Journal of Soils and Sediments

, Volume 2, Issue 1, pp 37–42 | Cite as

A guidance for the assessment and evaluation of sediment quality a German Approach based on ecotoxicological and chemical measurements

  • Wolfgang AhlfEmail author
  • Henner Hollert
  • Helga Neumann-Hensel
  • Mathias Ricking
Strategies: Sediment Quality


The recommendations presented in this paper use an integrated hierarchical approach combining toxicological, chemical and ecological information to assess and evaluate the quality of sediments. For this reason, biological methods, in combination with the tools of chemical analysis, are given priority when examining the quality of the sediment to establish adverse effects. The trigger is the biotest, instead of chemical methods commonly used. The individual methods are presented for a German approach and can be adopted to other countries by applying ISO, OECD methods. Support is provided on how to best integrate data generated using different assessment tools. Keywords: Bioassays; biological and chemical analysis; ecotoxicology; integrated assessment; sediment assessment; sediment quality; stepwise strategy


Sediment Quality Sediment Toxicity Test Risk Management Decision Semipermeable Membrane Device Rainbow Trout Hepatocyte 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.


Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.


  1. Ahlf W, Braunbeck T, Heise S, Hollert H (2002): Sediment and Soil Quality Criteria. In: Burdon F (ed) Environmental Monitoring Handbook. McGraw, in pressGoogle Scholar
  2. Ahlf W, Förstner U (2001): Managing Contaminated sediments, Part I: Improving chemical and biological criteria. Journal of Soils and Sediments1, 30–36CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Ahlf W, Gratzer H (1999): Erarbeitung von Kriterien zur Ableitung von Qualitätszielen für Sedimente und Schwebstoffe. UBA-Texte, 44/99 171Google Scholar
  4. Anderson BS, Hunt JW, Phillips BM, Fairey R, Roberts CA, Oakden JM, Puckett HM, Stephenson M, Tjeerdema RS, Long ER, Wilson CJ, Lyons JM (2001): Sediment quality in Los Angeles Harbor, USA: A triad assessment. Environmental Toxicology and Chemistry20, 359–370CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. ASTM (1994): American Society for Testing and Materials: ASTM/ E 1383-94—Standard guide for conducting sediment toxicity tests with freshwater invertebratesGoogle Scholar
  6. ATV (1997): ATV-Regelwerk Abwasser-Abfall Merkblatt ATV-M362, Teil 1: Umgang mit Baggergut; Bad HonnefGoogle Scholar
  7. Berbner T, Rahman N, Braunbeck T (1999): Induction of P450 1A and DNA damage in isolated rainbow trout (Oncorhynchus mykiss) hepatocytes by 2,3,7,8-tetrachlorodibenzo-p-dioxin. Biomarkers4, 214–228CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Boese BL, Ozretich RJ, Lamberson JO, Cole FA, Swartz RC, Ferraro SP (2000): Phototoxic evaluation of marine sediments collected from a PAH-contaminated site. Archives of Environmental Contamination and Toxicology38, 274–282CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Burton Jr GA, (2001 ): Moving beyond sediment quality values and simple laboratory toxicity tests. SETAC Globe2, 26–27Google Scholar
  10. Brack W, Altenburger R, Ensenbach U, Möder M, Segner H, Schüürmann G (1999): Bioassay-directed Identification of organic toxicants in river sediments in the industrial region of Bitterfeld (Germany) - A contribution to Hazard assessment. Archives of Environmental Contamination and Toxicology37, 164–174CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Chapman PM (1996): Presentation and interpretation of sediment quality triad data. Ecotoxicology5, 327–339CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Chapman PM (2000): The Sediment Quality Triad: Then, now and tomorrow. International Journal of Environment and Pollution13, 351–356CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Cleveland L, Little EE, Petty JD, Johnson BT, Lebo JA, Orazio CE, Dionne J, Crockett A (1997): Toxicological and chemical screening of Antarctica sediments: Use of whole sediment toxicity tests, Microtox, Mutatox and semipermeable membrane devices (SPMDs). Marine Pollution Bulletin34, 194–202CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Ensenbach U (1998): Embryonic development of fish—A model to assess the toxicity of sediments to vertebrates. Fresenius Environmental Bulletin7, 531–538Google Scholar
  15. Förstner U (1989): Contaminated sediments. Lecture notes in Earth Sciences 21Google Scholar
  16. Heise S, Maaß V, Gratzer H, Ahlf W (2000): Ecotoxicolgical sediment classification—Capabilities and potentials—Presented for Elbe river sediments. Mitteilungen der Bundesanstalt für Gewässerkunde22, 96–104Google Scholar
  17. Hollert H, Braunbeck T (1997): Ökotoxikologie in vitro—Gefährdungspotential in Wasser, Sediment und Schwebstoffen. Veröff.Google Scholar
  18. PAÖ 21. Landesanstalt für Umweltschutz Baden-Württemberg, Karlsruhe, 189 ppGoogle Scholar
