1、API PUBL*Vb07 94 m 0732290 0555223 TBT m Users Guide and Technical Resource Document: Evaluation of Sediment Toxicity Tests for Biomonitoring Programs HEALTH AND ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCES DEPARTMENT API PUBLICATION NUMBER 4607 documenting performance improvements; and communicating them to the public.
2、The foundation of STEP is the API Environmental Mission and Guiding Environmental Principles. API ENVIRONMENTAL MISSION AND GUIDING ENVIRONMENTAL PRINCIPLES The members of the American Petroleum Institute are dedicated to continuous efforts to improve the compatibility of our operations with the env
3、ironment while economically developing energy resources and supplying high quality products and services to consumers. The members recognize the importance of efficiently meeting societys needs and our responsibility to work with the public, the government, and others to develop and to use natural r
4、esources in an environmentally sound mannefwhile protecting the heaith and safety of our employees and the public. To meet these responsibilities, Apt members pledge to manage our businesses according to these principles: To recognize and to respond to community concerns about our raw materials, pro
5、ducts and operations. To operate our plants and facilities, and to handle our raw materials and products in a manner that protects the environment, and the safety and health of our employees and the public. To make safety, health and environmental considerations a priority in our planning, and our d
6、evelopment of new products and processes. To advise promptly, appropriate officials, employees, customers and the public of information on significant industry-related safety, health and environmental hazards, and to recommend protective measures. To counsel customers, transporters and others in the
7、 safe use, transportation and disposai of our raw materials, products and waste materials. To economicaliy develop and produce natural resources and to conserve those resources by using energy efficiently. To extend knowledge by conducting or supporting research on the safety, health and environment
8、al effects of our raw materials, products, processes and waste materiais. To commit to reduce overall emission and waste generation. To work with others to resolve problems created by handling and disposal of hazardous substances from our operations. To participate with government and others in crea
9、ting responsible laws, regulations and standards to safeguard the community, workplace and environment. To promote these principles and practices by sharing experiences and offering assistance to others who produce, handle, use, transport or dispose of similar raw materials, petroleum products and w
10、astes. API PUBLm4607 94 0732290 0555226 799 W FOREWORD API PUBLICATIONS NECESSARILY ADDRESS PROBLEMS OF A GENERAL NATURE. WITH RESPECT TO PARTICULAR CIRCUMSTANCES, LOCAL, STATE, AND FEDERAL LAWS AND REGULATIONS SHOULD BE REVIEWED. API IS NOT UNDERTAKING TO MEET THE DUTIES OF EMPLOYERS, WAC- TRERS, O
11、R SUPPLIERS TO WARN AND PROPERLY TR4IN AND EQUIP THEIR EMPLOYEES, AND OTHERS EXPOSED, CONCERNING HEALTH AND SAFETY RISKS AND PRECAUTIONS, NOR UNDERTAKING THEIR OBLIGATIONS UNDER LOCAL, STATE, OR FEDERAL, LAWS. NOTHING CONTAINED IN ANY API PUBLICATION IS TO BE CONSTRUED AS GRANTING ANY RIGHT, BY IMPL
12、ICATION OR OTHERWISE, FOR THE MANU- FACTURE, SALE, OR USE OF ANY METHOD, APPARATUS, OR PRODUCT COV- ERED BY LETTERS PATENT. NEITHER SHOULD ANYTHING CONTAINED IN ITY FOR INFRINGEMENT OF LETTERS PATENT. THE PUBLICATION BE CONSTRUED AS INSURING ANYONE AGAINST LIABIL- Copyright O 1994 American Petroleum
13、 institute iii - API PUBL*4b07 94 R 0732290 0555227 b25 ACKNOWLEDGMENTS THE FOLLOWING PEOPLE ARE RECOGNIZED FOR THEIR CONTRIBUTIONS OF TIME AND EXPERTISE DURING THIS STUDY AND IN THE PREPARATION OF THIS REPORT: API STAFF CONTACT Alexis E. Steen, Health and Environmental Sciences Department MEMBERS O
14、F THE BIOMONITORING TASK FORCE Philip B. Dorn, Ph.D., Shell Development Company Jerry F. Hall, Ph.D., Texaco Research W. Raymon Arnold, Ph.D., Exxon Biomedical Sciences, Inc. Shiv Baloo, Amoco Oil Company Janis M. Farmer, BP America Research Hill et al. 1993). The purpose of this Users Guide is to p
15、rovide information that will enable environmental personnel at petroleum facilities to select sediment toxicity tests and test methods that are scientifically valid and appropriate for a specific site. For those readers who are unfamiliar with sediment toxicity testing, this Users Guide explains gen
16、eral aspects of sediment toxicity testing and how to use available technical information. This document also outlines the technical requirements and appropriate condi- tions for using different sediment toxicity test methods. A companion document, Evaluation of Sediment Toxicity Tests for Biomonitor
17、ing Programs (PTI, 1994) hereafter referred to as the Technical Resource Document, has been prepared to provide technical background on the test methods and the detailed rationale for the evaluations presented here. The Technical Resource Document is intended to be used as a reference tool for the t
