the advantage <strong>of</strong> exposing organisms in a more stream-like manner, but they aresignificantly more labor intensive and are also more expensive than the other twotest types.Toxicity Test Duration - Acute or ChronicSediment toxicity is generally assessed in the laboratory using acute or chronic studies.Acute sediment studies take ten days (though screening assays may be shorter), and aredesigned to determine whether the sediment sample in question will kill the exposedorganisms or impact their growth. Chronic studies are longer, usually 20 days or more(some exceeding 50 days), and are designed to determine sublethal effects on growth,emergence and reproduction. While observed lethality is a direct indication that thesample in question is toxic, sublethal effects can be important for the assessment <strong>of</strong> longtermpopulation health. In ecological risk assessments, chronic toxicity tests aregenerally considered to be the preferred alternative. The NJDEP and USEPA Region 2BTAG have routinely recommended the use <strong>of</strong> ASTM E1706 - 05(2010) Standard TestMethod for Measuring the Toxicity <strong>of</strong> Sediment-Associated Contaminants withFreshwater Invertebrates. The previous version <strong>of</strong> this standard (Test Method E1706-95b) described 10-day toxicity tests with the amphipod Hyalella azteca and midgeChironomus. This version <strong>of</strong> the standard now outlines approaches for evaluatingsublethal endpoints in longer-term sediment exposures with these two species (Annex A6and Annex A7).However, in highly urbanized settings where there are numerous sources effecting a site,the longer-term sublethal studies are not always appropriate for environmental sedimentsamples because the short term toxicity tests are adequate to measure potential impactsassociated with the site. Sensitive sublethal tests are good for testing chemicals andwastewater solutions that can be diluted to different concentrations (e.g., 100%, 50%,25%, 12.5% and 6.25%) at which a dose response becomes apparent. If a responseunrelated to dose is observed (e.g., effect at 25%, but not at 100%), the test is suspect.When testing sediment samples, they are not diluted and are tested as 100 percent versusa laboratory control or reference area sample. If there is a sublethal effect, investigatorsmay not be able to tell whether it is related to the sample or to the inherent variability <strong>of</strong>the biological system being tested.Variability is expected even in the laboratory's Standard Reference Toxicant (SRT)studies. Labs perform regular SRT tests to assess the health <strong>of</strong> each batch <strong>of</strong> testorganisms and the procedures used by the technicians setting up the tests. The SRTstudies are typically short-term (96 hours or shorter), water-only tests that use a commonreagent-grade salt (e.g., KCl). The USEPA (2000a) states that even though the final SRTresult is allowed to fall within two standard deviations <strong>of</strong> the laboratory's historical mean,the laboratory is expected to have up to 10 percent <strong>of</strong> SRT tests fall outside <strong>of</strong> that range.It is not until the lab has more than 10 percent SRT failures that a problem is noted.Because USEPA expects so much variability in a short-term test with lab water andreagent salts, it is within reason to expect that long-term, sublethal effects from complexmixtures like site sediment will yield substantially more variability.<strong>Ecological</strong> <strong>Evaluation</strong> <strong>Technical</strong> <strong>Guidance</strong> Document 111Version 1.2 8/29/12
Toxicity Test DesignSediment toxicity studies are conducted by exposing a predetermined number <strong>of</strong>organisms (e.g., eight replicates <strong>of</strong> ten organisms) to a sediment sample. Benthicorganisms are placed in beakers containing a layer <strong>of</strong> the sediment sample covered withclean laboratory water, and in test chambers containing clean laboratory sediment toserve as an experimental control. Investigators make direct observations <strong>of</strong> the exposedtest setup at regular intervals for the duration <strong>of</strong> the test to determine responses such aserratic behavior and visible mortality. However, sediment organisms quickly burythemselves in the test sediment and are not seen again until test termination when theyare removed for final enumeration.A second “reference” control should also be included in each study, using sediment fromoutside the influence <strong>of</strong> the site (e.g., upstream). Use <strong>of</strong> an appropriate reference areasediment is more representative <strong>of</strong> the actual background area stream conditions. While asite sediment may show a significant effect as compared to the laboratory control, it maynot show a significant effect when compared to the reference area.To perform statistical analyses to determine whether significant differences exist betweenthe site-related samples and laboratory controls or reference area samples, toxicity studiesshould be set up with multiple replicates. As a general rule, more replicates mean greaterstatistical power and more confidence in the final results. Acute sediment studies aretypically performed with eight replicates <strong>of</strong> ten organisms for each test sample, whichensures sufficient statistical