Weight-of-Evidence Issues and Frameworks for Sediment Quality (And Other) Assessments

Weight of evidence (WOE) frameworks for integrating and interpreting multiple lines of evidence are discussed, focusing on sediment quality assessments, and introducing a series of ten papers on WOE. Approaches to WOE include individual lines of evidence (LOE) as well as combined LOE (indices, statistical summarization, logic systems, scoring systems, and best professional judgment [BPJ]). The application of WOE, based on multiple LOE, is discussed relative to the published literature. Fully implementing WOE requires consideration of six main LOE in sediment (or other assessments); these LOE generally correspond to other causality considerations including Koch's Postulates. However, the issue of sediment stability is an additional consideration, and the use of tabular decision matrices is recommended in a logic system to address LOE described by others as “analogy”, “plausibility”, or “logical and scientific sense.” Three examples of logic system WOE determinations based on the Sediment Quality Triad and using tabular decision matrices are provided. Key lessons from these examples include the: generally limited utility of sediment quality value (SQV)-based LOE; need for BPJ; importance of ecological relevance; importance of assessing background conditions; and, need for appropriately customizing study designs to suit sitespecific circumstances (rather than application of “boiler-plate” assessments). Overall, more quantitative approaches are needed that better define certainty elements of WOE in an open framework process, i.e., statistical summarization culminating in a logic system incorporating BPJ.

[1]  P M Chapman,et al.  Presentation and interpretation of Sediment Quality Triad data , 1996, Ecotoxicology.

[2]  Rebecca A. Efroymson,et al.  Ecological Risk Assessment for Contaminated Sites , 2000 .

[3]  Glenn W Suter,et al.  A methodology for inferring the causes of observed impairments in aquatic ecosystems , 2002, Environmental toxicology and chemistry.

[4]  Arnold Tukker,et al.  Peer Reviewed: Life-cycle assessment and the precautionary principle , 2002 .

[5]  R J Kavlock,et al.  Endocrine disruptors and reproductive development: a weight-of-evidence overview. , 1997, The Journal of endocrinology.

[6]  P. Chapman,et al.  Sediment quality values (SQVs) and ecological risk assessment (ERA) , 1999 .

[7]  Donald D. MacDonald,et al.  Predictions of Sediment Toxicity Using Consensus-Based Freshwater Sediment Quality Guidelines , 2001, Archives of environmental contamination and toxicology.

[8]  A. John Bailer,et al.  A Comparison of Three Weight-of-Evidence Approaches for Integrating Sediment Contamination Data within and Across Lines of Evidence , 2002 .

[9]  Charles Sheppard,et al.  How Large should my Sample be? Some Quick Guides to Sample Size and the Power of Tests , 1999 .

[10]  Douglas H. Johnson.  The Insignificance of Statistical Significance Testing , 1999 .

[11]  D. Mitchell,et al.  Special report of the Massachusetts weight‐of‐evidence workgroup A weight‐of‐evidence approach for evaluating ecological risks , 1996 .

[12]  Charles A. Staples,et al.  A Weight of Evidence Approach to the Aquatic Hazard Assessment of Bisphenoi A , 2002 .

[13]  Simon F. Thrush,et al.  Determining effects of suspended sediment on condition of a suspension feeding bivalve (Atrina zelandica): results of a survey, a laboratory experiment and a field transplant experiment , 2002 .

[14]  J. Giddings,et al.  The Need for Multiple Lines of Evidence for Predicting Site-Specific Ecological Effects , 2000 .

[15]  Linda A. Deegan,et al.  Regional application of an index of estuarine biotic integrity based on fish communities , 2002 .

[16]  T. Reynoldson,et al.  Identifying cause in sediment assessments: Bioavailability and the Sediment Quality Triad , 2001 .

[17]  Manon Bombardier,et al.  The SED‐TOX index: Toxicity‐directed management tool to assess and rank sediments based on their hazard—concept and application , 1999 .

[18]  D. Persaud,et al.  Guidelines for the protection and management of aquatic sediment quality in Ontario , 1993 .

[19]  B. Preston.  Hazard prioritization in ecological risk assessment through spatial analysis of toxicant gradients. , 2002, Environmental pollution.

[20]  Wellesley Site,et al.  What is an Ecological Risk Assessment ? , 2004 .

[21]  Donald S. Cherry,et al.  Laboratory to field validation in an integrative assessment of an acid mine drainage–impacted watershed , 2000 .

[22]  G. Allen Burton,et al.  Weight-of-Evidence Approaches for Assessing Ecosystem Impairment , 2002 .

[23]  Robert C. Bailey,et al.  Biological guidelines for freshwater sediment based on BEnthic Assessment of SedimenT (the BEAST) using a multivariate approach for predicting biological state , 1995 .

[24]  Christian Blaise,et al.  Comparative Study of the Sediment-Toxicity Index, Benthic Community Metrics and Contaminant Concentrations , 2000 .

[25]  Kenneth Finkelstein,et al.  Weighing the evidence of ecological risk from chemical contamination in the estuarine environment adjacent to the Portsmouth Naval Shipyard, Kittery, Maine, USA , 2002, Environmental toxicology and chemistry.

