Dr. Edith Widder: lady of light uses bioluminescence to find trace pollutants

In August of 2010, I wrote about bioluminescence and the amazing work of Dr. Edith Widder. Widder is the founder and chief scientist at ORCA (Ocean Research and Conservation Association). Her studies of the bio-illumination given off by marine animals has taken her and her equipment to the deeper depths of the ocean. It is in these regions, where sunlight does not penetrate, that animals use bioluminescence - organically-produced light - to hunt prey, camouflage from or deceive predators, and identify others of their own species.

Many of the pictures we have seen of examples of bioluminescence involve bizarre looking creatures from those cold deep depths, yet it is a feature more common than you might think. Indeed, as much as 90 percent of all creatures found in the open seas exhibit some degree of bioluminescence. Call it nature's night lights.

Dr. Widder's research has taken her into a new direction and one that can have a direct benefit on understanding the pervasive and subtle impact of pollution on oceans and waterways. In an excellent article in the New York Times, Erik Olsen writes about Dr. Widder's recent studies using bioluminescent bacteria and how it can be used to identify pollutants.

Olsen writes, "Now, Dr. Widder has found a way to put bioluminescence to work to fight pollution in the Indian River Lagoon, a 156-mile estuary that scientists say is one of Florida’s most precious and threatened ecosystems.

Back in her laboratory here, she mixes the sediment samples with a bioluminescent bacterium called Vibrio fischeri. Using a photometer to measure the light given off by the bacteria, she can quickly determine the concentration of toxic chemicals in the sediment by seeing how much and how quickly the light dims as the chemicals kill the bacteria.

Measuring the level of pollutants in the sediment provides a better indication of the estuary’s health than measuring the level of chemicals in the water, Dr. Widder said. 'Pollution in water is transient,' she said, 'but in sediment it’s persistent.'

Her samples have revealed high concentrations of heavy metals and nutrients like phosphorus and nitrogen, which can cause runaway algae growth; those organisms consume oxygen and stifle life in the estuary. Dr. Widder has also designed sensors that are placed around the estuary and can beam real-time data like current and flow direction of the water. Pairing those data with the toxicity of the sediment, she can trace the source of pollution. The method is far cheaper and quicker than the more common practice of sending samples to a lab for analysis."

Click here to read the entire article. And here's a link to a great video about Dr. Widder's work. It's fascinating research from a true expert in the field. And with this new chapter in her body of work, Widder is bringing the a unique element of ocean science into the broader realm of conservation and ocean management.

As Widder, herself, says, “It’s my belief if we can make pollution visible, and let people know what small things they are doing are actually making an improvement in this incredible environment. I think it could make a huge difference. It can be a game-changer.”

Source: RTSeaBlog 08/06/2010
Source: New York Times

Dr. Susan Shaw: working towards a better ocean without chemicals

What is a marine toxicologist? Toxicology is the study of toxins and man-made chemicals and their impact on the environment. Turn that focus towards the oceans and you have someone like Dr. Susan Shaw, who has been studying marine toxicology for many years and serves as the Director of the Marine Environmental Research Institute (MERI) in Maine, USA.

Dr. Shaw's studies in the early part of the past decade brought about the discontinuation in the use of the flame retardant, Deca, which was working its way into the local marine ecosystem and contaminating marine mammals and commercial fish stocks. The impact of Deca is emblematic of the issue of supposedly beneficial man-made chemicals and what ancillary or side effects they have when they are allowed to work their way through various ecosystems.

Clothes and furniture can be made flame-retardant but repeated washings or improper disposal will cause the chemical retardants to make their way into the water system. There are many chemicals that can pass through most water treatment facilities (or get dumped untreated directly into the sea), and so ecosystems can be exposed to these chemicals - chemicals ranging from fire retardants to metal particles that make up the odor-eating protection in socks to so-called anti-bacterial agents in soaps. What these disparate chemicals all have in common is that they provide mankind with some sort of specific benefit, and they don't belong out there with mother nature.

Dr. Shaw, more recently, was very much involved in analyzing the effects of oil dispersants in the Gulf, following the Deepwater Horizon/BP oil spill. She was one of the few divers to actually jump into the midst of the oil in the Gulf to get first hand observations and she established an independent investigative group, Gulf EcoTox, to study the effects of oil and, in particular, oil dispersants on the food chain.

