Water Resources, Vol. 31, No. 5, 2004, pp. 502–510. Translated from Vodnye Resursy, Vol. 31, No.

5, 2004, pp. 546–555.

Original Russian Text Copyright © 2004 by Ostroumov.

WATER QUALITY AND PROTECTION:

ENVIRONMENTAL ASPECTS

The Effect of Synthetic Surfactants

on the Hydrobiological Mechanisms of Water Self-Purification
S. A. Ostroumov
Moscow State University, Leninskie gory, Moscow, 119992 Russia
Received December 27, 2002

Abstract—Long-term studies of the biological effect of surfactants, including the effect surfactants exert on
filter feeders, are reviewed. The role of filter feeders in the functioning of freshwater and marine ecosystems is
analyzed. New aspects in the assessment of environmental hazard due to the impact of chemical pollutants,
including surfactants and detergents, are established.

INTRODUCTION physical and physicochemical processes [27],

Studies made by the author [21–38] and data given
in [5, 40, 56, 57] show that surfactants and surfactant-
containing compounds have an adverse impact on rep-
resentatives of the major functional blocks of ecosys-
tems, including both autotrophic [5, 38, 40] and het-
erotrophic organisms [21, 22, 27].
SELF-PURIFICATION OF WATER BODIES
AND THE ROLE OF HYDROBIONTS
IN MAINTAINING WATER QUALITY
There are several definitions of the notion of water
self-purification. According to one definition, it is con-
sidered “the entire complex of biological, physical, and
chemical processes that allow a water body to free itself
from pollutants delivered into it by wastewater or
formed as a result of the activity of aboriginal organ-
isms” [16], while, according to another, “water self-
purification in water bodies is water purification as a
result of natural biological and physicochemical pro-
cesses, transformation of organic and, partially, inorganic
matter” [46]. The results of a series of studies [7, 13] have
largely contributed to the understanding of self-purifi-
cation processes.
Wastewater passing through treatment facilities fails
to have its complete purification guaranteed. Thus, an
important function of natural ecosystems is the final
treatment of waters.
The self-purification processes in aquatic ecosys-
tems are of importance not only from the viewpoint of
maintaining water quality as a resource for water con-
sumption, but also in terms of maintaining habitats
appropriate for preservation of biodiversity.
The Contribution of Hydrobionts to the Maintaining
of Water Quality and Its Self-Purification
The self-purification of an aquatic environment
incorporates
including dissolution and dilution; discharge of pollut-
ants onto the shore and into nearby water bodies; pol-
lutant sorption by suspended particles with subsequent
sedimentation; pollutant sorption by bottom sediments;
and pollutant evaporation;
chemical processes [42], including pollutant hydroly-
sis; photochemical transformations; redox–catalytic
transformations; transformation involving free radicals;
pollutant bonding by dissolved organic matter (DOM),
which reduces pollutant toxicity; chemical oxidation of
pollutants with the participation of oxygen;
biological processes [3, 7, 10, 13, 19, 39, 44, 50],
including sorption and accumulation of pollutants and
nutrients by hydrobionts; biotransformation (redox-
reactions, destruction, and conjugation); mineralization
of organic matter (OM); extracellular fermentative
transformation of pollutants; removal of suspended
particles and pollutants from a water column through
water filtration by hydrobionts; removal of pollutants
from a water column as a result of sorption by pellets,
excreted by hydrobionts; nutrient consumption by
benthos, leading to the prevention or retardation of nutri-
ents and pollutants passing from bottom sediments into
water; biotransformation and sorption of pollutants in
soil, when polluted water is used for watering land; reg-
ulation of effects on other components of the water self-
purification system, including the effect on organisms
(the list is incomplete; the phenomena are interrelated,
and individual processes can be singled out only conven-
tionally with the aim of analyzing and studying them).
Important additional information about the above-
mentioned processes is given in [14, 56].
In fact, biological factors play a significant role in
the processes that are formally classified as physical or
chemical [22–24, 27].
The author of this paper has advanced a conception,
according to which the aquatic ecosystem is an ana-
logue of a large-scale diversified bioreactor with a
water-purification function [25], and formulated the

0097-8078/04/3105-0502 © 2004 MAIK “Nauka /Interperiodica”

 THE EFFECT OF SYNTHETIC SURFACTANTS ON THE HYDROBIOLOGICAL MECHANISMS
concept of the polyfunctional role of hydrobionts (and
the aquatic biota as a whole) in the purification of
aquatic ecosystems [53].
The self-purification processes involve virtually all
hydrobiont groups, including microorganisms. The role
of the latter is analyzed in detail in [56].
The rates of pollutant decay are controlled by virtu-
ally all ecosystem components and are regarded as one
of its integral characteristic [27].
In some works, the contribution of hydrobionts in
self-purification is considered a constant factor that
does not depend on the hazardous impact exerted on
organisms by substances polluting the ecosystem [49].
However, the biological self-purification factors are
now subject to many impacts, including the pollution of
the aquatic environment.
Experiments carried out in order to characterize the
biological effect of anionic surfactants, nonionic sur-
factants, cationic surfactants, and mixed preparations
(foam-detergents), detected by their effect on hydro-
bionts [27], were made with the use of organisms tak-
ing part in the self-purification processes in water bod-
ies [22–24, 39].
Depending on the situation, synthetic surfactants
and other pollutants may have different effects on
hydrobionts (they can inhibit their growth, change their
behavior, and the like), which can affect the water puri-
fication processes. In this context, both planktonic and
benthic organisms are of importance.
An important self-purification factor of aquatic eco-
systems is the functional activity of planktonic organ-
isms. Bacterio-, phyto-, and zooplankton take part in all
the processes that lead to water purification.
The filtration activity of plankton has been studied
and estimated by many authors [10, 44]. In particular, it
was established that rotifers are capable of filtrating the
entire volume of water in which they live up to
7.7 times a day [27].