[26]  Valery E. Forbes,et al.  Applying Weight-of-Evidence in Retrospective Ecological Risk Assessment When Quantitative Data Are Limited , 2002 .

[27]  Peter M. Chapmen.  EXTRAPOLATING LABORATORY TOXICITY RESULTS TO THE FIELD , 1995 .

[28]  G J Annas.  Burden of proof: judging science and protecting public health in (and out of) the courtroom. , 1999, American journal of public health.

[29]  Fred D. Calder,et al.  Development and evaluation of sediment quality guidelines for Florida coastal waters , 1996, Ecotoxicology.

[30]  Peter M. Chapman,et al.  The sediment quality triad approach to determining pollution-induced degradation , 1990 .

[31]  T. S. Schmidt,et al.  Modification of an ecotoxicological rating to bioassess small acid mine drainage‐impacted watersheds exclusive of benthic macroinvertebrate analysis , 2002, Environmental toxicology and chemistry.

[32]  S. Cohen,et al.  Alternative Models for Carcinogenicity Testing: Weight of Evidence Evaluations Across Models , 2001, Toxicologic pathology.

[33]  A. John Bailer,et al.  A Pooled Response Strategy for Combining Multiple Lines of Evidence to Quantitatively Estimate Impact , 2002 .

[34]  Mike T. Furse,et al.  The development of the BEAST: a predictive approach for assessing sediment quality in the North American Great Lakes. , 2000 .

[35]  Trefor B. Reynoldson,et al.  Integrating Multiple Toxicological Endpoints in a Decision-Making Framework for Contaminated Sediments , 2002 .

[36]  Gary Johnson,et al.  A Decision Making Framework for Sediment Assessment Developed for the Great Lakes , 2002 .

[37]  W. Clements,et al.  Integrated laboratory and field approach for assessing impacts of heavy metals at the Arkansas River, Colorado , 1994 .

[38]  Donald D. MacDonald,et al.  Predicting toxicity in marine sediments with numerical sediment quality guidelines , 1998 .

[39]  Peter J Mumby,et al.  Statistical power of non-parametric tests: a quick guide for designing sampling strategies. , 2002, Marine pollution bulletin.

[40]  Scott Painter,et al.  Initial Development and Evaluation of a Sediment Quality Index for the Great Lakes Region , 2002 .

[41]  G A Fox,et al.  Practical causal inference for ecoepidemiologists. , 1991, Journal of toxicology and environmental health.

[42]  Wayne G. Landis,et al.  A Regional Multiple Stressor Risk Assessment of the Codorus Creek Watershed Applying the Relative Risk Model , 2002 .

[43]  Valery E. Forbes,et al.  Uncertainties in Sediment Quality Weight-of-Evidence (WOE) Assessments , 2002 .

[44]  Peter M. Chapman,et al.  A Sediment Quality Triad: Measures of sediment contamination, toxicity and infaunal community composition in Puget Sound , 1985 .

[45]  Glenn W Suter,et al.  Determining the causes of impairments in the Little Scioto River, Ohio, USA: part 2. Characterization of causes. , 2002, Environmental toxicology and chemistry.

[46]  R J Mauthe,et al.  Response to “Alternative Models for Carcinogenicity Testing: Weight of Evidence Across Models” Sam Cohen, Toxicologic Pathology (2001) 29(Suppl.): 183—190 , 2002, Toxicologic pathology.

[47]  Valery E. Forbes,et al.  A Weight-of-Evidence Framework for Assessing Sediment (Or Other) Contamination: Improving Certainty in the Decision-Making Process , 2002 .

[48]  Arnold Tukker.  Life-cycle assessment and the precautionary principle. , 2002, Environmental science & technology.

[49]  Joseph M. Culp,et al.  A weight‐of‐evidence approach for Northern river risk assessment: Integrating the effects of multiple stressors , 2000 .

[50]  Glenn W Suter,et al.  Determining probable causes of ecological impairment in the Little Scioto River, Ohio, USA: Part 1. Listing candidate causes and analyzing evidence , 2002, Environmental toxicology and chemistry.

[51]  Christopher J. Schmitt,et al.  Hazard Ranking of Contaminated Sediments Based on Chemical Analysis, Laboratory Toxicity Tests, and Benthic Community Composition: Prioritizing Sites for Remedial Action , 1996 .

[52]  Peter M. Chapman,et al.  THE SEDIMENT QUALITY TRIAD: THEN, NOW AND TOMORROW , 2000 .

[53]  Joseph M. Culp,et al.  Integrating mesocosm experiments with field and laboratory studies to generate weight‐of‐evidence risk assessments for large rivers , 2000 .

[54]  J. Kevin Summers,et al.  A benthic index of environmental condition of Gulf of Mexico estuaries , 1994 .

[55]  A A Koelmans,et al.  Evaluation of bioassays versus contaminant concentrations in explaining the macroinvertebrate community structure in the Rhine‐Meuse delta, The Netherlands , 2001, Environmental toxicology and chemistry.

[56]  G. Annas,et al.  Scientific evidence in the courtroom. The death of the Frye rule. , 1994, The New England journal of medicine.

[57]  D. Cherry,et al.  An integrative assessment of a watershed impacted by abandoned mined land discharges. , 2001, Environmental pollution.