Literature DB >> 17722765

Derivation of soil values for the path 'soil-soil organisms' for metals and selected organic compounds using species sensitivity distributions.

Stephan Jänsch1, Jörg Römbke, Hans-Joachim Schallnass, Konstantin Terytze.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND, AIMS AND SCOPE: According to the German Federal Soil Protection Act, the natural function of soil as a habitat for human beings, animals, plants and soil organisms is, among other things, to be protected by deriving soil values for important chemicals regarding their amounts in the environment, their persistence and/or their toxicity. This contribution presents the results of the mathematical derivation of such values for nine metals and ten organic substances from soil ecotoxicological effect values available in the literature for microbial processes, plants and soil invertebrates.
MATERIAL AND METHODS: Ecotoxicological data were mostly extracted from published papers and reports and had to originate from valid studies that were performed according to internationally standardised guidelines (e.g. ISO) or were otherwise well documented, plausible and performed according to accepted laboratory practice. As test results, both structural (i.e., effects on mortality, growth or reproduction) and functional (i.e., effects on microbial activity or organic matter breakdown) parameters were included. The derivation of soil values was performed using the distribution based extrapolation model (DIBAEX) and EC(50)s (Effective Concentration) as input data.
RESULTS: For 19 compounds, soil values could be calculated. In 18 of these 19 cases clear laboratory ecotoxicological effects (i.e., EC50 values) below the calculated soil value have been found in the literature. DISCUSSION: In those few cases where a comparison with field studies is possible, effects have been observed in the same order of magnitude as the calculated soil values. A comparison with other similar approaches confirmed the plausibility of the calculated values.
CONCLUSIONS: The DIBAEX-method is a feasible and widely accepted method for deriving soil values from ecotoxicological input data. Data availability was already satisfactory for some substances, but other substances, especially organics, were only poorly covered. The soil values presented here were based on EC50 input data. However, depending on the protection level aimed at by using soil values in legislation, it might be appropriate to use other input data such as NOECs in the derivation process. RECOMMENDATIONS AND PERSPECTIVES: It is recommended to generate an appropriate number of data for further relevant substances by means of a test battery or multi-species approaches such as terrestrial model ecosystems. These tests should also consider the influence of the bioavailability of substances. A final recommendation for legally binding soil values demands a plausibility check of the mathematically derived values. This should include a comparison with natural background concentrations, soil values for other pathways and soil values used in legislation of other countries. Finally, expert judgement always has to be considered.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2007        PMID: 17722765     DOI: 10.1065/espr2006.06.310

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Environ Sci Pollut Res Int        ISSN: 0944-1344            Impact factor:   4.223


  21 in total

Review 1.  Uncertainty of the hazardous concentration and fraction affected for normal species sensitivity distributions.

Authors:  T Aldenberg; J S Jaworska
Journal:  Ecotoxicol Environ Saf       Date:  2000-05       Impact factor: 6.291

2.  The effect of lindane on terrestrial invertebrates.

Authors:  K Lock; K A C De Schamphelaere; C R Janssen
Journal:  Arch Environ Contam Toxicol       Date:  2002-02       Impact factor: 2.804

Review 3.  The bioavailability of chemicals in soil for earthworms.

Authors:  R Lanno; J Wells; J Conder; K Bradham; N Basta
Journal:  Ecotoxicol Environ Saf       Date:  2004-01       Impact factor: 6.291

4.  Comparison of toxicity of zinc for soil microbial processes between laboratory-contamined and polluted field soils.

Authors:  Erik Smolders; Steve P McGrath; Enzo Lombi; Chris C Karman; Roland Bernhard; Danielle Cools; Karen Van den Brande; Bertil van Os; Nicolai Walrave
Journal:  Environ Toxicol Chem       Date:  2003-11       Impact factor: 3.742

5.  Implementation of bioavailability in standard setting and risk assessment.

Authors:  Willie Peijnenburg; Else Sneller; Dick Sijm; Johannes Lijzen; Theo Traas; Eric Verbruggen
Journal:  Environ Sci       Date:  2004

6.  Insecticide species sensitivity distributions: importance of test species selection and relevance to aquatic ecosystems.