Understandably, that brought her inside the government's radar and, in 2010, she was appointed to the Department of the Interior's Strategic Sciences Working Group - a 14-member team that will assess the impact of the BP oil spill and make policy recommendations. Hopefully, those recommendations won't fall on politically deaf ears.

For her efforts on behalf of the oceans, the marine species within, and, in fact, all species (including man) that can be impacted by the subtle but pernicious effects of toxins, Dr. Shaw was recently awarded the 2011 Gold Medal from the Society of Women Geographers. In addition, the National Audubon Society's Women In Conservation Program is recognizing Dr. Shaw later this month as "Woman of the Gulf" the the annual Rachel Carson Award event in New York.

“Toxic contaminants in the oceans are a threat to marine and human life whether they are coming from oil and dispersants or from the flame retardants in our couches and computers. The scale of damage may be different in the Gulf of Maine and in the Gulf of Mexico , but we need to realize that polluting our oceans poses health risks to both people and wildlife,” said Dr. Shaw.

It's good to know that we have people like Susan Shaw looking out for our front, sides, and backsides. Marine toxicology may not be as "sexy" as other more publicly visible research arenas, but it serves to protect us from the important pollutants and, indeed, from ourselves.

Congratulations to Dr. Susan Shaw and all the "Dr. Shaws" toiling quietly behind the scenes.

Visit the MERI website.
Read about Dr. Shaw's accomplishments and recent recognition.

Eye of the Whale: entertaining fact-based novel with timely issues

The fact-based novel, much like a "based on a true story" film, is an interesting literary device - a cross between education and entertainment. When done right, meaning when the factual side is accurately portrayed, it can present information and issues (the non-fiction part) in the context of a personal human experience (the fictional part). This is something that non-fiction can sometimes miss, particularly when discussing science- or environmental-based issues.

There are many great examples. Carl Sagan's Contact, comes to mind, a novel combining present-day science in radio astronomy that then takes the reader a step beyond to our first contact with intelligent extra-terrestrial life. And that's the beauty of the fact-based novel, using facts to set the stage to then transport us to a fictional situation or premise that scientists may have actually dreamed of or bandied about over a couple of beers but would not openly propose without the research to actually support it.

Eye of the Whale, by Douglas Carlton Abrams (Atria Books) is just such a work - combining the topical issues of whale communication research, ocean pollution, and industrial/political influence to move the reader from what we know into what could be and, in so doing, takes us on an adventure with a dramatic ending and much to ponder as to our own future.

The story centers on Elizabeth, a young PhD candidate studying humpback whales and their songs in the Caribbean. Her research is in competition with local whalers and their paths cross in the opening act when, during a hunt, she detects a unique and abrupt change in the whales' communication. A baby whale is dying - not from a whaler's lance but from disease and this leads Elizabeth on both, a detective's investigation to find out what is causing whales worldwide to vocalize songs of concern for their offspring, and a crusade to save another humpback whale trapped in the brackish water far inland from San Francisco Bay - a whale that is trying to communicate an important message to its species and perhaps the world.

"Apollo swam northwest toward the summer feeding grounds - his long flippers not far from those of his two companions--
The three whales moved their flukes rhythmically and forcefully--their grace belying the extraordinary thrust of the broad tails propelling them onward--
Apollo could feel his companions by the lift and fall of water and the low sounds of the contact calls that groaned from within their great bodies--"

As Eye of the Whale unfolds, it lays a foundation of facts regarding whale intelligence, the insidious threat from chemical pollution and its impact on animals and man in even the most minute of quantities, and the multitude of players involved in maintaining the status quo for whaling and industrial chemical production. Abrams establishes a host of characters and locations with great detail and from there, the fictional novel takes over, culminating in Elizabeth literally fighting for her life - against those who are concerned as to what secrets she is uncovering - while racing against the clock to save the life of an important messenger whale.

The extent of Abrams research, with copious acknowledgments at the conclusion, is clearly evident and adds greatly to the believability of the story - an important component to any fact-based novel; the reader must be convinced of the factual foundation before any literary license is taken. And while some of the romantic dialog was a bit awkward at times, I found Eye of the Whale to be a riveting story, keeping one's attention to the end where the reader is left to ponder the real implications for the future that the story presents.

For lovers of whales, this book would certainly be an engaging read. However, and perhaps more importantly, if you have even a faint passing interest in environmental issues but resist those non-fiction works that sometimes seem to be factual digests of gloom and doom, then pick up Eye of the Whale. Every good yarn has a foundation of truth and Eye of the Whale accomplishes just that.

