Wildlife vulnerability and risk maps for combined pollutants

Science of the Total Environment

Volumn 408, Issue 18, 2010, Pages 3891-3898

  Lahr, Joost ^a   Münier, Bernd ^b   De Lange, Hendrika J ^a   Faber, Jack F ^a   Sørensen, Peter Borgen ^c  

^a WAGENINGEN UNIVERSITY   (Netherlands)

^b NATIONAL ENVIRONMENTAL RESEARCH INSTITUTE   (Denmark)

^c AARHUS UNIVERSITY   (Denmark)

Author keywords

Ecological risk assessment; Geographic Information Systems; Mixture toxicity; Risk map; Vulnerability analysis

Indexed keywords

CONCENTRATION ADDITION; DENMARK; DIFFERENT MECHANISMS; ECOLOGICAL DATA; ECOLOGICAL RISK ASSESSMENT; ECOLOGICAL RISKS; HOT SPOT AREA; HOT SPOT IDENTIFICATION; JOINT TOXICITY; MAXIMUM PERMISSIBLE CONCENTRATION; MIXTURE TOXICITY; RELATIVE RISKS; RISK MAPS; SOIL CONCENTRATIONS; VULNERABILITY ANALYSIS; VULNERABILITY MAPS;

ANIMALS; ECOLOGY; GEOGRAPHIC INFORMATION SYSTEMS; INFORMATION SYSTEMS; RISK ANALYSIS; RISK MANAGEMENT; SOIL POLLUTION; SOILS; TOXICITY;

RISK ASSESSMENT;

CADMIUM; CHLORPYRIFOS; COPPER; NICKEL; ZINC;

CHEMICAL POLLUTANT; ECOTOXICOLOGY; GIS; HEAVY METAL; INSECTICIDE; MAPPING METHOD; RISK ASSESSMENT; TOXICITY; VULNERABILITY;

ARTICLE; CONTROLLED STUDY; DENMARK; ECOLOGICAL PROCEDURES; ECOLOGICAL VULNERABILITY; ECOTOXICITY; HABITAT; MAXIMUM PERMISSIBLE DOSE; POLLUTANT; PRIORITY JOURNAL; RISK ASSESSMENT; SOIL ANALYSIS; SOIL POLLUTION; WILDLIFE;

ANIMALS; CADMIUM; CHLORPYRIFOS; COPPER; DENMARK; ECOSYSTEM; ENVIRONMENTAL EXPOSURE; ENVIRONMENTAL MONITORING; ENVIRONMENTAL POLLUTANTS; ENVIRONMENTAL POLLUTION; GEOGRAPHIC INFORMATION SYSTEMS; GEOGRAPHY; INSECTICIDES; METALS; NICKEL; RISK ASSESSMENT; RISK FACTORS; ZINC;

DENMARK;

EID: 77955053287     PISSN: 00489697     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1016/j.scitotenv.2009.11.018     Document Type: Article

References (46)

