Using a probabilistic approach in an ecological risk assessment simulation tool: Test case for depleted uranium (DU)

Chemosphere

Volumn 60, Issue 1, 2005, Pages 111-125

  Fan, Ming ^a   Thongsri, Tepwitoon ^b   Axe, Lisa ^a   Tyson, Trevor A ^b  

^a NEW JERSEY INSTITUTE OF TECHNOLOGY   (United States)

^b NEW JERSEY INSTITUTE OF TECHNOLOGY   (United States)

Author keywords

Bioavailability; Depleted uranium; Ecological risk assessment; Monte Carlo simulation

Indexed keywords

COMPUTER SIMULATION; DATABASE SYSTEMS; MONTE CARLO METHODS; PARAMETER ESTIMATION; PLANTS (BOTANY); PROBABILITY; RISK ASSESSMENT;

ABERDEEN PROVING GROUND (APG); DEPLETED URANIUM (DU); ECOLOGICAL RISK ASSESSMENT (ERA); YUMA PROVING GROUND (YPG);

ECOLOGY;

URANIUM;

ECOSYSTEM; RISK ASSESSMENT; TOXICITY; URANIUM;

ACHILLEA; ARTICLE; CONCENTRATION RESPONSE; CONTROLLED STUDY; DATA BASE; DEER; ECOSYSTEM; EVALUATION; MONTE CARLO METHOD; MOUSE; NONHUMAN; PLANT; PLANT ROOT; PROBABILITY; PROGENY; RAT; REDUCTION; REPRODUCTION; RISK ASSESSMENT; SIMULATION; UNITED STATES;

ANIMALIA; CERVIDAE; DIPODOMYS; LEPTONYCTERIS YERBABUENAE; MACROPUS SP.; NEOTOMA ALBIGULA; YUMA;

EID: 19444373525     PISSN: 00456535     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1016/j.chemosphere.2004.12.004     Document Type: Article

References (82)

