A review of bioconcentration factor (BCF) and bioaccumulation factor (BAF) assessments for organic chemicals in aquatic organisms

• Published in: Environmental reviews Vol. 14; no. 4; pp. 257 - 297
• Main Authors: Arnot, Jon A, Gobas, Frank APC
• Format: Journal Article
• Language: English
• Published: Ottawa, Canada NRC Research Press 01.12.2006; Canadian Science Publishing NRC Research Press
• Subjects: Aquatic life; Aquatic organisms; Bioaccumulation; Biological magnification; Ecosystem studies; Environmental impact; Marine biology; Organic chemicals; Risk assessment; Toxicity; Canada
• ISSN: 1181-8700; 1208-6053; 1208-6053
• DOI: 10.1139/a06-005

Bioaccumulation assessment is important in the scientific evaluation of risks that chemicals may pose to humans and the environment and is a current focus of regulatory effort. The status of bioaccumulation evaluations for organic chemicals in aquatic systems is reviewed to reduce uncertainty in bioaccumulation measurement, to provide quality data for assessment, and to assist in model development. A review of 392 scientific literature and database sources includes 5317 bioconcentration factor (BCF) and 1656 bioaccumulation factor (BAF) values measured for 842 organic chemicals in 219 aquatic species. A data quality assessment finds that 45% of BCF values are subject to at least one major source of uncertainty and that measurement errors generally result in an underestimation of actual BCF values. A case study of organic chemicals on the Canadian Domestic Substances List indicates that empirical data are available for less than 4% of the chemicals that require evaluation and of these chemicals, 76% have less than three acceptable quality BCF or BAF values. Field BAFs tend to be greater than laboratory BCFs emphasizing the importance of environmental measurement for reliable assessment; however, only 0.2% of current use organic chemicals have BAF measurements. Key parameters influencing uncertainty and variability in BCF and BAF data are discussed using reviewed data and models. A critical evaluation of representative BCF and BAF models in relation to existing measurements and regulatory criteria in Canada indicate the probability of Type II errors, i.e., false negatives or “misses”, using BCF models for bioaccumulation assessment may be as high as 70.6% depending on the model. Recommendations for the selection of measured and modelled values used in bioaccumulation assessment are provided, and improvements for the science and regulatory criteria are proposed.