1. Aldenberg T., Slob W. Confidence limits for hazardous concentrations of logistically distributed NOEC toxicity data. Ecotoxicol Environ Saf 1993, 25:48-63.
2. Baird D.J., Van den Brink Using biological traits to predict species response to toxic substances. Ecotoxicol Environ Saf 2007, 67:296-301.
3. Baird D.J., Rubach M.N., Van den Brink P.J. Trait-based ecological risk assessment (TERA): the new frontier. Integr Environ Assess Manage 2008, 4:2-3.
4. Bal D, Beije HM, Fellinger M, Haveman R, Van Opstal AJFM, Van Zadelhoff FJ Hand book nature target types. Expertisecentrum LNV, Ede, The Netherlands 2001, 832. in Dutch. Second, revised edition.
5. Banton MI, Klingensmith JS, Barchers DE, Clifford PA, Ludwig DF, Macrander AM, Sielken RJ, Valdez-Flores An approach for estimating ecological risks from organochlorine pesticides to terrestrial organisms at Rocky Mountain Arsenal. Hum Ecol Risk Assess 1996, 2:499-526.
6. Blanco G., Cooper E.L. Immune systems, Geographic Information Systems (GIS), environment and health impacts. J Toxicol Environ Health, Part B. 2004, 7:465-480.
7. Brus D.J., De Gruijter J.J., Walvoort D.J.J., De Vries F., Bronswijk J.J.B., Römkens P.F.A.M., De Vries W. Heavy metals in the environment. Mapping the probability of exceeding critical thresholds for cadmium concentrations in soils in the Netherlands. J Environ Qual 2002, 31:1875-1884.
8. Carlsen T.M., Coty J.D., Kercher J.R. The spatial extent of contaminants and the landscape scale: an analysis of the wildlife, conservation biology, and population modelling literature. Environ Toxicol Chem 2004, 23:798-811.
9. Carter IC, Williams JM, Webb A, Tasker ML Seabird concentrations in the North Sea: an atlas of vulnerability to surface pollutants. Joint Nature Conservation Committee, Aberdeen, UK 1993.
10. Clifford P.A., Barchers D.E., Ludwig D.F., Sielken R.L., Klingensmith J.S., Graham R.V., Banton M.I. An approach to quantifying spatial components of exposure for ecological risk assessment. Environ Toxicol Chem 1995, 14:895-906.
11. Cormont A, Baveco JM, Van den Brink NM Effects of spatial foraging behaviour on risks of contaminants for wildlife. Breaking ecotoxicological restraints in spatial planning (BERISP): the development of a spatially explicit risk assessment. Report no. 1369, Alterra, Wageningen UR, Wageningen, The Netherlands 2005, 97.
12. Crommentuijn T, Polder MD, Van de Plassche EJ Maximum permissible concentrations and negligible concentrations for metals, taking the background concentrations into account. Report no. 601501001, National Institute of Public Health and the Environment (RIVM), Bilthoven, The Netherlands 1997, 260.
13. Davis T.J., Keller C.P. Modelling and visualizing multiple spatial uncertainties. Comput Geosci 1997, 23:397-408.
14. De Lange H.J., Lahr J., Van der Pol J.J.C., Wessels Y., Faber J.H. Ecological vulnerability in wildlife. An expert judgment and multi-criteria analysis tool using ecological traits to assess relative impact of pollutants. Environ Toxicol Chem 2009, 28:2233-2240.
15. De Lange HJ, Lahr J, Van der Pol JJC, Faber JH. Ecological vulnerability in wildlife. Application of a ranking method of species to food chains and habitats. Submitted for publication.
16. De Lange H.J., Sala S., Vighi M., Faber J.H. Ecological vulnerability in risk assessment - a review and perspectives. Sci Tot Environ 2010, 408:3871-3879. (this issue).
17. Ehlschlaeger C.R., Shortridge A.M., Goodchild M.F. Visualizing spatial data uncertainty using animation. Comput GeoSci 1997, 23:387-395.
18. Gaines K.F., Boring C.S., Porter D.E. The development of a spatially explicit model to estimate radiocaesium body burdens in raccoons (Procyon lotor) for ecological risk assessment. Sci Tot Environ 2005, 341:15-31.
19. Giupponi C., Eiselt B., Ghetti P.F. A multicriteria approach for mapping risks of agricultural pollution for water resources: the Venice Lagoon watershed case study. J Environ Manage 1999, 56:259-269.
20. Golden N.H., Rattner B. Ranking terrestrial vertebrate species for utility in biomonitoring and vulnerability to environmental contaminants. Rev Environ Toxicol 2003, 176:67-136.
21. Goovaerts P. Geostatistics in soil science: state-of-the-art and perspectives. Geoderma 1999, 89:1-45.
22. Hiscock K., Tyler-Walters H. Assessing the sensitivity of seabed species and biotopes - the Marine Life Information Network (MarLIN). Hydrobiologia 2006, 555:309-320.
23. Junghans M., Backhaus T., Faust M., Scholze M., Grimme L.H. Application and validation of approaches for the predictive hazard assessment of realistic pesticide mixtures. Aquatic Toxicol 2006, 76:93-110.
24. King JG, Sanger GA Oil vulnerability index for marine oriented birds. Conservation of marine birds of northern North America. Wildlife Research report no. 11, Fish and Wildlife Service, Washington D.C 1979, 227-239. J.C. Bartonek, D.N. Nettleship (Eds.).
