Traditional cleanup is difficult and expensive. Alma iGEM proposes to address these problems using synthetic biology to restore the health of the ecosystem.
Alma is working on developing a biosensor utilizing E.coli to produce red fluorescent protein in the presence of DDT. This aim is to produce a bacterium that will allow for detection where DDT is present in the sample, with the application modeled after a pool testing kit where a water sample is mixed with a sample of our bacteria to serve as a detection measure.
We will be making use of DDT's agonistic behavior with the hormone estrogen in biologic pathways, thus allowing safe testing in the lab setting. We engineered a kill switch that permits broad spectrum screening of DDT contaminated areas, which minimizes the cost of remediation along with maximizing the efficiency of resources expended and allocated in these efforts, primarily in the realm of testing for contamination.
In local practice, the biosensor can be used to detect DDT in suspected samples, and proposes testing prices to be around $5. This price point will be of value for those with a vested interest in the remediation of the Pine River. One such organization is the Environmental Protection Agency, EPA. These are the first steps towards cleaning up our river, the superfund site, and to be used anywhere in the U.S, or world that has an issue with DDT in their environment.
The Alma iGEM team is a culmination of 30 members who have dedicated tremendous amounts of time and energy into getting our current successes available to display on our wiki page. With each member their picture and an included description of their attributions will be displayed. Our advisor in correlation with our executive counsel has paved a tremendous pathway for the ultimate success of our team in several ways that are listed. They conjointly have secured funding for laboratory equipment, official team gear to represent ourselves, and for us to travel overseas to display our success. With proposals,meetings with local EPA agencies, winning state-run merit competitions, and presentations to faculty and staff of Alma College, not only have the leaders increased our funding, but overall increased our outreach to our local community to assure them that their voices are heard and we are working on a stable means of remediation to the surrounding ecosystem that has been damaged.
1. DDT and its metabolite DDE were detected in the serum (a clear portion of blood) of 1,956 people aged 12 and older who took part in the CDC's National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey (NHANES) in 2003-2004. (Updated Tables and National Report on Human Exposure to Environmental Chemicals). Scientists can determine the levels of DDT and DDE in people's bodies by testing DDT and DDE in serum.
2. DDT and DDE blood serum levels in the US population appear to be five to 10 times lower than levels documented in smaller 1970s research.
3. DDT was extensively utilized because it was effective, cheap to produce, and lasted a long period in the environment. In 2005, an estimated 5,000 metric tons of DDT were used for disease vector control, while current DDT production and storage levels are sometimes difficult to detect.
4. While DDT was once an extremely efficient pesticide, its usage rapidly resulted in the development of resistance in many insect pest species. DDT resistance has been observed from more than 50 species of anopheline mosquitos, including those that cause malaria, since its introduction for mosquito control in 1946. After decades of usage, evidence of the pesticide's diminishing advantages and possible environmental and toxicological impacts began to raise concerns.
DDT (dichloro-diphenyl-trichloroethane) was the first modern synthetic pesticide to be created in the 1940s. It was first employed successfully in both military and civilian populations to battle malaria, typhus, and other insect-borne human illnesses. It was also excellent in controlling insects in agriculture and animal production, institutions, houses, and gardens. Because of DDT's rapid success as a pesticide and widespread usage in the United States and other countries, many insect pest species developed resistance.
DDT was touted as a wonder chemical, killing bugs for weeks with a single dosage and being safer than other insecticides at the time. These insecticides often contained lead, calcium arsenate, and/or the well-known mercury bichloride. DDT was advertised as less dangerous than these toxins since there were no observable effects on people unless huge amounts were taken. These instances were viewed as isolated incidents and hence were not cause for concern.
DDT was discovered to be toxic to both beneficial and noxious insects by federal scientists. Modest mammals that absorbed small doses on a regular basis while foraging might develop signs of big dosage poisoning over time. In tiny dosages, it was discovered to be toxic to honey bees, small fish, reptiles, helpful insects, and even mice. The investigations revealed liver damage, neurological problems, and even death. The habitats that had been DDT-treated. Arnold J. Lehman, an FDA expert, spoke concerning the accumulation of minute levels of DDT in human fat cells, echoing prior concerns about long-term poisoning in animals. In her book Silent Spring, Rachel Carson described the devastation done to numerous wildlife, including huge birds like eagles and falcons, as well as fish that are crucial to particular ecosystems like salmon. Many Americans had conflicting feelings about DDT. It was advertised as a magical chemical that could fix all pest problems. It was employed overseas to keep our soldiers safe from insect-borne infections. Some publications and community people debated and criticized the hazard. DDT was controversial, with some towns prospering with it and others outright refusing to allow it into their homes and crops.