Plankton experience both direct and indirect impact
of pollutants. The direct impact of pollutants on phy-
toplankton was considered in [5, 55] and many other
works. The author has recognized and examined the
effect of surfactants on S. quadricauda (the effect of
sodium dodecylsulfate, SDS), M. lutheri (the effect of eto-
nii cationic surfactant) [38], marine cyanobacteria Syni-
chococcus (the effect of nonionic surfactant TKh-100)
[45], euglena E. gracilis (the effect of synthetic surfactants
Bio-S and Kristall) [6], Dunaliella asymmetrica (the effect
of sulfonol), marine diatoms Talassiosira pseudonana (the
effect of nonionic surfactant TKh-100) [27].
The indirect effect of pollutants on phytoplankton is
due to the dependence of the phytoplankton population
on many abiotic and biotic factors, including the rate of
its grazing by invertebrate filter feeders [8, 10], in par-
ticular, benthic ones [3, 7, 19].
WATER RESOURCES Vol. 31 No. 5 2004
503
The Role of Benthic Filter Feeders in the Formation
of Water Quality and its Purification
Benthic filter feeders have a conditioning effect on
water quality through removing from it various types of
suspension. The assimilability of food by benthic filter
feeders varies within a wide range and, for some fresh-
water mollusks, amounts to 40–47% [19]. The rest of
the filtered organic matter is excreted and reaches the
bottom deposits in the form of pellets, which makes the
filter feeders participants in significant biogeochemical
flows associated with the extraction of suspended mat-
ter from water.
Zebra mussels in the western part of Lake Erie (up
to 50 thousand specimens per 1 m2) were reported to
consume each day the amount of phytoplankton 2–
4 times greater than their observed biomass per 1 m2
[27]. In summer, mollusks in Lake Krasnoe (Unio
tumidus, U. pictorum, Anodonta complanta) filter 123–
174 g of suspended organic matter in the water column
above 1 m2 of the bed [27]. A water layer 12 m in thick-
ness in Lake Baikal is filtered by sponges within about
1.2 day [27]. Mollusks of the Dnieper–Bug liman (The
Black Sea) filter the liman water volume more than
16 times per vegetation season [3]. The volume of water
filtered by macroinvertebrates (mollusks, ascidia, and
polychaeta) commonly totals 1–10 m3/(m2 day) [27].
Benthic filter feeders can contribute to the regula-
tion of processes associated with the eutrophication of
water bodies and mass blooming of toxic plankton spe-
cies [27].
Water filtering in an ecosystem is critical for the
self-purification of the water body and the regulation of
processes that proceed in it. Specifically:
—Suspension particles precipitate along with the
pollutants they have absorbed;
—It reduces water turbidity and improves the con-
ditions for visible and ultraviolet light penetration,
thus facilitating their effect on hydrobionts and
organic matter;
—It decreases the concentration of fine suspension
in water, thus enhancing the fishery value of the water
body. Otherwise, an increase in the suspension content
of water will cause a decrease in the filtration rate of all
the biofilterers examined [3, 44];
—Water mixing is intensified, facilitating water aer-
ation and affecting phyto- and zooplankton develop-
ment; higher phytoplankton concentrations and lower
concentrations of nutrient and zooplankton;
—Water aeration and oxygen consumption condi-
tions improve, thus facilitating organic matter oxida-
tion;
—The species composition and the abundance of
individual species of alga–bacterial community are
controlled; these factors, in turn, determine the genera-
tion and destruction rates of hydrogen peroxide and the
rate of free-radical self-purification;
—Components of DOM are excreted;
504 OSTROUMOV
—Sedimentation of organic matter accelerates due
to the assimilation of phyto- and bacterioplankton by
benthic biofilterers, excretion of faecal pellets and
pseudo-faeces by biofilterers;
—The active growth and functional activity of mol-
lusks–biofilterers facilitates the development and func-
tioning of heterotrophic bacteria in the underlying part
of the ecosystem [22–24, 27].
The above considerations are of an environmental
value. Thus, the formation of certain water transpar-
ency is of importance for the penetration of UV-radia-
tion and the implementation of its biological effects in
water bodies. A reduction in the amount of suspension
is important, because suspensions adversely affect
many hydrobionts [3, 9, 17, 44, 57]. The excessive
amount of suspension in water can increase the toxicity
of pollutants.
Pollutant Effect on Filterers
The author’s experiments confirmed the inhibition
of the filtration activity of hydrobionts under the effect
of anionic, non-anionic, and cationic surfactants, syn-
thetic detergents, foam-detergents, and liquid deter-
gents [27].
Pollutants (in particular, anionic, non-anionic, and
cationic surfactants) affect the rate of water filtration,
thus affecting the rate of removal of phytoplankton cells
from the ecosystem. Synthetic surfactants are capable of
inhibiting water filtration by M. edulis, M. galloprovin-
cialis, C. gigas, U. tumidus, and U. pictorum [27, 28,
37, 50–54]. Statistical significance of the effect of syn-
thetic surfactants is established [24, 27].
The results of experiments agree with data on the
effect of other pollutants on other mollusk species [17].
Various pollutants cause an increase in the time that
mollusks spent with their valves closed [47]. In the
author’s experiments, M. edulis closed its valves at the
concentration of SDS of 20 mg/l. This concentration is
much higher than that (1–2 mg/l) sufficient for inhibit-
ing the filtration rate.
Suppression of water biofiltration by bivalves under
the effect of pollutants was also demonstrated by other
authors [2, 17].
The environmental pollution results in that organ-
isms–filterers disappear from the macrozoobenthos
composition in polluted areas within rivers and reser-
voirs [27], which eventually reduces the filtration activ-
ity of the benthic community.
There are virtually no filterers (mollusks, pearl-
worts, or sponges) in the zooperiphyton composition in
the aquatic ecosystems of the upper Volga where the
environmental conditions are poor [41]. The biomass of
filterers abruptly dropped in the Fennoscandian water
bodies at an increase in the phosphorus concentration
Ptot in water, a decrease in pH, and toxification (near the
sources of heavy metal pollution) [48].
Data on the effect of pollutants on filtration activity
of plankton are also available [15, 27, 48]. The rates of
water filtration and the feeding of the freshwater crus-
tacean Daphnia magna by Chlamydomonas reinhardii
cells were found to be sensitive to the phenvalerat pyre-
throid [27]. The method of delayed fluorescence [15]
was used to show that the rate of daphnia (Daphnia
magna) feeding by chlorella cells change under the
effect of saturn herbicide (0.001–0.1 mg/l), insecti-
cides DDT (0.1–1 mg/l) and metaphos (2 mg/l), as well
as under the influence of copper sulfate.
