Skip to main content

The integrated biomarker response revisited: optimization to avoid misuse

Environmental Science and Pollution Research volume 21, pages 2448–2454 (2014)Cite this article

Abstract

The growing need to evaluate the quality of aquatic ecosystems led to the development of numerous monitoring tools. Among them, the development of biomarker-based procedures, that combine precocity and relevance, is recommended. However, multi-biomarker approaches are often hard to interpret, and produce results that are not easy to integrate in the environmental policies framework. Integrative index have been developed, and one of the most used is the integrated biomarker response (IBR). However, an analysis of available literature demonstrated that the IBR suffers from a frequent misuse and a bias in its calculation. Then, we propose here a new calculation method based on both a more simple formula and a permutation procedure. Together, these improvements should rightly avoid the misuse and bias that were recorded. Additionally, a case study illustrates how the new procedure enabled to perform a reliable classification of site along a pollution gradient based on biomarker responses used in the IBR calculations.

This is a preview of subscription content, access via your institution.

Access options

Buy single article

Instant access to the full article PDF.

43,34 €

Price includes VAT (Finland)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3
Fig. 4
Fig. 5
Fig. 6

Notes

  1. The R code to calculate all possible values of the IBR and to produce the associated graphics is available on demand to the corresponding author.

References

  • Aarab N, Champeau O, Mora P, Daubeze M, Garrigues P, Narbonne JF (2004) Scoring approach based on fish biomarkers applied to French river monitoring. Biomarkers 9:258–270

    CAS  Article  Google Scholar 

  • Artigas J, Arts G, Babut M, Caracciolo AB, Charles S, Chaumot A, Combourieu B, Dahllöf I, Despréaux D, Ferrari B, Friberg N, Garric J, Geffard O, Gourlay-Francé C, Hein M, Hjorth M, Krauss M, De Lange HJ, Lahr J, Lehtonen KK, Lettieri T, Liess M, Lofts S, Mayer P, Morin S, Paschke A, Svendsen C, Usseglio-Polatera P, van den Brink N, Vindimian E, Williams R (2012) Towards a renewed research agenda in ecotoxicology. Environ Pollut 160:201–206

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Beliaeff B, Burgeot T (2002) Integrated biomarker response: a useful tool for ecological risk assessment. Environ Toxicol Chem 21:1316

    CAS  Article  Google Scholar 

  • Broeg K, Lehtonen KK (2006) Indices for the assessment of environmental pollution of the Baltic Sea coasts: integrated assessment of a multi-biomarker approach. Mar Pollut Bull 53:508–522

    CAS  Article  Google Scholar 

  • Broeg K, Westernhagen HV, Zander S, Körting W, Koehler A (2005) The “bioeffect assessment index” (BAI): a concept for the quantification of effects of marine pollution by an integrated biomarker approach. Mar Pollut Bull 50:495–503

    CAS  Article  Google Scholar 

  • Chèvre N, Gagné F, Blaise C (2003) Development of a biomarker-based index for assessing the ecotoxic potential of aquatic sites. Biomarkers 8:287–298

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Coulaud R, Geffard O, Xuereb B, Lacaze E, Quéau H, Garric J, Charles S, Chaumot A (2011) In situ feeding assay with Gammarus fossarum (Crustacea): modelling the influence of confounding factors to improve water quality biomonitoring. Water Res 45:6417–6429

    CAS  Article  Google Scholar 

  • Dagnino A, Allen JI, Moore MN, Broeg K, Canesi L, Viarengo A (2007) Development of an expert system for the integration of biomarker responses in mussels into an animal health index. Biomarkers 12:155–172

    CAS  Article  Google Scholar 

  • Galloway TS, Brown RJ, Browne MA, Dissanayake A, Lowe D, Depledge MH, Jones MB (2006) The ECOMAN project: a novel approach to defining sustainable ecosystem function. Mar Pollut Bull 53:186–194

    CAS  Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hagger JA, Jones MB, Lowe D, Leonard DRP, Owen R, Galloway TS (2008) Application of biomarkers for improving risk assessments of chemicals under the water framework directive: a case study. Mar Pollut Bull 56:1111–1118

    CAS  Article  Google Scholar 

  • Izagirre U, Marigómez I (2009) Lysosomal enlargement and lysosomal membrane destabilisation in mussel digestive cells measured by an integrative index. Environ Pollut 157:1544–1553

