Standard Guide for Selection of Resident Species as Test Organisms for Aquatic and Sediment Toxicity Tests

SIGNIFICANCE AND USE
5.1 The USEPA's policy for whole-effluent monitoring stresses, an integrated approach to toxicity testing (1, 5) tests and other measures of toxicity, should be systematically employed and should be related to certain aquatic-system factors, such as the type of habitats available (benthic and water column), flow regime, and physicochemical quality of the site water and sediment. The determination of toxicity is generally accomplished with a few surrogate species for four major reasons: a regulatory agency can compare test results between sites and over time in order to help prioritize enforcement efforts, tests using these species are relatively inexpensive since the organisms can be cultured year-round under laboratory conditions, the reliability of test methods utilizing surrogate species is better established than for other species, and surrogate species are better integrated into toxicity identification evaluations than other species. For regulatory purposes, under the National Pollution Discharge Elimination System (NPDES), USEPA considers it unnecessary to conduct whole effluent toxicity tests with resident or indigenous species (6). An alternate testing procedure protocol is provided by USEPA for validating toxicity methods using species not already approved (6,7). In systems where surrogate species are not found, erroneous predictions might be obtained of environmental impact or water and sediment quality impairment based on toxicity tests using surrogate species (8).  
5.2 This guide is intended to assist researchers and managers in selecting appropriate resident species for site-specific toxicity assessments. This guide could be used to select a resident species for use in predicting the potential toxic effects of a substance in certain types of aquatic environments. Another use might be for selecting a number of indigenous species from the aquatic community, that when tested, might indicate potential toxic effects of the test substance or material on the...
SCOPE
1.1 This guide along with Guide E1192 and guidance from the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (1,2)2 covers the use of resident species in toxicity testing, particularly if site-specific information is desired. For example, in those systems where particular species are considered to be economically or aesthetically important, it might be more appropriate to utilize resident species for testing (3). For this reason, the USEPA allows development of site-specific chemical standards, using resident species, in order to reflect local conditions (1). This guide is designed to guide the selection of resident species for use as test organisms in aquatic and sediment toxicity tests. It presupposes that the user is familiar with the taxonomy of aquatic and benthic species and has some field experience.  
1.2 Because toxicological information is often limited for many aquatic species, it is assumed that the majority of testing applications will be acute tests. Therefore, much of the guidance presented in this guide pertaining to the species selection process is applicable when acute toxicity testing is the desired goal. However, the principles discussed in this guide pertain to chronic toxicity test applications as well, although it should be clearly understood that such testing requires substantially greater effort, time, and resources than acute testing.  
1.3 The procedures for selecting resident species in toxicity testing are necessarily general at this time because information is often lacking for specific taxa or groups of taxa. This guide attempts to give specific information when appropriate.  
1.4 This guide is not intended to be inclusive. References listed provide a starting point from which to approach the literature. This guide deals solely with aquatic toxicity test situations. Terrestrial, arboreal, or atmospheric species are not considered in this guide.  
1.5 This guide is arranged as follows:    
Se...

General Information

Status
Historical
Publication Date
30-Nov-2012
Current Stage
Ref Project

Relations

Buy Standard

Guide
ASTM E1850-04(2012) - Standard Guide for Selection of Resident Species as Test Organisms for Aquatic and Sediment Toxicity Tests
English language
14 pages
sale 15% off
Preview
sale 15% off
Preview

Standards Content (Sample)


