Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Development of species sensitivity distributions and estimation of HC5 of organochlorine pesticides with five statistical approaches

  • Published:
Ecotoxicology Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Eighteen organochlorine pesticides (OCPs) were studied to develop species sensitivity distributions (SSDs) and calculate hazardous concentration thresholds for 5% of species (HC5), using both parametric (log-normal and log-logistic) and nonparametric bootstrap methods. In order to avoid picking repetitive values in each resample when performing bootstrap, and to determine the influence of fluctuation of toxicity data of single species on the SSDs and HC5, a modified bootstrap method was introduced, which can generate unrepetitive sampling data other than original elements in datasets. This method can enlarge a dataset without any assumption of a special distribution. Combined with parametric methods, modified bootstrap was also used to develop SSDs and determine HC5. The HC5 estimated by five approaches coincide well with each other with good positive correlation. Even if there is intra-species variation in a certain range of toxicity data; SSDs and HC5 are not very sensitive to the local fluctuation of toxicity of single species. The studied OCPs were classified according to their estimated HC5. A lower HC5 indicates higher ecological toxicity potentials. Endrin, DDTs and Endosulfan are OCPs with very high ecological toxicity potential. α-HCH has the lowest ecological toxicity potential in the studied OCPs. For OCPs with high ecological potential, more attention should be paid to their ecological risk.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3
Fig. 4
Fig. 5

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • Chen CS (2005) Ecological risk assessment for aquatic species exposed to contaminants in Keelung River, Taiwan. Chemosphere 61:1142–1158

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Duboudin C, Ciffroy P, Magaud H (2004) Acute-to-chronic species sensitivity distribution extrapolation. Environ Toxicol Chem 23(7):1774–1785

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • González-Doncel M, Ortiz J, Izquierdo JJ, Martín B, Sánchez P, Tarazona JV (2006) Statistical evaluation of chronic toxicity data on aquatic organisms for the hazard identification: the chemicals toxicity distribution approach. Chemosphere 63:835–844

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Grist EPM, Leung KMY, Wheeler JR, Crane M (2002) Better bootstrap estimation of hazardous concentration thresholds for aquatic assemblages. Environ Toxicol Chem 21(7):1515–1524

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Grist EPM, O’Hagan A, Crane M, Sorokin N, Sims I, Whitehouse P (2006) Bayesian and time-independent species sensitivity distributions for risk assessment of chemicals. Environ Sci Technol 40(1):395–401

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Hoeven NVD (2001) Estimating the 5-percentile of the species sensitivity distributions without any assumptions about the distribution. Ecotoxicology 10:25–34

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Jagoe RH, Newman MC (1997) Bootstrap estimation of community NOEC values. Ecotoxicology 6:293–306

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Jones KC, Voogt PD (1999) Persistent organic pollutants (POPs): state of the science. Environ Pollut 100:209–221

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Kenaga EE (1982) Predictability of chronic toxicity of chemicals in fish and aquatic invertebrates. Environ Toxicol Chem 1:347–358

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Li YF, Cai DJ, Singh A (1999) Historical DDT use trend in China and usage data gridding with 1/4° by 1/6° longitude/latitude resolution. Adv Environ Res 2:497–506

    Google Scholar 

  • Li YF, Cai DJ, Shan ZJ, Zhu ZL (2001) Gridded usage inventories of technical hexachlorocyclohexane and lindane for China with 1/6° latitude by 1/4° longitude resolution. Arch Environ Contam Toxicol 41:261–266

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Newman MC, Ownby DR, Mézin LCA, Powell DC, Christensen TRL, Lerberg SB, Anderson BA (2000) Applying species sensitivity distributions in ecological risk assessment: assumptions of distribution type and sufficient number of species. Environ Toxicol Chem 19:508–515

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • OSPAR (2005) Cut-off values for the selection criteria of the OSPAR dynamic selection and prioritisation mechanism for hazardous substances. OSPAR 05/21/1-E, Annex 7

  • Pennington DW (2003) Extrapolating ecotoxicological measures from small data sets. Ecotoxicol Environ Saf 56:238–250

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Qiu XH, Zhu T, Yao B, Hu JX, Hu SW (2005) Contribution of dicofol to the current DDT pollution in China. Environ Sci Technol 39:4385–4390

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Roex EWM, van Gestel CAM, van Wezel AP, van Straalen NM (2000) Ratios between acute aquatic toxicity and effects on population growth rates in relation to toxicant mode of action. Environ Toxicol Chem 19(3):685–693

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Shao QX (2000) Estimation for hazardous concentrations based on NOEC toxicity data: an alternative approach. Environmetrics 11(5):583–595

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Sijm D, Hulzebos E, Peijnenburg W (1999) Estimating the PTB-profile. RIVM report 601503 016

  • UNEP-Chemicals (2004) Stockholm convention on persistent organic pollutants, United Nation Environment Programme. Available from: http://www.pops.int/. Accessed on 15/10/2007

  • USEPA (1998) Guidelines for ecological risk assessment. EPA/630/R-95/002F

  • Wang XL, Tao S, Dawson RW, Xu FL (2002) Characterizing and comparing risks of polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons in a Tianjin wastewater irrigated area. Environ Res 90:201–206

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Wang B, Yu G, Yu YJ, Zhamg ZL, Hu HY, Wang LS (2006) Aquatic ecological risk assessment of OCPs in Huaihe River, Jiangsu section. Chin J Geochem 25(suppl.):157

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wheeler JR, Grist EPM, Leung KMY, Morritt D, Crane M (2002) Species sensitivity distributions: data and model choice. Mar Pollut Bull 45:192–202

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Wiandt S, Poremski HJ (2002) Selection and prioritisation procedure of hazardous substances for the marine environment within OSPAR/DYNAMEC. Ecotoxicology 11:393–399

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Yu G, Niu JF, Huang J (2005) Persistent organic pollutants—new global environmental problem (in Chinese). Science Press, Beijing

    Google Scholar 

  • Zolezzi M, Cattaneo C, Tarazona JV (2005) Probabilistic ecological risk assessment of 1,2,4-trichlorobenzene at a former industrial contaminated site. Environ Sci Technol 39:2920–2926

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgement

This research was supported by the National Basic Research Program (973) of China (Grant No. 2003CB415007).

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Environmental Science and Engineering, POPs Research Centre, Tsinghua University, Beijing, 100084, China

    Bin Wang, Gang Yu, Jun Huang & Hongying Hu

Authors
  1. Bin Wang
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Gang Yu
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Jun Huang
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Hongying Hu
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Gang Yu.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Wang, B., Yu, G., Huang, J. et al. Development of species sensitivity distributions and estimation of HC5 of organochlorine pesticides with five statistical approaches. Ecotoxicology 17, 716–724 (2008). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10646-008-0220-2

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10646-008-0220-2

Keywords

Search

Navigation