Aquatic effects assessment: Needs and tools

Annali dell'Istituto Superiore di Sanita

Volumn , Issue 2, 2002, Pages 119-129

  Marchini, Silvia ^a  

^a ISTITUTO SUPERIORE DI SANITÀ   (Italy)

Author keywords

Aquatic toxicity assessment; Data analysis; Extrapolation; QSAR, toxicity testing

Indexed keywords

BENZALDEHYDE; HALIDE; ORGANIC COMPOUND;

AQUATIC ENVIRONMENT; AREA UNDER THE CURVE; ARTICLE; DATA ANALYSIS; ECOSYSTEM; ECOTOXICITY; ENVIRONMENTAL HEALTH; QUANTITATIVE STRUCTURE ACTIVITY RELATION; STATISTICAL ANALYSIS; STATISTICS; TOXICITY TESTING; VALIDATION PROCESS; WATER POLLUTION; ANIMAL; LD 50; METHODOLOGY; REVIEW; WATER POLLUTANT;

ANIMALS; ECOSYSTEM; LETHAL DOSE 50; ORGANIC CHEMICALS; QUANTITATIVE STRUCTURE-ACTIVITY RELATIONSHIP; RESEARCH DESIGN; WATER POLLUTANTS, CHEMICAL; WATER POLLUTION;

EID: 0036025314     PISSN: 00212571     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: None     Document Type: Article

References (45)