NOTICE: This standard has either been superseded and replaced by a new version or withdrawn.
Contact ASTM International (www.astm.org) for the latest information
Designation: E1850 − 04 (Reapproved 2012)
Standard Guide for
Selection of Resident Species as Test Organisms for
Aquatic and Sediment Toxicity Tests
This standard is issued under the fixed designation E1850; the number immediately following the designation indicates the year of
original adoption or, in the case of revision, the year of last revision. A number in parentheses indicates the year of last reapproval. A
superscript epsilon (´) indicates an editorial change since the last revision or reapproval.
1. Scope 1.4 This guide is not intended to be inclusive. References
listed provide a starting point from which to approach the
1.1 This guide along with Guide E1192 and guidance from
literature. This guide deals solely with aquatic toxicity test
the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (1,2) covers the
situations. Terrestrial, arboreal, or atmospheric species are not
use of resident species in toxicity testing, particularly if
considered in this guide.
site-specific information is desired. For example, in those
systemswhereparticularspeciesareconsideredtobeeconomi-
1.5 This guide is arranged as follows:
callyoraestheticallyimportant,itmightbemoreappropriateto
Section
utilize resident species for testing (3). For this reason, the
USEPA allows development of site-specific chemical Scope 1
Referenced Documents 2
standards, using resident species, in order to reflect local
Terminology 3
conditions (1). This guide is designed to guide the selection of
Summary of Guide 4
resident species for use as test organisms in aquatic and
Significance and Use 5
Species Selection Process 6
sediment toxicity tests. It presupposes that the user is familiar
Collection of Information 6.1
withthetaxonomyofaquaticandbenthicspeciesandhassome
Obtaining Resident Species for Toxicity Testing 6.2
field experience. Criteria for Selection 6.3
Test Performance Characterization 6.4
1.2 Because toxicological information is often limited for
Interferences 7
Safety Precautions 8
many aquatic species, it is assumed that the majority of testing
Documentation 9
applications will be acute tests. Therefore, much of the
Keywords 10
guidance presented in this guide pertaining to the species
Appendixes
Potential Test Species Appendix X1
selectionprocessisapplicablewhenacutetoxicitytestingisthe
Algae X1.1
desired goal. However, the principles discussed in this guide
Aquatic Floating Macrophytes X1.2
pertain to chronic toxicity test applications as well, although it
Protozoa X1.3
Rotifera X1.4
shouldbeclearlyunderstoodthatsuchtestingrequiressubstan-
Attached and Benthic Fauna X1.5
tially greater effort, time, and resources than acute testing.
Fish X1.6
Amphibia X1.7
1.3 The procedures for selecting resident species in toxicity
Examples of Resident Species Table X1.1
testing are necessarily general at this time because information
Taxonomic Keys—Partial Listing Appendix X2
is often lacking for specific taxa or groups of taxa. This guide Flow Chart of Factors to Consider For Selecting A Appendix X3
Resident Species
attempts to give specific information when appropriate.
1.6 This standard does not purport to address all of the
1 safety concerns, if any, associated with its use. It is the
ThisguideisunderthejurisdictionofASTMCommitteeE50onEnvironmental
Assessment, Risk Management and CorrectiveAction and is the direct responsibil- responsibility of the user of this standard to establish appro-
ity of Subcommittee E50.47 on Biological Effects and Environmental Fate.
priate safety and health practices and determine the applica-
Current edition approved Dec. 1, 2012. Published January 2013. Originally
bility of regulatory limitations prior to use. All safety precau-
approved in 1997. Last previous edition approved in 2004 as E1850–04. DOI:
10.1520/E1850-04R12. tions and health-related practices are the responsibility of the
The boldface numbers given in parentheses refer to a list of references at the
user. Specific safety practices are suggested in Section 8.
end of the text.
Copyright © ASTM International, 100 Barr Harbor Drive, PO Box C700, West Conshohocken, PA 19428-2959. United States
E1850 − 04 (2012)
2. Referenced Documents E1563 Guide for Conducting Static Acute Toxicity Tests
3 with Echinoid Embryos
2.1 ASTM Standards:
E1611 Guide for Conducting Sediment Toxicity Tests with
D4229 Practice for Conducting Static Acute Toxicity Tests
4 Polychaetous Annelids
on Waste-Waters with Daphnia (Withdrawn 1988)
E1688 Guide for Determination of the Bioaccumulation of
D4401 Practice for Collecting Benthic Macroinvertebrates
Sediment-Associated Contaminants by Benthic Inverte-
With Petersen Grab Sampler (Withdrawn 2003)
brates
D4407 Practice for Collecting Benthic Macroinvertebrates
E1706 Test Method for Measuring theToxicity of Sediment-
With Orange Peel Grab Sampler (Withdrawn 2003)