    CAS  Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kammann U, Biselli S, Reineke N, Wosniok W, Danischewski D, Huhnerfuss H, Kinder A, Sierts-Herrmann A, Theobald N, Vahl HH, Vobach M, Westendorf J, Steinhart H (2005) Bioassay-directed fractionation of organic extracts of marine surface sediments from the North and Baltic Sea—part II: results of the biotest battery and development of a biotest index. J Soils Sediments 5:225–232

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lam PKS (2009) Use of biomarkers in environmental monitoring. Ocean Coast Manag 52:348–354

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Leinio S, Lehtonen KK (2005) Seasonal variability in biomarkers in the bivalves Mytilus edulis and Macoma balthica from the northern Baltic Sea. Comp Biochem Physiol C Toxicol Pharmacol 140:408–421

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lyons BP, Thain JE, Stentiford GD, Hylland K, Davies IM, Vethaak AD (2010) Using biological effects tools to define good environmental status under the European Union Marine Strategy Framework directive. Mar Pollut Bull 60:1647–1651

    CAS  Article  Google Scholar 

  • Munkittrick KR, Arens CJ, Lowell RB, Kaminski GP (2009) A review of potential methods of determining critical effect size for designing environmental monitoring programs. Environ Toxicol Chem 28:1361–1371

    CAS  Article  Google Scholar 

  • Raftopoulou EK, Dimitriadis VK (2010) Assessment of the health status of mussels Mytilus galloprovincialis along Thermaikos Gulf (Northern Greece): an integrative biomarker approach using ecosystem health indices. Ecotoxicol Environ Saf 73:1580–1587

    CAS  Article  Google Scholar 

  • Sanchez W, Porcher J-M (2009) Fish biomarkers for environmental monitoring within the Water Framework Directive of the European Union. Trends Anal Chem 28:150–158

    CAS  Article  Google Scholar 

  • Schlenk D (1999) Necessity of defining biomarkers for use in ecological risk assessments. Mar Pollut Bull 39:48–53

    CAS  Article  Google Scholar 

  • Vörösmarty CJ, McIntyre PB, Gessner MO, Dudgeon D, Prusevich A, Green P, Glidden S, Bunn SE, Sullivan CA, Liermann CR, Davies PM (2010) Global threats to human water security and river biodiversity. Nature 467:555–561

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Xuereb B, Chaumot A, Mons R, Garric J, Geffard O (2009) Acetylcholinesterase activity in Gammarus fossarum (Crustacea Amphipoda): intrinsic variability, reference levels, and a reliable tool for field surveys. Aquat Toxicol 93:225–233

    CAS  Article  Google Scholar 

  • Yeom D-H, Adams SM (2007) Assessing effects of stress across levels of biological organization using an aquatic ecosystem health index. Ecotoxicol Environ Saf 67:286–295

    CAS  Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgments

The authors thank the French INSU-EC2CO-Cytrix program for supporting this work as part of the Sydépop project. We would like to thank Carole Cossu-Leguille, François Rodius and Alain Geffard for their participation in the Sydépop project.

Author information

Affiliations

  1. CNRS UMR 7360, Laboratoire Interdisciplinaire des Environnements Continentaux (LIEC), Université de Lorraine, Metz, 57070, France

    S. Devin, L. Giambérini, L. Minguez & S. Pain-Devin

  2. IFREMER, Département Biogéochimie et Ecotoxicologie, Laboratoire d’Ecotoxicologie, IFREMER Centre de Nantes, Nantes, France

    T. Burgeot

  3. LIEC, Campus Bridoux, Rue du Général Delestraint, Metz, 57070, France

    S. Devin

Authors
  1. S. Devin
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. T. Burgeot
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. L. Giambérini
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. L. Minguez
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  5. S. Pain-Devin
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to S. Devin.

Additional information

Responsible editor: Philippe Garrigues

Rights and permissions

Reprints and Permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Devin, S., Burgeot, T., Giambérini, L. et al. The integrated biomarker response revisited: optimization to avoid misuse. Environ Sci Pollut Res 21, 2448–2454 (2014). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11356-013-2169-9

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11356-013-2169-9

Keywords

  • Biomarkers
  • Integrated Index
  • Environmental risk assessment
  • Pollution
  • Water Framework Directive