Coal and coal combustion byproducts can have significant concentrations of lanthanides (rare earth elements). Rare earths are vital in the production of modern electronics and optics, among other uses. Enrichment in coals may have been a function of a number of processes, with contributions from volcanic ash falls being among the most significant mechanisms. In this paper, we discuss some of the important coal-based deposits in China and the US and critique classification systems used to evaluate the relative value of the rare earth concentrations and the distribution of the elements within the coals and coal combustion byproducts.

No abstract

Recent scientific debate has focused on the potential for inhaled formaldehyde to cause lymphohematopoietic cancers, particularly leukemias, in humans. The concern stems from certain epidemiology studies reporting an association, although particulars of endpoints and dosimetry are inconsistent across studies and several other studies show no such effects. Animal studies generally report neither hematotoxicity nor leukemia associated with formaldehyde inhalation, and hematotoxicity studies in humans are inconsistent. Formaldehyde's reactivity has been thought to preclude systemic exposure following inhalation, and its apparent inability to reach and affect the target tissues attacked by known leukemogens has, heretofore, led to skepticism regarding its potential to cause human lymphohematopoietic cancers. Recently, however, potential modes of action for formaldehyde leukemogenesis have been hypothesized, and it has been suggested that formaldehyde be identified as a known human leukemogen. In this article, we apply our hypothesis-based weight-of-evidence (HBWoE) approach to evaluate the large body of evidence regarding formaldehyde and leukemogenesis, attending to how human, animal, and mode-of-action results inform one another. We trace the logic of inference within and across all studies, and articulate how one could account for the suite of available observations under the various proposed hypotheses. Upon comparison of alternative proposals regarding what causal processes may have led to the array of observations as we see them, we conclude that the case fora causal association is weak and strains biological plausibility. Instead, apparent association between formaldehyde inhalation and leukemia in some human studies is better interpreted as due to chance or confounding.

No abstract

High‐profile reports of detrimental scientific practices leading to retractions in the scientific literature contribute to lack of trust in scientific experts. Although the bulk of these have been in the literature of other disciplines, environmental toxicology and chemistry are not free from problems. While we believe that egregious misconduct such as fraud, fabrication of data, or plagiarism is rare, scientific integrity is much broader than the absence of misconduct. We are more concerned with more commonly encountered and nuanced issues such as poor reliability and bias. We review a range of topics including conflicts of interests, competing interests, some particularly challenging situations, reproducibility, bias, and other attributes of ecotoxicological studies that enhance or detract from scientific credibility. Our vision of scientific integrity encourages a self‐correcting culture that promotes scientific rigor, relevant reproducible research, transparency in competing interests, methods and results, and education. Integr Environ Assess Manag 2019;00:000–000. © 2019 SETAC

The effects characterization phase of ecological risk assessments (ERAs) often includes the selection or development of toxicity reference values (TRVs) for chemicals under investigation. In wildlife risk assessments, TRVs are thresholds represented by a dose or concentration associated with a specified adverse response. Traditionally, a TRV may be derived from an estimate of the no-observed-adverse effect level or lowest-observed-adverse-effect level, identified from a controlled toxicity study. Because of the limitations of this approach, risk assessors are increasingly developing TRVs using alternative methods. Benchmark dose (BMD) analysis is widely recognized as one approach for developing TRVs. A BMD is derived using the full dose-response relationship from all experimental doses and may represent a user-specified response level (e.g., 5, 10, 20, or 50%). Although many regulatory programs consider the use of BMD-derived wildlife TRVs, there is limited guidance available for implementing the BMD approach, particularly for ERA. The present study provides a framework for ecological risk assessors to identify appropriate data, examine dose-response relationships, estimate BMDs, and document the results for use in risk analysis. This framework demonstrates the process of developing a TRV using BMD analysis and identifies applications for which this approach may enhance ERAs (e.g., site assessment, chemical or pesticide registration programs). Environ Toxicol Chem 2018;37:1496-1508. © 2018 SETAC.

The development of media-specific ecological values for risk assessment includes the derivation of acceptable levels of exposure for terrestrial wildlife (e.g., birds, mammals, reptiles, and amphibians). Although the derivation and subsequent application of these values can be used for screening purposes, there is a need to identify toxicological effects thresholds specifically for making remedial decisions at individual contaminated sites. A workshop was held in the fall of 2012 to evaluate existing methods and recent scientific developments for refining ecological soil screening levels (Eco-SSLs) and improving the derivation of site-specific ecological soil clean-up values for metals (Eco-SCVs). This included a focused session on the development and derivation of toxicity reference values (TRVs) for terrestrial wildlife. Topics that were examined included: methods for toxicological endpoint selection, techniques for dose-response assessment, approaches for cross-species extrapolation, and tools to incorporate environmental factors (e.g., metal bioavailability and chemistry) into a reference value. The workgroup also made recommendations to risk assessors and regulators on how to incorporate site-specific wildlife life history and toxicity information into the derivation of TRVs to be used in the further development of soil cleanup levels.

Wildlife toxicity reference values (TRVs) are routinely used during screening level and baseline ecological risk assessments (ERAs). Risk assessment professionals often adopt TRVs from published sources to expedite risk analyses. The US Environmental Protection Agency (USEPA) developed ecological soil screening levels (Eco-SSLs) to provide a source of TRVs that would improve consistency among risk assessments. We conducted a survey and evaluated more than 50 publicly available, large-scale ERAs published in the last decade to evaluate if USEPA's goal of uniformity in the use of wildlife TRVs has been met. In addition, these ERAs were reviewed to understand current practices for wildlife TRV use and development within the risk assessment community. The use of no observed and lowest observed adverse effect levels culled from published compendia was common practice among the majority of ERAs reviewed. We found increasing use over time of TRVs established in the Eco-SSL documents; however, Eco-SSL TRV values were not used in the majority of recent ERAs and there continues to be wide variation in TRVs for commonly studied contaminants (e.g., metals, pesticides, PAHs, and PCBs). Variability in the toxicity values was driven by differences in the key studies selected, dose estimation methods, and use of uncertainty factors. These differences result in TRVs that span multiple orders of magnitude for many of the chemicals examined. This lack of consistency in TRV development leads to highly variable results in ecological risk assessments conducted throughout the United States. Integr Environ Assess Manag 2013;9:114-123. ß 2012 SETAC