Evidence map›Paper›PMID 34850546›Full record

ArticleIntegrated environmental assessment and management2022

Multiple lines of evidence for identifying potential hazards to fish from contaminants of emerging concern in Great Lakes tributaries.

Sarah M Elliott, Daniel J Gefell, Richard L Kiesling, Stephanie L Hummel, Chryssa K King, Charles H Christen, Satomi Kohno, Heiko L Schoenfuss

Open access · hybridAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Integrated environmental assessment and management, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
0citing papers in PubMed
0.1field-weighted citation impact, top 62% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

0 citing papers in PubMed, 6 citations in OpenAlex.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

8 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.

Sarah M ElliottUS Geological Survey, Mounds View, Minnesota, USA.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-1414-3024
Daniel J GefellUS Fish and Wildlife Service, Cortland, New York, USA.
Richard L KieslingUS Geological Survey, Mounds View, Minnesota, USA.
Stephanie L HummelUS Fish and Wildlife Service, Bloomington, Minnesota, USA.
Chryssa K KingSt. Cloud State University, St. Cloud, Minnesota, USA.
Charles H ChristenSt. Cloud State University, St. Cloud, Minnesota, USA.
Satomi KohnoSt. Cloud State University, St. Cloud, Minnesota, USA.
Heiko L SchoenfussSt. Cloud State University, St. Cloud, Minnesota, USA.
St. Cloud State University · USUnited States Fish and Wildlife Service · USUnited States Geological Survey · US

Funding

Great Lakes Restoration Inititative
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Contaminants of emerging concern (CECs; e.g., pharmaceuticals, flame retardants, pesticides, and industrial chemicals) are omnipresent throughout tributaries to the Great Lakes. Furthermore, CECs are often present at concentrations that are potentially hazardous to aquatic species. Since 2010, we characterized the presence of CECs at 309 sites within 47 Great Lakes tributaries and characterized responses of fathead minnow (Pimephales promelas) exposed to river water at a subset of 26 sites within four tributaries. Our work resulted in three independent lines of evidence related to the potential hazards of CEC exposure to fish. First, vulnerability (where vulnerability refers to likelihood) of surface waters to CEC presence was predicted using select watershed characteristics. Second, hazard to fish (where hazard means the potential for adverse biological responses) was predicted using screening values for a subset of CECs. Third, biological responses of fathead minnow exposed to river water in streamside exposures were measured. We assessed the congruence of these three lines of evidence for identifying sites with elevated hazards to CEC exposure. Predicted vulnerability and hazards agreed at 66% of all sites. Where the two indices did not agree, vulnerability often underestimated predicted hazard. When compared with measured biological responses from streamside exposures, predicted hazards agreed for 42% of samples. Furthermore, when predicted hazards for specific effect categories were compared with similar measured biomarkers, 26% and 46% of samples agreed for reproductive and physiological effect categories, respectively. Overall, vulnerability and hazard predictions tended to overestimate the measured biological responses, providing a protective estimate of the potential hazards of CEC exposure to fish. When used together, these three approaches can help resource managers prioritize management activities in minimizing hazards of CEC exposure and can be used by researchers to prioritize studies focused on understanding the hazards of CEC exposure to fish. Integr Environ Assess Manag 2022;18:1246-1259. © 2021 The Authors. Integrated Environmental Assessment and Management published by Wiley Periodicals LLC on behalf of Society of Environmental Toxicology & Chemistry (SETAC). This article has been contributed to by US Government employees and their work is in the public domain in the USA.

Indexed as

CyprinidaeWater Pollutants, ChemicalAnimalsEnvironmental MonitoringHumansLakesWaterWaterWater Pollutants, ChemicalNatural resource managementOrganic contaminantsPimephales promelasScreening valuesSurface water

Identifiers

PMID34850546
PMCPMC9542151
OpenAlexW3217473815

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.