25. Kooistra L., Huijbregts M.A.J., Ragas A.M.J., Wehrens R., Leuven R.S.E.W. Spatial variability and uncertainty in ecological risk assessment: a case study on the potential risk of cadmium for the Little Owl in a Dutch river flood plain. Environ Sci Technol 2005, 39:2177-2187.
26. Lahr J, Koostra L. Environmental risk mapping. State of the art and use for risk communication. Sci Tot Environ 2009. doi:10.1016/j.scitotenv.2009.10.045.
27. Larsen MM, Bak J, Scott-Fordsmand J Monitering af Tungmetaller I Danske Dyrknings- og Naturjorder. Prøvetagningen i 1992/93. Danmarks Miljøundersøgelser, 78 p. Faglig Rapport nr. 157 1996.
28. Linkov I., Von Stackelberg K.E., Burmistrov D., Bridges T.S. Uncertainty and variability in risk from trophic transfer of contaminants in dredged sediments. Sci Total Environ 2001, 274:255-269.
29. Loos M. Ragas A, Schipper A, Leuven R, Plasmeijer R, Hendriks J. An object/oriented modelling approach for cumulative exposure assessments of wildlife species. Sci Tot Environ 2009. doi:10.1016/j.scitotenv.2009.11.045.
30. Luttik R, Traas TP, Mensink H Mapping the potentially affected fraction of avian and mammalian target species in the national ecological network. RIVM report no. 607504002, Bilthoven, The Netherlands 1997, 71.
31. McMath A, Cooke A, Jones M, Emblow CS, Wyn G, Roberts S, Costello MJ, Cook, Sides EM Sensitivity mapping of inshore marine biotopes in the southern Irish Sea (SensMap): final report. Maritime Ireland-Wales INTERREG. Dublin, Ecoserve/Bangor, Wales, Countryside Council for Wales/Dublin, Duchas The Heritage Service 2000, 22.
32. Oomen P.A., Marsman H., Oostelbos P.F.J., Schoeman-Weerdestijn M.E., Wanningen R. Plant protection Guide. Handbook for the combat of diseases, pests and weeds and application of growth regulators in agriculture, horticulture and public parks and gardens, 5th revised edition. Plant Protection Service, Wageningen, The Netherlands 1999, 764 pp. (in Dutch).
33. Pebesma E.J., De Jong K., Briggs D. Interactive visualization of uncertain spatial and spatio-temporal data under different scenarios: an air quality example. International J Geogr Inform Sci 2007, 21:515-527.
34. Species sensitivity distributions in ecotoxicology 2002, Lewis Publishers, Boca Raton, FL, USA, 587 pp. L. Posthuma, G.W. Suter, T.P. Traas (Eds.).
35. Posthuma L., De Zwart D. Predicted effects of toxicant mixtures are confirmed by changes in fish species assemblages in Ohio, USA, rivers. Env Toxicol Chem 2006, 25:1094-1105.
36. Ragas AMJ, Huijbregts MAJ, Henning-De Jong I., Leuven RSEW Uncertainty in environmental risk assessment: implications for risk-based management of River basins. Integr Environ Assess Manage 2009, 5:27-37.
37. Ragas A.M.J., Brouwer F.P.E., Büchner F.L., Hendriks H.W.M., Huijbregts M.A.J. Separation of uncertainty and interindividual variability in human exposure modelling. J Expos Sci Environ Epidemiol 2009, 19:201-212.
38. RIVM Environmental risk limits in The Netherlands. Part I, Procedure, and Part II, Risk limits, Appendix D. Report, National Institute of Public Health and the Environment (RIVM), Bilthoven, The Netherlands 1999.
39. Ross HLB. The interaction of chemical mixtures and their implications on water quality guidelines. Hons Thesis, University of Technology, Sydney, NSW, Australia, 1996, 167 pp.
40. Ross HLB, Warne MStJ Most chemical mixtures have additive aquatic toxicity. Proceedings of the third annual conference of the Australasian Society for Ecotoxicology, Brisbane, 17-19 July 1997, 30.
41. Saisana M., Dubois G., Chaloulakou A., Spyrellis N. Classification criteria and probability risk maps: limitations and perspectives. Environ Sci Technol 2004, 38:1275-1281.
42. Schipper A.M., Loos M., Ragas A.M.J., Lopes J.P.C., Nolte B.T., Wijnhoven S., Leuven R.S.E.W. Modeling the influence of environmental heterogeneity on heavy metal exposure concentrations for terrestrial vertebrates in river floodplains. Environ Toxicol Chem 2008, 27:919-932.
43. Traas T.P., Luttik R., Mensink H. Mapping risks of heavy metals to birds and mammals using species sensitivity distributions. Species sensitivity distributions in ecotoxicology 2002, 403-419. Lewis Publishers, Boca Raton, FL, USA. L. Posthuma, G.W. Suter, T.P. Traas (Eds.).
44. Van Bernem K-H, Grotjahn M, Knüpling J, Krasemann HL, Müller A, Neugebohrn L, Patzig S, Ramm G, Riethmüller R, Sach G, Suchrow S Thematische Kartierung und Sensitivitätsraster im deutschen Wattenmeer. Juni 1987-Juni 1993. Report no. GKSS 94/E/10, GKSS Forschungszentrum, Ghesstacht, Germany 1994.
45. Von Stackelberg K., Burmistrov D.B., Linkov I., Cura J., Bridges T.S. The use of spatial modelling in an aquatic food web to estimate exposure and risk. Sci Total Environ 2002, 288:97-110.
46. Warne MStJ A review of the ecotoxicity of mixtures, approaches to, and recommendations for, their management. Proceedings of the fifth national workshop on the assessment of site contamination 2003, 253-276. National Environment Protection Council Service Corporation, Adelaide, Australia. A. Langley, M. Gilbey, B. Kennedy (Eds.).