TDTMA surfactant inhibited the filtration activity
of two types of rotifers—Brachionus angularis and
Brachionus plicatilis [11].
The filtration activity of hydrobionts can be affected
by the entry of nutrients containing N and P into the
aquatic environment. These compounds stimulate the
development and increase in phytoplankton biomass.
Several groups of filterers were found to exhibit a
decrease in the filtration rate at an increase in the con-
centration of nutrient particles (for example, the con-
centration of phyto- and bacterioplankton cells) [3, 44].
As mentioned above, the mechanisms of water self-
purification include processes that involve het-
erotrophic bacteria, cyanobacteria, algae, as well as
flagellate, planktonic, and benthic biofilterers. Varia-
tions in the population, the growth and feeding rates of
hydrobionts [19], the rates of excretion of faecal and
pseudo-faecal pellets [27], and changes in the ratios of
species in aquatic biocenoses under the effect of surfac-
tants cannot but affect the self-purification processes.
These processes are dependent on the trophic activity
[19] of both bivalve and lung mollusks, which generate
a large amount of pellets rapidly precipitating onto the
bed under the effect of gravity, thus contributing to the
removal of the organic matter of organisms consumed as
a food from the pelagic zone. The sedimentation velocity
of the pellets proved to be higher than that of individual
phytoplankton cells and their fragments [14].
The differential biological activity of anthropogenic
substances with respect to organisms of different eco-
logical groups is especially distinct in the case of a
complex pollution of aquatic environment [46], includ-
ing synthetic detergent pollution, when P enters into the
water along with synthetic surfactants. Under certain
conditions, synthetic detergents (containing surfactants
and compounds of P) can stimulate alga growth. For
example, Tide-Lemon synthetic detergent at a concen-
tration of 1–100 mg/l stimulated growth of Syn-
echocystis sp. PCC–6803 [12]. Similar data were inde-
pendently obtained for some marine microalgae [1].
A potentially hazardous situation emerges when the
growth of phytoplankton organisms is stimulated (due
to P input), and the filtration activity, leading to the
removal of phytoplankton from the water column is
inhibited (under the effect of surfactants). The alga pop-
ulation can be stable only if the factors that cause an
increase and decrease in the population are in balance
WATER RESOURCES Vol. 31 No. 5 2004
 THE EFFECT OF SYNTHETIC SURFACTANTS ON THE HYDROBIOLOGICAL MECHANISMS
(alga grazing by consumers, including benthic filterers,
is among these factors). Therefore, when both surfac-
tants and P enter into the water, disbalance can form
between the processes that determine the state of phy-
toplankton in the water body subject to pollution [29],
thus facilitating alga blooming.
Taking into account the diversity of biological
effects that surfactants can have on the representatives
of all major hydrobiont groups, we come to understand-
ing the fact that the aquatic biota (including micro- and
macroorganisms) is a labile and vulnerable component
in the system of water self-purification. Bivalves, which
filtrate water, are among the most vulnerable compo-
nents [34–37, 50–54].
WATER PURIFICATION
AND SOME APPLIED ASPECTS
There are many ways of using organisms in schemes
of biotechnological treatment of polluted water [43]
and ecosystems or their components.
Of great importance is the information about the tol-
erance limits of hydrobionts with respect to all major
pollutants, including synthetic surfactants. Standards
have been introduced to restrict the concentration of
synthetic surfactants in waters sent to treatment facili-
ties (20–50 mg/l) [43]. These standards refer to syn-
thetic surfactants in general without differentiation into
individual components of classes of synthetic surfac-
tants.
Various test-objects were used in the author’s exper-
iments for testing the biological activity of synthetic
surfactants. Tests based on angiosperm plants allowed
ordering the representatives of different classes of syn-
thetic surfactants in accordance with their biological
activity. Thus, in accordance with increasing inhibiting
effect on ¿. esculentum, different synthetic surfactants
form the series: CHMA polymeric surfactant (copoly-
mer of hexen and malein aldehyde) < anionic surfactant
DSN PMS (Vilva) < non-ionic surfactant TKh-100 <
cationic surfactant TDTMA.
Therefore, the heterogeneity of synthetic surfactants
should be taken into account in the future works aimed
at standardization of the chemistry of water supplied to
the biological treatment. In practice, the situation is
even more aggravated by the fact that the synthetic sur-
factant content of wastewater often exceeds the above-
considered admissible levels and can reach 30 g/l. The
role of synthetic surfactants increases also by the effi-
ciency of their treatment averaging 48–80% (and as low
as 20% in winter) [4]; individual types of synthetic sur-
factants (such as non-ionic surfactants from the class of
alkilphenols derivative) belong to the class of difficultly
decomposable xenobiotics, and the percent of water
purification from them is even lower.
In some regions where water resources are deficient,
soil watering by polluted water is being implemented or
planned. In such cases, the use of waters containing
WATER RESOURCES Vol. 31 No. 5 2004
505
synthetic surfactants results in their accumulation in
soils and plants [27]. The author has made experiments
to study the effect of synthetic surfactants on several
plant species, including Sinapis alba L., Fagopyrum
escelentum Moench, Lepidium sativum L., Oryza
sativa L., Camelina sativa (L.) Crantz, Triticum aesti-
vum L., and others. The results of these experiments
show that synthetic surfactants inhibit the growth of
plant germs even when their concentration in water is
much less than the maximum concentration in waste-
water [21, 27]. When in concentrations lower than
those that notably inhibited the extension of germs,
synthetic surfactants affected the formation of root
fibrils by plant rhizoderma [24, 27]. This also has an
effect on the ecological interaction in the plant–soil
system. Of interest in this connection are the results of
experiments demonstrating an increase in the popula-
tion of cyanobacteria (including nitrogen-fixing bacte-
ria) in soil under the influence of aqueous solutions of
synthetic surfactants [27]. Thus, the results of studies of
the effect synthetic surfactants exert on plants and soil
cyanobacteria essentially supplement the published
data and suggest the possibility of disturbance of the
structural–functional parameters of ecosystems, which
will certainly affect their water-purification potential
and the ecological capacity of agricultural lands (their
ability to serve for the utilization of polluted waters).
