PB85-227049 

GUIDELINES FOR DERIVING NUMERICAL NATIONAL WATER QUALITY CRITERIA 

FOR THE PROTECTION OF AQUATIC ORGANISMS MD THEIR USES 

by 

Charles E. Stephen, Donald I. Mount, David J. Hansen, John R. Gentile, 

Gary A. Chapman, and William A. Brungs 

U.S. ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY 

OFFICE OF RESEARCH AND DEVELOPMENT 

ENVIRONMENTAL RESEARCH LABORATORIES 

DULUTH, MINNESOTA 

NARRAGANSETT, RHODE ISLAND 

CORVALLIS, OREGON 

REPRODUCED BY 

NATIONAL TECHNICAL 

INFORMATION SERVICE 

U.S. DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE 

SPRINGFIELD, VA 22161 
NOTICES 

This document has been reviewed in accordance with U.S. Environmental 

Protection Agency policy and approved for publication. 

Mention of trade names or commercial products does not constitute endorsement 

or recommendation for use. 

This document is available the public to through the National Technical 

Information Service (NTIS), 5285 Port Royal Road, Springfield, VA 22161. 

ii 
CONTENTS 

Page 

Executive Summary . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . iv 

Introduction .............................. 1 

I. Definition of Material of Concern ................ 19 

II. Collection of Data ...................... 21 

III. Required Data .......................... 22 

IV. Final Acute Value ........................ 26 

V. Final Acute Equation ...................... 32 

VI. Final Chronic Value ....................... 36 

VII. Final Chronic Equation ..................... 43 

VIII. Final Plant Value ........................ 47 

IX. Final Residue Value ....................... 48 

X. Other Data ........................... 54 

XI. Criterion. ........................... 54 

XII. Final Review .......................... 55 

References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 58 

Appendix 1. Resident North American Species of Aquatic Animals Used 

in Toxicity and Bioconcentration Tests . . . . . . . . . . 62 

Appendix 2. Example Calculation of Final Acute Value, Computer 

Program, and Printouts . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 97 

iii 
exEcwTIvE SUMMARY 

Derivetim of n-rice1 nation81 water quality criteria for the 

protection of aquatic organism8 and their Use8 is a Collp18X process (Figure 

.l) chat u8es information from many areas of aquatic toxicology. After a 

decision is made ehrt a aacional criterion ir needed for a particular 

material, all available information concerning toxicity to, and bioaccumulacion by, l qu8tic orgaairas ir collectrd , reviewd for rcceptability, and 

rorted. If enough acceptable data on acute toxicity co aquatic animals are 

available, they are u8ed co estimate the hiqhesc one-hour average coacencration that should not rerult in uoaccepcable affect8 oa aquatic organisma and 

their uaas. If jurcifiad, thir concencracioa is m&d8 a fuaccioa of a water 

quality characteristic ruch a8 PB, ralinity, or hardacs8. Similarly, data on 

the chronic toxicity of the material to aquatic animal8 are ured co escimace 

the highert four-day average concentration thee rhould not cause unacceptable 

toxicity during a long-term exposure. If appropriate, Ehi8 concencracion is 

al80 related to a w&car quality characterirtic. 

Data on toxicity to aquatic pleat8 are examined to decemine vhecher 

plants are likely to be unacceptably affected by conceacracioas chrt should 

not cause uaaccepcable effeccr oa animals. Data ou bioaccumulacion by 

aquatic orgaairu are ured co decermiae if residue8 might subject edible 

specie8 to rescrictioor by the U.S. Food and Drug Mainircracion or if such 

residue8 might harm som wildlife coa8mer8 of aquatic life. All ocher 

av8ilable data are exriaed for l dverre effect8 that might be biologically 

important. 

If a chorouqh review of the pertinent informacion indicates that enough 

acceptable data are available, numerical national vacer quality criteria are 

derived for Eresh water or salt water or both co protect aquatic organisms 

iv 
DerhaUon oi Hum- National Wmtw Quality Crituia for the 

ProtmctiondAqumtiaO~mnisnu mndibolr U#r 

V 
sad their ures from unacceptable effect8 due to exporures to high, conceatrstionr for rhort period8 of time, lower coaceacracioa8 for longer period8 of 

time, and combin8tioa8 of the two. 

vi 
Iat roduct ion 

Of the several pO88ible form8 of Criteria , the numerical form is the 

IDOlt COaSEIOUs but the aarracive (e.g., pollutants m8c not be present ia 

harmful concentrations) and operational (e.g., concentration3 of pollutants 

msc aoc exceed one-teach of the 96-hr LCSO) forms can be used if numerical 

criteria are not porriblc or desirable. If it were fearible, a freehwater 

(or 3alewacer) numeric81 aquatic life national cricerioa* for a material 

should be determined by conducting field tests on a wide variety of 

unpolluted bodies of fresh (or salt) water. It would be aecersary to add 

vrrious mount8 of the material to each body of wacer in order co determine 

the higherc concentration that would not cause any unacceptable long-term or 

shore-term effect on the aquatic orgaairnr or chair u8e3. The 10=8C of 

these highest coacentracioas would becoas the freshwaccr (or salcwacer) 

national aquatic life w&cat quality crireriou for that aacerial, unless one 

or more of the lowert conceacracious were judged to be outlierr. Because ic 

is uot fearible co determine national criteria by conducting ouch field 

testr, chase Guideline8 for Deriving Numerical Naeioaal Water Quality 

Criteria for the Procectioa of Aquatic Organisms and Their Uses (hereafter 

referred co as the National Cuideliaes) describe an objective, internally 

coasisceat, appropriate, and fersible vay of deriving national criteria, 

which are intended to provide the 3ame level of protection as the infeasible 

field testing approach described above. 

Becaure aquatic ecoryscem8 can tolerate some seresr .and occasional 

adverse effects, protection of all 3pecies at all times and placer is not 

The term “national criteria” is used herein becaure ic is more descriptive 

than the 3ynoamou8 term “section 304(a) criteria”, which is used in cheWater Quality gtandards Regulation [lj. 

1 
deemed access l ry l If acceptable data are available for a large number of 

appropriate t8xa frao an appropriate variety of caxoacmic and functional 

grcups, a rea8oaablc level of prOteCCiOn vi11 probably be provided if all 

except a small fraction of the taxa are protected, ualess a Commercially or 

recrsatioa8lly iaporcant specie8 ir very 3ea3itive. The mall fraction is 

get at 0.05 becau8e other fractioa8 rerultad in criteria chat reamed too high 

or coo low ia compariroa with the let8 of deer from which they wre 

calculaeed. Use of 0.05 to calculare a Final Acura Valur doe8 not imply char 

this perceacage of adversely affected tax8 rhould be u8ed to decide in a 

field situation *ether a criterioa is coo high or coo low or just right. 

Dacensiaiag the validity of a criterion derived for a particular body of 

v&car, porribly by mOdifiC&tiOn of a nacioaal CTiCeriOU co reflect local 

condicioas [1,2,31, should be based on an operaeioaal definition of 

“protection of aquatic orgaairms ad their urea” chat take8 iaco account the 

praccicalicies of field monitoring programs rod the concern8 of the public. 

Ebnicoriag progrmr should contain sampling point8 8f enough times and places 

thee all unacceptable changes, whether caured directly or indirectly, will be 

detected. The programs rhould adequately monitor the kinds of species of 

concern co the public, i.e., firh in fresh water and firh aad 

aacroinvercebrace8 in 8alt water. If the kind8 of specie8 of concern cannot 

be adequately moaicored at a rearouable co8t , appropriate rurrogace species 

8hould be monitored. The kinds of rpecier m08t likely to be good surrogates 

are chore that either (a) are a major food of the derired kinds of species or 

(b) utilize the same food a8 the derired specie8 or (c) both. Even if a 

major adverse effect on appropriate surrogate species doe8 not directly 

result in an unacceptable effect on the kind8 of rpecies of concern to the 

public, it indicates a high probability that such an efface will occur. 

2 
To be acceptable to the public and useful in field sicuacions, 

protection of aquatic organisms and their uses should be defined as 

prevention of unacceptable long-term and short-term effects on (1) 

commercially, tecreacionally, and ocher important species and (2) (a) fish 

and benchic invertebrate assemblages in rivers and screams, and (b) fish, 

benchic inverrebrate, and zooplankcon assemblages in lakes, reservoirs, 

estuaries, and oceans. Monitoring programs intended to be able co detect 

unacceptable effects should be tailored to the body of water of concern so 

that necessary samples are obtained af enough times and places co provide 

adequate data on the populations of imporranc species, as well as data 

directly related co the reasons for their being considered important. For 

example, for substances chat are residue limited, species chat are consumed 

should be monitored for coacrainancs to ensure chat wildlife predators are 

protected, FDA action levels are not exceeded, and flavor is uoc impaired. 

Moaicorinq programs should also provide daea on the nusber of taxa and number 

of individuals in the above-named assemblages rhac can be sampled at 

reasonable cost. The amount of decrease in the number of caxa or number of 

individuals in an assemblage that should be considered unacceptable should 

cake into account appropriate feacurer of the body of vacer and its aquatic 

community. Because most monitoring programs can only dececc decreases of 

more chm 20 percent, any statistically significant decrease should usually 

be considered unacceptable. The insensitivity of most oonicoring programs 

greatly limits their usefulness for studying the validicy of criteria because 

unacceptable changes can occur and not be dececced. Therefore, although 

limited field studies can sometimes demonscrare chat crieeria are 

underprotective, only high quality field studies can reliably demonscrace 

that criteria are not underproteccive. 

3 
If the purpo8e of water quality criteria were co protect only 

cmrcially and recreacionaily important species, criteria Specifically 

derived co protect such species and chair uses from the direct adverse 

effects of a m8cerial would probably, in more rieuacions, 8100 protect those 

species from indirecr adverse effects due to effectr of the material on ocher 

species in the l cosystee. For ex8aple, in most sicuatioos either the food 

chain would be more resistant than the important species 8d their uses or 

the important species and their food chains would be adaptable enough co 

overcome effeccr of the material oa portions of the food chains. 

These Retional Cuideliner have been developed on the rheory that effects 

which occur ou a species in appropriate laboratory tests will generally occur 

on the s8aa species in ccmp8rable field situations. All Morth American 

bodies of water and resident aquatic species md their uses 8re want co be 

taken into account, rxcepc for a fav chat may be coo atypical, such as the 

Great Salt Lake, brine shriap, aud the riscouet subspecies of Lake trout, 

which occurs in Lake Superior and contains up co 67% fat in cha fillets [4]. 

Derivation of criteria specifically for the Great Salt Lake or Lake Superior 

might have co take brine shrimp and siscowec, rerpectively, into accouec. 

-erical aquatic Life criteria darived using these Aacioaal Guidelines 

are l xpre8sed as tw emhero, rather than the traditional one umber, so that 

the criteria more accurecely reflect toxicological and practical realicier. 

Kf properly derived and used, the coabinacion of a raxircn concentration and 

a coatinuour coaceatratiou rhould provide an appropriate degree of protection 

of aquatic organism8 and their uses from acute l ud chronic toxicicy co 

l nim818, toxicity to plaacs, and bioaccmulation by aquatic org8nismr, 

4 
without being as restrictive as a one-number criterion would have to be iu 

order to provide the same degree of protection. 

Criteria produced by these Guidelines are intended co be useful for 

developing water quality standards, mixing zone standards, effluent limicatioas, etc. The development of such standards and limitations, however, 

might have co take into account such additional factors as social, legal, 

economic, and hydrological considerations, the environmental and analytical 

chemistry of the aacerisl , the extrapolatiaa from Laboratory daea co field 

situations, and relationships becueea species for which data are available 

and species in the body of vater of concern. As an iatenaediate step in the 

development of stmdards, it might be desirable to derive rice-specific 

criteria by modification of* national criteria to reflect such local 

conditions as uater quality, temperecure, or ecologicaLly importanc species 

[1,2,31. In addjtion, vich appropriate modifications them National 

Guidelines can ba used co derive criteria for any specific geographical area, 

body of water (such as the Great Salt Lake), or group of similar bodies of 

water, if adequate infomation is available concerning the effects of the 

material of concern on appropriate species and their uses. 

Criteria should attempt co provide a reasonable and adequate amouac of 

protection with only a small possibility of coasiderablr overprotection or 

underprotection. It is not enough chat a national criterion be the best 

estimate chat can be obtained using available data; ic is equally important 

chat a criterion be derived only if adequate appropriate data are available 

co provide reasonable confidence chat ic is a good eat imare. Therefore, 

these National Guidelines specify cartrin data chat should be available if a 

numerical criterion is co be derived. If all the required data are uot 

5 
available, usually a criterion should not be derived. On the other hand, the 

availability of all required data does not ensure that a criterion can be 

derived. 

