Theories and Methods of Ecological Risk Assessment

Transcript

1 21 2Π PROGRESS IN CHEMISTRY Vol. 21 No. 2Π3 Mar., ( ),,,, : X13 ; X826 : A : X(2009) 02Π Theories and Methods of Ecological Risk Assessment Lei Bingli Huang Shengbiao Wang Zijian 3 3 (State Key Laboratory of Environmental Aquatic Chemistry, Research Center for Eco2Environmental Sciences, Chinese Academy of Sciences, Beijing , China) Abstract Ecological risk assessment is developed from single2species toxicity test to multi2species toxicity test, then to ecological risk models. Accordingly, chronic toxicity data is obtained from different assessment methods containing a simple extrapolation model based on single2species toxicity test, microcosm or mesocosm based on multi2 species test, and ecological risk models based on population or ecosystem. This paper discusses the development and characteristics of ecological risk assessment methods and existing problems at different stages. It points out that the main development treads of the ecological risk assessment is from the individual to the community. At the same time, risk characteristic method, data selection and statistical method selection in ecological risk assessment are introduced. The perspectives of ecological risk assessment are given. Key words ecological risk assessment ; ecological risk assessment methods ; risk characterization Contents 1 The development process of ecological risk assessment 2 The methodology progress of ecological risk assessment 2. 1 Ecological risk assessment based on the single2 species toxicity test 2. 2 Ecological risk assessment based on the multi2 species toxicity test (microcosm or mesocosm) 2. 3 Ecological risk assessment based on the population or ecosystem (ecological models) 3 Risk characterization methods 3. 1 Risk quotients (RQ) 3. 2 Probabilistic ecological risk assessment (PERA) 3. 3 Multi2level ecological risk assessment methods 4 The data and statistical method selection in probabili2 stic models : (No ) (863) (2007AA06A405) 3 3 e2mail ac. cn

2 2Π The data selection 4. 2 The statistical method selection 5 The perspectives of ecological risk assessment,,,,,,, (ecological risk assessment,era), [1 ] [2 ],, [3 ],, (OECD) (higher tier risk assessment),, [4 ],, [5 7 ], 1,, [8 ],,,,, [9 ] 1990 [10 ],,1998,, ( ) [2 ],,,, 2, 20, [2, 11,12 ] ; ; ;, [13 15 ] [16 ], [17 ],

3 ; [18 ], [19 ], [20 ], 2,, [8 ], ( predicted environmental concentration, PEC) (predicted no effect concentr2 ation, PNEC) PNEC (NOEC), NOEC, NOEC (LC50 EC50) PNEC, 3 : ; ; 2. 1,,, ( PNEC), [4,21 ] (assessment factor, AF) :,PNEC (AF), (,ACR ) PNEC [21,22 ], AF [23 ], (species sensitivity distri2 bution, SSD) :, (SSD) PNEC [24 ],, (SSD) (HCx, HC5),HC5 5 %, 95 % [25 ], ( HCx, ) ( HCx ), [21,26 28 ], [27 ] 2. 2 ( ) 3 :, ;, ;, [12 ], (microcosm) (mesocosm) [29,30 ],

4 2Π3 353,, ( HC5 EC20) [31 ], [30,32,33 ] 2. 3 ( ) [30 ], 100 [34 ],,,,, [35 ], PEC [36 38 ] PNEC [39,40 ] AQUATOX CASM,, HC5 EC20 NOEC, HC5 EC20 NOEC, [41 ] ; HC5 EC20, NOEC 5 % 30 % [41,42 ] - 20 % + 20 %, [43 ] Naito (CASM2SUMA) [39 ] AQUATOX [40 ], [44 ] 3 [2 ], : ;, ;,, 3. 1 (risk quotients, RQ), (RQ), ( EEC PEC) ( PNEC),( RQ) [45,46 ] 1, ; 1,,,

5 354 21,,,,,, [31,47 ], 3. 2 ( probabilistic ecological risk assessment, PERA), [31 ], [48 ],, (SSD) x %, x % ( hazardous concentration, HCx) [31,49 ] [51 ],,,, (the margin of safety, MOS 10 ) :,, 4 [51 ],, 10 % 90 %, [50 ] 1, 1, (probability distribution curve) :,, [31,49 ], HC5 EC20 [16,47 ] 3. 3,,,,, 2005 Weeks [52 ], 2007 Critto (DSS2ERAMNIA) [53 ] 4

