UNITED
STATES
ENVIRONMENTAL
PROTECTION
AGENCY
WASHINGTON,
D.
C.
20460
OFFICE
OF
PREVENTION,
PESTICIDES
AND
TOXIC
SUBSTANCES
MEMORANDUM
SUBJECT:
Lindane
Food
Chain
Bio­
Accumulation,
­Magnification
and
­Concentration
PC
Code
No.
009001;
Case
No.
818566;
DP
Barcode:
D283666
TO:
B.
Shackleford,
Branch
Chief
M.
Howard,
Team
Leader
Special
Review
and
Reregistration
Division
(7508C)

FROM:
ERB
V
RED
Team
for
Lindane:
N.
E.
Federoff,
Wildlife
Biologist,
Ecological
Effects
Reviewer,
Team
Leader
F.
A
Khan,
Ph.
D.,
Environmental
Scientist
Environmental
Fate
and
Effects
Division
(7507C)

THROUGH:
Mah
T.
Shamim,
Ph.
D.,
Chief
Environmental
Risk
Branch
V­
EFED
(7507C)

Lindane
Food
Chain
Bio­
Accumulation,
­Magnification
and
­Concentration
Due
to
extensive
use
over
the
past
50
years,
lindane
is
present
in
most
environmental
media
and
biological
compartments
and
is
present
in
terrestrial
and
aquatic
food
chains.
However,
evidence
suggests
that
concentrations
have
been
gradually
decreasing.
Recent
data
suggest
that
the
declines
of
 
­HCH
isomer
concentrations
in
the
environment
have
resulted
from
reduced
use
of
technical
HCH,
especially
in
Asian
countries
(Iwata
et
al.,
1993).
The
behavior
of
HCH
isomers
in
the
environment
is
complex
because
they
are
multimedia
chemicals,
existing
and
exchanging
among
different
compartments
of
the
environment
such
as
atmosphere,
surface
water,
soil
and
sediment.
In
addition,
temperature,
humidity,
and
other
environmental
properties,
may
have
significant
influence
on
environmental
degradation
rates.
The
most
common
isomers
found
in
the
environment
are
lindane
(
 
­),
 
­,
and
 
­HCHs,
with
 
­HCH
as
the
predominant
isomer
in
air
and
ocean
water
and
 
­HCH
the
predominant
isomer
in
soils,
animal
tissues
and
fluids
(Willett
et
al.,
1998).
The
physical
and
chemical
properties
of
the
HCH
isomers
can
be
quite
different
from
one
another.
For
example,
 
­HCH
has
a
lower
vapor
pressure
and
a
higher
bio­
concentration
factor
in
fat
than
either
 
­HCH
or
lindane.
In
contrast,
lindane
and
 
­HCH
seem
to
be
more
volatile
than
 
­HCH
(Willett
et
al.,
1998).
These
properties
likely
reflect
some
of
the
differences
seen
in
HCH
isomer
persistence
and
variability
in
bio­
magnification,
­concentration
and
­accumulation
in
the
various
biological
compartments.
Differences
in
accumulation
are
also
likely
due
to
different
modes
of
uptake,
metabolism
and
sources
of
contamination.
Bio­
concentration
factors
(BCF)
for
Lindane
were
780x
in
fillet,
2500x
in
viscera
and
1400x
in
whole
fish.
It
would
seem
this
is
partly
due
to
high
lipid
solubility.
Lindane
can
become
enriched
in
lipid­
containing
biological
compartments.
However,
although
lindane
may
bioconcentrate
rapidly,
most
data
suggest
bio­
transformation,
depuration
and
elimination
are
relatively
rapid
once
exposure
is
eliminated.
After
a
28
day
exposure
and
14
days
of
depuration,
levels
were
reduced
by
96%,
95%
and
85%
in
fillet,
viscera
and
in
whole
fish,
respectively.