A common belief is that national criteria are based on “worse case” 

assumptions and that local considerations will raise, but not lower, 

criteria. For exmple, it will usually be assused that if the concentration 

of a material in a body of water is lower than the national criterion, no 

unacceptable effects will occur and no site-specific cri&arion needs co be 

derived. If, however, the concentration of a material in a body of water is 

higher than the national cricerioa , it will usually be assumed that a sitespecific criterioa should be derived. In order co preveac the l ssuxpcioa of 

the “worst case” nature of aatioual criteria from resulrinq in the 

underprotection of coo aaay bodies of water, national criteria muat be 

intended to protect a1’1 or alaosc all bodier of water. Thus, if bodies of 

water and the aquatic comaraities in them do differ substantially in their 

sensitivities to a naterial, national criteria should be at least somewhat 

overprotective for a majority of the bodies of water. To do otherwise would 

either (a) require derivation of site-specific criteria even if the sicespecific concentration were substantially below the natioaal criccrion or (b) 

cause the “worst case” l srmpeioa to result in the underprotection of 

numerous bodies of water. On the other hand, national criteria are probably 

underprotective of some bodies of water. 

The tuo factors that will probably cause the most difference between 

national and site-specific criteria are the species chat will be exposed and 

the characteristics of the water. In order to ensure chat national crireria 

are appropriately protective, the required data for national criteria include 

some species that are sensitive co many materials and national criteria are 

6 
specifically based on tests coaducted in water relatively low in particulate 

matter aad orgaaic matter. Thus, the two factors chat will usually be 

considered in the derivatioa of site-specific criteria from natioaal criteria 

are used to help ensure chat national criteria are appropriecely proceccive. 

00 the ocher hand, some local condicioas might require chat ricespecific criteria be lower thaa national criteria. Some uaeesced locally 

important species might be very sensitive co the material of concern, aad 

local water quality might aoc reduce the coxicicy of the material. In 

addition, aquatic organisms in. field situations might be streeeed by diseases, 

parasites, predators, other pollutmcs, contaminated or insufficient food, aad 

fluctuating l ud extreme conditioas of flow, water quality, aad temperature. 

Further, some materials might degrade to more toxic materials, or some 

import&at cmaity fuactioas or species interactions might be adversely 

affected by coaceatratious lower than chose that affect iadividual species. 

Criteria aaat be used in a manaer that is coneietenc with the way ia 

which they were derived if the intended lev.el of protrctioo is to be provided 

ia the real world. Although derivation of wafer quality criteria for aquatic 

life is coascraiaed by the ways toxicity and biocouceatration tests are 

usually coaducted, there are still aaay diffareac ways that criteria can be 

derived, expressed, and used. The means used to derive aad rtate criteria 

should relate, in the best possible way , the Linda of data that are available 

concerning toxicity aad bioconceatracioa and the ways criteria can be used co 

protect aquatic organirma l ud their uses. 

The major problem is to determine the best way chat the atatement of a 

cricerioa caa bridge the gap between the nearly constant conceatrations used 

in most toxicity aad bioconcentratioa tests and the fluctuating coaceacrations 

that usually exist in the real world. A statement of a criterioa as a number 

7 
that is not to be exceeded any time or place is not acceptable betause few, 

if any, people who use criteria would take it literally aad few, if any, 

toxicologists would defend a literal interpretation. Rather than cry to 

reinterpret a criterion chat is neither ureful nor valid, it is better to 

develop a more appropriate way of staeiag criteria. 

Alchouqh soms materials might not exhibit chresholdr, maay materials 

probably do. For any threshold material , coatinuoua exposure co any 

combiaation of coocaatratioas below she threshold will not cause an 

unacceptable effect (es defiaed oa pager l-3) on aquatic orgaaistis and their 

ures, except that the conceocration of a required crate nutrient might be too 

low. However, ie is importaac to noee that this is a threshold of 

unacceptable effect, not a threshold of adverse effect. Some adverse effect, 

possibly even a small reduccioa ia the suNiva1, growth, or reproduction of a 

cmrcially or recreatioaally imporcaat species, will probably occur ar, sad 

possibly even below, the threshold. The Criterion Continuous Coacuacracion 

(CCC) is iatended to be a good estimate of this threshold of unaccepceble 

effect. If maintained coatinuously, l ay coucentracion above the CCC is 

expected to cauae aa uaacceptable affect. Cn the ocher head, the conceacratioa of a pollutant in a body of water can be above the CCC without causing 

an unacceptable affect if (a) the magnitudes aad durations of the excursions 

above the CCC are appropriately limited and (b) there are compensating 

periods of time during which the concentration is below the CCC. The higher 

the concentration ir above the CCC, the shorter the period of time ic can be 

tolerated. But it is uailnportrat whether there is any upper limit on 

coaceatrations that can be colerated instancaaeously or even for one minute 

because concentrations outside mixing soaes rarely change substantially in 

such short periods of time. 

8 
in elegant, general approach co the problem of definiag conditions (a) 

and (b) would be to integrate the concentration over time, taking into 

account uptake and deputation rates, cransport within the organism co a 

critical site, etc. Because such an approach is not currently feasible, an 

approximate approach is to require that the average concentration not exceed 

tha CCC. The average concentration should probably be calculated as the 

arithmetic average rather than the geometric mean (51. If a suitable 

averaging period is selected, the magnitudes end duraeioas of conceasratione 

above the CCC will be appropriately limited, end suitable compensating 

periods below the CCC will be required. 

In the elegant approach mentioned above, the uptake end depuracioa rates 

vould deeermine the effective averagiag period, but these rates are likely to 

vary from species to rpecies for any particular material. Thus the elegaat 

approach might not provide a defiaitive aaswer to the problem of selecting an 

appropriate averaging period. An l lteraacive is to consider that the purpose 

of the averaging period is to allow the concentration to be above the CCC 

only if the allowed fluctuating concentracioas do not cause more adverse 

effect thaa would be caused by a coaeinuous exposure co the CCC. For 

example, if the CCC caused a 10% reduction in growth of rainbow trout, or a 

13% reduction in survival of oysters, or a 7% reduction ia reproduction of 

smallmouth bass, it ia the purpose of the averaging period co allow concentrations above the CCC only if the coral exposure will not cause any more 

adverae effect than continuous exposure to the CCC would cause. 

Even though only a few tests have compared the effects of a conscanc 

concentration with the effects of the same average conceatratioa resulting 

fran a fluccuatiag concentration , nearly all the available comparisons have 

shown that substantial fluctuations result in increased adverse effects 

9 
[5,61 n Thus if the averaging period is aot co allow increesed adverse 

ef facts, it mst not allow subataatial fluctuations. Life-Cycle cescs with 

species such as mysids and daphnids aad early life-stage tests with warnwater 

fishes usually last for 20 CO 30 days. An averaging period that is equal CO 

the lenqch of the test will obviously allow the worst possible fluccuacions 

and would very likely allou increased adverse effects. 

An averaging period of four days seems appropriate for use with the CCC 

for two reasons. First, it ia subecantially shorter than the 20 co 30 days 

chat is obviously unacceptable. Secoad, for some species it appears that the 

results of chroaic tests are due to the existence of a sensitive life stage 

at some time during the test [71, rather than being caused by either longterm stress or loag-term l ccumulatioa of the test material in the organism. 

The existence of a sensitive life stage is probably the cause of acutechronic rarios that are not much greater thaa 1, and is also possible when 

the ratio is subscancially greater than 1. Ia addition, some experimentally 

determined acute-chronic ratios are somewhat less than 1, possibly because 

prior exposure duriag the chronic tese increased the resistance of the 

sensitive life stage (81. A four-day averaging period will probably prevent 

increased adverse effactr on sensitive life stages by limiting the durations 

and magnitudes of exceedeaces* of the CCC. 

‘Ibe considerations applied to interpretation of the CCC also apply to 

the CMC. For the Cm: the averaging period should again be substaatially less 

than the lengths of the tests ic is based on, i.e., substaotially less than 

*Although “exceedence” has not been found in l ay dictionary, it is used here 

because it is not appropriate to use “violation” in conjunction with 

criteria, no other word seems approvriate , sad all appropriate phrases are 

awkward. 

10 
68 to 96 hours. One hour is probably an appropriate averaging period because 

high conceatratioas of some materials can cause death in one to.three hours. 

gven when organisms do not die within the first hour or so, it is not ~IIOWII 

how many might have died due to delayed effects of this short of en exposure. 

Thus it is not appropriate to allow concentrations above the Q4C co exist for 

aa loag as one hour. 

lhe durations of the averaging periods in national criteria have been 

made short enough to restrict allowable fluccuatioas in the conceacration of 

the pollutant in the receiving water and co rescricc the length of time that 

the coacentracioa in the receiving water can be koatiauously above a 

criterion concentratioas. The statement of a criterion could specify that 

the four-day average should never exceed the CCC aad that the one-hour 

average should never exceed the CMC. However, one of the most important uses 

of criteria is for desigaiag waste creacment facilities. Such facilities are 

designed based on probabilities and it is not possible to desiga for a zero 

probability. Thus, one of the important design parameters is the probability 

that the four-day average or the one-hour average will be exceeded, or, in 

other uords, the frequeacy with which exceedences will be allowed. 

The frequency of allowed exceedences should be based on the ability of 

aquatic ecosystems to recover from the exceedences, which will depend in part 

oa the magnitudes and durations of the exceedeaces. It is important to 

realize that high coaceatrations caused by spills and similar major events 

are aot what is meant by an “exceedence”, because spills and other accidents 

are not part of the desiga of the normal operation of waste treatment facilities. Rather, exceedences are extreme values in the discriburion of ambient 

concentrations and this distribution is the result of the usual variations in 

the flows of both the effluent end the receiving water and the usual 

11 
variations in the concentrrtions of the material of concern in both the 

effluent and in the upstretln receiving water. Because exceedeaces are the 

resulf of usual variation, most of the exceedences will be small and 

exceedences as large as a factor of CWO will be rare. In addition, because 

these excaedences are due co random variation, ehey will not be evenly 

spaced. In fact, because many receiving waters have both one-year end 

multi-year cycles and many treatment facilities have daily, weekly, and 

yearly cyc 108, exceedencee will often be grouped, rather than being evenly 

spaced or raadomly distributed. If the flow of the receiving water is 

usually much greater than the flow of the effluent , normal variation and the 

flow cycles will result in the ambient concencracioa usually being below the 

CCC, occasionally beiag aear ehe CCC, and rarely beiag above the CCC. In 

l dditioa, excaedences that do occur will be grouped. On the other hand, if 

the flow of the effluent is much greater than the flow of the receiving 

water, the concentration might be close co the CCC much of the time and 

rarely above the CCC, with exceedences being randomly distributed. 

The abilities of ecosystems co recover differ greatly, and depend on the 

pollutant, the magnitude and duration of the exceedence, and the physical and 

biological features of the ecosystem. Docmeaced studies of recoveries are 

few, but some systems recover from small stresses ia six weka whereas ocher 

systems take more than ten years to recover fran severe stress [3]. Although 

most l xceedeaces l ra expected to be very mall, larger exceedences will occur 

occasionally. Most aquatic ecosystems can probably recover frown most 

exceedences in about ehree years. Therefore, it does noe seem reasonable co 

purposely design for stress above that caused by the CCC to occur more than 

once every three years on the average, just as it does not seem reasonable 

12 
to require that these kinds of stresses only occur once every five or can 

years on the average. 

If the body of water is not subject to l nthropogeaic stress other than 

the exceedences of concern and if exceedences as large as e factor of cwo are 

rare, ic seems reasonable that most bodies of water could tolerate 

exceedencee once every three years on the average. Ia situations in which 

exceedences are grouped, several exceedeaces might occur in oae or two years, 

but then there will be, for example, 10 co 20 year, during which no 

exceedsaces will occur and the coacencration will be substantially below the 

CCC most of the time. In situations in which the coacentracioa is often 

close to the CCC and exceedeaces are randomly distributed, some adverse 

effect will occur replarly, aad amall additional , uaacceptable effects will 

occur about every third year. The relative long-tens ecological consequences 

of evenly spaced end grouped exceedeaces are uakaown, but because most 

exceedeaces will probably be small, the long-tern consequences should be 

about equal over long periods of time. 

The above considerariona lead to a stacemeat of a criterion in the 

frequency-intensity-duration format chat is often used co describe rain and 

snow fall aad screw flow, e.g., how often, oa the average, does more than 

ten iaches of rain fall in a week? The numerical values chosea for 

frequency (of average recurrence interval), iatensity (i.e., conceatracion), 

aad duration (of averaging period) are those appropriate for national 

criteria. Whenever adequately justified, a national criterion may be 

replaced by a site-specific criterion 111, which may include not only sitespecific criterioa coacentrations [21, but also site-specific durations of 

l veragiag periods and site-specific frequencies of allowed exceedences [3]. 