When it comes to DDT history, there is a lot of information out there, but not very many recent updates, which is why it is so important for us to look into this and push forward to change the future of these affected ecosystems. From information released in 2014, that gained national traction, Douglas Main with the Smithsonian Magazine wrote about how DDT is still actively affecting and killing birds in Michigan still. This is significant to us as we are based in Michigan on the Pine River, where contamination of DDT has been an issue for years. An article from April 10th, 1975, in the New York Times, aptly named “Pesticides Linked to Defects in Fish,” by Boyce Rensberger, detailed similar health effects from a pesticide related to DDT. This pesticide, Toxaphene is related closely to DDT, and was banned in a similar time frame due to the health concerns and damages to wildlife health. The most important part of the history of this pesticide, and those linked very closely to it, is that in many places around the world it is still actively being sold and used, despite its damaging risks.
Via epa.gov: “DDT - A Brief History and Status.” EPA, Environmental Protection Agency.
The U.S. Department of Agriculture, the federal agency with responsibility for regulating pesticides before the formation of the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency in 1970, began regulatory actions in the late 1950s and 1960s to prohibit many of DDT’s uses because of mounting evidence of the pesticide’s declining benefits and environmental and toxicological effects.
In 1972, EPA issued a cancellation order for DDT based on its adverse environmental effects, such as those to wildfire, as well as its potential human health risks. Since then, studies have continued, and a relationship between DDT exposure and reproductive effects in humans is suspected, based on studies in animals. In addition, some reproductive effects in humans are suspected, based on studies of liver tumors. As a result, today, DDT is classified as a probable human carcinogen by U.S. and international authorities.
o known to be very persistent in the environment,
o will accumulate in fatty tissues, and
o can travel long distances in the upper atmosphere.
After the use of DDT was discontinued in the United States, its concentration in the environment and animals has decreased, but because of its persistence, residues of concern from historical use still remain.
Since 1996, EPA has been participating in international negotiations to control the use of DDT and other persistent organic pollutants used around the world. Under the auspices of the United Nations Environment Programme, countries joined together and negotiated a treaty to enact global bans or restrictions on persistent organic pollutants (POPs), a group that includes DDT. This treaty is known as the Stockholm Convention on POPs. The Convention includes a limited exemption for the use of DDT to control mosquitoes that transmit the microbe that causes malaria - a disease that still kills millions of people worldwide.
In September 2006, the World Health Organization (WHO) declared its support for the indoor use of DDT in African countries where malaria remains a major health problem, citing that benefits of the pesticide outweigh the health and environmental risks. The WHO position is consistent with the Stockholm Convention on POPs, which bans DDT for all uses except for malaria control.
Via Rehabilitation Robotics: Smith, Alex. “Why Should DDT Still Be Used?” Rehabilitationrobotic.net, 14 May 2021.
- Why is DDT still a problem today?
o In 1972, EPA issued a cancellation order for DDT based on its adverse environmental effects, such as those to wildlife, as well as its potential human health risks. As a result, today, DDT is classified as a probable human carcinogen by U.S. and international authorities.
- Why is DDT bad for the environment?
o DDT’s devastating effect on the aquatic environment has been thoroughly studied. Due to its low solubility, it has a greater rate of bioaccumulation in water, and thus poses a great long-term threat to aquatic wildlife.
- Do any countries still use DDT?
o DDT can only be used in the US for public health emergencies, such as controlling vector disease. Today, DDT is manufactured in North Korea, India, and China. India remains the largest consumer of the product for vector control and agricultural use.
- What is an alternative to DDT?
o Pyrethroids are the most cost-effective alternatives to DDT in malaria control except where pyrethroid resistance occurs (Walker 2000).
- Why and where is DDT still being used?
o DDT is still used today in South America, Africa, and Asia for this purpose. Farmers used DDT on a variety of food crops in the United States and worldwide. The reason why DDT was so widely used was because it is effective, relatively inexpensive to manufacture, and lasts a long time in the environment.
- How long does DDT last in the environment?
o DDT is highly persistent in the environment. The soil half-life for DDT is from 2 to 15 years (15). See box on Half-life. Half-life is the time required for half of the compound to degrade.