For the practical solution of problems of water treat-
ment and the rehabilitation and enhancement of the nat-
ural aquatic ecosystems that have already been pol-
luted, of great importance are the approaches involving
bio- and phyto-remediation.
Numerous biotechnological schemes of polluted
water treatment are known to use some organisms, in
particular, immobilized microorganisms [27, 43], float-
ing or partly submerged macrophytes. Destruction of
pollutants with the use of artificial ecosystems and phy-
toremediation is much cheaper (specifically, in terms of
operating cost, it is no less than 30% cheaper) than
other methods of elimination (destruction) of xenobiot-
ics [27].
The newly collected data on the sensitivity and tol-
erance of some plant species to synthetic surfactants
can be of use for works aimed at phytoremediation of
polluted waters and ecosystems.
PROBLEMS OF ASSESSING
THE ENVIRONMENTAL HAZARD
OF ANTHROPOGENIC IMPACT
ON HYDROBIONTS
The diversity and environmental role of the biologi-
cal effects of synthetic surfactants, including sublethal
ones, allow establishment of the incomplete adequacy
of some systems of criteria used for the assessment of
the environmental hazard of chemicals.
The objective estimation of the environmental haz-
ard of chemicals must incorporate the assessment of
506 OSTROUMOV
sublethal effects [47] and the effect of these substances
on the self-purification capacity of ecosystems [22–
35, 46], where the latter should be interpreted wider
than just the processes effected by microorganisms.
A system of criteria, taking into account various
[18, 20–22, 45–48, 55, 57] effects of pollutants, includ-
ing sublethal ones is required. The author thinks it
appropriate to suggest for consideration and possible
use a four-link concept of the system level–block anal-
ysis of the potential environmental hazard of the
anthropogenic impact on the biota. The procedure
should include the analysis of anthropogenic distur-
bances at the level of individual and population
changes, aggregated parameters (for example, aggre-
gate characteristics of total production and biomass of
organism groups), the integrity and stability of the eco-
system, and the contribution of the ecosystem to the
biospheric processes. The notions essential for this con-
cept were developed and substantiated in [22–39, 50–54].
The use of this concept as a basis for a classification
scheme introduces additional systematization and order
in the analysis of factual data on the anthropogenic
impact on organisms.
This concept can be used for solving problems
requiring the determination of specific numerical val-
ues of the critical (environmentally admissible) loads
onto ecosystems, that is, for quantitative assessment of
“the input into the habitat of one or several pollutants
that have no adverse impact on most sensitive compo-
nents of the ecosystem (according to the present-day
knowledge)” [18]. Within the framework of the latter
group of problems, the concept of the level–block anal-
ysis can be applied at the stage designated as “the diag-
nostics of the state of ecosystems and the substantiation
of most informative criteria of the state of organisms,
populations, and communities,” and at the final assess-
ment of “the critical (admissible) loads, that is, the vol-
umes of pollutants entering water objects” [18]. The
obtained results and the developed notions can be used
to improve the system of assessing the potential hazard
of the effect of chemicals [46], as well as in the environ-
mental monitoring and forecasting and for environmen-
tal expert evaluation. The relatively high tolerance of
angiosperms to synthetic surfactants can be used in
phytoremediation [24].
ON NEW METHODOLOGICAL APPROACHES,
CONCEPTS, AND GENERALIZATIONS
Taking into account the obtained results, a concept
is developed that the aquatic biota as an ecosystem
block, including not only microbiota, but also macro-
biota, is a labile and vulnerable component of the water
self-purification system [23]. The prevention of the
anthropogenic reduction in the self-purification poten-
tial of aquatic ecosystems is a necessary condition of
stable utilization of water ecosystem resources.
Some biological effects described or quantitatively
characterized above are sublethal or subtoxic. The
obtained results demonstrate the potential environmen-
tal hazard of the effect of sublethal concentrations of
synthetic surfactants and the physiological and behav-
ioral responses they can cause in organisms, which is in
agreement with the results of studying other xenobiot-
ics [46, 47].
Some procedures used by the author to assess the
biological activity of chemicals have been tested on
synthetic surfactants and represent an alternative to the
most frequently used methods of biotesting of toxic
substances on animals. Testing on germs and testing
based on the characteristic of filterer functional activity
is the most detailed presentation of the modified and
tested procedure [33]. The testing of all classes of syn-
thetic surfactants on germs or testing of nonionic sur-
factants, cationic surfactants, and synthetic detergents
on mollusks virtually have not been used to character-
ized the substances described above and some other.
New methodological approaches for biotesting have
been developed and improved (a morphogenetic index
characterizing the conventional mean length, testing
based on the rhizoderma disturbance response, and spe-
cific modifications of measurements of the effect on the
efficiency of filtration activity). This extended the vali-
dation of the set of instruments used to assess the bio-
logical activity of chemicals of the classes mentioned
above.
The environmental hazard of a pollutant should be
assessed based on an approach that takes into account
the diversity of the biological effects involved. In addi-
tion to the conventional estimates based on the death
rate within certain period [46], approaches based on
recording other types of impact on organisms [22, 26,
27, 33, 47] are also of use. The different effects of TKh-
100 surfactant on representatives of successive links of
the trophic chain—plankton (Synechococcus sp.,
Hyphomanas sp.) and benthic filter feeders (Mytilus
edulis, M. galloprovincialis, Crassostrea gigal, Unio
sp.)—enabled the establishment of the potential hazard
of anthropogenic generation of environmental disbal-
ances [29]. Surfactants had an effect on both planktonic
organisms and on benthic filter feeders, which use the
former as a food resource. The filtration activity of the
latter was more sensitive to surfactants than the growth
of planktonic organisms—at relatively small surfactant
concentrations, the efficiency of mollusk filtration
activity notably decreased. The experimental results
demonstrate the potential hazard of the situation when
the decrease in the withdrawal of planktonic organisms
from water by consumers is not compensated for by an
adequate decrease in their growth. Moreover, under
certain conditions, surfactant-containing substances
(synthetic detergents) can stimulate alga growth [1, 12].