HCH
bio­
accumulation/
food
chain
data
from
Russia
(Moisey
et
al
2001)
and
from
Central/
Western
Canada
(Kelly
and
Gobas
2001)
suggests
that
 
­HCH
does
bio­
accumulate/
biomagnify
alpha
does
also,
but
at
a
lower
level,
and
gamma
(Lindane)
the
least.
Data
from
Moisey
et
al
(2001)
suggests
that
the
relative
proportions
of
HCH
isomers
varied
dramatically
across
species
in
the
arctic
marine
food
web
studied.
Kelly
and
Gobas
(2001)
indicate
that
the
fugacity
of
lindane
decreases
with
increasing
trophic
level
suggesting
trophic
dilution
(the
lichen­
caribouwolf
food
chain
was
studied).
It
appears
that
upper
trophic
level
mammals
may
be
able
to
efficiently
eliminate
lindane
and
to
a
smaller
extent
 
­HCH,
but
not
 
­HCH.
In
birds,
 
­HCH
seems
to
have
a
tendency
to
accumulate
to
a
greater
extent
than
the
other
isomers,
which
may
be
due
to
consuming
contaminated
prey
(Elliot
et
al.,
1989),
although
concentrations
have
been
on
the
decline.
Even
though
concentrations
of
HCH
isomers
were
detected
in
surface
waters
of
the
Arctic,
bioaccumulation
in
the
aquatic
food
chains
was
significantly
less
than
the
other
organochlorine
compounds
(Norstrom
and
Muir,
1994)
analyzed.

In
conclusion,
although
there
is
evidence
that
HCH
isomers
can
and
do
bio­
magnify,
bioconcentrate
and
bio­
accumulate
in
different
biological
compartments
and
at
different
rates,
the
overall
magnitude
is
an
uncertainty.
Overall,
lindane
seems
to
accumulate
environmentally
but
generally
to
a
lesser
extent
than
either
the
alpha,
and
especially,
the
beta
isomers.
Generally,
Lindane
tends
to
bio­
magnify
in
lower
trophic
levels
where
bio­
transformation
was
minimal,
although
not
to
the
extent
 
­HCH
does.
 
­HCH
tends
to
mainly
bio­
accumulate
in
upper
trophic
levels
(fish,
birds,
mammals)
at
higher
concentrations.

Literature
Cited
Elliot,
J.
E.,
D.
G.
Noble
and
R.
J.
Norstrom.
1989.
Organochlorine
contaminants
in
seabird
eggs
from
the
Pacific
coast
of
Canada,
1971­
1986.
Environmental
Monitoring
and
Assessment
12:
67­
82.

Iwata,
H.,
S.
Tanabe,
N.
Sakai
and
R.
Tatsukawa.
1993.
Distribution
of
persistent
organochlorines
in
the
oceanic
air
and
surface
seawater
and
the
role
of
ocean
on
their
global
transport
and
fate.
Environmental
Science
and
Technology
27:
1080­
1098.

Kelly,
B.
and
F.
Gobas.
2001.
Bioaccumulation
of
POPs
in
lichen­
caribou­
wolf
food
chains
of
Canada's
Central
and
Western
Arctic.
Environmental
Science
and
Technology
35(
2):
325­
334.

Moisey,
J.,
A.
Fisk,
K.
Hobson
and
R.
Norstrom.
2001.
Hexachlorocyclohexane
(HCH)
isomers
and
chiral
signatures
of
alpha­
HCH
in
Arctic
marine
food
web
of
the
Northwater
Polynya.
Environmental
Science
and
Technology
35(
10):
1920­
1927.
Norstrom,
R.
J.,
and
D.
C.
G.
Muir.
1994.
Chlorinated
hydrocarbon
contaminants
in
arctic
marine
mammals.
Sci
Total
Environ.
154:
107­
128.

Willet,
K.,
E.
M.
Ulrich
and
R.
A.
Hites.
1998.
Differential
toxicity
and
environmental
fates
of
hexachlorocyclohexane
isomers.
Environmental
Science
and
Technology
32
(15):
2197­
2207.