13 
The concentrations, durations, and frequencies specified in criteria are 

based on biological, ecological, Aad tOXiCOlOqiC&l data, and are designed to 

protect aquatic organisms and their uses from unacceptable effects. Use of 

criteria for designing waste treatment facilities requires selection of an 

appropriate wasteload allocation model. @namic models are preferred for the 

application of water quality criteria, but a steady-state model might have co 

be used instead of a dynamic model in some situations. Regardless of the 

model that is used, the durationa of rhe averagiag periods and the 

frequencies of allowed exceedences must be applied correcclp if the intended 

level of protectiou is to be provided. For example, in the criterion 

statement frequeacy refers to the average frequency, over a long period of 

time, of rare events (i.e., exceedences). However, in some discipliars, 

frequency is often ehought of in tams of the average frequency, over a long 

period of time, of the years in which rare events occur, without any 

consideration‘of how aany rare eveacs occur within each of those eveacful 

years. The distiaction between the frequency of events and cbe frequency of 

years is important for all those situations i’n which the rare events, e.g., 

sxceedences, tend to occur in groups within the eventful years. The cwu ways 

of calculatiuq frequency produce the same results ia situations ia which each 

rare eveac occurs in a different year because then the frequency of eveacs is 

rhe same as the frequency of eventful years. 

Because fresh water and salt water have basically different chemical 

compositions and because freshwater and saltwater (i.e., estuarine sad true 

marine) species rarely inhabit the same water simultaaeously, these National 

Guidelines provide for the derivation of separate criteria for these two 

kinds of water. For some materials sufficient data might not be available to 

allow derivation of criteria for one or both kinds of water. Evea though 

absolute toxicicier might be different in fresh and sale waters, such 

14 
relative data as acute-chronic ratios and bioconcenrration factors often 

appear to be similar in the two waters. When data are available to indicate 

that these ratios and factors are probably similar, they are used iaterchangeably. 

The material for which a criterion is desired is usually defined in 

terms of a particular chemical compound or ion, or a group of closely related 

compounds or ions, but it might possibly be defined in terma of an effluent. 

These National Guidelines might also be useful for deriving criteria for 

temperature, dissolved oxygen, suspended solids, pE, sstc., if the kinds of 

data on which the Guidelines are based are available. 

Because they are meant to be applied only after a decision has been made 

that a national water quality criterion for aquatic organisms is needed for a 

material, these National Guidelines do not address the rationale for making 

that decision. If the potential for adverse effects on aquatic organisms and 

their uses is part of the basis for deciding whether sn aquatic life 

criterion is needed for a material, these Guidelines will probably be helpful 

in the collection and interpretation of relevant data. Such properties as 

volatility might affect the fate of a macerial in the aquatic environment and 

might be imporcane when determining whether a criterion is needed for a 

material; for example, aquatic life criteria might not be needed for 

materials that are highly volatile or highly degradable in water. Although 

such properties can affect how much of the material will get from the point 

of discharge through any allowed mixing tone to some portion of the ambient 

water aad can also affect the size of the zone of influence in the ambient 

water, such properties do not affect how much of the material aquatic 

organisms can tolerate in the zone of iaflueace. 

This version of the National Guidelines provides clarifications, 

additional details, and technical and editorial changes from the previous 

15 
version 191. These modifications are she result of co~cncs on the previous 

version and subsequent drafts (101, experience gained during the U.S. EPA’S 

u8e of previous versions and drafts, and advances in aquatic toxicology and 

related fields. Future versions will incorporate new concepts and data as 

their usefulness is demonsrraced. The major technical change8 incorporated 

into rhis version of cha National Guidelines are: 

1. The requirement for acute data for freshwater animals has been changed co 

include more cots with invertebrate species. The caxonoaic, functional, 

and probably the toxicological, diversities aonq invertebrate species 

are greater than chose among vertebrate species and this should be 

reflected ia the required data. 

2. When available, 960hr ECSOs based on the percentage of fish immobilized 

plus the percentage of fish killed l rs used instead of 96-l-w LC5Os for 

fish; comparable EC508 are used instead of LC508 for ocher species. Such 

appropriately defined KC508 bercer reflect the total severe acute adverse 

impacc of the cesc maeerial on the cesc species than do LC5Os or narrowly 

defined LC5Os. kuce EC508 chat are based on effects chat are not 

severe, such u reduction in shell deposition and reduction in grouch, 

are nor used in calculating the Final Acute Value. 

3. The Final Acute Value is now defined in censs of Genus tkan Acute Values 

ragher than Species &an Acute Values. A Genus Mean Acute Value is the 

geowtric mean of all the Species Mean Acute Values available for species 

in the genus. Cn the average, rpecies within a genus are coxicoloqically 

much more similar than species in different qenera, and so the use of 

Genus Mean Acute Values will prevent data sets frcm being biaaed by an 

overabundance of species in one or a few genera. 

16 
4. The Final Acute Value is now calculated using a method Ill] chat is not 

subject co the bias and anomalous behavior chat the previous method was. 

The new method is also less influenced by one very low value because it 

always gives equal weight co the four values chat provide the most 

information about the cumulative probability of 0.05. Although the four 

values receive the most weight , the ocher values do have a substantial 

effect on the Final Acute Value (see examples in Appendix 2). 

5. The requirements for using the results of cesca with aquatic plants have 

been made more stringent. 

6. Instead of being equal to the Final Acute Value, the Criterion brimam 

Concentration is now equal CO one-half the Final Acuce Value. The 

Criterion Maximum Concentration is intended co protect 95 percent of a 

group of diverse genera , unless a comosrcially or recreacionally 

importane species is very sensirive. However, a concencracion chat would 

severely harm 50 percent of the fifth percentile or 50 percent of a 

sensitive important species cannot be considered co be proceceive of chat 

percentile or thst species. Dividing the Final Acute Value by 2 is 

intended to result in a concencracion that will not severely adversely 

affect coo many of the orgsnimu. 

7. The 1-r of the two n-bets in the criterion is now called the Criterion 

Continuous Concentration , rather than the Criterion Average Concencration, to more accurately reflect the nature of the toxicological data on 

which it is based. 

8. The statement of a criterion has been changed (a) co include durations of 

averaging periods and frequencies of allowed exceedences chat are based 

on what aquatic organisms and their uses can colerace, and (b) to 

17 
identify a specific sicu8cion in which site-specific cricerir [1,2,3j are 

probably desirable. 

In addition, Appendix 1 vas added CO aid in determining vhecher a species 

should be considered resident in North America and its caxonomic classificacion. Appendix 2 explrins the calculation of the Final Acute Value. 

The mount of guid8nce io these N8cional Guidelines has been increased, 

but such of the guidanoe is necessarily qualitative rather than quantitative; 

xuch judgment will usually be required CO derive a wacer~ualicy criterion 

for aqu8tic organisms and chair uses. In addition, although this version of 

the Netional Guidelines l CtempC8 Co cover all major questiona char have 

arisen during use of srevious versions and drafts, it undoubtedly does not 

cover all sicuacions chat might occur in the future. All necessary decisions 

should be based on s thorough knowledge of aquatic toxicology and an 

understanding of chase Guidelines snd should be consistent with the spirit of 

chase Guidelines, i.e., to make best use of the Nailable dac8 to derive the 

most appropriate criteri8. These National Guidelines should be modified 

whenever sound scientific evidence indicates chsc a national criterion 

produced using chase Guidelines would probrbly be substantially 

overprotective or underproceccioe of the aquatic organism8 and their uses on 

a necional basis. Derivation of nmeric81 n8cional meet quality criteria 

for aquatic organisms end their uses is l complex process and requires 

knowledge in many areas of aquatic toxicology; any deviation from these 

Guidelines should be carefully considered co ensure chat ie is cousiscenc 

vith other parts of these Guidelines. 

18 
I. ~finicion of Material of Concern 

A. Each separate chemical that does not ionize subscancially in most 

natural bodies of water should usually be considered a separate 

material, except possibly for structurally similar organic 

compounds chat only exist in large quantities as cornnercial 

mixtures of the various compounds and apparently have similar 

biological, chemical, physical , and toxicological properties. 

B. For chemicals chat do ionize subsc8nciall~ in most natural bodies 

of water (e.g., some phenols and organic acids, som salts of 

phenols and orgaaic acids, and most inorganic 88lcs and 

coordination complexes of metals), all forms chat would be in 

chemical equilibrium should usually be considered one material. 

tach different oxidation state of a weal and each different 

nonionixable covalently bonded organometallic compound should 

usually be considered a sep8r8te racsrial. 

c. The definition of the material should include an operational 

l aalyc ical component. Identification of a material simply, for 

exmple, AS “sodiu” obviously implies “coca1 sodi=“, but leaves 

rooa for doubt. If “total” is maanf, it should be explicitly 

St&ted. Bvea “total” has different operational definitions, some 

of dtich do not necessarily measure “all that is there” in all 

samples. Thus, it is also necessary to reference or describe xhe 

analytical method that is intended. The operacion8l analytical 

component should cake into account the analytical and environmental 

chemistry of the material , the desirability of using the sane 

analytical method on samples frop laboratory tests, ambient water, 

19 
and. aqueous effluents, and Various practical considerations, such 

88 labor and equipaanc requirements and whether the method would 

require measurement in the field or uould allow measurement after 

samples are transported to a laboratory. 

‘fhe primary requirements of the operational analytical componenC 

are that it be appropriate for use on samples of receiving uucer, 

chat ic be compatible with the 8vailablo toxicity and bioaccumulacioa data uichouc m8kiUg eXtrApOl8tiOUS thrc 8tS too hypochecic81, 

and chat it rarely result in underprocection or overprotection of 

aquatic organisms and their uses. Because 8n ideal analyCica1 

aeuureunt vi11 rarely be avAil8ble , a compromise measurement will 

usually h8ve Co be. used. ‘Ibis compromise l e8suremeat must fit with 

the general approach chat if an mbiene concencracion is lover ch,an 

the nacion81 cricerioa, unacceptable effects will probably not 

occur, i.e., the coapraise measurement atat not err on the side of 

underprotection when measurements are sde on 8 surface tracer. 

Because the chaical l ud phySiCA propetries of aa effluent are. 

usually quite different from those of the receiving uacer, an 

analytical method that is acceptable for l nalyxing an effluent 

might uot be rppropriace for analyzing 8 receiving ulcer', and vice 

versa. If the ubient concencrecion calculated from a measured 

coacencr8tiou in an effluent is higher than the national crice?ion, 

an additional option is Co measure chs concentration after dilution 

of the effluent with receiving water co determine if the measured 

coocentracion is lowered by such phenomena 8s complexacion or 

sorption. A further option, of course, is co derive a sicespecific criterion [1,2,3]. Thus, the criterion should be based on 

20 
an appropriate analytical measurement, but the criterion is not 

rendered uaelcrs if an ideal measurement either is not available or 

ir not feasible. 

NOTE: The analytical chemistry of the material might have co be 

taken into account when defining the material or when judging the 

acceptability of some toxicity tests, but a criterion should not be 

based on the sensitivity of an analytical method. When aquatic 

organisms are more sensitive than routine malyrical methods, the 

proper solution is to develop better analytical methods, not co 

underprotect aquatic life. 

II. Collection of Data 

A. Collect all available data on the material concerning (a> toxicity 

to, and bioaccumulacion by, aquatic animals and plants, (b) FDA 

action level8 (121, and (c) chronic feeding studies and long-term 

field studies with wildlife species that regularly consume aquatic 

organisms. 

0. All data that are uaed should be available in cpped, dated, and 

signed hard copy (publication, manuscript, letter, memorandum, 

etc.) with enough supporting information co indicate that 

acceptable test procedures were used and that the reaulcr are 

probably reliable. In some cases it may be appropriate to obtain 

additional written information from the invertigacor, if possible. 

Information that is confidential or privileged or otherwise not 

available for distribution should not be used. 

C. Questionable data, whether published or unpublished, should not be 

used. For example, data should usually be rejected if they are 

21 
from rests that did not cont.&in a control treatment, tests in which 

too many organisms in the control treatment died or showed signs of 

stress or disease, and rests in which distilled or deionized uater 

was used as the dilution water without addition of appropriate 

sales. 

D. Data on technical grade materials may be used if appropriate, but 

data on formulaeed mixtures and emulsifiable concentrates of the 

material of concern should not be used. 

E. For some highly volatile, hydrolyzable , or degradable materials it 

is probably appropriate to use only results of flow-through tests 

in which the concentrations of test material in the test solutions 

were measured often enough using acceptable analytical methods. 

P. Data should be rejected if they were obtained using: 

1. Brine shrimp, because they usually only occur naturally in 

water with salinity greater than 35 g/kg. 

2. Species that do not have reproducing wild populations in North 

America (see Appendix 1). 

3. Orgaaisms that uera previously exposed to subetantial 

concentrations of the test material or other contaminants. 

G. Questionable data, data on fomlated mixtures and ewlsifiable 

4 7l@dtu 

concane rat es, and data obtainad with non-resident species% 

A 

previously exposed organisms may be used to provide auxiliary 

information but should not be used in the derivation of criteria. 

III. Required Data 

A. Certain data should be available to help ensure that each of the 

four major kinds of possible adverse effects receives adequate 

22 
consideration. Results of acute and chronic toxicicy tests with 

representative species of aquatic animals are necessary so chat 

data available for tested species can be considered a useful 

indication of the sensitivities of appropriate unceated species. 

