Validation of Ontario's New Laboratory-based bioaccumulation Methods with In Situ Field Data

The Atrium, University of Guelph Institutional Repository

Validation of Ontario's New Laboratory-based bioaccumulation Methods with In Situ Field Data

Show simple item record

dc.contributor.author Van Geest, Jordana L.
dc.contributor.author Poirier, David G.
dc.contributor.author Sibley, Paul K.
dc.contributor.author Solomon, Keith R.
dc.date.accessioned 2011-09-01T23:22:12Z
dc.date.available 2011-09-01T23:22:12Z
dc.date.issued 2011
dc.identifier.citation Van Geest, J.L., Poirier, D.G., Sibley, P.K., and Solomon, K.R. "Validation of Ontario's New Laboratory-based bioaccumulation Methods with In Situ Field Data." Environmental Toxicology and Chemistry 30.4 (2011): 950-958
dc.identifier.uri http://hdl.handle.net/10214/2939
dc.description.abstract To validate the standardization of a laboratory protocol for measuring bioaccumulation, laboratory-derived tissue residues and biota–sediment accumulation factors (BSAFs) were compared with historical field data from nine sites in Ontario, Canada. As a result of temporal discontinuity between the field and the laboratory studies, a priori considerations, such as changes in site conditions or concentrations of contaminants in sediment, were necessary to assess whether to compare absolute or relative measures of bioaccumulation. For the majority of sites, BSAFs for field-collected and laboratory-exposed fish were within a factor of 2. Biota–sediment accumulation factors for laboratory-exposed oligochaetes were typically greater than those for mussels caged in the field, by a factor of 2 to 9. Overall, the laboratory methods for all species generally overestimated the relative bioavailability of contaminants compared with field conditions by a factor of 1.1 to 9.2. Other than the great disparity observed for polychlorinated dibenzo-p-dioxins and dibenzofurans (PCDD/Fs) between field and laboratory studies, on average the laboratory-derived BSAFs with Pimephales promelas and Lumbriculus variegatus overestimated those from field-collected fish and field-exposed mussels by factors of 1.6 and 3.6, respectively. The laboratory method reflects a potentially worst-case exposure scenario and provides an appropriately conservative estimate of bioaccumulation. Laboratory-based estimates can be comparable to bioaccumulation data from the field but may be confounded by species-specific differences in routes of exposure and bioaccumulation of certain compounds or other environmental and biological factors that should be considered in these comparisons.
dc.language.iso en en_US
dc.publisher Environmental Toxicology and Chemistry en_US
dc.subject Bioaccumulation en_US
dc.subject Sediment en_US
dc.subject Field Validation en_US
dc.subject Laboratory Methods en_US
dc.title Validation of Ontario's New Laboratory-based bioaccumulation Methods with In Situ Field Data en_US
dc.type Article en_US


Files in this item

Files Size Format View
469.pdf 267.4Kb PDF View/Open

This item appears in the following Collection(s)

Show simple item record

Search the Atrium


Advanced Search

Browse

My Account