Literature DB >> 29761630

Specifying the Dimensions of Aquatic Life Benchmark Values in Clear, Complete, and Justified Problem Formulations.

Glenn Suter1.   

Abstract

Nations that develop water quality benchmark values have relied primarily on standard data and methods. However, experience with chemicals such as Se, ammonia, and tributyltin has shown that standard methods do not adequately address some taxa, modes of exposure, and effects. Development of benchmark values that are protective requires an explicit description of the issues, a problem formulation. In particular, the assessment endpoints and other dimensions should be specified for each chemical so that the necessary data will be obtained and appropriate analyses will be performed. Assessment endpoints specify the entity and attribute to be protected. In addition, the level of protection, including the magnitude of effect and the proportion effected, is specified. Magnitude and proportion are included because they are used to calculate the benchmark concentration. If uncertainty is considered in the benchmark, the proportion of the uncertainty distribution that is protected should be specified. Because effects are related to the duration of exposure and time for recovery, temporal dimensions should be specified. Clearly described exposure metrics are also needed because the relevant exposure parameter is not always total aqueous concentration. Finally, the benchmark may be applicable to particular geographic or climatological areas, water chemistries, taxa, or habitat types. Considering and justifying all the dimensions is likely to result in protective and more easily communicated benchmarks. Integr Environ Assess Manag 2018;14:631-638. Published 2018. This article is a US Government work and is in the public domain in the USA.
© 2018 SETAC.

Entities:  

Keywords:  Assessment endpoints; Problem formulation; Water quality criteria; Water quality guidelines; Water quality standard

Mesh:

Year:  2018        PMID: 29761630      PMCID: PMC6235734          DOI: 10.1002/ieam.4059

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Integr Environ Assess Manag        ISSN: 1551-3777            Impact factor:   2.992


  6 in total

1.  Ecological Recovery Potential of Freshwater Organisms: Consequences for Environmental Risk Assessment of Chemicals.

Authors:  Andre Gergs; Silke Classen; Tido Strauss; Richard Ottermanns; Theo C M Brock; Hans Toni Ratte; Udo Hommen; Thomas G Preuss
Journal:  Rev Environ Contam Toxicol       Date:  2016       Impact factor: 7.563

2.  What is meant by risk-based environmental quality criteria?

Authors:  Glenn W Suter; Susan M Cormier
Journal:  Integr Environ Assess Manag       Date:  2008-10       Impact factor: 2.992

3.  Chemical standard derivation for the protection of aquatic life: A guided world tour.

Authors:  Christian E Schlekat; Graham Merrington; Dean Leverett; Adam Peters
Journal:  Integr Environ Assess Manag       Date:  2017-07       Impact factor: 2.992

4.  Modernizing Water Quality Criteria in the United States: A Need to Expand the Definition of Acceptable Data.

Authors:  David B Buchwalter; William H Clements; Samuel N Luoma
Journal:  Environ Toxicol Chem       Date:  2017-02       Impact factor: 3.742

5.  Are Standardized Test Guidelines Adequate for Assessing Waterborne Particulate Contaminants?

Authors:  Farhan R Khan; Kristian Syberg; Annemette Palmqvist
Journal:  Environ Sci Technol       Date:  2017-02-08       Impact factor: 9.028

6.  Derivation of a benchmark for freshwater ionic strength.

Authors:  Susan M Cormier; Glenn W Suter; Lei Zheng
Journal:  Environ Toxicol Chem       Date:  2012-12-27       Impact factor: 3.742

  6 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.