  19. Hollert H, Braunbeck T (2001): Identifizierung und Bewertung (öko)toxikologisch belasteter Gewässer in Baden-Württemberg. Abschlussbericht an das Forschungszentrum Karlsruhe, Projekt BW-Plus (Förderkennzeichen Ö97 004), online at Scholar
  20. Hollert H, Dürr M, Erdinger L, Braunbeck T (2000): Cytotoxicity of settling paniculate matter (SPM) and sediments of the Neckar river (Germany) during a winter flood. Environmental Toxicology and Chemistry19, 528–534CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Hollert H, Dürr M, Olsman H, Halldin K, Bavel BV, Brack W, Tysklind M, Engwall M, Braunbeck T (2002a): Biological and chemical determination of dioxin-like compounds in sediments by means of a sediment triad approach in the catchment area of the Neckar River Ecotoxicology, accepted for publicationGoogle Scholar
  22. Hollert H, Heise S, Pudenz S, Brüggemann R, Ahlf W, Braunbeck T (2002b): Application of a sediment quality triad and different statistical approaches (hasse diagrams and fuzzy logic) for the comparative evaluation of small streams. Ecotoxicology, accepted for publicationGoogle Scholar
  23. Hupfer M, Steinberg C (1997): Auswirkungen von Restaurierungsverfahren auf den Phosphat-Rückhalt in Sees-Sedimenten. DGM,4, 238–245Google Scholar
  24. Ingersoll CG, Dillon T, Biddinger GR (1997): Ecological risk assessment of contaminated sediments. SETAC Special Publication Series. SETAC-Press, Pensacola, Florida, 389 ppGoogle Scholar
  25. Islinger M, Pawlowski S, Hollert H, Völkl A, Braunbeck T (1999): Measurement of vitellogenin-mRNA expression in primary cultures of rainbow trout hepatocytes in a non-radioactive dot blot/RNAse protection-assay. Science of the Total Environment15, 109–122CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Keddy CJ, Greene JC, Bonnell MA (1995) Review of Whole-Organism Bioassays: Soil, Freshwater Sediment, and Freshwater Assessment in Canada. Ecotoxicology and Environmental Safety30, 221–251CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Kwan KK, Dukta BJ (1990): Simple two-step sediment extraction procedure for the use in genotoxicity and toxicity. Toxicology Assessment5, 395–404CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Maaß V, Schmidt C, Lüschow R, Leitz T (1997): Sedimentuntersuchungen im Hamburger Hafen 1994/95. Ergebnisse aus dem Baggergutuntersuchungsprogramm, Heft 6. Stadt Hamburg, Wirtschaftsbehörde, Strom- und Hafenbau, Hamburg, 149 ppGoogle Scholar
  29. Maron DM, Ames BN (1983): Revised methods for theSalmonella mutagenicity test. Mutation Research113, 173–215Google Scholar
  30. Meyers P, Ishiwatari R (1992): Organic matter accumulation records in lake sediments. In: Lerman A., Imboden D, Gatt J (eds) Physics and chemistry of lakes. Springer, pp 279–328Google Scholar
  31. OECD (1997): OECD-Guidline 471—Bacterial reverse mutation test. DraftGoogle Scholar
  32. Peeters ETHM, DeWitte A, Koelmans AA, Van der Velden JA, den Besten PJ (2001) Evaluation of bioassays versus contaminant concentrations in explaining the macroinvertebrate community structure in the Rhine-Meuse delta, The Netherlands. Toxicology and Chemistry20, 2883–2891CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. Safe SH, Gaido K (1998): Phytoestrogens and anthropogenic estrogenic compounds. Environmental Toxicology and Chemistry17, 119–126CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. Ricking M, Pachur H-J (1999):Methodisches Konzept zur vergleichenden Messung von chlorierten Kohlenwasserstoffen in Sedimenten als Entscheidungsbasis für Sanierungsmaßnahmen; Abschlussbericht DBU AZ 06936Google Scholar
  35. Ryssen van R, Leermakers M, Baeyens W (1999): The mobilisation of trace metals in aquatic sediments as a tool for sediment quality classification. Environmental Science and Policy2, 75–86CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. Traunspurger W, Haitzer M, Hoss S, Beier S, Ahlf W, Steinberg C (1997): Ecotoxicological assessment of aquatic sediments with Caenorhabditis elegans (nematoda)—A method for testing liquid medium and whole-sediment samples. Environmental Toxicology and Chemistry16, 245–250CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. US-EPA (1996): Ecological Effects Test Guidelines, OPPTS 850440, Aquatic toxicity test using Lemna ssp. Phases I and II, Public draftGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Ecomed Publishers 2002

Authors and Affiliations

  • Wolfgang Ahlf
    • 1
    Email author
  • Henner Hollert
    • 2
  • Helga Neumann-Hensel
    • 3
  • Mathias Ricking
    • 4
  1. 1.Dept. of Environmental Science and TechnologyTechnical University Hamburg-HarburgHamburgGermany
  2. 2.Dept. of ZoologyUniversity of HeidelbergHeidelbergGermany
  3. 3.Laboratory Dr. Fintelmann & Dr. MeyerHamburgGermany
  4. 4.Dept. of Earth Sciences, Environmental Organic GeochemistryFree University of BerlinBerlinGermany

Personalised recommendations