Organochlorine Compounds and Trace Elements 

in Fish Tissue and Streambed Sediment in the 

Mobile River Basin, Alabama, Mississippi, and 

Georgia, 1998

By Humbert Zappia

NATIONAL WATER-QUALITY ASSESSMENT PROGRAM

Montgomery, Alabama

2002

U.S. GEOLOGICAL SURVEY

Water-Resources Investigations Report 02–4160
Cover photographs—Top left: Night electrofishing by USGS personnel on the Alabama River, Alabama (taken by J.B. Atkins); 

Bottom left: Barge traffic on the Black Warrior River, Alabama (taken by H. Zappia); Right: USGS 

personnel processing fish-tissue samples on the Sougahatchee Creek, Alabama (taken by J.B. Atkins).

For additional information write to: Copies of this report can be purchased from:

District Chief U.S. Geological Survey

U.S. Geological Survey Branch of Information Services

2350 Fairlane Drive, Suite 120 Box 25286, Federal Center

Montgomery, AL 36116 Denver, CO 80225

dc_al@usgs.gov 1-888-ASK-USGS

Information regarding the National Water-Quality Assessment (NAWQA) Program can be obtained from the National 

Web site <http://water.usgs.gov/nawqa/nawqa_home.html> or the Mobile River Basin Study Unit Web site 

<http://tenn.er.usgs.gov/MOBL/mobl.html>.

The use of firm, trade, and brand names in this report is for identification purposes only and does not 

constitute endorsement by the U.S. Geological Survey.

U.S. DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR

GALE A. NORTON, Secretary

U.S. GEOLOGICAL SURVEY

CHARLES G. GROAT, Director
Foreword 3

The U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) is 

committed to serve the Nation with accurate and 

timely scientific information that helps enhance and 

protect the overall quality of life, and facilitates 

effective management of water, biological, energy, and 

mineral resources. Information on the quality of the 

Nation’s water resources is of critical interest to the 

USGS because it is so integrally linked to the longterm availability of water that is clean and safe for 

drinking and recreation and that is suitable for 

industry, irrigation, and habitat for fish and wildlife. 

Escalating population growth and increasing demands 

for the multiple water uses make water availability, 

now measured in terms of quantity and quality, even 

more critical to the long-term sustainability of our 

communities and ecosystems.

The USGS implemented the National WaterQuality Assessment (NAWQA) Program to support 

national, regional, and local information needs and 

decisions related to water-quality management and 

policy. Shaped by and coordinated with ongoing 

efforts of other Federal, State, and local agencies, the 

NAWQA Program is designed to answer: What is the 

condition of our Nation’s streams and ground water? 

How are the conditions changing over time? How do 

natural features and human activities affect the quality 

of streams and ground water, and where are those 

effects most pronounced? By combining information 

on water chemistry, physical characteristics, stream 

habitat, and aquatic life, the NAWQA Program aims to 

provide science-based insights for current and 

emerging water issues and priorities. NAWQA results 

can contribute to informed decisions that result in 

practical and effective water-resource management 

and strategies that protect and restore water quality.

Since 1991, the NAWQA Program has 

implemented interdisciplinary assessments in more 

than 50 of the Nation’s most important river basins 

and aquifers, referred to as Study Units. Collectively, 

these Study Units account for more than 60 percent of 

the overall water use and population served by public 

water supply, and are representative of the Nation’s 

major hydrologic landscapes, priority ecological 

resources, and agricultural, urban, and natural sources 

of contamination. 

Each assessment is guided by a nationally 

consistent study design and methods of sampling and 

analysis. The assessments thereby build local 

knowledge about water-quality issues and trends in a 

particular stream or aquifer while providing an 

understanding of how and why water quality varies 

regionally and nationally. The consistent, multiscale 

approach helps to determine if certain types of waterquality issues are isolated or pervasive, and allows 

direct comparisons of how human activities and 

natural processes affect water quality and ecological 

health in the Nation’s diverse geographic and 

environmental settings. Comprehensive assessments 

on pesticides, nutrients, volatile organic compounds, 

trace metals, and aquatic ecology are developed at the 

national scale through comparative analysis of the 

Study-Unit findings. 

The USGS places high value on the 

communication and dissemination of credible, timely, 

and relevant science so that the most recent and 

available knowledge about water resources can be 

applied in management and policy decisions. We hope 

this NAWQA publication will provide you the needed 

insights and information to meet your needs, and 

thereby foster increased awareness and involvement in 

the protection and restoration of our Nation’s waters. 

The NAWQA Program recognizes that a 

national assessment by a single program cannot 

address all water-resource issues of interest. External 

coordination at all levels is critical for a fully 

integrated understanding of watersheds and for 

cost-effective management, regulation, and 

conservation of our Nation’s water resources. The 

Program, therefore, depends extensively on the 

advice, cooperation, and information from other 

Federal, State, interstate, Tribal, and local agencies, 

non-government organizations, industry, academia, 

and other stakeholder groups. The assistance and 

suggestions of all are greatly appreciated.

Robert M. Hirsch

Associate Director for Water

FOREWORD
Contents V

Abstract ................................................................................................................................................................................ 1

Introduction .......................................................................................................................................................................... 2 

Purpose and scope ...................................................................................................................................................... 4

Description of the Mobile River Basin ....................................................................................................................... 4

Study design ............................................................................................................................................................... 6

Acknowledgments....................................................................................................................................................... 6

Methods of data collection and analysis .............................................................................................................................. 6

Sample collection and laboratory analysis ................................................................................................................. 6

Quality assurance and quality control ........................................................................................................................ 10

Data analysis .............................................................................................................................................................. 10

Organochlorine compounds and trace elements ................................................................................................................... 13

Fish-tissue samples ..................................................................................................................................................... 14

Comparison of concentrations of organochlorine compounds and trace elements in 

whole-fish tissue samples to standards and guidelines ........................................................................... 16

Relation of organochlorine compounds and trace elements in whole-fish tissue samples 

to land use ............................................................................................................................................... 23

Comparison of concentrations of organochlorine compounds and trace elements in 

fish-tissue samples to 1991 and 1994 National Water-Quality Assessment 

Study-Unit data ....................................................................................................................................... 24

Streambed-sediment samples ...................................................................................................................................... 30

Comparison of concentrations of organochlorine compounds and trace elements in 

streambed-sediment samples to standards and guidelines ...................................................................... 36

Relation of organochlorine compounds and trace elements in streambed-sediment samples 

to land use ............................................................................................................................................... 37

Comparison of concentrations of organochlorine compounds and trace elements in 

streambed-sediment samples to 1991 and 1994 National Water-Quality 

Assessment Study-Unit data ................................................................................................................... 39

Comparison between sampling media ....................................................................................................................... 46

Summary and conclusions .................................................................................................................................................... 50

References cited .................................................................................................................................................................... 53

Appendixes ........................................................................................................................................................................... 55

FIGURES

1–6. Maps showing:

1. Location of the Mobile River Basin in Alabama, Georgia, Mississippi, and Tennessee, 

and the physiographic units within the basin ................................................................................................... 3

2. Land use and fish-tissue and streambed-sediment sampling sites and their associated 

drainage basins in the Mobile River Basin Study Unit ................................................................................... 5

3. Study Units of the National Water-Quality Assessment Program .................................................................. 7

4. Sites where organochlorine compounds were reported in whole-fish tissue samples in the

Mobile River Basin .......................................................................................................................................... 15

5. Sites in the Mobile River Basin where concentrations of organochlorine compounds in 

whole-fish tissue exceeded National Academy of Science and National Academy of 

Engineering guidelines for piscivorous wildlife ............................................................................................. 21

6. Sites in the Mobile River Basin where concentrations of organochlorine compounds in 

whole-fish tissue exceeded Canadian tissue residue guidelines (TRG’s) for the 

protection of wildlife ....................................................................................................................................... 22

7. Floating bar charts of statistical distributions of concentrations of organochlorine 

compounds in whole-fish tissue samples from the Mobile River Basin and in 1991 and 

1994 National Water-Quality Assessment Program Study-Unit data.................................................................... 27

CONTENTS
VI Contents

8. Floating bar charts of statistical distributions of concentrations of trace elements in 

fish-liver tissue samples from the Mobile River Basin and in 1991 and 1994 National 

Water-Quality Assessment Program Study-Unit data ............................................................................................ 30

9. Map showing sites in the Mobile River Basin where organochlorine compounds were 

reported in streambed-sediment samples .............................................................................................................. 33

10. Map showing sites in the Mobile River Basin where concentrations of organochlorine 

compounds and trace elements exceeded probable-effects concentrations and mean quotients 

in streambed-sediment samples ............................................................................................................................. 37

11. Floating bar charts of statistical distributions of concentrations of organochlorine

compounds in streambed-sediment samples from the Mobile River Basin and in 1991

and 1994 and National Water-Quality Assessment Program Study-Unit data....................................................... 42

12. Floating bar charts of statistical distributions of concentrations of trace elements

in streambed-sediment samples from the Mobile River Basin and in 1991and 

1994 and National Water-Quality Assessment Program Study-Unit data.............................................................. 46

13. Map showing sites in the Mobile River Basin where organochlorine compounds were reported .......................... 48

TABLES

1. Fish-tissue and streambed-sediment sampling sites and land-use percentages in the 

Mobile River Basin ............................................................................................................................................... 8

2. Percentages of surrogate recoveries for whole-fish tissue samples from the Mobile River Basin........................... 13

3. Percentages of surrogate recoveries for streambed-sediment samples from the Mobile River Basin ..................... 14

4. Reporting frequency and range in concentrations of organochlorine compounds in 

30 whole-fish tissue samples from the Mobile River Basin .................................................................................. 17

5. Sites in the Mobile River Basin where organochlorine compounds were reported in 

whole-fish tissue samples ...................................................................................................................................... 18

6. Reporting frequency and range in concentrations of trace elements in 25 fish-liver samples 

from the Mobile River Basin ................................................................................................................................. 19

7. Comparison of concentrations of organochlorine compounds in whole-fish tissue samples 

from the Mobile River Basin with standards and guidelines ................................................................................ 20

8. Spearman-rho rank correlations of land use and concentrations of organochlorine 

compounds in whole-fish tissue samples from the Mobile River Basin ............................................................... 23

9. Spearman-rho rank correlations of land use and concentrations of trace elements in 

fish-liver tissue samples from the Mobile River Basin ......................................................................................... 24

10. Summary data for organochlorine compounds in whole-fish tissue samples from

the Mobile River Basin and from 1991 and 1994 National Water-Quality Assessment 

Study Units nationwide ......................................................................................................................................... 25

11. Summary data for trace elements in fish-liver tissue samples from the Mobile River Basin 

and from 1991 and 1994 National Water-Quality Assessment Study Units nationwide ...................................... 28

12. Reporting frequency and range in concentrations of organochlorine compounds in 21 

streambed-sediment samples from the Mobile River Basin .................................................................................. 31

13. Sites in the Mobile River Basin where organochlorine compounds were reported in 

streambed-sediment samples ................................................................................................................................. 32

14. Reporting frequency and range in concentrations of trace elements in 21 streambed-sediment 

samples from the Mobile River Basin ................................................................................................................... 34

15. Comparison of concentrations of organochlorine compounds and trace elements in streambedsediment samples from the Mobile River Basin with consensus-based probable-effects 

guidelines ................................................................................................................................................................. 36

16. Spearman-rho rank correlations of land use and concentrations of organochlorine compounds 

in streambed-sediment samples from the Mobile River Basin .............................................................................. 38

17. Spearman-rho rank correlations of land use and concentrations of trace elements in streambedsediment samples from the Mobile River Basin ...................................................................................................... 38

18. Summary data for organochlorine compounds in streambed-sediment samples 

from the Mobile River Basin and from 1991 and 1994 National Water-Quality 

Assessment Study Units nationwide ..................................................................................................................... 40
Contents VII

19. Summary data for trace elements in streambed-sediment samples from the Mobile 

River Basin and from 1991 and 1994 National Water-Quality Assessment 

Study Units nationwide ......................................................................................................................................... 43

20. Organochlorine compounds analyzed in streambed-sediment and fish-tissue samples 

from the Mobile River Basin ................................................................................................................................ 47

21. Trace elements analyzed in streambed-sediment and fish-tissue samples from 

the Mobile River Basin ......................................................................................................................................... 49

APPENDIXES

1. Data for individual fish collected at sites in the Mobile River Basin Study Unit 

for organochlorine compound and trace element analysis .................................................................................... 56

2. Concentration data for organochlorine compounds in whole-fish tissue samples from 

the Mobile River Basin, 1998 ................................................................................................................................ 66

3. Concentration data for trace elements in fish-liver tissue samples from the Mobile 

River Basin, 1998 .................................................................................................................................................. 72

4. Concentration data for organochlorine compounds in streambed-sediment samples from 

the Mobile River Basin, 1998 ................................................................................................................................ 75

5. Concentration data for trace elements in streambed-sediment samples from 

the Mobile River Basin, 1998 ................................................................................................................................ 80
VIII Contents

CONVERSION FACTORS, ACRONYMS, AND ABBREVIATIONS

Water-quality units: Chemical concentrations were measured and reported in metric units for this 

study. The metric units can be converted to standard units by using the following conversion table:

Acronyms and abbreviations used in this report:

BHC hexachlorocyclohexane

BRD Biological Resources Discipline of the U.S. Geological Survey

CV-AAS cold vapor atomic absorption spectrophotometry

DCPA chlorthaldimethyl

DDE dichlorodiphenyldichloroethylene

DDT dichlorodiphenyltrichloroethane

GC/ECD gas chromatography with electron-capture detection

GPC gel-permeation chromatography

HCB hexachlorobenzene

ICP-AES inductively coupled plasma atomic emission spectrometry

ICP-MS inductively coupled plasma mass spectrometry

LRL laboratory reporting level

MOBL Mobile River Basin Study Unit in the National Water-Quality Assessment Program

MRL minimum reporting level

MRLC Multi-Resolution Land Characteristics

NAS/NAE National Academy of Science and National Academy of Engineering

NAWQA National Water-Quality Assessment Program

NWQL National Water Quality Laboratory of the U.S. Geological Survey

PCB polychlorinated biphenyl

PEC probable-effects concentrations

QA/QC quality assurance and quality control

RL reporting level

SQG sediment-quality guidelines

TEC threshold-effects concentrations

TRG tissue residue guidelines, established by the Canadian Council of Ministers of the Environment

USGS U.S. Geological Survey

WRD Water Resources Discipline of the U.S. Geological Survey

ng/kg nanogram per kilogram

μg/kg microgram per kilogram

μm micrometer

Multiply By To obtain

Area

square mile (mi2) 2.590 square kilometer

Multiply By To obtain

Length

centimeter (cm) 0.3937 inch

millimeter (mm) 0.03937 inch

meter (m) 3.281 foot

Weight

microgram (μg) 0.00000003527 ounce

gram (g) 0.03527 ounce

kilogram (kg) 2.205 pound
Abstract 1

Organochlorine Compounds and Trace Elements in Fish 

Tissue and Streambed Sediment in the Mobile River Basin, 

Alabama, Mississippi, and Georgia, 1998

By Humbert Zappia

ABSTRACT

During the summer of 1998, as part of the 

National Water-Quality Assessment Program, a survey 

was conducted to determine which organochlorine 

compounds and trace elements occur in fish tissues and 

streambed sediments in the Mobile River Basin, which 

includes parts of Alabama, Mississippi, Georgia, and 

Tennessee. The data collected were compared to 

guidelines related to wildlife, land use, and to 1991 and 

1994 National Water-Quality Assessment Program 

Study-Unit data.

Twenty-one sites were sampled in subbasins of 

the Mobile River Basin. The subbasins ranged in size 

from about 9 to 22,000 square miles and were 

dominated by either a single land use or a combination 

of land uses. The major land-use categories were urban, 

agriculture, and forest.

Organochlorine compounds were widespread 

spatially in the Mobile River Basin. At least one 

organochlorine compound was reported at the majority 

of sampling sites (84 percent) and in a majority of 

whole-fish (80 percent) and streambed-sediment 

(52 percent) samples. Multiple organochlorine 

compounds were reported at 75 percent of the sites 

where fish tissues were collected and were reported at 

many of the streambed-sediment sampling sites 

(45 percent). The majority of concentrations reported, 

however, were less than 5 micrograms per kilogram in 

fish-tissue samples and less than 1 microgram per 

kilogram in streambed-sediment samples.

The majority of trace elements analyzed in fishliver tissue (86 percent) and streambed-sediment 

(98 percent) samples were reported during this study. 

Multiple trace elements were reported in all samples 

and at all sites.

Based on comparisons of concentrations of 

organochlorine compounds and trace elements in fishtissue and streambed-sediment samples in relation to 

National Academy of Science and National Academy 

of Engineering and Canadian tissue guidelines, 

probable-effects concentrations, and mean probableeffects concentration quotients for streambed sediment, 

the potential exists for adverse effects to wildlife at 

15 (72 percent) of the sites sampled. The potential for 

adverse effects at these sites is because of the presence 

of residues or breakdown products related to 

polychlorinated biphenyls (PCB’s), chlordane, 

dichlorodiphenyltrichloroethane (DDT), chromium, 

lead, and zinc.

The majority of compounds reported 

(65 percent) were chlordane, DDT, and PCB’s, or their 

breakdown products. Concentrations of chlordane and 

heptachlor epoxide in whole-fish tissue were positively 

correlated to the amount of urban land use in a basin. 

Total DDT concentrations in whole-fish tissues were 

positively correlated to agriculture.

The relation of trace elements to land use is not 

as clear as the relation of organochlorine compounds to 

land use. This lack of clarity may be due to the 

possibility of geologic sources of trace elements in the 

Mobile River Basin and to the ubiquitous nature of 

many of these trace elements. However, there may be a 

correlation between the amount of urban land use and 

concentrations of antimony, cadmium, lead, and zinc in 

streambed-sediment samples from the Mobile River 

Basin.

Fewer organochlorine compounds and trace 

elements were reported in samples from the Mobile 

NATIONAL WATER-QUALITY ASSESSMENT PROGRAM
2 Organochlorine Compounds and Trace Elements in Fish Tissue and Streambed Sediment in the Mobile River Basin, 1998

River Basin than in samples collected during the 1991 

and 1994 National Water-Quality Assessment Program 

studies. Of the organochlorine compounds analyzed 

nationally, 57 percent were reported in whole-fish 

tissue samples collected locally and 41 percent were 

reported in streambed-sediment samples collected 

locally, whereas 96 percent and 86 percent, 

respectively, were reported nationally. Of trace 

elements analyzed nationally, 86 percent were reported 

in fish-liver tissue locally and 95 percent were reported 

in streambed-sediment samples locally, whereas 

95 percent and 98 percent, respectively, were reported 

nationally.

In general, concentrations of organochlorine 

compounds and trace elements and the frequency with 

which they were reported in the Mobile River Basin are 

similar to or less than those reported by 1991 and 1994 

Study Units; however, exceptions do exist to this 

generality.

Exceptions are the higher reporting frequency of 

heptachlor epoxide, p,p'-DDT, and PCB’s in whole-fish 

samples, higher quartile concentrations of heptachlor 

epoxide and p,p'-DDT in whole-fish samples, the 

higher maximum concentration of heptachlor epoxide 

in whole-fish samples, and the higher maximum 

concentration and reporting frequency of transchlordane in streambed-sediment samples in the 

Mobile River Basin. In addition, aluminum, barium, 

chromium, cobalt, nickel, and strontium were reported 

more frequently in fish-liver samples locally than 

nationally, boron concentrations were consistently 

higher in fish-liver samples locally than nationally, and 

mercury, silver, and ytterbium were reported more 

frequently in streambed-sediment samples from the 

Mobile River Basin than nationally.

The higher reporting frequencies and 

concentrations of heptachlor epoxide, p,p'-DDT, and 

trans-chlordane in samples from the Mobile River 

Basin are probably due to the greater use of these 

compounds locally than nationally. The reason for the 

higher reporting frequency of PCB’s is less clear, but 

may be due to the production of these compounds 

within the basin.

The higher frequency with which some trace 

elements were reported in fish-liver tissue and 

streambed-sediment samples in the Mobile River Basin 

may be due to geology or anthropomorphic activities. 

Higher boron concentrations locally are probably due 

to anthropomorphic activities, because there are no 

major geological sources for boron in the Mobile River 

Basin. Potential sources locally for most of these trace 

elements include irrigation drain water (mercury), coal 

combustion (mercury and nickel), metallurgy (barium, 

boron, chromium, and nickel), soaps (boron), and the 

wood and pulp industry (barium and chromium). Other 

sources that could enrich samples from the Mobile 

River Basin are the Black Warrior coal fields 

(aluminum and mercury) in the northwestern quarter of 

the basin, which are known to have elevated levels of 

mercury, and barite deposits (barium) in east-central 

Alabama.

INTRODUCTION

An investigation was conducted in 1998 to 

determine the occurrence and distribution of 

organochlorine compounds and trace elements in the 

Mobile River Basin, which includes most of Alabama, 

and parts of Mississippi, Georgia, and Tennessee 

(fig. 1). This investigation was conducted as part of the 

U.S. Geological Survey’s (USGS) National WaterQuality Assessment (NAWQA) Program.

To address the need for consistent and 

scientifically sound information for managing the 

Nation’s water resources, the USGS fully implemented 

the NAWQA Program in 1991 (Leahy, and others, 

1990; Atkins, 1998). The NAWQA Program integrates 

the monitoring of the quality of surface and ground 

waters with the study of aquatic ecosystems. The 

objectives of the NAWQA Program are to (1) describe 

current water-quality conditions for a large part of the 

Nation’s freshwater streams and aquifers, (2) describe 

how water quality is changing over time, and 

(3) improve the understanding of primary natural and 

human factors that affect water quality (Gilliom and 

others, 1995; Atkins, 1998). The investigation of 

organochlorine compounds and trace elements in the 

Mobile River Basin Study Unit (MOBL) is one of the 

many components used to achieve the goal of waterquality assessment locally, regionally, and nationally 

(Leahy and others, 1990; Gilliom and others, 1995).

Organochlorine pesticides and polychlorinated 

biphenyls (PCB’s) in the environment have been a 

concern nationally since the 1960’s because of their 

toxicity and persistence in the environment. The 

majority of organochlorine pesticides and PCB’s were 

banned in the United States in the 1970’s and 1980’s 

(Nowell and others, 1999). In particular, the use of 

chlordane and PCB’s has been banned since 1988 and 

the use of dichlorodiphenyltrichloroethane (DDT)
Introduction 3

Figure 1. Location of the Mobile River Basin in Alabama, Georgia, Mississippi, and Tennessee, and the physiographic units within the 

basin.
4 Organochlorine Compounds and Trace Elements in Fish Tissue and Streambed Sediment in the Mobile River Basin, 1998

since 1973 (U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, 

1992). 

Organochlorine pesticides and PCB’s have been 

used throughout the United States in agriculture, 

households, and industry. In particular, DDT was used 

heavily as a pesticide in agriculture and for mosquito 

control; chlordane was used for termite control; and 

PCB’s were used as a dielectric fluid in transformers, 

lubricant, solvent, and as a plasticizer (U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, 1992; Nowell and others, 

1999). 

In addition, many trace elements are of concern. 

Because of potential environmental harm, uses of some 

trace elements have also been restricted, such as lead as 

an additive in gasoline.

Trace elements in the environment occur from 

many natural and manmade sources. For example, 

arsenic, barium, cadmium, chromium, mercury, nickel, 

lead, and zinc all can be released into the environment 

through metallurgy, wood and pulp production, and the 

production of electrical power (Rice, 1999; U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, 2001a). Trace elements 

also have nonpoint sources in urban areas and are often 

associated with runoff from urban centers. Nonpoint 

sources for trace elements in urban areas include, 

batteries, ceramics, wear of automobile parts, 

pigments, and combustion (U. S. Environmental 

Protection Agency, 1997, 2001b). In addition, arsenic, 

cadmium, chromium, mercury, lead, zinc, and other 

trace elements can occur naturally, such as impurities 

in coals and ores and as constituents of many rock types 

(U.S. Department of the Interior, 1998; U.S. 

Environmental Protection Agency, 2001a). Sources 

that could enrich samples from the Mobile River Basin 

are the Black Warrior coal fields (aluminum and 

mercury) in the northwest quarter of the basin, and 

barite deposits (barium) in east-central Alabama 

(Travis and Lynch, 1973; Goldhaber and others, 2000).

Many organochlorine compounds and trace 

elements do not easily dissolve in streamwater. Instead, 

these materials tend to accumulate in streambed 

sediments and aquatic organisms. Both acute and 

chronic exposure to these materials can adversely 

affect the health of aquatic organisms and, depending 

on the concentration and duration of exposure, can be 

lethal or sub-lethal. Once in the food chain, these 

materials can affect terrestrial organisms, such as fisheating wildlife (herons, otters, and kingfishers), and 

potentially humans. Organochlorine compounds, 

particularly chlordane and DDT, their related 

compounds, and PCB’s are known to have adverse 

effects on wildlife. Eggshell thinning and reduced 

fecundity in several piscivorous bird species have been 

well documented, as well as the potential for liver 

disease and carcinogenicity (U.S. Environmental 

Protection Agency, 1992; U.S. Department of the 

Interior, 1998). Endocrine-system effects have been 

associated with these compounds as well (Goodbred 

and others, 1996; Steven L. Goodbred, U.S. Geological 

Survey, written commun., 1996; Keith, 1997). Some 

trace elements also cause adverse effects to wildlife, 

such as carcinogenicity, liver disease, reduced 

fecundity, and endocrine-system disruption (Steven L. 

Goodbred, U.S. Geological Survey, written commun., 

1996; U.S. Department of the Interior, 1998). For these 

reasons, organochlorine compounds and trace elements 

were analyzed in fish-tissue and streambed-sediment 

samples from the Mobile River Basin.

Purpose and Scope

This report presents the results of the 1998 

investigation of the occurrence and distribution of 

organochlorine compounds and trace elements in fish 

tissue and streambed sediment in the MOBL Study 

Unit. Also presented in this report are comparisons of 

these results to current standards and guidelines, landuse characteristics in the study basin, and 1991 and 

1994 NAWQA study results. The significance of these 

relations and the sampling media are discussed.

Description of the Mobile River Basin

The Mobile River Basin is the sixth largest river 

basin in the Nation. Encompassing about 44,000 square 

miles, the Mobile River Basin drains portions of 

Mississippi, Tennessee, Georgia, and Alabama (fig. 1). 

The Alabama and Tombigbee Rivers meet to form the 

Mobile River, which then flows into Mobile Bay and 

discharges into the Gulf of Mexico. Approximately 

71 percent of the basin lies in Alabama, and approximately 4.9 million people live in the basin. Cities with 

populations of 100,000 people or more include 

Birmingham, Mobile, Montgomery, and Tuscaloosa 

(fig. 1; Atkins, 1998). Approximately 69 percent of the 

basin is forested, 18 percent is agricultural, 2 percent is 

urban, and 11 percent is other land-use categories 

(fig. 2; Atkins, 1998; Charles R. Lawson, U.S. 

Geological Survey, written commun., 1998).
Description of the Mobile River Basin 5

Figure 2. Land use and fish-tissue and streambed-sediment sampling sites and their associated drainage basins in the 

Mobile River Basin Study Unit.

Many agricultural and industrial activities occur 

within the Mobile River Basin. Agricultural activities 

include row crops, such as cotton, corn, and soybeans; 

aquaculture; and poultry and cattle production. Major 

industries in the basin include power production; 

silviculture; and chemical, pulp, paper, iron, steel, coal, 

and textile production (Atkins, 1998).

The Mobile River Basin lies within five 

physiographic provinces (fig. 1). These provinces 

include the Blue Ridge, Piedmont, Valley and Ridge, 

Appalachian Plateaus, and the Coastal Plain (Atkins, 

1998). 
6 Organochlorine Compounds and Trace Elements in Fish Tissue and Streambed Sediment in the Mobile River Basin, 1998

Study Design

The Mobile Basin is one of more than 50 of the 

Nation’s river basins, also referred to as Study Units, 

that are being investigated as part of the NAWQA 

Program (fig. 3.) Intense water-quality data collection 

began in the MOBL Study Unit in 1997. In 1998, 

21 sites were selected in nontidal areas of the basin to 

collect fish-tissue and streambed-sediment samples to 

determine the occurrence and distribution of 

organochlorine compounds and trace elements in the 

basin. Sampling sites were selected to represent major 

subbasins and land uses within the MOBL basin and to 

provide broad, spatial coverage (fig. 2; table 1).

The MOBL subbasins associated with the fishtissue and streambed-sediment sampling sites range in 

size from 8.96 to 21,967 square miles (mi2

) (table 1). 

The largest subbasins are the Alabama (site 9) and 

Tombigbee (site 19) River Basins, which drain 

approximately 90 percent of the Mobile River Basin 

and represent multiple land uses, but are predominantly 

forested. The smallest MOBL subbasins are Three Mile 

Branch (site 4) and Cribbs Mill Creek (site 18), both of 

which are smaller than 10 mi2

. 

In 1998, the majority of the MOBL subbasins 

were predominantly forested, although they all 

contained multiple land uses (Charles R. Lawson, U.S. 

Geological Survey, written commun., 1998). Three 

Mile Branch (site 4), Cribbs Mill Creek (site 18), 

Shades Creek (site 7), and Valley Creek (site 15) all 

drained areas with greater than 20 percent urban land 

use, while Bogue Chitto (site 12), Town Creek 

(site 10), and Locust Fork (site 14) drained basins with 

greater than 40 percent agriculture. The remainder of 

the sites were dominated by forested land use—the 

Alabama (site 9) and Tombigbee (site 19) Rivers and 

Shades Creek (site 7) (table 1; fig. 2).

Acknowledgments

The author would like to acknowledge the land 

owners and local government authorities who provided 

access to several sites used in this study, to USGS 

Biological Resources Discipline (BRD) personnel who 

determined fish ages, and to the USGS Water 

Resources Discipline (WRD) personnel who gave an 

extraordinary effort during field activities that were, at 

times, outside of their normal duties.

METHODS OF DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Sampling fish tissues and streambed sediments 

for the presence of selected organochlorine compounds 

and trace elements offers several advantages over 

water-quality sampling. Organochlorine compounds 

and trace elements in water samples are often at 

concentrations too low to be detected; however, 

concentrations of organochlorine compounds and trace 

elements tend to accumulate in fish tissues and 

streambed sediments at levels that are more readily 

detected. Analysis of fish-tissue and streambedsediment samples can provide a time-averaged 

assessment of the compound or trace element in 

question. In addition, concentrations in tissue samples 

provide a direct measurement of bioavailability 

(Crawford and Luoma, 1993).

Because hydrophobic organic compounds do not 

readily dissolve in water, they typically are at 

extremely low concentrations in streams. However, 

these organochlorine compounds are readily associated 

with organic material in streambed sediments and in 

lipids of aquatic organisms (Shelton and Capel, 1994). 

In addition, organisms that have bioaccumulated 

organochlorine compounds may be consumed by other 

organisms, adding potential for increasing 

concentrations of organochlorine compounds in the 

predator organism’s tissues (Crawford and Luoma, 

1993). 

Trace elements readily sorb to fine-grained 

sediment particles in streams. The majority of trace 

elements are highly sorptive and associated with fine 

sediment particles in almost all natural surface waters. 

Because a large fraction of the total mass of trace 

elements in surface water is associated with finegrained sediment, the water column may contain only 

small quantities of these constituents (Shelton and 

Capel, 1994).

Sample Collection and Laboratory Analysis

Sampling reaches were established at 21 sites 

using methods described in Crawford and Luoma 

(1993) and Meador and others (1993). Composite fishtissue and streambed-sediment samples were collected 

from the sampling reach at each site. The samples were 

processed on site and then shipped to the USGS 

National Water Quality Laboratory (NWQL) in 

Arvada, Colo. The tissue samples were collected, 
Methods of Data Collection and Analysis 7 BEGAN IN FISCAL YEAR 1991 EXPLANATION BEGAN IN FISCAL YEAR 1994 BEGAN IN FISCAL YEAR 1997 BEGAN IN FISCAL YEAR 1999 NOT SCHEDULED YET HIGH PLAINS REGIONAL GROUND-WATER STUDY

MARK

CNBR

PUGT

NPLT

CHEY

YELL

USNK

NROK CCPT YAKI

WILL

RIOG

CAZB

NVBR

SANA

SANJ

NVBR

SACR

KANS

CNBR

SPLT

UCOL

MARK

CACI

TRIN

SHPL

CACI

UARK

OZRK

LSUS

DELR

ALMN

NECB

LERI

MIAM

WHIT

WMIC

LIRB

EIWA

UMIS

REDN

CONN

MISE

KNTY

ACAD

UTEN

LTEN

MOBL

SOFL

GAFL

SANT

POTO KANA

ALBE

SCTX

UIRB

LINJ

HDSN

DLMV

COOK

OAHU

NATIONAL WATER-QUALITY ASSESSMENT PROGRAM

GRSL

ACFB

Figure 3. Study Units of the National Water-Quality Assessment Program (U.S. Geological Survey, 2002).
8 Organochlorine Compounds and Trace Elements in Fish Tissue and Streambed Sediment in the Mobile River Basin, 1998 Table 1. Fish-tissue and streambed-sediment sampling sites and land-use percentages in the Mobile River Basin [USGS, U.S. Geological Survey; mi2, square mile; Blvd., Boulevard; L&D, Lock and Dam] Site number (fig. 2) Site name (USGS identification numbera

)

a USGS identification number is based on geographic location and the downstream order of streamflow sites.

