Retrospective stepwise prioritization of chemicals detected in Great Lakes tributaries (2008-2018).

IF 2.8 4区 环境科学与生态学 Q2 ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCES Environmental Toxicology and Chemistry Pub Date : 2025-07-01 DOI:10.1093/etojnl/vgaf069
Erin M Maloney, Steven R Corsi, Matthew A Pronschinske, Laura A DeCicco, John R Frisch, Neil Fuller, Austin K Baldwin, Kimani Kimbrough, Michael Edwards, Stephanie L Hummel, Natalia G Vinas, Daniel L Villeneuve
{"title":"Retrospective stepwise prioritization of chemicals detected in Great Lakes tributaries (2008-2018).","authors":"Erin M Maloney, Steven R Corsi, Matthew A Pronschinske, Laura A DeCicco, John R Frisch, Neil Fuller, Austin K Baldwin, Kimani Kimbrough, Michael Edwards, Stephanie L Hummel, Natalia G Vinas, Daniel L Villeneuve","doi":"10.1093/etojnl/vgaf069","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Through the U.S. Great Lakes Restoration Initiative, a 10-year, multiagency chemical monitoring effort was undertaken across the Great Lakes. In this effort, 586 chemicals were monitored and 334 were detected in grab/composite water samples. To help inform potential future actions, a stepwise prioritization framework was used to identify compounds for which publicly accessible water quality guidelines or effects information suggested there was potential aquatic ecotoxicity. Because water quality guidelines were only available for some chemicals, this framework used apical toxicity data collated from publicly accessible databases (e.g., the ECOTOXicology Knowledgebase) and alternative data, including literature-derived non-apical effect concentrations, in vitro bioactivities from high-throughput screening, and modeled ecotoxicity. To account for the diverse levels of confidence in these data, chemicals were prioritized within specific action categories, which suggested potential management or experimental activities that may be considered based on the types of data available for each compound. Overall, 11 detected chemicals were identified as high priority in different action categories. This included four chemicals prioritized for environmental management or targeted risk assessment, three chemicals prioritized for effects-based monitoring, one chemical prioritized for apical effects assessment, and three chemicals targeted for non-apical effects evaluation. This framework also identified 164 low-priority chemicals, among which more than 50% were prioritized based on water quality guidelines or apical effect concentrations (thus could be considered low priority for future risk assessment or management activities). Results aim to help regulatory agencies, environmental managers, and other stakeholders focus available resources on carrying out monitoring, experimental, and risk assessments for the chemicals that display the greatest potential to adversely impact Great Lakes ecosystems.</p>","PeriodicalId":11793,"journal":{"name":"Environmental Toxicology and Chemistry","volume":" ","pages":"2048-2069"},"PeriodicalIF":2.8000,"publicationDate":"2025-07-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Environmental Toxicology and Chemistry","FirstCategoryId":"93","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1093/etojnl/vgaf069","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"环境科学与生态学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCES","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Through the U.S. Great Lakes Restoration Initiative, a 10-year, multiagency chemical monitoring effort was undertaken across the Great Lakes. In this effort, 586 chemicals were monitored and 334 were detected in grab/composite water samples. To help inform potential future actions, a stepwise prioritization framework was used to identify compounds for which publicly accessible water quality guidelines or effects information suggested there was potential aquatic ecotoxicity. Because water quality guidelines were only available for some chemicals, this framework used apical toxicity data collated from publicly accessible databases (e.g., the ECOTOXicology Knowledgebase) and alternative data, including literature-derived non-apical effect concentrations, in vitro bioactivities from high-throughput screening, and modeled ecotoxicity. To account for the diverse levels of confidence in these data, chemicals were prioritized within specific action categories, which suggested potential management or experimental activities that may be considered based on the types of data available for each compound. Overall, 11 detected chemicals were identified as high priority in different action categories. This included four chemicals prioritized for environmental management or targeted risk assessment, three chemicals prioritized for effects-based monitoring, one chemical prioritized for apical effects assessment, and three chemicals targeted for non-apical effects evaluation. This framework also identified 164 low-priority chemicals, among which more than 50% were prioritized based on water quality guidelines or apical effect concentrations (thus could be considered low priority for future risk assessment or management activities). Results aim to help regulatory agencies, environmental managers, and other stakeholders focus available resources on carrying out monitoring, experimental, and risk assessments for the chemicals that display the greatest potential to adversely impact Great Lakes ecosystems.

