Table Of ContentECOtoxicology:
Ecological Dimensions
JOIN US ON THE INTERNET VIA WWW, GOPHER, FTP OR EMAIL:
WWW: http://www.thomson.com
GOPHER: gopher.thomson.com
A service of ICDP®
FTP: ftp.thomson.com
EMAIL: [email protected]
Chapman & Hall Ecotoxicology Series
Series Editors
Michael H. Depledge
Director and Professor of Ecotoxicology, Plymouth Environmental Research Centre,
University of Plymouth, UK
Brenda Sanders
Associate Professor of Physiology, Molecular Ecology Institute, California State
University, USA
In the last few years emphasis in the environmental sciences has shifted
from direct toxic threats to humans, towards more general concerns regard
ing pollutant impacts on animals and plants, ecosystems and indeed on the
whole biosphere. Such studies have led to the development of the scientific
discipline of ecotoxicology. Throughout the world socio-political changes
have resulted in increased expenditure on environmental matters. Conse
quently, ecotoxicological science has developed extremely rapidly, yielding
new concepts and innovative techniques that have resulted in the identifi
cation of an enormous spectrum of potentially toxic agents. No single book
or scientific journal has been able to keep pace with these developments.
This series of books provides detailed reviews of selected topics in
ecotoxicology. Each book includes both factual information and discus
sions of the relevance and significance of the topic in the broader context
of ecotoxicological science.
Already published
Animal Biomarkers as Pollution Indicators
David B. Peakall
Hardback (0412402009),292 pages
Ecotoxicology in Theory and Practice
V. E. Forbes and T. L. Forbes
Hardback (0412435306),262 pages
Interconnections Betweeri'l:luman aItd E~osystem Health
Edited by Richard T. Di Giulio arid Emily Monosson
Hardback (0 412 624001),292 pages
ECOtoxicology:
Ecological Dimensions
Edited by
Donald J. Baird
University of Stirling
Stirling
UK
Lorraine Maltby
The University of Sheffield
Sheffield
UK
Peter W. Greig-Smith
Ministry of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food
Lowestoft
UK
and
Peter E. T. Douben
Her Majesty's Inspectorate of Pollution
London
UK
Society of Er:lVironmental Toxicology and Chemistry
CHAPMAN Of HAll
London· Weinheim . New York· Tokyo· Melbourne· Madras
Published by Chapman & Hall, 2--6 Boundary Row, London SEl8HN
Chapman & Hall, 2-6 Boundary Row, London SE I 8HN, UK
Chapman & Hall GmbH, Pappelallee 3, 69469 Weinheim, Germany
Chapman & Hall USA, 115 Fifth Avenue, New York, NY 10003, USA
Chapman & Hall Japan, ITP-Japan, Kyowa Building, 3F, 2-2-1
Hirakawacho, Chiyoda-ku, Tokyo 102, Japan
Chapman & Hall Australia, 102 Dodds Street, South Melbourne,
Victoria 3205, Australia
Chapman & Hall India, R. Seshadri, 32 Second Main Road, CIT East,
Madras 600 035, India
First edition 1996
© 1996 Chapman & Hall
Softcover reprint of the hardcover 1st edition 1996
Typeset in 101l2pt Times by WestKey Ltd, Falmouth, Cornwall
ISBN-13: 978-0-412-75490-6 e-ISBN-13: 978-94-009-1541-1
DOl: 10.1007/978-94-009-1541-1
Apart from any fair dealing for the purposes of research or private study, or
criticism or review, as permitted under the UK Copyright Designs and
Patents Act, 1988, this publication may not be reproduced, stored, or
transmitted, in any form or by any means, without the prior permission in
writing of the publishers, or in the case of reprographic reproduction only in
accordance with the terms of the licences issued by the Copyright Licensing
Agency in the UK, or in accordance with the terms oflicences issued by the
appropriate Reproduction Rights Organization outside the UK. Enquiries
concerning reproduction outside the terms stated here should be sent to the
publishers at the London address printed on this page.
The publisher makes no representation, express or implied, with regard to
the accuracy of the information contained in this book and cannot accept any
legal responsibility or liability for any errors or omissions that may be made.
A catalogue record for this book is available from the British Library
e
Printed on permanent acid-free text paper, manufactured in accordance
With ANSIINISO Z39.48-l992 and ANSIINISO Z39.48-1984 (Permanence of
Paper).