Drainage 

area 

(mi2

)

Land-use categories, in percent

Open water Urban Barren Forest Agricul- ture Wetlands

1 Coosa River near Rome, GA (02397000) 4,040.00 0.94 2.43 2.12 79.94 14.36 0.212 Chattooga River above Gaylesville, AL (02398300) 365.53 .27 1.43 1.71 74.58 21.75 .263 Sougahatchee Creek above Reeltown, AL (02418264) 170.08 .73 3.62 1.20 83.33 9.78 1.334 Three Mile Branch at North Blvd. at Montgomery, AL 

(02419977)

8.96 .04 58.51 .03 31.53 9.85 .05

5 Pintlalla Creek at Liberty Church Road near Pintlalla, AL 

(02421115)

59.38 .82 .08 3.01 68.37 23.83 3.90

6 Cahaba Valley Creek at Cross Creek Road at Pelham, AL 

(0242354750)

25.11 1.26 9.01 .05 78.33 11.09 .25

7 Shades Creek at Homewood, AL (02423581) 21.47 .18 28.77 2.05 60.88 7.83 .298 Cahaba River at Centreville, AL (02424000) 1,024.90 .74 4.47 2.35 80.92 10.51 1.029 Alabama River at Claiborne, AL (02429500) 18,458.52 1.35 1.36 2.81 64.10 22.38 8.00

10 Town Creek at Tupelo, MS (02434000) 100.84 1.17 .57 .37 46.49 51.13 .2611 Buttahatchee River near Aberdeen, MS (02439400) 810.19 .23 .51 5.36 75.98 11.06 6.8712 Bogue Chitto Creek near Memphis, AL (02444490) 52.62 .58 .28 .00 8.50 88.73 1.9213 Lost Creek above Parrish, AL (02454055) 143.13 .16 .63 4.02 85.13 10.02 .0514 Locust Fork below Snead, AL (02454500) 122.72 .41 .57 .67 57.33 40.77 .2515 Valley Creek near Bessemer, AL (02461500) 53.56 .20 56.65 1.77 31.79 9.59 .0016 Black Warrior River at Bankhead L&D near Bessemer, 

AL (02462500)

3,982.82 1.41 3.03 1.84 76.24 17.29 .20

17 Hurricane Creek near Holt, AL (02463500) 108.18 .33 1.76 3.66 85.58 8.52 .1518 Cribbs Mill Creek at Tuscaloosa, AL (02465288) 9.54 .40 49.29 .00 37.69 12.61 .0019 Tombigbee River below Coffeeville L&D near 

Coffeeville, AL (02469762)

21,967.44 1.64 1.62 1.99 74.02 16.67 4.06

20 Satilpa Creek near Coffeeville, AL (02469800) 163.09 .03 .05 3.56 91.22 1.55 3.6021 Chickasaw Creek near Kushla, AL (02471001) 125.11 .15 .28 4.17 81.92 9.99 3.50

Summary statisticsMinimum 8.96 0.03 0.05 0.00 8.50 1.55 0.0025th percentile 53.56 .20 .57 .67 57.33 9.85 .20Median 125.11 .41 1.62 1.99 74.58 11.09 .2675th percentile 810.19 .94 4.47 3.01 80.92 21.75 3.50Maximum 21,967.44 1.64 58.51 5.36 91.22 88.73 8.00Range 21,958.48 1.61 58.46 5.36 82.72 87.18 8.00
Methods of Data Collection and Analysis 9

processed, and handled by using methods specified in 

Crawford and Luoma (1993).

A minimum of five fish of a single species and of 

similar size formed a composite sample. The fish 

species and sex were identified, and the fish were 

measured, weighed, and examined for internal and 

external anomalies. In this region of the country, fish 

age is often difficult to determine from scale samples. 

However, scale samples were taken for use in 

determining fish age rather than risk potential 

contamination of the fish samples during the removal 

of other portions of the fish that are more reliable for 

fish aging, but require substantially more dissecting 

skill to remove than fish scales. Pectoral spines were 

removed from Ictalurid species and used for age 

determination. Fish age was determined by counting 

the number of annuli present on scales or spines that 

were removed from individual fish. 

Scale samples were analyzed by WRD personnel 

from the USGS in Mississippi who are experienced in 

determining the age of fish from this region of the 

country. Fish age and size data from this study were 

then compared to age and size class data from other 

sites in the area to determine the accuracy of the age 

determinations. In addition, a subsample of fish scales 

collected during this study was simultaneously and 

independently analyzed by BRD personnel for quality 

assurance. Fish ages determined by WRD and BRD 

personnel were similar, with only two exceptions—

one largemouth bass (Micropterus salmoides) and 

several longear sunfish (Lepomis megalotis). The ages 

assigned by the BRD and WRD personnel differed by 

1 year. The age differences probably occurred because 

(1) there was not a series of fish to examine from any 

one locality, (2) fish collected from areas within the 

MOBL basin had dissimilar growth rates, and (3) the 

age of fish is difficult to determine from small sunfish 

scales.

Whole-fish composite samples were analyzed 

for organochlorine compounds. The whole-fish 

samples were wrapped in aluminum foil, placed in 

plastic bags, frozen with dry ice, and then shipped to 

the NWQL for analysis. If enough fish were not 

available for both organochlorine-compound and traceelement samples, portions of liver were removed from 

the fish collected for analysis of organochlorine 

compounds. The livers were then composited into a 

single sample and analyzed for trace elements. The 

remainder of the fish were then processed, composited 

into a single sample, and analyzed for organochlorine 

compounds.

The livers of individual fish collected for traceelement analysis were removed and composited into a 

single sample. The remainder of the fish was then 

discarded. The liver samples were immediately frozen 

with dry ice and shipped to the NWQL for analysis.

Whole-fish composite samples were analyzed 

for organochlorine compounds at the NWQL by using 

methods described in Leiker and others (1995). 

Methylene chloride extracts of the homogenized 

sample were used in the analysis. The extracts were 

processed by using gel-permeation chromatography 

(GPC) and fractionated by using alumina/silica 

adsorption chromatography. These extracts were then 

analyzed by using two dissimilar fused-silica gas 

chromatographic capillary columns with electroncapture detection.

Fish-liver samples were analyzed for trace 

elements at the NWQL by using methods described in 

Hoffman (1996). The tissues were dried and acid 

digested. Inductively coupled plasma mass 

spectrometry (ICP-MS) and inductively coupled 

plasma atomic emission spectrometry (ICP-AES) were 

used to analyze the liver samples for trace elements. 

Mercury concentrations were determined using cold 

vapor atomic absorption spectrophotometry (CV-AAS) 

(Hoffman, 1996; Long and others, 1999).

A composite streambed-sediment sample was 

collected from as many of the depositional areas in 

each stream reach as possible, usually more than 10. 

Using methods described in Shelton and Capel (1994), 

only the most recently deposited sediments were 

collected by sampling only the top 3–5 centimeters 

(cm) of the sediment. The composite sample was then 

split into two samples by sieving, one sample greater 

than 2 millimeters (mm) in size for synthetic 

organochlorine compound analysis, and one sample 

less than 63 micrometers (μm) in size for trace-element 

analysis. The sediment samples for trace-element 

analysis were allowed to settle out of solution; excess 

water was then decanted, and the samples were shipped 

to the NWQL. Sediment samples processed for 

analysis of organochlorine compounds were frozen 

with dry ice immediately after processing and sent to 

the NWQL.

Streambed-sediment samples were analyzed to 

determine organochlorine compounds and PCB 

concentrations by using methods described in Foreman 

and others (1995) and Tate and Heiny (1996). Excess 
10 Organochlorine Compounds and Trace Elements in Fish Tissue and Streambed Sediment in the Mobile River Basin, 1998

water was removed from the samples by centrifuge. 

Each sample was homogenized, and dry weight was 

determined on a 2-gram (g) subsample. Then, a 25-g 

equivalent dry-weight subsample was mixed with 

sodium sulfate to remove residual water. Three 

surrogates were added to the 25-g equivalent dryweight subsample. The subsample was Soxhlet 

extracted with dichloromethane and then concentrated. 

The extract was centrifuged and cleaned by GPC. The 

GPC fraction was further processed and split into two 

fractions. One fraction contained PCB’s, dichlorodiphenyldichloroethylene (p,p'-DDE), heptachlor, 

aldrin, hexachlorobenzene (HCB), isodrin, mirex, and 

one surrogate. The other fraction contained all other 

organochlorine compounds. Samples were analyzed by 

dual capillary column gas chromatography with 

electron-capture detection (GC/ECD).

Streambed-sediment samples were analyzed for 

trace elements at the USGS Branch of Geochemistry 

Laboratory in Denver, Colo., using methods described 

in Arbogast (1996) and Heiny and Tate (1997). The 

samples were dried, acid digested, and analyzed by 

using a variety of atomic spectroscopy methods.

Quality Assurance and Quality Control

The NWQL has established stringent qualityassurance and quality-control (QA/QC) methods for 

analytical operations. Details of these methods are 

provided in Pritt and Raese (1992, 1995), Glodt and 

Pirkey (1998), and Pirkey and Glodt (1998). In 

addition, specific information concerning method 

performance is available in Foreman and others (1995), 

Leiker and others (1995), Arbogast (1996), and 

Hoffman (1996).

The addition of three surrogate compounds to 

streambed-sediment samples and two surrogate 

compounds to tissue samples was also part of the 

QA/QC procedures for analysis of organochlorine 

compounds. The relative rates of recovery of these 

compounds can provide insight into the accuracy and 

precision associated with the analysis of each sample.

No field replicates or split samples were 

collected during this investigation because it often was 

difficult to obtain the amount of material required for a 

sample. Also, because of the paucity of the 

appropriated fish species and streambed sediments, no 

field QA/QC samples were collected.

Data Analysis

Results from the laboratory analysis of fishtissue and streambed-sediment samples were analyzed 

by using various approaches to determine the 

distribution of organochlorine compounds and trace 

elements within the Mobile River Basin and the 

relation of observed concentrations to current standards 

and guidelines, land use, sampling media, and to 1991 

and 1994 NAWQA Study-Unit data. No comparison 

was made to other data from the MOBL basin because 

of the paucity of other data, and because of differences 

between local agency data and NAWQA data in regard 

to sampling media, analytes, and site coverages.

Concentrations of organochlorine compounds 

and trace elements in fish-tissue samples from the 

MOBL basin were compared to two standards and 

guidelines. The standards and guidelines used in this 

study are (1) the recommended maximum 

concentration for the protection of fish-eating wildlife 

established by the National Academy of Science and 

National Academy of Engineering (NAS/NAE) 

(Nowell and Resek, 1994) and (2) tissue residue 

guidelines (TRG’s) for the protection of wildlife 

consumers of aquatic biota established by the Canadian 

Council of Ministers of the Environment (1999).

The NAS/NAE recommended maximum 

concentrations for the protection of fish-eating wildlife 

were considered preliminary values when published in 

1973 (Nowell and Resek, 1994); however, no 

subsequent Federal guidelines have been established. 

The guidelines are based on experimental studies of 

DDT and its metabolites in relation to eggshell thinning 

in several families of birds. By analogy to DDT, values 

for other pesticides were established conservatively. 

The guidelines indicate that when pesticide 

concentrations exceed the guidelines in whole-fish 

tissue samples, adverse effects may occur to fish-eating 

wildlife that are dependent on freshwater food sources 

(Nowell and Resek, 1994).

Canadian TRG’s are recommended guidelines to 

protect wildlife that consume aquatic biota in 

freshwater. In order to protect a particular species, the 

guidelines must be applied at the trophic level at which 

the species feed (Canadian Council of Ministers of the 

Environment, 1999). To protect all wildlife, the TRG’s 

must be applied at the highest known aquatic trophic 

level. This was not possible at all MOBL sites sampled 

during this investigation. Multiple species were 

sampled in the study area, some of which were not the 

top predators within the system. Thus, the data cannot 
Data Analysis 11

be used to infer potential adverse effects to all wildlife, 

although all of the fish species collected during this 

investigation probably are preyed upon by fish-eating 

wildlife.

Many of the fish species sampled were 

omnivores or insectivores, which may be less likely 

than piscivorous fish species to encounter food sources 

that have accumulated significant concentrations of 

organic contaminants. Consumption of organisms that 

have bioaccumulated contaminants is one of the main 

mechanisms for biomagnification (Canadian Council 

of Ministers of the Environment, 1999). For this 

reason, concentrations of organochlorine compounds 

reported in fish species other than top predators may 

underestimate the potential for adverse effects to 

wildlife that feed on organisms that typically are 

considered to be at the top of the aquatic food chain.

Concentrations of organochlorine compounds 

and trace elements in streambed-sediment samples 

from the MOBL basin were compared to consensusbased sediment-quality guidelines (SQG’s), and mean 

probable-effects concentration quotients were 

calculated for each sample. Two groups of SQG’s have 

been developed by MacDonald and others 

(2000)—threshold-effects concentrations (TEC’s) and 

probable-effects concentrations (PEC’s). The TEC’s 

represent concentrations in streambed sediment below 

which adverse effects to aquatic organisms in 

association with streambed sediments would not be 

expected to be frequent. The PEC’s represent 

concentrations above which adverse effects to aquatic 

organisms would be expected to occur frequently 

(MacDonald and others, 2000). Mean PEC quotients 

are the average ratio of organochlorine compounds and 

trace elements in a sample to their respective PEC’s. 

Samples with mean quotients greater than 0.5 are 

predicted to be toxic to sediment-dwelling organisms. 

Because the comparison of data to PEC’s and mean 

PEC quotients is a relatively new technique, a brief 

description of the development of SQG’s and mean 

PEC quotients is presented in this report.

Consensus-based SQG’s were developed by 

using previously published sediment-quality 

guidelines. Only sediment-quality guidelines that 

(1) have readily discernible derivation methods, (2) are 

based on empirical data relating contaminant 

concentrations to harmful effects in sediment-dwelling 

organisms, (3) are intended to be predictive of effects, 

(4) are newly derived, and (5) have three sedimentquality guidelines available were used to derive SQG’s 

(MacDonald and others, 2000). The existing sedimentquality guidelines were then grouped into two 

categories based on their original narrative intent. A 

geometric mean was then calculated for each sedimentquality guideline. The two categories were TEC’s and 

PEC’s.

The potential for harmful effects to sedimentdwelling organisms as a result of contaminant 

concentrations in streambed sediment was evaluated by 

using TEC’s, PEC’s, and concentration data and 

toxicity-test results from previously published studies. 

If the measured concentration of a contaminant in a 

sample was less than the TEC’s, the sample was 

considered to be nontoxic. If the measured 

concentration of a contaminant was greater than any 

one of the PEC’s, the sample was considered to be 

toxic. Concentrations in streambed-sediment samples 

between TEC’s and PEC’s were considered to be 

neither toxic nor nontoxic (MacDonald and others, 

2000).

Samples that were predicted to be toxic or 

nontoxic based on TEC’s and PEC’s were then 

compared to data from toxicity tests conducted on the 

original sediment samples associated with the 

previously published SQG’s. Based on toxicity tests, 

the PEC’s and TEC’s that accurately predicted either 

frequent (greater than 75 percent of the samples were 

correctly predicted to be toxic) or infrequent (greater 

than 75 percent of the samples were correctly predicted 

to be nontoxic) harmful effects to organisms in 

association with streambed sediment were adopted as 

SQG’s.

With the exception of using SQG’s, MacDonald 

and others (2000), derived the PEC quotient 

methodology from a previously published study. Only 

mean PEC quotients that accurately predicted harmful 

effects to sediment-dwelling organisms were adopted 

by MacDonald and others, (2000) based on toxicity 

tests and mean PEC quotients.

Sediment samples analyzed in NAWQA 

investigations for organochlorine compounds typically 

include only sediment particles less than 2 mm in size. 

Concentrations of organochlorine compounds reported 

from the analysis of a sediment sample containing 

particles less than 2 mm may be greater than the 

concentrations that would have been reported from a 

whole-sediment sample. Higher concentrations may be 

expected in a sediment sample containing particles less 

than 2 mm because (1) the majority of the 

organochlorine compounds in streambed sediment are 
12 Organochlorine Compounds and Trace Elements in Fish Tissue and Streambed Sediment in the Mobile River Basin, 1998

associated with organic matter less than 2 mm in size, 

and (2) the removal of particulate material greater than 

2 mm from a sample would reduce the total mass of the 

sample without significantly decreasing the total 

amount of the organochlorine compounds present 

(Shelton and Capel, 1994). 

In addition, trace element concentrations in 

NAWQA streambed-sediment samples may be greater 

than those that would be reported in a whole sediment 

sample. Trace element concentrations may be higher 

because many trace elements are known to associate 

with clay particles, and NAWQA sediment samples 

typically are less than 63 μm in size and contain the 

majority of clay particles from a whole sediment 

sample.

Furthermore, the laboratory uses a strong acid 

digestion for processing trace element samples, which 

extracts all trace elements associated with clay 

particles, including those that might not be bioavailable 

(Dennis R. Helsel, U.S. Geological Survey, written 

commun., 2001).

Because trace element concentrations may be 

higher in NAWQA streambed-sediment samples than 

those reported in whole streambed-sediment samples, 

comparison of NAWQA data to SQG’s may 

overestimate the potential for harmful effects to 

organisms associated with streambed sediments. This 

may not be a real disadvantage, however, since this 

approach is considered “conservative” and provides 

early warning of potential problems, thus serving to 

protect more sensitive species.

Comparisons of concentrations of organochlorine compounds and trace elements in fish-tissue 

and streambed-sediment samples to land-use 

percentages in the study basins were done using 

nonparametric statistical tests. Spearman-rho and 

Kendall-tau rank correlations at the 95-percent 

confidence level were calculated, where appropriate, 

based on the number of sites with concentrations 

reported. Correlation statistics were calculated by 

using median concentrations from sites where multiple 

fish-tissue samples were collected. Information 

pertaining to the number and type of samples collected 

at a site are presented in the next section of this report. 

All data with a remark code of less than (<) were 

considered nondetects. Comparisons of data were 

made by using non-normalized data. Data comparisons 

also were made by using lipid-normalized organochlorine data from fish-tissue samples and percentages 

of organic carbon normalized trace element data from 

streambed-sediment samples. The total concentration 

and total number of organochlorine compounds 

reported also were related to land use by using rank 

correlations and medians. Because the results of both 

correlations were similar, only Spearman-rho rank 

correlations are presented in this report.

The land-use data used in this report were 

extracted from the Federal Region 4 portion of the 

30-meter resolution land cover data set produced as a 

cooperative project between the U.S. Environmental 

Protection Agency and the USGS. The data were 

developed from Landsat Thematic Mapper Scenes. The 

cooperative project was one of the Multi-Resolution 

Land Characteristics (MRLC) Consortium activities 

(Charles R. Larson, U.S. Geological Survey, written 

commun., 1998).

Only comparisons to major land-use categories 

are presented. Land-use categories are considered 

major if they represent a substantial percentage of a 

basin’s area and have values that range over 10 percent. 

Major land-use categories in the MOBL Study Unit are 

urban, agriculture, and forest. Relations to other land 

uses were considered to be insignificant and are not 

presented.

Fish-tissue and streambed-sediment sampling 

results from this investigation were compared to 

sampling results from 1991 and 1994 NAWQA StudyUnit investigations. Only the first sample from each 

site sampled nationally was used for comparison with 

MOBL data. Both the MOBL and national data were 

censored to a common minimum reporting level 

(MRL) or laboratory reporting level (LRL) for 

comparative purposes. Values below the common 

MRL or LRL were considered as nondetections, 

whereas values censored above the MRL or LRL were 

eliminated from comparison. All estimated values were 

included in the comparisons. For simplicity, MRL’s and 

LRL’s will both be referred to as reporting level (RL) 

throughout the report.

In almost all cases, organochlorine compound 

and trace element data were censored to the RL 

currently used (2002) in NWQL investigations. In 

some instances, it was necessary to censor data at a 

concentration other than the current RL, because some 

RL’s have changed during the course of the NAWQA 

Program. In these instances, censoring the data to the 

current RL would have eliminated all or most of the 

data from current or previous studies from comparison 

with national data. A comparison of summary statistics 

and the frequency with which compounds were 
Organochlorine Compounds and Trace Elements 13

reported both locally and nationally are presented in 

this report. Summary statistics presented are for data 

above the RL. In the vast majority of the samples 

analyzed, concentrations of organochlorine 

compounds and trace elements were below the RL.

Sampling sites in the NAWQA Program were 

selected to address specific objectives. For example, 

sites may have been selected to quantify the extent of 

known contamination or the effects of a particular land 

use, to provide for spatial coverage within a basin, or to 

sample in areas not previously investigated. This 

sampling approach does not represent a random 

approach for quantifying conditions nationally. 

However, these data do provide a frame of reference for 

comparing data collected in the Mobile River Basin.

Comparing concentration data between fish 

tissue and streambed sediments can aid in determining 

bioavailability and the partitioning of organochlorine 

compounds and trace elements in the environment, 

provide insight into the value of sampling both media, 

and give a more complete picture of the occurrence and 

spatial distribution of organochlorine compounds and 

trace elements. Comparisons were made between fishtissue and streambed-sediment samples based on 

individual and total organochlorine compound 

concentrations and detection frequencies by using 

Spearman-rho rank correlations at the 95-percent 

confidence level. In addition, a comparison between 

sampling media for trace-element concentrations also 

was completed. Median concentrations were used to 

represent sites were multiple fish samples were 

collected.

ORGANOCHLORINE COMPOUNDS AND TRACE 

ELEMENTS

Results of the 1998 sampling of fish tissue and 

streambed sediment at 21 sampling sites in the MOBL 

Study Unit are presented in this section of the report. 

The surrogate recoveries for whole-fish tissue and 

streambed-sediment samples in the MOBL basin are 

presented in tables 2 and 3, respectively. Recoveries of 

surrogate compounds in fish-tissue and streambedsediment samples were less than 80 percent in many of 

the samples.

Table 2. Percentages of surrogate recoveries for whole-fish tissue samples from the Mobile River Basin

[USGS, U.S. Geological Survey; Blvd., Boulevard; L&D, Lock and Dam]

Site 

number

(fig. 2) Site name (USGS identification numbera)

a

 USGS identification number is based on geographic location and the downstream order of streamflow sites.

Surrogate recovery, in percent

-d6 -Hexachlorocyclohexane3,5-Dichlorobiphenyl

1 Coosa River near Rome, GA (02397000) 75, 94 76, 71

2 Chattooga River above Gaylesville, AL (02398300) 69 58

3 Sougahatchee Creek above Reeltown, AL (02418264) 90, 102 80, 66

4 Three Mile Branch at North Blvd. at Montgomery, AL (02419977) 108 100

5 Pintlalla Creek at Liberty Church Road near Pintlalla, AL (02421115) 116 95

6 Cahaba Valley Creek at Cross Creek Road at Pelham, AL (0242354750) 93 81

7 Shades Creek at Homewood, AL (02423581) 109 112

8 Cahaba River at Centreville, AL (02424000) 90 70

9 Alabama River at Claiborne, AL (02429500) 104 66

10 Town Creek at Tupelo, MS (02434000) 100, 109 84, 108

13 Lost Creek above Parrish, AL (02454055) 62, 75, 91 56, 61, 65

14 Locust Fork below Snead, AL (02454500) 96 90

15 Valley Creek near Bessemer, AL (02461500) 93 86

16 Black Warrior River at Bankhead L&D near Bessemer, AL (02462500) 94 84

17 Hurricane Creek near Holt, AL (02463500) 89, 108 88, 86

18 Cribbs Mill Creek at Tuscaloosa, AL (02465288) 75, 78, 84, 98 47, 61, 67, 70

19 Tombigbee River below Coffeeville L&D near Coffeeville, AL 

(02469762) 68, 97 59, 74

20 Satilpa Creek near Coffeeville, AL (02469800) 91, 94 99, 95

21 Chickasaw Creek near Kushla, AL (02471001) 88 93

α
14 Organochlorine Compounds and Trace Elements in Fish Tissue and Streambed Sediment in the Mobile River Basin, 1998

The low recoveries of surrogate compounds in 

some samples may indicate the potential for 

underestimating concentrations and underdetection of 

organochlorine compounds in a sample. No 

correlations could be made, however, between the total 

concentration of organochlorine compounds or the 

number of organochlorine compounds reported in 

samples and the surrogate recovery rates, based on 

Spearman-rho rank correlations at the 95-percent 

confidence level. Based on this correlation analysis, the 

sample results are reported without correction for bias 

associated with rates of recovery of surrogate 

compounds.

Fish-Tissue Samples

A total of 30 whole-fish tissue samples were 

collected from 19 sites and analyzed for organochlorine 

compounds during this study. Twenty-five fish-liver 

samples were collected and analyzed for trace elements 

from 18 sites. Either equipment failure or flow 

conditions prevented collection of fish-tissue samples 

at two sites, Buttahatchee (site 11) and Bogue Chitto 

(site 12) Creeks (fig. 4). Additionally, Three Mile 

Branch (site 4) did not have enough fish available for 

both a whole-fish and fish-liver samples, so only a 

whole-fish sample was collected at this site and 

analyzed for organochlorine compounds.

An attempt was made to sample the same fish 

species at all sites. This was not possible, however, 

because of the diverse environmental settings and the 

limited number of fish at many of the sites. Therefore, 

a total of 13 species were collected for analysis of 

organochlorine compounds from the sites sampled, and 

multiple species and samples were collected at seven 

sites for analysis of organochlorine compounds. These 

sites were Cribbs Mill (site 18), Hurricane (site 17), 

Lost (site 13), and Sougahatchee (site 3) Creeks and 

Tombigbee River (site 19) in Alabama; Town Creek 

Table 3. Percentages of surrogate recoveries for streambed-sediment samples from the Mobile River Basin

[USGS, U.S. Geological Survey; Blvd., Boulevard; NA, not available; L&D, Lock and Dam]

Site 

number

(fig. 2) Site name (USGS identification numbera)

a

 USGS identification number is based on geographic location and the downstream order of streamflow sites.

Surrogate recovery, in percent

-d6 - HexachlorocyclohexaneOctachlorobiphenyl3,5-Dichlorobiphenyl

1 Coosa River near Rome, GA (02397000) 86 88 94

2 Chattooga River above Gaylesville, AL (02398300) 94 86 117

3 Sougahatchee Creek above Reeltown, AL (02418264) 70 84 70

4 Three Mile Branch at North Blvd. at Montgomery, AL (02419977) 84 93 78

5 Pintlalla Creek at Liberty Church Road near Pintlalla, AL (02421115) 60 78 64

6 Cahaba Valley Creek at Cross Creek Road at Pelham, AL (0242354750) 86 82 94

7 Shades Creek at Homewood, AL (02423581) 92 80 81

8 Cahaba River at Centreville, AL (02424000) 95 88 96

9 Alabama River at Claiborne, AL (02429500) 60 51 52

10 Town Creek at Tupelo, MS (02434000) 71 78 75

11 Buttahatchee River near Aberdeen, MS (02439400) 84 136 NA

12 Bogue Chitto Creek near Memphis, AL (02444490) 62 NA NA

13 Lost Creek above Parrish, AL (02454055) 68 55 91

14 Locust Fork below Snead, AL (02454500) 94 86 101

15 Valley Creek near Bessemer, AL (02461500) 96 83 NA

16 Black Warrior River at Bankhead L&D near Bessemer, AL (02462500) 94 82 79

17 Hurricane Creek near Holt, AL (02463500) 86 84 94

18 Cribbs Mill Creek at Tuscaloosa, AL (02465288) 99 83 78

19 Tombigbee River below Coffeeville L&D near Coffeeville, AL 

(02469762)

91 85 83

20 Satilpa Creek near Coffeeville, AL (02469800) 106 83 86

21 Chickasaw Creek near Kushla, AL (02471001) 86 80 102

α
Fish-Tissue Samples 15

Figure 4. Sites where organochlorine compounds were reported in whole-fish tissue samples in the Mobile River Basin.

(site 10) in Mississippi; and the Coosa River (site 1) in 

Georgia (Appendix 1). Eleven species were collected 

for analysis of trace elements. At some of the sites, 

multiple species and samples were collected for analysis of trace elements in fish-liver tissue 

samples—Cribbs Mill (site 18), Lost (site 13), and 

Town (site 10) Creeks, and the Tombigbee River 

(site 19; Appendix 1).

Although an effort was made to collect fish of the 

same size and age at each site, variations in age did 

exist in the fish comprising a sample. The species, 

weight, age, and number of fish in the composite 
16 Organochlorine Compounds and Trace Elements in Fish Tissue and Streambed Sediment in the Mobile River Basin, 1998

samples are listed by site in Appendix 1. Because the 

samples were composites of fish of varying ages, no 

analysis of data relative to fish age was conducted. 

Concentrations of organochlorine compounds and 

trace elements reported were similar among the 

samples at a particular site, regardless of the species. 

For this reason, only median concentrations of 

organochlorine compounds and trace elements are used 

for correlations to land use, 1991 and 1994 NAWQA 

data, and between sampling media. In addition, no 

analysis of anomaly data is presented because of the 

limited number of anomalies reported.

The whole-fish tissue samples were analyzed for 

the presence of 28 organochlorine compounds and 

16 (57 percent) were reported (table 4). The 

organochlorine compounds reported were 

pentachloroanisole, mirex, p,p'-methoxychlor, 

hexachlorobenzene, endrin, trans-chlordane, 

oxychlordane, cis-nonachlor, p,p'-DDT, heptachlor 

epoxide, cis-chlordane, p,p'-DDD, dieldrin, transnonachlor, PCB’s, and p,p'-DDE. All of the 

organochlorine compounds reported in whole-fish 

tissues except PCB’s are an organochlorine pesticide or 

related compound. PCB’s, used in industry as a 

plasticizer, lubricant, and dielectric fluid in capacitors 

and transistors, were reported in the highest 

concentrations (900 micrograms per kilogram [μg/kg]) 

in whole-fish tissues of any compound analyzed (U.S. 

Environmental Protection Agency, 1992). The most 

frequently reported compound was p,p'-DDE, which 

also was reported at the highest concentration in wholefish tissue and at more sites (15) than any other 

pesticide or related compound.

Organochlorine compounds were reported in 

24 of the 30 samples (80 percent) analyzed from the 

19 sampling sites (Appendix 2). Of these 24 samples, 

19 samples (79 percent) contained multiple 

organochlorine compounds. Five samples contained a 

single organochlorine compound, and six samples 

contained no organochlorine compounds (Appendix 2).

Organochlorine compounds were reported at 

16 of the 19 sites (84 percent) sampled (fig. 4; table 5). 

Of these 16 sites, 12 (75 percent) had multiple 

organochlorine compounds, and 4 sites each had a 

single organochlorine compound reported. Only three 

sites had no organochlorine compounds reported 

(fig. 4). The site with the most organochlorine 

compounds reported was Cribbs Mill Creek (site 18), 

where multiple samples were collected. Only one 

sample was collected at Three Mile Branch (site 4), 

which had the second highest number of organochlorine compounds reported (table 5). At only two 

sites, Cribbs Mill Creek (site 18) and Town Creek 

(site 10), did multiple samples greatly increase the total 

number of organochlorine compounds reported at the 

site (fig. 4; table 5; Appendix 2).

All of the 25 fish-liver samples analyzed from 

the 18 sites sampled had multiple trace elements 

reported. The samples were analyzed for 22 trace 

elements, and all except antimony, beryllium, and 

uranium, or 86 percent, were reported (table 6). The 

most frequently reported trace elements were 

aluminum, boron, copper, iron, manganese, selenium, 

strontium, and zinc (table 6).

Comparison of Concentrations of Organochlorine 

Compounds and Trace Elements in Whole-Fish Tissue 

Samples to Standards and Guidelines

Of the 16 organochlorine compounds reported in 

whole-fish tissue samples, only 13 are included in 

NAS/NAE or Canadian guidelines (table 7). 