- Did DDT kill birds?
o DDT poisoning of birds is extremely rare, although traces of the persistent pesticide remain in people and wildlife worldwide. Populations of bald eagles and other birds crashed when DDT thinned their eggs, killing their embryos.
- Which pollution does DDT cause?
o It is a colorless, tasteless, and almost odorless crystalline chemical compound. It became infamous for its environmental impacts i.e. it caused air, water and soil pollution.
- Is DDT a pollutant?
o DDT is a persistent organic pollutant that is readily adsorbed to soils and sediments, which can act both as sinks and as long-term sources of exposure affecting organisms. Because of its lipophilic properties, DDT can bioaccumulate, especially in predatory birds.
- Does DDT cause soil pollution?
o DDT is a persistent organic pollutant that is readily adsorbed by soils and sediments, which can act both as sinks and as long-term sources of exposure, contributing to terrestrial organisms.
- Is DDT a secondary pollutant?
o DDT is a secondary pollutant.
- Is DDT a biodegradable waste?
o DDT (Dichlorodiphenyltrichloroethane) is a non-biodegradable pesticide i.e. it cannot be degraded by the action of microbes. It is a crystalline, colorless and odorless compound which was used extensively as an insecticide until its harmful environmental impacts were identified. Thus, it is a non-biodegradable compound.
Although the pesticide was prohibited in many nations, several countries in Africa, Asia, and South America need it for mosquito control to lower malaria risk. In 2006, WHO advocated for the indoor use of DDT in African nations where malaria was still a severe problem. According to the group, the advantages of pesticides to African countries exceeded the negative impacts on the environment. Despite the restriction, India and North Korea have continued to utilize pesticides for agricultural purposes. Each year, approximately 4,000 tons of DDT are manufactured for the vector control program. It is lawful to produce DDT in the United States, but it can only be exported for use in other countries. In the United States, DDT can only be used in public health situations, such as vector disease management. DDT is now produced in North Korea, India, and China. India continues to be the product's top client for vector control and agricultural application. China produces 4,500 metric tons of the chemical, 80-90% of which is used to manufacture Dicofol, an acaricide. African nations do not use the product for agricultural reasons, although it is used to combat malaria in Ethiopia, South Africa, Uganda, and Swaziland.
For many years, the tobacco business relied heavily on DDT to protect tobacco crops from destructive pests. However, Big Tobacco realized that simply eliminating DDT was in their best interests. DDT was being phased out considerably more vigorously in Europe than in the United States; if American tobacco businesses wanted to sell their goods abroad, they needed to get DDT out of U.S. tobacco." They also realized they could use DDT as a scapegoat for a variety of health concerns associated with smoking: When internal industry research revealed the presence of DDT in cigarettes, cigarette smoke, and smokers' bodies, executives decided they could spin these studies to make it appear that the health risks associated with smoking were caused by carcinogenic pesticides rather than the cigarettes themselves.
The larger chemical industries were also mostly unconcerned about DDT's demise. Despite the fact that they had previously sold significant quantities, they did not have much to lose. Because no firm possessed a patent on DDT, which was in the public domain following its creation during WWII, none of the major players were able to benefit from it efficiently. In reality, a prohibition would open up a new avenue for profit. With DDT off the market, chemical firms will be able to offer their own "pricier, patented pesticides." As a result, a prohibition on one of the most famous and (for a long time) popular consumer items in twentieth-century America benefitted capital's interests.
Marine biologists think they have discovered up to 25,000 barrels of DDT deposited off the Southern California coast at Catalina Island, where a vast undersea hazardous waste site going back to World War II has long been suspected. The 27,345 "barrel-like" photos were acquired by Scripps Institution of Oceanography researchers at the University of California, San Diego. They surveyed almost 36,000 acres of seafloor between Santa Catalina Island and the Los Angeles coast, a location previously discovered to have significant quantities of the hazardous chemical in sediments and the ecology. The study gives a "wide-area map" of the barrels, but it will be left to others to establish if the containers contain DDT through sediment tests, according to Terrill. Between 350 and 700 tons of DDT are thought to have been deposited in the region, which is 12 miles (20 kilometers) from Los Angeles and 8 miles (12 kilometers) from Catalina Island. With the development of a biosensor to detect DDT, Alma College’s iGEM team may be able to aid residents, like those in California, to safely and cost-effectively test their local water sources.