1. J.P. Absallom, S.D. Young, N.M.J. Crout, A.F. Nisbet, R.F.M. Woodman, E. Smolders, and A.G. Gillett Predicting soil to plant transfer of radiocesium using soil characteristics Environ. Sci. Technol. 33 1999 1218 1223
2. S.M. Bartell, R.H. Gardner, and R.V. O'Neill Ecological Risk Estimation 1992 Lewis Publishing Chelsea, MI, USA
3. A. Bleise, P.R. Danesi, and W. Burkart Properties, use and health effects of depleted uranium (DU): a general overview J. Environ. Radioact. 64 2003 93 112
4. G.G. Briggs, R.H. Bromilow, A.A. Evans, and M. Williams Relationships between lipophilicity and the distribution of non-ionised chemicals in barley shoots following uptake by the roots Pestic. Sci. 14 1983 492 500
5. G. Carbonell, C. Ramos, M.V. Pablos, J.A. Ortiz, and J.V. Tarazona A system dynamic model for the assessment of different exposure routes in aquatic ecosystems Sci. Total Environ. 247 2000 107 118
6. Cheng, J.J., 1998. RESRAD-ECORISK: A computer code for ecological risk assessment beta version 1.01. Environmental Assessment Division, Argonne National Laboratory, Argonne, IL
7. L.G. Cockerham, and B.S. Shane Basic Environmental Toxicology 1994 CRC Press, Inc. Boca Raton, FL, USA
8. A.C. Cullen, and H.C. Frey Probabilistic Techniques in Exposure Assessment: A Handbook for Dealing with Variability and Uncertainty in Models and Inputs 1999 Plenum Press New York, NY, USA
9. Donnelly, C.A., Tenbus, F.J., 1998. Temporal and vertical variation of hydraulic head in aquifers in the Edgewood area, Aberdeen Proving Ground, Maryland. Water Resources Investigations Report 98-4047. US Geological Survey, Baltimore, MD
10. Ebinger, M.H., 2002. Personal communication
11. Ebinger, M.H., Kennedy, P.L., Myers, O.B., Clements, W., Bestgen, H.T., Beckman, R.J., 1996. Long-term fate of depleted uranium at Aberdeen and Yuma Proving Grounds, Phase II: Human health and ecological risk assessments. Los Alamos National Laboratory Report LA-13156-MS. Los Alamos, NM
12. Efroymson, R.A., Will, M.E., Suter II, G.W., Wooten, A.C., 1997. Toxicological benchmarks for screening contaminants of potential concern for effects on terrestrial plants: 1997 revision. Health Sciences Research Division. Oak Ridge National Laboratory, Oak Ridge, TN
13. Entech Engineers, Inc., 1988. Geohydrologic study of the Yuma Proving Ground with particular reference to the open burning/open detonation facility. US Army Yuma Proving Ground. Yuma, AZ
14. E.M. Farago Plants and the Chemical Elements: Biochemistry, Uptake, Tolerance and Toxicity 1994 VCH Publishers New York, NY, USA
15. B.L. Finley, P.K. Scott, and D.A. Mayhall Development of a standard soil-to-skin adherence probability density function for use in Monte Carlo analyses of dermal exposure Risk Anal. 14 1994 555 569
16. H.C. Frey, and S.D. Rhodes Characterization and simulation of uncertainty frequency distributions: effects of distribution choice, variability, uncertainty, and parameter dependence Hum. Ecol. Risk Assess. 4 1998 423 468
17. Fulco, C.E., Liverman, C.T., Sox, H.C., 2000. Gulf War and Health, Vol. 1: Depleted Uranium, Pyridostigmine Bromide, Sarin, Vaccines. National Academy Press, Washington, DC, USA
18. H.M. Hartmann, F.A. Monette, and H.I. Avci Overview of toxicity data and risk assessment methods for evaluating the chemical effects of depleted uranium compounds Hum. Ecol. Risk Assess. 6 2000 851 874
19. D. Hattis, A. Russ, R. Goble, P. Banati, and M. Chu Human interindividual variability in susceptibility to airborne particles Risk Anal. 21 2001 585 599
20. E.G. Hertwich, T.E. McKone, and W.S. Pease Parameter uncertainty and variability in evaluative fate and exposure models Risk Anal. 19 1999 1193 1204
21. B.K. Hope A review of models for estimating terrestrial ecological receptor exposure to chemical contaminants Chemosphere 30 1995 2267 2287
22. B.K. Hope Assessment of risk to terrestrial receptors using uncertainty analysis-a case study Hum. Ecol. Risk Assess. 5 1999 145 170
23. T. Jager, H.A. den Hollander, P. van der Poel, M.G.J. Rikken, and T. Vermeire Probabilistic environmental risk assessment for dibutylphthalate (DBP) Hum. Ecol. Risk Assess. 7 2001 1681 1697
24. S.E. Jorgensen, S.N. Nielsen, and L.A. Jorgensen Handbook of Ecological Parameters and Ecotoxicology 1991 Elsevier Publishing New York, USA
25. Kenaga, E.E., Goring, C.A.I., 1980. Relationship between water solubility, soil sorption, octanol-water partitioning, and concentration of chemicals in biota. American Society for Testing and Materials Spec. Tech. Publ. 707, Aquat. Toxicol., pp. 78-115
26. R.T. Lackey If ecological risk assessment is the answer, what is the question? Health Ecol. Risk Assess. 3 1997 921 928
27. M.B. Lahkim, L.A. Garcia, and J.R. Nuckols Stochastic modeling of exposure and risk in a contaminated heterogeneous aquifer. 2: Application of Latin hypercube sampling Environ. Eng. Sci. 16 1999 329 343