Fewer data concerning toxicity to aquatic plants are required 

because QtOCedUteS for conducting tests with plants and 

interpreting the results of such tests are not as well developed. 

Data concerning bioaccumulation by aquatic organisms are only 

required if relevant data are available concerning the significance 

of residues in aquatic organisms. 

B. To derive a criterion for freshwater aquatic organisms and their 

uses, the following should be available: 

1. Results of acceptable acute tests (see Section IV) vith at 

leaat one species of freshwater animal in at least eight different families such that all of the following are included: 

a. 

b. 

C. 

d. 

e. 

the family Salmonidae ‘in the class Qsteichthyes 

a second family in the class Osteichthyer, 

preferably a commercially or recreationally 

important warmwater species (e.g., bluegill, channel 

catfish, etc.) 

a third family in the phylum Chordata (may be in the 

class Osteichthyes or may be an amphibian, etc.) 

a planktonic crustacean (e.g., cladoceran, COpepOd, 

etc.) 

a benthic crustacean (e.g., oatracod, isopod, 

aatphipod, crayf isb, etc. 1 

23 
f. an insect (a.g., mayfly, dragonfly, damselfly, 

stonefly, caddisfly, mosquito, midge, ccc.) 

80 a family in a phylum other thm Arthropoda or 

Chordara (e.g., Rotifera, Annelida, Hollurca, etc.) 

h. a family in any order of insect or any phylrnn not 

already rsprsaented. 

2. Acute-chronic ratios (see Section VI) with species of aquatic 

animal8 in at least three different foilies QrOVidad that of 

the three rpecies: 

--at least one ia a fish 

-at least one is an invertebrata 

-at least one is an acutely sensiciva freshwater 

species (the ocher two may be saltwatar species). 

3. Eeaults of at lea&c one acceptable test wicb a freshwater alga 

or vascular plaat (aae Sectioer VIII). If planta are song the 

aquatic organisms thee are most sensitive to the material, 

results of a test with a plant in another phylum (division) 

should alao be available. 

4. AC least oae acceptable biocouceacracioo factor determined 

with an l pproprface freshwater species, if a maxinrn permissible tiaaur concentration is available (see Section IX). 

c. To derive a criterion for saltwater aquatic organisms and cheik 

uses, the following ahould be available: 

1. Raaults of acceptable acute carts (rae Saction IV) with l c 

least one species of saltwater animal in ae least eight 

different failiss such chat all of the following are 

included: 

24 
a. two families iir the phylrnn Chordata 

b. a fmily in a phyla other than Arthropoda or 

Chordata 

c. either the Myaidae or Pen&aid&e family 

d. three other familiar not in the phylum Chordaca (may 

include Xyaidae or Penaeidae, whichever was not used 

above) 

l * any ocher family. 

2. Acute-chronic ratios (see Section VI) with species of aquatic 

aniula in at Isaac three differeut fairies provided that of 

the three l peciea: 

--•c least ona ia a fiab 

-at least oua is aa invertebrate 

--ac least one ia an acutely seositiva saltwater spaciea 

(the ocher two may ba freshw8ter species). 

3. Bhsulcs of at least Ocle acceptable test with a salcwacer alga 

or vascular plaur (see Section VIII). If plants are among the 

aquatic organisms aoac seasicive to the material, results of a 

test with a pleat in another phylrer (division) should also be 

roailable. 

4. AC leaat ane acceptable biocoacentratiou factor determined 

with an appropri8te s~lcwacer spacies, if a maxima permissible 

tissue concentration is available (see Section IX). 

D. If all the required d8ta l ra available, a nmerical criterion can 

uaually be derived, except in special cares. For ex8mpLe, derivacion of a criterion might not be possible if the available acutechroaic ratios vary by more than a factor of ten with no appatent 

25 
pattern. ALSO, if a criterion is to be related to a water quality 

characteristic (see Sections V and VII), more data will be 

necessary. 

Similarly, if all required data are not available, a numerical 

criearioa should not be derived except in special cases. For 

ex8mple, even if not anough acute md chronic data are available, 

it might be possible to derive a criterion if the available data 

clearly indicate that the Final Residue Value should be arch lower 

than either the Pin81 Ironic Value or the Final Pl8nt Value. 

t. Confidence in a criterion uau8lly increases 8s rhe mount of 

available percineot data incre8ses. Thus, addirional d8ca are 

uaually desirabl8. 

xv. Final Acute Value 

A. Appropriate maaaures of the acute (short-term) toxicity of the 

a8ceri8L co a variety of species of 8quacic 8nimals are used co 

calculate the Final Acuee Value. The Final Acuce Value is an 

estiute of the coaceatration of the uterial corresponding to a 

cuulative probability of 0.05 in the acute coxicicy values for the 

genera with which acceptable acute testa have been conducted on the 

l 8c8rial . Emaver, in l ou cues, if the Speciea khan Acute Value 

of a corrwrcially or recre8tionally important species is lower than 

the c8kulated Final Acute Value , then that Species Uean hcuce 

Value replaces the calculated Final Acute Value in order to provide 

protection for ch8t important species. 

B. kuce toxicity tasts should have beea conducted using acceptable 

procedures 1131. 

26 
c. Except for tests with saltwater annelids and nrysids, results of 

acute tests during which the test organirw were fed should not be 

used, unless data indicate that the food did not affect rhe 

toxicity of the test material. 

D. Results of acute tests conducted in unusual dilutioa water, e.g., 

dilution water in which total organic carbon or particulate matter 

exceeded 5 mg/L, should not be used, ualeaa a relationship is 

developed between acute toxicity and organic carbon or particulate 

maccar or unless data show chat organic carbon, particulate matter, 

ccc., & not affecr toxicity. 

E. Acuta values should be based on endpoints which reflect the coca1 

severe acuta adverse impecc of the eeac material on the organisms 

uaed in the teat. Therefore, only the following kinds of data on 

acute toxicity co aquatic animals should be used: 

1. Tests with daphnids and other cladocerans should be scarced 

with orgaaisms less than 24 hours old and tests with midges 

should be acarted with second- or third-instar larvae. The 

result ahould be the 4g-hr EC50 baaed on percentage of 

organirma imobilized plus percentage of organisms killed. If 

such an ECSO is not available from a cesc, the 48-hr LC50 

should be used in place of the desired 48-hr ECSO. An EC50 or 

LCSO of longer than 48 hr can be used as long as the snimals 

were not fed and the control animals were l ccepeable ac the end 

of the test. 

2. The result of a test with embryos and larvae of barnacles, 

bivalve molluscr (clams, mussels, oysters, and scallops), sea 

27 
urchins, lobsters, crabs, shrimp, and abalones should, be the 

96-hr EC50 based on the percentage of organisms vith 

incompletely developed shells plus the percentage of organisms 

killed. If such an EC50 ia not available from a test, the 

lover of the 96-hr EC50 based on the percentage of organisms 

vith incompletely developed shells and the 96-hr LC50 should be 

used in place of the desired 96-hr EC50. If the duration of 

the test vas between 48 and 96 hr, the EC50 or LC50 at the end 

of the test should be used. 

3. The acute values from tests vith all other freshwater and 

saltwater aainrl species and older life stages of barnacles, 

bivalve molluscs, sea urchins, lobsters, crabs, shrimps, and 

abaloaes should be the 96-hr HC50 based on the percentage of 

organispr exhibiting loss of equilibrium plus the percentage of 

organisms iProbilized plus the percentage of organisms killed. 

If such an EC50 is not available from a test, the 96-hr LC50 

should be used in place of the desired 96-hr EC50. 

4. Tests vith single-celled organisms are not considered acute 

tests, even if the duration was 96 hours or less. 

5. If the teats vere conducted properly, acute values reported as 

“greater than” values and those vhich are above the solubility 

of the test material should be used, because rejection of such 

acute valuer would unnecessarily lover the Final Acute Value by 

eliminating acute values for resistant species. 

28 
F. If the acute toxicity of the material to aquatic animals apparently 

has been shown to be related to a vater quality characteristic such 

as hardness or particulate matter for freshvater animals or 

salinity or particulate matter for saltwater animals, a Final Acute 

Equation should be derived based on that water quality 

characteristic. Go to Section V. 

G. If the available data indicate that one or more life stages are at 

least a factor of tvo more resistant than one or more other life 

stages of the same species, the data for the more resistant life 

stages should not be used in the calculation of the Species Mean 

Acute Value because a species can only be considered protected frcnn 

acute toxicity if all life stages are protected. 

8. The agreement of the data within and betveen species should be 

considered. Acute values that appear to be questionable in 

cmarison with other acute and chronic data for the same species 

and for other species iu the same genus probably should not be 

used in calculation of a Species Mean Acute Value. For example, if 

the acute values available for a species or genus differ by more 

thsn a factor of 10, SOPDC or all of the values probably should not 

be used in calculationr. 

I. For each species for which at least one acute value is available, 

the Species Mean Acute Value (SLAV) should be calculated as the 

geometric mean of the results of all flow-through tests in which 

the concentrations of test material vere measured. For a species 

29 
for which no such result is available, the SHAV should be 

calculated aa the geometric mean of all available acute values, 

. I.e., results of flov-through teats in which the concencracions 

vere not measured and results of static and renewal tests based on 

initial concentraeions (nominal coacentrations are acceptable for 

moat test materials if meaaured concencratioos are uot available) 

of feat material. 

NOTE : Data reported by origiaal investigators should not be 

rounded off. Resulca of all incenaediate calculations should be 

rounded [14] to four significant digits. 

NOTE: The geometric mean of N numbers is the Nch root of the 

produce of the N nmbers. Alcamatively, the geometric mean can be 

calculated by adding ehc logarithma of the N numbers, dividing the 

su by N, and taking the antilog of the quotient. The geometric 

mesa of ttlD nuabers is the square root of the product of the cvo 

ntasbers, and the geometric mean of one number is chat number. 

Either aecurrl (base e) or cmou (base 10) logaricbs can be used 

co calculate geometric *means as long aa they are used consistently 

vithin each ace of data, i.e., the antilog used must match the 

logericbm wed. 

non: Geometric means, racher than aritlasetic means, are used here 

because the distributions of sensitivities of individual organisms 

in toxicity tests on most materials and the distributions of sensicivities of species vichia a genus are more likely co be lognormal 

t ban normal. Similarly, geometric means are used for acute-chronic 

ratios and biocoacentratioa faccors because quoeients are likely to 

be closer to lognormal than normal distributions. In addition, 

30 
division of the g8OwtriC mean of a aet of nueracors by the 

gwtric me- of the see of corrrapoudiag deaaminacors will result 

in the geometric mean of the set of corresponding quociencs. 

J. For each genus for which one or more WV8 are available, the c&us 

Hem Acute Value (G4AV) should be calculated aa the gemtric man 

of the SHAVa maileble for the genus. 

K. Order the Gt4AVs from high co Lou. 

L. Amsign ranks, EL, to the Q44Va fra “1” for the lowear to “N” for 

the highest. If tw or more QIAVa are idenrical, arbitrarily 

8aaign them l ucceasive rmka. 

H. Calculate the cuoulacive probebility, P, for each GHAV as n/(B+l). 

1. Select the four QUVa uhich have cuwlatfva probabilities closaac 

to 0.05 (if there are lea8 then 59 QUWa, these will always be the 

four loueac QUVa). 

0. Using the selected QUWa end Pa, calculate 

L - (r(ln QUV) - sm*IPm/r 

A * S(m) +L 

(See [Ill for developem of the calculatiou procedure end Appendix 

2 for an uemple celcul8tioo ad computer progrew) 

UOTK: Neturel logarichr (logeritlma to bese a, denoced as 114 are 

used herein merely because they are easier to uae on sow hand 

31 
calcul8tors 8ud compuears ch8n comoa (b8re 10) log8rithns. 

~eiatenc use of either will produce the sme reault. 

P. If for a cwttially or tUta8tiOUally iaporturc species the 

geometric w8u of the scum values fra floss-through eescs in which 

the concencraciona of Cut l 8teri81 u8re me8rured is lower than tha 

c8lculated Pin81 Acute Velue , thaa that geaetric ~8x1 should be 

used es the Pins1 Acme Velue instead of the celculaced Final Acute 

Value. 

Q. Go co Section VI. 

V. Pin81 Acutr Equ8tioa 

A, When enoqh data are available to show thee acute toxicity co 

tw or more l pwier is similarly related to 8 u8cer quality 

chSr8Ct8riSCiCB the reletioaahip should be takea iato ucount as 

deecribed in Section8 I-C below or uaiq analysis of covariance 

[15,161. The c:uo methods are l quiv8leac and produce ideoticel 

rerulta. The 08mml method described belou provides an under 

remding of thia 8pplic8tioo of coo8riroce m8lyai8, but 

caputerired vetaioaa of covrri8acr aa8lyria are wchdore 

convenient for aa8tyring large d8t8 sacs. If tuo or more factors 

aftact toxicity, ultiple regression ra8lyaia should be used. 

