Skip to main content

CADDIS: The Causal Analysis/Diagnosis Decision Information System

  • Chapter
  • First Online:
Book cover Decision Support Systems for Risk-Based Management of Contaminated Sites

Abstract

Biological monitoring and assessment methods have become indispensable tools for evaluating the condition of aquatic and terrestrial ecosystems. When an undesirable biological condition is observed (e.g., a depauperate fish assemblage), its cause (e.g., toxic substances, excess fine sediments, or nutrients) must be determined in order to design appropriate remedial management actions. Causal analysis challenges environmental scientists to bring together, analyze, and synthesize a broad variety of information from monitoring studies, models, and experiments to determine the probable cause of ecological effects. Decision-support systems can play an important role in improving the efficiency, quality and transparency of causal analyses.

CADDIS (http://www.epa.gov/caddis) is an on-line decision framework for identifying the stressors responsible for undesirable biological conditions in aquatic systems. CADDIS was developed in response to requirements under the U.S. Clean Water Act to develop plans for restoring impaired aquatic systems. CADDIS is based on U.S. EPA’s 2000 Stressor Identification Guidance document, and draws from multiple types of eco-epidemiological evidence. A major update in 2007 added summaries of commonly encountered causes of biological impairment: metals, sediments, nutrients, flow alteration, temperature, ionic strength, low dissolved oxygen, and toxic chemicals. These reviews are designed to help practitioners choose which causes to consider, based on sources, site information, and observed biological effects. A series of conceptual models illustrates connections between sources, stressors and effects. Another major new section provides advice and tools for analyzing data and interpreting results as causal evidence; these tools help quantify associations between any cause and any biological impairment using innovative methods such as species-sensitivity distributions, biological inferences, conditional probability analysis, and quantile regression analysis.

An essential part of the development strategy for CADDIS has been the use of case studies to test the process and tools in different regions, and with different causal factors. Case studies have been conducted in streams on the urbanized east coast and the agriculturally-dominated mid-west to the arid west, and have considered causes including low dissolved oxygen, increased temperature, toxic substances, altered food resources and fine sediments. Lessons learned from the case studies include the importance of a structure for organizing the large variety of evidence that is often available, the need for well-matched reference sites for comparison, the benefits of iterative and directed data collection, and the frequency of surprising results. The case studies illustrate the promise of CADDIS: by building on the foundation of biological monitoring, we can provide a powerful means for improving the health of our aquatic systems.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Chapter
USD 29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD 84.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD 109.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info
Hardcover Book
USD 109.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Durable hardcover edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

References

  • Cormier SM, Norton SB, Suter GW II, Altfater D, Counts B (2002) Determining probable causes of ecological impairment in the Little Scioto River, Ohio, USA: Part 2. Characterization of causes. Environ Toxicol Chem 21:1125–1137

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Davis WS (1995) Biological Assessment and Criteria: Building on the Past. In: Davis WS, Simon TP (eds). Biological Assessment and Criteria. Lewis Publishers, Boca Raton, pp 7–14

    Google Scholar 

  • Dawes RM (2001) Everyday Irrationality. Westfield Press, Boulder, CO, USA

    Google Scholar 

  • Environmental Sciences Division, Jacobs Engineering Group (1996) Remedial Investigation/Feasibility Study of the Clinch River/Poplar Creek Operable Unit.ORNL/ER-315/V1&D3. U.S. Department of Energy, Oak Ridge, TN

    Google Scholar 

  • Fox GA (1991) Practical Causal Inference for Ecoepidemiologists. J Toxicol Environ Health 33(4):359–373

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Hill AB (1965) The Environment and Disease: Association or Causation? Proc Roy Soc Med 58:295–300

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Kahneman D, Slovic P, Tversky A (1982) Judgment under uncertainty: Hueristics and biases. Cambridge University Press, New York

    Google Scholar 

  • Marchant R (1997) Classification and prediction of macroinvertebrate assemblages from running water in Victoria, Australia. J North Am Benthol Soc 16:644–681