Comparison to NAS/NAE standards requires the 

summation of DDT congeners, and the summation of 

aldrin, BHC (hexachlorocyclohexane), chlordane, 

dieldrin, endrin, heptachlor, heptachlor epoxide, 

lindane, and toxaphene residue concentrations (Nowell 

and Resek, 1994). The sum of all DDT congeners is 

referred to as total DDT in this report. The sum of 

aldrin, BHC, chlordane, dieldrin, endrin, heptachlor, 

heptachlor epoxide, lindane, and toxaphene residues is 

referred to as chlordane and related compounds in this 

report when compared to NAS/NAE guidelines.

Chlordane and related compounds exceeded the 

NAS/NAE-recommended maximum concentration to 

protect fish-eating wildlife at three sites—Three Mile 

Branch (site 4), Shades Creek (site 7), and Cribbs Mill 

Creek (site 18). PCB’s exceeded NAS/NAErecommended maximum concentrations at the Coosa 

River (site 1) (table 7; fig. 5).

Several of the DDT congeners, singly and in 

combination, exceeded the Canadian TRG of 14 μg/kg 

at 13 sites—the Coosa (site 1), Chattooga (site 2), 

Cahaba (site 8), Alabama (site 9), Black Warrior 

(site 16), and Tombigbee (site 19) Rivers; Shades 

(site 7), Town (site 10), Lost (site 13), Hurricane 

(site 17), and Cribbs Mill (site 18) Creeks; Three Mile 

Branch (site 4), and Locust Fork (site 14). PCB’s 

exceeded the Canadian TRG’s at all sites where 

reported—the Coosa (site 1), Tombigbee (site 19),
Fish-Tissue Samples 17

Table 4. Reporting frequency and range in concentrations of organochlorine compounds in 30 whole-fish tissue samples from the Mobile River Basin[μg/kg, microgram per kilogram; <, less than; —, not reported; BHC, hexachlorocyclohexane; DCPA, chlorthaldimethyl; PCB’s, polychlorinated biphenyls; NA, not applicable]

Compound

Reporting level, 

in μg/kg 

wet weight

Number of 

detections

Minimum 

concentration,

in μg/kg 

wet weight

Concentrations, 

in μg/kg 

wet weight, 

within the 

25th percentile

Median 

concentration, 

in μg/kg 

wet weight

Concentrations, 

in μg/kg 

wet weight, 

within the 

75th percentile

Maximum 

concentration, 

in μg/kg 

wet weight

Number of 

sites where 

concentrations 

were reported

Aldrin < 5 0 — — — — — 0alpha-BHC < 5 0 — — — — — 0beta-BHC < 5 0 — — — — — 0delta-BHC < 5 0 — — — — — 0cis-Chlordane < 5 9 5.7 6.8 12 36 72 6trans-Chlordane < 5 4 8.8 10.4 20 35.5 43 3DCPA < 5 0 — — — — — 0o,p'-DDD < 5 0 — — — — — 0p,p'-DDD < 5 10 6.5 9.2 11.5 15 37 6o,p'-DDE < 5 0 — — — — — 0p,p'-DDE < 5 23 6.4 18 31 96 550 15o,p'-DDT < 5 0 — — — — — 0p,p'-DDT < 5 6 5.3 5.6 11.4 35 39 6Dieldrin < 5 11 8.1 15 84 180 720 7Endrin < 5 1 10 10 10 10 10 1Heptachlor < 5 0 — — — — — 0Heptachlor epoxide < 5 8 5.6 12.4 34 66 220 5Hexachlorobenzene < 5 1 5.4 5.4 5.4 5.4 5.4 1Lindane < 5 0 — — — — — 0o,p'-Methoxychlor < 5 0 — — — — — 0p,p'-Methoxychlor < 5 1 15 15 15 15 15 1Mirex < 5 1 8.6 8.6 8.6 8.6 8.6 1cis-Nonachlor < 5 6 4.8 6.6 15 24 29 3trans-Nonachlor < 5 13 5.7 11 18 39 130 9Oxychlordane < 5 6 7.8 8.2 17.8 31 51 3Pentachloroanisole < 5 1 4.8 4.8 4.8 4.8 4.8 1PCB’s < 50 16 50 74.5 135 240 900 12Toxaphene < 200 0 — — — — — 0

Lipids and sample weight

Lipids, in percent NA 30 1.45 2.4 3.35 4.4 10.25 0Sample weight, 

in grams

NA 30 10 10 10 10.01 10.04 0
18 Organochlorine Compounds and Trace Elements in Fish Tissue and Streambed Sediment in the Mobile River Basin, 1998

Table 5. Sites in the Mobile River Basin where organochlorine compounds were reported in whole-fish tissue samples

[Site locations are shown in figure 2; number in parentheses is the U.S. Geological Survey downstream order number; PCB’s, 

polychlorinated biphenyls; Blvd., Boulevard; L&D, Lock and Dam]

Site identification and organochlorine compounds reported

Site 1. Coosa River near Rome, GA (02397000)—4 compounds reported

p,p'-DDD p,p'-DDT

p,p'-DDE PCB’s

Site 2. Chattooga River above Gaylesville, AL (02398300)—2 compounds reported

p,p'-DDE PCB’s

Site 3. Sougahatchee Creek above Reeltown, AL (02418264)—1 compound reported

p,p'-DDE

Site 4. Three Mile Branch at North Blvd. at Montgomery, AL (02419977)—11 compounds reported

cis-Chlordane p,p'-DDT trans-Nonachlor

trans-Chlordane cis-Nonachlor Oxychlordane

p,p'-DDD Heptachlor epoxide PCB’s

p,p'-DDE Dieldrin

Site 6. Cahaba Valley Creek at Cross Creek Road at Pelham, AL (0242354750)—1 compound reported

trans-Nonachlor

Site 7. Shades Creek at Homewood, AL (02423581)—8 compounds reported

cis-Chlordane Heptachlor epoxide PCB’s

p,p'-DDE trans-Nonachlor cis-Nonachlor

Dieldrin Oxychlordane

Site 8. Cahaba River at Centreville, AL (02424000)—6 compounds reported

cis-Chlordane Dieldrin Pentachloroanisole

p,p'-DDE trans-Nonachlor PCB’s

Site 9. Alabama River at Claiborne, AL (02429500)—6 compounds reported

p,p'-DDD p,p'-DDT Hexachlorobenzene

p,p'-DDE Endrin PCB’s

Site 10. Town Creek at Tupelo, MS (02434000)—9 compounds reported

cis-Chlordane p,p'-DDT Mirex

p,p'-DDD Dieldrin trans-Nonachlor

p,p'-DDE Heptachlor epoxide PCB’s

Site 13. Lost Creek above Parrish, AL (02454055)—1 compound reported

p,p'-DDE

Site 14. Locust Fork below Snead, AL (02454500)—4 compounds reported

p,p'-DDE trans-Nonachlor

p,p'-DDT PCB’s

Site 15. Valley Creek near Bessemer, AL (02461500)—6 compounds reported

cis-Chlordane p,p'-DDE trans-Nonachlor

trans-Chlordane Dieldrin PCB’s

Site 16. Black Warrior River at Bankhead L&D near Bessemer, AL (02462500)—1 compound reported

p,p'-DDE

Site 17. Hurricane Creek near Holt, AL (02463500)—5 compounds reported

p,p'-DDE Heptachlor epoxide PCB’s

Dieldrin trans-Nonachlor

Site 18. Cribbs Mill Creek at Tuscaloosa, AL (02465288)—12 compounds reported

cis-Chlordane p,p'-DDT Oxychlordane

trans-Chlordane Heptachlor epoxide PCB’s

p,p'-DDD cis-Nonachlor Dieldrin

p,p'-DDE trans-Nonachlor p,p'-Methoxychlor

Site 19. Tombigbee River below Coffeeville L&D near Coffeeville, AL (02469762)—3 compounds reported

p,p'-DDD p,p'-DDE

PCB’s
Fish-Tissue Samples 19

.

Table 6. Reporting frequency and range in concentrations of trace elements in 25 fish-liver samples from the Mobile River Basin[μg/g, microgram per gram; <, less than; —, not reported]

Trace element

Reporting level, 

in μg/g 

dry weight

Number of 

detections

Minimum 

concentration,

in μg/g 

dry weight

Concentrations, 

in μg/g 

dry weight, 

within the 

25th percentile

Median 

concentration, 

in μg/g 

dry weight

Concentrations, 

in μg/g 

dry weight, 

within the 

75th percentile

Maximum 

concentration, 

in μg/g 

dry weight

Number of 

sites where 

concentrations 

were reported

Aluminum < 1 25 1.10 5.09 8.22 12.58 180.17 18Antimony < .1 0 — — — — — 0Arsenic < .1 12 .34 .42 .69 1.17 2.70 9Barium < .1 19 .10 .14 .26 .39 5.65 14Beryllium < .1 0 — — — — — 0Boron < .2 25 .84 1.19 2.90 5.63 20.52 18Cadmium < .1 16 .29 .54 .78 2.25 10.90 13Chromium < .5 12 .52 .63 .72 .86 1.34 11Cobalt < .1 17 .37 .65 1.01 1.99 2.81 13Copper < .5 25 4.39 8.59 12.82 34.91 151.63 18Iron < 1 25 146.23 608.94 758.29 1,010.20 2,066.10 18Lead < .1 2 .21 .21 .33 .44 .44 2Manganese < .1 25 3.30 4.77 6.49 8.47 30.01 18Mercury < .1 13 .04 .07 .24 .58 1.80 9Molybdenum < .1 18 .46 .77 .98 1.09 1.77 13Nickel < .1 4 .29 .39 .53 .78 .98 4Selenium < .1 25 3.31 5.62 7.14 9.18 19.56 18Silver < .1 3 .29 .29 .43 1.10 1.10 3Strontium < .1 25 .14 .59 .78 1.33 3.21 18Uranium < .1 0 — — — — — 0Vanadium < .1 20 .34 .76 1.19 1.51 3.21 15Zinc < .5 25 60.00 82.56 89.99 108.57 800.64 18
20 Organochlorine Compounds and Trace Elements in Fish Tissue and Streambed Sediment in the Mobile River Basin, 1998

Table 7. Comparison of concentrations of organochlorine compounds in whole-fish tissue samples from the Mobile River Basin with standards and 

guidelines

[μg/kg, microgram per kilogram; NAS/NAE, National Academy of Science and National Academy of Engineering; ng/kg, nanogram per 

kilogram; site locations are shown in figure 2]

Compound

Standard 

concentration, 

in μg/kg wet weight

Sites where standards 

or guidelines 

were exceeded

Concentration in 

whole-fish tissue sample, 

in μg/kg wet weight

NAS/NAE-recommended maximum concentration

Chlordane and related compounds 100 Three Mile Branch (site 4)

Shades Creek (site 7)

Cribbs Mill Creek (site 18)a

a

 Multiple samples were collected and analyzed at this site.

508

316

1,205; 257.1; 250.4; 344.8

Polychlorinated biphenyls (PCB’s) 500 Coosa River (site 1)a 530, 900

Canadian guidelines for the protection of wildlife consumers of aquatic biota

DDT congeners, single or combined 14 Coosa River (site 1)a

Chattooga River (site 2)

Three Mile Branch (site 4)

Shades Creek (site 7)

Cahaba River (site 8)

Alabama River (site 9)

Town Creek (site 10)a

Lost Creek (site 13)

Locust Fork (site 14)

Black Warrior River (site 16)

Hurricane Creek (site 17)a

Cribbs Mill Creek (site 18)a

Tombigbee River (site 19)a

106.2, 171.8

47

172

23

24

84.3

248, 92

15

589

25

18, 29

85.6, 20, 39.8 

57.7, 111

Polychlorinated biphenyls (PCB’s) 0.79 ng/kg Coosa River (site 1)a

Chattooga River (site 2)

Three Mile Branch (site 4)

Shades Creek (site 7)

Cahaba River (site 8)

Alabama River (site 9)

Town Creek (site 10)

Locust Fork (site 14)

Valley Creek (site 15)

Hurricane Creek (site 17)a

Cribbs Mill Creek (site 18)a

Tombigbee River (site 19)a

900, 530

78

340

220

140

160

50

150

260

93, 97

130, 57

65, 71
Fish-Tissue Samples 21

Figure 5. Sites in the Mobile River Basin where concentrations of organochlorine compounds in whole-fish tissue exceeded

National Academy of Science and National Academy of Engineering guidelines for piscivorous wildlife.

Cahaba (site 8), Chattooga (site 2), and Alabama (site 

9) Rivers; Three Mile Branch (site 4); Locust Fork 

(site 14); and Valley (site 15), Shades (site 7),Hurricane 

(site 17), Cribbs Mill (site 18), and Town (site 10) 

Creeks (table 7; fig. 6).

No NAS/NAE or Canadianstandards currently 

exist for trace-element concentrations in fish-liver 

tissue. However, standards do exist for selected trace 

elements in fish tissues other than liver. For example, 

the U.S. Food and Drug Administration has established 
22 Organochlorine Compounds and Trace Elements in Fish Tissue and Streambed Sediment in the Mobile River Basin, 1998

Figure 6. Sites in the Mobile River Basin where concentrations of organochlorine compounds in whole-fish tissue 

exceeded Canadian tissue residue guidelines (TRG’s) for the protection of wildlife.
Fish-Tissue Samples 23

standards for mercury concentrations in edible fish for 

the protection of human health, and the U.S. Department of the Interior (1998) has presented concentrations for several trace elements, above which adverse 

effects could occur to wildlife.

Relation of Organochlorine Compounds and Trace Elements 

in Whole-Fish Tissue Samples to Land Use

Individual concentrations of organochlorine 

compounds, total DDT, the sum of cis- and transchlordane, cis- and trans-nonachlor, and oxychlordane 

(referred to as chlordane), total concentrations of 

organochlorine compounds, and the total number of 

organochlorine compounds reported in whole-fish 

tissue samples were related to land use by using a 

Spearman-rho rank correlation at the 95-percent 

confidence level. Normalizing the data to the 

percentage of lipid content in a sample did not 

alter the correlations substantially. Only nonnormalized concentration data are presented in 

further discussions in this report. For sites where 

multiple samples were collected, median 

concentrations were used for correlation analysis.

Total DDT, chlordane, and heptachlor epoxide 

concentrations in whole-fish tissue samples were 

correlated with land use. Total DDT was positively 

correlated to agricultural land use (table 8). Chlordane 

and heptachlor epoxide were positively correlated to 

urban land use and negatively correlated to forested 

land use. In addition, total concentrations of 

organochlorine compounds and numbers of 

organochlorine compounds reported were negatively 

correlated to forested land use (table 8).

Based on Spearman-rho rank correlation 

analysis and a 95-percent confidence level, there was 

an apparent relation between concentrations of three 

trace elements analyzed in fish-liver tissue and land 

use. The three trace elements were aluminum, zinc, and 

selenium (table 9). Selenium and zinc showed a 

negative relation to agricultural land use, and 

aluminum had a negative relation to urban land use in 

a basin (table 9).

Table 8. Spearman-rho rank correlations of land use and concentrations of organochlorine compounds in whole-fish tissue samples from the Mobile 

River Basin

[—, no correlation; NA, not applicable]

Correlation with percentage of land use

Total DDT Heptachlor 

epoxide Chlordane Total concentration

Total number of 

compounds 

reported

Urban land use

Spearman-rho statistic — 0.900 0.667 — —

p-value — .037 .050 — —

Number of sites where reported NA 5 9 NA NA

Agricultural land use

Spearman-rho statistic 0.714 — — — —

p-value .003 — — — —

Number of sites where reported 15 NA NA NA NA

Forested land use

Spearman-rho statistic — – 0.900 – 0.667 – 0.656 – 0.691

p-value — .037 .050 .006 .003

Number of sites where reported NA 5 9 16 16
24 Organochlorine Compounds and Trace Elements in Fish Tissue and Streambed Sediment in the Mobile River Basin, 1998

Comparison of Concentrations of Organochlorine 

Compounds and Trace Elements in Fish-Tissue 

Samples to 1991 and 1994 National Water-Quality 

Assessment Program Study-Unit Data

Whole-fish tissue samples from 504 sites in the 

1991 and 1994 NAWQA Study-Unit investigations 

throughout the United States were analyzed at the 

selected RL’s for concentrations of 28 organochlorine 

compounds. Of these 28 compounds, 27 (96 percent) 

were reported nationally, whereas 54 percent were 

reported locally. Aldrin was the only compound not 

reportednationally. Aldrin also was not reported in the 

MOBL basin. The most frequently reported compound 

nationally (81 percent of sites) as well as in the MOBL 

Study Unit (79 percent of sites) was p-p'-DDE 

(tables 4, 10).

Fifteen of the 27 organochlorine compounds 

were reported in whole-fish tissue samples from less 

than 10 percent of the national NAWQA sites—DCPA, 

o,p'-DDE, o,p'-DDT, endrin, alpha-BHC, beta-BHC, 

delta-BHC, heptachlor, hexachlorobenzene, lindane, 

p,p'-methoxychlor, o,p'-methoxychlor, mirex, 

pentachloroanisole, and toxaphene. Four of these 

15 organochlorine compounds also were reported at 

less than 10 percent of the sites sampled in the MOBL 

Study Unit—endrin, hexachlorobenzene, p,p'-

methoxychlor, and mirex. The remaining organochlorine compounds reported nationally at less than 

10 percent of the sites sampled were not reported in 

samples from the MOBL basin. Because of the low 

reporting frequency of these compounds nationally, the 

probability of detecting these compounds in the Mobile 

River Basin is low.

Twelve organochlorine compounds were 

reported at more than 10 percent of the national 

NAWQA sites. These compounds were cis-chlordane, 

trans-chlordane, o,p'-DDD, p,p'-DDD, p-p'-DDE, 

p,p'-DDT, dieldrin, heptachlor epoxide, cis-nonachlor, 

trans-nonachlor, oxychlordane, and PCB’s. All of these 

organochlorine compounds except o,p'-DDD, which 

was not reported in the MOBL, also were reported at 

10 percent or more of the MOBL sites.

Minimum, 25th percentile, median, and 75th

percentile concentrations of several organochlorine 

compounds reported in whole-fish tissue nationally 

were lower than those in the MOBL basin (table 10; 

fig. 7). These differences in concentrations may be the 

result of greater use of DDT and chlordane in the 

MOBL basin than in other parts of the country. The 

majority of the compounds with higher concentrations 

were DDT and chlordane or their related compounds. 

These differences in concentration, however, could be 

a result of the greater range in concentrations assessed 

nationally, or due to the limited number of samples 

collected in the MOBL, compared to the number of 

samples collected nationally. Otherwise, 

concentrations reported in whole-fish tissue in the 

MOBL River Basin are less than or similar to (within 

1 μg/kg) those reported nationally.

Maximum concentrations of organochlorine 

compounds in fish-tissue samples typically were higher 

nationally than in the MOBL Study Unit, excluding 

heptachlor epoxide. Concentrations of organochlorine 

compounds nationally might be expected to be higher 

than those in the MOBL Study Unit because of siteselection criteria used in some NAWQA Study Units. 

In order to quantify conditions in the study basins, 

some national NAWQA sites were selected based on 

the known or suspected presence of organochlorine 

compound contamination in streams. Concentrations 

Table 9. Spearman-rho rank correlations of land use and concentrations of trace elements in fish-liver tissue samples from the 

Mobile River Basin

[—, no correlation; NA, not applicable]

Correlation with percentage of land use

Aluminum Selenium Zinc

Urban land use

Spearman-rho statistic – 0.507 — —

p-value .032 — —

Number of sites where reported 18 NA NA

Agricultural land use

Spearman-rho statistic — – 0.476 – 0.474

p-value — .046 .045

Number of sites where reported NA 18 18
Fish-Tissue Samples 25

Table 10. Summary data for organochlorine compounds in whole-fish tissue samples from the Mobile River Basin and from 1991 and 1994 National Water-Quality Assessment Program Study Units 

nationwide

[μg/kg, microgram per kilogram; MOBL, Mobile River Basin Study Unit; —, not reported; BHC, hexachlorocyclohexane; DCPA, chlorthaldimethyl; PCB’s, polychlorinated biphenyls]

Compound 

and 

reporting level

Data source 

and 

number of sites

Number of 

sites where 

concentrations 

were reported

Minimum 

concentration,

in μg/kg 

wet weight

Concentrations, 

in μg/kg 

wet weight, 

within the 

25th percentile

Median 

concentration, 

in μg/kg 

wet weight

Concentrations, 

in μg/kg 

wet weight, 

within the 

75th percentile

Maximum 

concentration, 

in μg/kg 

wet weight

Frequency 

of detection, 

in percent

Aldrin

5 μg/kg

MOBL (19 sites) 0 — — — — — 0National (502 sites) 0 — — — — — 0

alpha-BHC

5 μg/kg

MOBL (19 sites) 0 — — — — — 0National (486 sites) 1 5.4 5.4 5.4 5.4 5.4 0.2

beta-BHC

5 μg/kg

MOBL (19 sites) 0 — — — — — 0National (472 sites) 3 5.4 5.5 5.7 5.8 5.9 .6

delta-BHC

5 μg/kg

MOBL (19 sites) 0 — — — — — 0National (464 sites) 3 5.5 5.7 6.4 16.5 19.9 .6

cis-Chlordane

5 μg/kg

MOBL (19 sites) 6 5.7 6.8 18 25.5 36 31.6National (491 sites) 169 5 8.7 13 23.2 230 34.4

trans-Chlordane

5 μg/kg

MOBL (19 sites) 3 8.8 8.8 12 35.5 35.5 15.8National (495 sites) 115 5 6.9 10 20 140 23.2

DCPA

5 μg/kg

MOBL (19 sites) 0 — — — — — 0National (493 sites) 23 5 5.9 12 32.8 78 4.7

o,p'-DDD

5 μg/kg

MOBL (19 sites) 0 — — — — — 0National (474 sites) 54 5 6.7 9.2 20 360 11.4

p,p'-DDD

5 μg/kg

MOBL (19 sites) 6 7.8 9.3 12.2 16.5 37 31.6National (477 sites) 226 5.1 10 20 41 2,000 47.4

o,p'-DDE

5 μg/kg

MOBL (19 sites) 0 — — — — — 0National (464 sites) 22 5.1 7.5 15.5 22 130 4.7

p,p'-DDE

5 μg/kg

MOBL (19 sites) 15 6.4 23 25.5 100 550 78.9National (504 sites) 408 5 18 48 130 7,300 81.0

o,p'-DDT

5 μg/kg

MOBL (19 sites) 0 — — — — — 0National (461 sites) 20 5.1 5.9 16.5 25.5 140 4.3

p,p'-DDT

5 μg/kg

MOBL (19 sites) 6 5.3 5.6 11.4 35 39 31.6National (472 sites) 126 5.2 7.4 14.5 30 430 26.7

Dieldrin

5 μg/kg

MOBL (19 sites) 7 8.1 15 25 180 240 36.8National (488 sites) 184 5 8.6 17.5 33 390 37.7
26 Organochlorine Compounds and Trace Elements in Fish Tissue and Streambed Sediment in the Mobile River Basin, 1998 Endrin 5 μg/kg MOBL (18 of 19 sites)

1 10 10 10 10 10 5.6

National (463 sites) 4 9.2 9.6 13 18.5 21 .9

Heptachlor

5 μg/kg

MOBL (19 sites) 0 —

—

—

—

— 0

National (502 sites) 2 11 11 11.5 12 12 .4

Heptachlor epoxide

5 μg/kg

MOBL (19 sites) 5 5.6 6.8 18 41 85 26.3National (495 sites) 55 5 7.7 11 18.5 44 11.1

Hexachlorobenzene

5 μg/kg

MOBL (19 sites) 1 5.4 5.4 5.4 5.4 5.4 5.3National (497 sites) 25 5 6.4 9.1 13.2 33 5.0

Lindane

5 μg/kg

MOBL (19 sites) 0 —

—

—

—

— 0

National (485 sites) 14 5.6 7.7 8.5 12 17 2.9

o,p'-Methoxychlor

5 μg/kg

MOBL (19 sites) 0 —

—

—

—

— 0

National (457 sites) 1 9.6 9.6 9.6 9.6 9.6 .2

p,p'-Methoxychlor

5 μg/kg

MOBL (19 sites) 1 15 15 15 15 15 5.3National (464 sites) 1 8.2 8.2 8.2 8.2 8.2 .2

Mirex

5 μg/kg

MOBL (19 sites) 1 8.6 8.6 8.6 8.6 8.6 5.3National (495 sites) 8 5.1 6.0 27 55 96 1.6

cis-Nonachlor

5 μg/kg

MOBL (19 sites) 3 11 11 19 29 29 15.8National (485 sites) 108 5.1 6.6 9.0 13 53 22.3

trans-Nonachlor

5 μg/kg

MOBL (19 sites) 9 8.2 11 13 28 130 47.4National (482 sites) 212 5 8.8 14.5 27 220 44.0

Oxychlordane

5 μg/kg

MOBL (19 sites) 3 8.8 8.8 31 51 51 15.8National (495 sites) 81 5.2 7.2 9.7 14 67 16.4

Pentachloroanisole

5 μg/kg

MOBL (19 sites) 0 —

—

—

—

— 0

National (490 sites) 38 5 5.6 7.2 14 87 7.8

Total PCB’s

5 μg/kg

MOBL (19 sites) 12 50 85.8 145 240 715 63.2National (504 sites) 251 50 90.2 160 380 72,000 49.8

Toxaphene

5 μg/kg

MOBL (19 sites) 0 —

—

—

—

— 0

National (482 sites) 21 210 537.5 950 2,025 12,000 4.4

Table 10. Summary data for organochlorine compounds in whole-fish tissue samples from the Mobile River Basin and from 1991 and 1994 National Water-Quality Assessment Program Study Units 

nationwide — Continued

[μg/kg, microgram per kilogram; MOBL, Mobile River Basin Study Unit; —, not reported; BHC, hexachlorocyclohexane; DCPA, chlorthaldimethyl; PCB’s, polychlorinated biphenyls]

Compound 

and 

reporting level

Data source 

and 

number of sites

Number of 

sites where 

concentrations 

were reported

Minimum 

concentration,

in μg/kg 

wet weight

Concentrations, 

in μg/kg 

wet weight, 

within the 

25th percentile

Median 

concentration, 

in μg/kg 

wet weight

Concentrations, 

in μg/kg 

wet weight, 

within the 

75th percentile

Maximum 

concentration, 

in μg/kg 

wet weight

Frequency 

of detection, 

in percent
Fish-Tissue Samples 27

of heptachlor epoxide are probably higher in samples 

from the MOBL because of the intensive use of chlordane for termite control locally.

In addition, the frequency at which 

organochlorine compounds were reported in the 

MOBL basin was either similar to (less than 5 percent 

difference in reporting frequency between local and 

national data) or less than for national data, excluding 

total PCB’s, p,p'-DDT, and heptachlor epoxide 

(table 10). Total PCB’s, p,p'-DDT, and heptachlor 

epoxide were reported more frequently in the MOBL 

than nationally (greater than 5 percent difference in 

reporting frequency between local and national data). 

Reasons for these difference in reporting frequency, at 

least when considering p,p'-DDT and heptachlor 

epoxide, are also probably a result of the historical use 

of DDT and chlordane in the Mobile River Basin.

Fish-liver samples from approximately 285 sites 

from the 1991 and 1994 NAWQA Study Units were 

analyzed for 22 trace elements, and all except 

beryllium (95 percent) were reported (table 11). Fishliver samples from the MOBL were analyzed for the 

same trace elements, and all except antimony, 

beryllium, and uranium (86 percent) were reported. 

Antimony and uranium were reported in fish-liver 

samples from only 6 percent of the sites nationally

(table 11). Because of the low reporting frequency of 

these trace elements in fish-liver tissues nationally, 

detections of these trace elements likely would not be 

expected in the MOBL Study Unit.

Maximum trace-element concentrations in fishliver tissue reported in the 1991 and 1994 NAWQA 

Study Unit samples typically were higher than those in 

the MOBL Study Unit, and sometimes substantially 

higher (table 10; fig. 8). This difference may be a result 

of site-selection criteria used in some NAWQA Study 

Units to quantify sites with suspected or known 

contamination and different rock types in other parts of 

the Nation. Nationally, minimum, 25th percentile, 

median, and 75th percentile concentrations of several 

trace elements in fish-liver samples were lower than 

those from the MOBL Study Unit probably because of 

the greater range in concentrations quantified 

nationally. Boron was the only trace element from the 

MOBL basin with concentrations consistently higher 

than those reported nationally. Geological sources of 

boron are typically associated with the western half of 

the United States and probably do not account for these 

higher concentrations (Hulbert and Klein, 1977). Other 

sources for boron in the MOBL basin include borax in 

soaps, antiseptics, and preservatives and many 

metallurgical processes (Hulbert and Klein, 1977).

The frequency with which trace elements were 

reported in fish-liver tissue was generally similar 

between MOBL and national samples (less than 

5 percent difference in reporting frequency between 

local and national data). The only exceptions were 

aluminum, barium, chromium, cobalt, lead, nickel, and 

strontium, which were reported more frequently in the 

MOBL than nationally.

Figure 7. Floating bar charts of statistical distributions of concentrations of organochlorine compounds in whole-fish tissue samples

from the Mobile River Basin and in 1991 and 1994 National Water-Quality Assessment Program Study-Unit data.
28 Organochlorine Compounds and Trace Elements in Fish Tissue and Streambed Sediment in the Mobile River Basin, 1998 Table 11. Summary data for trace elements in fish-liver tissue samples from the Mobile River Basin and from 1991 and 1994 National Water-Quality Assessment Program Study Units nationwide [μg/g, microgram per gram; MOBL, Mobile River Basin Study Unit; —, not reported] Trace element and reporting level Data source and number of sites Number of sites where concentrations were reported Minimum concentration, in μg/g dry weight Concentrations, in μg/g dry weight, within the 25th percentile Median concentration, in μg/g dry weight Concentrations, in μg/g dry weight, within the 75th percentile Maximum concentration, in μg/g dry weight Frequency of detection, in percent Aluminum 1 μg/g MOBL (18 sites) 18 1.10 6.72 10.50 14.99 91.86 100 National (281 sites) 180 1.1 2.90 6.58 18.05 1,280 64.06 Antimony 0.2 μg/g MOBL (2 sites) 0 —

—

—

—

— 0

National (31 sites) 2 .20 .20 .20 .20 .20 6.45

Arsenic

 0.1 μg/g 

MOBL (9 sites) 9 .38 .60 .72 .98 2.70 100National (189 sites) 180 .14 .30 .40 .53 3.80 95.24

Barium

0.1 μg/g

MOBL (18 sites) 14 .11 .14 .27 .39 3.06 77.78National (281 sites) 153 .10 .14 .20 .50 82.10 54.45

Beryllium

0.1 μg/g

MOBL (18 sites) 0 —

—

—

—

— 0

National (280 sites) 0 —

—

—

—

— 0

Boron

0.2 μg/g

MOBL (18 sites) 18 .84 1.19 2.64 5.72 20.52 100National (280 sites) 258 .23 .50 .70 1.10 4.60 92.14

Cadmium

0.1 μg/g

MOBL (13 sites) 13 .29 .57 .71 1.77 10.90 100National (238 sites) 236 .20 .60 1.50 4.10 58.10 99.16

Chromium

0.5 μg/g

MOBL (18 sites) 11 .52 .64 .75 .87 1.34 61.11National (280 sites) 150 .54 .60 .70 .80 2.60 53.57

Cobalt

0.1 μg/g

MOBL (13 sites) 13 .52 .90 1.24 1.93 2.81 100National (171 sites) 160 .13 .20 .31 .67 3.80 93.57

Copper

0.5 μg/g

MOBL (18 sites) 18 4.58 9.80 12.59 48.23 151.63 100National (281 sites) 281 1.40 22.50 55.90 92.10 552 100

Iron

0.1 μg/g

MOBL (18 sites) 18 146.23 657.35 765.61 987.98 2,066.10 100National (281 sites) 281 104 349 544 891 18,200 100

Lead

0.1 μg/g

MOBL (2 sites) 2 .21 .21 .32 .44 .44 100National (97 sites) 77 .14 .22 .32 .50 5.40 79.38
Fish-Tissue Samples 29

Manganese

0.1 μg/g

MOBL (18 sites) 18 3.30 4.77 6.66 11.21 30.01 100National (281 sites) 281 .70 4.40 5.90 8 542 100

Mercury

0.1 μg/g

MOBL (10 sites) 6 .24 .39 .53 1.64 1.80 60National (285 sites) 180 .11 .19 .24 .40 112 63.16

Molybdenum

0.1 μg/g

MOBL (13 sites) 13 .46 .80 1.03 1.18 1.77 100National (277 sites) 277 .30 .90 1.10 1.40 6.70 100

Nickel

0.1 μg/g

MOBL (4 sites) 4 .29 .38 .53 .78 .98 100National (140 sites) 128 .20 .30 .40 .80 7.37 91.43

Selenium

0.1 μg/g

MOBL (18 sites) 18 3.31 5.71 7.40 9.18 19.56 100National (273 sites) 273 1.30 3.90 5.30 7.30 76 100

Silver

0.1 μg/g

MOBL (3 sites) 3 .29 .29 .43 1.10 1.10 100National (172 sites) 169 .15 .30 .60 .90 19.70 98.26

Strontium

0.1 μg/g

MOBL (18 sites) 18 .14 .58 .82 1.38 2.42 100National (281 sites) 254 .13 .30 .50 .80 40.30 90.39

Uranium

0.1 μg/g

MOBL (2 sites) 0 — — — — — 0National (31 sites) 2 .20 .20 .35 .50 .50 6.45

Vanadium

0.1 μg/g

MOBL (15 sites) 15 .34 .75 1.30 1.62 3.21 100National (214 sites) 212 .18 .50 .80 1.22 9.90 99.07

Zinc

0.5 μg/g

MOBL (18 sites) 18 60.00 83.60 100.40 108.57 443.74 100National (281 sites) 281 34.69 85.12 123 524 1,950 100

Table 11. Summary data for trace elements in fish-liver tissue samples from the Mobile River Basin and from 1991 and 1994 National Water-Quality Assessment Program Study Units 

nationwide — Continued

[μg/g, microgram per gram; MOBL, Mobile River Basin Study Unit; —, not reported]

Trace element 

and 

reporting level

Data source 

and 

number of sites

Number of 

sites where 

concentrations 

were reported

Minimum 

concentration,

in μg/g 

dry weight

Concentrations, 

in μg/g 

dry weight, 

within the 

25th percentile

Median 

concentration, 

in μg/g 

dry weight

Concentrations, 

in μg/g 

dry weight, 

within the 

75th percentile

Maximum 

concentration, 

in μg/g 

dry weight

Frequency 

of detection, 

in percent
30 Go to the Master Page Named Left, Delete This Entry, and Keyboard the Title in Caps and Lower Case

Figure 8. Floating bar charts of statistical distributions of concentrations of trace elements in fish-liver tissue samples from the Mobile River Basin and

in 1991 and 1994 National Water-Quality Assessment Program Study-Unit data.

