2.1 Smdy sites hnthe U.S. underground testing program (Robbins, Makhijani, & Yih, 1991; Norris & Arkin, 1998; DOE, Arnchitka Island (5 1.5O N lat; 179' E long) and Kiska 2000). The relevant source tern information is Island (about 120 km to the west, I 77S0 E Long) in classified and unavailable to the public and the the western Aleutian Chain of Alaska, are psrt of the authors. The releases