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Metcalfe-Smith J (1994) Biological water-quality assessment of rivers: Use of macroinvertebrate communities. In: Calow P, Petts G (eds). The Rivers Handbook, Hydrological and Ecological Principles. Blackwell Science, Cambridge, pp 144–170

    Google Scholar 

  • Nisbett R, Ross L (1980) Human Inference: Strategies and Shortcomings of Social Judgment. Prentice-Hall, Inc., Englewood Cliffs NJ, USA

    Google Scholar 

  • Norton SB, Cormier SM, Suter GW II, Subramanian B, Lin E, Altfater D et al. (2002) Determining probable causes of ecological impairment in the Little Scioto River, Ohio, USA: Part I. Listing candidate causes and analyzing evidence. Environ Toxicol Chem 21:1112–1124

    Google Scholar 

  • Norton SB, Rao L, Suter GW (2003) Minimizing cognitive errors in site-specific causal assessments. Human Ecol Risk Assess 9:213–229

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Ohio Environmental Protection Agency (1987) Biological Criteria for the Protection of Aquatic Life: Volume II: Users Manual for Biological Assessment of Ohio Surface Waters.WQMA-SWS-6. Division of Water Quality Planning and Assessment, Ecological Assessment Section, Columbus, OH

    Google Scholar 

  • Plafkin JL, Barbour MT, Porter KD (1989) Rapid Bioassessment Protocols for Use in Rivers and Streams: Benthic Macroinvertebrates and Fish.EPA-440-4-89-001. Office of Water Regulations and Standards, Washington DC, USA

    Google Scholar 

  • Russo JE, Schoemaker PJH (1989) Decision Traps: The Ten Barriers to Brilliant Decision-Making and How to Overcome Them. Simon and Schuster, New York

    Google Scholar 

  • Schofield K (2007) Simple Conceptual Model for Nutrients. In: U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. Causal Analysis/Diagnosis Decision Information System (CADDIS) http://www.epa.gov/caddis. Accessed October 9, 2008.

  • Stark TB, Maxted JR (2007) A biotic index for New Zealand's soft-bottomed streams. NZ J Mar Freshwater Res 41:43–61

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Susser M (1986) Rules of Inference in Epidemiology. Regul Toxicol Pharmacol 6:116–128

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Suter GW II, Barnthouse LW, Efroymson RE, Jager H (1999) Ecological risk assessment of a large river-reservoir: 2. Fish community. Environ Toxicol Chem 18(4):589–598

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (2002) Consolidated Assessment Programs and Biocriteria Development for States, Tribes, Territories, and Interstate Commissions: Streams and Wadeable Rivers.EPA-822-R-02-048. Office of Water, Washington DC, USA

    Google Scholar 

  • U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (2005) Methods/Indicators for Determining when Metals are the Cause of Biological Impairments of Rivers and Streams: Species Sensitivity Distributions and Chronic Exposure-Response Relationships from Laboratory Data. NCEA-1494. Office of Research and Development, National Center for Environmental Assessment, Cincinnati, OH

    Google Scholar 

  • U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (2006a) Estimation and application of macroinvertebrate tolerance values. EPA/600/P-04/116A. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Office of Research and Development, Washington, DC

    Google Scholar 

  • U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (2006b) Framework for developing suspended and bedded sediments water quality criteria. EPA-822-R-06-001. Washington, DC

    Google Scholar 

  • Yuan LL (2007) Using biological assemblage composition to infer the values of covarying environmental factors. Freshw Biol 52:1159–1175

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Susan B. Norton .

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2009 Springer Science+Business Media, LLC

About this chapter

Cite this chapter

Norton, S.B. et al. (2009). CADDIS: The Causal Analysis/Diagnosis Decision Information System. In: Marcomini, A., Suter II, G., Critto, A. (eds) Decision Support Systems for Risk-Based Management of Contaminated Sites. Springer, Boston, MA. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-0-387-09722-0_17

Download citation

Publish with us

Policies and ethics