B. ?or l uh species for uhich comp8rable acute coricicy values are 

8V8ilSbf8 at two or more ,differenc v8luer of the wafer quality 

chuacreriatic, perform 8 leuc aquuea regrtreioa of the acute 

toxicity values 011 the correapoading values of the uater quality 

ch8racceriscic to obtain the slope and its 95% coafideoce limits 

for each species. 

32 
c. 

HOTS: Bemuse the best documaced rrlrtionship ir thsc betveeo 

herdness end scum coxicic7 of wcrls ia fresh wear and l log-log 

rrluioaship fits chase dets, geometric IYUIS l d amural 

logsrichms of both toxicity md vuer qualie are used in the rest 

of this section. For rrlrcionships based on other vscer quslit7 

chsrecterirtics, such ss pE, temperacure, or sslinit7, no 

crmsforutioa or 8 different tr&asforutioa might fit the dscr 

better, end l ppropriete chaager vi11 be ancessrr7 chroughouc this 

section. 

Decide vhrchar the detr for l uh specier is useful, taking iaco 

account the range aad rider of the tartad v8luee of t’h8 v8ter 

quality chuuteriscic end the degree of agreemane vichin snd 

bacmeo specie,. tar l xmple, a slope based a~ six dam points 

might be of limited vrlue if it ir based only on data for a very 

uurw range of valuer of the vuer quelit7 chrrecterirtic. A 

rlope bssed on on17 cw dstr ~~iocs, howvet, might be useLu1 if ir 

is conristenc vitb ocher iaforuciolr snd if rhe tvo poiacs cover s 

broad enough renge of the vecer qualit cherscteriscic. In 

addition, acute values that rppesr co be quercioneble io compsriron 

with other scute rad chronic data eveilrble for the r&me rpecier 

and for ocher spacier in the same genw probably should not be 

wed. tar exrple, if after edjurcwnt for the vuer qudicy 

cheracteriscic, the acute valuea available for l species or genus 

differ by more than 8 factor of 10, rejection of son or rll of the 

values is probably appropriate. If useful slopes sre not svsilsble 

tot 8t le8rc oue fish 8nd oue invertebrrce or if the svsilsble 

33 
#lopar 8re coo dissimilar or if coo fev d8c8 8re l v8ilablc co 

adequate17 define the rel8tionship becueen 8cute toxicity oad the 

water quality ch8rrcteristic, return CO Scccion IV.C., using the 

results of tests coaducted under conditions 8nd in vacers similar 

CO those comonly ured for coxiciry L8stS with the rpacies. 

D. Iadividu8lly for e8ch rpecies c8lcul8te the geometric aan of the 

8v8il8ble 8cuce v8luer and then divide eech of the acute ~81~8s for 

a species by the me8n for the species. ‘Ibis aorm8lisas the acute 

v8luas so th8t the qemcric me8n of the norrr8lized v8lues for e8ch 

species iadividu8lly end for an7 combin8tion of rpccics ir 1.0. 

8. Siailarly noruulize the v8lues of the v8ter qu8lity churccerircic 

for e8ch species individually. 

1. Individu811y for l uh species natform 8 le8sc squrres regression of 

the norm8lirad 8cufe coxicicy v8lues on the corresponding 

aorulirrd v8lues of the v8ter qu8lity charrcteristic. The 

raeultin8 slopes end 95X confidence limits will be identical co 

chose obcrined in Section B above. kv, hou8ver, if the d8c8 are 

8ccu8lly plotted, the lin8 of best fit for e8ch individurl rpecies 

vi11 po through the point 1,l in the center of the graph. 

G. Treat all tha norm8lised d8t8 88 if they vere 811 for the a8me 

spacies md parform 8 leest squrres regression of l ll cha 

norulised acute velu8s on the correspondity norm8lized valuer of 

the u8fer qu8lity ch8rrcteriscic co obcrin the pooled 8cuce elope, 

V, 8nd its 95X confidence limier. If. 811 the nonn8lized dac8 8rt 

8ccu8lly ploccad, the line of best fit will go through the point 

1,l in the center of the grrph. 

34 
8. Pot a&& Specie8 c8kul8ce the geOaSCrrC Wan, W, of.thc ScucS 

toxicicy values l ud the gecaecric me&U, I(, of Cha values of the 

v8fer quality characteristic. (These vere crkulaced in ScepS 0 

and x 8bov8.) 

I. For arch SpeCi8S C&lCUl&Ce the lOg8riCbl, Y, Of the WV 8c 8 

selected value, 2, of the v&car qu8lity charscteriscic using the 

equac ion: Y - 10 U - Vtln X - la 2). 

J. lor each species c8lcul8to the SXAV at 2 Wing the aquacion: SHAV - 

e*. 

ROTS: Alternuively, the StUVs l c 2 can bi obtained by skipping 

seep fl 8bOVq using rha equations in steps I and J to adjust each 

acute value individu8lly co 2, and Ch8rr c8lcul8ciag the peaetric 

meea of the 8djusced values for l 8ch species individually. This 

l lcermrive procedure sllws an ereaiaacioa of the range of the 

rdjusced uute values for euh spacie8. 

It. CJbtaia the line1 Acute Value l c 2 by using the procedure described 

in &cioa IV.J-0. 

L. If the SUN at 2 of 8 ColerCi8lly or tecreac~ion8lly impofcanc 

species is lwer chm the C8kUl&t@d Fin81 Acute Value l c 2, then 

ch8t SUN? should be used as the Pins1 Acute Value l c 2 iarcead of 

the celcolated tine1 Acute Value. 

If. The Ha81 Acute gquuion is uriccen as: Final Acute Value * 

l (V(ln(uacer quality ch&r&cteri#tic)] + In A - V(ln Z]> 

, 

vhere V * pooled acute slope and A - Final kuce Value l c 2. 

Because V, A, and 2 are known , the Final Acute Value can be 

c&lCUl&t@d for any selected Value Of the Vacer qU&lity ChPr&CCeristic. 
VI. Final Chronic Value 

A. hpendins on the d8r8 ch8t 8re 8V8il8ble concerning chronic 

toxicicy CO 8qu8CiC 8Ilb81$, the Pin81 Cbroaic V8lue rnighc be 

c8lclJlrc8d in the rme m8nner 8# the Pitt81 Acute V81Ue or by 

dividing the Pin81 Acute V8lue by the yin81 Acute-Chronic g8tio. In 

~001 c8sea it r8y uOC be porrible CO C8lCUl8Ce 8 Pin81 Chrooic 

v8lue. 

NOTE: A8 the ame impliea, the rciatcchrouic r8cio (ACM ir 8 U8y 

of tel8ting 8cute 8nd chronic coxicitier. The 8cutvchrooic r8tio 

is b8aic8lly the inVet8e of the 8pplic8rion fatOr, but this oev 

DN is better bec8ure it ia more descriptive 8nd should help 

preVenC confurioa betmea ‘a8pp1ic8cioa f8ctots” md "r8fety 

fucord’. Acute-chronic r8tiOO 8ad 8ppliC8Cioa f8CtOr$ 8Ke V8y8 of 

te18Cing the 8CUte 8nd chroaic toxicities of 8 uteri81 co 8qU8tiC 

org8nisu. g8fecy f8ccorr 8re used co provide 8n extr8 mrgia of 

r8fecy beyond the krmm or eatir8Ced rearicivitier of 8qu8tic 

org8airar. Another 8dV8Ut8ge of the ecuce-chroaic r8tio is ch8c it 

will usu8lly be gre8cer ch8a one; chir should 8VOid the coafusioa 

8s to uhecher 8 18rge 8pplic8tioo f8ccor ia 001 eh8c ir clorc co 

uoicy or one th8t hu 8 denominrtor ch8c ir such gre8ter th8n the 

mmer8tOr. 

b. Chronic v8luer rhould be hued on rrrulcr of flow-through (excapc 

renew81 ir 8CCepC8ble for d8phnidr) chromic teats in which the 

coacentr8ciom of tare a8terirl in the teat rolutioor wre properly 

mururad 8f rppropri8te times during the ceac; 

36 
c. bsults of chroaic fescs in which Iurviv81, growth, or reproduceion 

ia the control cre8cmenc Y8s ua8ccSpt8b~g 10~ should not be used. 

The limits of 8cCept8bility will depend on the species. 

D. Results of chronic tests coaducced io unususl dilution vecer, 

l .q., dilutioa v8cer in which cot81 org8aic c8rboa or p8rcicul8ce 

utter exceeded 5 q/L, should UOC be uS8d. ualrrs S ral8tiOnahip 

is developed bee-en chronic toxicity sad org8aic c8rboa or 

p8rticul8ce utter or unless d8t8 rhov thst org8aic c8rbon, 

p8rticul8ce l 8ccer, sec., do not affect coxicicy. 

E. Qroaic v8lues stmuld be b8red on l adpaiacs 8ad leqchs of 

exposure 8ppropri8re co the species. Therefore, only results of 

the follouing kiuds of chronic coxicicy c8sfs should be used: 

1. Life-cycle coxicfry tests coaristia~ of uporurer of 88ch of 

tvo or more groups of iadividuAls of 8 species to a differeac 

coaceatr8tioa of the Gem n 8ceri81 throughout 8 life cycle. 

To ensure th8t 811 lifr 8c8Rer 8ad life procerser 8ra 

exposed, teats with fish should begin with embryos or newly 

h8cched young le88 thra 48 hours old, continue through 

m8tur8cioa 8ad reproduccioa , rod should end aoc lerr th8n 24 

d8yr (90 d8ys for s8konids) 8fcer the h8cchiag of the next 

8ener8tion. Tests vith drphnids rhould begin vich young leas 

th8a 24 hours old 8ad lrrc for not less ch8a 21 d8ys. Tares 

with mysidr should begin vith youafl less chm 24 hours old 8nd 

coatiaue until ‘I d8y8 p8st the aedisa cims of first brood 

rele8se in the controls. For fish, d8C8 should be obmioed and 

sa8lyted orb SUtviV81 8hd groveh Of rdulcs 8nd young, m8Cut8ciOn 

of m8ler 8nd f8mle8, sgqs speumed per female, embryo visbilicy 

37 
(s8laonidS only), sod h8cchsbilicy. For d8phnid8, dsca should 

be ob~&md 8ad sO8lyZad 00 SutviV8l 8nd young per female. For 

ayeids, d8C8 should be obcsioed snd rnrlyred on eurvivsl, 

g much, and young per fem8le+ 

2. P8rci81 life-cycle toxicicy tests conrirciog of exposures of 

e8ch of cua or lots groups of iadividu818 of 8 rpecies of fish 

co 8 different conceacr8cioa of the cesc 88rerirl through wsc 

porrioas of 8 life cycle. P8rti81 life-cycle tests are slloved 

uich fish 8pWieS ch8t require more ch8n 8 ye8r co re8ch seXU81 

a8curify, so ch8c 811 Mjor life rt8ger c80 be exposed co the 

test l 8ceri81 in less thm 15 months. Exposure to rhe cesc 

macerid should begin with ir8cure juvenil88 8c le8rc 2 months 

prior LO rccive goa8d developmeac, continue through oaturacion 

8ad r8prodUCtiO0, 8ad and aoc less chsa 24 d8yr (90 days for 

88hOnid8) after the h8cchiog of the next gemrrtioa. g8C l 

should be obt8ined sad 8a8lyred on survive1 snd grovch of 

8dulC8 8Od young, m8turrtioa of l 8les 8nd fa8le8, egg8 rpmaed 

per femle, embryo vi8bilicy (s8laooids only), sad 

h8rchrbility. 

3. Urly lifrrc8ge toxicity tests consisting of 280 co 32day 

(60 d8]rs post hrtch for 88~OOidS) exposures of the early 

life rt8ger of 8 species of fish from rhorcly 8fcer 

fertilin8tion through eabryoaic, 18~81, sad e8rly jwenile 

developaeac. D8cr should be obcrined 8nd an8lyzed on survive1 

8ed growth. 

NOTB: Resultr of 8n e8rly Life-stage cast are used 8s prediccions of rerulcs of life-cycle and p8rcirl life-cycle cescs 

38 
vith the 881m species. Therefore, uhen rerulcs of 8 life-cycle 

or pati life-cycle cast 8re nt8118bl8, results of rn early 

lifwrt8ge te8c vich the S8ms species should aoc be used. 

Also, resultr of e8rly life-sc8ge tests in which the incidence 

of wrc8lities or 8bnora8liries iocre88ed 8ubrcmcislly nesr 

the aad of the fast should not be used bec8ure rerulcs of such 

cescr 8re possibly not good predictions of the rerulcs of 

comp8r8ble life-cycle or p8rtirl lifr*cycle cases. 

