Revisiting Bioaccumulation Criteria for POPs and PBT Assessments

Authors

  • Frank APC Gobas,

    Corresponding author
    1. School of Resource and Environmental Management, Simon Fraser University, Burnaby, British Columbia V5A 1S6, Canada
    • School of Resource and Environmental Management, Simon Fraser University, Burnaby, British Columbia V5A 1S6, Canada
    Search for more papers by this author
  • Watze de Wolf,

    1. Human and Environmental Sciences, DuPont Europe, A. Spinoystr. 6, B-2800 Mechelen, Belgium
    Search for more papers by this author
  • Lawrence P Burkhard,

    1. Mid-Continent Ecology Division, National Health and Environmental Effects Research Laboratory, Office of Research and Development, US Environmental Protection Agency, 6201 Congdon Boulevard, Duluth, Minnesota 55804
    Search for more papers by this author
  • Eric Verbruggen,

    1. RIVM Expertise Centre for Substances, PO Box 1, 3720BA Bilthoven, The Netherlands
    Search for more papers by this author
  • Kathleen Plotzke

    1. Dow Corning, Health and Environmental Sciences, 2200 W Salzburg Road, Mail #C03101 Midland, Michigan 48686, USA
    Search for more papers by this author

  • Published on the Web 6/24/2009.

Abstract

Scientists from academia, industry, and government reviewed current international regulations for the screening of commercial chemicals for bioaccumulation in the context of the current state of bioaccumulation science. On the basis of this review, several recommendations were proposed, including a scientific definition for “bioaccumulative substances,” improved criteria for the characterization of bioaccumulative substances (including the trophic magnification factor and the biomagnification factor), novel methods for measuring and calculating bioaccumulation properties, and a framework for screening commercial chemicals for bioaccumulative substances. The proposed framework for bioaccumulation screening improves current practices by reducing miscategorization, making more effective use of available bioaccumulation data that currently cannot be considered, reducing the need for animal testing, providing simpler and cheaper test protocols for animal studies in case animal studies are necessary, making use of alternative testing strategies, including in vitro and in silico metabolic transformation assays, and providing a scientific foundation for bioaccumulation screening that can act to harmonize bioaccumulation screening among various jurisdictions.

Ancillary