Loading…
Field assessments in conjunction with whole effluent toxicity testing
Whole effluent toxicity (WET) tests are widely used to assess potential effects of wastewater discharges on aquatic life. This paper represents a summary of chapters in a 1996 Society of Environmental Toxicology and Chemistry–sponsored workshop and a literature review concerning linkages between WET...
Saved in:
Published in: | Environmental toxicology and chemistry 2000-01, Vol.19 (1), p.14-24 |
---|---|
Main Authors: | , |
Format: | Article |
Language: | English |
Subjects: | |
Citations: | Items that this one cites Items that cite this one |
Online Access: | Get full text |
Tags: |
Add Tag
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!
|
cited_by | cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c4873-8feaff48beec5eff4b96b564485557cdea0264046d77480b8e150aa6d2b5cce3 |
---|---|
cites | cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c4873-8feaff48beec5eff4b96b564485557cdea0264046d77480b8e150aa6d2b5cce3 |
container_end_page | 24 |
container_issue | 1 |
container_start_page | 14 |
container_title | Environmental toxicology and chemistry |
container_volume | 19 |
creator | La Point, Thomas W. Waller, William T. |
description | Whole effluent toxicity (WET) tests are widely used to assess potential effects of wastewater discharges on aquatic life. This paper represents a summary of chapters in a 1996 Society of Environmental Toxicology and Chemistry–sponsored workshop and a literature review concerning linkages between WET testing and associated field biomonitoring. Most published studies thus far focus primarily on benthic macroinvertebrates and on effluent‐dominated stream systems in which effluents demonstrate little or no significant acute toxicity. Fewer studies examine WET test predictability in other aquatic ecosystems (e.g., wetlands, estuaries, large rivers) or deal with instream biota such as fish and primary producers. Published results indicate that standards for the usual WET freshwater test species, Ceriodaphnia dubia and Pimephales promelas, may not always protect most of the species inhabiting a receiving stream. Although WET tests are useful in predicting aquatic individual responses, they are not meant to directly measure natural population or community responses. Further, they do not address bioconcentration or bioaccumulation of hydrophobic compounds; do not assess eutrophication effects in receiving systems; and lastly, do not reflect genotoxic effects or function to test for endocrine‐disrupting chemicals. Consequently, a more direct evaluation of ecosystem health, using bioassessment techniques, may be needed to properly evaluate aquatic systems affected by wastewater discharges. |
doi_str_mv | 10.1002/etc.5620190103 |
format | article |
fullrecord | <record><control><sourceid>proquest_cross</sourceid><recordid>TN_cdi_proquest_miscellaneous_17715135</recordid><sourceformat>XML</sourceformat><sourcesystem>PC</sourcesystem><sourcerecordid>14526282</sourcerecordid><originalsourceid>FETCH-LOGICAL-c4873-8feaff48beec5eff4b96b564485557cdea0264046d77480b8e150aa6d2b5cce3</originalsourceid><addsrcrecordid>eNqNkTtPwzAUhS0EEqWwMmdAbCnXjl8ZoeIllYegEqPluDfgkiYldlX67wkqomIq012-8x3pXEKOKQwoADvD6AZCMqA5UMh2SI8KwVItqd4lPVAZpIpJvU8OQpgCUJnneY9cXnmsJokNAUOYYR1D4uvENfV0UbvomzpZ-viWLN-aChMsy2rRMUlsPr3zcZVEDNHXr4dkr7RVwKOf2yfjq8vx8CYdPVzfDs9HqeNaZaku0ZYl1wWiE52MF7kshORcCyGUm6AFJjlwOVGKayg0UgHWygkrhHOY9cnpWjtvm49FV21mPjisKltjswiGKkUFzcQ_QAEg82w7yAWTTLMOHKxB1zYhtFiaeetntl0ZCuZ7ftPNbzbzd4GTH7MNzlZla2vnwybFvp8BHZavsaWvcLVFajryT0W6zvoQ8fM3a9t3I1WmhHm5vzbweDcc6ecL85R9AaEOpYY</addsrcrecordid><sourcetype>Aggregation Database</sourcetype><iscdi>true</iscdi><recordtype>article</recordtype><pqid>14526282</pqid></control><display><type>article</type><title>Field assessments in conjunction with whole effluent toxicity testing</title><source>Wiley</source><creator>La Point, Thomas W. ; Waller, William T.</creator><creatorcontrib>La Point, Thomas W. ; Waller, William T.