F. A chroaic v8lue uy be obr8iaed by c8lcul8tiag the geometric ms8a 

of. the 1-r 8ad upper chromic LimiCS frm 8 chronic tcsc or by 

l 8lyring chroaic d8C8 using regrerrioa ra8lysi8. A lover chronic 

limit is the highest tested coaceatr8cioa (8) in 80 rccepc8ble 

chroaic test, (b) which did ooc c8use 80 ua8ccepc8ble saouac of 

8dvrrse effect oa 8x1~ of the specified biologic81 me8ruremeocs, and 

(c) below which 10 cssred conceatr8cioa crured 8a uosccept8ble 

efface. An upper chroaic liaic is the lovesc cesced coacencr8cion 

(8) in 8a 8ccept8ble chronic feat, lb) which did c8use sa 

ua8ccspc8ble muac of rdverse effect oa one or mom of the 

specified biologic81 me88urem8nt8, snd (c) 8boV8 vbich 811 tested 

coaceatr8tioar 8180 C8US8d such sa effect. 

NOTX: gec8use v8riour suchors hsve used 8 v8riery of carma and 

defiaitioas to iarerpr8c 8nd report results of chronic cesc8, 

reported resuits should be revieued c8refully. The mouut of 

effect th8C is considered un8ccepc8ble i8 often b8sed on a scrci8- 

cicrl hypochesir test, but oighr 8180 be defined in tens8 of a 

specified percent reduction fram the controls. A am811 percent 

39 
reductioa (e.g., 3%) might be coasidered 8ccepc8bLe sveu if it is 

st8tistic8lly rigoific8ncly diffareoc fra the conctol, wheress s 

Large percmt reduction (8.3.. 30%) might be coaridered 

un8ccspt8ble sveo if ic is uoc rc8tirtic8lly significmc. 

G. If the chrooic tOXiCiCy of the MC8ri8L co 8qu8tic 8aim8lr 

8pp8reotly hrr been rhoua co be rel8ced tu 8 w8cer qurlicy 

cherscteriscic such 8s h8rdaers or p8rticul8ce m8cter for 

freshv8eer 8rrin818 or 88liaity or p8rticul8ce utter for 88ltw8cer 

8nir8lr, 8 Fin81 Chronic tqu8tioa should be derived breed on ch8c 

vater qu8lity ch8r8cterisric. Go to gectioa VII. 

R. If chronic v8luer 8re 8v8il8ble for Specie8 in eight failies 8s 

described in Secaioas III.l.1 or IIf.C.1, 8 Species Meur Chroaic 

V8lur (SI4CV) should be c8lcul8ced for l 8ch species for which 8c 

le8st oue chrouic vrlue is 8v8il8bLe by c8lcul8ting the geometric 

me80 of 811 chronic v8lues 8V8il8bh for the species, 8Od 

8apropri8te Genus M8a Chronic Values should be c8kulSted. Tha 

Fin81 Chronic V8lue should chea be obcrined using ch8 procedure 

described in Seccioa IV.J-0. Then go co Section V1.M. 

I. For l 8ch chronic v8lue for which 8c Lease one corresponding 

8ppropri8te ICute V8h is w8il8ble. c8lcul8c8 8a Icure-chronic 

ratio, using for the amer8cor the geometric me80 of the resulcr of 

811 8ccepc8ble flowthrough (rxcepc St8CiC is 8ccept8bte for 

d8phaidr) 8cute cases in rhe aa dilution vater and in which the 

concsatr8tions were mersured. For fish, the 8cuca cssc(s) should 

hrve been conducced uich juveniLea. The 8cute test(r) should have 

been p8rt of the ssms study 8s the chronic test. ff SCUC8 CSSCS 

vere not conducted as psrc of the alma study, acute tesca conducted 

40 
J. 

R. 

in the s-e lrbor8tory l d dilution v8ter, bur in s different 

study, may be used. If a0 such 8cuCe tests 8re l v8ilrble, results 

of 8cute tares conducted in the s8ae dilution v8cer in 8 different 

18bOr8tOry m8y be used. If no such 8CUce Ce8c8 are available, an 

acute-chronic r8tio should not be C8lCUl8Ced. 

For e8ch species, c8lcul8te the SpeCiLS rem 8cuce-chronic ratio as 

th8 geomscric me811 of 811 8cuecchroaic r8CiOS av8ilrble for chat 

Sp8Ci88. 

For soms o8cerislr the rcuts-chronic r8cio seeu co be the s8me for 

811 species, but fot ocher r8ceri818 the r8tio seems co incre8se or 

dWrS888 8s the Specie8 WI80 ACUC8 ff8h8 (SMAV) iUCr88888. l’hu# 

the yin81 Acute-Chronic Lt8tio c8a be obc8ined in four v8y1, 

depending oa the d8c8 ff8iL8ble: 

1. If the species aesn rcuce-chronic rrtio sesms to increase or 

dscre8se 8s the SMAV iocre88e8, the Fin81 Acute-Chronic Ratio 

should be C8lCUl8t8d as the geolMtric me8n of the acme-chronic 

rstios for specieg those Sl4AVs are close co the Fia81 Acute 

V8lue. 

2. If no ujor trend is l pp8rent 8nd the scuce-chronic racier for 

8 amber of species are within 8 f8ctor of fen, the Fin41 

Acuts-Chroaic h8tio should be C4lCUl8ted 8s the geolaecric mean 

of 811 the species ae8a acute-chronic r8cior AV8il8bLe for both 

freshw8ctr rod s81cw8cer species. 

3. For 8cut8 terts conducted on metrh rnd possibly other 

rubrt8ncer vich embryos and 18N8e of b8rn8CL88, biv8Lve 

moLlusc8, se8 urchins, lobsters, crabs, shrimp, and ab8lOneS 

41 
(gee Seccioo IV.E.21, it i@ prob8bly rppropriate to 88sume chrt 

the scuce-chronic ratio is 2. Chronic tests Are very difficult 

to conduct with most such specier, but ic is likely chat the 

sensieivitier of smbryor &ad l8rVSe wmld determine the results 

of life-cycle tests. Thus, if the louesc Av8iLrble SMVS were 

det8rPiOed wieh embryos 8ud Lrrv8e of such species, tbs gin81 

Acute-Chronic R8tio should probably be 8rsrroed to be 2, SO that 

the Fin81 Chronic Vfrlue i8 equ81 co the Criserioa M8ximum 

Concencrscioa (see Section X1.B). 

4. If.the most 8ppropri8te species ms80 rcuce-chrooic r&cior are 

less rhm 2.0, 8nd l specially if they 8re less ch8n 1.0, 

8cclilurioa h88 prob8bLy occurred duriag the chronic cert. 

Because coaeiouous exposure rnd 8ccliutioa c8aaoc be 8rsursd 

co provide 8dequ8te prot8ccioa in field ritu8cioa8, the yin81 

Acure-Cbroaic R8cio should be 8srued co be 2, so th8c the 

Fin81 Chronic V8lue i8 l qu81 co the Criterion H8ximm 

Coaceacrscioa (see Section X1.B). 

ff the 8v8iL8ble species wsa Acute-chronic rscior do not fit one 

of these csses, 8 Fin81 Afuce-Chronic E8cio probably ~8oo0c be 

obt8ioed, 8ad 8 tin81 ChrOaiC Vrlus prob8bly c8aaot be crlcul8ted. 

L. C8lcul8te the Fin81 Chronic V8lue by dividing the Fin81 Acute Value 

by the Fin81 kUC#-ChrOUiC hCi0. ff there ~88 8 Fin81 Acute 

tqu8tioa r8ther thra 8 Fin81 Acute V8fue, 888 8180 Section VI1.A. 

K. If the Species Hs8n ChrOUiC V8he of 8 CmrCi8lly or recreation8lLy import8nt 8p8CieS iS Lower eh8n the C8kUl8tsd Fin81 Chronic 

Value, then th8t Species Me80 Chronic V8lue should be used 88 the 

Fin81 CbrOUiC v&kMt inrte8d Of the C8lcul8tad Fin81 Chronic Vdlue. 

42 
N. Go to Section VIII. 

VII. Final Chronic Equation 

A. A Final Chronic Equation can be derived in two ways. The procedure 

described here in Section A will result in the chronic slope being 

the same as the acute slope. The procedure described in Sections 

B-N will usually result in the chronic slope being different from 

the acute slope. 

1. If acute-chronic ratios are available for enough species at 

enough values of the water quality characteristic co indicate 

that the acute-chronic ratio is probably the same for all 

species and is probably independent of the water quality 

characteristic, calculate the final Acute-Chronic Ratio as the 

geometric mean of the available species mean acute-chronic 

ratios. 

2. Calculate the Final Chronic Value at the selected value Z of 

the water quality characteristic by dividing the Final Acute 

Value at Z (see Section V.M.) by the Final Acute-Chronic 

ratio. 

-3 l Use V - pooled acute slope (see section V.M.) as L = pooled 

chronic slope. 

4. Go co Section VII.M. 

B. when enough data are available to show that chronic toxicity to at 

least one species is related to a water quality characteristic, the 

relationship should be taken into account as described in Sections 

B-G below or using analysis of covariance [15,16]. The two methods 

are equivalent and produce identical results. The manual method 

43 
described below provides an understanding of this application of 

covariance analysis, but computerized versions of covariance 

analysis are much more convenient for analyzing large data sets. 

If two or more factors affect toxicity, multiple regression 

analysis should be used. 

C. For each species, for which comparable chronic toxicity values are 

available at two or more different values of the water quality 

characteristic, perform a least squares regression of the chronic 

toxicity values on the corresponding values of the water quality 

characteristic co obtain the slope and its 95% confidence limits 

for each species. 

NOTE: Because the best documented relationship is that between 

hardness and acute toxicity of metals in fresh water and a log-log 

relationship fits these data, geometric means and natural 

logarithms of both toxicity and water quality are used in the rest 

of this section. For relationships based on other water quality 

characteristics, such as pH, temperature, or salinity, no transformation or a different transformation right fit the data better, 

and appropriate changes will be necessary throughour this section. 

It is probably preferable, but not necessary, to use the same 

transformation that was used with the acute values in Section V. 

D. Decide whether the data for each species is useful, taking into 

account the range and number of the tested values of the water 

quality characteristic and the degree of agreement within and 

between species. For example, a slope based on six data points 

might be of limited value if it is based only on data for a very 

narrow range of values of the water quality characteristic. A 

44 
$10~ b&red OU Only CYO d&C8 points, ho-vet, aighc be useful if it 

is coasiscenc vith ocher inform8eion 8nd if the two points cover & 

bro8d eamgh r&age of the Y8ter qu8lity ch8~8ccttistic. In 

&ddicioa, chronic v81uss th8r 8pperr to be quescion&ble in 

comprriroa with ocher 8cuCe &ad chronic d&c8 &V&il&ble for the s-e 

species &ad for ocher Specie8 in the sa gmu8 probably should not 

be used. For l xeaple , if &fear djuscaenc for the u8cer qu8licy 

characceriscic, the chronic v&her 8v8ilrble for 8 species or genus 

diEfer.by more than 8 f8ctor of 10, rejection of some or 811 of chs 

vrlues is prob8bly &ppropri&ce. If 8 ureful chroaic slope is not 

w8il8ble for 8t le8sc one rpecies or if the 8v8ilsble slopes 8re 

coo di$&imi'l&r ox if tO0 few d8t8 8re rv&il&ble co &deqU&cely 

define the rel&cioaship bacwea cbroaic toxicity 8ad the v8cer 

qu8licy ch8r8cceriscic, it mighc be rppropri8te co rsrume ch8C ehe 

chronic slope i8 ch8 ssn 8s the rcuce slope, rrhich ir equiv8leac 

co rsruriag ehrt cbe 8cutcchroaic r8cio ir independeac of the 

u8c8r qurlity cbrrecceristic. Alcemrcively, return co Seccioa 

VI.& using the rude8 of ce8cs conducted under conditions 8nd in 

v8c8rs $imil&r Co those coroaly used for coxicicy Cescs vich the 

species. 

15. fndividu&lly for 88Ch species c&lcul&ce rhe geometric 8e8n of the 

8V&il&ble chronic v8lues rnd then divide l 8ch chronic v&lue for 8 

species by the me&n for ehe species. This nora8lizes chc chronic 

vrlues so ch8t the qeamecric mera of the aorm&lized vrlues for e8ch 

species individu&lly &ad for my combin&tion of species is 1.0. 

P. Similaly aom&lite the V81UeS of the vuer qurlicy ch&r&cteriscic 

for e8ch species individu8lly. 

4s 
c. Individu&lly for e8ch Species petfOm 8 Leuc squ8res regression of 

the normalized chronic toxicicy vrluer on the corresponding norm81- 

ixed vrluar of the u&car qu8licy ch8r8cceriscic. The resulting 

slopes 8nd the 95% confidence limits Will be idencic81 co chose 

obtgined in Seccioa B rbove. bu, hovwer, if the d&c& rre 

8ccu8lly plocced , the line of base fit for l ech individu81 species 

will go through the mint 1,1 in the center of the gr8ph. 

1. 'Ire&c 811 thr oorm8lited d&c& 8s if they were 811 for the same 

species &ad perfom 8 le8sc squ8rer regression of 811 the norm&lired chronic v&her on the corresponding aorm8lized v8lues of the 

water quelicy ch8rrcceriscic co obc8in the pooled chronic slope, L, 

8bd its 952 coafidence lirirs. If 811 the oorm8lized d&t& 8re 

8ccu8lly plotted , the line of best fit will go through cha poine 

1,l in ch8 center of cbe gr8ph. 

