Cited by 80Environmental Toxicology and EcotoxicologyCrustacean biology and ecologyEnvironmental Chemistry and Analysis

Influence of pH and hardness on toxicity of ammonia to the amphipod Hyalella azteca

Ankley, G. T., Schubauer-Berigan, M. K., Monson, P. D.·1995·Canadian Journal of Fisheries and Aquatic Sciences

Abstract

The amphipod Hyalella azteca is frequently used for freshwater sediment tests throughout North America. A common potential toxicant in sediments is ammonia. Our objective was to characterize the influence of two key water quality variables, pH and hardness, on toxicity of ammonia to the amphipod. Ninety-six hour, water-only exposures of H. azteca to ammonia were conducted using three different water types with hardnesses of 42, 100, and 270 mg/L as CaCO 3 and three levels of pH (ca. 6.5, 7.5, and 8.5). In the soft water, toxicity of total ammonia was constant across test pH. As water hardness increased, toxicity of ammonia (on a total basis) to the amphipod decreased and became more pH dependent. Our data suggest that in softer water the amphipod was quite sensitive to the ionized (NH 4 + ) form of ammonia. This contrasts with most other species that have been tested, which typically are more sensitive to un-ionized (NH 3 ) ammonia than to NH 4 + . These data provide baseline values for interpreting the possible contribution of ammonia to sediment toxicity in tests conducted with H. azteca and also indicate that in some situations NH 4 + may be important in determining ammonia toxicity.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1139/f95-801

Cites

24 of 24 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

This paper’s full text isn’t openly available, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • Un-ionized ammonia decreased over the experiment, reaching an average of 0.002 ± 0.001 mg NH3/L at the end, and remained below available LC50 values for the species.

    “Un-ionised levels of ammonia decreased along the experiment for all species, reaching an average of 0.002 ± 0.001 mg NH3/l at the end of the experiment. All un-ionized ammonia levels were always below the LC50 values available for these species.26,32−34”

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Ankley, G. T., Schubauer-Berigan, M. K., & Monson, P. D.
Venue
Canadian Journal of Fisheries and Aquatic Sciences
Published
1995-10-01
Volume
52
Issue
10
Pages
2078-2083
ISSN
  • 0706-652X (ISSN-L)
  • 1205-7533
OpenAlex
W1982950464
Cited by
80
References
24
Citations by year
2023: 2 · 2022: 1 · 2021: 1 · 2020: 4 · 2019: 2 · 2018: 4 · 2017: 2 · 2016: 5 · 2015: 1 · 2014: 2 · 2013: 2 · 2012: 6
FWCI
3.21
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
Canadian Journal of Fisheries and Aquatic Sciences (publishedVersion)
Topics
  • Physical Sciences › Environmental Science › Health, Toxicology and Mutagenesis › Environmental Toxicology and Ecotoxicology
  • Physical Sciences › Environmental Science › Ecology › Crustacean biology and ecology
  • Physical Sciences › Environmental Science › Environmental Chemistry › Environmental Chemistry and Analysis
Keywords
Hyalella azteca, ammonia toxicity, water hardness, pH, ammonium, un-ionized ammonia, Amphipoda, sediment toxicity testing, water quality parameters

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review