Contents
List of contributors VB
Series foreword ix
1 Putting the 'ECO-' into ECOtoxicology 1
Donald J. Baird, Lorraine Maltby, Peter W Greig-Smith and Peter
E. T. Douben
2 Ecology in ecotoxicology: some possible 'rules of thumb' 5
Peter Calow
2.1 Introduction 5
2.2 Reliability 6
2.3 Relevance 6
2.4 'Rules of thumb' 8
2.5 Conclusions 10
References 11
3 Using demographic theory, community ecology and spatial models to
illuminate ecotoxicology 13
Peter Kareiva, John Stark and Uno Wennergren
3.1 Introduction 13
3.2 Stage-structured demographic models as an improvement on
simply counting dead animals 14
3.3 Adapting recent advances in community ecology for predicting
beyond single-species reponses in ecotoxicology 18
3.4 Using spatially explicit models to suggest how the scale and
spatial patterning of a chemical stress influences its impact 20
3.5 Can ecology better serve environmental toxicology? 21
3.6 Conclusion 22
Acknowledgements 22
References 22
4 Indirect effects: concepts and approaches from ecological theory 25
Donald L. DeAngelis
4.1 Introduction 25
4.2 Simple types of indirect effects 27
4.3 Empirical studies to determine indirect effects 34
vi Contents
4.4 Estimating magnitudes of direct and indirect effects 35
4.5 Factors affecting the propagation of indirect effects 37
4.6 Indeterminacy of ecological interactions 38
4.7 Conclusions 39
References 40
5 The dimensions of space and time in the assessment of
ecotoxicological risks 43
Paul C. Jepson and Tom N. Sherratt
5.1 Introduction 43
5.2 Space and time in ecotoxicology: arguments from first
principles 45
5.3 Effects of temporal and spatial factors on ecotoxicological
processes 48
5.4 The next steps in ecotoxicology 52
References 52
6 Coping with variability in environmental impact assessment 55
John A. Wiens
6.1 Introduction 55
6.2 The nature of environmental variation 56
6.3 Variation and impact assessment 58
6.4 Study designs and their assumptions 58
6.5 On natural variation, pseudoreplication, power and scale 64
6.6 Conclusions 66
Acknowledgements 67
References 68
7 Environmental stress and the distribution of traits within populations 71
Valery E. Forbes and Michael H. Depledge
7.1 Are responses to environmental stress general? 72
7.2 Key definitions 72
7.3 Population tolerance distributions 73
7.4 Sensitivity in toxicology 75
7.5 Sensitivity in ecology 75
7.6 Variability in asexual versus sexual populations 78
7.7 Stress-caused changes in variability 79
7.8 Evidence for increased variability in response to stress? 80
7.9 Predicting variance changes in response to stress 82
7.1 0 Detecting effects of stress on variable systems 83
7.11 Promising directions for future inquiry 83
7.12 Concluding remarks 84
Acknowledgements 84
References 84
Index 87
Contributors
Donald J Baird London SWI 3B2
0
Institute of Aquaculture UK
University of Stirling
Stirling FK9 4LA Valery Forbes
UK Department of Life Sciences &
Chemistry
Peter Calow Roskilde University
Department of Animal and Plant PO Box 260
Sciences DK-4000 Roskilde
The University of Sheffield Denmark
Sheffield S 10 2TN
UK Peter Wo Greig-Smith
Ministry of Agriculture, Fisheries
Donald L. DeAngelis and Food
National Biological Service Director.ate of Fisheries Research
Department of Biology Fisheries Laboratory
University of Miami Lowestoft
PO Box 249018 Suffolk NR33 OHT
Coral Gables UK
Florida 33124
USA Paul Jepson
Department of Entomology
Michael Ho Depledge Oregon State University
Department of Biological 2046 Cordley Hall
Sciences Corvallis
University of Plymouth Oregon 97331-2907
Drake Circus USA
Plymouth PL4 8AA
UK Peter Kareiva
Department of Zoology
Peter EoT. Douben University ofWas~ington
Royal Commission on Seattle
Environmental Pollution Washington 98195
Great Smith Street USA
viii Contributors
Lorraine Maltby Washington State University
Department of Animal and Plant Puyallup
Sciences Washington 98371
The University of Sheffield USA
Sheffield S 10 2TN
UK Uno Wennergren
Department of Biology
Tom Sherratt Linkoping University
Department of Biological Sciences S-58l 83 Linkoping
University of Durham Sweden '
Sciences Laboratories
South Road John Wiens
Durham DHI 3LE Department of Biology
UK Colorado State University
Fort Collins
John Stark Colorado 80523
Puyallup Research & Extension Center USA
Series foreword
Ecotoxicology is a relatively new scientific discipline. Indeed, it might be
argued that it is only during the last 5-10 years that it has come to merit being
regarded as a true science, rather than a collection of procedures for protecting
the environment through management and monitoring of pollutant discharges
into the environment. The term 'ecotoxicology' was first coined in the late
sixties by Prof. Truhaut, a toxicologist who had the vision to recognize the
importance of investigating the fate and effects of chemicals in ecosystems. At
that time, ecotoxicology was considered a sub-discipline of medical toxicology.