1. European Commission. Technical guidance document in support of Commission Directive 93/67/EEC on risk asessment for new notified substances and the Commission Regulation (EC) 1488/94 on risk assessment of existing substances. Part III. Brussels: European Commission; 1996.
2. Scientific Advisory Committee on Toxicity and Ecotoxicity of Chemicals of the European Commission-Ecotoxicity Section. EEC water quality objectives for chemicals dangerous to aquatic environments (List 1). CSTE/EEC; 1994. (Reviews of Environmental Contamination and Toxicology, 137).
3. Hermens JLM. Quantitative structure-activity relationships of environmental pollutants. In: Hutzinger O (Ed.). Handbook of environmental chemistry. vol. 2E. Berlin: Springer Verlag. 1989; p. 111-62.
4. Verhaar HJM, van Leeuwen CJ, Hermens JLM. Classifying environmental pollutants. 1. Structure activity relationships for prediction of aquatic toxicity. Chemosphere 1992;25:471-91.
5. Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development. Guidance document for aquatic effects assessment. Paris: OECD; 1995. (OECD environment monographs no. 92).
6. Van Leeuwen CJ, van der Zandt PTJ, Aldenberg T, Verhaar HJM, Hermens JLM. Application of QSARs, extrapolation and equilibrium partitioning in aquatic effects assessment. I. Narcotic industrial pollutants. Environ Toxicol Chem 1992;11:267-82.
7. Nendza M. Structure-activity relationships in environmental sciences. London: Chapman & Hall; 1998.
8. Hermens JLM. Electrophiles and acute toxicity to fish. Environ Health Persp 1990;87:219-25.
9. Veith GD, Broderius SJ. Rules for distinguishing toxicants that cause type I and type II narcosis syndromes. Environ Health Persp 1990;87:207-11.
10. Russom CL, Bradbury SP, Broderius SJ, Hammermeister DE, Drummond RA. Predicting modes of toxic action from chemical structure: acute toxicity in the fathead minnow (Pimephales promelas). Environ Toxicol Chem 1997;16:948-67.
11. Marchini S, Passerini L, Hoglund MD, Pino A, Nendza M. The toxicity of aryl- and benzylhalides to Daphnia magna and classification of their mode of action based on QSARs. Environ Toxicol Chem 1999;18(12):2759-66.
12. Lieth H. Ecosystem principles for ecotoxicological analyses. In: Schuurmann G, Markert B (Ed.). Ecotoxicology. New York and Heidelberg: John Wiley & Sons Inc. and Spektrum Akademischer Verlag; 1998.
13. th conference, ASTM STP 766. American Society for Testing and Materials; 1982. p. 69-81.
14. Verhaar, HJM, De Wolf W, Dyer S, Legierse KCHM, Seinen W, Hermens JLM. An LC50 vs time model for the aquatic toxicity of reactive and receptor-mediated compounds. Consequences for bioconcentration kinetics and risk assessment. Environ Sci Technol 1999;33:758-63.
15. McCarty LS, Mackay D. Enhancing ecotoxicologicaI modeling and assessment. Environ Sci Technol 1993;27:1719-28.
16. Kooijman SALM. Parametric analyses of mortality rates in bioassays. Water Res 1981;15:107-19.
17. Niesink RJM, de Vries J, Hollinger MA. Toxicology: principles and applications. Boca Raton, FL: CRC Press; 1996.
18. Pack S. A review of statistical data analysis and experimental design in OECD aquatic toxicity test guidelines. Sittingbourne, UK: Shell Research Ltd.; 1992.
19. Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development. Report of the final ring test of the Daphnia magna reproduction test. Paris: OECD; 1997. (Environmental Health and Safety Publications Series on Testing and Assessment, 6).
20. Mallett MJ, Grandy NJ, Lacey RF. Interlaboratory comparison of a method to evaluate the effects of chemicals on fish growth. Environ Toxicol Chem 1997;16:528-33.
21. Marchini S, Tosato ML, Norberg-King TJ, Hammermeister DE, Hoglund MD. Lethal and sublethal toxicity of benzene derivatives to the fathead minnow, using a short-term test. Environ Toxicol Chem 1992;11:187-95.
22. Stephan CE, Rogers JW. Advantages of using regression to calculate results of chronic toxicity tests. In: Bahner RC, Hansen DJ (Ed.). Aquatic toxicology and hazards assessment. 8. Symposium ASTM STP 891. Philadelphia, USA: American Society for Testing and Materials; 1985.
23. Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development. Report of the OECD workshop on statistical analysis of aquatic toxicity data. Paris: OECD; 1998. (Environmental Health and Safety Publications Series on Testing and Assessment, 107).
24. Kooijman, SALM. Process-oriented descriptions of toxic effects. In: Schuurmann G, Markert B (Ed.). Ecotoxicology. New York and Heidelberg: John Wiley & Sons Inc. and Spektrum Akademischer Verlag; 1998.
25. Slooff W, Canton JH, Hermens JLM. Comparison of the susceptibility of 22 freshwater species to 15 chemical compounds. 1. (Sub)acute toxicity tests. Aquat Toxicol 1983;4:113-28.
26. Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development. Report of the OECD workshop on the extrapolation of laboratory aquatic toxicity data to the real environment. Paris: OECD; 1992. (OECD Environment Monographs, 59).
27. nd ed. Washington, DC: Taylor and Francis; 1995.
28. Blank H. Species dependent variation among aquatic organisms in their sensitivity to chemicals. Ecological Bull 1984;36:107-19.
29. Thurston RV, Gilfoil TA, Meyn EL, Zajdel RK, Aoki TI, Veith GD. Comparative toxicity often organic chemicals to ten common aquatic species. Water Res 1985;19:1145-55.
30. Sloof W, Van Oers JAM, De Zwart D. Margin of uncertainty in ecotoxicological hazard assessment. Environ Toxicol Chem 1986; 5:841-52.
31. Hoekstra JA, Vaal MA, Noteboom J, Slooff W. Variation in the sensitivity of aquatic species to toxicants. Bull Environ Contam Toxicol 1994;5:98-105.
32. Nendza M, Wenzel A. Statistical approach to chemical classification. Sci Total Environ Suppl 1993;1459-70.
33. Vittozzi L, De Angelis G. A critical review of comparative acute toxicity data on freshwater fish. Aquatic Toxicol 1991;19:167-204.
34. Sprague JB. Factors that modify toxicity. In: Rand GM, Petrocelli SE (Ed.). Fundamentals of aquatic toxicology. Methods and applications. Washington, DC: Hemisphere Pub. Corp; 1985.
35. Marchini S, Hoglund MD, Broderius SJ, Tosato ML. Comparison of the susceptibility of daphnids and fish to benzene derivatives. Sci Total Environ Suppl 1993;1:799-808.
36. Stephan CE, Mount DI, Gentile JH, Chapman GA, Brungs WA. Guidelines for deriving numeric National Water Quality Criteria for the protection of aquatic organisms and their uses, PB-85227049. Duluth, Minnesota, USA: US Environmental Protection Agency; 1985.
37. Kooijman SALM. A safety factor for LC50 values allowing for differences in sensitivity among species. Water Res 1987;21:269-76.
38. Wagner C, Løkke H. Estimation of ecotoxicological protection levels from NOEC toxicity data. Water Res 1991;25:1237-42.
39. Aldenberg T, Slob W. Confidence limits for hazardous concentrations based on logistically distributed NOEC toxicity data. Ecotoxicol Environ Safety 1993;25:48-63.
40. Van Straalen NM, Denneman CAJ. Ecotoxicological evaluation of soil quality criteria. Ecotoxicol Environ Safety 1989;18:241-51.
41. Hopkin SP. Ecological implications of "95% protection levels" for metals in soil. Oikos 1993;66:137-41.
42. Pratt JR, Cairns J Jr. Ecotoxicology and the redundancy problem: understanding effects on community structure and function. In: Newman MC, Jagoe CH (Ed.). Ecotoxicology: a hierarchical treatment. Boca Raton, FL: CRC; 1996. p. 347-70.
43. Nendza M, Volmer J, Klein W. Risk assessment based QSAR estunates. In: Karcher W, Devillers J (Ed.). Practical applications of quantitative structure-activity relationships (QSAR) in environmental chemistry and toxicology. Dordrecht: Kluwer; 1990.
44. Okkerman PC, Plassche EJ, Slooff W, Van Leeuwen CJ, Canton JH. Ecotoxicological effects assessment: a comparison of several extrapolation procedures. Ecotox Environ Safety 1991;21:182-93.
45. Newman MC, Ownby DR, Mézin LCA, Powell DC, Christensen TRL, Lerberg SB, Andersen BA. Applying species-sensitivity distributions in ecological risk assessment: assumptions of distribution type and sufficient numbers of species. Environ Toxicol Chem 2000;19(2):508-15.