18、est selection process and also as an information resource to support negotiations with agencies concerning the appropri- ateness of any recommended tests. Sediment toxicity tests anticipated for future use in biomonitoring programs for National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) permit c
19、ompliance are addressed in the Technical Resource Document and in this Users Guide. These docu- ments were developed for use by petroleum industry operations (refineries, marketing terminals, and production facilities) that have discharges to surface waters. However, the Technical Resource Docu- men
20、t and this Users Guide contain information that is applicable to other industries and could be used by any wastewater discharger. The term sediment toxicity test, as used here, refers to any laboratory method that measures the adverse biological response of a group of organisms to a sample of test s
21、ediment. Some sediment toxicity tests measure lethal effects by determining the num- ber of organisms that are killed during the exposure period. Other tests measure sublethal effects such as developmental abnormalities in juvenile stages, inhibition of reproduction, or reduced growth. Sediment toxi
22、city tests are used in many biomonitoring programs because they integrate the effects of multiple chemicals and can be used in conjunction with chemical measurements and sur- veys of sedimentdwelling organisms to establish cause-effect relationships. Sediment toxicity tests are also the primary tool
23、 for any toxicity identifica- tion and evaluation program. Sediment toxicity tests are available for many different species and various life stages of some species. For example, they may be conducted on embryos, larvae, and juveniles of various fish species, as well as embryos and juve- niles of inv
24、ertebrates such as clams, oysters, and sea urchins. Sediment toxicity tests can also be con- ducted with microscopic algae and bacteria, sub- merged aquatic plants (e.g., water hyacinth), and wetland plants (e.g., marsh grass). The next section presents an evaluation of available sediment toxicity t
25、ests, including descriptions of habitat type, sediment test systems, and biological endpoints. The following section provides a proce- dure for selection of tests at a specific site. Finally, brief sumaries of sampling and data analysis issues are presented in a section on application of sediment to
26、xicity tests. Selected terms in this Users Guide are defined in the GZossurv. 1 API PUBL*4b07 94 0732290 0555233 929 EVALUATION OF SEDIMENT TOXiCITY TESTS The available test methods were classified by type of habitat (marine, estuarine, and freshwater) to which each method applies and the general en
27、dpoint type (lethal or sublethal) specified for each test. This classification scheme resulted in the following six major categories of tests: H Marine lethal H Marine sublethal H Estuarine lethal H Estuarine sublethal H Freshwater lethal H Freshwater sublethal. Appendix A of the Technical Resource
28、Document presents test classification tables that contain the following information on each test: 1) organisms, including the broad biotic group, scientific name, and life stage of the species used in the test; 2) exposure medium (whole sediment, interstitial water, sediment elutriate, or sediment e
29、xtract); 3) exposure duration; and 4) primary literature refer- ences for test methods. Each test was assigned a number to allow users of the Technical Resource Document to track a given test through the various evaluation tables. In many cases, several of the specified tests were actually variation
30、s of a single test method and were assigned the same test num- ber. Habitat Type The primary characteristic that distinguishes marine, estuarine, and freshwater habitat types is water salinity. Salinity strongly influences the distribu- tions of most of the test organisms. In some cases, test organi
31、sms are tolerant of both marine and estuarine conditions or both estuarine and freshwater conditions. However, few test organisms tolerate both marine and freshwater conditions. For pur- poses of this study, habitat categories were defined as follows: H Marine (228 ppt) H Freshwater (SOS ppt). Estua
32、rine ( 0.5 ppt and c 3 % L O u) al C 3 7 - .- 5 - U O O. !.I .- E a - (0 - *) O O - 7 n i I + W -I 3 u) W Z K I- u) W I u) i- u) W + rn - a E P I- z W E E W cn 8 8 5 3 s W 4 rn a W -I I- API PUBLu4607 94 0732290 0555239 347 = API PUBLU4b07 94 0732290 0555240 Ob9 m z -1 I 3 I v) 4 u) ZI m o .% 9 P .s
33、 .$ m 4 - al N u) m .- L - .- .- E GY rn m U al X 6 5 - al al m II m c O .- - o - cv UI cv - o, - n x (Y cy (Y 9 API PUBLxqb7 94 0732290 0555241 TT5 ! Li I m 3 u) U W t t 3 c a P 5 o 5 3 s L I u) W I u) c I- I- a 5 w u) z O W 6 m W .J s 10 Many of the lowest ranking toxicity tests involved exposure
