Application of the tissue residue approach in ecological risk assessment

Abstract

The objective of this work is to present a critical review of the application of the tissue residue approach (TRA) in ecological risk and/or impact assessment (ERA) of chemical stressors and environmental criteria development. A secondary goal is to develop a framework for integrating the TRA into ecological assessments along with traditional, exposure concentration-based assessment approaches. Although widely recognized for its toxicological appeal, the utility of the TRA in specific applications will depend on numerous factors, such as chemical properties, exposure characteristics, assessment type, availability of tissue residue-response data, and ability to quantify chemical exposure. Therefore, the decision to use the TRA should include an evaluation of the relative strengths, limitations, and uncertainties among exposure and residue-based methods for characterizing toxicological effects. Furthermore, rather than supplanting exposure concentration-based toxicity assessments, the TRA can be highly effective for evaluating and reducing uncertainty when used in a complementary manner (e.g., when evaluating multiple lines of evidence in field studies). To address limitations with the available tissue residue-response data, approaches for extrapolating residue-based toxicity data across species, tissues, and exposure durations are discussed. Some of these approaches rely on predicted residue-response relationships or toxicological models that have an implicit residue-response basis (e.g., biotic ligand model). Because risk to an organism is a function of both its exposure potential and inherent sensitivity (i.e., on a residue basis), bioaccumulation models will be required not only for translating tissue residue criteria into corresponding water and sediment criteria, but also for defining the most vulnerable species in an assemblage (i.e., highly exposed and highly sensitive species). Application of the TRA in ecological assessments and criteria development are summarized for bioaccumulative organic chemicals, TBT, and in situ bioassays using bivalve molluscs.

Contaminants of emerging concern in a large temperate estuary

“…Despite the widespread occurrence of CECs and importance whole-body tissue concentration in risk assessment and regulatory frameworks (Sappington et al 2011), we found no comprehensive studies reporting on whole-body tissue concentrations for these compounds in field-collected fish. Clearly, this is an important data gap in assessing the environmental risk of CECs.…”

Toxicity Reference Values and Tissue Residue Criteria for Protecting Avian Wildlife Exposed to Methylmercury in China

“…CSA is the primary method for assessing risk to wildlife and for deriving criteria for protection of wildlife (CCME 1998 ;US EPA 1995a, b, 2003, 2005Sample and Suter 1993 ) . This method is used to select the critical study for deriving recommended TRVs, which involves fi nding a technically defensible, de fi nitive study from which a toxicity threshold is bracketed by experimental doses (Blankenship et al 2008 ;US EPA 2003 ) .…”

Processes, Assessment and Remediation of Contaminated Sediments

“…For metals, the application of whole-body residues as threshold criteria associated with effects does not lead to a defensible prediction of risk to the organism largely due to the existence of metal-and species-specific physiological mechanisms that facilitate acclimation to metal exposure . Sappington et al (2011) present a critical review of the application of the TRA in approach in ecological risk assessment and environmental criteria development. Those authors proposed that rather than supplanting exposure concentration-based toxicity assessments, the TRA can be highly effective for evaluating and reducing uncertainty when used in a complementary manner, as one among multiple lines of evidence in field studies.…”

“…For example, many authors now advocate that laboratory toxicity testing be performed concurrently with physicochemical characterizations, indigenous biotic community assessment and in situ-based approaches to characterize exposures from overlying waters, sediments and advective groundwater-pulse events (Burton, 1991;Burton et al, 2005a;Greenberg et al, 2002;Adams et al, 2005). Sediment quality assessment tools and approaches also include toxicity identification evaluations (TIEs) (USEPA, 2007;Ho and Burgess, 2009), assessment of abiotic factors as stressors (Burton and Johnston, 2010) and toxicological evaluation of tissue residue (Meador et al, 2008;Sappington et al, 2011). However, compartmentalization rather than integration of key approaches and issues is a potential pitfall for sediment quality evaluation.…”