Streambed-Sediment Samples

During this study, 21 streambed-sediment 

samples from 21 sites were collected and analyzed for 

organochlorine compounds and trace elements. 

Sediment samples were collected at one site, Bogue 

Chitto Creek (site 12), in 1999. Sampling at this site 

was postponed during 1998 because of low-flow 

conditions.

Of the 21 streambed-sediment samples analyzed, 

11 (52 percent) contained concentrations of 

organochlorine compounds (tables 12, 13). Five of 

these 11 streambed-sediment samples (45 percent) 

contained multiple organochlorine compounds, and 

6 samples (55 percent) contained a single compound 

(fig. 9). No organochlorine compounds were reported 

in 10 of the streambed-sediment samples (48 percent). 

The greatest number of organochlorine compounds 

were reported in the Valley Creek sample (site 15, 

table 13).

Of the 32 organochlorine compounds analyzed in 

21 streambed-sediment samples, 13 (41 percent) 

were reported (table 12). The organochlorine 

compounds reported were -DDE, -DDD, 

trans-chlordane, cis-chlordane, trans-nonachlor, 

p,p'-DDT, dieldrin, PCB’s, cis-nonachlor, 

oxychlordane, o,p'-DDD, o,p'-DDT, and o,p'-DDE. The 

most frequently reported compound was 

p,p'-DDE. PCB’s had the highest concentration 

reported.

All of the organochlorine compounds reported in 

streambed-sediment samples except one, PCB’s, are 

organochlorine pesticides or related compounds. PCB’s 

were used in industry as a plasticizer, lubricant, and 

dielectric fluid in capacitors and transistors (U.S. 

Environmental Protection Agency, 1992).

Multiple trace elements were reported in all 

21 samples analyzed from the 21 sites. MOBL 

streambed-sediment samples were analyzed for 

44 trace elements, and all but 8 (82 percent) were 

reported in all samples (table 14). A total of 98 percent 

of the trace elements analyzed were reported. Gold was 

the only trace element not reported, and bismuth was 

reported at one site only. 

p, p' p, p'
Streambed-Sediment Samples 31

Table 12. Reporting frequency and range in concentrations of organochlorine compounds in 21 streambed-sediment samples from the Mobile River Basin[μg/kg, microgram per kilogram; <, less than; —, not reported; BHC, hexachlorocyclohexane; DCPA, chlorthaldimethyl; PCB’s, polychlorinated biphenyls]

Compound

Reporting level, 

in μg/kg 

dry weight

Number of 

detections

Minimum 

concentration,

in μg/kg 

dry weight

Concentrations, 

in μg/kg 

dry weight, 

within the 

25th percentile

Median 

concentration, 

in μg/kg 

dry weight

Concentrations, 

in μg/kg 

dry weight, 

within the 

75th percentile

Maximum 

concentration, 

in μg/kg 

dry weight

Number of 

sites where 

concentrations 

were reported

Aldrin < 1 0 — — — — — 0alpha-BHC < 1 0 — — — — — 0beta-BHC < 1 0 — — — — — 0delta-BHC < 1 0 — — — — — 0cis-Chlordane < 2 4 1 2 2 8 14 4trans-Chlordane < 1 5 2 2 2 3 25 5Chloroneb < 5 0 — — — — — 0DCPA < 5 0 — — — — — 0o,p'-DDD < 1 1 7 7 7 7 7 1p,p'-DDD < 1 5 1 2 3 4 19 5o,p'-DDE < 1 1 7 7 7 7 7 1p,p'-DDE < 1 7 1 2 2 4 8 7o,p'-DDT < 2 1 7 7 7 7 7 1p,p'-DDT < 2 3 4 4 14 23 23 3Dieldrin < 1 2 2 2 7 12 12 2Endosulfan I < 1 0 — — — — — 0Endrin < 2 0 — — — — — 0Heptachlor < 1 0 — — — — — 0Heptachlor epoxide < 1 0 — — — — — 0Isodrin < 1 0 — — — — — 0Lindane < 1 0 — — — — — 0o,p'-Methoxychlor < 5 0 — — — — — 0p,p'-Methoxychlor < 5 0 — — — — — 0Mirex < 1 0 — — — — — 0cis-Nonachlor < 1 1 4 4 4 4 4 1trans-Nonachlor < 1 4 2 2 3 8 13 4Oxychlordane < 1 1 3 3 3 3 3 1Pentachloroanisole < 1 0 — — — — — 0cis-Permethrin < 5 0 — — — — — 0trans-Permethrin < 5 0 — — — — — 0PCB’s < 50 1 160 160 160 160 160 1Toxaphene < 200 0 — — — — — 0
32 Organochlorine Compounds and Trace Elements in Fish Tissue and Streambed Sediment in the Mobile River Basin, 1998

Table 13. Sites in the Mobile River Basin where organochlorine compounds were reported in streambed-sediment samples

[Site locations are shown in figure 2; number in parentheses is the U.S. Geological Survey downstream order number; Blvd., 

Boulevard; PCB’s, polychlorinated biphenyls]

Site identification and organic compounds reported

Site 1. Coosa River near Rome, GA (02397000)—1 compound reported

p,p'-DDE

Site 2. Chattooga River above Gaylesville, AL (02398300)—1 compound reported

p,p'-DDE

Site 4. Three Mile Branch at North Blvd. at Montgomery, AL (02419977)—7 compounds reported

cis-Chlordane p,p'-DDE trans-Nonachlor

trans-Chlordane p,p'-DDT

p,p'-DDD Dieldrin

Site 7. Shades Creek at Homewood, AL (02423581)—3 compounds reported

cis-Chlordane trans-Chlordane trans-Nonachlor

Site 8. Cahaba River at Centreville, AL (02424000)—1 compound reported

p,p'-DDD

Site 10. Town Creek at Tupelo, MS (02434000)—1 compound reported

p,p'-DDE

Site 11. Buttahatchee River near Aberdeen, MS (02439400)—1 compound reported

p,p'-DDE

Site 13. Lost Creek above Parrish, AL (02454055)—4 compounds reported

cis-Chlordane p,p'-DDD

trans-Chlordane trans-Nonachlor

Site 14. Locust Fork below Snead, AL (02454500)—3 compounds reported

p,p'-DDD p,p'-DDT p,p'-DDE

Site 15. Valley Creek near Bessemer, AL (02461500)—13 compounds reported

cis-Chlordane p,p'-DDE trans-Nonachlor

trans-Chlordane o,p'-DDT Oxychlordane

o,p'-DDD p,p'-DDT PCB’s

p,p'-DDD Dieldrin

o,p'-DDE cis-Nonachlor

Site 18. Cribbs Mill Creek at Tuscaloosa, AL (02465288)—1 compound reported

trans-Chlordane
Streambed-Sediment Samples 33

Figure 9. Sites in the Mobile River Basin where organochlorine compounds were reported in streambed- sediment 

samples.
34 Organochlorine Compounds and Trace Elements in Fish Tissue and Streambed Sediment in the Mobile River Basin, 1998 Table 14. Reporting frequency and range in concentrations of trace elements in 21 streambed-sediment samples from the Mobile River Basin

[μg/g, microgram per gram; —, not reported; NA, not applicable]

Trace element

Reporting level 

in μg/g 

dry weight

Number of 

detections

Minimum 

concentration,

in μg/g 

dry weight

Concentrations, 

in μg/g 

dry weight, 

within the 

25th percentile

Median 

concentration, 

in μg/g 

dry weight

Concentrations, 

in μg/g 

dry weight, 

within the 

75th percentile

Maximum 

concentration, 

in μg/g 

dry weight

Number of 

sites where 

concentrations 

were reported

Aluminum < 0.005a 21 3.30 5.40 6.80 8 10 21Antimony < .1 21 .40 .53 .60 .90 3.30 21Arsenic < .1 21 3.80 8.50 11 16 34 21Barium < 1 21 230 320 430 520 4,300 21Beryllium < .1 21 1 1.40 2.10 2.40 2.60 21Bismuth < 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1Cadmiumb < .1 18 .10 .10 .20 .26 1.30 18Calcium < .005a 21 .10 .27 .39 .74 6.70 21Cerium < 1 21 56 80 96 120 160 21Chromium < 1 21 32 54 78 96 170 21Cobalt < 1 21 8 13 14 22 32 21Copper < 1 21 11 20 22 28 73 21Europium < 1 19 1 1.60 2 2 3 19Gallium < 1 21 7 13 16 18 27 21Gold < 1 0 —

—

—

—

— 0

Holmium < 1 18 1 1 1 2 3 18Iron < .005a 21 1.80 3.20 3.70 4.70 6.50 21Lanthanum < 1 21 31 39 53 61 78 21Lead < 1 21 17 22 26 30 160 21Lithium < 1 21 16 33 38 49 97 21Magnesium < .005a 21 .15 .28 .45 .53 .85 21Manganese < 4 21 380 1,000 1,400 2,600 5,900 21Mercury < .02 21 .04 .05 .05 .07 .23 21Molybdenum < .5 21 .60 1 1.20 1.80 4.70 21
Streambed-Sediment Samples 35

Neodymium < 1 21 23 34 45 54 68 21Nickel < 2 21 9 25 29 34 49 21Niobium < 4 21 9 14 16 18 28 21Phosphorus < .005a 21 .02 .05 .08 .10 .16 21Potassium < .005a 21 .53 .81 1.10 1.40 2.40 21Scandium < 2 21 5 8 11 14 20 21Selenium < .1 21 .30 .50 .60 .80 1.60 21Silver < .1 18 .50 .70 .80 .90 1.70 18Sodium < .005a 21 .06 .09 12 .18 .43 21Strontium < 2 21 38 46 64 86 330 21Sulfur < .05a 10 .05 .06 .07 .12 .21 10Tantalum < 1 18 1 1 2 2 2.60 18Thorium < 1 21 9 12 13 18 21 21Tin < 1 21 2 2 3 3 20 21Titanium < .005a 21 .31 .44 .49 .58 .81 21Uranium < .1 21 2.40 3.10 3.80 4.10 5.80 21Vanadium < 2 21 44 74 99 110 140 21Ytterbium < 1 21 2 2.60 3 3 4 21Yttrium < 1 21 15 23 26 29 40 21Zinc < 2 21 41 96 110 130 510 21Carbon, in percentOrganic carbon NA 21 0.89 1.30 1.60 2.90 3.70 20Organic and 

inorganic carbon

NA 21 .95 1.50 2.10 3.10 4.30 20

Inorganic carbon NA 21 .01 .03 .05 .10 1.70 20

a Value represents the percentage of sample composed of the trace element.b Only 20 of 21 streambed-sediment samples were analyzed for concentrations of cadmium.

Table 14. Reporting frequency and range in concentrations of trace elements in 21 streambed-sediment samples from the Mobile River Basin — Continued[μg/g, microgram per gram; —, not reported; NA, not applicable]

Trace element

Reporting level 

in μg/g 

dry weight

Number of 

detections

Minimum 

concentration,

in μg/g 

dry weight

Concentrations, 

in μg/g 

dry weight, 

within the 

25th percentile

Median 

concentration, 

in μg/g 

dry weight

Concentrations, 

in μg/g 

dry weight, 

within the 

75th percentile

Maximum 

concentration, 

in μg/g 

dry weight

Number of 

sites where 

concentrations 

were reported
36 Organochlorine Compounds and Trace Elements in Fish Tissue and Streambed Sediment in the Mobile River Basin, 1998

Comparison of Concentrations of Organochlorine 

Compounds and Trace Elements in Streambed-Sediment 

Samples to Standards and Guidelines

Concentrations of organochlorine compounds 

and trace elements in streambed-sediment samples 

from the MOBL basin were compared to consensusbased sediment-quality guidelines (SQG’s), and mean 

probable-effects concentrations (PEC’s) quotients were 

calculated for each sample. Only mean PEC quotients 

and PEC’s are presented in this report. The PEC’s 

represent concentrations above which effects to aquatic 

organisms would be expected to be frequent 

(MacDonald and others, 2000). Mean PEC quotients 

greater than 0.5 are predicted to be toxic to sedimentdwelling organisms.

Organochlorine compound and trace element 

concentrations reported in streambed-sediment 

samples exceeded PEC’s at five sites. These sites were 

Valley (site 15), Lost (site 13), Pintlalla (site 5), and 

Bogue Chitto (site 12) Creeks and the Black Warrior 

River (site 16) (table 15; fig. 10).

Although concentrations of five trace elements 

exceeded PEC’s, chlordane was the only 

organochlorine compound to exceed a PEC in 

streambed sediment (Valley Creek, site 15). 

Concentrations of arsenic, chromium, lead, nickel, and 

zinc exceeded their respective PEC’s. The arsenic 

concentration in the sample from the Black Warrior 

River (site 16) exceeded the PEC for streambed 

sediment. Zinc and lead concentrations were higher 

than PEC’s in the sample from Valley Creek (site 15). 

Nickel concentrations exceeded the PEC in the sample 

from Lost Creek (site 13), and chromium 

concentrations were higher than the PEC in samples 

from Pintlalla (site 5) and Bogue Chitto (site 12) 

Creeks (table 15). 

Mean PEC quotients were greater than 0.5 at two 

sites—Pintlalla (site 5) and Valley (site 15) Creeks. 

The mean PEC quotient was higher than 0.5 at Pintlalla 

Creek because of the concentration of chromium 

(table 15; fig. 10). The mean PEC quotient was higher 

than 0.5 at Valley Creek as a result of concentrations of 

total chlordane, lead, and zinc (table 15; fig. 10).

Table 15. Comparison of concentrations of organochlorine compounds and trace elements in streambed-sediment samples from the Mobile River

Basin with consensus-based probable-effects guidelines

[μg/g, microgram per gram; PEC, consensus-based probable-effects concentration; NA, not applicable; μg/kg, microgram per kilogram; site locations 

are shown in figure 2]

Analyte

Consensus-based 

probable-effects 

concentration, 

in μg/g dry weight

Sites where 

probable-effects 

concentration 

was exceeded

Concentration in 

streambed-sediment 

sample, 

in μg/g dry weight

Mean PEC quotienta (0.5)

a

 The mean PEC quotient is a unitless value.

NA Pintlalla Creek (site 5)

Valley Creek (site 15)

NA

Total chlordane 17.6 Valley Creek (site 15) 25 (μg/kg)

Arsenic 33 Black Warrior River (site 16) 34

Chromium 111 Pintlalla Creek (site 5)

Bogue Chitto Creek (site 12)

167

120

Lead 128 Valley Creek (site 15) 156

Nickel 48.6 Lost Creek (site 13) 49

Zinc 459 Valley Creek (site 15) 514
Streambed-Sediment Samples 37

Figure 10. Sites in the Mobile River Basin where concentrations of organochlorine compounds and trace elements 

exceeded probable-effects concentrations and mean quotients in streambed-sediment samples.

Relation of Organochlorine Compounds and Trace Elements 

in Streambed-Sediment Samples to Land Use

Total DDT and the total concentration and 

number of all organochlorine compounds reported in a 

sample were related to land use, based on the test 

statistic at the 95-percent confidence level. Total DDT 

and the total concentrations and numbers of all 

organochlorine compounds reported in streambed 

sediment at a site were negatively related to the amount 

of agriculture within a basin (table 16).

Concentrations of antimony, cadmium, cobalt, 

lead, lithium, manganese, niobium, tantalum, and zinc
38 Organochlorine Compounds and Trace Elements in Fish Tissue and Streambed Sediment in the Mobile River Basin, 1998

in streambed sediment were significantly correlated to 

land use based on non-normalized data and the test statistic. When the data were normalized, however, most 

of the correlations were no longer apparent (table 17).

Although normalized data may indicate 

otherwise, some of the concentrations of trace elements 

probably are related to land use. This is supported by 

several facts. Concentrations of only one trace element 

related to land use, niobium, was correlated to the 

percentage of organic carbon in the samples. The trace 

element that was correlated to land use after 

normalizing was phosphorus, which also was 

correlated with the percentage of organic carbon based 

on the Spearman-rho statistic at the 95-percent 

confidence level. In addition, there was no relation to 

percentages of organic carbon and land use. This is 

why many correlations were no longer apparent after 

normalization, except for the trace element with a 

positive relation to percentages of organic carbon. 

Therefore, sediment samples from sites with the 

highest concentrations of most trace elements reported 

did not necessarily have the highest percentages of 

organic carbon. For these reasons, the trace elements 

that appeared to be related to land-use percentages 

before normalizing probably are related, and likely are 

Table 17. Spearman-rho rank correlations of land use and concentrations of trace elements in streambed-sediment samples from the Mobile River 

Basin

[—, no correlation; NA, not applicable]

Correlation with percentage of land use

Antimony Cadmium Cobalt Lead Lithium Manganese Niobium Tantalum Zinc

Urban land use

Spearman-rho 

statistic

0.550 0.508 — 0.663 — — – 0.481 – 0.470 0.478

p-value .010 .026 — .001 — — .027 .049 .028

Number of sites 

where reported

21 19 NA 21 NA NA 21 18 21

Agricultural land use

Spearman-rho 

statistic

– 0.509 — – 0.5 – 0.500 0.449 0.447 0.492 — —

p-value .019 — .010 .021 .041 .042 .023 — —

Number of sites 

where reported

21 NA 21 21 21 21 21 NA NA

Forested land use

Spearman-rho 

statistic

— – 0.570 0.597 — — — — — —

p-value — .011 .004 — — — — — —

Number of sites 

where reported

NA 19 21 NA NA NA NA NA NA

i 

Table 16. Spearman-rho rank correlations of land use and concentrations of organochlorine 

compounds in streambed-sediment samples from the Mobile River Basin

Correlation with percentage of land use

Total DDT

Total 

organochlorine 

concentration

Total number of 

organochlorine 

compounds 

reported

Agricultural land use

Spearman-rho statistic – 0.714 – 0.651 – 0.641

p-value .031 .030 .034

Number of sites where reported 9 11 11
Streambed-Sediment Samples 39

from sources with low amounts of organic carbon 

associated with them. This also seems reasonable in 

that the majority of the trace elements in question were 

positively related to the amount of urban land use in a 

basin. Urban land use may not have large allochthenous 

carbon inputs when compared to other land uses. In 

addition, there are a large number of potential sources 

of trace elements in urban settings. Examples of 

potential sources of these trace elements in streambedsediment include industrial effluents, pipes, and runoff 

from roadways and steel-production facilities, 

although in the MOBL basin, geology also may have 

contributed to the observed concentrations. Adequate 

data from the different geological settings in the study 

area are not available to test for this hypothesis.

In addition, the streambed-sediment samples 

analyzed were less than a 63-micron fraction and 

contained very little carbon. The maximum percentage 

of organic carbon was 2.7 percent, with a range of only 

1.83 percent. So, there was only a slight difference 

between samples when considering organic carbon, 

and potentially not enough of a difference to account 

for the observed concentration ranges. Also, some trace 

elements are known to be associated with fine clay 

particles, and the laboratory used a total-extraction 

method that would liberate these trace elements from 

the particles regardless of the percentage of carbon.

Comparison of Concentrations of Organochlorine 

Compounds and Trace Elements in Streambed-Sediment 

Samples to 1991 and 1994 National Water-Quality 

Assessment Study-Unit Data

At the selected RL’s, streambed-sediment 

samples from 820 NAWQA sites across the Nation 

were analyzed for 32 organochlorine compounds, and 

26 organochlorine compounds (81 percent) were 

reported (table 18). The most frequently reported 

compound locally and nationally was p,p'-DDE. 

Organochlorine compounds that were not reported in 

streambed-sediment samples nationally were 

chloroneb, endrin, heptachlor, isodrin, o,p'-

methoxychlor, and pentachloroanisole. These 

compounds also were not reported in streambedsediment samples from the MOBL Study Unit.

Eighteen of the 26 organochlorine compounds 

(69 percent) reported nationally were reported at less 

than 10 percent of the NAWQA sites (table 18). These 

organochlorine compounds are aldrin, DCPA, o,p'-

DDD, o,p'-DDE, o,p'-DDT, endosulfan I, alpha-BHC, 

beta-BHC, heptachlor epoxide, hexachlorobenzene, 

lindane, p,p'-methoxychlor, mirex, cis-nonachlor, 

oxychlordane, cis-permethrin, trans-permethrin, and 

toxaphene. Five of these organochlorine compounds 

were reported in less than 10 percent of the streambedsediment samples from the MOBL Study Unit—

o,p'-DDD, o,p'-DDE, o,p'-DDT, cis-nonachlor, and 

oxychlordane. The remainder of these compounds—

aldrin, DCPA, endosulfan I, alpha-BHC, beta-BHC, 

heptachlor epoxide, hexachlorobenzene, lindane, 

p,p'-methoxychlor, mirex, cis-permethrin, transpermethrin and toxaphene—were not reported in the 

MOBL basin.

Eight organochlorine compounds (31 percent) 

were reported in streambed-sediment samples 

nationally at 10 percent or more of the NAWQA sites. 

These organochlorine compounds are cis-chlordane, 

trans-chlordane, p,p'-DDD, p-p'-DDE, p,p'-DDT, 

dieldrin, trans-nonachlor, and PCB’s. These same 

organochlorine compounds, except PCB’s, which were 

reported at 4.7 percent of the sites, also were reported 

at 10 percent or more of the MOBL Study-Unit sites 

(table 18).

The percentage of sites where organochlorine 

compounds were reported and minimum, 25th

percentile, median, and 75th percentile concentrations 

of organochlorine compounds in streambed-sediment 

samples from the MOBL Study Unit generally were 

similar to (within 5-percent detection frequency and 

concentrations within 1 μg/kg) or less than those 

reported nationally, although there were some 

exceptions (table 18; fig. 11). Differences in these 

concentrations may be a result of the greater range in 

concentrations quantified nationally. Indications that a 

greater range in concentrations was quantified 

nationally are the lower frequency at which and the 

limited number of analyses in which these compounds 

were reported in the MOBL Study Unit. One 

compound, trans-chlordane, was reported more 

frequently in the MOBL Study Unit than nationally 

(table 18).

Nationally, maximum concentrations of some 

organochlorine compounds were at least 10 times 

greater than those reported in the MOBL (table 10; 

fig. 11). The only compound reported at a higher 

maximum concentration locally, than nationally, was 

trans-chlordane. However, the concentration of transchlordane (25 μg/kg) reported in a sample from the 

MOBL basin was only slightly higher than the 

maximum nationally (23 μg/kg). Higher maximum 

concentrations reported in the 1991 and 1994 Study 
40 Organochlorine Compounds and Trace Elements in Fish Tissue and Streambed Sediment in the Mobile River Basin, 1998 Table 18. Summary data for organochlorine compounds in streambed-sediment samples from the Mobile River Basin and from 1991 and 1994 National Water-Quality Assessment Study Units nationwide

[μg/kg, microgram per kilogram; MOBL, Mobile River Basin Study Unit; —, no detections; BHC, hexachlorocyclohexane; DCPA, chlorthaldimethyl; PCB’s, polychlorinated biphenyls]

Compound 

and 

reporting level

Data source

and

number of sites

Number of 

sites where 

concentrations 

were reported

Minimum 

concentration,

in μg/kg 

dry weight

Concentrations, 

in μg/kg 

dry weight, 

within the 

25th percentile

Median 

concentration, 

in μg/kg 

dry weight

Concentrations, 

in μg/kg 

dry weight, 

within the 

75th percentile

Maximum 

concentration, 

in μg/kg 

dry weight

Frequency 

of detection, 

in percent

Aldrin

1 μg/kg

MOBL (21 sites) 0 —

—

—

—

— 0

National (811 sites) 5 1.3 1.75 2.2 2.93 3 .62

alpha-BHC

1 μg/kg

MOBL (21 sites) 0 —

—

—

—

— 0

National (788 sites) 1 1 1 1 1 1 .13

beta-BHC

1 μg/kg

MOBL (21 sites) 0 —

—

—

—

— 0

National (780 sites) 3 1 1.03 1.1 1.18 1.2 .38

cis-Chlordane

1 μg/kg

MOBL (20 sites) 3 2 2 3 14 14 15National (805 sites) 110 1 1.5 2.5 4.1 23 13.66

trans-Chlordane

1 μg/kg

MOBL (21 sites) 5 2 2 2 3 25 23.81National (808 sites) 115 1 1.6 2.6 4.5 23 14.23

Chloroneb

5 μg/kg

MOBL (20 sites) 0 —

—

—

—

— 0

National (774 sites) 0 —

—

—

—

— 0

DCPA

5 μg/kg

MOBL (21 sites) 0 —

—

—

—

— 0

National (808 sites) 7 5 5.63 7.1 9.25 32 .87

o,p'-DDD

1 μg/kg

MOBL (21 sites) 1 7 7 7 7 7 4.76National (675 sites) 56 1 1.35 2.3 5.05 150 8.30

p,p'-DDD

1 μg/kg

MOBL (21 sites) 5 1 2 3 4 19 23.81National (692 sites) 192 1 1.8 3.1 6.35 130 27.75

o,p'-DDE

1 μg/kg

MOBL (21 sites) 1 7 7 7 7 7 4.76National (771 sites) 11 1 1.18 1.8 3.85 22 1.43

p,p'-DDE

1 μg/kg

MOBL (21 sites) 7 1 2 2 4 8 33.33National (820 sites) 340 1 1.6 3.2 7.85 440 41.46

o,p'-DDT

2 μg/kg

MOBL (21 sites) 1 7 7 7 7 7 4.76National (715 sites) 23 2 2.6 3.3 4.88 42 3.22

p,p'-DDT

2 μg/kg

MOBL (21 sites) 3 4 4 14 23 23 14.29National (722 sites) 133 2 2.78 4.8 10 180 18.42

Dieldrin

1 μg/kg

MOBL (21 sites) 2 2 2 7 12 12 9.52National (802 sites) 103 1 1.4 1.9 3.5 21 12.84

Endosulfan I

1 μg/kg

MOBL (21 sites) 0 —

—

—

—

— 0

National (776 sites) 16 1.2 1.6 2.2 4.65 8.8 2.06

Endrin

2 μg/kg

MOBL (20 sites) 0 —

—

—

—

— 0

National (805 sites) 0 —

—

—

—

— 0
Streambed-Sediment Samples 41

Heptachlor

1 μg/kg

MOBL (21 sites) 0 — — — — — 0National (813 sites) 0 — — — — — 0

Heptachlor epoxide

1 μg/kg

MOBL (21 sites) 0 — — — — — 0National (784 sites) 7 1.1 1.12 1.4 2.18 4.6 .89

Hexachlorobenzene

1 μg/kg

MOBL (21 sites) 0 — — — — — 0National (728 sites) 20 1 1.6 2.4 6 11 2.75

Isodrin

1 μg/kg

MOBL (21 sites) 0 — — — — — 0National (803 sites) 0 — — — — — 0

Lindane

1 μg/kg

MOBL (21 sites) 0 — — — — — 0National (787 sites) 6 1 1 1.9 3.6 5.2 .76

o,p'-Methoxychlor

5 μg/kg

MOBL (20 sites) 0 — — — — — 0National (719 sites) 0 — — — — — 0

p,p'-Methoxychlor

5 μg/kg

MOBL (20 sites) 0 — — — — — 0National (708 sites) 5 5.2 6.4 22 43.25 71 .71

Mirex

1 μg/kg

MOBL (21 sites) 0 — — — — — 0National (809 sites) 18 1 1.2 1.6 2.5 5.7 2.22

cis-Nonachlor

1 μg/kg

MOBL (21 sites) 1 4 4 4 4 4 4.76National (800 sites) 53 1 1.3 1.6 2.68 10 6.63

trans-Nonachlor

1 μg/kg

MOBL (21 sites) 4 2 2 3 8.5 13 19.05National (804 sites) 119 1 1.6 2.2 3.4 18 14.80

Oxychlordane

1 μg/kg

MOBL (21 sites) 1 3 3 3 3 3 4.76National (795 sites) 3 1.2 1.2 1.2 1.35 1.4 .38

Pentachloroanisole

1 μg/kg

MOBL (21 sites) 0 — — — — — 0National (718 sites) 0 — — — — — 0

cis-Permethrin

5 μg/kg

MOBL (21 sites) 0 — — — — — 0National (669 sites) 6 6.7 8.6 16 18 26 .90

trans-Permethrin

5 μg/kg

MOBL (21 sites) 0 — — — — — 0National (651 sites) 6 7 7.6 10.45 14 15 .92

PCB’s

50 μg/kg

MOBL (21 sites) 1 160 160 160 160 160 4.76National (558 sites) 69 51 75.75 120 300 13,000 12.37

Toxaphene

200 μg/kg

MOBL (21 sites) 0 — — — — — 0National (815 sites) 2 351 351 490.5 630 630 .25

Table 18. Summary data for organochlorine compounds in streambed-sediment samples from the Mobile River Basin and from 1991 and 1994 National Water-Quality Assessment Study Units nationwide — Continued[μg/kg, microgram per kilogram; MOBL, Mobile River Basin Study Unit; —, no detections; BHC, hexachlorocyclohexane; DCPA, chlorthaldimethyl; PCB’s, polychlorinated biphenyls]

Compound 

and 

reporting level

Data source

and

number of sites

Number of 

sites where 

concentrations 

were reported

Minimum 

concentration,

in μg/kg 

dry weight

Concentrations, 

in μg/kg 

dry weight, 

within the 

25th percentile

Median 

concentration, 

in μg/kg 

dry weight

Concentrations, 

in μg/kg 

dry weight, 

within the 

75th percentile

Maximum 

concentration, 

in μg/kg 

dry weight

Frequency 

of detection, 

in percent
42 Organochlorine Compounds and Trace Elements in Fish Tissue and Streambed Sediment in the Mobile River Basin, 1998

Figure 11. Floating bar charts of statistical distributions of concentrations of organochlorine compounds in streambed-sediment samples 

from the Mobile River Basin and in 1991 and 1994 National Water-Quality Assessment Program Study-Unit data.

Units may be a result of site-selection criteria 

used in some of the NAWQA Study Units as previously 

described in the fish-tissue section of this report. 

Of the 44 trace elements analyzed in MOBL 

streambed-sediment samples, only 40 were readily 

comparable at the common censoring level (table 19). 

Nationally, bismuth, gold, holmium, and tantalum had 

too few samples censored at the current RL used by the 

NWQL to enable comparison with data from the 

MOBL Study Unit.

The percentage of sites where a trace elements 

was reported and the minimum and quartile 

concentrations reported in streambed-sediment 

samples from the MOBL basin were similar to (within 

1 μg/g in concentration or within 5 percent difference 

in reporting frequency) or less than those reported 

nationally, although there were several exceptions. 

Minimum, 25th percentile, median, and 75th percentile 

concentrations of several trace elements analyzed in 

streambed-sediment samples in the MOBL were 

slightly greater than those nationally, probably as a 

result of a wider range in concentrations characterized 

nationally. Mercury, silver, and ytterbium were 

reported more frequently in the MOBL than nationally, 

although at similar concentrations (table 19). 