</creatorcontrib><description>Whole effluent toxicity (WET) tests are widely used to assess potential effects of wastewater discharges on aquatic life. This paper represents a summary of chapters in a 1996 Society of Environmental Toxicology and Chemistry–sponsored workshop and a literature review concerning linkages between WET testing and associated field biomonitoring. Most published studies thus far focus primarily on benthic macroinvertebrates and on effluent‐dominated stream systems in which effluents demonstrate little or no significant acute toxicity. Fewer studies examine WET test predictability in other aquatic ecosystems (e.g., wetlands, estuaries, large rivers) or deal with instream biota such as fish and primary producers. Published results indicate that standards for the usual WET freshwater test species, Ceriodaphnia dubia and Pimephales promelas, may not always protect most of the species inhabiting a receiving stream. Although WET tests are useful in predicting aquatic individual responses, they are not meant to directly measure natural population or community responses. Further, they do not address bioconcentration or bioaccumulation of hydrophobic compounds; do not assess eutrophication effects in receiving systems; and lastly, do not reflect genotoxic effects or function to test for endocrine‐disrupting chemicals. Consequently, a more direct evaluation of ecosystem health, using bioassessment techniques, may be needed to properly evaluate aquatic systems affected by wastewater discharges.</description><identifier>ISSN: 0730-7268</identifier><identifier>EISSN: 1552-8618</identifier><identifier>DOI: 10.1002/etc.5620190103</identifier><identifier>CODEN: ETOCDK</identifier><language>eng</language><publisher>Hoboken: Wiley Periodicals, Inc</publisher><subject>Animal, plant and microbial ecology ; Applied ecology ; Biological and medical sciences ; Biomonitoring ; Ceriodaphnia dubia ; Ecotoxicology, biological effects of pollution ; Fresh water environment ; Fundamental and applied biological sciences. Psychology ; Instream response ; Lab-to-field correspondence ; Pimephales promelas ; Whole effluent toxicity ; whole effluent toxicity test</subject><ispartof>Environmental toxicology and chemistry, 2000-01, Vol.19 (1), p.14-24</ispartof><rights>Copyright © 2000 SETAC</rights><rights>2000 INIST-CNRS</rights><lds50>peer_reviewed</lds50><oa>free_for_read</oa><woscitedreferencessubscribed>false</woscitedreferencessubscribed><citedby>FETCH-LOGICAL-c4873-8feaff48beec5eff4b96b564485557cdea0264046d77480b8e150aa6d2b5cce3</citedby><cites>FETCH-LOGICAL-c4873-8feaff48beec5eff4b96b564485557cdea0264046d77480b8e150aa6d2b5cce3</cites></display><links><openurl>$$Topenurl_article</openurl><openurlfulltext>$$Topenurlfull_article</openurlfulltext><thumbnail>$$Tsyndetics_thumb_exl</thumbnail><link.rule.ids>314,780,784,4024,27923,27924,27925</link.rule.ids><backlink>$$Uhttp://pascal-francis.inist.fr/vibad/index.php?action=getRecordDetail&idt=1272680$$DView record in Pascal Francis$$Hfree_for_read</backlink></links><search><creatorcontrib>La Point, Thomas W.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Waller, William T.</creatorcontrib><title>Field assessments in conjunction with whole effluent toxicity testing</title><title>Environmental toxicology and chemistry</title><addtitle>Environmental Toxicology and Chemistry</addtitle><description>Whole effluent toxicity (WET) tests are widely used to assess potential effects of wastewater discharges on aquatic life. This paper represents a summary of chapters in a 1996 Society of Environmental Toxicology and Chemistry–sponsored workshop and a literature review concerning linkages between WET testing and associated field biomonitoring. Most published studies thus far focus primarily on benthic macroinvertebrates and on effluent‐dominated stream systems in which effluents demonstrate little or no significant acute toxicity. Fewer studies examine WET test predictability in other aquatic ecosystems (e.g., wetlands, estuaries, large rivers) or deal with instream biota such as fish and primary producers. Published results indicate that standards for the usual WET freshwater test species, Ceriodaphnia dubia and Pimephales promelas, may not always protect most of the species inhabiting a receiving stream. Although WET tests are useful in predicting aquatic individual responses, they are not meant to directly measure natural population or community responses. Further, they do not address bioconcentration or bioaccumulation of hydrophobic compounds; do not assess eutrophication effects in receiving systems; and lastly, do not reflect genotoxic effects or function to test for endocrine‐disrupting chemicals. Consequently, a more direct evaluation of ecosystem health, using bioassessment techniques, may be needed to properly evaluate aquatic systems affected by wastewater discharges.