Ecosystem impairment evaluation on biodiversity and functional diversity for contaminated soil assessment

Integrated Environmental Assessment and Management

Volumn 5, Issue 3, 2009, Pages 399-413

  Semenzin, Elena ^a,b   Critto, Andrea ^a   Marcomini, Antonio ^a  

^a CA' FOSCARI UNIVERSITY OF VENICE   (Italy)

^b Consorzio Venezia Ricerche ^*  (Italy)

Author keywords

Contaminated sites; Decision support system; Ecosystem functions; Site specific ecological risk assessment

Indexed keywords

ANIMAL; ARTICLE; BIODIVERSITY; CHEMISTRY; ENVIRONMENTAL MONITORING; ITALY; SOIL; SOIL POLLUTANT;

ANIMALS; BIODIVERSITY; ENVIRONMENTAL MONITORING; ITALY; SOIL; SOIL POLLUTANTS;

EID: 73949159261     PISSN: 15513793     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1897/IEAM_2008-071.1     Document Type: Article

References (28)

1. Beck L, Römbke J, Breure AM, Mulder C. 2005. Considerations for the use of soil ecological classification and assessment concepts in soil protection. Ecotoxicol Environ Saf 62:189-200. (Pubitemid 41196117)
2. Breure AM, Mulder C, Römbke J, Ruf A. 2005. Ecological classification and assessment concepts in soil protection. Ecotoxicol Environ Saf 62:211-229. (Pubitemid 41196119)
3. Breure AM, Römbke J. 2005. The ecological classification and assessment of soils. Ecotoxicol Environ Saf 62:185-186.
4. Chapman PM. 1985. Sediment quality criteria from the sediment quality triad: An example. Environ Toxicol Chem 5:957-964.
5. [CLARINET] Contaminated Land Rehabilitation Network for Environmental Technologies. 2002. Review of decision support tools for contaminated land management, and their use in Europe. A report from the Contaminated Land Rehabilitation Network for Environmental Technologies. Wien (AT): Austrian Federal Environment Agency on behalf of CLARINET, Spittelauer Lände 5, A- 1090.
6. Commission of the European Communities. 2006. Proposal for a Directive of the European Parliament and of the Council establishing a framework for the protection of soil and amending Directive 2004/35/EC. Brussels (BE): CEC. COM(2006) 232 final 2006/0086 (COD).
7. Critto A, Torresan S, Semenzin E, Giove S, Mesman M, Schouten AJ, Rutgers M, Marcomini A. 2007. Development of a site-specific ecological risk assessment for contaminated sites: Part I. A multi-criteria based system for the selection of ecotoxicological tests and ecological observations. Sci Total Environ 379:16-33. (Pubitemid 46686684)
8. [EP] European Parliament. 2003. Resolution on the Commission Communication Towards a Thematic Strategy for Soil Protection. Strasbourg (FR): EP. COM(2002) 179-C5-0328/20022002/2172(COS).
9. [IDEAS] Interdepartmental Centre for Sustainable Development. 2004. Quarta relazione (da Giugno 2004 a Dicembre 2004) del progetto di ricerca ERAMANIA. Venice (IT): Ca' Foscari University. Final report of the ERA-MANIA project. Centre IDEAS. p 144-166. [In Italian]
10. Karlen DL, Mausbach MJ, Doran JW, Cline RG, Harris RF, Schuman GE. 1997. Soil quality: A concept, definition and a framework for evaluation. Soil Sci Soc Am J 61:4-10.
11. Laakso J, Setälä H. 1999. Sensitivity of primary production to changes in the architecture of belowground food webs. Oikos 87:57-64.
12. Lavelle P. 1997. Faunal activities and soil processes: Adaptive strategies that determine ecosystem engineers. Adv Ecol Res 27:93-132.
13. Lavelle P, Bignell D, Lepage M. 1997. Soil function in a changing world: The role of invertebrate ecosystem engineers. Eur J Soil Biol 33:159-193.
14. Lavelle P, Spain AV. 2001. Soil ecology. Dordrecht (NL): Kluwer Academic. Nortcliff S. 2002. Standardisation of soil quality attributes. Agric Ecosys Environ 88:161-168.
15. Odum EP. 1985. Fundamentals in ecology. 3rd ed. Philadelphia (PA): Saunders.
16. [OECD] Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development. 2004. Agricultural impacts on soil erosion and soil biodiversity: Developing indicators for policy analysis. In: Proceedings, OECD Expert Meeting; 2003 Mar 25-28; Rome, Italy. Rome (IT): OECD. 611 p.
17. Römbke J, Breure AM, Mulder C, Rutgers M. 2005. Legislation and ecological quality assessment of soil: Implementation of ecological indication systems in Europe. Ecotoxicol Environ Saf 62:201-210.
18. Rutgers M, Den Besten P. 2005. Approach to legislation in a global context, B. The Netherlands perspective-Soils and sediments. In: Thompson KC, Wadhia K, Loibner AP, editors. Environmental toxicity testing. Oxford (UK): Blackwell, CRC. p 269-289.
19. Rutgers M, Faber JH, Postma JF, Eijsackers H. 2000. Site-specific ecological risks: A basic approach to the function-specific assessment of soil pollution. In: Reports of the Programme on Integrated Soil Research. Vol 28. Wageningen (NL): Programme Bureau Soil Research.
20. Schäfer M, Tischler W. 1983. ö kologie. Jena (DE): Gustav Fischer Verlag.
21. Semenzin E, Critto A, Carlon C, Rutgers M, Marcomini A. 2007a. Development of a site-specific ecological risk assessment for contaminated sites: Part II. A multi-criteria based system for the selection of bioavailability assessment tools. Sci Total Environ 379:34-45. (Pubitemid 46711067)
22. Semenzin E, Critto A, Rutgers M, Marcomini A. 2007b. DSS-ERAMANIA: A decision support system for site-specific ecological risk assessment of contaminated sites. In: Hull RN, Barbu C-H, Goncharova N, editors. Strategies to Enhance Environmental Security in Transition Countries. Amsterdam (NL): Springer. p 35-46.
23. Semenzin E, Critto A, Rutgers M, Marcomini A. 2008. Integration of bioavailability, ecology and ecotoxicology by three lines of evidence into ecological risk indexes for contaminated soil assessment. Sci Total Environ 389:71-86.
24. Singer MJ, Ewing SA. 2000. Soil quality. In: Sumner ME, editor. Handbook of soil science. Boca Raton (FL): CRC. p G-271-G-298.
25. Suter II GW, Efroymson RA, Sample BE, Jones DS. 2000. Ecological risk assessment for contaminated sites. Boca Raton (FL): Lewis.
26. Traas TP, van de Meent D, Posthuma L, Hamers T, Kater BJ, De Zwart D, Aldenberg T. 2002. The potential affected fraction as measure of ecological risk. In: Posthuma L, Suter II GW, Traas TP, editors. Species sensitivity distributions in ecotoxicology. Boca Raton (FL): Lewis. p. 315-343.
27. [UNEP] United Nations Environmental Protection. 2000. Decisions adopted by the Conference of the Parties to the Convention on Biological Diversity at its fifth meeting Nairobi; 2000 May 15-26. UNEP/CBD/COP/5/23.
28. [USEPA] US Environmental Protection Agency. 1998. Guidelines for ecological risk assessment. Washington DC: Risk Assessment Forum. EPA/630/R-95/002F. Wardle DA. 2002. Communities and ecosystems: Linking the aboveground and belowground components. Princeton (NJ): Princeton Univ.