You are here:
Bioaccumulation Data from Laboratory and Field Studies: Are They Comparable?
Citation:
BURKHARD, L., C. COWAN-ELLSBERRY, M. R. EMBRY, R. A. HOKE, AND K. A. KIDD. Bioaccumulation Data from Laboratory and Field Studies: Are They Comparable? . Integrated Environmental Assessment and Management. Allen Press, Inc., Lawrence, KS, 8(1):13-16, (2012).
Impact/Purpose:
these papers present the group’s current understanding and assessment of bioaccumulation science and make a number of recommendations on how to improve the collection and interpretation of bioaccumulation data.
Description:
Once released into the environment, there are a number of chemicals that are known to bioaccumulate in organisms, sometimes to concentrations that may threaten their health or the health of their predators. However, it remains challenging to use physical or chemical properties or results from lab bioaccumulation tests to predict the concentrations that are sometimes found in wild organisms. How well lab studies and field measurements agree or disagree and the cause of any discrepancies is a subject of great interest and discussion from both a scientific and a regulatory perspective. A workshop (sponsored by the International Life Sciences Institute Health and Environmental Sciences Institute (ILSI HESI), United States Environmental Protection Agency (US-EPA), and the Society of Environmental Toxicology and Chemistry (SETAC) assembled scientists from academia, industry, and government to compare and contrast laboratory and field bioaccumulation data. The results of this workshop are summarized in a series of five articles, published in this issue of Integrated Environmental Assessment and Management, and describe: i) a weight of evidence approach that uses fugacity ratios to bring field measurements into the assessment of biomagnification/bioaccumulation potential for legacy chemicals , ii) a detailed comparison between laboratory and field data for the most commonly measured bioaccumulation endpoint, biota-sediment accumulation factors (BSAFs), iii) a study that identifies and quantifies the differences between laboratory and field metrics of bioaccumulation for aquatic and terrestrial organisms, and iv) two reports on trophic magnification factors (TMFs); i.e., the first addresses how they are determined and interpreted, and the second describes how TMFs could be used in regulatory assessments. Collectively, these papers present the group’s current understanding and assessment of bioaccumulation science and make a number of recommendations on how to improve the collection and interpretation of bioaccumulation data.