Thus, the different effect of pollutants on the organisms
at successive trophic levels can create a potential haz-
ard of disbalance in trophic chains [29–32].
WATER RESOURCES Vol. 31 No. 5 2004
 THE EFFECT OF SYNTHETIC SURFACTANTS ON THE HYDROBIOLOGICAL MECHANISMS
NATURE PROTECTION PRIORITIES
AND RECOMMENDATIONS, SOLUTION
OF APPLIED PROBLEMS
The system of priorities used as a basis for ranking
substances according to their environmental hazard
should be revised, and a more adequate system for the
classification of pollutants should be developed. We
propose to use the approaches involving the analysis of
the potential hazard each pollutant presents for the pro-
cesses of ecosystem self-purification, transport of mat-
ter and energy over the trophic network, dynamic bal-
ance between the interacting species, and the informa-
tion flows in each ecosystem and between them. The
established biological effects of xenobiotics are used to
show that a generalized four-link level–block concept
can be used for the analysis of the environmental hazard
of the anthropogenic impact on ecosystems [22–24].
Underestimation of sublethal effects and differential
biological activity of xenobiotics (e.g., synthetic sur-
factants), associated with their effect on different spe-
cies, can cause errors in forecasting the consequences
of the anthropogenic stress in ecosystems. This deter-
mines proposals for planning works aimed at studying
the hydrobiological aspects of global changes, namely
the ecological mechanisms controlling the bio-
geochemical flows of carbon [14, 56], as well as con-
sumption and retention of CO2 and Corg by aquatic eco-
systems.
The author has already mentioned that in some
cases, synthetic surfactants can be even more hazardous
pollutants than they have been supposed to be [21]. The
amount of synthetic surfactants entering the environ-
ment is considerable and still growing (depending on
the class of the synthetic surfactants) by 2–5%. The
range of the biological effects caused by synthetic sur-
factants is wide and embraces virtually all major blocks
and trophic levels in aquatic ecosystems [27, 38]. It also
incorporates distortion in the behavior of organisms as
well as in the processes contributing to water self-puri-
fication. The decomposition of many synthetic surfac-
tants in the course of microbial oxidation and biodegra-
dation is very slow [43, 55]. Not only the synthetic sur-
factants themselves, but also the products of their
biodegradation (as was shown for ionic surfactants,
such as alkylphenols and their derivatives) exhibit per-
sistence and high bioaccumulation coefficients and,
among other negative effects, have an estrogenic effect
on the biota [27]. Thus, in some cases, synthetic surfac-
tants can be more hazardous environmental pollutants
than they were assumed to be before. This should be
taken into account in improving and modifying the sys-
tem of nature-protection priorities.
New types of hazard associated with the effect of
environmental chemical pollution were recognized in
[30–32, 34, 35]: the disruption of the pellagial–benthal
interaction in aquatic ecosystems, disturbance of the
ecological remediation (ecological reparation) of water
quality in water bodies, synecological summation of
WATER RESOURCES Vol. 31 No. 5 2004
507
impacts on different trophic levels of an ecosystem,
enhanced eutrophication as a result of reduced regula-
tory potential of the consumers.
The new results demonstrate the need for a more
adequate interpretation of some notions in the environ-
mental legislation. Thus, the notion of the damage to
the environment, ecosystems, and living resources,
used in the environmental legislation, cannot be inter-
preted adequately unless, in addition to other kinds of
damage, it will include the derangement of the capabil-
ity of organisms and ecosystems for water self-purifica-
tion, in particular, the derangement of the capacity to
filter water with a normal rate. The laws, the interpreta-
tion and implementation of which require maximally
accurate interpretation of the notion of the environmen-
tal damage or damage to an ecosystem and living
resources, are, for example, the Federal Laws “On the
Environmental Expert Evaluation,” “On the Animal
World,” and “On the Continental Shelf of the Russian
Federation.”
In [20] attention was drawn to the role of chemical
and biochemical factors in the stabilization and destabi-
lization of the ecological equilibrium. Studies of the
biological effects of synthetic surfactants, in particular,
their effect on the processes that are of importance for
water self-purification and for maintaining the stability
of aquatic ecosystems, yielded new data for the analysis
of anthropogenic destabilization of environmental
equilibrium.
The application domain of the results obtained and
the notions derived from them includes the diagnostics
of the state of an ecosystem, the evaluation of the criti-
cal (admissible) loads, environmental expert evalua-
tion, monitoring, and forecasting, which are necessary
for the sustainable use of bioresources and their sus-
tainable development [27, 32]. The materials of this
study can also be used for scientific support and sub-
stantiation of measures for preventing emergencies that
are due to large-scale environmental pollution.
The collected facts and developed notions [51] tes-
tify that additional attention should be paid to the
potential ecological hazard and environmental damage
caused by irrational use of synthetic surfactants, which
results in pollution of water bodies; more energetic
measures should be taken to control and reduce this
type of pollution; the rank of synthetic surfactants in the
system of nature-protection priorities should be raised.
The established vulnerability of filter-feeding
hydrobionts to sublethal concentrations of pollutants,
including synthetic surfactants, emphasizes the impor-
tance of maintaining the proper level of the functional
activity of this group of hydrobionts in aquatic ecosys-
tems subject to anthropogenic stress. One of the prereq-
uisites for maintaining of water quality [24, 37], con-
servation of hydrobiont habitats, and hence the preser-
vation of the biodiversity of all inhabitants of the
aquatic environment as a whole is the creation and
maintenance of conditions required for normal and suf-
508 OSTROUMOV
ficiently high level of functional activity of the block of
aquatic ecosystem that is represented by filter feeders.
The maintenance of the filtration activity of filter feeder
populations should be among the aims of the nature-
protection regime of water bodies and water areas in
reserves, including special hydrobiological and mala-
cological reserves and other types of protected territo-
ries and water areas [36].