Available in hardcover, paperback, or Kindle from Amazon.

Whales & Heavy Metals: new study documents high levels of toxins

Because of the annual meeting of the International Whaling Commission (IWC) this week, there has been a lot of related cetacean news with various scientific reports being issued for the benefit of the commission.

BTW: The IWC went into closed door sessions regarding potential changes in the current whaling moratorium. Apparently, the issue was tabled, which is being considered a good or bad thing by observers, depending on who you talk to. Good because the status quo remains and nations like Japan and Norway haven't stormed out; bad because it's still an issue that has sticking points for some and the delay allows opposing parties to exert more influence against the moratorium as it currently exists.

The Associated Press recently reported on a disturbing scientific study presented to the IWC by Dr. Roger Payne and the Ocean Alliance, which conducted the research. According to the report, whales are carrying a stunningly high level of various toxic heavy metals including cadmium, aluminum, chromium, lead, silver, mercury, and titanium.

The research, begun in 2000 by taking tissues samples from 995 whales over a five-year period, was initially designed to track persistent organic pollutants (DDT, PCB, etc.). The researchers were surprised by the levels of heavy metals in their samples.

"The researchers were stunned with the results. 'That's where the shocking, sort of jaw-dropping concentrations exist,' Payne said. Though it was impossible to know where the whales had been, Payne said the contamination was embedded in the blubber of males formed in the frigid polar regions, indicating that the animals had ingested the metals far from where they were emitted. 'When you're working with a synthetic chemical which never existed in nature before and you find it in a whale which came from the Arctic or Antarctic, it tells you that was made by people and it got into the whale,' he said. How that happened is unclear, but the contaminants likely were carried by wind or ocean currents, or were eaten by the sperm whales' prey."

The report cited levels of mercury at an average of 2.4 parts per million (ppm), with some whales recording as high as 16 ppm. Chromium - a known carcinogen used in the making of stainless steel, dyes, paints, and leather tanning and the subject of a major environmental civil suit made famous in the movie "Erin Brockovich" - was found in all of the study's 361 sperm whales.

Mercury pollution has become a hot topic in the shark and tuna conservation movement with levels typically around 1 ppm. There has been considerable industry opposition in the form of conflicting or disputing counter-reports as to either the levels or toxicity of mercury in seafood. It would not be surprising to see a similar response to this Ocean Alliance report from nations with an economic interest in continued whaling.

"'The entire ocean life is just loaded with a series of contaminants, most of which have been released by human beings,' Payne said in an interview on the sidelines of the International Whaling Commission's annual meeting. Payne said sperm whales, which occupy the top of the food chain, absorb the contaminants and pass them on to the next generation when a female nurses her calf. 'What she's actually doing is dumping her lifetime accumulation of that fat-soluble stuff into her baby,' he said, and each generation passes on more to the next. Ultimately, he said, the contaminants could jeopardize seafood, a primary source of animal protein for 1 billion people. 'You could make a fairly tight argument to say that it is the single greatest health threat that has ever faced the human species. I suspect this will shorten lives, if it turns out that this is what's going on,' he said."

Dr. Payne is well known for his studies in the late 60's of humpback whale songs. His research advanced our understanding of the intelligence and complex social behaviors of whales and significantly added to the public groundswell in support of a whaling moratorium. But his recent research gives him much reason for concern as to the whales' future.

"'I don't see any future for whale species except extinction,' Payne said. 'This is not on anybody's radar, no government's radar anywhere, and I think it should be.'"

Read entire Associated Press article.

Local Asian Fishermen At Risk: EPA awards So Cal groups' efforts to educate about polluted catch

Fishing and the consumption of seafood is a dietary foundation in many Asian cultures - either due to a lack of suitable, large scale food resources like cattle or poultry, or because of isolated geography, or because of religious or cultural preferences. Even as immigrants, they often bring their preferences for seafood with them.

Along the west coast of the United States, you can often find local Asian fishermen casting a line over piers or into the surf. Unfortunately, much of what they catch consists of small bottom feeders and these fish can often carry a lot more than a savory taste. They also can carry an unhealthy level of pollutants, including pesticides that have been banned for decades.

