Department of Environmental Engineering, Technical University of Denmark, Miljoevej Building 113, 2800 Kgs. Lyngby, Denmark.
Sci Total Environ. 2012 Jun 15;427-428:319-31. doi: 10.1016/j.scitotenv.2012.04.011. Epub 2012 May 2.
The release of chemicals such as chlorinated solvents, pesticides and other xenobiotic organic compounds to streams, either from contaminated sites, accidental or direct application/release, is a significant threat to water resources. In this paper, different methods for evaluating the impacts of chemical stressors on stream ecosystems are evaluated for a stream in Denmark where the effects of major physical habitat degradation can be disregarded. The methods are: (i) the Danish Stream Fauna Index, (ii) Toxic Units (TU), (iii) SPEAR indices, (iv) Hazard Quotient (HQ) index and (v) AQUATOX, an ecological model. The results showed that the hydromorphology, nutrients, biological oxygen demand and contaminants (pesticides and trichloroethylene from a contaminated site) originating from groundwater do not affect the good ecological status in the stream. In contrast, the evaluation by the novel SPEAR(pesticides) index and TU indicated that the site is far from obtaining good ecological status - a direct contradiction to the ecological index currently in use in Denmark today - most likely due to stream sediment-bound pesticides arising from the spring spraying season. In order to generalise the findings of this case study, the HQ index and AQUATOX were extended for additional compounds, not only partly to identify potential compounds of concern, but also to determine thresholds where ecological impacts could be expected to occur. The results demonstrate that some commonly used methods for the assessment of ecological impact are not sufficient for capturing - and ideally separating - the effects of all anthropogenic stressors affecting ecosystems. Predictive modelling techniques can be especially useful in supporting early decisions on prioritising hot spots, serving to identify knowledge gaps and thereby direct future data collection. This case study presents a strong argument for combining bioassessment and modelling techniques to multi-stressor field sites, especially before cost-intensive studies are conducted.
化学物质如氯化溶剂、农药和其他异源有机化合物被释放到溪流中,无论是源自污染场地的释放,还是意外或直接的应用/释放,都会对水资源构成重大威胁。本文评估了不同方法来评估化学胁迫物对溪流生态系统的影响,这些方法适用于丹麦的一条溪流,该溪流的主要物理生境退化的影响可以忽略不计。这些方法包括:(i)丹麦溪流动物区系指数,(ii)毒性单位(TU),(iii)SPEAR 指数,(iv)危害系数(HQ)指数和(v)AQUATOX,一种生态模型。结果表明,水力学形态、养分、生物需氧量和污染物(源自地下水的农药和三氯乙烯)不会影响溪流的良好生态状况。相反,新型 SPEAR(农药)指数和 TU 的评估表明,该地点远未达到良好的生态状况-与丹麦目前使用的生态指数直接矛盾-很可能是由于春季喷洒季节源自溪流沉积物的农药。为了推广本案例研究的结果,HQ 指数和 AQUATOX 被扩展到其他化合物,不仅部分用于识别潜在的关注化合物,还用于确定可能出现生态影响的阈值。结果表明,一些常用的生态影响评估方法不足以捕捉-理想情况下是分离-影响生态系统的所有人为胁迫因素的影响。预测建模技术特别有助于支持对优先热点进行早期决策,有助于识别知识差距,并指导未来的数据收集。本案例研究有力地证明了将生物评估和建模技术结合到多胁迫现场的必要性,特别是在进行成本高昂的研究之前。