CONCLUSIONS
Autotrophic and heterotrophic hydrobionts and
other organisms are used to establish and characterize
the biological effects in an aquatic medium containing
synthetic surfactants, i.e., inhibition of the growth of
diatoms Thalassiosira pseudonana (Hustedt) Hasle et
Heimdal and euglena; derangement of the growth and
development of angiosperms, including inhibition of
the extension of plant germs (Sinapis alba L., Fagopy-
rum seculentum Moench, Lepidium sativum L., Oryza
sativa L., and others), and the growth of aquatic macro-
phytes (Pistia stratiotes L.). It was found that the mor-
phogenetic processes in rhizoderm, which lead to the
formation of root fibrils, are deranged; the growth of
marine bacteria (prostecobacteria Hyphomonas sp.) is
inhibited, the behavior of annelidas Hirudo medicinalis
L.; and other effects.
Experiments allowed the establishment of a previ-
ously unknown ability of ionic and non-ionic synthetic
surfactants and mixtures containing them to reduce the
filtration activity of mollusks, which manifests itself
when synthetic surfactants and preparations containing
them affect mollusk organisms. The result is a lower
rate of the observed withdrawal of a mixture of mono-
cellular organisms by water-filtrating mollusks [22–37,
50]. This property was proved by the author in a series
of experiments with marine and freshwater mollusks
subject to the effect of aquatic solutions of synthetic
surfactants (anionic, non-anionic, and cationic) con-
ducted for studying the effect of synthetic surfactants
on the activity of marine and freshwater mollusks
(Mytilus edulis L., M. galoprovincialis Lamarck; Cras-
sostrea gigas Thunberg; Unio tumidus Philipsson; U.
pictorum L.) [22–37, 50–54].
A conceptual approach based on a structured system
of analysis of the potential hazard due to the effect of
chemicals was proposed for assessing the potential
environmental hazard to hydrobionts of synthetic sur-
factants and other chemicals. This system incorporates
the assessment of the danger of disturbance of aquatic
biota at four levels: individual and population changes,
aggregated parameters, integrity and stability of the
ecosystem, the contribution of the ecosystem to bio-
spheric processes [48].
It is recommended that the system of priority objects
and indices for biological testing be completed (it is
proposed to include, in particular, the filtration activity
of bivalves) and the priority system of contaminants be
improved (it is proposed to raise the priority of syn-
thetic surfactants).
It is recommended that the biological activity of
chemicals be assessed by an improved biotesting
method based on the proposed and tested morphoge-
netic characteristic, which integrates information on
the germination of seeds and the rate of germ elonga-
tion (an integral morphogenetic characteristic—the
conventional mean length of germs). A new method of
biotesting based on the effect of inhibition of root fibril
formation, revealed for the first time, was developed.
An experimental substantiation was given to the
potential environmental significance of the effect
caused by the influence of synthetic surfactants on
hydrobionts and the relationship between these effects
and the hazard of anthropogenic impact on the pro-
cesses of water self-purification. Therefore, the preser-
vation of the self-purification potential of water bodies
is impossible without additional efforts aimed at the
reduction of damage to hydrobionts and ecosystems
because of pollution of water bodies by synthetic sur-
factants and substances containing them. It is proposed
to consider this notion when formulating the hydrobio-
logical priorities for sustainable development, environ-
mental expert assessment, preservation of biodiversity,
and the utilization of bioresources. It may be predicted
that new examples of similar effects that synthetic sur-
factants, compounds containing them, and other chem-
icals have on organisms will be found in the future.
A bilateral cause-and-effect relationship exists
between the maintaining of water quality and preserva-
tion of biodiversity in water bodies. Studying the filtra-
tion activity of hydrobionts as a labile function of
aquatic organisms gives a new indication of the fact that
the preservation of biodiversity of hydrobionts and their
functional activity is an important prerequisite of main-
taining water quality [37].
The notions, generalizations, and recommendations
formulated in this paper are mostly applicable both to
freshwater and marine ecosystems.
ACKNOWLEDGMENTS
The author is grateful to V.D. Fedorov, T.I. Moiseenko,
E.V. Venitsianov, A.G. Kocharyan, B.M. Dolgonosov
(WPI RAS) for discussion of problems relating to water
quality, L.I. Shpitonova, E.F. Zhukova, G. Widdous
(Institute of Open Society, MacArthur Foundation),
European Environmental Organization, Plymouth
Marine Laboratory, Institute of Biology of Southern
Seas of the National Academy of Sciences of Ukraine
for their support during the implementation of some
phases of this study.
REFERENCES
1. Aizdaicher, N.A., Malynova, S.I., and Khristoforova, N.K.,
Influence of Detergents on Microalga Growth, Biologiya
Morya, 1999, vol. 25, pp. 234–238.
WATER RESOURCES Vol. 31 No. 5 2004
 THE EFFECT OF SYNTHETIC SURFACTANTS ON THE HYDROBIOLOGICAL MECHANISMS
2. Alekseenko, T.L. and Aleksandrova, N.G., The Role of
Bivalves in the Mineralization and Sedimentation of
Organic Matter, Gidrobiol. Zh., 1995, vol. 31, no. 2,
pp. 17–22.
3. Alimov, A.F., Funktsional’naya ekologiya presnovod-
nykh dvustvorchatykh mollyuskov (Functional Ecology
of Freshwater Bivalves), Leningrad: Nauka, 1981.
4. Boichenko, V.K. and Grigor’ev, V.T., On the Method for
Calculating the Entry of Synthetic Surfactants into the
Ivankovo Reservoir, Vodn. Resur., 1991, no. 1, pp. 78–
87.
5. Braginskii, L.P., Velichko, I.M., and Shcherban’, E.P.,
Presnovodnyi plankton v toksicheskoi srede (Freshwater
Plankton in Toxic Environment), Kiev: Naukova
Dumka, 1987.
6. Vasternak, K. and Ostroumov, S.A., Effect of Water Pol-
lution by Bio-S Detergent on Euglena, Gidrobiol. Zh.,
1990, vol. 26, no. 6, pp. 78–79.
7. Vinberg, G.G., Bentos Uchinskogo vodokhranilishcha
(Benthos of the Ucha Reservoir), Moscow: Nauka, 1980.
8. Vinogradov, M.E. and Shushkina, E.A., Funktsioniro-
vanie planktonnykh soobshchestv epipelagiali okeana
(Functioning of Planktonic Communities of the Epipe-
lagic Zones of the Ocean), Moscow: Nauka, 1987.