Associated Contaminants with Freshwater Invertebrates
D4556 Guide for Selecting Stream-Net Sampling Devices
E1913 Guide for Conducting Static, Axenic, 14-Day Phyto-
for Collecting Benthic Macroinvertebrates (Withdrawn
4 toxicity Tests in Test Tubes with the Submersed Aquatic
2003)
Macrophyte, Myriophyllum sibiricum Komarov (With-
D4557 Practice for Collecting Benthic Macroinvertebrates
drawn 2012)
with Surber and Related Type Samplers (Withdrawn
E1924 Guide for Conducting Toxicity Tests with Biolumi-
2003)
nescent Dinoflagellates (Withdrawn 2013)
D4558 Practice for Collecting Benthic Macroinvertebrates
4 E2122 Guide for Conducting In-situ Field Bioassays With
With Drift Nets (Withdrawn 2003)
Caged Bivalves
E724 Guide for Conducting Static Acute Toxicity Tests
Starting with Embryos of Four Species of Saltwater
3. Terminology
Bivalve Molluscs
E729 Guide for Conducting Acute Toxicity Tests on Test
3.1 Definitions:The words “must,” “should,” “may,” “can,”
Materials with Fishes, Macroinvertebrates, and Amphib- and “might” have very specific meanings in this guide. “Must”
ians
is used to express an absolute requirement. “Should” is used to
E1191 Guide for Conducting Life-Cycle Toxicity Tests with state that the specified condition is recommended and ought to
Saltwater Mysids
be met if possible. Although a violation of one “should” is
E1192 Guide for ConductingAcute Toxicity Tests onAque- rarelyaseriousmatter,violationofseveralwilloftenrenderthe
ous Ambient Samples and Effluents with Fishes,
results questionable. Terms such as “desirable,” or “might be
Macroinvertebrates, and Amphibians desirable” are used in conjunction with less important factors.
E1193 Guide for Conducting Daphnia magna Life-Cycle
“May” is used to mean “is (are allowed to),” “can” is used to
Toxicity Tests mean “is (are) able to,” and “might” is used to mean “could
E1210 Practice for Fluorescent Liquid Penetrant Testing
possibly.” Thus, the classic distinction between “may” and
Using the Hydrophilic Post-Emulsification Process “can”ispreserved,and“might”isneverusedasasynonymfor
E1218 Guide for Conducting Static Toxicity Tests with
either “may” or “can.”
Microalgae 3.2 Definitions of Terms Specific to This Standard:
E1241 GuideforConductingEarlyLife-StageToxicityTests 3.2.1 impaired water body or site—a body of water or site
with Fishes
which exhibits decreased structural or functional biological
E1367 Test Method for Measuring theToxicity of Sediment- integrity, or both, given the geomorphic habitat available. This
Associated Contaminants with Estuarine and Marine In-
is typically measured as a decrease in the number of species
vertebrates present or decreased biological productivity compared to sites
E1383 Guide for Conducting Sediment Toxicity Tests with
similar in size and habitat and having few anthropogenic
Freshwater Invertebrates (Withdrawn 1995) influences.
E1415 Guide for Conducting Static Toxicity Tests With
3.2.2 indigenous species—a species that is likely to occur at
Lemna gibba G3
a specified site for some portion of its life span as a native
E1440 Guide for Acute Toxicity Test with the Rotifer Bra-
species.
chionus
3.2.3 key species—a species that is of special concern for
E1463 Guide for Conducting Static and Flow-Through
ecological or economic reasons.
AcuteToxicityTestsWith Mysids From theWest Coast of
3.2.4 resident species—a species that is present at a speci-
the United States
fied site for some portion of its life span.
E1498 Guide for Conducting Sexual Reproduction Tests
with Seaweeds
3.2.5 surrogate species—a species that can be studied to
E1525 Guide for Designing BiologicalTests with Sediments
produce results to estimate toxicity responses of other species
E1562 Guide for Conducting Acute, Chronic, and Life-
that are not tested directly (4). Frequently, published standard
Cycle Aquatic Toxicity Tests with Polychaetous Annelids
testing procedures, established through nationally recognized
agencies or societies such as ASTM, OECD, Environment
Canada, and USEPA, have been developed for these species.
For referenced ASTM standards, visit the ASTM website, www.astm.org, or
contact ASTM Customer Service at service@astm.org. For Annual Book of ASTM
Standards volume information, refer to the standard’s Document Summary page on 4. Summary of Guide
the ASTM website.
4.1 A list of resident species is compiled from published
The last approved version of this historical standard is referenced on
www.astm.org. literature on the natural history of the area, bioassessments of
E1850 − 04 (2012)
the receiving body of water, species lists compiled by indi- 5.4 This guide can be used as a general framework for
viduals or agencies, maps, and taxonomic keys. researchers who desire to develop or modify existing toxicity
test methods for previously untested species.
4.2 The list of species is reduced by first defining the
objectives of the study and the decisions to be made, followed 5.5 Researchers in countries other than the United States
