Two-dimensional numerical and eco-toxicological modeling of chemical spills

  • Suiliang Huang
  • Yafei Jia
  • Sam S. Y. Wang
Research Article


The effects of chemical spills on aquatic nontarget organisms were evaluated in this study. Based on a review of three types of current eco-toxicological models of chemicals, i.e., ACQUATOX model of the US-EPA, Hudson River Model of PCBs, and critical body residual (CBR) model and dynamic energy budget (DEBtox) model, this paper presents an uncoupled numerical ecotoxicological model. The transport and transformation of spilled chemicals were simulated by a chemical transport model (including flow and sediment transport), and the mortalities of an organism caused by the chemicals were simulated by the extended threshold damage model, separately. Due to extreme scarcity of data, this model was applied to two hypothetical cases of chemical spills happening upstream of a lake. Theoretical analysis and simulated results indicated that this model is capable of reasonably predicting the acute effects of chemical spills on aquatic ecosystems or organism killings.


chemical spills acute effects aquatic ecosystem eco-toxicological modeling 


Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.


  1. 1.
    Barnes R S K, Mann K H. Fundamentals of Aquatic Ecology. 2nd ed. Boston: Blackwell Scientific Publications, 1991Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Rand G. M. Fundamentals of Aquatic Toxicology: Effects, Environmental Fate, and Risk Assessment. 2nd ed. Washington, DC: Taylor & Francis, 1995Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Roy K. Ecotoxicological modeling and risk assessment using chemometric tools. Molecular Diversity, 2006, 10: 93–94CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    McCarty L S, Mackay D. Enhancing ecotoxicological modeling and assessment: Body residuals and modes of toxic action. Environmental Science & Technology, 1993, 27: 1719–1728CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Park R A, Clough J S. Aquatox (Release 2): Modeling Environmental Fate and Ecological Effects in Aquatic Ecosystems. Technical Documentation for Environmental Protection Agency. 2004Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    TAMS Consultants, Inc, Limno-Tech, Inc, Menzie-Cura & Associates, Inc, and Tetra Tech, Inc. Phase report-review copy: Further site characterization and analysis. Volume 2d-Revised baseline modeling report. Hudson River PCBs Reassessment RI/FS For U.S. Environmental Protection Agency Region 2 and U. S. Army Corps of Engineers Kansas City Distrcit. 2000Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    Kooijman S A L M. Parametric analysis of mortality rates in bioassays. Water Research, 1981, 15(1): 107–119Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    Legierse K C H M, Verhaar H J M, Vaes W H J, De Bruijn J H M, Hermens J L M. Analysis of the time-dependent acute aquatic toxicity of organophosphorus pesticides: The critical target occupation model. Environmental Science & Technology, 1999, 33(6): 917–925CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Lee J H, Landrum P F, Koh C H. Prediction of time-dependent PAH toxicity in Hyalella azteca using a damage assessment model. Environmental Science & Technology, 2002, 36(14): 3131–3138CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Kooijman S A L M. Dynamic Energy Budgets in Biological Systems: Theory and Applications in Ecotoxicology. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1993Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    Jager T, Kooijman S A L M. Modeling receptor kinetics in the analysis of survival data for organophosphorus pesticides. Environmental Science & Technology, 2005, 39(21): 8307–8314CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Ashauer R, Boxall A B A, Drown C D. New ecotoxicological model to simulate survival of aquatic invertebrates after exposure to fluctuating and sequential pulses of pesticides. Environmental Science & Technology, 2007, 41(4): 1480–1486CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Lee J H, Landrum P F, Hwankoh C. Toxicokinetics and time-dependent PAH toxicity in the amphipod hyalella azteca. Environmental Science & Technology, 2002, 36(14): 3124–3130CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Huang S L, Wan Z H, Smith P. Numerical simulation of heavy metal pollutant transport-transformation in fluvial rivers. Journal of Hydraulic Research, IAHR, 2007, 45(4): 451–461CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Huang S L. Two-dimensional numerical modeling of chemical transport-transformation in fluvial rivers: Formulation of equations and physical interpretation, Journal of Hydroinformatics, 2009, 11(2): 106–108CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Mossman D J, Schnoor J L, Stumm W. Predicting the effects of a pesticide release to the Rhine River. Journal WPCF (Water Pollution Control Federation), 1988, 60(10): 1806–1812Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Higher Education Press and Springer-Verlag GmbH 2009

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Numerical Simulation Group for Water Environment, Key Laboratory of Pollution Processes and Environmental Criteria of Ministry of Education, Tianjin Key Laboratory of Environmental Remediation and Pollution ControlCollege of Environmental Science and Engineering, Nankai UniversityTianjinChina
  2. 2.National Center for Computational Hydroscience and EngineeringThe University of MississippiOxfordUSA

Personalised recommendations