Maximum concentrations typically were higher in the 

national NAWQA streambed-sediment samples 

(table 19; fig. 12). This may be a result of site-selection 

criteria used in some of the NAWQA Study Units. Sites 

of suspected or known trace-element contamination 

were selected for sampling in some NAWQA Study 

Units to quantify the worse-case scenario.
Streambed-Sediment Samples 43

Table 19. Summary data for trace elements in streambed-sediment samples from the Mobile River Basin and from 1991 and 1994 National Water-Quality Assessment Study Units nationwide[μg/g, microgram per gram; MOBL, Mobile River Basin Study Unit; —, not reported]

Trace element 

and 

reporting level

Data source 

and 

 number of sites

Number of 

sites where 

concentrations 

were reported

Minimum 

concentration,

in μg/g 

dry weight

Concentrations, 

in μg/g 

dry weight, 

within the 

25th percentile

Median 

concentration, 

in μg/g 

dry weight

Concentrations, 

in μg/g 

dry weight, 

within the 

75th percentile

Maximum 

concentration, 

in μg/g 

dry weight

Frequency 

of detection, 

in percent

Aluminuma

0.005% of sample

MOBL (21 sites) 21 3.3 5.4 6.8 8 10 100National (781 sites) 781 1.4 5.3 6.3 7.5 14 100

Antimony

0.1 μg/g

MOBL (21 sites) 21 .4 .53 .6 .9 3.3 100National (756 sites) 753 .2 .6 .9 1 24 99.60

Arsenic

0.1 μg/g 

MOBL (21 sites) 21 3.8 8.5 11 16 34 100National (765 sites) 764 1 5 6.9 10 110 99.87

Barium

1 μg/g

MOBL (21 sites) 21 230 320 430 520 4,300 100National (775 sites) 775 6 380 490 580 1,600 100

Beryllium

0.1 μg/g

MOBL (21 sites) 21 1 1.4 2.1 2.4 2.6 100National (702 sites) 702 1 1 2 2 20 100

Bismuth

1 μg/g

MOBL (21 sites) 0 —

—

—

—

— 0

National (2 sites) 1 20 20 20 20 20 50

Cadmium

0.1 μg/g

MOBL (21 sites) 13 .2 .2 .2 .3 1.3 61.90National (775 sites) 724 .16 .3 .5 .9 57 93.42

Calciuma

0.005% of sample

MOBL (21 sites) 21 .1 .27 .39 .74 6.7 100National (770 sites) 770 .1 .64 1.5 3.4 28 100

Cerium

1 μg/g

MOBL (21 sites) 21 56 80 96 120 160 100National (771 sites) 771 13 56 73 96 360 100

Chromium

1 μg/g

MOBL (21 sites) 21 32 54 78 96 170 100National (781 sites) 781 8 51 65 83 630 100

Cobalt

1 μg/g

MOBL (21 sites) 21 8 13 14 22 32 100National (781 sites) 781 2 11 16 22 210 100

Copper

1 μg/g

MOBL (21 sites) 21 11 20 22 28 73 100National (781 sites) 781 1 18 28 43 620 100

Europium

1 μg/g

MOBL (21 sites) 15 1.6 2 2 2 3 71.43National (80 sites) 80 1.3 2 2 3 37 100

Gallium

1 μg/g

MOBL (21 sites) 21 7 13 16 18 27 100National (762 sites) 762 4 12 16 19 50 100

Gold

1 μg/g

MOBL (21 sites) 0 —

—

—

—

— 0

National (2 sites) 1 8 8 8 8 8 50

Holmium

1 μg/g

MOBL (21 sites) 8 2 2 2 2 3 38.10National (3 sites) 3 1.2 1.2 4 4 4 100
44 Organochlorine Compounds and Trace Elements in Fish Tissue and Streambed Sediment in the Mobile River Basin, 1998 Irona 1% of sample MOBL (21 sites) 21 1.8 3.2 3.7 4.7 6.5 100 National (781 sites) 781 .7 2.6 3.5 4.5 21 100 Lanthanum 1 μg/g MOBL (21 sites) 21 31 39 53 61 78 100 National (773 sites) 773 9 31 40 52 200 100 Lead1 μg/g MOBL (21 sites) 21 17 22 26 30 160 100 National (781 sites) 776 6 19 29 45.5 2,300 99.36 Lithium 1 μg/g MOBL (21 sites) 21 16 33 38 49 97 100 National (781 sites) 781 6 23 30 50 91 100 Magnesiuma 0.005% of sample MOBL (21 sites) 21 .15 .28 .45 .53 .85 100 National (771 sites) 771 .07 .49 .79 1.1 4.7 100 Manganese 4 μg/g MOBL (21 sites) 21 380 1,000 1,400 2,600 5,900 100 National (781 sites) 781 53 680 1,000 1,700 34,000 100 Mercury 0.02 μg/g MOBL (21 sites) 21 .04 .05 .05 .07 .23 100 National (780 sites) 669 .03 .05 .08 .15 14.5 85.77 Molybdenum 0.5 μg/g MOBL (21 sites) 21 .6 1 1.2 1.8 4.7 100 National (51 sites) 51 .52 2 3 6 260 100 Neodymium 1 μg/g MOBL (21 sites) 21 23 34 45 54 68 100 National (764 sites) 764 5 27 34 46 180 100 Nickel 2 μg/g MOBL (21 sites) 21 9 25 29 34 49 100 National (781 sites) 781 6 21 28 38 400 100 Niobium 4 μg/g MOBL (21 sites) 21 9 14 16 18 28 100 National (769 sites) 718 5 9 12 16 68 93.37 Phosphorusa 0.005% of sample MOBL (21 sites) 21 .02 .05 .08 .10 .16 100 National (771 sites) 771 .03 .09 .12 .16 1.8 100 Potassiuma 0.005% of sample MOBL (21 sites) 21 .53 .81 1.1 1.4 2.4 100 National (771 sites) 771 .06 1.1 1.4 1.8 3.1 100 Scandium

2 μg/g

MOBL (21 sites) 21 5 8 11 14 20 100National (769 sites) 768 3 8 11 14 53 99.87

Selenium

0.1 μg/g

MOBL (21 sites) 21 .3 .5 .6 .8 1.6 100National (778 sites) 775 .17 .5 .7 1.1 13 99.61

Silver

0.1 μg/g

MOBL (20 sites) 18 .5 .7 .8 .9 1.7 90National (770 sites) 549 .12 .2 .3 .5 12.8 71.30

Table 19. Summary data for trace elements in streambed-sediment samples from the Mobile River Basin and from 1991 and 1994 National Water-Quality Assessment Study Units 

nationwide — Continued

Trace element 

and 

reporting level

Data source 

and 

 number of sites

Number of 

sites where 

concentrations 

were reported

Minimum 

concentration,

in μg/g 

dry weight

Concentrations, 

in μg/g 

dry weight, 

within the 

25th percentile

Median 

concentration, 

in μg/g 

dry weight

Concentrations, 

in μg/g 

dry weight, 

within the 

75th percentile

Maximum 

concentration, 

in μg/g 

dry weight

Frequency 

of detection, 

in percent
Streambed-Sediment Samples 45

Sodiuma

0.005% of sample

MOBL (21 sites) 21 0.06 0.09 0.12 0.18 0.43 100National (771 sites) 771 .02 .24 .61 .96 2.4 100

Strontium

2 μg/g

MOBL (21 sites) 21 38 46 64 86 330 100National (781 sites) 781 17 90 140 210 1,600 100

Sulfura

0.05% of sample

MOBL (19 sites) 7 .06 .07 .1 .19 .21 36.84National (760 sites) 586 .06 .08 .12 .21 1.69 77.11

Tantalum

1 μg/g

MOBL (21 sites) 10 2 2 2 2 2.6 47.62National (1 site) 0 —

—

—

—

— 0

Thorium

1 μg/g

MOBL (21 sites) 21 9 12 13 18 21 100National (728 sites) 728 2.9 9.58 12 15.7 91 100

Tin

1 μg/g

MOBL (21 sites) 21 2 2 3 3 20 100National (33 sites) 33 2.7 6 9 16 54 100

Titaniuma

0.05% of sample

MOBL (21 sites) 21 .31 .44 .49 .58 .81 100National (758 sites) 758 .05 .28 .36 .48 1.9 100

Uranium

0.1 μg/g

MOBL (21 sites) 21 2.4 3.1 3.8 4.1 5.8 100National (756 sites) 756 .67 3.02 3.96 5.49 45.2 100

Vanadium

2 μg/g

MOBL (21 sites) 21 44 74 99 110 140 100National (781 sites) 781 14 70 88 110 380 100

Ytterbium

1 μg/g

MOBL (21 sites) 21 2 2.6 3 3 4 100National (769 sites) 682 2 2 2 3 12 88.69

Yttrium

1 μg/g

MOBL (21 sites) 21 15 23 26 29 40 100National (771 sites) 771 4 19 23 29 130 100

Zinc

2 μg/g

MOBL (21 sites) 21 41 96 110 130 510 100National (781 sites) 781 21 86 120 180 9,000 100

a Trace element was reported as a percentage of the sample and not as a unit of measure in micrograms per gram.

Table 19. Summary data for trace elements in streambed-sediment samples from the Mobile River Basin and from 1991 and 1994 National Water-Quality Assessment Study Units 

nationwide — Continued

Trace element 

and 

reporting level

Data source 

and 

 number of sites

Number of 

sites where 

concentrations 

were reported

Minimum 

concentration,

in μg/g 

dry weight

Concentrations, 

in μg/g 

dry weight, 

within the 

25th percentile

Median 

concentration, 

in μg/g 

dry weight

Concentrations, 

in μg/g 

dry weight, 

within the 

75th percentile

Maximum 

concentration, 

in μg/g 

dry weight

Frequency 

of detection, 

in percent
46 Organochlorine Compounds and Trace Elements in Fish Tissue and Streambed Sediment in the Mobile River Basin, 1998

Figure 12. Floating bar charts of statistical distributions of concentrations of trace elements in streambed-sediment samples from the Mobile River 

Basin and in 1991 and 1994 National Water-Quality Assessment Program Study-Unit data. (

1

Trace element was reported as a percentage of the sample and not 

as a unit of measure in micrograms per gram.)

Comparison Between Sampling Media

Whole-fish tissue and streambed-sediment 

samples from the MOBL Study Unit were analyzed 

for 33 organochlorine compounds. About half, or 

55 percent, of the 33 compounds were reported in the 

MOBL. These two sampling media had 27 analytes 

(81 percent) in common (table 20). A total of 18 

(67 percent) of the organochlorine compounds were 

reported in either media, and 10 (37 percent) were 

reported in both media. Sixteen (59 percent) of the 

27 compounds in common between these media were 

reported in whole-fish tissues, whereas 12 (44 percent) 

of the compounds were reported in streambed-sediment 

samples from the MOBL (table 20).

Although streambed-sediment samples were 

analyzed for a greater number of compounds from a 

greater number of sites than were fish-tissue samples, 

tissue samples had a greater number of compounds 

reported and greater reporting frequency when 

considering both samples and sites than did streambed 

sediments. Of the 28 organochlorine compounds 

analyzed in whole-fish tissue samples, 16 (57 percent) 

were reported from 16 of the 19 sites (84 percent) 

sampled (fig. 13). Twelve (41 percent) of the 

32 organochlorine compounds analyzed in streambed-
Comparison Between Sampling Media 47

Table 20. Organochlorine compounds analyzed in streambed-sediment and fish-tissue samples from the Mobile 

River Basin

[Shaded blocks indicate the analyte was analyzed and reported; blank blocks indicate the analyte was analyzed but not 

reported; BHC, hexachlorocyclohexane; —, the analyte was not analyzed; DCPA, chlorthaldimethyl; PCB’s, polychlorinated biphenyls]

Compound Streambedsediment samples

Fish-tissue 

samples

Aldrin

alpha-BHC

beta-BHC

delta-BHC —

cis-Chlordane

trans-Chlordane

Chloroneb —

DCPA

o,p'-DDD

p,p'-DDD

o,p'-DDE

p,p'-DDE

o,p'-DDT

p,p'-DDT

Dieldrin

Endosulfan I —

Endrin

Heptachlor

Heptachlor epoxide

Hexachlorobenzene

Isodrin —

Lindane

o,p'-Methoxychlor

p,p'-Methoxychlor

Mirex

cis-Nonachlor

trans-Nonachlor

Oxychlordane

Pentachloroanisole

cis-Permethrin —

trans-Permethrin —

PCB’s

Toxaphene

sediment samples were reported from 11 of the 21 sites 

(52 percent) sampled. 

One possible explanation for a greater number of 

organochlorine compounds reported with a higher 

frequency in fish-tissue samples is that multiple tissue 

samples were collected at several sites, whereas only a 

single sediment sample was collected at each site. 

Having multiple samples at some sites and a greater 

number of samples overall could increase the potential 

for detection of individual organochlorine compounds 

and the number of organochlorine compounds at 

individual sites. On average, approximately two 

additional organochlorine compounds were reported for 

sites with multiple samples than for sites with only a 

single sample. Other studies, however, have noted 

higher detection frequencies in fish tissue than in 

streambed sediment. These higher detection 

frequencies possibly occur because of bioaccumulation
48 Organochlorine Compounds and Trace Elements in Fish Tissue and Streambed Sediment in the Mobile River Basin, 1998

Figure 13. Sites in the Mobile River Basin where organochlorine compounds were reported.

and biomagnification, or because of the greater solubility of organochlorine compounds in fish lipids 

than in organic carbon in streambed sediment (Nowell and others, 1999; Steven L. Goodbred, U.S. Geological Survey, written commun., 2002; tables 4, 11, 

20; fig. 13). In the MOBL basin, 86 percent of the 22 

trace elements analyzed in fish-tissue samples were 

reported (table 21). All sites and samples had reportable concentrations of trace elements. Ninety-eight 

percent of the 44 trace elements analyzed in 

streambed-sediment samples were reported. All

sediment-sampling sites had reportable trace-element 
Comparison Between Sampling Media 49

Table 21. Trace elements analyzed in streambed-sediment and fish-tissue samples from the Mobile River 

Basin

[Shaded blocks indicate the analyte was analyzed and reported; blank blocks indicate the analyte was analyzed 

but not reported; —, the analyte was not analyzed]

Compound Streambedsediment samples

Fish-tissue 

samples

Aluminum

Antimony

Arsenic

Barium

Beryllium

Bismuth —

Boron —

Cadmium

Calcium —

Cerium —

Chromium

Cobalt

Copper

Europium —

Gallium —

Gold —

Holmium —

Iron

Lanthanum —

Lead

Lithium —

Magnesium —

Manganese

Mercury

Molybdenum

Neodymium —

Nickel

Niobium —

Phosphorus —

Potassium —

Scandium —

Selenium

Silver

Sodium —

Strontium

Sulfur —

Tantalum —

Thorium —

Tin —

Titanium —

Uranium

Vanadium

Ytterbium —

Yttrium —

Zinc
50 Organochlorine Compounds and Trace Elements in Fish Tissue and Streambed Sediment in the Mobile River Basin, 1998

concentrations. Collectively, a total of 44 trace elements were reported from both media. These two sampling media had 21 analytes in common, 18 of which 

(86 percent) were reported in both media (table 21). 

Antimony, beryllium, and uranium were the only trace 

elements analyzed in both media but only reported in 

streambed-sediment samples. Trace elements typically 

were reported more frequently in streambed-sediment 

samples than in fish-liver samples, possibly because of 

the total extraction method used by the NWQL, which 

is a good indication of what is present in streambed 

sediments as a whole. Fish-tissue samples, however, 

may give a better idea as to which trace elements are 

bioavailable (tables 6, 14, 21).

Spearman-rho rank correlations were calculated 

between the two sampling media using median 

concentrations of organochlorine compounds reported 

in fish-tissue and streambed-sediment samples at each 

site. In addition, the test statistic was calculated for the 

median total concentration and median total number of 

organochlorine compounds reported at each site in each 

medium. Based on the test statistic at the 95-percent 

confidence level, no relation was found between the 

sampling media when considering organochlorine 

compounds.

A Spearman-rho rank correlation also was 

calculated for individual trace-element median 

concentrations at each site in fish tissue and streambed 

sediments. Based on the test statistic at the 95-percent 

confidence level, no relation was evident between the 

two media.

SUMMARY AND CONCLUSIONS

During the summer of 1998, as part of the 

National Water-Quality Assessment Program, a survey 

was conducted to determine which organochlorine 

compounds and trace elements occur in fish tissues and 

streambed sediments in the Mobile River Basin, which 

includes parts of Alabama, Mississippi, Georgia, and 

Tennessee. The data collected were compared to 

guidelines related to wildlife, land use, and to 1991 and 

1994 National Water-Quality Assessment Program 

Study-Unit data.

Twenty-one sites were sampled in subbasins of 

the Mobile River Basin. The subbasins ranged in size 

from about 9 to 22,000 square miles and were 

dominated by either a single land use or a combination 

of land uses. The major land-use categories were urban, 

agriculture, and forest.

Organochlorine compounds are widespread in 

the Mobile River Basin (MOBL). At least one 

organochlorine compound was present at a reportable 

level at a majority of the sampling sites (84 percent) in 

the MOBL and in the whole-fish (80 percent) and 

streambed-sediment (52 percent) samples. A majority 

of sites (75 percent) where fish-tissue samples were 

collected had multiple organochlorine compounds 

reported, as did many of the streambed-sediment 

sampling sites (45 percent). The majority of 

concentrations reported were less than their reporting 

levels (RL’s), typically 5 μg/kg in fish-tissue samples 

and 1 μg/kg in streambed-sediment samples. 

Organochlorine compounds were reported more 

frequently in fish tissue than in streambed-sediment 

samples, possibly because of bioaccumulation and 

biomagnification.

Based on concentrations of organochlorine 

compounds reported in fish-tissue samples from the 

MOBL basin, National Academy of Science and 

National Academy of Engineering (NAS/NAE) 

recommended maximum concentrations, and Canadian 

tissue-residue guidelines (TRG’s), a potential exists for 

adverse effects to piscivorous wildlife at a majority 

(14 of 19 sites or 74 percent) of sites sampled due to 

residues or breakdown products related to PCB’s, 

chlordane, and DDT. Examples of piscivorous wildlife 

inhabiting the MOBL basin include otters, herons, and 

kingfishers. The sites with samples exceeding these 

concentrations are Three Mile Branch (site 4), Cribbs 

(site 18), Hurricane (site 17), Locust (site 14), Lost 

(site 13), Shades (site 7), Town (site 10), and Valley 

(site 15) Creeks, and the Alabama (site 9), Black 

Warrior (site 16), Chattooga (site 2), Cahaba (site 8), 

Coosa (site 1), and Tombigbee (site 19) Rivers.

Although concentration data for streambedsediment samples produced using NAWQA sample 

processing and analysis methods may overestimate the 

actual concentration in whole sediment and, therefore, 

overestimate the potential for adverse effects to 

organisms in association with streambed sediment 

when compared to probable-effects concentrations 

(PEC’s), there probably is a potential for adverse 

effects at two sites. Pintlalla (site 5) and Valley (site 15) 

Creeks were the only sites out of five sites, from which 

samples contained concentrations of either 

organochlorine compounds or trace elements that 

exceed PEC’s, to have mean PEC quotients greater 
Summary and Conclusions 51

than 0.5. Samples whose mean PEC quotients are 

greater than 0.5 are considered to indicate a high 

probability of adverse effects to organisms in 

association with the streambed sediment at that site. In 

addition, the mean PEC quotient at Valley Creek 

(site 15) was calculated based on multiple analytes 

exceeding their respective PEC’s. Therefore, based on 

the mean PEC quotient and the occurrence of multiple 

analytes above their respective PEC’s, adverse effects 

may occur to organisms in association with streambed 

sediments at the Pintlalla (site 5) and Valley (site 15) 

Creek sites.

The potential harm to wildlife caused by 

exposure to organochlorine compounds and trace 

elements can be due to chronic or acute exposure and, 

depending on the concentration and duration of 

exposure, can be lethal or sub-lethal. Chlordane and its 

related compounds, total DDT, and PCB’s are known to 

have several adverse effects on wildlife. Reduced 

fecundity due to eggshell thinning in several 

piscivorous bird species has been well documented, as 

well as the potential for liver disease and 

carcinogenicity. In addition, endocrine system effects 

have been associated with these compounds. The types 

of adverse effects to wildlife due to concentrations of 

various trace elements also include carcinogenicity, 

liver disease, reduced fecundity, and endocrine 

disruption.

The majority of the 18 organochlorine 

compounds reported in samples from the MOBL basin 

and those compounds most frequently reported were 

chlordane, DDT, PCB’s, or their breakdown products. 

These compounds were prevalent, although the use of 

chlordane and PCB’s has been banned since 1988 and 

for DDT since 1973.

Concentrations of chlordane, total DDT, 

heptachlor epoxide, and the total number and 

concentrations of pesticides reported in a basin were 

related to land use. Concentrations of chlordane and 

heptachlor epoxide in whole-fish tissue were positively 

correlated to the amount of urban land use in a basin. 

Total DDT concentrations in whole-fish tissues were 

positively related to agricultural land use, whereas total 

DDT concentrations in streambed sediments were 

negatively related to agricultural land use. 

It is not surprising that concentrations of 

chlordane, heptachlor epoxide, and the total 

concentration and number of organochlorine 

compounds reported were either positively related to 

urban land use or negatively related to the amount of 

agriculture or forest within a basin. Chlordane, 

although used on crops, was extensively used for 

termite control in urban areas of the termite-prone 

subtropical Southeast. These uses often outstripped 

those of agriculture. In addition, PCB’s often are 

associated with urban areas because they were used in 

electrical transformers and in manufacturing processes. 

The negative relation of these organochlorine 

compounds with agricultural and forested lands can be 

explained by the inverse relation of agricultural and 

forested land uses to the amount of urban land use 

within a basin.

DDT was used extensively for agricultural 

purposes in the United States, and other studies have 

shown the positive relation of concentrations of DDT 

in stream sediments and fish tissue to agricultural land 

use. Thus the observed positive relation of DDT 

concentrations in whole-fish tissue samples from the 

Mobile River Basin to agriculture is probably to be 

expected, although DDT was commonly used for 

mosquito control in urban areas of the South. The 

negative correlation of DDT concentrations in 

streambed sediment to the amount of agriculture in a 

basin is harder to explain. This correlation may be 

because concentrations of DDT in sediment are low 

enough that the relation is not perceptible by using 

current analysis methods but is perceptible in wholefish tissues because of bioaccumulation or because the 

correlation may be spurious.

Fewer of the total number of organochlorine 

compounds analyzed both locally and nationally were 

reported in whole-fish tissue (57 percent) and 

streambed-sediment (41 percent) samples in the 

MOBL basin than nationally (96 percent in whole-fish 

tissue samples and 86 percent in streambed-sediment 

samples). The fewer number of compounds reported in 

the MOBL basin is because of the greater number of 

pesticides used nationally than in the MOBL.

Organochlorine compounds that were not 

reported in samples from the MOBL but were reported 

nationally were reported at extremely low frequencies. 

This low frequency of detection nationally may 

indicate a very low probability of detection in any one 

study unit. In addition, sites in some NAWQA Study 

Units were sampled because of known contamination 

to quantify the extent of contamination. This siteselection criterion probably accounts for the higher 

maximum concentrations reported in the 1991 and 

1994 NAWQA Study Units for many of the 

organochlorine compounds.
52 Organochlorine Compounds and Trace Elements in Fish Tissue and Streambed Sediment in the Mobile River Basin, 1998

In general, concentrations of organochlorine 

compounds and the frequency with which they were 

reported in whole-fish and streambed-sediment 

samples from the MOBL Study Unit are similar to or 

less than those reported in 1991 and 1994 NAWQA 

Study Units. Exceptions to this generality that cannot 

be explained by the wider range in concentrations 

characterized, the lower reporting frequency, and siteselection criteria for sites nationally, are the higher 

reporting frequency of heptachlor epoxide, p,p'-DDT, 

and PCB’s in whole-fish samples, higher quartile 

concentrations of heptachlor epoxide and p,p'-DDT in 

whole-fish samples, the higher maximum 

concentration of heptachlor epoxide in whole-fish 

samples, and the higher maximum concentration and 

reporting frequency of trans-chlordane in streambedsediment samples in the MOBL Study Unit. The higher 

reporting frequencies and concentrations of heptachlor 

epoxide, p,p'-DDT, and trans-chlordane in samples 

from the MOBL are probably due to the greater use of 

these compounds locally than nationally. The reason 

for the higher reporting frequency of PCB’s is less clear 

but may be due to the production of these compounds 

within the basin.

The majority of trace elements analyzed in fishliver tissues (86 percent) and streambed-sediment 

(98 percent) samples were reported during this study. 

All of the fish-liver tissue and streambed-sediment 

samples analyzed contained reportable concentrations 

of multiple trace elements. In addition, multiple trace 

elements were reported in samples from all sites.

When considering the relation of trace-element 

concentrations in samples from the MOBL to land use, 

the picture is not as clear as that for organochlorine 

compounds. This lack of clarity is due to the possibility 

of geologic sources for the trace elements analyzed 

within the MOBL and the ubiquitous nature of many of 

these trace elements. However, there may be a 

correlation between several trace elements and land use 

based on the current analysis.

Concentrations of antimony, cadmium, lead, and 

zinc in streambed-sediment samples were positively 

correlated to the amount of urban land use within a 

basin. This positive correlation of concentrations of 

antimony, cadmium, lead, and zinc to urban land use 

within a basin is reasonable. Several of the sites 

sampled during the 1998 study were within the 

Birmingham area. This portion of the basin is known 

for its long history of involvement with the steel 

industry. Cadmium, lead, and zinc are all known to be 

associated with this type of industry, and antimony is a 

common impurity in ores. In addition, these trace 

elements have nonpoint sources in urban areas and are 

often associated with runoff from urban centers. 

Nonpoint sources for these trace elements in urban 

areas include batteries, ceramics, wear of automobile 

parts, pigments, and combustion.

At the common reporting level selected for this 

analysis, fewer trace elements were reported in fishliver tissue (86 percent) and streambed-sediment 

(95 percent) samples in the MOBL basin than 

nationally (95 percent in fish-liver samples and 

98 percent in streambed-sediment samples). The fewer 

number of trace elements reported in the MOBL is due 

to the greater range in geologies sampled nationally.

In general, concentrations of trace elements and 

the frequency with which they were reported in fishliver and streambed-sediment samples from the MOBL 

Study Unit are similar to or less than those reported in 

1991 and 1994 NAWQA Study Units. Exceptions do 

exist, typically explained by the wider range of 

geological settings, low detection frequency, and siteselection criterion nationally.

Concentration quartiles of a few trace elements 

reported in the MOBL were slightly higher that those 

nationally. These concentrations were probably lower 

in 1991 and 1994 NAWQA Study Unit data because of 

the more diverse geological settings sampled 

nationally. Samples from other NAWQA Study Units 

were probably collected from areas where the 

composition of weatherable material contained less of 

some trace elements than the geologic settings of the 

MOBL, accounting for the lower concentrations.

Trace elements not reported in samples from the 

MOBL Study Unit that were reported nationally were 

reported infrequently. This low reporting frequency 

nationally probably indicates a very low probability of 

detection in any one study unit. In addition, some 

NAWQA Study Units sampled sites of known 

contamination to quantify the extent of that 

contamination. This site-selection criterion probably 

accounts for the higher maximum concentrations 

reported in the 1991 and 1994 Study Units for many of 

the trace elements.

Exceptions not explained by low detection 

frequency and site-selection criteria nationally are the 

higher frequencies with which aluminum, barium, 

chromium, cobalt, nickel, and strontium were reported 
References Cited 53

in fish-liver samples, the consistently higher 

concentrations of boron in fish-liver samples, and the 

higher reporting frequency in streambed-sediment 

samples of mercury, silver, and ytterbium in the MOBL 

Study Unit.

The frequency with which these trace elements 

were reported in fish-liver tissue and streambedsediment samples may be higher in the MOBL due to 

geology or anthropomorphic activities. Boron 

concentrations are probably due to anthropomorphic 

activities, because there are no major geological 

sources for boron in the MOBL basin. Potential sources 

locally for most of these trace elements include 

irrigation drain water (mercury), coal combustion 

(mercury and nickel), metallurgy (barium, boron, 

chromium, and nickel), soaps (boron), and the wood 

and pulp industry (barium and chromium). Other 

sources that could enrich samples from the MOBL 

basin are the Black Warrior coal fields (aluminum and 

mercury) in the northwestern quarter of the basin, 

which are known to have elevated levels of mercury, 

and barite deposits (barium) in east-central Alabama. 

Although, the potential reasons for the higher 

frequencies with which cobalt, strontium, silver, and 

ytterbium were reported in the MOBL basin are less 

clear.

In summary, the widespread occurrence of many 

organochlorine compounds and certain trace elements 

in samples from the Mobile River Basin can probably 

be attributed to land use. The higher concentration of 

certain organochlorine compounds and trace elements 

in samples from the MOBL than in those samples 

collected nationally and the potential for adverse 

effects to wildlife at many sites can also be attributed to 

land-use practices within the MOBL basin. The 

majority of compounds reported were related to those 

used in termite control in urban areas and to control of 

crop pests in agricultural areas. In addition, the 

majority of trace elements reported were related to 

metallurgy or nonpoint runoff from urban areas—the 

majority of the metallurgical practices within the 

MOBL River Basin are associated with the 

Birmingham metropolitan area.

REFERENCES CITED

Arbogast, B.F., ed., 1996, Analytical methods manual for the 

Mineral Resource Surveys Program: U.S. Geological 

Survey Open-File Report 96-0525, 248 p.

Atkins, J.B., 1998, National Water-Quality Assessment 

Program, Mobile River Basin: U.S. Geological Survey 

Fact Sheet FS-100-98, 4 p.

Canadian Council of Ministers of the Environment, 1999, 

Canadian tissue residue guidelines for the protection of 

wildlife consumers of aquatic biota—Summary table, 

in Canadian Council of Ministers of the Environment, 

1999, Canadian environmental quality guidelines: 

Winnipeg, Canada.

Crawford, J.K., and Luoma, S.N., 1993, Guidelines for the 

studies of contaminants in biological tissues for the 

National Water-Quality Assessment Program: U.S. 

Geological Survey Open-File Report 92-494, 

69 p.

Foreman, W.T., Connor, B.F., Furlong, E.T., Vaught, D.G., 

and Merten, L.M., 1995, Methods of analysis by the 

U.S. Geological Survey National Water Quality 

Laboratory—Determination of organochlorine 

pesticides and polychlorinated biphenyls in bottom 

sediment by dual capillary-column gas chromatography with electron-capture detection: U.S. 

Geological Survey Open-File Report 95-140, 78 p.

Gilliom, R.J., Alley, E.M., and Gurtz, M.E., 1995, Design 

of the National Water-Quality Assessment Program—

Occurrence and distribution of water-quality 

conditions: U.S. Geological Survey Circular 1112, 33 p.

Glodt, S.R., and Pirkey, K.D., 1998, Participation in 

performance-evaluation studies by the U.S. Geological 

Survey, National Water Quality Laboratory: U.S. 

Geological Survey Fact Sheet FS-023-98, 6 p.

Goldhaber, M.B., Irwin, E., Atkins, J.B., Lee, R., Zappia, H., 

Black, D.D., and Finkelman, R.B., 2000, 

Environmental impact of elevated As in Southern 

Appalachian Basin coals, in Centeno, J.A., Collery, P., 

Vernet, G., Finkelman, R.B., Gibb, H., Etienne, J.C., 

eds., Metal ions in biology and medicine: John Libbey 

Eurotext, Paris, p. 38–40.

Goodbred, S.L., Gilliom, R.J., Gross, T.S., Denslow, N.P., 

Bryant, W.B., and Schoeb, T.R., 1996, Reconnaissance 

of 17 B-estradiol, 11-detotestosterone, vitellogenin, and 

gonad histopathology in common carp of United States 

streams—Potential for contaminant-induced endocrine 

disruption: U.S. Geological Survey Open-File Report 

96-627, 47 p.

Heiny, J.S., and Tate, C.M., 1997, Concentration, 

distribution, and comparison of selected trace elements 

in bed sediment and fish tissue in the South Platte River 

Basin, USA, 1992–1993: Archive of Environmental 

Contamination and Toxicology, v. 32, p. 246–249.

Hoffman, G.L., 1996, Methods of analysis by the U.S. 

Geological Survey National Water Quality 

Laboratory—Preparation procedure for aquatic 

biological material determined for trace metals: U.S. 

Geological Survey Open-File Report 96-362, 42 p.
54 Organochlorine Compounds and Trace Elements in Fish Tissue and Streambed Sediment in the Mobile River Basin, 1998

Hulbert, C.S., Jr., and Klein, C., 1977, Manual of minerology 

(after James D. Dana) (19th ed.): John Wiley & Sons, 

Inc., New York, p. 531.