</description><subject>Animal, plant and microbial ecology</subject><subject>Applied ecology</subject><subject>Biological and medical sciences</subject><subject>Biomonitoring</subject><subject>Ceriodaphnia dubia</subject><subject>Ecotoxicology, biological effects of pollution</subject><subject>Fresh water environment</subject><subject>Fundamental and applied biological sciences. Psychology</subject><subject>Instream response</subject><subject>Lab-to-field correspondence</subject><subject>Pimephales promelas</subject><subject>Whole effluent toxicity</subject><subject>whole effluent toxicity test</subject><issn>0730-7268</issn><issn>1552-8618</issn><fulltext>true</fulltext><rsrctype>article</rsrctype><creationdate>2000</creationdate><recordtype>article</recordtype><recordid>eNqNkTtPwzAUhS0EEqWwMmdAbCnXjl8ZoeIllYegEqPluDfgkiYldlX67wkqomIq012-8x3pXEKOKQwoADvD6AZCMqA5UMh2SI8KwVItqd4lPVAZpIpJvU8OQpgCUJnneY9cXnmsJokNAUOYYR1D4uvENfV0UbvomzpZ-viWLN-aChMsy2rRMUlsPr3zcZVEDNHXr4dkr7RVwKOf2yfjq8vx8CYdPVzfDs9HqeNaZaku0ZYl1wWiE52MF7kshORcCyGUm6AFJjlwOVGKayg0UgHWygkrhHOY9cnpWjtvm49FV21mPjisKltjswiGKkUFzcQ_QAEg82w7yAWTTLMOHKxB1zYhtFiaeetntl0ZCuZ7ftPNbzbzd4GTH7MNzlZla2vnwybFvp8BHZavsaWvcLVFajryT0W6zvoQ8fM3a9t3I1WmhHm5vzbweDcc6ecL85R9AaEOpYY</recordid><startdate>200001</startdate><enddate>200001</enddate><creator>La Point, Thomas W.</creator><creator>Waller, William T.</creator><general>Wiley Periodicals, Inc</general><general>SETAC</general><scope>BSCLL</scope><scope>IQODW</scope><scope>AAYXX</scope><scope>CITATION</scope><scope>7ST</scope><scope>C1K</scope><scope>SOI</scope><scope>7TV</scope><scope>7U7</scope><scope>7UA</scope><scope>F1W</scope><scope>H97</scope><scope>L.G</scope><scope>7QH</scope></search><sort><creationdate>200001</creationdate><title>Field assessments in conjunction with whole effluent toxicity testing</title><author>La Point, Thomas W. ; Waller, William T.</author></sort><facets><frbrtype>5</frbrtype><frbrgroupid>cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c4873-8feaff48beec5eff4b96b564485557cdea0264046d77480b8e150aa6d2b5cce3</frbrgroupid><rsrctype>articles</rsrctype><prefilter>articles</prefilter><language>eng</language><creationdate>2000</creationdate><topic>Animal, plant and microbial ecology</topic><topic>Applied ecology</topic><topic>Biological and medical sciences</topic><topic>Biomonitoring</topic><topic>Ceriodaphnia dubia</topic><topic>Ecotoxicology, biological effects of pollution</topic><topic>Fresh water environment</topic><topic>Fundamental and applied biological sciences. Psychology</topic><topic>Instream response</topic><topic>Lab-to-field correspondence</topic><topic>Pimephales promelas</topic><topic>Whole effluent toxicity</topic><topic>whole effluent toxicity test</topic><toplevel>peer_reviewed</toplevel><toplevel>online_resources</toplevel><creatorcontrib>La Point, Thomas W.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Waller, William T.</creatorcontrib><collection>Istex</collection><collection>Pascal-Francis</collection><collection>CrossRef</collection><collection>Environment Abstracts</collection><collection>Environmental Sciences and Pollution Management</collection><collection>Environment Abstracts</collection><collection>Pollution Abstracts</collection><collection>Toxicology Abstracts</collection><collection>Water Resources Abstracts</collection><collection>ASFA: Aquatic Sciences and Fisheries Abstracts</collection><collection>Aquatic Science & Fisheries Abstracts (ASFA) 3: Aquatic Pollution & Environmental Quality</collection><collection>Aquatic Science & Fisheries Abstracts (ASFA) Professional</collection><collection>Aqualine</collection><jtitle>Environmental toxicology and chemistry</jtitle></facets><delivery><delcategory>Remote Search Resource</delcategory><fulltext>fulltext</fulltext></delivery><addata><au>La Point, Thomas W.