Special Series: Lab-Field Bioaccumulation Workshop

Comparing laboratory- and field-measured biota–sediment accumulation factors

  1. Lawrence P Burkhard1,*,
  2. Jon A Arnot2,
  3. Michelle R Embry3,
  4. Kevin J Farley4,
  5. Robert A Hoke5,
  6. Masaru Kitano6,
  7. Heather A Leslie7,
  8. Guilherme R Lotufo8,
  9. Thomas F Parkerton9,
  10. Keith G Sappington10,
  11. Gregg T Tomy11,
  12. Kent B Woodburn12

Article first published online: 26 AUG 2011

DOI: 10.1002/ieam.218

Issue

Integrated Environmental Assessment and Management

Integrated Environmental Assessment and Management

Volume 8, Issue 1, pages 32–41, January 2012

Additional Information

How to Cite

Burkhard, L. P., Arnot, J. A., Embry, M. R., Farley, K. J., Hoke, R. A., Kitano, M., Leslie, H. A., Lotufo, G. R., Parkerton, T. F., Sappington, K. G., Tomy, G. T. and Woodburn, K. B. (2012), Comparing laboratory- and field-measured biota–sediment accumulation factors. Integr Environ Assess Manag, 8: 32–41. doi: 10.1002/ieam.218

Author Information

  1. 1

    US Environmental Protection Agency (USEPA), Office of Research and Development, National Health and Environmental Effects Research Laboratory, Mid-Continent Ecology Division, 6201 Congdon Boulevard, Duluth, Minnesota 55804, USA

  2. 2

    University of Toronto Scarborough, Toronto, Ontario, Canada

  3. 3

    International Life Sciences Institute, Health and Environmental Sciences Institute, Washington, DC, USA

  4. 4

    Manhattan College, Department of Civil and Environmental Engineering, Manhattan College, Riverdale, New York, USA

  5. 5

    DuPont, Haskell Global Centers for Health and Environmental Sciences, Newark, Delaware, USA

  6. 6

    Meiji University, Department of Applied Chemistry, School of Science and Technology, Tokyo, Japan

  7. 7

    Institute for Environmental Studies, VU University Amsterdam, Amsterdam, The Netherlands

  8. 8

    US Army Engineer Research and Development Center, Vicksburg, Mississippi, USA

  9. 9

    ExxonMobil Biomedical Sciences, Toxicology and Environmental Sciences Division, Annandale, New Jersey, USA

  10. 10

    USEPA, Environmental Fate and Effects Division, Office of Pesticide Programs, Washington, DC, USA

  11. 11

    Fisheries and Oceans Canada, Winnipeg, Manitoba, Canada

  12. 12

    Dow Corning, Health and Environmental Sciences, Midland, Michigan, USA

*US Environmental Protection Agency (USEPA), Office of Research and Development, National Health and Environmental Effects Research Laboratory, Mid-Continent Ecology Division, 6201 Congdon Boulevard, Duluth, Minnesota 55804, USA.

Publication History

  1. Issue published online: 19 DEC 2011
  2. Article first published online: 26 AUG 2011
  3. Accepted manuscript online: 28 APR 2011 11:42AM EST
  4. Manuscript Accepted: 20 APR 2011
  5. Manuscript Revised: 1 FEB 2011
  6. Manuscript Received: 23 DEC 2010

SEARCH

SEARCH BY CITATION

ARTICLE TOOLS

View Full Article (HTML) Get PDF (810K)

Keywords:

  • Bioaccumulation;
  • BSAF;
  • PCBs;
  • PAHs;
  • Pesticides

Abstract

Standardized laboratory protocols for measuring the accumulation of chemicals from sediments are used in assessing new and existing chemicals, evaluating navigational dredging materials, and establishing site-specific biota–sediment accumulation factors (BSAFs) for contaminated sediment sites. The BSAFs resulting from the testing protocols provide insight into the behavior and risks associated with individual chemicals. In addition to laboratory measurement, BSAFs can also be calculated from field data, including samples from studies using in situ exposure chambers and caging studies. The objective of this report is to compare and evaluate paired laboratory and field measurement of BSAFs and to evaluate the extent of their agreement. The peer-reviewed literature was searched for studies that conducted laboratory and field measurements of chemical bioaccumulation using the same or taxonomically related organisms. In addition, numerous Superfund and contaminated sediment site study reports were examined for relevant data. A limited number of studies were identified with paired laboratory and field measurements of BSAFs. BSAF comparisons were made between field-collected oligochaetes and the laboratory test organism Lumbriculus variegatus and field-collected bivalves and the laboratory test organisms Macoma nasuta and Corbicula fluminea. Our analysis suggests that laboratory BSAFs for the oligochaete L. variegatus are typically within a factor of 2 of the BSAFs for field-collected oligochaetes. Bivalve study results also suggest that laboratory BSAFs can provide reasonable estimates of field BSAF values if certain precautions are taken, such as ensuring that steady-state values are compared and that extrapolation among bivalve species is conducted with caution. Integr Environ Assess Manag 2012;8:32–41. © 2011 SETAC

View Full Article (HTML) Get PDF (810K)