by a stepwise procedure to determine which species to test. and Canada might obtain useful information from this guide
This procedure includes consideration of factors such as ease regardingpotentialtestspeciesortestmethodsforsitesoflocal
ofhandlingandtesting,availability,sensitivity,andavarietyof interest.
other concerns (see Section 6).
6. Species Selection Process
5. Significance and Use
6.1 Collection of Information—To select a resident species
5.1 The USEPA’s policy for whole-effluent monitoring
for toxicity tests, one must first determine what species are
stresses, an integrated approach to toxicity testing (1, 5) tests
likely to occur at the location of interest. This can be
and other measures of toxicity, should be systematically
determined by examining historical species data for the site
employed and should be related to certain aquatic-system
that predates contamination, or by examining recent or histori-
factors, such as the type of habitats available (benthic and
cal data for nearby reference sites of similar size and habitat
water column), flow regime, and physicochemical quality of
type. From these lists, select species that can be handled in the
the site water and sediment. The determination of toxicity is
laboratory and for which test data are known, or species with
generally accomplished with a few surrogate species for four
close relatives for which data are available to demonstrate
major reasons: a regulatory agency can compare test results
sensitivity to the contaminant of interest. Methods suggested
between sites and over time in order to help prioritize enforce-
include the following:
ment efforts, tests using these species are relatively inexpen-
6.1.1 Bioassessments—Quantitative sampling of
sive since the organisms can be cultured year-round under
macroinvertebrates, fish, algae, and macrophytes, see Guides
laboratory conditions, the reliability of test methods utilizing
D4229 and D4407 (13, 14, 15) located outside point and
surrogate species is better established than for other species,
non-point sources of pollutants can yield information on the
and surrogate species are better integrated into toxicity identi-
types of common species available as potential test organisms.
fication evaluations than other species. For regulatory
If a site containing potential pollutants is the object of study, a
purposes, under the National Pollution Discharge Elimination
bioassessment performed both within and outside of the
System (NPDES), USEPAconsiders it unnecessary to conduct
suspected impaired area might reveal species-specific popula-
wholeeffluenttoxicitytestswithresidentorindigenousspecies
tion trends which might be correlated to toxicity. Species that
(6). An alternate testing procedure protocol is provided by
exhibit decreases in abundance or biomass, or both, within or
USEPA for validating toxicity methods using species not
downstream of the suspect area might represent sensitive
already approved (6,7). In systems where surrogate species are
resident species that could be utilized in toxicity testing.
not found, erroneous predictions might be obtained of environ-
Factors such as time of sampling, similarity of habitat regimes,
mental impact or water and sediment quality impairment based
and the number of samples taken might influence the accuracy
on toxicity tests using surrogate species (8).
of this approach (see Guide D4556, Practice D4557, and
5.2 This guide is intended to assist researchers and manag-
Practice D4558). Studies of community structure (15) can be
ers in selecting appropriate resident species for site-specific
conducted to determine abundance and dominance of species.
toxicity assessments. This guide could be used to select a
Such studies can provide lists of potential test species, as well
resident species for use in predicting the potential toxic effects
as suggest suitable organism and laboratory maintenance
of a substance in certain types of aquatic environments.
procedures.
Another use might be for selecting a number of indigenous
6.1.1.1 Bioassessments can also have significant application
species from the aquatic community, that when tested, might
to the USEPA Recalculation Procedure (1, 14) that allows
indicate potential toxic effects of the test substance or material
deletion of nonresident species from the National Water
on the ecological integrity of that community. Selection of a
Quality criteria database. Bioassessments can be used to
suitable test species is very important because species might
determine the types of species and taxonomic families capable
respond quite differently to toxic compounds (9). Species
of naturally existing in the water body of interest (15, 16).
suggested as test organisms by regulatory agencies might not
Following the procedures outlined later in this guide, suitable
occur in the receiving waters of interest and their sensitivity to
test
...

Questions, Comments and Discussion

Ask us and Technical Secretary will try to provide an answer. You can facilitate discussion about the standard in here.