Recently, the Environmental Protection Agency awarded a collective of Southern California environmental, cultural and educational groups the agency's Environmental Justice Achievement Award for the group's efforts in educating local fishermen as to the dangers in consuming fish from the Palos Verdes Peninsula. Part of the Palos Verde Shelf, an EPA declared Superfund site, the peninsula contains one of the nation's largest deposits of DDT and PCBs, dumped into the waters by factories over 25 years ago.

As reported in the Los Angeles Times, the organizations receiving the award include Boat People SOS, Cabrillo Marine Aquarium, Asian Youth Center, Heal the Bay, and St. Anselm's Cross-Cultural Community Center. Collectively they distribute brochures and conduct outreach campaigns to reach the, primarily, Chinese and Vietnamese fishermen who catch local fish like white croaker and other bottom feeders.
"For years now, this group has gone out of its way to tell people 'Don't fish here, and if you're going to, don't eat the head or the tail and the skin, because the toxins accumulate in the fatty parts of the fish'," said EPA spokesperson Francisco Arcaute.

Congratulations to all members of the group. Although it has been many years, let's hope that someday the waters are once again clear and a dwindling number of fishermen can safely pull up a fish or two while the majority of us are relying on aquaculture for our seafood requirements.

Conservation's Indirect Strategy: mercury levels in Japanese could effect change

The strategy of reporting on the health impact on humans brought about by the consumption of endangered ocean species continues to gain momentum as a viable approach for garnering public awareness. The Ocean Preservation Society, who produced the award-winning documentary The Cove, is spreading the word about a recent article in The Japan Times about mercury levels in the whale and dolphin meat that is consumed by the people of Taiji, where much of The Cove takes place.

Taiji is known for its capture and bloody harvest of dolphins and small whales - either for aquariums or for human consumption. While there has been much government intervention to manipulate the media and downplay the event, at least one brave Taiji council member moved to have the meat tested. He was eventually shunned and left Taiji, but the testing continued and the results have been reported in some segments of the media who have resisted government pressure.

According to the Kyodo News and The Japan Times, it was found that the people of Taiji, who consume dolphin and whale meat, have mercury levels that are as much as 10 times higher than the Japanese norm. Children, who can be very susceptible to the neurological effects of mercury, were going to school every day only to dine on contaminated dolphin meat as part of the town's school lunch program. Fortunately, the program has now discontinued serving dolphin meat.

Pelagic animals like whales, dolphins, tuna, swordfish, and sharks, unfortunately are able to retain pollutants deep in their tissues. Although mercury seems to be one of the most worrisome agents, other pollutants have been found, including DDT, and other pesticides, in addition to several other industrial chemicals that enter the ocean either directly or from discharge into the atmosphere (which then eventually falls into the sea).

While health threats against mankind might be the impetus needed to produce change in environmental or ecological policy, it seems sad that it has to come to that. It illustrates our self-centered behavior when it's not enough that the atmosphere is being altered or that species are being endangered by over-harvesting or loss of habitat - instead, it takes a direct negative effect on ourselves for us to sit up and take notice.

Perhaps it's academic; it's just human nature and we should use it to our best advantage. Shark conservationists are using mercury poisoning to drum up concern over the demand for shark products; climate change proponents are using documented changes in agricultural output and drought conditions in Africa and the related loss of life to make their case; and groups like GotMercury.org put out information on the pollutant levels in over-fished species like swordfish, tuna, and others. It seems to be a strategy that has potential for generating real change. The problem is that when that change comes to protect mankind from himself, where will the plant and animals, the ocean, land and air be by then? Will it already have been too late?

Read article in Japan Today/Kyodo News.

Orcas of the Puget Sound: article looks at vanishing whale pods

Orcas, or if you prefer, killer whales - are one of the most distinctive cetaceans in the world. Though often associated with cold water regions, these intelligent and highly social predators are actually found in all the oceans. But probably nothing personifies the classic image of the orca as the pods of orcas that frequent the waters in Puget Sound in the northeastern Pacific Ocean - tall dorsal fins cutting through the blue water or whales fully breaching from frigid waters with picturesque forest shoreline backdrops.

But something ominous is taking place in this northern wilderness: the whales are slowly disappearing. There are several theories being studied that could explain the whales decline. But whether it's one cause or a combination, it all springs from one source: mankind.

Outdoor adventure writer Thayer Walker has written a very interesting article for the online Sierra Club Magazine about the decline of these orcas, known by researchers as the "Southern Residents." I had the opportunity to work with Thayer before and he is a gifted writer with a terrific appreciation for our natural resources, from geography to biology.