Authors:  Lorraine Maltby; Naomi Blake; Theo C M Brock; Paul J van den Brink
Journal:  Environ Toxicol Chem       Date:  2005-02       Impact factor: 3.742

7.  Internal exposure: linking bioavailability to effects.

Authors:  Beate I Escher; Joop L M Hermens
Journal:  Environ Sci Technol       Date:  2004-12-01       Impact factor: 9.028

Review 8.  Effects of pesticides on soil invertebrates in model ecosystem and field studies: a review and comparison with laboratory toxicity data.

Authors:  Stephan Jänsch; Geoff K Frampton; Jörg Römbke; Paul J Van den Brink; Janeck J Scott-Fordsmand
Journal:  Environ Toxicol Chem       Date:  2006-09       Impact factor: 3.742

Review 9.  The evolution of the Environmental Quality concept: from the US EPA Red Book to the European Water Framework Directive.

Authors:  Marco Vighi; Antonio Finizio; Sara Villa
Journal:  Environ Sci Pollut Res Int       Date:  2006-01       Impact factor: 4.223

10.  Effects and risk assessment of linear alkylbenzene sulfonates in agricultural soil. 1. Short-term effects on soil microbiology.

Authors:  L Elsgaard; S O Petersen; K Debosz
Journal:  Environ Toxicol Chem       Date:  2001-08       Impact factor: 3.742

View more
  7 in total

1.  Soil microbial respiration and PICT responses to an industrial and historic lead pollution: a field study.

Authors:  Annette Bérard; Line Capowiez; Stéphane Mombo; Eva Schreck; Camille Dumat; Frédéric Deola; Yvan Capowiez
Journal:  Environ Sci Pollut Res Int       Date:  2015-08-02       Impact factor: 4.223

2.  ESPR Subject Area 4 'Environmental Education, Science Communication, Science & Policy, Health Issues'.

Authors:  Kees van Leeuwen
Journal:  Environ Sci Pollut Res Int       Date:  2007-07       Impact factor: 4.223

3.  Mercury toxicity to Eisenia fetida in three different soils.

Authors:  Khandaker Rayhan Mahbub; Kannan Krishnan; Ravi Naidu; Mallavarapu Megharaj
Journal:  Environ Sci Pollut Res Int       Date:  2016-10-22       Impact factor: 4.223

4.  Long-term variability of metals from fungicides applied in amended young vineyard fields of La Rioja (Spain).

Authors:  Eliseo Herrero-Hernández; M Soledad Andrades; M Sonia Rodríguez-Cruz; Michele Arienzo; María J Sánchez-Martín
Journal:  Environ Monit Assess       Date:  2011-06-29       Impact factor: 2.513

5.  Copper toxicity in a natural reference soil: ecotoxicological data for the derivation of preliminary soil screening values.

Authors:  Ana Luísa Caetano; Catarina Ribeiro Marques; Fernando Gonçalves; Eduardo Ferreira da Silva; Ruth Pereira
Journal:  Ecotoxicology       Date:  2015-10-31       Impact factor: 2.823

6.  Can physiological endpoints improve the sensitivity of assays with plants in the risk assessment of contaminated soils?

Authors:  Ana Gavina; Sara C Antunes; Glória Pinto; Maria Teresa Claro; Conceição Santos; Fernando Gonçalves; Ruth Pereira
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2013-04-02       Impact factor: 3.240

7.  Deriving site-specific soil clean-up values for metals and metalloids: rationale for including protection of soil microbial processes.

Authors:  Roman G Kuperman; Steven D Siciliano; Jörg Römbke; Koen Oorts
Journal:  Integr Environ Assess Manag       Date:  2014-02-26       Impact factor: 2.992

  7 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.