|
(80-81) Biological Concern Values: A Simplistic and Realistic Assessment Tool for Weight-of-Evidence Approaches. Burton, Allen*,1, Irvine, Cameron1, Johnson, Jeff1, McWilliam, Ruth1, Gallagher, Jeff1, Schwab, Becky1, Greenberg, Marc1, Leppanen, Matti1, 1 Wright State University, Dayton, OH, USA ABSTRACT- Chemical criteria for water and sediment quality are the primary assessment tool for regulators throughout the world. While the assessment process may also use information on biological indices and laboratory-based toxicity, the use of a guideline value is preferred for its simplicity. Many of our studies across the United States were analyzed using a multiple lines-of-evidence approach in order to detect whether impairment exists and to differentiate stressor source compartments and stressor types. Various endpoints were evaluated and compared, including: water and sediment quality values, hazard quotients, benthic macroinvertebrate indices, laboratory and in situ toxicity responses, in situ bioaccumulation, and DNA profile responses. The level of sensitivity of the assessment tools varied, and were not always predictive of each other. These differences can be attributed to method-related artifacts, contaminant characteristics, stressor exposure dynamics and interactions, and inherent endpoint differences. Multiple lines-of-evidence were most useful at detecting toxicity at less contaminated sites or potential reference sites. Site-specific and compartment-specific (water, surficial sediment, pore water) Biological Concern Values (BCVs) were developed based on biological responses (i.e., multiple in situ responses). BCVs have less uncertainty than chemically-based criteria and laboratory exposures; therefore, have unique advantages for use in weight-of-evidence studies. Key words: water criteria, sediment quality guidelines, in situ toxicity, bioavailability |
