流域受到不同的人为输入,将水生生物群暴露于各种化学物质中。检测多个,不同的化学品可以挑战自然资源管理者,他们往往必须决定在哪里分配潜在的有限资源。在这里,我们描述了一个回顾性优先考虑水生污染物的证据权重框架。要演示框架实用程序,我们使用来自96小时笼养鱼类研究的数据来优先考虑在密尔沃基河口检测到的化学物质(WI,美国;2017-2018年)。在学习期间,77/178个目标化学品被检测到。根据空间和时间检测频率为化学品分配优先级分数,环境分布,环境命运,生态毒理学潜力,和效果预测。根据优先级评分和数据可用性的交集,将化学品分类到优先箱中。数据有限的化学品代表那些没有足够数据来充分评估生态毒理学潜力或环境命运的化学品。七个化合物(荧蒽,苯并[a]芘,芘,阿特拉津,甲草胺,菲,和DEET)被确定为高或中等优先级且数据充足,并被标记为进一步基于效果的监测研究的候选人。21种化合物被确定为高或中等优先级且数据有限,并被标记为进一步生态毒理学研究的候选化合物。15种化学品被标记为流域中最低优先级。这些化学品之一(2-甲基萘)没有数据限制,被标记为明确的低优先级化学品。其余化学品显示出一些数据限制,被认为是较低优先级的化合物(取决于进一步的生态毒理学和环境归宿评估)。其余34种化合物被标记为低或中等优先级。总之,这种优先排序提供了筛选级(非确定性)评估,可用于在密尔沃基河口进一步集中资源管理和风险评估活动.此外,通过提供详细的方法和具有真实实验数据的实际示例,我们证明了拟议的框架代表了一种透明和适应性强的方法,可以优先考虑淡水环境中的污染物。本文受版权保护。保留所有权利。国际环境评估管理2022;00:0-0。©2022SETAC。
Watersheds are subjected to diverse anthropogenic inputs, exposing aquatic biota to a wide range of chemicals. Detection of multiple, different chemicals can challenge natural resource managers who often have to determine where to allocate potentially limited resources. Here, we describe a weight-of-evidence framework for retrospectively prioritizing aquatic contaminants. To demonstrate framework utility, we used data from 96-h caged fish studies to prioritize chemicals detected in the Milwaukee Estuary (WI, USA; 2017-2018). Across study years, 77/178 targeted chemicals were detected. Chemicals were assigned prioritization scores based on spatial and temporal detection frequency, environmental distribution, environmental fate, ecotoxicological potential, and effect prediction. Chemicals were sorted into priority bins based on the intersection of prioritization score and data availability. Data-limited chemicals represented those that did not have sufficient data to adequately evaluate ecotoxicological potential or environmental fate. Seven compounds (fluoranthene, benzo[a]pyrene, pyrene, atrazine, metolachlor, phenanthrene, and DEET) were identified as high or medium priority and data sufficient and flagged as candidates for further effects-based monitoring studies. Twenty-one compounds were identified as high or medium priority and data limited and flagged as candidates for further ecotoxicological research. Fifteen chemicals were flagged as the lowest priority in the watershed. One of these chemicals (2-methylnaphthalene) displayed no data limitations and was flagged as a definitively low-priority chemical. The remaining chemicals displayed some data limitations and were considered lower-priority compounds (contingent on further ecotoxicological and environmental fate assessments). The remaining 34 compounds were flagged as low or medium priority. Altogether, this prioritization provided a screening-level (non-definitive) assessment that could be used to focus further resource management and risk assessment activities in the Milwaukee Estuary. Furthermore, by providing detailed methodology and a practical example with real experimental data, we demonstrated that the proposed framework represents a transparent and adaptable approach for prioritizing contaminants in freshwater environments. Integr Environ Assess Manag 2023;19:1276-1296. © 2022 SETAC.