Chapter 10 Water-Sediment Studies Jeremy Dyson Basel, Switzerland Outline • Defining, Estimating & Using Endpoints • Parent Kinetics – Similarities/differences to other test systems – Models and flowcharts – Statistics and examples • Metabolite Kinetics – Similarities to other test systems – When are metabolite kinetics not required? – Models and flowcharts • Concluding Remarks Defining, Estimating & Using Endpoints Application of Parent or Metabolite Volatilisation Water Column Well-mixed Aerobic Water+particulates Metabolism: Formation & Degradation Transfer Processes Water-Sediment Interface Sediment Slow-mixing Oxic to anoxic Metabolism: Formation & Degradation Defining, Using & Estimating Endpoints • Persistence Endpoints – To determine whether various aquatic ecotoxicolgy studies are triggered, e.g. fish accumulations studies • Modelling Endpoints – To use in calculating PEC values as part of an aquatic risk assessment, e.g. FOCUS surface water scenarios • Further Aspects of these Endpoints – For Parent or Metabolites – For Degradation or Dissipation – For Whole System, Water Column or Sediment Defining, Using & Estimating Endpoints • The Water-Sediment System & Definitions – Behaviour can be more complex than in other systems – Straightforward definitions e.g. dissipation from compartments – Non-straightforward definitions, e.g. degradation in compartments • Study Guidelines and Use – Not always clear if dissipation or degradation required – Decisions about endpoints used made on a case-by-case basis • Difficulties of Estimation – Main problem over degradation-transfer correlations – No simple, robust & reliable constraints procedures – Default worst-case approach if lack of degradation in one compartment, implausible transfer rates (Fsed test), or generally inconsistent with other environmental fate studies Defining, Using & Estimating Endpoints Kinetic Level Level I (1 comp.) Persistence/Modelling Endpoints System (Parent & Metabs) Water column (Both) Sediment (Both) Level II (2 comp.) Water column (Parent) Sediment (Parent) Disappearance Endpoints Degradation Dissipation Dissipation Degradation Degradation Parent Kinetics • Similarities to Other Test Systems – – – – Data entry and exclusion Selection of fitting routine Standard constraints, underlying kinetics etc. Methods of making kinetic decisions • Differences to Other Test Systems – – – – Day zero data: put all in water column Data in terms of mass or equivalent, e.g. %AR Do not use concentration data Operation of the worst-case default approach at Level P-II Models and Flowcharts: Level P-I Kinetic Concept Compartment Initial Level Mo Generic Equation M = Mo F(t) wc + sed or wc or sed Data for wc Disappearance Graphs Data for wc + sed Disappearance Times DT50/90wc+ sed – calculate directly from the fit DT50/90wc – calculate directly from the fit DT50/90sed – calculate directly from the fit Data for sed Models and Flowcharts: Level P-I • SFO Kinetics – Default first choice – Required for modelling endpoints • FOMC Kinetics – Evaluate if data depart appreciably from SFO kinetics • DFOP Kinetics – Offers more flexibility than FOMC with extra parameter • Hockey Stick Kinetics – Data sometimes appear to have some „breakpoint“ in rate Models and Flowcharts: Level P-I System Degradation/Compartment Dissipation • Persistence Endpoints – Tier 1: Check if SFO is an appropriate model – Tier 2: Identify best-fit model if required • Modelling Endpoints – Tier 1: Check if SFO is an acceptable model – Tier 2: Correction procedures if SFO not an acceptable model Models and Flowcharts: Level P-II Kinetic Concept Application Mo Compartment Water Column Mw rw-s rs-w Sediment k-w Ms ks Generic Equations dMw = -rw-s Mw + rs-w Ms – kw Mw dt dMs = -rs-w Ms + rw-s Mw – ks Ms dt Disappearance Graph Data for wc Data for water column Data for sediment Disappearance Times DegT50/90w – calculate directly from the fit DegT50/90s – calculate directly from the fit Models and Flowcharts: Level P-II • Empirical Transfer Pattern – Able to approximate quite closely • Simple Transfer Kinetics – No assumptions about sediment concentration gradients – Appropriate if gradients are complex and not measured – Appropriate to consider before more complex alternatives • First-Order Transfer Kinetics – Relatively easy to implement in software packages Models and Flowcharts: Level P-II Example of Transfer Pattern without Degradation Models and Flowcharts: Level P-II The Fsed Test • Definition – Fraction in sediment at equilibrium in absence of degradation • Modelled Fsed Values – Calculated from fitted transfer parameters of Level P-II model Fsed = rw-s / (rw-s + rs-w) • Theoretical Fsed Values – Based on system/pesticide properties & diffusion assumptions Fsed = (Kd b+) / [(Zw /ZD)+(Kd b+)] Models and Flowcharts: Level P-II • Persistence/Modelling Degradation Endpoints SFO Fit (Criteria to be met even if fit acceptable) – – – Consistent with environmental fate data Degradation rates kw and ks>0 as demonstrated by t-test The Fsed test needs to be passed Use 1 of 3 default approaches tested to ensure they lead to worst-case PEC values No Criteria met? Yes Use estimates as required against triggers/ in modelling Models and Flowcharts: Level P-II • Persistence/Modelling Degradation Endpoints Default approach 1 Passes Fsed test but one degradation rate is zero or fails t-test Set degradation rate to overall system half-life in degrading compartment Set degradation rate to 1 000 day half-life in