Subsequently, several attempts have been made to portray ecotoxicology in a
more realistic light. Notably, both Moriarty (1988) and F. Ramade (1987)
emphasized in their books the broad basis of ecotoxicology, encompassing
chemical and radiation effects on all components of ecosystems. In doing so,
they and others have shifted concern from direct chemical toxicity to humans,
to the far more subtle effects that pollutant chemicals exert on natural biota.
Such effects potentially threaten the existence of all life on earth.
Although I have identified the sixties as the era when ecotoxicology was first
conceived as a coherent subject area, it is important to acknowledge that
studies that would now be regarded as ecotoxicological are much older.
Wherever people's ingenuity has led them to change the face of nature signif
icantly, it has not escaped them that a number of biological consequences,
often unfavourable, ensue. Early waste disposal and mining practices must
have alerted the practitioners to effects that accumulated wastes have on local
natural communities; for example, by rendering water supplies undrinkable or
contaminating agricultural land with toxic mine tailings. As activities intensi
fied with the progressive development of human civilizations, effects became
even more marked, leading one early environmentalist, G. P. Marsh, to write
in 1864: 'The ravages committed by Man subvert the relations and destroy the
balance that nature had established'.
But what are the influences that have shaped the ecotoxicological studies of
today? Stimulated by the explosion in popular environmentalism in the sixties,
there followed in the seventies and eighties a tremendous increase in the
creation of legislation directed at protecting the environment. Furthermore,
political restructuring, especially in Europe, has led to the widespread
x Series foreword
implementation of this legislation. This currently involves enormous numbers
of environmental managers, protection officers, technical staff and consul
tants. The ever-increasing use of new chemicals places further demands on
government agencies and industries who are required by law to evaluate
potential toxicity and likely environmental impacts. The environmental
manager's problem is that he needs rapid answers to current questions con
cerning a very broad range of chemical effects and also information about how
to control discharges, so that legislative targets for in situ chemical levels can
be met. It is not surprising, therefore. that he may we\! feel frustrated by more
research-based ecotoxicological scientists who constantly question the rele
vance and validity of current test procedures and the data they yield. On the
other hand, research-based ecotoxicologists are often at a loss to understand
why huge amounts of money and time are expended on conventional toxicity
testing and monitoring programmes, which may satisfy legislative require
ments, but apparently do little to protect ecosystems from long-term, insidious
decline.
It is probably true to say that until recently ecotoxicology has been driven
by the managerial and legislative requirements mentioned above. However,
growing dissatisfaction with laboratory-based tests for the prediction of eco
system effects has enlisted support for studying more fundamental aspects of
ecotoxicology and the development of conceptual and theoretical frameworks.
Clearly, the best way ahead for ecotoxicological scientists is to make use of
the strengths of our field. Few sciences have at their disposal such a well
integrated input of effort for people trained in ecology, biology, toxicology,
chemistry, engineering, statistics, etc. Nor have many subjects such over
whelming support from the general public regarding our major goal:
environmental protection. Equally important, the practical requirements
of ecotoxicological managers are not inconsistent with the aims of more
academically-orientated ecotoxicologists. For example, how better to validate
and improve current test procedures than by conducting parallel basic research
programmes in situ to see if controls on chemical discharges really do protect
biotic communities?
More broadly, where are the major ecotoxicological challenges likely to
occur in the future? The World Commission on Environment and Develop
ment estimates that the world population will increase from c. 5 billion at
present to 8.2 billion by 2025. 90% of this growth will occur in developing
countries in subtropical and tropical Africa, Latin America and Asia. The
introduction of chemical wastes into the environment in these regions is likely
to escalate dramatically, ifnot due to increased industrial output, then due to
the use of pesticides and fertilizers in agriculture and the disposal of damaged,
unwanted or obsolete consumer goods supplied from industrialized countries.
It may be many years before resources become available to implement effective
waste-recycling programmes in countries with poorly developed infra
structures, constantly threatened by natural disasters and poverty.
