Cover Image

PAPERBACK
$49.00



View/Hide Left Panel

concept of dose-response assessment for ecological applications and then on the complexities that need to be addressed in practice. The group agreed immediately that for ecological assessments it is better to talk about stress-response than about dose-response relationships. Scientifically, the stress-response concept, as it applies to ecological risk assessment, is complex and involves many considerations that are absent from the usual understanding of dose-response relationships in human health risk assessment. The bulk of the session was devoted to identifying those considerations and discussing how assessments should be structured to address them.

Aspects of An Adequate Stress-Response Analysis for Ecological Risk Assessment
Selection of End Points

The group argued that end point definition is critical for ecological stress-response assessment. Responses can be assessed at all three hierarchical levels of ecological organization: population, community, and ecosystem. Because of the inherent linkages between the levels, it is important to assess how an effect at one level can affect the other levels. No standard methods exist for making those linkages. Because empirical studies of different levels of organization usually also involve different spatial and temporal scales, the decision about which levels to study must be made before studies are initiated.

Final end points must be expressed as measurable characteristics, such as minimal sustainable population or maximal damage that permits the continued viability of a complex ecosystem. Both structural end points and functional end points should be considered. Structural end points include descriptive characteristics of an ecosystem, such as abundance, species composition, and trophic structure. Functional end points include energy/material flows and other transformation processes (i.e., what the organisms do, as distinct from what they are). The choice of end points must be responsive to both technical and policy concerns, including the following:

  • Values (what do we really care about?),



The National Academies | 500 Fifth St. N.W. | Washington, D.C. 20001
Copyright © National Academy of Sciences. All rights reserved.
Terms of Use and Privacy Statement



Below are the first 10 and last 10 pages of uncorrected machine-read text (when available) of this chapter, followed by the top 30 algorithmically extracted key phrases from the chapter as a whole.
Intended to provide our own search engines and external engines with highly rich, chapter-representative searchable text on the opening pages of each chapter. Because it is UNCORRECTED material, please consider the following text as a useful but insufficient proxy for the authoritative book pages.

Do not use for reproduction, copying, pasting, or reading; exclusively for search engines.

OCR for page 312
APPENDIX F 312 original typesetting files. Page breaks are true to the original; line lengths, word breaks, heading styles, and other typesetting-specific formatting, however, cannot be About this PDF file: This new digital representation of the original work has been recomposed from XML files created from the original paper book, not from the retained, and some typographic errors may have been accidentally inserted. Please use the print version of this publication as the authoritative version for attribution. concept of dose-response assessment for ecological applications and then on the complexities that need to be addressed in practice. The group agreed immediately that for ecological assessments it is better to talk about stress- response than about dose-response relationships. Scientifically, the stress- response concept, as it applies to ecological risk assessment, is complex and involves many considerations that are absent from the usual understanding of dose-response relationships in human health risk assessment. The bulk of the session was devoted to identifying those considerations and discussing how assessments should be structured to address them. Aspects of An Adequate Stress-Response Analysis for Ecological Risk Assessment Selection of End Points The group argued that end point definition is critical for ecological stress- response assessment. Responses can be assessed at all three hierarchical levels of ecological organization: population, community, and ecosystem. Because of the inherent linkages between the levels, it is important to assess how an effect at one level can affect the other levels. No standard methods exist for making those linkages. Because empirical studies of different levels of organization usually also involve different spatial and temporal scales, the decision about which levels to study must be made before studies are initiated. Final end points must be expressed as measurable characteristics, such as minimal sustainable population or maximal damage that permits the continued viability of a complex ecosystem. Both structural end points and functional end points should be considered. Structural end points include descriptive characteristics of an ecosystem, such as abundance, species composition, and trophic structure. Functional end points include energy/material flows and other transformation processes (i.e., what the organisms do, as distinct from what they are). The choice of end points must be responsive to both technical and policy concerns, including the following: • Values (what do we really care about?),