Intra- And Intertreatment Variability in Reference Toxicant Tests: Implications for Whole Effluent Toxicity Testing Programs

Moore, Dwayne R.J.; Warren-Hicks, William; Parkhurst, Benjamin R.; Teed, R. Scott; Baird, Rodger B.; Berger, Robert; Denton, Debra L.; Pletl, James J.

doi:10.1897/1551-5028(2000)019<0105:iaivir>2.3.co;2

Cited by 8 publications

(11 citation statements)

References 0 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Available data (Table 3) does not support this general assumption. Moreover, most results are well within the commonly accepted criterion of a CV of less than 30 to 40% (Environment Canada 1990; Moore et al 2000).…”

Section: Introductionsupporting

confidence: 68%

Ecotoxicological testing of sediments and dredged material: an overlooked opportunity?

et al. 2020

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Purpose Basing decisions for the management of contaminated sediments on ecotoxicological data is still often met with skepticism by European stakeholders. These concerns are discussed as they pertain to bioassays to show how ecotoxicological data may provide added value for the sustainable management of sediment in aquatic systems. Materials and methods Five “concerns” are selected that are often raised by stakeholders. The ecotoxicological practice is discussed in light of the knowledge gained in recent decades and compared with chemical sediment analysis and chemical data. Results and discussion Common assumptions such as a higher uncertainty of biotest results for sediments compared to chemical analyses are not supported by interlaboratory comparisons. Some confusion also arises, because the meaning of biotest data is often misunderstood, questioning their significance in light of a limited number of organisms and altered test conditions in the lab. Because biotest results describe a sediment property, they should not be directly equated with an impact upon the biological community. To identify a hazard, however, the possibility of false-negative results due to the presence of contaminants that are not analyzed but are toxic is lower. Conclusions The cost of increased investment in ecotoxicological tests is, in our view, small compared with that of making false-negative assessments of sediment/dredged material that can ultimately have long-term environmental costs. As such, we conclude that ecotoxicological testing is an opportunity for sediment management decision-making that warrants more attention and confidence in Europe.

show abstract

Section: Introductionsupporting

confidence: 68%

Ecotoxicological testing of sediments and dredged material: an overlooked opportunity?

et al. 2020

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Analyses were conducted with SAS® software [23] by using the generalized linear models (GLiM) framework PROC NLIN. The GLiM framework includes two components, the probability distribution of the response variable and a link function or transformation that effectively linearizes the concentration‐response relationship to facilitate linear regression analysis [24]. Kerr and Meador [16] and Bailer and Oris [17] described this framework in detail.…”

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Response of macroinvertebrates to copper and zinc in a stream mesocosm

Hickey

Golding

2002

Enviro Toxic and Chemistry

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Metal pollution of streams and rivers is recognized as one of the major concerns for management of freshwaters. Macroinvertebrate communities were established within 12 artificial streams and exposed to three replicated concentrations of a metals mixture (copper and zinc) for 34 d. The cumulative criterion units (CCU = sigma[metals]/hardness-adjusted U.S. Environmental Protection Agency [U.S. EPA] 1996 chronic criterion value) of total metals in the low, medium, and high treatments were 2.4, 5.9, and 18 CCUs. Zinc comprised approximately 75% of the CCUs in each of the treatments. Effects on taxa richness and the number of taxa in the orders Ephemeroptera, Plecoptera, and Trichoptera (EPT) were moderate at the high exposure concentration (-23% and -26% respectively, p < 0.05). All of the five major mayfly species showed near extinction, whereas four of the seven caddisflies showed stimulation (up to +121%) and three were reduced (up to -76%). Redundancy analysis for this metal gradient indicated that 94% of the variance in community structure was explained by three quantitative variables: total mayfly abundance, a mollusk (Potamopyrgus antipodarum) abundance, and the number of EPT individuals, indicating that multiple indices do provide improved predictors of metal stress. Most species showed a threshold response relationship, whereas some community indicators showed apparent hormetic responses (e.g., number of mayfly taxa, total taxa, and number of EPT taxa). Model concentration-response relationships with generalized linear models were used to provide threshold of 20% effective concentration values for species and community metrics. Threshold effect values ranged upwards of 1.4 CCUs, indicating that U.S. EPA chronic criteria would be protective of species and community responses.

show abstract

“…Linear regression can then be conducted on the transformed data to derive the dose–response relationship. Thus, the framework can be used for all types of response variables (Moore et al 2000).…”

Section: Effects Assessmentmentioning

confidence: 99%

Probabilistic risk‐assessment model for birds exposed to granular pesticides

Moore

Fischer

Teed

et al. 2010

Integr Envir Assess & Manag

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

For granular formulations of pesticides, direct consumption by birds is generally the most important route of exposure. A probabilistic exposure model was developed that estimates how many pesticide granules a bird ingests and, from that, the quantity of pesticide ingested. This model, referred to as the "granular pesticide avian risk assessment model" (GranPARAM), has input variables not included in current screening-level assessments for granular pesticides, such as proportion of time for which birds forage in the field, grit ingestion rates, attractiveness of pesticide granules compared with natural grit, and proportions of soil particles and pesticide granules in the size range consumed by birds. For input variables that are uncertain, variable, or both, distributions are used rather than point estimates. Monte Carlo analysis is then performed to propagate input variable uncertainties through the exposure model for granular pesticides. The outputs from the exposure portion of GranPARAM are estimated pesticide doses for each of 20 birds of a selected species on each of 1000 fields. The dose for each bird is compared with a randomly chosen dose from the dose-response curve for that species or an appropriate surrogate. If the exposure dose for a bird exceeds the randomly chosen effects dose, the bird is considered dead; otherwise, the bird is assumed to be alive. Thus, the risk output from GranPARAM is a bar chart showing the percentages of fields with 0/20 dead birds, 1/20 dead birds, 2/20 dead birds, and so forth.

show abstract

Intra- And Intertreatment Variability in Reference Toxicant Tests: Implications for Whole Effluent Toxicity Testing Programs

Cited by 8 publications

References 0 publications

Ecotoxicological testing of sediments and dredged material: an overlooked opportunity?

Ecotoxicological testing of sediments and dredged material: an overlooked opportunity?

Response of macroinvertebrates to copper and zinc in a stream mesocosm

Probabilistic risk‐assessment model for birds exposed to granular pesticides

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About