I. For 88Ch Specie8 C&lCUl&te the geCWCriC me&n, n, Of the toxicicy 

v&her 8nd cha geometric me&n, P, of the values of the water 

qu8licy cbrrrcceriscic. (IheSe Mre C&kUl&Ced in steps E l d F 

8bov8.1 

J. For e8ch SpeCieS c8lcul8re ehe lOg&riChP, Q, of the Species Me&n 

chronic V8lw 8c 8 &elected v8lue. 2, of the ulcer qu8licy 

cbuacterirtic uring cba l qu8ciou: Q - In M - t(ln P - In 2). 

lWft: Although it: is not necess8ry, ic will usu8lly be best to use 

the 88me v&he of cha v8cer qu8liCy ch8r8cceriscic here es was used 

in section V.I. 

K. For e8ch specie8 c8lcul8ce 8 Species Ht8n Chronic V8lue re Z using 

the equacioo: SW3 - eQ. 

46 
loon : ~ternacively, the Species Na8n Chronic V8lues gc 2 cgn be 

obt8in8d by skipping seep J dmvr , using the equations in steps J 

l d K CO 8djUSt erch &Cue8 vrlue individu8lly CO 2 8nd then C&lCUlrcing ehe geometric aem of ehe rdjusted v8luts for each species 

individu&lly . This 8lcern8tive procedure 8110~s on exmingcion of 

the r8nge of the 8djUSted chronic ~~1~88 for e8ch Sptcies. 

L. Obc8in the Fin81 Chronic V8lue 8c 2 by u&ins the procedure 

described in Section IV.J-0. 

X. If the Species Me&n Chronic V8lua 8t 2 of 8 comerci8lly or 

recre8Cion8lly import&UC Sp8CieS ir lover chm the c8lcul8Ced Fin81 

Chroaic V8lue 8f 2, Ch8U chrc Species 1JI8n Chronic V8lue should be 

used 8s the Pin81 Chronic V8lue 8f 2 instead of ch8 c8lcul8ted 

Fin81 Chronic V8luo. 

#. The Fin81 Chronic gqurcion i$ wrieren 88: Pin81 Chronic V8lue - 

l (L[ln(w8rer qu8licy ch8rrccerisric)l + In S - L[la 211, eere 

L = pooled chronic slope &ad S * Fin81 Chronic V8luc 8c 2. Bec8use 

L, S rnd 2 8ra Laura, cbe Fin81 Chronic V8lue c8n be c8lculrted for 

8ny &elected v8lue of ebe V8t8r qu8licy Ch&r&CteriStiC. 

VIII. Fin81 P18aC V&b8 

A. Appropri8ce me&&Urea of the coxicicy of the meterirl to 8qurcic 

plurcs 8re used to comp8re the rel8tive sen8ieivicies of equ8tic 

P18Ut8 8nd 8niuls. Although procedures for conducting 8nd 

interpreting the resu~cs of toxicity tests vich pl&ncr 8re not well 

developed, resutcr of cescs uich pl8nts usu&lly indic&re chrc 

Crittri8 WbiCh 8dequ8eely prOceCC 8qU8tiC &aim818 mud their uses 

will probably 8180 procecc rqu8tic plrner and their uses. 

47 
B. A plane value is the result of 8 96-hr cesc conducted vich 8n &lg& 

or 8 chroaic cd&c conducted with 8a 8qU8tiC v88cul8r plaac. 

NOTE: A cesc of the toxicity of 8 Ire81 co 8 plurc ururlly should 

not be used if the medim COUt&iaed 8n l XCeSSiVe 8mounc of 8 

complexing 8geaC. such 88 EDTA, th8t night 8ffecc the coxicicy of 

ehe met&l. Concenrr8tionr of EDNA rbove &bow 200 Ug/L should 

prob8bly be considered excesrive. 

C. The Fin81 P18ac V8lue 8hould be obt8ined by selecting the lowese 

result Era 8 case with 8n iEpOrt8aC 8qu8cic pl&ne species in hich 

the concencrrcioas of ce8c m8Leri81 uere muured 8nd the endpoine 

~88 biolopic8lly imporc8nc. 

IX. Fin81 Reridue V8lue 

A. The Fin81 Residue V8lue ia iaeeadrd to (8) prev8ac concencr8cions 

in co6erci8llj or recr88cion8lly iaport8ae 8qurcic species from 

8ffeccing x8rkec8bilicy beC&U&e of exceedeace of rpplic&ble PDA 

rccioa levels &ad (b) procecc wildlife , including fishes 8nd birds, 

ch8c consw8 8qucrtic org&nisms fra demoastr8red un8cctpc8b~e 

effects. The Fin81 Residue V8lue is the lowest of the residue 

v8lues ch8t 8re obc8ined by dividing a&xi- permissible tissue 

coaceatr&ciow by &pprOpri&Ce bioconcencr8cioa or bio8ccumul8cion 

fecrorr. A mximum permissible cisru8 COaCenCr8Cion is eirher (8) 

m FDA actioa level [I21 for fish oil or for the edible portion of 

firh or sb8llfish, or (b) 8 MXiw 8ccepc8blr dicc8ry intake based 

on observ&tions on surviV81, grouch, or reproduceion in 8 chronic 

wildlife feeding study or 8 long-term wildlife field study. If no 

48 
muimn permissible CiSSUc COUCentr8CiOU i8 &vril&ble, go co 

Section X becgure no Fin&l Residua V&he c&n be derived. 

B. Bioconcentr8cion f8CtOrS (BC?S) l d bio8ccrPmul8cioa f&ctor$ (Bus) 

are quotients of the conceacr8cion of A mrceri81 in one or more 

tissues of 8n 8qu8Cic orgrnism divided by the 8Ver8ge coaceacr8cioa 

in ehe solueion in which the org8nism hd been living. A BCF is 

intended co 8ccounc oaly for net upc8k8 directly frm wcer, rnd 

thur &loose baa co be re&sured in 8 18bor.~cory test. gems UPC&ire 

during the bioconcencr8tion cesf might aoc be directly fras u8cer 

if the food sorb8 same of cha ce&t mreerirl before ie is e&ten by 

the c8se org8nimu. A BM is intended co 8ccounc for net UPC&k8 

fra both food 8nd w8cer in 8 re&llrorld sicu8cion. A MF 8Lmosc 

h&s co be w8sured in 8 field sicu8cion in uhicb pred8cors 

&cC~l&t8 xhe 88teri81 direcrly from u8Cer &ad by conswsing prey 

th8c itself could h8ve &ccwul&ted the m8ceri81 from both food 8nd 

u8cer. The BCF &ad DA? 8re probrbly Simil8r for 8 r8ceri81 vieh 8 

Lou BCF, but the BAF is prob8bly hiqher ehaa the BCF for materials 

with high bCF8. Although BCFS 8re aoc coo difficult co deceminc, 

very feu BMs b8ve been me&sured 8CCepC8bly bec&ure it is necess8ry 

co uke enough me8surements of the concencr8cion of chs m8cari81 in 

u8fer to show cb8c it Y88 re8son8bly COnsC8nc for 8 1Oag enough 

period of time oVer the r8age of territory inhrbited by the 

org8nins. hC8OSe 80 f8V 8CC8pt8ble bAvI 8re &V&il&bh, Only BCFs 

vi11 be di&CW&rd further. Howaver, if 8n &CCept&ble BAF is 

8v&il&ble for 8 m8Ceri81, it should be u&cd insce8d of 8ny 

&V&il8ble BCFs. 

49 
c. 11 8 meximum permissible CiS8Ue COaCeatr8CiOU i8 8V&il&bls for 8 

suhst8nce (e.g.. , p8t8Ut q &t8ri&l, p8reUC m8C8ri81 p1U8 met&bolitss, 

etc.), the tissue conceaer8eion used in the c&lcul&cion of the BCF 

should be for the 88me subsc8nce. Ocherwise the tissue 

concentrgeion used in the c&lcul&Cion of Ch8 BCF should be chat of 

the uceri&l 8nd it8 mec8bolices vhich 8re 8trUcCUrdly similar and 

are not. such mor8 8Oiuble in u8C8r th8n cbe p8renc m8cerirl. 

D. 1. A BCF should be used dy if the ce8t ~88 florchrough, the BCF 

1888 C&lCUl&Ced b&red 00 l e&rural cOncentr8cion8 of the test 

m8ceri81 ia tissue &ad in the te8c &olucion, &ad the exposure 

continued 8f la&&t until either 8pp8renc sce&dy-SC&cc or 28 

d8ys ~88 rerhed. Sterdy-scrce ir re8chode uhea the BCF does 

aoc cb8age signific8acly over 8 p8riod of time, such 8s era 

d8ys or 16 percenc of the length of ehe exposure, whichever is 

longer. The BCF used from 8 Cesc should be cha highest of (8) 

the rpp8rent &Ce&dy-SC8Ce Bet, if 8pp8renc SCe&dp-SC&C8 VPI 

rerChed, (b) the highesc DC? obc&ined, if 8pp8reae Ste&dy-8t8te 

~88 noc re&ched, &ad (c) the projected rce8dy-sc8ee BCF, if 

c &lCUl&Ced. 

2. Ubenorer 8 gC? is deermined for 8 lipopbilic m&ceri&l, the 

percent lipida rbould 8180 be dec8rmined in the tissue(s) for 

vbicb cbe m ~88 C&lCUl&ted. 

3. A BCF obt8ined froll 80 exposure ch8c 8dverrely 8fftceed the 

tese org8aismr m&y be used only if it is riail&r co 8 BCF 

obcrined with unlffecced orgmism8 of the 88me species 8c lover 

conceatr8cions th8c did aoc c&use 8dverse effects. 

50 
4. Becwre ouimua pemirrible cirrue concmcr8cionr are olm08~ 

never bared oa dry weights , 8 BCF celculaced using drg tissue 

veiehcr a~uac be converted co 8 uet tirrue weight basis. If no 

conversion fucor ir reported with the BCF, multiply the dry 

weight BCF by 0.1 for pl8nkcoa 8nd by 0.2 for individurl 

rpecie8 of firhe 8nd invercebrece8 117 I. 

5. If more than one 8ccepceble BCF ir available for a 8pccies, the 

gconecric mean of the available value@ 8hould be u8ed, cxccpc 

ch8c if the BCFr are from different lengch8 of exporure 8ad the 

BCF increaser with lea@ of expowre, the BCF for the longerc 

l xpo8ure rhould be ured. 

t. If enough pertinent deer exirt , reverrl reridue value8 can be 

celculeced by dividing aexiau perai88ible tirrue coacancrecion8 

by appropriate BCF8: 

1. For each l veileble maxian acceptable dietary incake derived 

fra e chronic feediry 8cudy or 8 long-tern field rcudy with 

wildlife, including bird8 end rqurcic orRmism8, the 

l ppropriece B‘C? ir beeed on the whole body of 8quacic rpecics 

which conrcicute or reprereac l l ejor portion of the diet of 

the errted wildlife rpcier. 

2. For 10 FDA l ccion level for firh or rhellfirh, the 8ppropriace 

BCF ir the higherc geometric meen rpecier BCP for the edible 

portion (ana8cle for decrpodr, aurcle with or without skin for 

firbe,, 8dduceor mwcle for rcellopr, cud cot81 soft tissue for 

other bivalve mollu8c8) of 8 conru8ed rpecies. The highest 

rpecier BCF ir u8ed beceure FDA rccion level8 are 8pplied on 8 

8peCie8-by-8peCie8 ba8i8. 

51 
F. For lipophilic m8teri818, it right be po88ible co celculace 

ddicionel reridue VelUe8. Beceure the rceedy-rcece BCF for e 

lipophilic neterie 8eem8 CO be proporcionel co percent lipids from 

one cirrue to another end from one rpecie8 co l uocher 118-201, 

excrepolecioa8 ten be made fra Carted cirruer or species to 

uncerted ci88uer or rpecier OU the be8i8 of percent lipidr. 

1. For each BCF for which rhe percent lipid8 ir known for the 

8me ci88ue for uhich the BCF Ye8 Oerured, norpelite the BCF 

co l oue petcenc lipid berir by dividing the BCF by the percent 

lipid,. Thi8 edjU8CmenC co 8 Oae perceac lipid b88i8 i8 

intended co make 811 the aeerured BCF8 for e meceriel cotnprrable re;erdlerr of the rpecier or cirrus with which the BCF ve8 

meerured a 

2. Celculece the geometric meet nomelired BCF. Date for both 

8elcveter end fte8hVatOr rpecie8 rhould be ured Co determine 

the aeen norulited BCF, unlerr the deer rhou thee the 

aormelired 8CF8 are probably not 8iriler. 