34、of planktonic organisms to whole sedi- ments. The exposure relevance of these tests is relatively low because the test species are rarely exposed to sediments in the field and they may be sensitive to interference of suspended sediments with feeding mechanisms. The species included in the highest ra
35、nking marine and estuarine tests for lethality include the following amphipods: Ampelisca abdita, Rhepoxynius abro- nius, Grandidierella japonica, Eohaustorius wash- ingtonianus, Eohaustorius estuarius, Amphporeia virginium, Foxiphalus xiximeus, Corophium volu- tutor, Leptocheirus pinguis, and Lepto
36、cheirus plum- ulosus. Reproductive endpoints are also well devel- oped for the L. plumulosus test. Although behav- ioral endpoints (e.g., reburial at exposure termina- tion) are used in many of these amphipod tests, the behavioral endpoints have generally not been field validated. The tests based on
37、 A. abdita and R. abronius are the only ones with a high regulatory status. Taxonomic groups other than amphipods also ranked high among the marine and estuarine sublethal tests, including the polychaete (Neanthes sp.) growth test based on a 20-28 day exposure to whole sediments, the echinoderm (Str
38、ongylocentrotus purpuratus, S. droebachiensis, Dendraster excentricus, Arbacia punctulata, Lyfechinis pictus) fertilization test of sediment elutriates, and the bivalve (Mytilus edulis, Cracisostrea gigas, C. virginica) larval abnormality test of sediment elutriates. Although these elutriate tests h
39、ave a lower exposure relevance than the whole sediment tests, they use sensitive life stages of ecologically important species, are widely avail- able, and have well developed methods. Although these elutriate tests are generally reliable, their variability can be high and the negative controls fail
40、 quality assurance limits more frequently than those in the tests involving juveniles and adults of these or other species. Other high-ranking tests in the marine and estuarine sublethal category included the juvenile clam (Mulinia lateralis) test with whole sediments and the Microtoxe (Photobacteri
41、um phosphoreum) test with sediment elutriates or inter- stitial water. The highest ranking freshwater tests for lethal and sublethal endpoints were based on the exposure of infaunal insects (Le., nymphs of the mayfly Hexa- genia Eimbata and larvae of the midges Chironomus ripanus and Chironomus tent
42、ans) and an epifaunal amphipod (Hyalella azteca) to whole sediments. Only the H. azteca and C. tentam lethal tests have high regulatory status. Whole sediment tests with vascular plants (Hydrilla verticillata and Echinochloa crusgalli) were among the top six ranked tests in the freshwater lethal cat
43、egory. These tests ranked high primarily because of their high degrees of exposure and ecological relevance and their relatively low susceptibility to interferences. The high ecological relevance of the two plant tests is based on the importance of the plants in providing habitat for other organisms
44、. The major drawback of these two tests is their infrequent use in regulatory programs. There is a relative lack of information on interfer- ences and chemical discrimination for sediment toxicity tests. Further research in these areas and more comparative studies of toxicity tests with correspondin
45、g data on the bioavailability of sediment chemicals are needed. 11 API PUBLU4607 94 0732290 0555243 878 SITE-SPECIFIC SELECTION OF SEDIMENT TOXICITY TESTS The selection of toxicity test methods for application at a particular site involves consideration of many factors, including physical, chemical,
46、 and biological conditions at the site; regulatory requirements at federal, state, and local levels; and specific objectives for a monitoring program. Procedures for selecting sediment toxicity tests for use in biomonitoring programs are outlined in this section. First, the factors to be considered
47、in test selection are defined. Second, the steps for selecting a test or battery of tests for application at a given site are described. DEFINITION OF SELECTION CRITERIA The selection of sediment toxicity tests for use in a biomonitoring program depends on site-specific characteristics, regulatory r
48、equirements, and other factors that are important in test evaluation (Table 7). Many of the decisions based on these factors may be constrained by technical specifica- tions of a permit or monitoring program require- ments. OVERVIEW OF TEST SELECTION PROCESS The process for selecting the most approp
49、riate sediment test for a given study is illustrated in the decision tree shown in Figure 1. As users progress through each decision point within the tree, the number of candidate tests is reduced until the final sediment test(s) have been selected. Habitats and endpoints desired for the biomonitoring program should be matched to one of the six tables for test selection (Tables 1 through 6). Information on biotic group and geographic range for each of the tests is found in Appendix D of the Technical Resource Document. Also included in Appendix D are i
