Advertisement

Ecotoxicology: Problems and Approaches

  • Simon A. Levin
  • Mark A. Harwell
  • John R. Kelly
  • Kenneth D. Kimball
Part of the Springer Advanced Text in Life Sciences book series (SATLIFE)

Abstract

Virtually any discussion of the the risk assessment of releasing chemicals into the environment begins by organizing the fundamental considerations into three categories: evaluation of fate, transport, and effects. Each of these is contingent on the ecosystem into which the chemical is introduced; therefore none can be resolved adequately without a perspective that considers the ecosystem and its interactions with the introduced chemicals. Yet, as discussed further in Chapter 2 (Kelly and Harwell), it is a long step from this recognition to the development and implementation of methods that address these needs.

Keywords

Adaptive Management United Nations Environment Program Dissolve Oxygen Level Laboratory Bioassay Toxicity Bioassay 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. Cairns J Jr (1986) The myth of the most sensitive species. Bioscience 36: 670–672CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Forbes SA (1887) The lake as a microcosm. Bull Peoria Sei Assn (reprinted 1925). Bull Ill State Nat Hist Surv 15: 537–550Google Scholar
  3. Forbes SA, Richardson RE (1913) Studies on the biology of the upper Illinois River. Bull Ill State Lab Nat Hist 9: 481–574Google Scholar
  4. Holling CS (ed) (1978) Adaptive Environmental Assessment and Management. Sponsored by the United Nations Environment Program. IIASA International Series on Applied Systems Analysis. New York: Wiley, 377 pp.Google Scholar
  5. Kimball KD, Levin SA (1985) Limitations of laboratory bioassays: The need for ecosystem-level testing. Bioscience 35 (3): 165–171CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Kolkwitz R, Marrson M (1908) Ökologie der pflanzlichen Saprobien. Berichte der Deutschen Botanischen Gesellschaft 26a: 505–519. (Transl. 1967. Ecology of plant saprobia. In: Keup LE, Ingram WM, Mackenthun KM (eds) Biology of Water Pollution. Federal Water Pollution. Federal Water Pollution Control Admin., Washington DC: U.S. Dept. of the Interior, pp. 47–52 )Google Scholar
  7. Kolkwitz R, Marrson M (1909) Ökologie der tierischen Saprobien. Beiträge zur Lehre von der biologischen Gewässerbeurteilung. Int. Rev. der Gesamten Hydrobiol. und Hydrogeographie 2: 126–152. (Transl. 1967. Ecology of animal saprobia. In: Keup LE, Ingram WM, Mackenthun KM (eds) Biology of Water Pollution. Federal Water Pollution. Federal Water Pollution Control Admin., Washington DC: U.S. Dept. of the Interior, pp. 85–95 )Google Scholar
  8. Levin SA, Kimball KD (eds) (1984) New perspectives in ecotoxicology. Environ Manage 8: 375–442Google Scholar
  9. Mount DI (1982) Progress in research on ecotoxicity: Single species tests (Part One). In: Mason WT Jr (ed.), Research on Fish and Wildlife Habitat. Office of Research and Development, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, EPA- 600-8/82-022, pp. 143–149.Google Scholar
  10. Richardson RE (1928) The bottom fauna of the middle Illinois River, 1913–1925: its distribution, abundance, valuation, and index value in the study of stream pollution. Bull Ill State Nat Hist Surv 17: 387–475Google Scholar
  11. Walters C (1986) Adaptive Management of Renewable Resources. New York: Macmillan, 429 pp.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag New York Inc. 1989

Authors and Affiliations

  • Simon A. Levin
    • 1
    • 2
  • Mark A. Harwell
    • 1
    • 2
  • John R. Kelly
    • 2
  • Kenneth D. Kimball
    • 3
  1. 1.Center for Environmental ResearchCornell UniversityIthacaUSA
  2. 2.Ecosystems Research CenterCornell UniversityIthacaUSA
  3. 3.Appalachian Mountain ClubGorhamUSA

Personalised recommendations