9. Gorbunova, A.V., Effect of Suspended Matter on Plank-
tonic Filter Feeders, Sb. Nauch. Tr. GNII Ozern. i Rechn.
Rybn. Khoz., 1988, no. 288, pp. 69–70.
10. Gutel’makher, B.L., Metabolizm planktona kak edinogo
tselogo (Metabolism of Plankton as a Whole), Lenin-
grad: Nauka, 1986.
11. Kartasheva, N.V. and Ostroumov, S.A., Studying the
Capacity of Surfactants to Inhibit the Filtration Activity
of Rotifera, in Pishchevaya promyshlennost’ na rubezhe
tret’ego tysyacheletiya (Food Industry on the Eve of the
Third Millennium), Moscow: Moskovsk. gos. tekhnol.
akademiya, 2000, pp. 245–247.
12. Kolotilova, N.N. and Ostroumov, S.A., Growth under the
Effect of a Surfactant-Containing Substance, in Prob-
lemy ekologii i fiziologii organizmov (Problems of Ecol-
ogy and Physiology of Organisms), Moscow: Dialog-
MGU, 2000, p. 66.
13. Konstantinov, A.S., Gidrobiologiya (Hydrobiology),
Moscow: Vysshaya Shkola, 1979.
14. Lisitsyn, A.P., Matter and Energy Fluxes in the Outer and
Inner Spheres of the Earth, Global’nye izmeneniya
prirodnoi sredy-2001 (Global Changes in the Environ-
ment–2001), Dobretsov, N.L. and Kovalenko, V.I., Eds.,
Novosibirsk: GEO, 2001, pp. 163–248.
15. Matorin, D.N., Vavilin, D.V., Popov, I.V., and Venedik-
tov, P.S., Method for Biotesting Natural Waters with the
Use of Delayed Fluorescence of Microalgae, Metody
biotestirovaniya kachestva vodnoi sredy (Methods for
Biotesting the Quality of Aquatic Environment),
Filenko, O.F., Ed., Moscow: Mosk. Gos. Univ., 1989,
pp. 10–20.
16. Metelev, V.V., Kanaev, A.I., and Dzasokhova, N.G., Vod-
naya toksikologiya (Aquatic Toxicology), Moscow:
Kolos, 1971.
17. Mitin, A.V., Effect of Some Environmental Factors on
Water Clarification Activity of Bivalves, Extended
Abstract of Cand. Sci. (Biol.) Dissertation, Moscow:
Moscow State University, 1984.
WATER RESOURCES Vol. 31 No. 5 2004
509
18. Moiseenko, T.I., Methodology and Methods for Deter-
mining Critical Loads (In the Case of Surface Waters of
Kola Subarctics), Izv. RAN. Ser. Geogr., 1999, no. 6,
pp. 68–78.
19. Monakov, A.V., Pitanie presnovodnykh bespozvonoch-
nykh (Nutrition of Freshwater Invertebrates), Moscow:
IPEE, 1998.
20. Ostroumov, S.A., Vvedenie v biokhimicheskuyu ekologiyu
(Introduction to Biochemical Ecology), Moscow: Mosk.
Gos. Univ., 1986.
21. Ostroumov, S.A., Biological Activity of Surfactant-Con-
taining Waters, Khim. Tekhnol. Vody, 1991, vol. 13, no. 3,
pp. 270–283.
22. Ostroumov, S.A., Criteria of the Environmental Hazard
of Anthropogenic Impact on Biota: Search for a System,
Dokl. Akad. Nauk, 2000, vol. 371, no. 6, pp. 844–846.
23. Ostroumov, S.A., A Concept of Aquatic Biota as Labile
and Vulnerable Component of Water Self-Purification
System, Dokl. Akad. Nauk, 2000, vol. 372, no. 2, pp. 279–
282.
24. Ostroumov, S.A., Biologicheskie effekty poverkhnostno-
aktivnykh veshchestv v svyazi s antropogennymi vozde-
istviyami na biosferu (Biological Effects of Surfactants
in the Context of Anthropogenic Impact on the Bio-
sphere), Moscow: MAKS-Press, 2000.
25. Ostroumov, S.A., Aquatic Ecosystem: A Large-Scale
Diversified Bioreactor with Water Self-Purification Sys-
tem, Dokl. Akad. Nauk, 2000, vol. 374, no. 3, pp. 427–
429.
26. Ostroumov, S.A., Principles of Analysis of the Environ-
mental Hazard of Anthropogenic Impact, in Particular,
Chemical Pollution: Conception and New Data, Vestn.
MGU. Ser.16, Biologiya, 2000, no. 4, pp. 27–33.
27. Ostroumov, S.A., Biologicheskie effekty pri vozdeistvii
poverkhnostno-aktivnykh veshchestv na organizmy (Bio-
logical Effect of Surfactants on Organisms), Moscow:
MAKS-Press, 2001.
28. Ostroumov, S.A., Amphiphile Supresses the Ability of
Mollusks to Filter Water and Remove Phytoplankton
Cells from It, Izv. RAN. Ser. Biol., 2001, no. 1, pp. 108–
116.
29. Ostroumov, S.A., Disbalance of Factors that Control the
Population of Unicellular Planktonic Organisms under
Anthropogenic Impact, Dokl. Akad. Nauk, 2001, vol. 379,
no. 1, pp. 136–138.
30. Ostroumov, S.A., Response of Unio tumidus to the
Impact of Chemical Mixture and the Hazard of Syneco-
logical Summing of Anthropogenic Impacts, Dokl.
Akad. Nauk, 2001, vol. 380, no. 5, pp. 714–717.
31. Ostroumov, S.A., The Hazard of Two-Level Synergism
at Synecological Summing of Anthropogenic Impacts,
Dokl. Akad. Nauk, 2001, vol. 380, no. 6, pp. 847–849.
32. Ostroumov, S.A., Synecological Principles of Solving
Eutrophication Problem, Dokl. Akad. Nauk, 2001, vol. 381,
no. 5, pp. 709–712.