</au><au>Waller, William T.</au><format>journal</format><genre>article</genre><ristype>JOUR</ristype><atitle>Field assessments in conjunction with whole effluent toxicity testing</atitle><jtitle>Environmental toxicology and chemistry</jtitle><addtitle>Environmental Toxicology and Chemistry</addtitle><date>2000-01</date><risdate>2000</risdate><volume>19</volume><issue>1</issue><spage>14</spage><epage>24</epage><pages>14-24</pages><issn>0730-7268</issn><eissn>1552-8618</eissn><coden>ETOCDK</coden><abstract>Whole effluent toxicity (WET) tests are widely used to assess potential effects of wastewater discharges on aquatic life. This paper represents a summary of chapters in a 1996 Society of Environmental Toxicology and Chemistry–sponsored workshop and a literature review concerning linkages between WET testing and associated field biomonitoring. Most published studies thus far focus primarily on benthic macroinvertebrates and on effluent‐dominated stream systems in which effluents demonstrate little or no significant acute toxicity. Fewer studies examine WET test predictability in other aquatic ecosystems (e.g., wetlands, estuaries, large rivers) or deal with instream biota such as fish and primary producers. Published results indicate that standards for the usual WET freshwater test species, Ceriodaphnia dubia and Pimephales promelas, may not always protect most of the species inhabiting a receiving stream. Although WET tests are useful in predicting aquatic individual responses, they are not meant to directly measure natural population or community responses. Further, they do not address bioconcentration or bioaccumulation of hydrophobic compounds; do not assess eutrophication effects in receiving systems; and lastly, do not reflect genotoxic effects or function to test for endocrine‐disrupting chemicals. Consequently, a more direct evaluation of ecosystem health, using bioassessment techniques, may be needed to properly evaluate aquatic systems affected by wastewater discharges.</abstract><cop>Hoboken</cop><pub>Wiley Periodicals, Inc</pub><doi>10.1002/etc.5620190103</doi><tpages>11</tpages><oa>free_for_read</oa></addata></record> |
fulltext | fulltext |
identifier | ISSN: 0730-7268 |
ispartof | Environmental toxicology and chemistry, 2000-01, Vol.19 (1), p.14-24 |
issn | 0730-7268 1552-8618 |
language | eng |
recordid | cdi_proquest_miscellaneous_17715135 |
source | Wiley |
subjects | Animal, plant and microbial ecology Applied ecology Biological and medical sciences Biomonitoring Ceriodaphnia dubia Ecotoxicology, biological effects of pollution Fresh water environment Fundamental and applied biological sciences. Psychology Instream response Lab-to-field correspondence Pimephales promelas Whole effluent toxicity whole effluent toxicity test |
title | Field assessments in conjunction with whole effluent toxicity testing |
url | http://sfxeu10.hosted.exlibrisgroup.com/loughborough?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&ctx_tim=2025-01-03T20%3A51%3A00IST&url_ver=Z39.88-2004&url_ctx_fmt=infofi/fmt:kev:mtx:ctx&rfr_id=info:sid/primo.exlibrisgroup.com:primo3-Article-proquest_cross&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.atitle=Field%20assessments%20in%20conjunction%20with%20whole%20effluent%20toxicity%20testing&rft.jtitle=Environmental%20toxicology%20and%20chemistry&rft.au=La%20Point,%20Thomas%20W.&rft.date=2000-01&rft.volume=19&rft.issue=1&rft.spage=14&rft.epage=24&rft.pages=14-24&rft.issn=0730-7268&rft.eissn=1552-8618&rft.coden=ETOCDK&rft_id=info:doi/10.1002/etc.5620190103&rft_dat=%3Cproquest_cross%3E14526282%3C/proquest_cross%3E%3Cgrp_id%3Ecdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c4873-8feaff48beec5eff4b96b564485557cdea0264046d77480b8e150aa6d2b5cce3%3C/grp_id%3E%3Coa%3E%3C/oa%3E%3Curl%3E%3C/url%3E&rft_id=info:oai/&rft_pqid=14526282&rft_id=info:pmid/&rfr_iscdi=true |