power for the more sensitive sublethal growth endpoint.Toxicity Test EndpointsFor acute sediment toxicity studies, the endpoints include survival and growth. Survivalis assessed as a percentage <strong>of</strong> the number <strong>of</strong> organisms exposed at test initiation. Growth<strong>of</strong> amphipods, both freshwater and saltwater, is assessed as the dry weight <strong>of</strong> thesurviving organisms.Growth <strong>of</strong> midges is assessed as the ash-free dry weight (AFDW) <strong>of</strong> the survivingorganisms. Sediment grain size influences the amount <strong>of</strong> sediment that C. dilutus larvaeingest, and as a result, larvae exposed to finer-grained sediment will have more sedimentin their guts. Because most sediment sites have varying grain size distributions,significant bias can be added to the C. dilutus growth results. By measuring the dryweight <strong>of</strong> the surviving organisms at test termination, then ashing them to burn <strong>of</strong>f anyorganic material, the weight <strong>of</strong> the sediment grains can be subtracted from the total dryweight to yield AFDW, which is the more appropriate endpoint.Data <strong>Evaluation</strong>All statistical analyses are to be performed as specified in the USEPA and ASTMguidance documents. Data from site samples should be compared to the laboratorycontrols to determine whether observed toxic effects are statistically significant. Inaddition to the laboratory control, an appropriately selected field reference area sedimentmay yield results that are more representative <strong>of</strong> actual background area field conditions.If the upstream reference area sample shows toxic effects, it is possible that at least aportion <strong>of</strong> any toxic effect observed from the downstream sample is not related to the site.<strong>Ecological</strong> <strong>Evaluation</strong> <strong>Technical</strong> <strong>Guidance</strong> Document 112Version 1.2 8/29/12
- Page 1 and 2:
Ecological EvaluationTechnical Guid
- Page 3 and 4:
6.2.1.3 Biological Sampling of Fish
- Page 5 and 6:
Acronyms and AbbreviationsADDAETAFA
- Page 7 and 8:
Executive SummaryThis document prov
- Page 9 and 10:
environmentally sensitive areas pur
- Page 11 and 12:
Figure 3-1: Flow diagram to describ
- Page 13 and 14:
assessment may also include evaluat
- Page 15 and 16:
“Hazard quotient” or “HQ” m
- Page 17 and 18:
“Site investigation” means the
- Page 19 and 20:
parameters as specified in ERAGS (i
- Page 21 and 22:
document otherwise). The investigat
- Page 23 and 24:
5.3.2.1 Potential Contaminant Migra
- Page 25 and 26:
71 0Sampling pointsSampling transec
- Page 27 and 28:
5.3.4 Background ConsiderationsIt i
- Page 29 and 30:
III. GroundwaterAnalytical data fro
- Page 31 and 32:
5.5 Ecological Evaluation ReportThe
- Page 33 and 34:
Step 1 - Preliminary Screening Leve
- Page 35 and 36:
specific measurements of receptor h
- Page 37 and 38:
Figure 6-2: Ecological Conceptual S
- Page 39 and 40:
ingested, air inhaled, or material
- Page 41 and 42:
Fugacity, which is described as the
- Page 43 and 44:
environment. As noted in ERAGS, the
- Page 45 and 46:
Sample SelectionAfter completing th
- Page 47 and 48:
While there are many laboratories t
- Page 49 and 50:
ioavailability, and by doing so, of
- Page 51 and 52:
For the purposes of surface water,
- Page 53 and 54:
higher trophic level receptors. Lip
- Page 55 and 56:
Details regarding surface water tox
- Page 57 and 58:
e present at intervals greater than
- Page 59 and 60:
elatively sedentary organisms that
- Page 61 and 62: COPECs. The following references ar
- Page 63 and 64: tests (USEPA, 2002e). After collect
- Page 65 and 66: multiple reference area soils repre
- Page 67 and 68: In ERAs, tissue residue analyses ar
- Page 69 and 70: Objectives of the ERA: including a
- Page 71 and 72: evaluation might necessitate the co
- Page 73 and 74: N.J.A.C. 7:26E-4.8(c)1. The ERA may
- Page 75 and 76: sediment (i.e., that fraction that
- Page 77 and 78: Twelve dioxin-like PCB congeners ha
- Page 79 and 80: indicates burial of potential dioxi
- Page 81 and 82: of evidence for evaluating risk unt
- Page 83 and 84: 7.2.1 Apparent Effects Threshold Ap
- Page 85 and 86: when site conditions are most simil
- Page 87 and 88: destroying 10 acres of the mature f
- Page 89 and 90: ASTM (American Society for Testing
- Page 91 and 92: Establishing Sediment Quality Crite
- Page 93 and 94: N.J.A.C. (New Jersey Administrative
- Page 95 and 96: USEPA. 1989c. Risk Assessment Guida
- Page 97 and 98: http://www.epa.gov/owow/oceans/regu
- Page 99 and 100: USEPA 2006a. Data Quality Assessmen
- Page 101 and 102: Appendix A - Habitat Survey FormsEc
- Page 103 and 104: Ecological Evaluation Technical Gui
- Page 105 and 106: Appendix B - Sampling Procedures fo
- Page 107 and 108: Appendix C - Surface Water Toxicity
- Page 109 and 110: Short-term chronic studies, endpoin
- Page 111: Appendix D - Sediment Toxicity Test
- Page 115 and 116: Appendix E - Sediment Pore Water an
- Page 117 and 118: The seven-day daphnid survival and
- Page 119 and 120: esults are then evaluated using USE
- Page 121 and 122: Surber or Square-foot BottomThis sa
- Page 123 and 124: Appendix H - Soil Toxicity TestingS
- Page 125 and 126: another sample may still have a sub
- Page 127 and 128: conservative approach from an ecolo
- Page 129: Data PresentationTabular presentati