28. C.M. Liao, M.P. Ling, and J.S. Chen Appraising zinc bioaccumulation in abalone Haliotis diversicolor Supertexta and alga Gracilaria tenuistipitata var. Liui by probabilistic analysis Aquaculture 217 2003 285 299
29. K. Lohman, P. Pai, C. Seigneur, D. Mitchell, K. Heim, K. Wandland, and L. Levin A probabilistic analysis of regional mercury impacts on wildlife Hum. Ecol. Risk Assess. 6 2000 103 130
30. H. Lu, L. Axe, and T.A. Tyson Development and application of a computer simulation tool for ecological risk assessment Environ. Model. Assess. 8 2003 311 322
31. D.L. MacIntosh, G.W. Suter II, and O. Hoffman Uses of probabilistic exposure models in ecological risk assessments of contaminated sites Risk Anal. 14 1994 405 419
32. Martin, C.O., Fischer, R.A., 2000. Regional strategies for managing threatened, endangered, and sensitive species on DOD sites, US ongoing project by waterways Experimental Station, Vicksburg, MS
33. J.T. Maughan Ecological Assessment of Hazardous Waste Sites 1993 Van Nostrand Reinhold New York, NY, USA
34. D.E. McClain, K.A. Benson, and T.K. Dalton Biological effects of embedded depleted uranium (DU): summary of Armed Forces Radiobiology Research Institute research Sci. Total Environ. 274 2001 115 118
35. T.E. McKone The precision of QSAR methods for estimating transfer factors in exposure assessment SAR QSAR Environ. Res. 1 1993 41 51
36. T.E. McKone Uncertainty and variability in human exposures to soil contaminants though home-grown food: a Monte Carlo assessment Risk Anal. 14 1994 449 463
37. M.G. Morgan, and M. Henrion Uncertainty: A Guide to Dealing with Uncertainty in Quantitative Risk and Policy Analysis 1998 Cambridge University Press Cambridge, UK
38. D.J. Moschandreas, and S. Karuchit Scenario-model-parameters: a new method of cumulative risk uncertainty analysis Environ. Int. 28 2002 247 261
39. W. Naito, K. Miyamoto, J. Nakanishi, S. Masunaga, and S.M. Bartell Application of an ecosystem model for aquatic ecological risk assessment of chemicals for a Japanese lake Water Res. 36 2002 1 14
40. National Council on Radiation Protection and Measurements (NCRP), 1996. A guide for uncertainty analysis in dose and risk assessments related to environmental contamination NCRP Commentary No. 14. Bethesda, MD
41. National Council on Radiation Protection and Measurements (NCRP), 1999. Recommended screening limits for contaminated surface soil and review of factors relevant to site-specific studies. Recommendations of the National Council on Radiation Protection and Measurements. NCRP Report No. 29. Bethesda, MD
42. T.K. Nayak, and S. Kundu Calculating and describing uncertainty in risk assessment: the Bayesian approach Hum. Ecol. Risk Assess. 7 2001 307 328
43. W.R. Ott A physical explanation of the log normality of pollutant concentrations J. Air Waste Manage. Assoc. 40 1990 1378 1383
44. Oxenberg, T.P., 1997. The use of catchboxes to minimize the impact to the environment from testing depleted uranium penetrators. Master Thesis. Georgia Institute of Technology, Atlanta, GA, USA
45. Pacific Northwest National Laboratory (PNNL), 1998. Screening assessment and requirements for a comprehensive assessment, Columbia River comprehensive impact assessment. DOE/RL-96-16 Draft. Richland, WA
46. M.D. Polder, E.M. Hulzeebos, and D.T. Jager Bioconcentration of gaseous organic chemicals in plant leaves: Comparison of experimental data with model predictions Environ. Toxicol. Chem. 17 1998 952 968
47. Price, K.R., 1991. The analysis of soil and vegetation samples collected from the Yuma Proving Ground. Pacific Northwest Laboratory Report TD 2761. Richland, WA
48. R. Sadiq, T. Husain, B. Veitch, and N. Bose Distribution of arsenic and copper in sediment pore water: an ecological risk assessment case study for offshore drilling waste discharges Risk Anal. 23 2003 1309 1321
49. B.E. Sample, and C.A. Arenal Allometric model for interspecies extrapolation of wildlife toxicity data Bull. Environ. Contam. Toxicol. 62 1999 653 663
50. Sample, B.E., Opresko, D.M., Suter II, G.W., 1996. Toxicological benchmarks for wildlife: 1996 revision. Health Sciences Research Division, Oak Ridge National Laboratory, Oak Ridge, TN
51. Sample, B.E., Suter II, G.W., Efroymson, R.A., 1998. A guide to the ORNL ecotoxicological screening benchmarks background, development, and application. Environmental Science Division No. 4783. Oak Ridge National Laboratory, Oak Ridge, TN
52. L. Samsoe-Petersen, E.H. Larsen, P.B. Larsen, and P. Bruun Uptake of trace elements and PAHs by fruit and vegetables from contaminated soils Environ. Sci. Technol. 36 2002 3057 3063
53. M. Schumacher, M. Meneses, A. Xifro, and J.L. Domingo The use of Monte Carlo simulation techniques for risk assessment: study of a municipal waste incinerator Chemosphere 43 2001 787 799
54. R.L. Smith Use of Monte Carlo simulation for human exposure assessment at a Superfund site Risk Anal. 14 1994 433 439
55. C.A. Stow, and S. Qian A size-based probabilistic assessment of PCB exposure from Lake Michigan fish consumption Environ. Sci. Technol. 32 1998 2325 2330