Keith, L.H., 1997, Environmental endocrine disrupters—A 

handbook of property data: John Wiley & Sons, Inc., 

USA, 1,232 p.

Leahy, P.P., Rosenshein, J.S., and Knopman, D.S., 1990, 

Implementation plan for the National Water-Quality 

Assessment Program: U.S. Geological Survey OpenFile Report 90-174, 10 p.

Leiker, T.J., Madsen, J.E., Deacon, J.R., and Foreman, W.T., 

1995, Methods of analysis by the U.S. Geological 

Survey National Water Quality Laboratory—

Determination of chlorinated pesticides in aquatic 

tissue by capillary-column gas chromatography with 

electron-capture detection: U.S. Geological Survey 

Open-File Report 94-710, 42 p.

Long, G.R., Chang, M., and Kennen, J.G., 1999, Trace 

elements and organochlorine compounds in bed 

sediment and fish tissue at selected sites in New Jersey 

streams—Sources and effects: U.S. Geological Survey 

Water-Resources Investigations Report 99-4235, 

29 p.

MacDonald, D.D., Ingersoll, C.G., and Berger, T.A., 2000, 

Development and evaluation of consensus-based 

sediment quality guidelines for freshwater ecosystems: 

Archives of Environmental Contamination and 

Toxicology, v. 39, p. 20–31.

Meador, M.R., Cuffney, T.F., and Gurtz, M.E., 1993, 

Methods for sampling fish communities as part of the 

National Water-Quality Assessment Program: U.S. 

Geological Survey Open-File Report 93-104, 40 p.

Nowell, L.H., Capel, P.D., and Dileanis, P.D., 1999, 

Pesticides in streambed sediment and aquatic 

biota—Distribution, trends, and governing factors, in

Gilliom, R.J., ed., Pesticides in the hydrologic system: 

U.S. Geological Survey National Water-Quality 

Assessment Program, v. 4, 1,001 p.

Nowell, L.H., and Resek, E.A., 1994, National standards and 

guidelines for pesticides in water, sediment, and aquatic 

organisms—Application to water-quality assessments: 

Reviews of Environmental Contamination and 

Toxicology, v. 40, 221 p.

Pirkey, K.D., and Glodt, S.R., 1998, Quality control at the 

U.S. Geological Survey National Water Quality 

Laboratory: U.S. Geological Survey Fact Sheet FS026-98, 4 p.

Pritt, J.W., and Raese, J.W., eds., 1992, Quality assurance/

quality control manual, National Water Quality 

Laboratory: U.S. Geological Survey Open-File Report 

92-495, 33 p.

———1995, Quality assurance/quality control manual, 

National Water Quality Laboratory: U.S. Geological 

Survey Open-File Report 95-443, 35 p.

Rice, K.C., 1999, Trace-element concentrations in 

streambed sediment across the conterminous United 

States: Environmental Science and Technology, v. 33, 

no. 15, p. 2499–2504.

Shelton, L.R., and Capel, P.D., 1994, Guidelines for 

collecting and processing samples of stream bed 

sediment for analysis of trace elements and organic 

contaminants for the National Water-Quality 

Assessment Program: U.S. Geological Survey OpenFile Report 94-458, 20 p.

Tate, C.M., and Heiny, J.S., 1996, Organochlorine 

compounds in bed sediment and fish tissue in the South 

Platte River Basin, USA, 1992–1993: Archives of 

Environmental Contamination and Toxicology, v. 30, 

p. 62–78.

Travis, H.H., and Lynch, E., Jr., 1973, Barite in Alabama: 

Geological Survey of Alabama, Circular 85, 43 p.

U.S. Department of the Interior, 1998, Guidelines for the 

interpretation of the biological effects of selected 

constituents in biota, water, and sediment: National 

Irrigation Water-Quality Program Information Report 

No. 3, 198 p.

U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, 1991, Fact 

sheet—National primary drinking water standards: 

U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, EPA 570/9-91-

012FS, 8 p.

———1992, National study of chemical residues in 

fish—Volume II: Washington, D.C., Office of Science 

and Technology, Standards, and Applied Science 

Division, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, EPA 

823-R-92-008b, 263 p.

———1997, The incidence and severity of sediment 

contamination in surface waters of the United 

States—Volume I: U.S. Environmental Protection 

Agency, EPA 823-R-97-006, p. 4–5.

———2001a, Ground Water and Drinking Water, Consumer 

Factsheet on—Barium; U.S. Environmental Protection 

Agency, accessed January 16, 2002, at URL http://

www.epa.gov/safewater/dwh/c-ioc/barium.html.

———2001b, Ground Water and Drinking Water, 

Consumer Factsheet on—Antimony; U.S. 

Environmental Protection Agency, accessed 

January 16, 2002, at URL http://www.epa.gov/

safewater/dwh/c-ioc/antimony.html.

U.S. Geological Survey, 2002, Locations of National WaterQuality Assessment Study Units: National WaterQuality Assessment (NAWQA) Program, accessed 

July 31, 2002, at URL http://water.usgs.gov/nawqa/

nawqamap.html#TABLE.
Appendixes 55

APPENDIXES

1. Data for individual fish collected at sites in the Mobile River Basin Study Unit for organochlorine compound and trace element analyses.

2. Concentration data for organochlorine compounds in whole-fish tissue samples from the 

Mobile River Basin, 1998.

3. Concentration data for trace elements in fish-liver tissue samples from the Mobile River 

Basin, 1998.

4. Concentration data for organochlorine compounds in streambed-sediment samples from the 

Mobile River Basin, 1998.

5. Concentration data for trace elements in streambed-sediment samples from the Mobile River 

Basin, 1998.
56 Organochlorine Compounds and Trace Elements in Fish Tissue and Streambed Sediment in the Mobile River Basin, 1998 Appendix 1. Data for individual fish collected at sites in the Mobile River Basin Study Unit for organochlorine compound and trace element analyses [mm, millimeter; g, gram; USGS, U.S. Geological Survey; ?, unable to determine; NA, not applicable; min., minimum; <, less than; max., maximum; —, not determined; L&D, lock and dam] Sample type Common name Species Standard length (mm) Total length (mm) Weight (g) Gender External anomalies Age, in years Coosa River near Rome, Georgia

—USGS station number 02397000

Organochlorine compounds Bluegill Lepomis macrochirus

126 161 71 Male None 3122 154 73 Female None 3124 157 76 Male None 3132 168 90 Male Lesion 4138 177 104 Male None 4118 155 63 Male None 5

Trace elements Bluegill Lepomis macrochirus

121 153 62 Male None 3118 152 63 Male None 3111 143 53 Male None 3128 168 91 Male None 4126 163 79 Male None 4132 171 97 Male Lesion 5128 170 98 Male None 5

Organochlorine compounds Common carp Cyprinus carpio

355 442 1,250 Female None 5378 457 1,250 Female Undefined 

anomalie

5

382 466 1,600 Female None 6468 582 3,050 Female None 8480 583 3,150 Female None 8

Trace elements Common carp Cyprinus carpio

415 515 1,700 Male Lesion 6412 515 2,100 Female None 7475 582 2,650 Female None 8448 553 2,400 Male None 8462 570 3,600 Female None 8

Chattooga River above Gaylesville, Alabama

—USGS station number 02398300

Organochlorine compounds Redspotted sunfish Lepomis miniatus

77 98 22 Female None 2

107 133 52 Male None 3

85 105 28 Female None 382 104 23 Female None 3

122 152 81 Male None 4

Trace elements Redspotted sunfish Lepomis miniatus

68 86 15 ? None 261 78 11 Female None 268 86 17 Male None 273 94 18 Male None 274 92 16 Female None 267 86 16 Female None 368 86 14 Female None 383 114 22 Female None 3
Appendix Tables 57

Sougahatchee Creek above Reeltown, Alabama—USGS station number 02418264

Organochlorine compounds Alabama hogsucker Hypentelium etowanum

122 149 35 Male None NA132 155 35.5 Female None NA132 157 36 Female None NA133 163 42 Male None NA133 159 42.5 Female None NA135 158 39.5 Female None NA136 164 48 Male None NA

Organochlorine compounds Channel catfish Ictalurus punctatus

111 131 23.5 ? None 1109 135 21.5 ? None 2132 169 38.5 Female None 2150 190 55.5 ? None 3142 171 44 ? None 3137 173 40.5 Female None 3

Trace elements Channel catfish Ictalurus punctatus

145 186 45 Female None 2122 151 33.5 Female None 2109 134 21.5 Female None 2232 286 192.5 Male None 3335 409 529.5 Female None 6

Three Mile Branch at North Boulevard at Montgomery, Alabama—USGS station number 02419977

Organochlorine compounds Mosquito fish (48 specimens) Gambusia affinis 18 min. 21 min. < 1 min. ? None NA 46 max. 56 max. 2 max. ? None NA

Pintlalla Creek at Liberty Church Road near Pintlalla, Alabama—USGS station number 02421115

Organochlorine compounds Longear sunfish Lepomis megalotis

68 82 11 Female None 265 81 9 Female None 262 78 9 Male None 272 89 12.5 Female None 372 91 12.5 Male None 3

Trace elements Longear sunfish Lepomis megalotis

72 89 11.5 ? None 277 98 22 Male None 388 109 27.5 Male None 484 107 24.5 Male Lesion 4

Appendix 1. Data for individual fish collected at sites in the Mobile River Basin Study Unit for organochlorine compound and trace element analyses — Continued[mm, millimeter; g, gram; USGS, U.S. Geological Survey; ?, unable to determine; NA, not applicable; min., minimum; <, less than; max., maximum; —, not determined; L&D, lock and dam]

Sample type Common name Species

Standard 

length 

(mm)

Total 

length 

(mm)

Weight 

(g) Gender External anomalies Age, in years
58 Organochlorine Compounds and Trace Elements in Fish Tissue and Streambed Sediment in the Mobile River Basin, 1998 Cahaba Valley Creek at Cross Creek Road at Pelham, Alabama—USGS station number 0242354750 Organochlorine compounds Longear sunfish Lepomis megalotis 63 81 9.5 Female None 2 75 94 13.5 Female None 3 75 97 17.5 Male None 3 76 98 17 Male None 3 85 106 23 Male None 4 91 113 24 Female None 4 Trace elements Longear sunfish Lepomis megalotis 61 80 10 Male None 2 65 83 10 Female None 2 67 87 ? Female None 3 72 89 13 Male None 3 68 87 12 Male None 3 80 100 18.5 Male Lesion 3 71 89 14.5 Male None 3 68 87 12.5 Female None 3 Shades Creek at Homewood, Alabama—USGS station number 02423581 Organochlorine compounds Longear sunfish Lepomis megalotis 98 122 38 Male Lesion 2 89 109 26.5 ? Deformaties 2 82 105 21.5 ? Lesion 2 98 122 35.5 Male Lesion 3 95 122 35 Male Lesion 3 103 128 42.5 Male Lesion 4 96 118 36 Male Lesion 4 104 132 48 Male Lesion 5 Trace elements Longear sunfish Lepomis megalotis 88 115 29 Male None 2 82 105 21 Male Deformaties 2 88 110 22.5 ? None 2 98 122 36 Male None 4 98 124 36 Male Lesion 4 92 116 28 Male None

—

93 118 31 Male None

—

100 125 36.5 Male Deformaties

—

85 105 22 ? Lesion

—

95 117 32 Male Lesion

—

Appendix 1. Data for individual fish collected at sites in the Mobile River Basin Study Unit for organochlorine compound and trace element analyses — Continued[mm, millimeter; g, gram; USGS, U.S. Geological Survey; ?, unable to determine; NA, not applicable; min., minimum; <, less than; max., maximum; —, not determined; L&D, lock and dam]

Sample type Common name Species

Standard 

length 

(mm)

Total 

length 

(mm)

Weight 

(g) Gender External anomalies Age, in years
Appendix Tables 59

Cahaba River at Centreville, Alabama—USGS station number 02424000

Organochlorine compounds Smallmouth buffalo Ictiobus bubalus

281 374 600 Female None 3335 438 1,300 Female None 4315 417 760 Female None 4355 455 1,400 Male None 4390 493 1,550 Male None 5

Trace elements Smallmouth buffalo Ictiobus bubalus

275 354 620 Female None 4335 438 1,300 Female None 4315 417 760 Female None 4355 455 1,400 Male None 4

Alabama River at Claiborne, Alabama—USGS station number 02429500

Organochlorine compounds Largemouth bass Micropterus salmoides

218 267 220 Male Lesion 2270 330 421 Male None 3228 276 232 Female None 3270 328 425 Male None 4332 400 811 Male None 5

Trace elements Spotted bass Micropterus punctulatus

188 230 155 Female Lesion 2206 250 161 Male None 3235 284 288 Female None 3226 274 241 Female Lesion 3312 383 762 Female None 4312 380 737 Male None 4

Town Creek at Tupelo, Mississippi—USGS station number 02434000

Organochlorine compounds Bluegill Lepomis macrochirus

93 116 33 Female None 288 111 26 ? Anchor worm, 

bacterial infection, eroded fins

2

78 100 23 Female Bacterial 

infection, eroded fins

2

68 90 14 Female None 2

131 163 99 Male None 4

Trace elements Bluegill Lepomis macrochirus

82 101 21 Female None 2

108 135 48 Male Undefined 

anomalie

2

85 105 29 Male None 2

128 161 99 Male Anchor 

worm

4

128 160 105 Male Lesion 4

Appendix 1. Data for individual fish collected at sites in the Mobile River Basin Study Unit for organochlorine compound and trace element analyses — Continued[mm, millimeter; g, gram; USGS, U.S. Geological Survey; ?, unable to determine; NA, not applicable; min., minimum; <, less than; max., maximum; —, not determined; L&D, lock and dam]

Sample type Common name Species

Standard 

length 

(mm)

Total 

length 

(mm)

Weight 

(g) Gender External anomalies Age, in years
60 Organochlorine Compounds and Trace Elements in Fish Tissue and Streambed Sediment in the Mobile River Basin, 1998 Town Creek at Tupelo, Mississippi—USGS station number 02434000 (Continued) Organochlorine compounds Channel catfish Ictalurus punctatus 202 265 126 Male None 2 168 206 72 Female None 3 174 224 88 Male None 3 168 219 73 Male None 3 201 261 120 Female None 4 Trace elements Channel catfish Ictalurus punctatus 168 220 79 Male Leeches 2 160 206 62 Female None 3 170 216 76 Male None 3 180 234 86 Male None 3 188 242 102 Female None 3 Lost Creek above Parrish, Alabama—USGS station number 02454055 Organochlorine compounds Longear sunfish Lepomis megalotis 88 112 27 ? None 2 108 137 60 Male None 4 112 138 58 Male None 5 124 154 77 Male None 5 110 135 55 Male None 5 Trace elements Longear sunfish Lepomis megalotis 91 110 26 Female None 2 77 97 17 Female None 2 89 110 24 Female None 3 Organochlorine compounds Bluegill Lepomis macrochirus 108 140 52 Female None 2 103 145 56 Male Deformaties, black spot

3

135 170 93 Male None 4135 174 110 Male None 4132 170 101 Male None 4

Trace elements Bluegill Lepomis macrochirus

86 110 21 ? None 295 118 29 ? None 2

115 145 57 Male None 2105 135 46 Male None 2110 130 38 Male None 2

91 118 27 ? Undefined 

anomalie

2

98 127 33 Male None 382 105 21 ? None 3

Organochlorine compounds Spotted bass Micropterus punctulatus 194 235 155 Female None 2 240 292 288 Male None 3

Appendix 1. Data for individual fish collected at sites in the Mobile River Basin Study Unit for organochlorine compound and trace element analyses — Continued[mm, millimeter; g, gram; USGS, U.S. Geological Survey; ?, unable to determine; NA, not applicable; min., minimum; <, less than; max., maximum; —, not determined; L&D, lock and dam]

Sample type Common name Species

Standard 

length 

(mm)

Total 

length 

(mm)

Weight 

(g) Gender External anomalies Age, in years
Appendix Tables 61

Locust Fork below Snead, Alabama—USGS station number 02454500

Organochlorine compounds Largemouth bass Micropterus salmoides

268 322 450 Male None 3270 328 509 Male None 3340 411 953 Male None 4315 386 703 Male None 4323 391 900 Male None 4

Trace elements Spotted bass Micropterus punctulatus

145 177 57 Male None 2206 249 191.5 Female None 3212 252 202 Female None 3296 359 575 Male Lesion 4

Valley Creek near Bessemer, Alabama—USGS station number 02461500

Organochlorine compounds Yellow bullhead Ameiurus natalis

141 166 77.5 Male None 2185 216 143 Male Lesion 3184 206 135.5 Male Deformaties 3163 190 105.5 Male Lesion 3151 181 78.5 Female None 3195 235 167.5 Male Lesion 3

Trace elements Yellow bullhead Ameiurus natalis

198 232 170.5 Male Lesion 3155 182 83 Male Deformaties 3176 213 150 Female None 3165 196 104 Female Deformaties 3198 232 166.5 Male Lesion 3186 225 144.5 Female Lesion 3

Black Warrior River at Bankhead L&D near Bessemer, Alabama—USGS station number 02462500

Organochlorine compounds Bluegill Lepomis macrochirus

92 116 30 Male None 297 120 28 Male None 298 125 29 Male Protruding anus 288 110 20 Female None 2

124 158 66 Male None 2

96 121 28 Male None 2

Trace elements Bluegill Lepomis macrochirus

118 139 47 Female None 2

90 116 29 ? None 294 119 30 Female None 293 120 32 Female None 293 119 29 Male None 293 118 31 Female Black spot 2

Appendix 1. Data for individual fish collected at sites in the Mobile River Basin Study Unit for organochlorine compound and trace element analyses — Continued[mm, millimeter; g, gram; USGS, U.S. Geological Survey; ?, unable to determine; NA, not applicable; min., minimum; <, less than; max., maximum; —, not determined; L&D, lock and dam]

Sample type Common name Species

Standard 

length 

(mm)

Total 

length 

(mm)

Weight 

(g) Gender External anomalies Age, in years
62 Organochlorine Compounds and Trace Elements in Fish Tissue and Streambed Sediment in the Mobile River Basin, 1998 Hurricane Creek near Holt, Alabama—USGS station number 02463500 Organochlorine compounds Largemouth bass Micropterus salmoides 170 206 97 Male None 1 230 277 257 Male None 3 225 275 250 Male Deformaties 3 228 277 228.5 Female None 3 303 364 594.5 Female None 4 Organochlorine compounds Channel catfish Ictalurus punctatus 300 378 418.5 Female None 5 295 338 394 Male None 5 268 341 267.5 Female None 5 305 381 440.5 Male None 6 328 402 521 Male None 6 328 407 539 Male None 6 Trace elements Channel catfish Ictalurus punctatus 208 265 136.5 Male None 3 184 250 101 Female None 3 210 272 152 Female None 4 230 306 195 ? None 4 291 362 351 Female None 5 281 365 362.5 Male None 6 Cribbs Mill Creek at Tuscaloosa, AL—USGS station number 02465288 Organochlorine compounds Largemouth bass Micropterus salmoides 166 202 135 ? None 1 205 252 228 Female None 2 192 232 175 Male None 2 280 335 600 Female Eroded fins 3 234 284 348 Female Lesion 3 Trace elements Largemouth bass Micropterus salmoides 166 202 135 ? None 1 205 252 228 Female None 2 192 232 175 Male None 2

280 335 600 Female Eroded fins 3234 284 348 Female Lesion 3

Appendix 1. Data for individual fish collected at sites in the Mobile River Basin Study Unit for organochlorine compound and trace element analyses — Continued[mm, millimeter; g, gram; USGS, U.S. Geological Survey; ?, unable to determine; NA, not applicable; min., minimum; <, less than; max., maximum; —, not determined; L&D, lock and dam]

Sample type Common name Species

Standard 

length 

(mm)

Total 

length 

(mm)

Weight 

(g) Gender External anomalies Age, in years
Appendix Tables 63

Cribbs Mill Creek at Tuscaloosa, AL—USGS station number 02465288 (Continued)

Organochlorine compounds Longear sunfish Lepomis megalotis

86 108 30 Female None 398 121 40 Female None 4

102 128 56 Male Lesion 5101 128 55 Male None 5105 132 55 Male None 5100 130 50 Male None 2108 141 65 ? None 2102 134 50 ? None 2108 141 55 ? None 2107 151 50 ? Fungus 3

Trace elements Longear sunfish Lepomis megalotis

76 96 20 ? None 285 105 20 Female None 282 104 25 Female None 3

104 134 35 Male None 3

98 126 30 Male Lesion 4

100 132 48 ? None 2112 140 60 ? Deformaties 3118 150 75 Male None 3

99 132 45 ? None 4

116 157 62 Male None 4

Organochlorine compounds Yellow bullhead Ameiurus natalis

160 184 95 Female None 2154 182 45 Male None 2180 215 235 Male Undefined 

anomalie

3

192 227 135 Male None 3215 255 250 Male None 4

Trace elements Yellow bullhead Ameiurus natalis

128 154 45 Male None 2167 192 90 Female None 2167 195 100 Male None 3198 230 155 Male None 3169 197 95 Male None 3

Appendix 1. Data for individual fish collected at sites in the Mobile River Basin Study Unit for organochlorine compound and trace element analyses — Continued[mm, millimeter; g, gram; USGS, U.S. Geological Survey; ?, unable to determine; NA, not applicable; min., minimum; <, less than; max., maximum; —, not determined; L&D, lock and dam]

Sample type Common name Species

Standard 

length 

(mm)

Total 

length 

(mm)

Weight 

(g) Gender External anomalies Age, in years
64 Organochlorine Compounds and Trace Elements in Fish Tissue and Streambed Sediment in the Mobile River Basin, 1998 Tombigbee River below Coffeeville L&D near Coffeeville, Alabama—USGS station number 02469762 Organochlorine compounds Gizzard shad Dorosoma cepedianum 212 267 202.5 Male None 3 192 250 170 Male None 3 208 265 236 Female None 3 183 235 124.5 ? None 3 168 216 112.5 ? None 3 Trace elements Gizzard shad Dorosoma cepedianum 212 267 202.5 Male None 3 192 250 170 Male None 3 208 265 236 Female None 3 183 235 124.5 ? None 3 168 216 112.5 ? None 3 Organochlorine compounds Largemouth bass Micropterus salmoides 220 270 237 Male None 2 220 268 237 Female Black spot, lesion

2

258 311 421 Male Lesion 3231 280 292 Female None 3310 373 662 Male Black spot, 

lesion

4

302 358 630 Female Lesion, black 

spot

4

Trace elements Largemouth bass Micropterus salmoides

200 247 174 Female None 2222 270 233 Male None 3290 350 577 Male Lesion, black 

spot

3

247 300 353 Female Black spot 3228 275 263 Male None 3307 370 611 Male None 4

Satilpa Creek near Coffeeville, Alabama—USGS station number 02469800

Organochlorine compounds Blacktail redhorse Moxostoma poecilurum

220 270 216.5 Male None 3207 252 161.5 Male Lesion 3204 248 147.5 Male None 3268 314 293.5 Male None 4248 304 274.5 Female None 4

Trace elements Blacktail redhorse Moxostoma poecilurum

220 270 216.5 Male None 3207 252 161.5 Male Lesion 3204 248 147.5 Male None 3268 314 293.5 Male None 4248 304 274.5 Female None 4

Appendix 1. Data for individual fish collected at sites in the Mobile River Basin Study Unit for organochlorine compound and trace element analyses — Continued[mm, millimeter; g, gram; USGS, U.S. Geological Survey; ?, unable to determine; NA, not applicable; min., minimum; <, less than; max., maximum; —, not determined; L&D, lock and dam]

Sample type Common name Species

Standard 

length 

(mm)

Total 

length 

(mm)

Weight 

(g) Gender External anomalies Age, in years
Appendix Tables 65

Satilpa Creek near Coffeeville, Alabama—USGS station number 02469800 (Continued)

Organochlorine compounds Longear sunfish Lepomis megalotis

70 90 16 Male None 277 97 16.5 ? None 272 88 14 ? None 2

111 132 42.5 Female None 4

Chickasaw Creek near Kushla, Alabama—USGS station number 02471001

Organochlorine compounds Longear sunfish Lepomis megalotis

67 86 11.5 Female None 288 110 22 Female None 3

102 126 31 Female None 4122 150 66 Female None 5

98 127 40.5 Female None 5

Trace elements Longear sunfish Lepomis megalotis

67 86 11.5 Female None 288 110 22 Female None 3

102 126 31 Female None 4122 150 66 Female None 5

98 127 40.5 Female None 5

Appendix 1. Data for individual fish collected at sites in the Mobile River Basin Study Unit for organochlorine compound and trace element analyses — Continued[mm, millimeter; g, gram; USGS, U.S. Geological Survey; ?, unable to determine; NA, not applicable; min., minimum; <, less than; max., maximum; —, not determined; L&D, lock and dam]

Sample type Common name Species

Standard 

length 

(mm)

Total 

length 

(mm)

Weight 

(g) Gender External anomalies Age, in years
66 Organochlorine Compounds and Trace Elements in Fish Tissue and Streambed Sediment in the Mobile River Basin, 1998 Appendix 2. Concentration data for organochlorine compounds in whole-fish tissue samples from the Mobile River Basin, 1998 [USGS, U.S. Geological Survey; PCB’s, polychlorinated biphenyls; <, less than; Blvd., Boulevard; L&D, Lock and Dam; E, estimated; BHC, hexachlorocyclohexane] Site name (USGS identification numbera)

a USGS identification number is based on geographic location and the downstream order of streamflow sites.

Species

Concentration, in microgram per kilogram, wet weight

a-d6-Hexachlorocyclohexaneb

b Reported as percent of sample.

3,5-Dichlorobiphenylb Percent lipid content Aldrin PCB’s Toxaphene

Coosa River near Rome, GA (02397000) Cyprinus carpio 75 76 4.9 < 5 900 < 200 Lepomis macrochirus 94 71 2.4 < 5 530 < 200Chattooga River above Gaylesville, AL 

(02398300)

Lepomis miniatus 69 58 2.4 < 5 78 < 200

Sougahatchee Creek above Reeltown, AL 

(02418264)

Hypentelium etowanum 90 80 4 < 5 < 50 < 200Ictalurus punctatus 102 66 3.2 < 5 < 50 < 200

Three Mile Branch at North Blvd. at Montgomery, AL (02419977) Gambusia affinis 108 100 4.6 < 5 340 < 200Pintlalla Creek at Liberty Church Road near 

Pintlalla, AL (02421115)

Lepomis megalotis 116 95 3.1 < 5 < 50 < 200

Shades Creek at Homewood, AL (02423581) Lepomis megalotis 109 112 4.3 < 5 220 < 200Cahaba River at Centreville, AL (02424000) Ictiobus bubalus 90 70 5.05 < 5 140 < 200Alabama River at Claiborne, AL (02429500) Micropterus salmoides 104 66 3.5 < 5 160 < 200Town Creek at Tupelo, MS (02434000) Ictalurus punctatus 100 84 2.4 < 5 50 < 200 Lepomis macrochirus 109 108 3.3 < 5 < 50 < 200Lost Creek above Parrish, AL (02454055)

Lepomis megalotis 75 61 3.9 < 5 < 50 < 200Lepomis macrochirus 91 65 4.4 < 5 < 50 < 200Micropterus punctulatus 62 56 3.4 < 5 < 50 < 200

Locust Fork below Snead, AL (02454500) Micropterus salmoides 96 90 5.3 < 5 150 < 200Valley Creek near Bessemer, AL (02461500) Ameiurus natalis 93 86 4 < 5 260 < 200Black Warrior River at Bankhead L&D near 

Bessemer, AL (02462500)

Lepomis macrochirus 94 84 1.9 < 5 < 50 < 200

Hurricane Creek near Holt, AL (02463500) Ictalurus punctatus 108 86 6 < 5 93 < 200 Micropterus salmoides 89 88 5.2 < 5 97 < 200Cribbs Mill Creek at Tuscaloosa, AL 

(02465288)

Micropterus salmoides 98 70 2.2 < 5 130 < 200Lepomis megalotis 78 61 2.1 < 5 < 50 < 200Lepomis macrochirus 75 47 1.45 < 5 < 50 < 200Ameiurus natalis 84 67 2.7 < 5 57 < 200

Tombigbee River below Coffeeville L&D 

near Coffeeville, AL (02469762)

Dorosoma cepedianum 68 59 10.25 < 5 65 < 200Micropterus salmoides 97 74 2.4 < 5 71 < 200

Satilpa Creek near Coffeeville, AL 

(02469800)

Moxostoma poecilurum 94 95 1.9 < 5 < 50 < 200Lepomis megalotis 91 99 3.6 < 5 < 50 < 200

Chickasaw Creek near Kushla, AL 

(02471001)

Lepomis megalotis 88 93 2.2 < 5 < 50 < 200

Cahaba Valley Creek at Cross Creek Road at 

Pelham, AL (0242354750)

Lepomis megalotis 93 81 1.8 < 5 < 50 < 200
Appendix Tables 67

Appendix 2. Concentration data for organochlorine compounds in whole-fish tissue samples from the Mobile River Basin, 1998—Continued[USGS, U.S. Geological Survey; PCB’s, polychlorinated biphenyls; <, less than; Blvd., Boulevard; L&D, Lock and Dam; E, estimated; BHC, hexachlorocyclohexane]

Site name (USGS identification numbera)

a USGS identification number is based on geographic location and the downstream order of streamflow sites.

Species

Concentration, in microgram per kilogram, wet weight

Pentachloroanisole Oxy- chlordane trans- Nonachlor cis- Nonachlor Mirex p,p'- Methoxychlor

Coosa River near Rome, GA (02397000) Cyprinus carpio < 5 < 5 < 5 < 5 < 5 < 5 Lepomis macrochirus < 5 < 5 < 5 < 5 < 5 < 5Chattooga River above Gaylesville, AL 

(02398300)

Lepomis miniatus < 5 < 5 < 5 < 5 < 5 < 5

Sougahatchee Creek above Reeltown, AL 

(02418264)

Hypentelium etowanum < 5 < 5 < 5 < 5 < 5 < 8Ictalurus punctatus < 5 < 5 < 5 < 5 < 5 < 5

Three Mile Branch at North Blvd. at Montgomery, AL (02419977) Gambusia affinis < 5 51 65 19 < 5 < 5Pintlalla Creek at Liberty Church Road near 

Pintlalla, AL (02421115)

Lepomis megalotis < 5 < 5 < 5 < 5 < 5 < 5

Shades Creek at Homewood, AL (02423581) Lepomis megalotis < 5 31 E 130 29 < 5 < 5Cahaba River at Centreville, AL (02424000) Ictiobus bubalus E 4.8 < 5 13 < 5 < 5 < 5Alabama River at Claiborne, AL (02429500) Micropterus salmoides < 5 < 5 < 5 < 5 < 5 < 5Town Creek at Tupelo, MS (02434000) Ictalurus punctatus < 5 < 5 5.7 < 5 8.6 < 5 Lepomis macrochirus < 5 < 5 39 < 5 < 5 < 5Lost Creek above Parrish, AL (02454055)

Lepomis megalotis < 5 < 5 < 5 < 5 < 5 < 5Lepomis macrochirus < 5 < 5 < 5 < 5 < 5 < 5Micropterus punctulatus < 5 < 5 < 5 < 5 < 5 < 5

Locust Fork below Snead, AL (02454500) Micropterus salmoides < 5 < 5 E 11 < 5 < 5 < 5Valley Creek near Bessemer, AL (02461500) Ameiurus natalis < 5 < 5 13 < 5 < 5 < 5Black Warrior River at Bankhead L&D near 

Bessemer, AL (02462500)

Lepomis macrochirus < 5 < 5 < 5 < 5 < 5 < 5

Hurricane Creek near Holt, AL (02463500) Ictalurus punctatus < 5 < 5 < 5 < 5 < 5 < 5 Micropterus salmoides < 5 < 5 10 < 5 < 5 < 5Cribbs Mill Creek at Tuscaloosa, AL 

(02465288)

Micropterus salmoides < 5 26 100 24 < 5 < 6Lepomis megalotis < 5 9.5 24 6.6 < 5 < 5Lepomis macrochirus < 5 8.2 18 E 4.8 < 5 15Ameiurus natalis < 5 7.8 32 11 < 5 < 5

Tombigbee River below Coffeeville L&D 

near Coffeeville, AL (02469762)

Dorosoma cepedianum < 5 < 5 < 5 < 5 < 5 < 5Micropterus salmoides < 5 < 5 < 5 < 5 < 5 < 5

Satilpa Creek near Coffeeville, AL 

(02469800)

Moxostoma poecilurum < 5 < 5 < 5 < 5 < 5 < 5Lepomis megalotis < 5 < 5 < 5 < 5 < 5 < 5

Chickasaw Creek near Kushla, AL 

(02471001)

Lepomis megalotis < 5 < 5 < 5 < 5 < 5 < 5

Cahaba Valley Creek at Cross Creek Road at 

Pelham, AL (0242354750)

Lepomis megalotis < 5 < 5 8.2 < 5 < 5 < 5
68 Organochlorine Compounds and Trace Elements in Fish Tissue and Streambed Sediment in the Mobile River Basin, 1998 Appendix 2. Concentration data for organochlorine compounds in whole-fish tissue samples from the Mobile River Basin, 1998

—Continued

[USGS, U.S. Geological Survey; PCB’s, polychlorinated biphenyls; <, less than; Blvd., Boulevard; L&D, Lock and Dam; E, estimated; BHC, hexachlorocyclohexane]

Site name (USGS identification numbera

)

a USGS identification number is based on geographic location and the downstream order of streamflow sites.