33. Ostroumov, S.A., Methods of Biotesting: Methods for
Assessing the Potential Hazard of Chemicals in Accor-
dance with Their Capacity to Reduce the Filtration
Activity of Hydrobionts (Case Study of Bivalves), Ecol.
Studies, Hazards, Solutions, 2001, vol. 5, no. 5.
34. Ostroumov, S.A., A New Type of the Effect of Poten-
tially Hazardous Substances: Disuniting Pelagic–
510 OSTROUMOV
Benthic Conjunction, Dokl. Akad. Nauk, 2002, vol. 383,
no. 1, pp. 138–141.
35. Ostroumov, S.A., Identification of a New Type of Chem-
ical Hazard: Inhibition of Environmental Remediation
Processes, Dokl. Akad. Nauk, 2002, vol. 385, no. 4,
pp. 571–573.
36. Ostroumov, S.A., A System of Principles for Preserva-
tion of the Biogeocenotic Function and Biodiversity of
Filter Feeders, Dokl. Akad. Nauk, 2002, vol. 383, no. 5,
pp. 710–713.
37. Ostroumov, S.A., Preservation of Biodiversity and Water
Quality: the Role of Feedbacks in Ecosystems, Dokl.
Akad. Nauk, 2002, vol. 382, no. 1, pp. 138–141.
38. Ostroumov, S.A. and Maksimov, V.N., Degradation of
Algae in Aquatic Medium Polluted by Etonium,
Ekologiya, 1988, no. 6, pp. 165–168.
39. Ostroumov, S.A. and Fedorov, V.D., Principal Compo-
nents of Ecosystem Self-Purification and the Possibility
of Its Derangement Due to Chemical Pollution, Vestn.
MGU. Ser. 16, Biologiya, 1999, no. 1, pp. 24–32.
40. Parshikova, T.V., Veselovskii, V.V., Veselova, T.V., and
Dmitrieva, A.G., Effect of Surfactants on the Function-
ing of the Photosynthetic Apparatus of Chlorella,
Al’gologiya, 1994, vol. 4, no. 1, pp. 38–46.
41. Skal’skaya, I.A. and Flerov, B.A., Assessment of the
State of the Upper Volga (Yaroslavl Province),
Ekologiya, 1999, no. 6, pp. 442–448.
42. Skurlatov, Yu.I., Principles of Natural Water Quality
Management, in Ekologicheskaya khimiya vodnoi sredy
(Ecological Chemistry of Aquatic Environment), Mos-
cow: Mosk. Gos. Univ., 1988, vol. 1, pp. 230–255.
43. Stavskaya, S.S., Udod, V.M., Taranova, L.A., and Kriv-
ets, I.A., Mikrobiologicheskaya ochistka vody ot poverkh-
nostno-aktivnykh veshchestv (Microbiological Water Puri-
fication of Surfactants), Kiev: Naukova Dumka, 1988.
44. Sushchenya, L.M., Kolichestvennye zakonomernosti pita-
niya rakoobraznykh (Quantitative Regularities in Crusta-
cean Nutrition), Minsk: Nauka i Tekhnika, 1975.
45. Waterbery, Dzh. and Ostroumov, S.A., The Effect of
Non-Ionogenic Surfactant on Cyanobacteria, Mikrobi-
ologiya, 1994, vol. 63, no. 2, pp. 258–262.
46. Filenko, O.F., Vodnaya toksikologiya (Water Toxicol-
ogy), Chernogolovka, 1988.
47. Flerov, B.A., Ekologo-fiziologicheskie aspekty tok-
sikologii presnovodnykh zhivotnykh (Ecological–Physi-
ological Aspects of Toxicology of Freshwater Animals),
Leningrad: Nauka, 1989.
48. Yakovlev, V.A., Trophic Structure of Zoobenthos as an
Ecological Indicator for Aquatic Ecosystems and a
Water Quality Index, Vodn. Resur., 2000, vol. 27, no. 2,
pp. 237–244.
49. Lech, J. and Vodicnik, M., Biotransformation, in Fun-
damentals of Aquatic Toxicology, Rand, G. and Petro-
celli, S.N.Y, Eds., N.Y.: Hemisphere Publ. Corp., 1985,
pp. 526–557.
50. Ostroumov, S.A., Biological Filtering and Ecological
Machinery for Self-Purification and Bioremediation in
Aquatic Ecosystems: Towards a Holistic View, Rivista di
Biologia/Biology Forum, 1998, vol. 91, pp. 247–258.
51. Ostroumov, S.A., Synopsis of New Data and Concepts in
Aquatic and General Ecology, Ecological Studies, Haz-
ards, Solutions, 2001, vol. 5, pp. 130–136.
52. Ostroumov, S.A., Inhibitory Analysis of Top-Down Con-
trol: New Keys to Studying Eutrophication, Algal
Blooms, and Water Self-Purification, Hydrobiologia,
2002, vol. 469, pp. 117–129.
53. Ostroumov, S.A., Polyfunctional Role of Biodiversity in
Processes Leading to Water Purification: Current Con-
ceptualizations and Concluding Remarks, Hydrobiolo-
gia, 2002, vol. 469, pp. 203–204.
54. Palaski, M. and Booth, H., Zebra Mussel Pseudofaeces
Production, Degradation, and Their Potential for
Removal of PCBs from Freshwater, Abstr. Pap. Present.
Ann. Meet. Mich. Acad. Ferris State Univ., Ann Arbor,
Mich., 1995, vol. 27, no. 3, p. 381.
55. Poremba, K., Gunkel, W., Lang, S., and Wagner, F.,
Marine Biosurfactants, III. Toxicity Testing with Marine
Microorganisms and Comparison with Synthetic Surfac-
tants, Z. Naturforsch, 1991, vol. 45C, pp. 210–216.
56. Wetzel, R.G., Limnology: Lake and River Ecosystems,
San Diego: Academic, 2001.
57. Yamasu, T. and Mizofuchi, S., Effects of Synthetic, Neu-
tral Detergent and Red Clay on Short-Term Measure-
ment of O2 Production in an Okinawan Reef Coral, Gal-
axea, 1989, vol. 8, no. 1, pp. 127–142.
WATER RESOURCES Vol. 31 No. 5 2004