56. P.J. Sydelko, I. Hlohowskyj, K. Majerus, J. Christiansen, and J. Dolph An object-oriented framework for dynamic ecosystem modeling: Application for integrated risk assessment Sci. Total Environ. 274 2001 271 281
57. L.V. Tannenbaum, M.S. Johnson, and M. Bazar Application of the hazard quotient method in remedial decision: a comparison of human and ecological risk assessment Hum. Ecol. Risk Assess. 9 2003 387 401
58. J. Tellinghuisen A Monte Carlo study of precision, bias, inconsistency, and non-Gaussian distributions in nonlinear least squares J. Phys. Chem. B 104 2000 2834 2844
59. R.V. Thomann, J.P. Connollly, and T.F. Parkerton An equilibrium model of organic chemical accumulation in aquatic food webs with sediment interaction Environ. Sci. Technol. 11 1992 615 629
60. M.K. Thompson, and J.D. Graham Going beyond the single number: using probabilistic risk assessment to improve risk management Hum. Ecol. Risk Assess. 2 1996 1008 1034
61. T.P. Traas, R. Luttik, and R.H. Jongbloed A probabilistic model for deriving soil quality criteria based on secondary poisoning of top predators: I. Model description and uncertainty analysis Ecotoxicol. Environ. Saf. 34 1996 264 278
62. C.C. Travis, and A.D. Arms Bioconcentration of organics in beef, milk, and vegetation Environ. Sci. Technol. 22 1988 271 274
63. US Environmental Protection Agency, 1989. Risk assessment guidance for Superfund (RAGS): Volume I Human health evaluation manual (Part A). Office of Emergency and Remedial Response. Washington, DC
64. US Environmental Protection Agency, 1992a. Framework for ecological risk assessment. EPA/630/R-92/001. Risk Assessment Forum, Washington, DC
65. US Environmental Protection Agency, 1992b. Dermal exposure assessment: principles and applications. EPA/600/8-91/011B. Office of Health and Environmental Assessment. Washington, DC
66. US Environmental Protection Agency, 1992c. Preparation of soil sampling protocols: Sampling techniques and strategies. EPA/600/R-92/128. Office of Research and Development. Washington, DC
67. US Environmental Protection Agency, 1993a. Wildlife exposure factors handbook vol. I. EPA/600/R-93/187a. Office of Research and Development. Washington, DC
68. US Environmental Protection Agency, 1993b. Addendum: Methodology for assessing health risks associated with indirect exposure to combustor emissions, working group recommendations. Office of Solid Waste and Office of Research and Development, Washington, DC
69. US Environmental Protection Agency, 1997a. Exposure factors handbook vol. I. General factors. Office of Research and Development, Washington, DC
70. US Environmental Protection Agency, 1997b. The log normal distribution in environmental applications: Technology support center issue. Office of Research and Development, Office of Solid Waste and Emergency Response. Washington, DC
71. US Environmental Protection Agency, 1998. Guidelines for ecological risk assessment. EPA/630/R-98/002F. Risk Assessment Forum, Washington, DC
72. US Environmental Protection Agency, 2001. Supplemental guidance for developing soil screening levels for Superfund sites. Office of Emergency and Remedial Response Washington, DC
73. US Environmental Protection Agency, 2003. ECOTOX Database
74. Veith, G.D., Macek, K.J., Petrocelli, S.R., Carroll, J., 1980. An evaluation of using partition coefficients and water solubility to estimate bio-concentration factors for organic chemicals in fish. American Society for Testing and Materials Spec. Tech. Publ. 707, Aquat. Toxicol. pp. 116-129
75. H.J.M. Verhaar, J. De Jongh, and J.L.M. Hermens Modeling the bioconcentration of organic compounds by fish: A novel approach Environ. Sci. Technol. 33 1999 4069 4072
76. T. Vermeire, T. Jager, G. Janssen, P. Bos, and M. Pieters A probabilistic human health risk assessment for environmental exposure to dibutylphthalate Hum. Ecol. Risk Assess. 7 2001 1663 1679
77. W. Warren-Hicks, J.P. Carbone, and P.L. Havens Using Monte Carlo techniques to judge model prediction accuracy: Validation of the pesticide root zone model 3.12 Environ. Toxicol. Chem. 21 2002 1570 1577
78. W.J. Warren-Hicks, and D.R.J. Moore Uncertainty Analysis in Ecological Risk Assessment 1998 Society of Environmental Toxicology and Chemistry Pensacola, FL, USA
79. Weiss, E.J., 1999. Preliminary ecological risk assessment to assess the implications of replacing chromium plating with tantalum coatings. Master Thesis. New Jersey Institute of Technology, Newark, NJ, USA
80. R.W. West, and R.L. Kodell A comparison of methods of benchmark-dose estimation for continuous response data Risk Anal. 19 1999 453 459
81. P. Wiwatanadate, and H.H. Claycamp Exact propagation of uncertainty in multiplicative models Hum. Ecol. Risk Assess. 6 2000 355 368
82. A. Yegnan, D.G. Williamson, and A.J. Graettinger Uncertainty analysis in air dispersion modeling Environ. Model. Software 17 2002 639 649