Species

Concentration, in microgram per kilogram, wet weight

o,p'-

Methoxychlor Lindane delta- BHC beta- BHC alpha- BHC Hexachloro- benzene

Coosa River near Rome, GA (02397000) Cyprinus carpio < 5 < 5 < 5 < 5 < 5 < 5 Lepomis macrochirus < 5 < 5 < 5 < 5 < 5 < 5Chattooga River above Gaylesville, AL 

(02398300)

Lepomis miniatus < 5 < 5 < 5 < 5 < 5 < 5

Sougahatchee Creek above Reeltown, AL 

(02418264)

Hypentelium etowanum < 5 < 5 < 5 < 5 < 5 < 5Ictalurus punctatus < 5 < 5 < 5 < 5 < 5 < 5

Three Mile Branch at North Blvd. at Montgomery, AL (02419977) Gambusia affinis < 5 < 5 < 5 < 5 < 5 < 5Pintlalla Creek at Liberty Church Road near 

Pintlalla, AL (02421115)

Lepomis megalotis < 5 < 5 < 5 < 5 < 5 < 5

Shades Creek at Homewood, AL (02423581) Lepomis megalotis < 5 < 5 < 5 < 5 < 5 < 5Cahaba River at Centreville, AL (02424000) Ictiobus bubalus < 5 < 5 < 5 < 5 < 5 < 5Alabama River at Claiborne, AL (02429500) Micropterus salmoides < 5.4 < 5 < 5 < 5 < 5 < 5Town Creek at Tupelo, MS (02434000) Ictalurus punctatus < 5 < 5 < 5 < 5 < 5 < 5 Lepomis macrochirus < 5 < 5 < 5 < 5 < 5 < 5Lost Creek above Parrish, AL (02454055)

Lepomis megalotis < 5 < 5 < 5 < 5 < 5 < 5Lepomis macrochirus < 5 < 5 < 5 < 5 < 5 < 5Micropterus punctulatus < 5 < 5 < 5 < 5 < 5 < 5

Locust Fork below Snead, AL (02454500) Micropterus salmoides < 5 < 5 < 5 < 5 < 5 < 5Valley Creek near Bessemer, AL (02461500) Ameiurus natalis < 5 < 5 < 5 < 5 < 5 < 5Black Warrior River at Bankhead L&D near 

Bessemer, AL (02462500)

Lepomis macrochirus < 5 < 5 < 5 < 5 < 5 < 5

Hurricane Creek near Holt, AL (02463500) Ictalurus punctatus < 5 < 5 < 5 < 5 < 5 < 5 Micropterus salmoides < 5 < 5 < 5 < 5 < 5 < 5Cribbs Mill Creek at Tuscaloosa, AL 

(02465288)

Micropterus salmoides < 5 < 5 < 5 < 5 < 5 < 5Lepomis megalotis < 5 < 5 < 5 < 5 < 5 < 5Lepomis macrochirus < 5 < 5 < 5 < 5 < 5 < 5Ameiurus natalis < 5 < 5 < 5 < 5 < 5 < 5

Tombigbee River below Coffeeville L&D 

near Coffeeville, AL (02469762)

Dorosoma cepedianum < 5 < 5 < 5 < 5 < 5 5.4Micropterus salmoides < 5 < 5 < 5 < 5 < 5 < 5

Satilpa Creek near Coffeeville, AL 

(02469800)

Moxostoma poecilurum < 5 < 5 < 5 < 5 < 5 < 5Lepomis megalotis < 5 < 5 < 5 < 5 < 5 < 5

Chickasaw Creek near Kushla, AL 

(02471001)

Lepomis megalotis < 5 < 5 < 5 < 5 < 5 < 5

Cahaba Valley Creek at Cross Creek Road at 

Pelham, AL (0242354750)

Lepomis megalotis < 5 < 5 < 5 < 5 < 5 < 5
Appendix Tables 69

Appendix 2. Concentration data for organochlorine compounds in whole-fish tissue samples from the Mobile River Basin, 1998—Continued[USGS, U.S. Geological Survey; PCB’s, polychlorinated biphenyls; <, less than; Blvd., Boulevard; L&D, Lock and Dam; E, estimated; BHC, hexachlorocyclohexane]

Site name (USGS identification numbera)

a USGS identification number is based on geographic location and the downstream order of streamflow sites.

Species

Concentration, in microgram per kilogram, wet weight

Heptachlorepoxide Hepta- chlor Endrin Dieldrin p,p'-DDE o,p'-DDE

Coosa River near Rome, GA (02397000) Cyprinus carpio < 5 < 5 < 5 < 5 97 < 5 Lepomis macrochirus < 5 < 5 < 5 < 5 160 < 5Chattooga River above Gaylesville, AL 

(02398300)

Lepomis miniatus < 5 < 5 < 7 < 5 47 < 5

Sougahatchee Creek above Reeltown, AL 

(02418264)

Hypentelium etowanum < 5 < 5 < 5 < 5 8 < 5Ictalurus punctatus < 5 < 5 < 5 < 5 < 5 < 5

Three Mile Branch at North Blvd. at Montgomery, AL (02419977) Gambusia affinis 85 < 5 < 5 240 100 < 5Pintlalla Creek at Liberty Church Road near 

Pintlalla, AL (02421115)

Lepomis megalotis < 5 < 5 < 5 < 5 < 5 < 5

Shades Creek at Homewood, AL (02423581) Lepomis megalotis 18 < 5 < 5 84 23 < 5Cahaba River at Centreville, AL (02424000) Ictiobus bubalus < 5 < 5 < 5 8.1 24 < 5Alabama River at Claiborne, AL (02429500) Micropterus salmoides < 5 < 5 < 5 < 5 75 < 5Town Creek at Tupelo, MS (02434000) Ictalurus punctatus < 5 < 5 < 5 < 5 210 < 5 Lepomis macrochirus 6.8 < 5 < 5 25 81 < 5Lost Creek above Parrish, AL (02454055)

Lepomis megalotis < 5 < 5 < 5.3 < 5 < 5 < 5Lepomis macrochirus < 5 < 5 < 5 < 5 11 < 5Micropterus punctulatus < 5 < 5 < 6 < 5 15 < 5

Locust Fork below Snead, AL (02454500) Micropterus salmoides < 5 < 5 < 5 < 5 550 < 5Valley Creek near Bessemer, AL (02461500) Ameiurus natalis < 5 < 5 < 5 15 6.4 < 5Black Warrior River at Bankhead L&D near 

Bessemer, AL (02462500)

Lepomis macrochirus < 5 < 5 < 5 < 5 25 < 5

Hurricane Creek near Holt, AL (02463500) Ictalurus punctatus < 5 < 5 < 5 12 18 < 5 Micropterus salmoides 5.6 < 5 < 5 18 29 < 5Cribbs Mill Creek at Tuscaloosa, AL 

(02465288)

Micropterus salmoides 220 < 5 < 5 720 68 < 5Lepomis megalotis 35 < 5 < 5 170 20 < 5Lepomis macrochirus 33 < 5 < 5 180 11 < 5Ameiurus natalis 47 < 5 < 5 180 31 < 5

Tombigbee River below Coffeeville L&D 

near Coffeeville, AL (02469762)

Dorosoma cepedianum < 5 < 5 10 < 5 38 < 5Micropterus salmoides < 5 < 5 < 5 < 5 96 < 5

Satilpa Creek near Coffeeville, AL 

(02469800)

Moxostoma poecilurum < 5 < 5 < 5 < 5 < 5 < 5Lepomis megalotis < 5 < 5 < 5 < 5 < 5 < 5

Chickasaw Creek near Kushla, AL 

(02471001)

Lepomis megalotis < 5 < 5 < 5 < 5 < 5 < 5

Cahaba Valley Creek at Cross Creek Road at 

Pelham, AL (0242354750)

Lepomis megalotis < 5 < 5 < 5 < 5 < 5 < 5
70 Organochlorine Compounds and Trace Elements in Fish Tissue and Streambed Sediment in the Mobile River Basin, 1998 Appendix 2. Concentration data for organochlorine compounds in whole-fish tissue samples from the Mobile River Basin, 1998

—Continued

[USGS, U.S. Geological Survey; PCB’s, polychlorinated biphenyls; <, less than; Blvd., Boulevard; L&D, Lock and Dam; E, estimated; BHC, hexachlorocyclohexane]

Site name (USGS identification numbera

)

a USGS identification number is based on geographic location and the downstream order of streamflow sites.

Species

Concentration, in microgram per kilogram, wet weight

o,p'-DDD p,p'-DDD p,p'-DDT o,p'-DDT DCPA trans- Chlordane

Coosa River near Rome, GA (02397000) Cyprinus carpio < 5 9.2 < 5 < 5 < 5 < 5 Lepomis macrochirus < 5 6.5 5.3 < 5 < 5 < 5Chattooga River above Gaylesville, AL 

(02398300)

Lepomis miniatus < 5 < 5 < 5 < 5 < 5 < 5

Sougahatchee Creek above Reeltown, AL 

(02418264)

Hypentelium etowanum < 5 < 5 < 5 < 5 < 5 < 5Ictalurus punctatus < 5 < 5 < 5 < 5 < 5 < 5

Three Mile Branch at North Blvd. at Montgomery, AL (02419977) Gambusia affinis < 5 37 35 < 5 < 5 12Pintlalla Creek at Liberty Church Road near 

Pintlalla, AL (02421115)

Lepomis megalotis < 5 < 5 < 5 < 5 < 5 < 5

Shades Creek at Homewood, AL (02423581) Lepomis megalotis < 5 < 5 < 5 < 5 < 5 < 5Cahaba River at Centreville, AL (02424000) Ictiobus bubalus < 5 < 5 < 5 < 5 < 5 < 5Alabama River at Claiborne, AL (02429500) Micropterus salmoides < 5 9.3 < 5 < 5 < 5 < 5Town Creek at Tupelo, MS (02434000) Ictalurus punctatus < 5 22 16 < 5 < 5 < 5 Lepomis macrochirus < 5 11 < 5 < 5 < 5 < 5Lost Creek above Parrish, AL (02454055)

Lepomis megalotis < 5 < 5 < 5 < 5 < 5 < 5Lepomis macrochirus < 5 < 5 < 5 < 5 < 5 < 5Micropterus punctulatus < 5 < 5 < 5 < 5 < 5 < 5

Locust Fork below Snead, AL (02454500) Micropterus salmoides < 5 < 5 39 < 5 < 5 < 5Valley Creek near Bessemer, AL (02461500) Ameiurus natalis < 5 < 5 < 5 < 5 < 5 8.8Black Warrior River at Bankhead L&D near 

Bessemer, AL (02462500)

Lepomis macrochirus < 5 < 5 < 5 < 5 < 5 < 5

Hurricane Creek near Holt, AL (02463500) Ictalurus punctatus < 5 < 5 < 5 < 5 < 5 < 5 Micropterus salmoides < 5 < 5 < 5 < 5 < 5 < 5Cribbs Mill Creek at Tuscaloosa, AL 

(02465288)

Micropterus salmoides < 5 12 5.6 < 5 < 5 43Lepomis megalotis < 5 < 5 < 5 < 5 < 5 < 5Lepomis macrochirus < 5 < 5 < 5 < 5 < 5 < 5Ameiurus natalis < 5 8.8 < 5 < 5 < 5 28

Tombigbee River below Coffeeville L&D 

near Coffeeville, AL (02469762)

Dorosoma cepedianum < 5 13 6.7 < 5 < 5 < 5Micropterus salmoides < 5 15 < 5 < 5 < 5 < 5

Satilpa Creek near Coffeeville, AL 

(02469800)

Moxostoma poecilurum < 5 < 5 < 5 < 5 < 5 < 5Lepomis megalotis < 5 < 5 < 5 < 5 < 5 < 5

Chickasaw Creek near Kushla, AL 

(02471001)

Lepomis megalotis < 5 < 5 < 5 < 5 < 5 < 5

Cahaba Valley Creek at Cross Creek Road at 

Pelham, AL (0242354750)

Lepomis megalotis < 5 < 5 < 5 < 5 < 5 < 5
Appendix Tables 71

Appendix 2. Concentration data for organochlorine compounds in whole-fish tissue samples from the Mobile River Basin, 

1998—Continued

[USGS, U.S. Geological Survey; PCB’s, polychlorinated biphenyls; <, less than; Blvd., Boulevard; L&D, Lock and Dam; E, estimated; BHC, hexachlorocyclohexane]

Site name (USGS identification numbera)

a USGS identification number is based on geographic location and the downstream order of streamflow sites.

Species

Concentration, in microgram per kilogram, 

wet weight

cis-Chlordane Sample weight

Coosa River near Rome, GA (02397000) Cyprinus carpio < 5 10 Lepomis macrochirus < 5 10Chattooga River above Gaylesville, AL 

(02398300)

Lepomis miniatus < 5 10

Sougahatchee Creek above Reeltown, AL 

(02418264)

Hypentelium etowanum < 5 10Ictalurus punctatus < 5 10

Three Mile Branch at North Blvd. at Montgomery, AL (02419977) Gambusia affinis 36 10Pintlalla Creek at Liberty Church Road near 

Pintlalla, AL (02421115)

Lepomis megalotis < 5 10.04

Shades Creek at Homewood, AL (02423581) Lepomis megalotis 24 10.01Cahaba River at Centreville, AL (02424000) Ictiobus bubalus 6.8 10Alabama River at Claiborne, AL (02429500) Micropterus salmoides < 5 10Town Creek at Tupelo, MS (02434000) Ictalurus punctatus < 5 10 Lepomis macrochirus 5.7 10Lost Creek above Parrish, AL (02454055)

Lepomis megalotis < 5 10Lepomis macrochirus < 5 10Micropterus punctulatus < 5 10

Locust Fork below Snead, AL (02454500) Micropterus salmoides < 5 10.01Valley Creek near Bessemer, AL (02461500) Ameiurus natalis 12 10Black Warrior River at Bankhead L&D near 

Bessemer, AL (02462500)

Lepomis macrochirus < 5 10.01

Hurricane Creek near Holt, AL (02463500) Ictalurus punctatus < 5 10 Micropterus salmoides < 5 10Cribbs Mill Creek at Tuscaloosa, AL 

(02465288)

Micropterus salmoides 72 10Lepomis megalotis 12 10Lepomis macrochirus 6.4 10.01Ameiurus natalis 39 10

Tombigbee River below Coffeeville L&D 

near Coffeeville, AL (02469762)

Dorosoma cepedianum < 5 10Micropterus salmoides < 5 10

Satilpa Creek near Coffeeville, AL 

(02469800)

Moxostoma poecilurum < 5 10Lepomis megalotis < 5 10.01

Chickasaw Creek near Kushla, AL 

(02471001)

Lepomis megalotis < 5 10.01

Cahaba Valley Creek at Cross Creek Road at 

Pelham, AL (0242354750)

Lepomis megalotis < 5 10.01
72 Organochlorine Compounds and Trace Elements in Fish Tissue and Streambed Sediment in the Mobile River Basin, 1998 Appendix 3. Concentration data for trace elements in fish-liver tissue samples from the Mobile River Basin, 1998 [USGS, U.S. Geological Survey; <, less than; Blvd., Boulevard; L&D, Lock and Dam; —, missing data] Site name (USGS identification numbera)

a USGS identification number is based on geographic location and the downstream order of streamflow sites.

Species Concentration, in microgram per gram, dry weight Aluminum Barium Boron Chromium Copper Iron Manganese Strontium

Coosa River near Rome, GA 

(02397000)

Lepomis macrochirus 10.283 0.479 0.865 < 0.5 9.29 876.56 8.407 0.588Cyprinus carpio 10.481 5.646 3.829 < 0.5 95.663 1,099.4 9.471 0.668

Chattooga River above 

Gaylesville, AL (02398300)

Lepomis miniatus 7.7699 0.36335 5.8402 0.80763 11.905 758.29 12.698 1.1904

Sougahatchee Creek above 

Reeltown, AL (02418264)

Ictalurus punctatus 8.2611 0.12 1.34 0.75 9.8 659.08 13.9 0.77

Pintlalla Creek at Liberty Church 

Road near Pintlalla, AL (02421115)

Lepomis megalotis 13.049 < 0.1 20.524 < 0.5 7.0289 752.23 4.679 0.97371

Shades Creek at Homewood, AL 

(02423581)

Lepomis megalotis 7.7611 < 0.1 3.91 0.69 15.46 901.17 5.19 0.58

Cahaba River at Centreville, AL 

(02424000)

Ictiobus bubalus 14.987 0.23393 0.84058 1.3448 68.146 1,807.5 6.1471 0.14386

Alabama River at Claiborne, AL 

(02429500)

Micropterus punctulatus 1.099 < 0.1 0.899 < 0.5 5.433 146.23 3.301 0.298

Town Creek at Tupelo, MS 

(02434000)

Lepomis macrochirus 6.3559 0.13381 1.2609 < 0.5 6.6571 586.2 5.5869 1.3272Ictalurus punctatus 7.0941 0.15464 4.8432 < 0.5 18.083 1,646.5 5.877 2.7893

Lost Creek above Parrish, AL 

(02454055)

Lepomis macrochirus 5.0914 0.10235 3.4022 < 0.5 4.3908 288.64 3.3552 1.304Lepomis megalotis 5.9807 0.11015 10.375 < 0.5 4.7599 463.65 3.6955 1.8737

Locust Fork below Snead, AL 

(02454500)

Micropterus punctulatus 21.556 0.27 1.08 0.65 11.33 813.43 4.77 2.42

Valley Creek near Bessemer, AL 

(02461500)

Ameiurus natalis 3.451 < 0.1 1.19 0.6 48.23 561.68 4.27 0.56

Black Warrior River at Bankhead 

L&D near Bessemer, AL (02462500)

Lepomis macrochirus 10.623 0.358 5.715 < 0.5 8.591 657.35 13.952 0.779

Hurricane Creek near Holt, AL 

(02463500)

Ictalurus punctatus 12.581 0.14 0.87 0.52 151.63 684.18 8.47 0.86

Cribbs Mill Creek at Tuscaloosa, AL 

(02465288)

Lepomis macrochirus 1.7174 < 0.1 1.195 < 0.5 7.9107 608.94 4.6065 0.14197Micropterus salmoides 4.5938 0.14102 1.5275 < 0.5 22.6 890.53 5.1134 0.39623Lepomis macrochirus 4.7086 0.19349 5.6271 0.61616 29.298 1,010.2 6.4901 0.59687Ameiurus natalis 8.222 0.31179 8.1126 1.1316 34.911 1,380.6 7.8103 1.1989

Tombigbee River below Coffeeville 

L&D near Coffeeville, AL (02469762)

Dorosoma cepedianum 3.546 < 0.1 1.188 < 0.5 11.306 614.9 7.189 0.635Micropterus salmoides 180.17 3.0252 2.9008 0.82965 13.103 930.97 15.227 3.213

Satilpa Creek near Coffeeville, AL 

(02469800)

Moxostoma poecilurum 26.759 0.41035 1.7514 0.63706 44.701 2,066.1 30.008 0.62962

Chickasaw Creek near Kushla, AL 

(02471001)

Lepomis megalotis 20.249 0.39146 2.936 0.89304 12.819 1,047.5 7.1788 1.3766

Cahaba Valley Creek at Cross Creek 

Road at Pelham, AL (0242354750)

Lepomis megalotis 11.319 0.26463 20.094 < 0.5 85.083 502.66 7.249 1.3356
Appendix Tables 73

Appendix 3. Concentration data for trace elements in fish-liver tissue samples from the Mobile River Basin, 1998—Continued[USGS, U.S. Geological Survey; <, less than; Blvd., Boulevard; L&D, Lock and Dam; —, missing data]

Site name (USGS identification numbera)

a USGS identification number is based on geographic location and the downstream order of streamflow sites.

Species Concentration, in microgram per gram, dry weight Zinc Antimony Arsenic Beryllium Cadmium Cobalt Lead Molybdenum

Coosa River near Rome, GA 

(02397000)

Lepomis macrochirus 86.849 < 0.15 0.6 < 0.15 3.01 0.37 0.21 1.05Cyprinus carpio 800.64 < 0.97 < 0.97 < 0.97 3.38 2.11 < 0.97 1.08

Chattooga River above 

Gaylesville, AL (02398300)

Lepomis miniatus 100.12 < 1.44 < 1.44 < 1.44 < 1.44 1.99 < 1.44 < 1.44

Sougahatchee Creek above 

Reeltown, AL (02418264)

Ictalurus punctatus 133.45 < 0.51 < 0.51 < 0.51 0.68 < 0.51 < 0.51 1.09

Pintlalla Creek at Liberty Church 

Road near Pintlalla, AL (02421115)

Lepomis megalotis 63.12 < 1.73 < 1.73 < 1.73 < 1.73 < 1.73 < 1.73 < 1.73

Shades Creek at Homewood, AL 

(02423581)

Lepomis megalotis 89.99 < 0.9 < 0.9 < 0.9 2.73 1.93 < 0.9 1.77

Cahaba River at Centreville, AL 

(02424000)

Ictiobus bubalus 134.88 < 0.28 0.66 < 0.28 1.77 0.52 0.44 1.22

Alabama River at Claiborne, AL 

(02429500)

Micropterus punctulatus 59.996 < 0.2 0.98 < 0.2 0.29 0.6 < 0.2 0.59

Town Creek at Tupelo, MS 

(02434000)

Lepomis macrochirus 82.555 < 0.31 0.42 < 0.31 0.34 0.41 < 0.31 0.91Ictalurus punctatus 118.82 < 0.37 E 0.42 < 0.37 < 0.37 E 1.39 < 0.37 E 1.44

Lost Creek above Parrish, AL 

(02454055)

Lepomis macrochirus 61.465 < 0.43 0.72 < 0.43 0.69 1.01 < 0.43 0.46Lepomis megalotis 64.95 < 1.3 < 1.3 < 1.3 < 1.3 < 1.3 < 1.3 < 1.3

Locust Fork below Snead, AL 

(02454500)

Micropterus punctulatus 81.5 < 0.36 < 0.36 < 0.36 1.25 2.14 < 0.36 1.03

Valley Creek near Bessemer, AL 

(02461500)

Ameiurus natalis 108.04 < 0.41 < 0.41 < 0.41 < 0.41 < 0.41 < 0.41 0.77

Black Warrior River at Bankhead 

L&D near Bessemer, AL (02462500)

Lepomis macrochirus 83.602 < 1.22 2.7 < 1.22 < 1.22 2.81 < 1.22 < 1.22

Hurricane Creek near Holt, AL 

(02463500)

Ictalurus punctatus 131.79 < 0.42 < 0.42 < 0.42 0.84 1.27 < 0.42 0.97

Cribbs Mill Creek at Tuscaloosa, AL 

(02465288)

Lepomis macrochirus 67.786 < 0.3 0.34 < 0.3 0.45 < 0.31 < 0.3 0.7Micropterus salmoides 85.124 < 0.31 0.41 < 0.31 0.5 0.65 < 0.31 0.8Lepomis macrochirus 98.372 < 0.84 < 0.84 < 0.84 1.32 2.46 < 0.84 0.99Ameiurus natalis 119.38 < 2.85 < 2.85 < 2.85 < 2.85 < 2.85 < 2.85 < 2.85

Tombigbee River below Coffeeville 

L&D near Coffeeville, AL (02469762)

Dorosoma cepedianum 89.214 < 0.33 1.35 < 0.33 < 0.37 0.96 < 0.33 0.77Micropterus salmoides 89.673 < 0.37 1.72 < 0.37 0.57 0.97 < 0.37 0.97

Satilpa Creek near Coffeeville, AL 

(02469800)

Moxostoma poecilurum 107.26 < 0.33 0.85 < 0.33 0.71 0.79 < 0.33 1.44

Chickasaw Creek near Kushla, AL 

(02471001)

Lepomis megalotis 108.57 < 1.79 < 1.79 < 1.79 10.9 < 1.79 < 1.79 < 1.79

Cahaba Valley Creek at Cross Creek 

Road at Pelham, AL (0242354750)

Lepomis megalotis 104.52 < 2.1 < 2.1 < 2.1 < 2.1 < 2.1 < 2.1 < 2.1
74 Organochlorine Compounds and Trace Elements in Fish Tissue and Streambed Sediment in the Mobile River Basin, 1998 Appendix 3. Concentration data for trace elements in fish-liver tissue samples from the Mobile River Basin, 1998

—Continued

[USGS, U.S. Geological Survey; <, less than; Blvd., Boulevard; L&D, Lock and Dam; —, missing data]

Site name (USGS identification numbera

)

a USGS identification number is based on geographic location and the downstream order of streamflow sites.

Species

Concentration, in microgram per gram, dry weight

Nickel Selenium Silver Uranium Mercury Percent water in sample Vanadium

Coosa River near Rome, GA 

(02397000)

Lepomis macrochirus < 0.15 8.17 < 0.97 < 0.15 < 1 73.61 1.01Cyprinus carpio < 0.97 10.13 1.1 < 0.97 1.8009 76.57 2.22

Chattooga River above 

Gaylesville, AL (02398300)

Lepomis miniatus < 1.44 13.98 < 1.44 < 1.44 < 0.2

— 2.18

Sougahatchee Creek above 

Reeltown, AL (02418264)

Ictalurus punctatus < 0.51 7.91 < 0.51 < 0.51 0.066 79.53 1.3

Pintlalla Creek at Liberty Church 

Road near Pintlalla, AL (02421115)

Lepomis megalotis < 1.73 4.51 < 1.73 < 1.73

—

— < 1.73

Shades Creek at Homewood, AL 

(02423581)

Lepomis megalotis 0.98 19.56 < 0.9 < 0.9 < 0.9 77.44 1.4

Cahaba River at Centreville, AL 

(02424000)

Ictiobus bubalus 0.29 6.88 0.29 < 0.28 0.04 72.19 2.3

Alabama River at Claiborne, AL 

(02429500)

Micropterus punctulatus < 0.2 3.31 < 0.2 < 0.2 < 0.2 72.24 0.34

Town Creek at Tupelo, MS 

(02434000)

Lepomis macrochirus < 0.31 E 4.59 < 0.31 < 0.31 0.06 76.89 1.5Ictalurus punctatus < 0.37 7.24 < 0.37 < 0.37 0.63 81.72 E 1.51

Lost Creek above Parrish, AL 

(02454055)

Lepomis macrochirus < 0.43 3.79 < 0.43 < 0.43 < 0.06 68.42 0.46Lepomis megalotis < 1.3 5.7 < 1.3 < 1.3 < 0.1 73.28 < 1.3

Locust Fork below Snead, AL 

(02454500)

Micropterus punctulatus 0.58 5.71 < 0.36 < 0.36 1.64 77.53 1.41

Valley Creek near Bessemer, AL 

(02461500)

Ameiurus natalis < 0.41 14.21 0.43 < 0.41 < 0.4 80.99 1.18

Black Warrior River at Bankhead 

L&D near Bessemer, AL (02462500)

Lepomis macrochirus < 1.22 9.18 < 1.22 < 1.22 < 1.2 61.54 < 1.22

Hurricane Creek near Holt, AL 

(02463500)

Ictalurus punctatus < 0.42 6.15 < 0.42 < 0.42 0.39 81.39 0.75

Cribbs Mill Creek at Tuscaloosa, AL 

(02465288)

Lepomis macrochirus < 0.3 4.24 < 0.3 < 0.3 0.08 65.79 0.46Micropterus salmoides < 0.31 5.62 < 0.31 < 0.31 0.17 70 0.89Lepomis macrochirus < 0.84 7.14 < 0.84 < 0.84 0.24 74.42 1.19Ameiurus natalis < 2.85 9.96 < 2.85 < 2.85 0.58 83.75 < 2.85

Tombigbee River below Coffeeville 

L&D near Coffeeville, AL (02469762)

Dorosoma cepedianum < 0.33 4.05 < 0.33 < 0.33 0.06 65.38 0.73Micropterus salmoides 0.48 6.33 < 0.37 < 0.37 < 0.3 71.4 0.77

Satilpa Creek near Coffeeville, AL 

(02469800)

Moxostoma poecilurum < 0.33 8.17 < 0.33 < 0.33 0.43 75.91 0.84

Chickasaw Creek near Kushla, AL 

(02471001)

Lepomis megalotis < 1.79 11.86 < 1.79 < 1.79 < 1.8 60.71 3.21

Cahaba Valley Creek at Cross Creek 

Road at Pelham, AL (0242354750)

Lepomis megalotis < 2.1 E 7.93 < 2.1 < 2.1

—

— < 2.1
Appendix Tables 75

Appendix 4. Concentration data for organochlorine compounds in streambed-sediment samples from the Mobile River Basin, 1998[USGS, U.S. Geological Survey; <, less than; Blvd., Boulevard; —, missing data; L&D, Lock and Dam; DCPA, chlorthaldimethyl; BHC, hexachlorocyclohexane]

Site name (USGS identification numbera)

a USGS identification number is based on geographic location and the downstream order of streamflow sites.

Concentration, in microgram per kilogram, dry weight

Percent organic 

carbon

Percent organic + 

inorganic carbon

Percent 

inorganic carbon

a-d6-hexachlorocyclohexaneb

b Reported as percent of sample.

Octochlorbiphenylb 3,5-dichlorobi- phenylb cis- Nonachlor trans- Nonachlor

Coosa River near Rome, GA (02397000) 1.5 1.6 0.04 86 88 94 < 1 < 1Chattooga River above Gaylesville, AL 

(02398300)

1 1 0.02 94 86 117 < 1 < 1

Sougahatchee Creek above Reeltown, AL 

(02418264)

3.2 3.3 0.05 70 84 70 < 1 < 1

Three Mile Branch at North Blvd. at 

Montgomery, AL (02419977)

3.2 3.2 0.05 84 93 78 < 1 2

Pintlalla Creek at Liberty Church Road near 

Pintlalla, AL (02421115)

3 3.1 0.03 60 78 64 < 1 < 1

Shades Creek at Homewood, AL (02423581) 1.5 1.7 0.19 92 80 81 < 1 2Cahaba River at Centreville, AL (02424000) 2.4 2.5 0.06 95 88 96 < 1 < 1Alabama River at Claiborne, AL (02429500) 1.2 1.2 0.01 60 51 52 < 1 < 1Town Creek at Tupelo, MS (02434000) 1.4 1.7 0.23 71 78 75 < 1 < 1Buttahatchee River near Aberdeen, MS 

(02439400)

1.6 1.6 0.02 84 136 — < 1 < 1

Bogue Chitto Creek near Memphis, AL 

(02444490)

1.11 2.81 1.7 62 — — < 1 < 1

Lost Creek above Parrish, AL (02454055) 2.1 3.1 0.92 68 55 91 < 1 4Locust Fork below Snead, AL (02454500) 2.2 2.2 0.02 94 86 101 < 1 < 1Valley Creek near Bessemer, AL (02461500) 3.6 4.3 0.65 96 83 — 4 13Black Warrior River at Bankhead L&D near 

Bessemer, AL (02462500)

3.7 3.8 0.09 94 82 79 < 1 < 1

Hurricane Creek near Holt, AL (02463500) 1.1 1.1 0.04 86 84 94 < 1 < 1Cribbs Mill Creek at Tuscaloosa, AL 

(02465288)

1.3 1.4 0.08 99 83 78 < 1 < 1

Tombigbee River below Coffeeville L&D 

near Coffeeville, AL (02469762)

0.89 0.95 0.06 91 85 83 < 1 < 1

Satilpa Creek near Coffeeville, AL 

(02469800)

— — — 106 83 86 < 1 < 1

Chickasaw Creek near Kushla, AL 

(02471001)

2.1 2.1 0.01 86 80 102 < 1 < 1

Cahaba Valley Creek at Cross Creek Road at 

Pelham, AL (0242354750)

1.4 1.5 0.1 86 82 94 < 1 < 1
76 Organochlorine Compounds and Trace Elements in Fish Tissue and Streambed Sediment in the Mobile River Basin, 1998 Appendix 4. Concentration data for organochlorine compounds in streambed-sediment samples from the Mobile River Basin, 1998

—Continued

[USGS, U.S. Geological Survey; <, less than; Blvd., Boulevard; —, missing data; L&D, Lock and Dam; DCPA, chlorthaldimethyl; BHC, hexachlorocyclohexane]

Site name (USGS identification numbera)

a USGS identification number is based on geographic location and the downstream order of streamflow sites.

