The Lab-to-Field (LTF) Rating Scheme: A New Method of Investigating the Relationships between Laboratory Sublethal Toxicity Tests and Field Measurements in Environmental Effects Monitoring Studies
The Lab-to-Field (LTF) rating scheme is a straightforward method of relating the results of effluent toxicity tests to the field survey measurements and has proven to be a useful tool for interpretation of Environmental Effects Monitoring studies for pulp and paper mills in the province of Ontario....
Saved in:
Published in | Human and ecological risk assessment Vol. 10; no. 4; pp. 683 - 707 |
---|---|
Main Authors | , , |
Format | Journal Article |
Language | English |
Published |
01.08.2004
|
Online Access | Get full text |
Cover
Loading…
Summary: | The Lab-to-Field (LTF) rating scheme is a straightforward method of relating the results of effluent toxicity tests to the field survey measurements and has proven to be a useful tool for interpretation of Environmental Effects Monitoring studies for pulp and paper mills in the province of Ontario. The LTF method uses the same five-level scale (level 1 for no or low response to level 5 for severe response) for rating the toxicity and field survey results. Regression analysis of LTF scores has revealed that the relationship between the Ceriodaphnia reproduction test and benthic invertebrate field survey measurements was significant (p < 0.001, r = 0.79). However, there were not sufficient data to determine if this can be used as a predictive tool. Nonetheless, Ceriodaphnia-to-benthic survey, Selenastrum-to-benthic survey and fathead-to-fish survey relationships were qualitatively rated strong or moderately strong in 94%, 75%, and 60% of the 16 studies, respectively. The LTF rating scheme would benefit from the use of a more sensitive species or life stage of fish to strengthen the sublethal test-to-fish survey relationship. Further validation of the lab-to-field relationship could be accomplished through the synoptic collection of effluent samples for sublethal tests and field measurements. |
---|---|
Bibliography: | ObjectType-Article-2 SourceType-Scholarly Journals-1 content type line 23 ObjectType-Feature-1 |
ISSN: | 1080-7039 |
DOI: | 10.1080/10807030490484318 |