 |
|
|
||||
| Publications— Data Series |
U.S. Geological Survey Data Series 300
By Connie A. Loper, J.Kent Crawford, Kim L. Otto, Rhonda L. Manning, Michael T. Meyer, and Edward T. Furlong
This report is available online in Portable Document Format (PDF). If you do not have the Adobe Acrobat PDF Reader, it is available for free download from Adobe Systems Incorporated.
View the full report in PDF 5.59 MB
Download Microsoft Office Excel Worksheet--Table 6 ZIP 75 KB
This report presents environmental and quality-control data from analyses of 15 pharmaceutical and 31 antibiotic compounds in water
samples from streams and wells in south-central Pennsylvania. The analyses are part of a study by the U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) in
cooperation with the Pennsylvania Department of Environmental Protection (PADEP) to define concentrations of selected emerging contaminants in
streams and well water in Pennsylvania. Sampling was conducted at 11 stream sites and at 6 wells in 9 counties of south-central Pennsylvania.
Five of the streams received municipal wastewater and 6 of the streams received runoff from agricultural areas dominated by animal-feeding
operations. For all 11 streams, samples were collected at locations upstream and downstream of the municipal effluents or animal-feeding
operations. All six wells were in agricultural settings.
A total of 120 environmental samples and 21 quality-control samples were analyzed for the study. Samples were collected at each site in
March/April, May, July, and September 2006 to obtain information on changes in concentration that could be related to seasonal use of compounds.
For streams, 13 pharmaceuticals and 11 antibiotics were detected at least 1 time. Detections included analytical results that were estimated or
above the minimum reporting limits. Seventy-eight percent of all detections were analyzed in samples collected downstream from municipal-wastewater
effluents. For streams receiving wastewater effluents, the pharmaceuticals caffeine and para-xanthine (a degradation product of caffeine) had the
greatest concentrations, 4.75 μg/L (micrograms per liter) and 0.853 μg/L, respectively. Other pharmaceuticals and their respective maximum
concentrations were carbamazepine (0.516 μg/L) and ibuprofen (0.277 μg/L). For streams receiving wastewater effluents, the antibiotic azithromycin
had the greatest concentration (1.65 μg/L), followed by sulfamethoxazole (1.34 μg/L), ofloxacin (0.329 μg/L), and trimethoprim (0.256 μg/L).
For streams receiving runoff from animal-feeding operations, the only pharmaceuticals detected were acetaminophen, caffeine, cotinine,
diphenhydramine, and carbamazepine. The maximum concentration for pharmaceuticals was 0.053 μg/L. Three streams receiving runoff from
animal-feeding operations had detections of one or more antibiotic compound--oxytetracycline, sulfadimethoxine, sulfamethoxazole, and tylosin.
The maximum concentration for antibiotics was 0.157 μg/L. The average number of compounds (pharmaceuticals and antibiotics) detected in sites
downstream from animal-feeding operations was three. The average number of compounds detected downstream from municipal-wastewater effluents
was 13.
For wells used to supply livestock, four compounds were detected--two pharmaceuticals (cotinine and diphenhydramine) and two antibiotics
(tylosin and sulfamethoxazole). There were five detections in all the well samples. The maximum concentration detected in well water was for
cotinine, estimated to be 0.024 μg/L.
Seasonal occurrence of pharmaceutical and antibiotic compounds in stream water varied by compound and site type. At four stream sites, the same
compounds were detected in all four seasonal samples. At other sites, pharmaceutical or antibiotic compounds were detected only one time in
seasonal samples. Winter samples collected in streams receiving municipalwastewater effluent had the greatest number of compounds detected (21).
Research analytical methods were used to determine concentrations for pharmaceuticals and antibiotics. To assist in evaluating the quality of the
analyses, detailed information is presented on laboratory methodology and results from qualitycontrol samples. Quality-control data include results
for nine blanks, nine duplicate environmental sample pairs, and three laboratory-spiked environmental samples as well as the recoveries of
compounds in laboratory surrogates and laboratory reagent spikes.
Abstract
Introduction
Need for the Study
Purpose of the Report
Scope of the Report
Methods
Site Selection and Sampling Locations
Streamflow Measurement
Field Water Chemistry
Water-Quality Sampling and Processing
Stream Water
Well Water
Laboratory Analyses
Quality Assurance and Quality Control
Quality Control on Field Measurements
Quality Control on Water-Quality Samples
Blanks
Duplicates
Laboratory-Spiked Environmental Samples
Laboratory Quality Control
Results for Quality-Control Samples
Blanks
Duplicates
Laboratory-Spiked Environmental Samples
Laboratory Quality Control
Concentrations of Selected Pharmaceuticals and Antibiotics
Water Quality in Streams
Water Quality in Wells
Water Quality at All Sites
Numbers of Detections of Compounds by Season
Summary
Acknowledgments
References Cited
Appendix 1. Records of wells sampled in Adams, Lancaster, Lebanon, Huntingdon, and Union Counties in 2006
This report is available online in Portable Document Format (PDF). If you do not have the Adobe Acrobat PDF Reader, it is available for free download from Adobe Systems Incorporated.
View the full report in PDF 5.59 MB
For more information about USGS activities in Pennsylvania contact:
Director
USGS Pennsylvania Water Science Center
215 Limekiln Road
New Cumberland, Pennsylvania 17070
Telephone: (717) 730-6960
Fax: (717) 730-6997
or access the USGS Water Resources of Pennsylvania home page at:
http://pa.water.usgs.gov/.