Concentration, in microgram per kilogram, dry weight

Oxychlordane Aldrin cis-Chlordane trans-Chlordane Chloroneb DCPA o,p'-DDD p,p'-DDD

Coosa River near Rome, GA (02397000) < 1 < 1 < 1 < 1 < 5 < 5 < 1 < 1Chattooga River above Gaylesville, AL 

(02398300)

< 1 < 1 < 1 < 1 < 5 < 5 < 1 < 1

Sougahatchee Creek above Reeltown, AL 

(02418264)

< 1 < 1 < 1 < 1 < 5 < 5 < 1 < 1

Three Mile Branch at North Blvd. at 

Montgomery, AL (02419977)

< 1 < 1 3 3 < 5 < 5 < 1 2

Pintlalla Creek at Liberty Church Road near 

Pintlalla, AL (02421115)

< 1 < 1 < 1 < 1 < 5 < 5 < 1 < 1

Shades Creek at Homewood, AL (02423581) < 1 < 1 2 2 < 5 < 5 < 1 < 1Cahaba River at Centreville, AL (02424000) < 1 < 1 < 2 < 1 < 5 < 5 < 1 3Alabama River at Claiborne, AL (02429500) < 1 < 1 < 1 < 1 < 5 < 5 < 1 < 1Town Creek at Tupelo, MS (02434000) < 1 < 1 < 1 < 1 < 5 < 5 < 1 < 1Buttahatchee River near Aberdeen, MS 

(02439400)

< 1 < 1 < 1 < 1 < 5 < 5 < 1 < 1

Bogue Chitto Creek near Memphis, AL 

(02444490)

< 1 < 1 < 1 < 1 < 5 < 5 < 1 < 1

Lost Creek above Parrish, AL (02454055) < 1 < 1 1 2 < 5 < 5 < 1 4Locust Fork below Snead, AL (02454500) < 1 < 1 < 1 < 1 < 5 < 5 < 1 1Valley Creek near Bessemer, AL (02461500) < 1 < 1 14 25 < 5 < 5 7 19Black Warrior River at Bankhead L&D near 

Bessemer, AL (02462500)

3 < 1 < 1 < 1 < 5 < 5 < 1 < 1

Hurricane Creek near Holt, AL (02463500) < 1 < 1 < 1 < 1 < 5 < 5 < 1 < 1Cribbs Mill Creek at Tuscaloosa, AL 

(02465288)

< 1 < 1 < 1 2 < 5 < 5 < 1 < 1

Tombigbee River below Coffeeville L&D 

near Coffeeville, AL (02469762)

< 1 < 1 < 1 < 1 < 5 < 5 < 1 < 1

Satilpa Creek near Coffeeville, AL 

(02469800)

< 1 < 1 < 1 < 1 < 5 < 5 < 1 < 1

Chickasaw Creek near Kushla, AL 

(02471001)

< 1 < 1 < 1 < 1 < 5 < 5 < 1 < 1

Cahaba Valley Creek at Cross Creek Road at 

Pelham, AL (0242354750)

< 1 < 1 < 1 < 1 < 5 < 5 < 1 < 1
Appendix Tables 77

Appendix 4. Concentration data for organochlorine compounds in streambed-sediment samples from the Mobile River Basin, 1998—Continued[USGS, U.S. Geological Survey; <, less than; Blvd., Boulevard; —, missing data; L&D, Lock and Dam; DCPA, chlorthaldimethyl; BHC, hexachlorocyclohexane]

Site name (USGS identification numbera)

a USGS identification number is based on geographic location and the downstream order of streamflow sites.

Concentration, in microgram per kilogram, dry weight

o,p'-DDE p,p'-DDE o,p'-DDT p,p'-DDT Dieldrin Endosulfan I Endrin alpha-BHC

Coosa River near Rome, GA (02397000) < 1 2 < 2 <2 < 1 < 1 < 2 < 1Chattooga River above Gaylesville, AL 

(02398300)

< 1 2 < 2 < 2 < 1 < 1 < 2 < 1

Sougahatchee Creek above Reeltown, AL 

(02418264)

< 1 < 1 < 2 < 2 < 1 < 1 < 2 < 1

Three Mile Branch at North Blvd. at 

Montgomery, AL (02419977)

< 1 2 < 2 23 2 < 1 < 2 < 1

Pintlalla Creek at Liberty Church Road near 

Pintlalla, AL (02421115)

< 1 < 1 < 2 < 2 < 1 < 1 < 2 < 1

Shades Creek at Homewood, AL (02423581) < 1 < 1 < 2 < 2 < 1 < 1 < 2 < 1Cahaba River at Centreville, AL (02424000) < 1 < 1 < 2 < 2 < 1 < 1 < 2 < 1Alabama River at Claiborne, AL (02429500) < 1 < 1 < 2 < 2 < 1 < 1 < 2 < 1Town Creek at Tupelo, MS (02434000) < 1 1 < 2 < 2 < 1 < 1 < 2 < 1Buttahatchee River near Aberdeen, MS 

(02439400)

< 1 4 < 2 < 2 < 1 < 1 < 2 < 1

Bogue Chitto Creek near Memphis, AL 

(02444490)

< 1 < 1 < 2 < 2 < 1 < 1 < 2 < 1

Lost Creek above Parrish, AL (02454055) < 1 < 1 < 2 < 2 < 1 < 1 < 2 < 1Locust Fork below Snead, AL (02454500) < 1 8 < 2 4 < 1 < 1 < 2 < 1Valley Creek near Bessemer, AL (02461500) 7 3 7 14 12 < 1 < 3 < 1Black Warrior River at Bankhead L&D near 

Bessemer, AL (02462500)

< 1 < 1 < 2 < 2 < 1 < 1 < 2 < 1

Hurricane Creek near Holt, AL (02463500) < 1 < 1 < 2 < 2 < 1 < 1 < 2 < 1Cribbs Mill Creek at Tuscaloosa, AL 

(02465288)

< 1 < 1 < 2 < 2 < 1 < 1 < 2 < 1

Tombigbee River below Coffeeville L&D 

near Coffeeville, AL (02469762)

< 1 < 1 < 2 < 2 < 1 < 1 < 2 < 1

Satilpa Creek near Coffeeville, AL 

(02469800)

< 1 < 1 < 2 < 2 < 1 < 1 < 2 < 1

Chickasaw Creek near Kushla, AL 

(02471001)

< 1 < 1 < 2 < 2 < 1 < 1 < 2 < 1

Cahaba Valley Creek at Cross Creek Road at 

Pelham, AL (0242354750)

< 1 < 1 < 2 < 2 < 1 < 1 < 2 < 1
78 Organochlorine Compounds and Trace Elements in Fish Tissue and Streambed Sediment in the Mobile River Basin, 1998 Appendix 4. Concentration data for organochlorine compounds in streambed-sediment samples from the Mobile River Basin, 1998

—Continued

[USGS, U.S. Geological Survey; <, less than; Blvd., Boulevard; —, missing data; L&D, Lock and Dam; DCPA, chlorthaldimethyl; BHC, hexachlorocyclohexane]

Site name (USGS identification numbera

)

a USGS identification number is based on geographic location and the downstream order of streamflow sites.

Concentration, in microgram per kilogram, dry weight

beta-BHC Heptachlor Heptachlor epoxide BHC Isodrin Lindane p,p'- Methoxychlor o,p'- Methoxychlor

Coosa River near Rome, GA (02397000) < 1 < 1 < 1 < 1 < 1 < 1 < 5 < 5Chattooga River above Gaylesville, AL 

(02398300)

< 1 < 1 < 1 < 1 < 1 < 1 < 5 < 5

Sougahatchee Creek above Reeltown, AL 

(02418264)

< 1 < 1 < 1 < 1 < 1 < 1 < 5 < 5

Three Mile Branch at North Blvd. at 

Montgomery, AL (02419977)

< 1 < 1 < 1 < 1 < 1 < 1 < 5 < 5

Pintlalla Creek at Liberty Church Road near 

Pintlalla, AL (02421115)

< 1 < 1 < 1 < 1 < 1 < 1 < 5 < 5

Shades Creek at Homewood, AL (02423581) < 1 < 1 < 1 < 1 < 1 < 1 < 5 < 5Cahaba River at Centreville, AL (02424000) < 1 < 1 < 1 < 1 < 1 < 1 < 5 < 5Alabama River at Claiborne, AL (02429500) < 1 < 1 < 1 < 1 < 1 < 1 < 5 < 5Town Creek at Tupelo, MS (02434000) < 1 < 1 < 1 < 1 < 1 < 1 < 5 < 5Buttahatchee River near Aberdeen, MS 

(02439400)

< 1 < 1 < 1 < 1 < 1 < 1 < 5 < 5

Bogue Chitto Creek near Memphis, AL 

(02444490)

< 1 < 1 < 1 < 1 < 1 < 1 < 5 < 5

Lost Creek above Parrish, AL (02454055) < 1 < 1 < 1 < 1 < 1 < 1 < 5 < 5Locust Fork below Snead, AL (02454500) < 1 < 1 < 1 < 1 < 1 < 1 < 5 < 5Valley Creek near Bessemer, AL (02461500) < 1 < 1 < 1 < 1 < 1 < 1 < 16 < 10Black Warrior River at Bankhead L&D near 

Bessemer, AL (02462500)

< 1 < 1 < 1 < 1 < 1 < 1 < 5 < 5

Hurricane Creek near Holt, AL (02463500) < 1 < 1 < 1 < 1 < 1 < 1 < 5 < 5Cribbs Mill Creek at Tuscaloosa, AL 

(02465288)

< 1 < 1 < 1 < 1 < 1 < 1 < 5 < 5

Tombigbee River below Coffeeville L&D 

near Coffeeville, AL (02469762)

< 1 < 1 < 1 < 1 < 1 < 1 < 5 < 5

Satilpa Creek near Coffeeville, AL 

(02469800)

< 1 < 1 < 1 < 1 < 1 < 1 < 5 < 5

Chickasaw Creek near Kushla, AL 

(02471001)

< 1 < 1 < 1 < 1 < 1 < 1 < 5 < 5

Cahaba Valley Creek at Cross Creek Road at 

Pelham, AL (0242354750)

< 1 < 1 < 1 < 1 < 1 < 1 < 5 < 5
Appendix Tables 79

Appendix 4. Concentration data for organochlorine compounds in streambed-sediment samples from the Mobile River Basin, 1998—Continued[USGS, U.S. Geological Survey; <, less than; Blvd., Boulevard; —, missing data; L&D, Lock and Dam; DCPA, chlorthaldimethyl; BHC, hexachlorocyclohexane]

Site name (USGS identification numbera)

a USGS identification number is based on geographic location and the downstream order of streamflow sites.

Concentration, in microgram per kilogram, dry weight

Mirex cis- Permethrin trans- Permethrin Toxaphene PCB’s Pentachloro- anisole

Coosa River near Rome, GA (02397000) < 1 < 5 < 5 < 200 < 50 < 1Chattooga River above Gaylesville, AL 

(02398300)

< 1 < 5 < 5 < 200 < 50 < 1

Sougahatchee Creek above Reeltown, AL 

(02418264)

< 1 < 5 < 5 < 200 < 50 < 1

Three Mile Branch at North Blvd. at 

Montgomery, AL (02419977)

< 1 < 5 < 5 < 200 < 50 < 1

Pintlalla Creek at Liberty Church Road near 

Pintlalla, AL (02421115)

< 1 < 5 < 5 < 200 < 50 < 1

Shades Creek at Homewood, AL (02423581) < 1 < 5 < 5 < 200 < 50 < 1Cahaba River at Centreville, AL (02424000) < 1 < 5 < 5 < 200 < 50 < 1Alabama River at Claiborne, AL (02429500) < 1 < 5 < 5 < 200 < 50 < 1Town Creek at Tupelo, MS (02434000) < 1 < 5 < 5 < 200 < 50 < 1Buttahatchee River near Aberdeen, MS 

(02439400)

< 1 < 5 < 5 < 200 < 50 < 1

Bogue Chitto Creek near Memphis, AL 

(02444490)

< 1 < 5 < 5 < 200 < 50 < 1

Lost Creek above Parrish, AL (02454055) < 1 < 5 < 5 < 200 < 50 < 1Locust Fork below Snead, AL (02454500) < 1 < 5 < 5 < 200 < 50 < 1Valley Creek near Bessemer, AL (02461500) < 1 < 5 < 5 < 200 160 < 1Black Warrior River at Bankhead L&D near 

Bessemer, AL (02462500)

< 1 < 5 < 5 < 200 < 50 < 1

Hurricane Creek near Holt, AL (02463500) < 1 < 5 < 5 < 200 < 50 < 1Cribbs Mill Creek at Tuscaloosa, AL 

(02465288)

< 1 < 5 < 5 < 200 < 50 < 1

Tombigbee River below Coffeeville L&D 

near Coffeeville, AL (02469762)

< 1 < 5 < 5 < 200 < 50 < 1

Satilpa Creek near Coffeeville, AL 

(02469800)

< 1 < 5 < 5 < 200 < 50 < 1

Chickasaw Creek near Kushla, AL 

(02471001)

< 1 < 5 < 5 < 200 < 50 < 1

Cahaba Valley Creek at Cross Creek Road at 

Pelham, AL (0242354750)

< 1 < 5 < 5 < 200 < 50 < 1
80 Organochlorine Compounds and Trace Elements in Fish Tissue and Streambed Sediment in the Mobile River Basin, 1998 Appendix 5. Concentration data for trace elements in streambed-sediment samples from the Mobile River Basin, 1998 [USGS, U.S. Geological Survey; <, less than; Blvd., Boulevard; L&D, Lock and Dam; —, no data] Site name (USGS identification numbera

)

a USGS identification number is based on geographic location and the downstream order of streamflow sites.

Concentration, in microgram per gram, dry weight

Aluminumb

b Reported as percent of sample.

Antimony Arsenic Barium Beryllium Bismuth Cadmium Calciumb

Coosa River near Rome, GA (02397000) 8.1 1 12 4,300 2.5 < 1 0.18 0.36Chattooga River above Gaylesville, AL 

(02398300)

4.5 0.64 6.8 290 1.4 < 1 < 0.1 0.17

Sougahatchee Creek above Reeltown, AL 

(02418264)

8.38 1.09 4.71 594 2.52 < 1 0.147 0.294

Three Mile Branch at North Blvd. at 

Montgomery, AL (02419977)

5.92 0.636 26.5 433 1.42 < 1 0.439 0.387

Pintlalla Creek at Liberty Church Road near 

Pintlalla, AL (02421115)

8.62 0.395 23.5 390 2.31 < 1 0.135 0.744

Cahaba Valley Creek at Cross Creek Road at 

Pelham, AL (0242354750)

4.67 0.776 11.3 234 1.54 < 1 0.27 0.502

Shades Creek at Homewood, AL (02423581) 5.37 0.917 13.7 357 1.74 < 1 0.361 0.6Cahaba River at Centreville, AL (02424000) 7.3 0.75 16 510 1.9 < 1 0.15 0.37Alabama River at Claiborne, AL (02429500) 8.4 0.44 8.5 520 2.4 < 1 0.11 0.49Town Creek at Tupelo, MS (02434000) 7.3 0.55 16 490 2.1 < 1 0.24 1.3Buttahatchee River near Aberdeen, MS 

(02439400)

5.9 0.54 7.8 520 2.4 < 1 0.11 0.12

Bogue Chitto Creek near Memphis, AL 

(02444490)

6.8 0.53 9.1 240 2.6 < 1 0.26 6.7

Lost Creek above Parrish, AL (02454055) 10 0.77 12 770 2.3 < 1 0.13 3.6Locust Fork below Snead, AL (02454500) 5 0.6 7.7 350 1.2 < 1 0.2 0.22Valley Creek near Bessemer, AL (02461500) 5.8 3.3 23.1 319 1.32 1 1.34 2.16Black Warrior River at Bankhead L&D near 

Bessemer, AL (02462500)

5.7 1.2 34 520 1.7 < 1 0.19 0.27

Hurricane Creek near Holt, AL (02463500) 7.02 0.911 10.7 428 2.41 < 1 0.133 0.179Cribbs Mill Creek at Tuscaloosa, AL 

(02465288)

5.2 0.6 8.5 280 1.1 < 1 0.2 0.33

Tombigbee River below Coffeeville L&D 

near Coffeeville, AL (02469762)

7.6 0.53 8.7 520 2.3 < 1 0.18 0.74

Satilpa Creek near Coffeeville, AL 

(02469800)

8 0.8 20 400 2.3 < 1 0.2 0.63

Chickasaw Creek near Kushla, AL 

(02471001)

3.3 0.5 3.8 250 1 < 1 < 0.1 0.1
Appendix Tables 81

Appendix 5. Concentration data for trace elements in streambed-sediment samples from the Mobile River Basin, 1998—Continued[USGS, U.S. Geological Survey; <, less than; Blvd., Boulevard; L&D, Lock and Dam; —, no data]

Site name (USGS identification numbera)

a USGS identification number is based on geographic location and the downstream order of streamflow sites.

Concentration, in microgram per gram, dry weight

Cerium Chromium Cobalt Copper Europium Gallium Gold Holmium

Coosa River near Rome, GA (02397000) 110 69 23 42 2.8 21 < 1 1.9Chattooga River above Gaylesville, AL 

(02398300)

76 52 11 20 1.2 11 < 1 1.3

Sougahatchee Creek above Reeltown, AL 

(02418264)

107 103 32.2 37.9 2.42 26.2 < 1 2.51

Three Mile Branch at North Blvd. at 

Montgomery, AL (02419977)

128 77.6 15.1 22.1 1.61 18 < 1 1.53

Pintlalla Creek at Liberty Church Road near 

Pintlalla, AL (02421115)

112 167 11.8 24 1.64 26.8 < 1 1.3

Cahaba Valley Creek at Cross Creek Road at 

Pelham, AL (0242354750)

75.9 61.5 12.8 21 1.25 11 < 1 1.38

Shades Creek at Homewood, AL (02423581) 93.6 83.2 12.6 28.5 1.6 12.8 < 1 1.58Cahaba River at Centreville, AL (02424000) 93 66 18 26 1.6 16 < 1 1.1Alabama River at Claiborne, AL (02429500) 140 89 13 22 2.1 18 < 1 1.3Town Creek at Tupelo, MS (02434000) 120 96 13 49 1.8 18 < 1 1.5Buttahatchee River near Aberdeen, MS 

(02439400)

95 54 22 20 1.5 14 < 1 1.4

Bogue Chitto Creek near Memphis, AL 

(02444490)

94 120 9.5 20 1.6 17 < 1 1

Lost Creek above Parrish, AL (02454055) 110 86 23 33 2 22 < 1 1.1Locust Fork below Snead, AL (02454500) 68 48 14 14 < 1 11 < 1 < 1Valley Creek near Bessemer, AL (02461500) 95.5 96.8 13.6 72.7 1.58 13.4 < 1 1.88Black Warrior River at Bankhead L&D near 

Bessemer, AL (02462500)

62 52 14 25 1.1 14 < 1 < 1

Hurricane Creek near Holt, AL (02463500) 116 62.7 27.5 24.5 1.7 16.5 < 1 1.72Cribbs Mill Creek at Tuscaloosa, AL 

(02465288)

80 46 8 15 1.1 11 < 1 1

Tombigbee River below Coffeeville L&D 

near Coffeeville, AL (02469762)

130 88 13 20 2.1 16 < 1 1.3

Satilpa Creek near Coffeeville, AL 

(02469800)

160 96 24 20 2 16 < 1 2

Chickasaw Creek near Kushla, AL 

(02471001)

56 32 11 11 < 1 7.3 < 1 < 1
82 Organochlorine Compounds and Trace Elements in Fish Tissue and Streambed Sediment in the Mobile River Basin, 1998 Appendix 5. Concentration data for trace elements in streambed-sediment samples from the Mobile River Basin, 1998

—Continued

[USGS, U.S. Geological Survey; <, less than; Blvd., Boulevard; L&D, Lock and Dam; —, no data]

Site name (USGS identification numbera)

a USGS identification number is based on geographic location and the downstream order of streamflow sites.

Concentration, in microgram per gram, dry weight

Ironb Lanthanum Lead Lithium Magnesiumb

b Reported as percent of sample.

Manganese Mercury Molybdenum

Coosa River near Rome, GA (02397000) 4.8 59 39 39 0.47 2,100 0.1 1.1Chattooga River above Gaylesville, AL 

(02398300)

2.3 39 24 36 0.28 790 0.06 0.6

Sougahatchee Creek above Reeltown, AL 

(02418264)

6.46 54.3 29.8 32.3 0.322 5,930 0.07 1.76

Three Mile Branch at North Blvd. at 

Montgomery, AL (02419977)

6.42 68.8 50.8 28.1 0.281 3,400 0.07 1.89

Pintlalla Creek at Liberty Church Road near 

Pintlalla, AL (02421115)

6.34 59 25.7 96.9 0.63 1,380 0.04 2.95

Cahaba Valley Creek at Cross Creek Road at 

Pelham, AL (0242354750)

2.45 37.7 22.8 33.4 0.322 1,270 0.05 1.18

Shades Creek at Homewood, AL (02423581) 3.19 48.8 53.2 38.2 0.482 1,050 0.08 0.904Cahaba River at Centreville, AL (02424000) 3.7 52 30 45 0.45 2,200 0.06 1.2Alabama River at Claiborne, AL (02429500) 4.1 76 22 49 0.65 1,300 0.04 1.2Town Creek at Tupelo, MS (02434000) 4.2 66 28 71 0.53 1,400 0.05 1.4Buttahatchee River near Aberdeen, MS 

(02439400)

3.3 53 21 35 0.22 2,700 0.05 0.88

Bogue Chitto Creek near Memphis, AL 

(02444490)

3.2 50 18 89 0.47 440 0.05 1.2

Lost Creek above Parrish, AL (02454055) 4.1 61 26 76 0.85 2,600 0.07 0.88Locust Fork below Snead, AL (02454500) 2.2 36 20 30 0.21 2,000 0.05 1.1Valley Creek near Bessemer, AL (02461500) 4.65 45.1 156 41.3 0.756 915 0.23 4.66Black Warrior River at Bankhead L&D near 

Bessemer, AL (02462500)

3.3 35 24 44 0.4 5,600 0.1 3

Hurricane Creek near Holt, AL (02463500) 3.37 59 25.8 34.7 0.302 2,730 0.04 1.16Cribbs Mill Creek at Tuscaloosa, AL 

(02465288)

2.6 38 31 21 0.23 470 0.04 1

Tombigbee River below Coffeeville L&D 

near Coffeeville, AL (02469762)

4.1 75 21 51 0.67 1,000 0.05 1

Satilpa Creek near Coffeeville, AL 

(02469800)

5.4 78 27 35 0.53 2,400 0.07 2.5

Chickasaw Creek near Kushla, AL 

(02471001)

1.8 31 17 16 0.15 380 0.04 0.63
Appendix Tables 83

Appendix 5. Concentration data for trace elements in streambed-sediment samples from the Mobile River Basin, 1998—Continued[USGS, U.S. Geological Survey; <, less than; Blvd., Boulevard; L&D, Lock and Dam; —, no data]

Site name (USGS identification numbera)

a USGS identification number is based on geographic location and the downstream order of streamflow sites.

Concentration, in microgram per gram, dry weight

Neodymium Nickel Niobium Phosphorusb

b Reported as percent of sample.

Potassiumb Scandium Selenium Silver

Coosa River near Rome, GA (02397000) 52 36 23 0.092 1.4 14 0.49 0.91Chattooga River above Gaylesville, AL 

(02398300)

32 19 19 0.05 0.95 6.6 0.34 0.75

Sougahatchee Creek above Reeltown, AL 

(02418264)

53.8 36.8 14.3 0.117 1.02 18.7 0.83 0.726

Three Mile Branch at North Blvd. at 

Montgomery, AL (02419977)

59 20.7 15.1 0.138 0.8 8.96 0.75 0.787

Pintlalla Creek at Liberty Church Road near 

Pintlalla, AL (02421115)

52.5 32.6 15.6 0.158 1.07 14.5 1.1 0.726

Cahaba Valley Creek at Cross Creek Road at 

Pelham, AL (0242354750)

31.8 31.6 12.3 0.054 0.786 7.17 0.61 0.633

Shades Creek at Homewood, AL (02423581) 44.8 26.2 9.6 0.0537 1.13 9.31 0.67 0.964Cahaba River at Centreville, AL (02424000) 43 32 14 0.091 1.4 13 0.73 0.69Alabama River at Claiborne, AL (02429500) 68 28 17 0.089 1.4 15 0.53 0.81Town Creek at Tupelo, MS (02434000) 58 28 23 0.11 1.4 11 0.66 0.79Buttahatchee River near Aberdeen, MS 

(02439400)

41 25 28 0.049 1.1 8 0.43 0.9

Bogue Chitto Creek near Memphis, AL 

(02444490)

45 35 22 0.081 0.81 12 0.85 < 1

Lost Creek above Parrish, AL (02454055) 50 49 14 0.074 2.4 20 0.59 0.67Locust Fork below Snead, AL (02454500) 29 21 16 0.085 0.75 5 0.48 < 0.1Valley Creek near Bessemer, AL (02461500) 40.9 33.9 11.4 0.104 1.15 9.32 1.6 1.73Black Warrior River at Bankhead L&D near 

Bessemer, AL (02462500)

29 30 9.4 0.092 1.3 11 1.3 0.5

Hurricane Creek near Holt, AL (02463500) 51.5 36 14.8 0.0383 1.21 10.1 0.56 0.884Cribbs Mill Creek at Tuscaloosa, AL 

(02465288)

34 16 16 0.041 0.7 6 0.29 < 0.1

Tombigbee River below Coffeeville L&D 

near Coffeeville, AL (02469762)

63 29 18 0.098 1.4 14 0.42 0.89

Satilpa Creek near Coffeeville, AL 

(02469800)

68 27 18 0.082 0.98 15 1 0.9

Chickasaw Creek near Kushla, AL 

(02471001)

23 9 11 0.02 0.53 5.6 0.45 0.55
84 Organochlorine Compounds and Trace Elements in Fish Tissue and Streambed Sediment in the Mobile River Basin, 1998 Appendix 5. Concentration data for trace elements in streambed-sediment samples from the Mobile River Basin, 1998

—Continued

[USGS, U.S. Geological Survey; <, less than; Blvd., Boulevard; L&D, Lock and Dam; —, no data]

Site name (USGS identification numbera)

a USGS identification number is based on geographic location and the downstream order of streamflow sites.

Concentration, in microgram per gram, dry weight

Sodiumb

b Reported as percent of sample.

Strontium Sulfurb Tantalum Thorium Tin Uranium Vanadium

Coosa River near Rome, GA (02397000) 0.21 78 0.1 1.6 14 2.7 3.3 100Chattooga River above Gaylesville, AL 

(02398300)

0.11 38 < 0.05 1.3 10 1.6 2.7 59

Sougahatchee Creek above Reeltown, AL 

(02418264)

0.175 45.8 0.05 1.4 13.2 4.12 4.78 145

Three Mile Branch at North Blvd. at 

Montgomery, AL (02419977)

0.0643 59.7 0.07 1.55 21.3 2.48 5.63 99.2

Pintlalla Creek at Liberty Church Road near 

Pintlalla, AL (02421115)

0.102 104 0.07 1.69 19 2.86 5.76 142

Cahaba Valley Creek at Cross Creek Road at 

Pelham, AL (0242354750)

0.0901 39.2 < 0.05 < 1 10.4 1.83 3.47 63.1

Shades Creek at Homewood, AL (02423581) 0.159 63.9 < 0.05 1.11 13.2 3.21 3.96 75.9Cahaba River at Centreville, AL (02424000) 0.12 58 < 0.05 1.3 12 3 3.1 100Alabama River at Claiborne, AL (02429500) 0.24 83 < 0.05 1.5 20 2.4 4.5 110Town Creek at Tupelo, MS (02434000) 0.29 130 0.06 1.5 19 2.2 3.8 110Buttahatchee River near Aberdeen, MS 

(02439400)

0.13 68 < 0.05 1.7 12 1.9 2.7 74

Bogue Chitto Creek near Memphis, AL 

(02444490)

0.16 330 0.07 2.6 13 2.2 4.1 110

Lost Creek above Parrish, AL (02454055) 0.43 210 0.12 1.2 14 3.2 3.4 140Locust Fork below Snead, AL (02454500) 0.09 44 < 0.05 1 10 3 2.8 60Valley Creek near Bessemer, AL (02461500) 0.0902 64.3 0.19 1.1 13.2 19.8 3.83 76.8Black Warrior River at Bankhead L&D near 

Bessemer, AL (02462500)

0.18 55 0.21 < 1 10 2.6 3.7 91

Hurricane Creek near Holt, AL (02463500) 0.112 53.4 < 0.05 1.58 17 2.69 4.1 82.5Cribbs Mill Creek at Tuscaloosa, AL 

(02465288)

0.072 39 < 0.05 1.1 12 3 2.9 60

Tombigbee River below Coffeeville L&D 

near Coffeeville, AL (02469762)

0.24 110 < 0.05 1.5 18 2.1 4 120

Satilpa Creek near Coffeeville, AL 

(02469800)

0.1 86 0.05 2 19 3 4 120

Chickasaw Creek near Kushla, AL 

(02471001)

0.084 38 < 0.05 < 1 9.1 1.5 2.4 44
Appendix Tables 85

Appendix 5. Concentration data for trace elements in streambed-sediment samples from the Mobile River Basin, 1998—Continued[USGS, U.S. Geological Survey; <, less than; Blvd., Boulevard; L&D, Lock and Dam; —, no data]

Site name (USGS identification numbera)

a USGS identification number is based on geographic location and the downstream order of streamflow sites.

Concentration, in microgram per gram, dry weight

Yttrium Ytterbium Zinc Organic carbonb

b Reported as percent of sample.

Organic + inorganic 

carbonb

Inorganic 

carbonb Titaniumb Thallium

Coosa River near Rome, GA (02397000) 37 4.3 170 1.52 1.56 0.04 0.62 < 1Chattooga River above Gaylesville, AL 

(02398300)

25 3.3 69 1 1.02 0.02 0.41 < 1

Sougahatchee Creek above Reeltown, AL 

(02418264)

40.3 4.5 149 3.21 3.26 0.05 0.815 < 1

Three Mile Branch at North Blvd. at 

Montgomery, AL (02419977)

26 2.47 208 3.19 3.24 0.05 0.711 < 1

Pintlalla Creek at Liberty Church Road near 

Pintlalla, AL (02421115)

22.1 1.96 127 3.04 3.07 0.03 0.676 < 1

Cahaba Valley Creek at Cross Creek Road at 

Pelham, AL (0242354750)

25.4 2.67 116 1.36 1.46 0.1 0.435 < 1

Shades Creek at Homewood, AL (02423581) 26.2 3.14 165 1.51 1.7 0.19 0.476 < 1Cahaba River at Centreville, AL (02424000) 26 2.8 110 2.43 2.49 0.06 0.41 < 1Alabama River at Claiborne, AL (02429500) 31 3 110 1.23 1.24 0.01 0.58 < 1Town Creek at Tupelo, MS (02434000) 28 3.1 120 1.43 1.66 0.23 0.53 < 1Buttahatchee River near Aberdeen, MS 

(02439400)

27 3.2 82 1.62 1.64 0.02 0.45 < 1

Bogue Chitto Creek near Memphis, AL 

(02444490)

23 2.6 100 1.11 2.81 1.7 0.49 —

Lost Creek above Parrish, AL (02454055) 26 2.8 120 2.14 3.06 0.92 0.47 1Locust Fork below Snead, AL (02454500) 21 2.4 72 2.15 2.17 0.02 0.44 < 1Valley Creek near Bessemer, AL (02461500) 29.1 3.52 514 3.63 4.28 0.65 0.492 < 1Black Warrior River at Bankhead L&D near 

Bessemer, AL (02462500)

19 2.2 110 3.69 3.78 0.09 0.31 < 1

Hurricane Creek near Holt, AL (02463500) 26.3 3 96.2 1.06 1.1 0.04 0.598 < 1Cribbs Mill Creek at Tuscaloosa, AL 

(02465288)

23 2.8 88 1.28 1.36 0.08 0.48 < 1

Tombigbee River below Coffeeville L&D 

near Coffeeville, AL (02469762)

29 2.7 120 0.89 0.95 0.06 0.5 < 1

Satilpa Creek near Coffeeville, AL 

(02469800)

34 3 110 2.9 2.9 0.03 0.57 < 1

Chickasaw Creek near Kushla, AL 

(02471001)

15 1.6 41 2.08 2.09 0.01 0.32 < 1