6 2Π3 355,,, (SSD) 20 70, [24,25,54 ] ( HC5), [24 ] (SSD) SSD : HC5 [25 ] 4. 1 (data quality selection) : SSD, SSD SSD, [25,55 ], 3 :, ;, [56 ] [55,57,58 ] 4 :, ;,,, ;,,, ;,, Wheeler [25 ],, 4, 3 (data quantity selection) : SSD,, [25,50,59 ] [24,60 ],,OECD 5 SSD, Wheeler [25 ], 10,, HC5 [25 ] SSD,, 4. 2 SSD HC5,, SSD 3 SSD (parametric method) :,,,log2normal log2logistic log2normal, log2normal, 30, [54 ],, Log2logistic SSD,

7 log2normal, 95 % 90 %, 95 % [25 ] ( non2parametric bootstrap method) : 1996,Jagoe Newman SSD,,,, HC5 [61 ],,, 20 HC5 (bootstrap regression method) :, [62,63 ] HC5 [25,64 ],,, log2normal,,log2logistic ; bootstrap, HC5 20, HC10 10 ;, 10, 5, (1) 20 ; (2),, (3),, (4) 3, (5), [65 67 ], (6),,,,

8 2Π3 357 [ 1 ] (Lu H W), (Zeng GM), (Xie G X). (Acta Ecologica Sinica), 2003, 23 : [ 2 ] US EPA. Guidelines for Ecological Risk Assessment. EPA 6302R F [ 3 ] Hunsaker C T, Grahm R L, Suter G W, et al. Environmental Management, 1990, 14 : [ 4 ] OECD. OECD Environment, Monographs 92, Guidance Document for Aquatic Effects Assessment. 1995, OECDΠGD (95) 18 [ 5 ] Zhang X Y, Zha J M, Wang Z J. Environmental Toxicology and Chemistry, 2008, 27 : [ 6 ] Sun L W, Zha J M, Spear P A. Environmental Toxicology and Pharmacology, 2007, 24 : [ 7 ] Zha J M, Sun L W, Ma M, et al. Toxicol. Appl. Pharmacol., 2008, 226 : [ 8 ] Suter G W. Ecological Indicators, 2001, 1 : [ 9 ] Suter G W. Integrated Environmental Assessment and Management, 2008, 4 : [10 ] US EPA. Technical Support Document on Health Risk Assessment of Chemical Mixtures. EPAΠ600Π8290Π [11 ] King R S, Richardson C J. Environmental Management, 2003, 31 : [12 ] Schmitt2Jansen M, Veit U, Altenburger D G. Basic and Applied Ecology, 2008, 9 : [13 ] ( Yin H W). ( Shanghai Environmental Sciences), 1995, 14 : [14 ] (Xu X G), (Lin H P), (Fu Z Y). ( ) Universitatis Pekinensis), 2001, 37 : ( Acta Scientiarum Naturalium [15 ] (Huang S B), (Wang Z J), (Qiao M). (Acta Scientiae Circumstantiae), 2007, 27 : [16 ] Qiao M, Chen Y Y, Zhang Q H, et al. Environ. Sci. Technol., 2006, 40 : [17 ] (Qiao M), ( Huang S B), ( Zhu Y G). ( Asian Journal and Ecotoxicology), 2007, 2 : [18 ] Xiao R Y, Wang Z J, Wang C X, et al. Chemosphere, 2006, 64 : [19 ] Xiao R Y, Wang Z J, Wang C X, et al. Environ. Sci. Technol., 2006, 40 : [20 ] (Zhi X), (Niu J F), (Tang Z W). (Acta Scientiae Circumstantiae), 2008, 28 : [21 ] Seleck H, Riemann B, Christoffersen K, et al. Ecotoxicology and Environmental Safety, 2002, 52 : [22 ] Lgnge R, Hutchinson T H, Scholz N, et al. Chemosphere, 1998, 36 : [23 ] European Commission. Final Report on the Ecological Risk Assessment of Chemicals. Adopted by the Scientific Steering Committee at Its Meeting, [24 ] Aldenberg T, Slob W. Ecotoxicology and Environmental Safety, 1993, 25 : [25 ] Wheeler J R, Grist E P M, Leung K M Y, et al. Marine Pollution Bulletin, 2002, 45 : [26 ] Forbes T L, Forbes V E. Functional Ecology, 1993, 7 : [27 ] Smith E P, Cairns J Jr. Ecotoxicology, 1993, 2 : [28 ] Forbes V E, Callow P. Human and Ecological Risk Assessment, 2002, 8 : [29 ] Wong D C L, Toy R J, Philip P B. Ecotoxicology and Environmental Safety, 2004, 58 : [30 ] Van den Brink P J, Crum S J H, Gylstra R, et al. Environmental Pollution, [31 ] Brain R A, Sanderson H, Sibley P K, et al. Ecotoxicology and Environmental Safety, 2006, 64 : [32 ] Karen E M. Chemosphere, 1999, 39 : [33 ] (Nie X P), (Wei T L), (Lan C Y). (Acta Hydrobiologica Sinica), 2004, 28 : [34 ] Calow P, Forbes V E. Environ. Sci. Technol., 2003, 37 : 146A 151A [35 ] Landis W G. Human and Ecological Risk Assessment, 2003, 9 : [36 ] Karman C C, Reerink H G. Journal of Hazardous Materials, 1998, 61 : [37 ] Efroymson R A, Murphy D L. Science of the Total Environment, 2001, 274 : [38 ] Warren C S, Mackay D, Bahadur N P, et al. Water Research, 2002, 36 : [39 ] Natio W, Miyamoto K, Nakanishi J, et al. Chemosphere, 2003, 53 : [40 ] Park R A, Clough J S, Wellman M C. Ecological Modeling, 2008, 213 : 1 15 [41 ] Domene X, Ram rez W, Mattana S, et al. Environmental Pollution, 2008, 155 : [42 ] Moore D R J, Caux P Y. Environmental Toxicology and Chemistry, 1997, 16 : [43 ] De Laender F, De Schamphelaera KA C, Peter A. Water Research, 2008, 42 : [44 ] Lei B L, Huang S B, Qiao M, et al. J. Environmental Science, 2008, 20 : [45 ] EMEA. Committee for Medicinal Products for Veterinary Use ( CVMP ) : Guideline on Environmental Impact Assessment for Veterinary Medicinal Products Phase. European Medicines Agency Veterinary Medicines and Inspections, London, UK, 2004a [46 ] EMEA. Committee for Medicinal Products for Human Use (CHMP) : Guideline on the Environmental Risk Assessment of Medicinal Products for Human Use. European Medicines Agency Pre2 Authorization Evaluation of Medicines for Human Use, London, UK, 2004b [47 ] Solomon K R, Giesy J P, Jones P. Crop Prot. 2000, 19 : [48 ] Hanson M L, Solomon K R. Environ. Sci. Technol., 2002, 36 : [49 ] Solomon K R, Takacs P. Species Sensitivity Distributions in Risk

