Crane Mark, Burton G Allen, Culp Joseph M, Greenberg Marc S, Munkittrick Kelly R, Ribeiro Rui, Salazar Michael H, St-Jean Sylvie D
Watts & Crane Associates, 23 London Street, Faringdon, Oxfordshire SN7 7AG, United Kingdom.
Integr Environ Assess Manag. 2007 Apr;3(2):234-45. doi: 10.1897/ieam_2006-027.1.
Field-based (in situ) approaches are used increasingly for measuring biological effects and for stressor diagnoses in aquatic systems because these assessment tools provide realistic exposure environments that are rarely replicated in laboratory toxicity tests. Providing realistic exposure scenarios is important because environmental conditions can alter toxicity through complex exposure dynamics (e.g., multiple stressor interactions). In this critical review, we explore the information provided by aquatic in situ exposure and monitoring methods when compared with more traditional approaches and discuss the associated strengths and limitations of these techniques. In situ approaches can, under some circumstances, provide more valuable information to a decision maker than information from surveys of resident biota, laboratory toxicity tests, or chemical analyses alone. A decision tree is provided to assist decision makers in determining when in situ approaches can add value.
基于现场(原位)的方法越来越多地用于测量水生系统中的生物效应和诊断应激源,因为这些评估工具提供了在实验室毒性测试中很少能复制的真实暴露环境。提供真实的暴露场景很重要,因为环境条件可以通过复杂的暴露动态(例如多种应激源相互作用)改变毒性。在这篇批判性综述中,我们探讨了与更传统的方法相比,水生原位暴露和监测方法所提供的信息,并讨论了这些技术的相关优势和局限性。在某些情况下,原位方法可以为决策者提供比仅来自常驻生物群调查、实验室毒性测试或化学分析的信息更有价值的信息。提供了一个决策树,以帮助决策者确定原位方法何时可以增加价值。