Thayer writes about the dedicated work of Ken Balcomb, who formed the Center for Whale Research and has been studying the orcas of San Juan Island in the Puget Sound for over 30 years. Balcomb has documented the gradual decline of the number of whales in the area, impacted in the '60s and '70s by the demand for orcas for aquariums and amusement parks. But what appears to be happening now points to possible poisoning from pollution and, perhaps in equal or greater measure, the decline of the whales primary food source - chinook salmon.

Changes in the salmon population, from either overfishing or man-made interference or damage to the salmon's fresh water breeding grounds, have either pushed the orca pods to search for new hunting grounds or, as unfortunately suspected, doomed the whales to starvation. Orcas are known for their highly complex social structures; whales will stay within a pod for life and will stake out territories that are often not easily abandoned.

But also pollution plays a critical role in this threatening scenario. Much like the chemicals that can accumulate in sharks and dolphins, the blubber in orcas can retain a variety of pollutants that would not necessarily harm the whale (unless absorbed in great quantities) as long as the whale remains vibrant and well-fed. However, when food is scarce the orca will begin to burn some of its fat, thereby releasing stored pollutants into its system which weakens the immune system and the overall health of the whale deteriorates.

The demand for fresh-caught salmon combined with development in the area - including dam building, forest-clearing, and urban growth - are all contributing to the decline of one of the oceans' most magnificent hunters, one that has cruised these frigid waters for eons but is now faced with a threat for which its cunning and intelligence provides no defense.

Kudos to Thayer for "Empty Sound", a great story. To read the entire article in the Sierra Magazine, click here.

Ocean Poison: chemical pollution from the Great Pacific Garbage Patch

Many of you have probably heard of the Great Pacific Garbage Patch, an area in the mid-Pacific where the clockwise circulation of currents slowly works discarded plastics into a central area (about twice the size of Texas!). You may have visualized it as a floating garbage dump of plastic bags and discarded water bottles that we could, in some herculean effort, scoop all up.

Unfortunately, it's not that simple.

While there certainly are large pieces of plastic that make their way into the Garbage Patch - drawn in by the North Pacific Gyre (the famed "doldrums") and this material can pose a threat to ocean mammals and other animals like sea turtles that will sometimes mistake it for food, what constitutes a large portion of the garbage patch is "microplastic." These are minute pieces of plastic, the end result of being battered and ground by the action of the sea. It makes for a polluted soup that is ingested by a wide range of sea creatures, often unintentionally.

From seabirds all the way to larval fish, microplastic enters the marine food chain and as it does, it releases a variety of polluting chemicals as part of the process of breaking down - this breakdown we have come to call "biodegradable" but plastic doesn't really ever disappear; it simply continues to separate into smaller and smaller components, releasing chemicals into the water and into the tissues of many ocean species, many of which end up on our dinner table.

And this environmental threat is not being confined or contained within the Great Pacific Garbage Patch. After all, the plastic that is there did not just drop out of the sky. It came from the coastlines and spent weeks, months, and maybe even years, floating about, slowly disintegrating and discharging pollutants throughout the ocean, on its way to the ultimate plastic graveyard.

What to do? Well, the obvious answer would be to use less plastic and to dispose of plastic in a manner that keeps it out of the ocean. Both are challenging because the ubiquitous material has become a mainstay of our lives for the past century. And our sewage/trash transport infrastructure is still predominantly designed around the idea that the ocean is our convenient dumping ground. But, we must do what we can to minimize our "polyethylene footprint." (Are you bringing your own cloth bags to the supermarket or at least asking for paper bags over plastic? That's a start.)

Scientists are looking into methods of treating plastic, breaking it down into its base components and producing hydrocarbons - an alternative fuel source. But, currently, it requires more energy than the process produces - much like the problems with the production of ethanol, and the logistics of turning this technology towards such vast areas as the Great Pacific Garbage Patch and others worldwide is truly enormous.

To get a handle on the scope of this problem, read An Ocean of Plastic by Kitt Doucette in the latest print issue (No. 1090) of Rolling Stone (yes, Rolling Stone). I could cite several studies and technical papers, but this article puts the issue into language that everyone can understand. Right now, it's not a pretty picture and we can only hope that our actions to curtail discarded plastic combined with a future breakthrough in technology can stem the tide.