non-degrading compartment Use default as required in modelling Models and Flowcharts: Level P-II • Persistence/Modelling Degradation Endpoints Default approach 2 Fails Fsed test due to zero transfer rate from sediment to water Yes Fitted degradation faster Set water column degradation rate to overall system half-life Set sediment degradation rate to 1 000 day half-life in water column than Set water column degradation rate to estimated half-life in sediment? No Set sediment degradation rate to overall system half-life Use default as required in modelling Models and Flowcharts: Level P-II • Persistence/Modelling Degradation Endpoints Default approach 3 Fails Fsed test or inconsistent with E Fate data (degradation) Determine and use default that results in worst-case PEC values: Water column degradation half-life=overall system; Sediment half-life= 1 000 days, or vice versa Use default as required in modelling Models and Flowcharts: Level P-II • Persistence/Modelling Degradation Endpoints Default approach 3 Compound 2 Default 3A Compound 2 SFO fit Compound 2 Default 3B Strongly sorbing compound no degration in water column Models and Flowcharts: Level P-II • Persistence/Modelling Degradation Endpoints Default approach 3 Compound 6 Default 3A Compound 6 SFO Fit Compound 6 Default 3B Weakly sorbing compound no degration in water column Models and Flowcharts: Level P-II • What If the Default Options Need Refining? Fit a diffusion-based model to water-sediment data – – A TOXSWA example for such refinement is in Appendix 12 Development needed for a user-friendly implementation of TOXSWA, or a diffusion-based model specific to watersediment systems Statistics and Examples • Assessing Goodness of Fit Visual Assessment – – • 2 Test – – – • Main tool for assessment Plots of model fits & residuals Performed for each compartment, even at Level P-II Supplements visual assessment & model comparison Only a guidance value of 15% error value to pass test t-Test – – Reliability of individual dissipation/degradation rates Total df with a significance level of 10% to pass test Statistics and Examples: Level P-I Compound 6 wc Compound 6 wc + sed Compound 6 sed Statistics and Examples : Level P-I Compartment Modification DegT50/DT50 in days (2) SFO FOMC HS Remove outlier 20.1 (3.6) 20.1 (3.6) 19.8 (3.0) wc Remove outlier 19.1 (2.8) 18.6 (2.7) 18.7 (1.9) sed Remove outlier 21.1 (9.4) 15.2 (6.5) 17.7 (7.7) wc + sed Statistics and Examples : Level P-II Compound 6 Statistics and Examples : Level P-II Compartment Modification DegT1/2 Fsed (%) (2value) Modelled Theoretical wc sed Fix Mo (3.1) 2.16 (9.0) 44 27 - 57 Metabolite Kinetics • Similarities to Other Test Systems – – – – Data entry and exclusion Selection of fitting routine Standard constraints, data exclusion, underlying kinetics etc. Methods of making kinetic decisions • When Are Metabolite Kinetics Not Required? – – – – Sometimes not required for minor metabolites If risks implicitly assessed via higher tier studies Sometimes not if also applied as a „parent substance“ Sometimes not if can add metabolite residues to parent Models and Flow Charts: Level M-I Defining Persistence/Modelling Endpoints Type of Endpoint Compartment Kinetic Model Dissipation System Water Column Sediment Decline from peak „ „ „ „ „ „ Degradation System Formation & degradation Models and Flowcharts: Level M-I • SFO Kinetics – Default first choice – Required for modelling endpoints • FOMC Kinetics – Evaluate if data depart appreciably from SFO kinetics • DFOP Kinetics – Offers more flexibility than FOMC with extra parameter • Hockey Stick Kinetics – Not used Models and Flowcharts: Level M-I System/Compartment Dissipation/Degradation • Persistence Endpoints – Tier 1: Check if SFO is an appropriate model – Tier 2: Identify best-fit model if required • Modelling Endpoints – Tier 1: Check if SFO is an acceptable model – Tier 2: Correction procedures if SFO not an acceptable model Models and Flowcharts: Dissipation Level M-I Kinetic Concept Compartment wc + sed or wc or sed Initial Level Mo Generic Equation M = Mo F(t) Data for wc Disappearance Graphs Data for wc + sed Data for sed Disappearance Times DT50/90wc+sed – calculate directly from the fit DT50/90wc – calculate directly from the fit DT50/90sed – calculate directly from the fit Models and Flowcharts: Degradation Level M-I Kinetic Concept Application Mo Compartment Parent (wc+sed) Mp 1-fm fm Metabolite (wc+sed) Mm Generic Equations MP = Mo FP(t) t Mm(t) = - fm Mo dFP(ti) / dti Fm(t – ti) dti 0 Disappearance Graph Parent (wc+sed) Metabolite (wc+sed) Disappearance Times DegT50/90wc+sed – calculate directly from the fit Models and Flowcharts: Level M-II General Recommendations for Development • Data/Parameter Requirements – Minimise, e.g. do not use sink data as a first step • Kinetics – Use first-order kinetics for transfer & degradation processes • Formation Fraction – Option to use same fraction for water column & sediment – Option to use a default fraction, i.e. that estimated at Level M-I Concluding Remarks • General Remarks – Complex area of kinetics, but the workgroup has increased understanding of strengths & limitations of approaches, bringing greater transparancy & consistency • Parent Kinetics – Resolved endpoint definition, use and estimation – In a framework and developed degradation refinement process • Metabolite Kinetics – Resolving endpoint definition, use and estimation – Kinetics still need actively developing for Level M-II
© Copyright 2026 Paperzz