9 Assessment ( Eds. Posthuma L, Traas T, Suter G). Boca Raton, FL, USA : CRC Press, [50 ] Solomon K R, Baker D B, Richards R P, et al. Environmental Toxicology and Chemistry, 1996, 15 : [51 ] ECOFRAM. Ecological Committee on FIFRA Risk Assessment Methods Aquatic Reports. Washington D C, USA, 1999 [52 ] Weeks J M, Comber S D W. Mineralogical Magazine, 2005, 69 : [53 ] Critto A, Torresan S, Semenzin E, et al. The Science of Total Environment, 2007, 379 : [54 ] Newman M C, Ownby D R, Mezin L C A, et al. Environmental Toxicology and Chemistry, 2000, 19 : [55 ] Durda J L, Preziosi D V. Human and Ecological Risk Assessment, 2000, 6 : [56 ] Parkhurst D F. Eviron. Sci. Technol., 1998, 32 : 92A 98A [57 ] Klimisch H J, Andreae M, Tillmann U. Regul. Toxicol. Pharmacol., 1997, 25 : 1 5 [58 ] Caldwell D J, Mastrocco F, Hutchinson T H, et al. Environ. Sci. Technol., 2008, 42 : [59 ] Vega M M, Urzelai A, Angulo E. Environmental Toxicology and Chemistry, 1999, 18 : [60 ] Hakanson L. Ecological Modelling, 1995, 78 : [61 ] Jagoe R H, Newman M C. Ecotoxicology, 1996, 6 : [62 ] Davison A C, Hinkley D V. Bootstrap Methods and Their Application. Cambridge University Press, 1997 [63 ] (Xie Y H), (Zhu Y). (Statistics & Information Forum), 2008, 23 : [64 ] Duboudin C, Ciffroy P, Magaud H. Environmental Toxicology and Chemistry, 2004, 23 : [65 ] Xu Y P, Wang ZJ, Ke R H, et al. Environ. Sci. Technol., 2005, 39 : [66 ] Ke R H, Xu Y P, Wang ZJ, et al. Environ. Sci. Technol., 2006, 40 : [67 ] Ke R H, Luo J P, Sun L W, et al. Environ. Sci. Technol., 2007, 41 :