TenBrook Patti L, Tjeerdema Ronald S, Hann Paul, Karkoski Joseph
U.S. EPA Region 9, 75 Hawthorne Street, San Francisco, CA 94105, USA.
Rev Environ Contam Toxicol. 2009;199:19-109.
Environmental regulators charged with protecting water quality must have scientifically defensible water quality goals. For protection of aquatic life, regulators need to know what levels of contaminants a water body can tolerate, without producing adverse effects. The USEPA has developed water quality criteria for many chemicals, but few are for current-use pesticides. Other countries also derive aquatic life criteria utilizing a variety of methodologies. As a prelude to developing a new criteria derivation methodology, this chapter explores the current state of aquatic life criteria derivation around the world. Rather than discussing each methodology independently, this review is organized according to critical elements that must be part of a scientifically defensible methodology. All of the reviewed methodologies rely on effects data to derive aquatic life criteria. Water quality criteria may be derived from single-species toxicity data by statistical extrapolation procedures (for adequate data sets), or by use of empirically based AFs (for data sets of any size). Assessment factor methods are conservative and have a low probability of underestimating risk, with a concomitant high probability of overestimating risk. Extrapolation methods may also under-, or overestimate risk, but uncertainty is quantifiable and is reduced when larger data sets are used. Although less common, methods are also available for criteria derivation using multispecies toxicity data. Environmental toxicity of chemicals is affected by several factors. Some of these factors can be addressed in criteria derivation, and some cannot. For example, factors such as magnitude, duration and frequency of exposure may be incorporated into criteria, either through use of time-to-event and population models or by derivation of both acute and chronic criteria that have duration and frequency components. Aquatic species may be exposed to hydrophobic organic chemicals by multiple routes. They may take up residues directly from water, or may be exposed dietarily, or combinations of both. Unfortunately, to properly address such multiple routes in criteria derivation, food web models are needed that work for chemicals that have specific modes of action. Similarly, both bioavailability and toxicity parameters may contribute to derivation of criteria, providing sufficient data are available. Ecotoxicological effects and physical-chemical data are needed for criteria derivation. The quality and quantity of required data are clearly stated in existing methodologies; some guidelines provide very specific data quality requirements. The level of detail provided by guidelines varies among methodologies. Most helpful are those that provide lists of acceptable data sources, descriptions of adequate data searches, schemes for rating ecotoxicity data, specifications of required data types (e.g., acute vs chronic), and instructions for data reduction. Many methodologies present procedures for deriving criteria from both large and small data sets. Very small data sets may be supplemented through the use of QSARs for selected pesticides, and through the use of models such as ICE (for prediction of toxicity to under-tested species), and ACE (for estimation of chronic toxicity from acute data). The toxicity of mixtures is addressed by several existing methodologies. In some cases, additional AFs are applied to criteria to account for exposure to mixtures, whereas in others, concentration addition models are used to assess compliance. Multiple stressors and bioaccumulation are also addressed in some methodologies, by providing for application of additional safety factors. Methods are also available for translating dietary exposure limits for humans or other fish-eating animals into water concentrations. Options for addressing the safety of TES exist, and rely heavily on data from surrogate species to derive criteria. Utilizing partition coefficients, criteria may be harmonized across media to ensure that levels set to protect one compartment do not result in unacceptable levels in other compartments. Several methodologies derive criteria from entire data sets through the use of statistical extrapolations; other methods utilize only the lowest (most sensitive) data point or points. Utilization of entire data sets allows derivation of confidence limits for criteria, and encourages data generation. Criteria derivation methodologies have improved over the past two decades as they have incorporated more ecological risk assessment techniques. No single existing methodology is ideal, but elements of several may be combined, and when used with newer risk assessment tools, will produce more usable and flexible criteria derivation procedures that are protective.
负责保护水质的环境监管机构必须制定具有科学依据的水质目标。为了保护水生生物,监管机构需要了解水体能够承受何种污染物水平而不产生不利影响。美国环境保护局(USEPA)已经为许多化学物质制定了水质标准,但针对当前使用的农药的标准却很少。其他国家也采用各种方法得出水生生物标准。作为开发一种新的标准推导方法的前奏,本章探讨了世界各地水生生物标准推导的现状。本综述并非独立讨论每种方法,而是根据科学上合理的方法必须包含的关键要素进行组织。所有经过审查的方法都依赖效应数据来推导水生生物标准。水质标准可以通过统计外推程序(用于足够的数据集)从单物种毒性数据中得出,或者通过使用基于经验的评估因子(用于任何规模的数据集)得出。评估因子方法较为保守,低估风险的可能性较低,同时高估风险的可能性较高。外推方法也可能低估或高估风险,但不确定性是可量化的,并且在使用更大的数据集时会降低。虽然不太常见,但也有使用多物种毒性数据进行标准推导的方法。化学物质的环境毒性受到几个因素的影响。其中一些因素可以在标准推导中加以考虑,而有些则不能。例如,暴露的程度、持续时间和频率等因素可以通过使用事件时间和种群模型,或者通过推导包含持续时间和频率成分的急性和慢性标准纳入标准中。水生物种可能通过多种途径接触疏水性有机化学物质。它们可能直接从水中摄取残留物,或者通过饮食接触,或者两者兼而有之。不幸的是,为了在标准推导中正确考虑这些多种途径,需要适用于具有特定作用模式的化学物质的食物网模型。同样,如果有足够的数据,生物可利用性和毒性参数都可能有助于标准的推导。标准推导需要生态毒理学效应和物理化学数据。现有方法中明确规定了所需数据的质量和数量;一些指南提供了非常具体的数据质量要求。不同方法指南提供的详细程度各不相同。最有用的指南会提供可接受数据源列表、充分数据搜索的描述、生态毒性数据评级方案、所需数据类型的规范(例如,急性与慢性)以及数据简化说明。许多方法都提出了从大型和小型数据集中推导标准的程序。非常小的数据集可以通过使用选定农药的定量构效关系(QSARs),以及通过使用如ICE(用于预测对测试不足物种的毒性)和ACE(用于从急性数据估计慢性毒性)等模型来补充。几种现有方法涉及混合物的毒性问题。在某些情况下,会对标准应用额外的评估因子以考虑混合物暴露,而在其他情况下,则使用浓度相加模型来评估达标情况。一些方法还通过提供额外安全因子的应用来处理多重压力源和生物累积问题。也有将人类或其他食鱼动物的饮食暴露限值转化为水中浓度的方法。存在解决濒危物种安全问题的选项,并且在很大程度上依赖替代物种的数据来推导标准。利用分配系数,可以在不同介质之间协调标准,以确保为保护一个隔室而设定的水平不会导致其他隔室出现不可接受的水平。几种方法通过使用统计外推从整个数据集中推导标准;其他方法仅使用最低(最敏感)的数据点。使用整个数据集可以得出标准的置信限,并鼓励数据生成。在过去二十年中,标准推导方法随着纳入更多生态风险评估技术而有所改进。现有的方法都不是理想的,但可以将几种方法的要素结合起来,并且与更新的风险评估工具一起使用时,将产生更实用、更灵活且具有保护作用的标准推导程序。