查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
五大湖支流中检测到的化学品的回顾性逐步优先排序(2008-2018)。
通过美国大湖恢复计划,一项为期十年的多机构化学监测工作在整个大湖进行。在这项工作中,监测了586种化学物质,在抓取/复合水样中检测到334种化学物质。为了帮助为潜在的未来行动提供信息,采用了逐步优先排序框架来确定可公开获取的水质指南或影响信息表明存在潜在水生生态毒性的化合物。由于水质指南仅适用于某些化学品,因此该框架还使用了从可公开访问的数据库(例如ECOTOXicology知识库)整理的顶端毒性数据。它还使用了替代数据,包括文献衍生的非根尖效应浓度、高通量筛选的体外生物活性和模拟的生态毒性。考虑到对这些数据的不同信任程度,在具体行动类别中对化学品进行了优先排序,这表明可以根据每种化合物的现有数据类型考虑潜在的管理或实验活动。总的来说,11种检测到的化学品在不同的行动类别中被确定为高度优先。这包括4种优先用于环境管理或目标风险评估的化学品,3种优先用于基于效应的监测的化学品,1种优先用于顶点效应评估的化学品和3种针对非顶点评价的化学品。该框架还确定了164种低优先级化学品,其中超过50%的化学品根据水质准则或峰值效应浓度被优先考虑(因此可以将其视为未来风险评估或管理活动的低优先级)。研究结果旨在帮助监管机构、环境管理者和其他利益相关者集中现有资源,对可能对五大湖生态系统产生不利影响的化学品进行监测、实验和风险评估。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
7.40
自引率
9.80%
发文量
265
审稿时长
3.4 months
期刊介绍: The Society of Environmental Toxicology and Chemistry (SETAC) publishes two journals: Environmental Toxicology and Chemistry (ET&C) and Integrated Environmental Assessment and Management (IEAM). Environmental Toxicology and Chemistry is dedicated to furthering scientific knowledge and disseminating information on environmental toxicology and chemistry, including the application of these sciences to risk assessment.[...] Environmental Toxicology and Chemistry is interdisciplinary in scope and integrates the fields of environmental toxicology; environmental, analytical, and molecular chemistry; ecology; physiology; biochemistry; microbiology; genetics; genomics; environmental engineering; chemical, environmental, and biological modeling; epidemiology; and earth sciences. ET&C seeks to publish papers describing original experimental or theoretical work that significantly advances understanding in the area of environmental toxicology, environmental chemistry and hazard/risk assessment. Emphasis is given to papers that enhance capabilities for the prediction, measurement, and assessment of the fate and effects of chemicals in the environment, rather than simply providing additional data. The scientific impact of papers is judged in terms of the breadth and depth of the findings and the expected influence on existing or future scientific practice. Methodological papers must make clear not only how the work differs from existing practice, but the significance of these differences to the field. Site-based research or monitoring must have regional or global implications beyond the particular site, such as evaluating processes, mechanisms, or theory under a natural environmental setting.
期刊最新文献
The evolution of chemical risk in a Chinese river catchment exposed to untreated wastewater. Mercury exposure of Purple Martins (Progne subis) in Brazil: a comparison between two non-breeding sites. Do antimicrobial substances impact food webs bottom-up? A proof of concept in a stream mesocosm system. Spatial distribution and age estimation of microplastics collected from rivers, seas, and sediment in Shizuoka Prefecture, Japan. Target Lipid Model Update and Proposed Refinement of HC5 Calculation Procedure.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1