SIMONI (Smart Integrated Monitoring) as a novel bioanalytical strategy for water quality assessment: Part I–model design and effect‐based trigger values

Abstract

It is virtually impossible to reliably assess water quality with target chemical analyses only. Therefore, a complementary effect-based risk assessment by bioanalyses on mixtures of bioavailable micropollutants is proposed: the Smart Integrated Monitoring (SIMONI) strategy. The goal of this strategy is to obtain more reliable information on the water quality to select optimum measures for improvement. The SIMONI strategy is 2-tiered. Tier 1 is a bioanalytical hazard identification of sites. A tier 2 ecological risk assessment is carried out only at a limited number of sites where increased hazards are detected in tier 1. Tier 2 will be customized, based on tier 1 evaluation and additional knowledge of the aquatic system. The present study focuses on the tier 1 bioanalytical hazard identification to distinguish "hot spots" of chemical pollution. First, a selection was made of relevant and cost-effective bioanalytical endpoints to cover a wide spectrum of micropollutant modes of action. Specific endpoints may indicate which classes of chemicals might cause adverse effects. Second, effect-based trigger values (EBT) were derived for these bioassays to indicate potential ecological risks. Comparison of EBT with bioassay responses should discriminate sites exhibiting different chemical hazards. Third, a model was designed to estimate the overall risks for aquatic ecosystems. The associated follow-up for risk management is a "toxicity traffic light" system: green, low hazard (no action required); orange, potential risk (further research needed); and red, high risk (mitigation measures). Thanks to cost-effectiveness, flexibility, and relevance, the SIMONI strategy has the potential to become the first bioanalytical tool to be applied in regular water quality monitoring programs. Environ Toxicol Chem 2017;36:2385-2399. © 2017 SETAC.

SIMONI (Smart Integrated Monitoring) as a novel bioanalytical strategy for water quality assessment: Part II–field feasibility survey

“…All other bioassays were performed on passive sampler extracts. The proposed EBT values [1] were exceeded for Daphniatox at the ZL1 and NL1 sites; for antiandrogenic activity at the ZL1, NL1, and AAU sites; for genotoxicity at the ZL1 site; and for PAH activities at the ABU, AAU (both River Amstel sites), and RVL (River Vecht). The increased PAH CALUX activity at the River Amstel sites was in agreement with the observed annual average environmental quality standards exceedance of fluoranthene.…”

“…A selection of bioanalytical endpoints was established in the first study of this series [1], based on literature data [2][3][4][5] and This Environmental Toxicology and Chemistry, Vol. 36, No.…”

“…A selection of bioanalytical endpoints was established in the first study of this series , based on literature data and our own research (see Bioassay responses in polar and nonpolar passive sampling extracts ). The initial selection is summarized in Table , together with the bioassays that were applied in the present study to measure these endpoints.…”

Risk‐based approach in the revised European Union drinking water legislation: Opportunities for bioanalytical tools

“…In addition to the scoring of individual test systems, another consideration in the selection of in vitro bioassays for effect‐based water quality monitoring is that the use of a set of similar bioassays (for different endpoints) improves efficiency and quality control. The eventual bioassay panel should cover the various types of toxic action (i.e., nonspecific, specific, and reactive toxicity), be cost‐effective in terms of equipment and consumables, and include in vitro bioassays that perform well and can be implemented without high‐tech laboratory requirements or specialist knowledge (Van der Oost et al ).…”

“…Even though there are no formal regulations in place yet, bioassays are already being used for water quality monitoring in the Netherlands at Dutch drinking water utilities and water laboratories, in particular those that produce drinking water from infiltrated surface water. A panel of in vitro bioassays is included in the SIMONI strategy for water quality assessment that is regularly applied by many Dutch water boards (Van der Oost et al , ). The selection of in vitro bioassays in the SIMONI panel was based on Waternet research and earlier studies in which in vitro bioassays were evaluated for their use in water quality monitoring (Willemsen et al ; van der Linden et al ; Macova et al ; Escher et al ).…”