3. Calculate all pO88ible reeidue valuer by dividing the l veileble 

ruexiau perpi88ible cirrue conceacrecionr by the aeen 

normeli8ed BC? end by the percent lipid8 valuer l ppropriece co 

the uxiu prmi88ible tirrue COucencrecioa8, i.e., 

Raridue V8he - 1 (meximum perairrible cirrue concencr8titm) 

mean normalized BCF)(eppropriece percent lipida) 

a. For en IDA action level Eor firh oil, the appropriate 

perceac lipid8 value ir 100. 

b. For en FDA l ccion level for fi8h, the l ppropriece percent 

lipid8 value ir 11 for freshwecer criteria and 10 for 

52 
88ltvecer criterie beceure FDA eccioa level8 are applied on 

8 rpecie8-by-8paCie8 bari CO c~nly consrrrred species. 

The highart lipid conceuc8 in the edible portionr of 

importenc con8uued rpecier l re l bouC 11 percent for both 

the fre8hW8t8r chinook relaou end lake trout end about 10 

percent for the relcwecer Acleocic. herring [Zl]. 

c. For a muhum acceptable dietary intake derived from l 

chrouic feeding rcudy or 8 long-c.arm fiald rcudy with 

wildlife, the appropriate percent lipid8 ir ehec of an 

l quar ic rpecier or group of l quecic rpecier which 

conrcicute 8 major portion of ehe diet of the wildlife 

rpecier . 

C. The Final lkeridue Value ir obtained by releccing the loverc of 

the tveileble reridue viluer. 

NOTt: In rome ce8e8 the Final %ridue Value will not be low 

enough. For example, 8 reridue value calculated fra &II FDA eccion 

level will probably re8ule in en average conceucrecion in ehe 

edible porcioa of l fatty rpecier chec ir l c the l cciou level. 

Some individual orgeai8m8, end po88ibly 8oae 8pecie8, vi11 have 

reridue cooceaCretion8 higher chm the mean value but no aechenism 

he8 been devired to provide appropriate l ddiCione1 protection. 

Al80, 8ae chronic feeding rcudier end lOng-Cerm field 8CUdie8 with 

wildlife identify concencrecionr char ceure adverse effaces but do 

not identify coucencrecionr which do not ceure l dver8e effects; 

again no mechenim he8 been devired to provide appropriate 

additional protection. These are aae of the rpecie8 end uses chec 

l re not protected et 811 timer in l L1 placer. 

s3 
X. Ocher Deea 

Percimat inforucion thee could not be ured in earlier eeccion8 might 

be aveil8ble concerning rdverre effeccr on equecic Organi8w and their 

UIIBS. The more import8nc of Che8e are deca on cmulrcive and delayed 

toxicity, flevor impeirmenr, reduction in 8urvive1, grovch, or 

reproduction, or any ocher adverse effect chec he8 beea ahown co be 

bioloqicelly inoorcenc. Erpecielly importear are deer for specie8 for 

which no ocher date are evaileble. Date fra behetiiorel, biochemical, 

phy8iologice1, microcosm, end field rcudier ai ghc 8180 be eveilable. 

Dare aighc be eveileble from Ce8c8 conducted i n uauruel dilution uecer 

(eee 1V.D end VI.D), fra chronic ce8t8 in which the concencracionr 

vere not meelured (8ee V1.B)) ftOl CeIC8 with preViOU8ly expored 

orgenirmr (8ee fI.F), end from ce8t8 on formlaced mixture8 or 

earlrifi8blr concencraCe8 (8ae 1X.0). Such dacr mighr effect a 

criterion if the dece were obceined rich en imorcenc 8pecie8, the cesc 

conceatrecion8 were md88Ured, end the endpoint we8 bioloqically 

important. 

xx. Criterion 

A. A criterioa coarirtr of CYO coacencrecion8 

Concencreriou end rhe Criterion Coatiauour 

1. The Criterion Meximum Concrncr8cion (aC) 

Pine1 Acute Value. 

: the Criterion Maximum 

Coacencrecion. 

ir equal co oae-half the 

C. The Cricrrioa Coneinuour Concenrrecioa (CCC) ir equal co the lowest 

of the Final Chronic Value, the Fine1 Plant Value, end the Final 

Reridue Value, unlerr ocher dare (see Section X9 rhou chat a lower 

value rhould be ured. If toxicity ir releced co a vacer quality 

54 
cherecceri8tic, the CCC ir obceined from the Final Chronic 

Eqimc ion, the Final Plane Value, 8d the Final &sidue Value by 

selecting the oae, or the combination, chec result8 in the lowest 

concencracion8 in the urual range of the water quality 

chereccerist ic, unlerr ocher data (are Section X) show chsc a lower 

velue rhould be ured. 

D. Round (141 both cha CMC end the CCC co cue riqnificene digits. 

e. me criterion ir 8ceced 88: 

The procedure8 dercribed in the “Cuidaliner for Deriving Numeric81 

National Wecer Quelicy Cricerie for the Protection of Aquetic 

Orqenirme end Their DIeI” indic8ce chef, except po88ibly where 8 

locally importeat rpecier ir very 8enricive, (1) aquatic orgeuiam8 

end their wea 8hould uoc be effected uneccrpcebly if the four-dey 

everege conceacretion of (2) doe8 not ixcoed (3) ;rg/L more then 

once every three yeerr on the l veraqe end if the one-hour average 

coaceneretioa doe8 not exceed (4) $q/L more then once every three 

years on the avereqe. 

where (1) - insert “fre8hw8ter” or “8elcw8cer” 

(2) - in8erc na# of meceriel 

(3) * in8ere the Criterion Contiauou8 Coacencr8cion 

(4) - iarert the Criterion Meximw Conceacrecion. 

XII. Final Review 

A. The derivation of the criterion should be carefully reviewed by 

rechecking each step of the Cuideline8. Iteor thw rhould be 

eraecielly checked era: 

55 
1. 

2. 

3. 

4. 

S. 

6. 

7. 

8. 

9. 

10. 

11. 

12. 

13. 

14. 

15. 

I-f unpublished data are used, are they well documented? 

&e l ll required d&c8 rveileble? 

18 the r8npe of 8cuCe V&he8 for 8ny rpecier gre8cer ch&n 8 

factor of 101 

fr the range of Specie8 Mean Acute Velues for any genus greater 

chm a feccor of 101 

18 there more then 8 frccor of can difference between the four 

loue8c Genur Mean Acute Valuer? 

Are l ny of the four lowerc Cenu8 Hem Acute Values 

quest ioneb le? 

18 the Final ACUCe V8lUe ree8oneble in coaperiroa with the 

Specier Mean Acuce V8luer 8nd Geou8 Me&n Acura Valuer7 

For l ny comercielly or recreecionelly importme rpecier, ir 

the geometric mean Of the ecuce V&he8 from flow-through ce8c8 

in which the COUCenCr8CiOn8 of Celc m8ceri81 were me88ured 

lower then the Final Acute Value? 

Are 8ny of the chronic vrluer que8cioneble? 

Are chronic value8 eveileble for ecurely reasicive rpecier? 

I8 the r&nqe of ecuccchronic r&cior greeter ehen 8 frccor of lo? 

Se the Final Chronic Value reeronrble ia comperiroo uich the 

eveileble ecuce end chronic date? 

18 the meerured or predicted chronic value for any commercially 

or recreecionelly important rpecie8 below the Fin81 Chronik 

Value? 

Are any of the ocher date important? 

Do any d&c8 look like they miqhc be ouclie’rs? 

56 
16. Are Chere my deviation8 from the Guidelines? Are they 

l ccepceble? 

B. On Che b88i8 of 811 8veil8ble pcrCinenC 18bor8cory rod field 

informeCioa, derermine if the crirerioa ir con8irCenC with sound 

scientific evidence. If ic ir not, l uocher criterion, either 

higher or lower, rhould be derived q8ing epproprime modifications 

of there Guideliner. 

57 
1. U.S. EPA. 1983. Water Quelicy SC&Ud&rd8 tigul8CiOU. Federal Register 

f&:51400-51413. Novanber 8. 

2. U.S. EPA. 1963. Water Quality Standard8 Headbook. Office of Wrcer 

Regulation8 end Seenderdr , Werhington, DC. 

3. U.S. EPA. 1985. Technicel Support Doc=ent for Werer Quality-Beled 

Toxic8 Control. Office of Wecer, Werhinqtoa, DC. 

4. Thurscon, C. t. 1962. Phyricel Cherecceri8cicr &ad @emic&l Composition 

of Two Sub8peCiea of Leke Trout. J. Fi8h. Eer. Bd. Can&de 19:39-44. 

5. Hodron, P. V., ec 81. 1933. EffeCc of Fluctuating Le8d Exporure on te8d 

&cuarlerion by Reinbow Trout (Selmo u8irdneri). Environ. Toxicol. Chew 

2: 225-238. 

6. For l xaple, aee: Inqerroll, C. C. end R. W. Winner. 1982. Efface on 

Dephaie pulex (De Ceer) of Daily Pulre Expo8urer co Copper or Cedmiun. 

Environ. Toxicol. Chem. 1:321-327; Sail, W. IL., CC al. 1984. Crowch 8nd 

Suwivel of Develooiag Sceelheed Trour (Selmo rteirdoeri) Concinuou8ly or 

Incermittencly Exposed co Copper. Cen. J. Firh. Aquec. Sci. 41:433-438; 

Buckley, J.T., ec al. 1982. Chronic Expo8ure of Coho Salmon co 

Sublechel, Concentration8 of Copper-l. Effect on Grouch, on Accumulocion 

end Dircribucion of Copper, 8Ud on tipper Tolerence. Camp . Bioc hem. 

Phyriol. 72C:lS-19; Brown, V. H., et al. 1969. The Acure Toxicity co 

Reinbow Trout of Fluccu8cin: Concencrecion8 end Mixtures of Aamwnie, 

Phenol end Zinc. J. Fi8h Biol. 1:1-g; ‘hur8con. IL. V., ec al. 1981. 

Effect of Fluccuecinq Exporurer on the hcuce Toxicity of AmPonie co 

Reinbow Trout (S&l180 g&irdneri) 8nd Cucchro8c Trout (2. clerkii). Warer 

b8. 1~:911-917. 

58 
7. ?of oxample, see: Eoraia~, U. B. and T. U. Neiheiiel. 1979. Chronic 

8. 

9. 

10. 

11. 

12. 

13. 

14. 

15. 

tfhcc of Copper on the Bluncnom Minnow, Pimephelrs nocatu~ 

(Eafiaerque). Arch.. Environ. Contam. Toxicol. 8:545-552. 

For exauplc, aee: Clmpl8n, Go A. 1982. Lacer co Charles E. Scephan. 

U.S. EPA, Duluth, Minaeroce. December 6; &apman, G. A. 1975. Toxicicy 

of Copper, Cadmim and Zinc CO Pacific Notchwere Salmonida. Interim 

bporc. U.S. EPA, Corvrllir, Oregon; Spear, B. L. 1976. Cadpi- and 

Zinc Toxicity co Plrqfirh, Jordanella floridae. J. Fish. Eer. Board Can. 

33:1939-1945. 

U.S. EPA. 1980. Water Quality Criteria Docmncr; Aveilabilicy. 

Federal Regircer 45:79318-79379. November 28. 

U.S. EPA. 19Bb. Water Quelicy Cricerie; Requerc for Comentr. Federal 

Ee;ircrr 49:4551-4554. February 7. 

Ericksoa, R. J. md C. 15. Stephan. 1985. Calculation of the Final Acute 

Value for Water Quality Criteria for Aquatic 0r:eniru. Nacioaal 

Technical Inforurion Service, Sprinqfield, Virqinia. fW~-Z/~S?~ 

U.S. Food and Drug Admiaircrecioa. 1961. Compliance Policy Guide. 

Compliance Guidelines Branch* Warhinqcon, DC. 

For good txamplem of acceptable procedures, see: 

ASTM Scrndrrd E 729, Practice for Coaducciag Acute Toxicity Term with 

Fishes, lfacroinvertebrater, rod Aqhibiaor. 

AST!! Standard t 724, Practice for Conducting Scacic Acute ToxicicyTestr with Larvae of Four Specier of Bivalve P(ollurcr. 

tiuth, 1. J., et al. 1978. Council of Biology, Editors 3tyle Hm~ruL, 4th 

Ed. Council of Biology Editors, Inc., Bechesde, Wlrylmd. p. 117. 

Dixon, U. J. and M. 8. Brown teds.). 1979. BWP Biomedical Computer 

Prmrms, P-artier. Universiey of California, Berkeley. pp. 521-539. 

59 
16. -err, J. 8nd U. Uasseman. 1974, Applied Line8r Sc8tistic81 Models. 

I-in, 1r.i , Eowvood, Illinois. 

17. The v8luas of 0.1 and 0.2 vere derived from d8er published in: 

*Diffect, U. F. 1970. ECO~O~ 51:975-988. 

Brocksen, R. W., ec 81. 1968. J. Wildlife Umaqamenc 32:52-75. 

Cumaiar, K. W., et 81. 1973. Kcolow 54:336-345. 

Pesticide Aa8lytic81 r(tnu81, Volume I, Food 8nd Drug Mxinistrarion, 

1969. 

Love, IL. pi. 1957. In: H. 1. Brom ted.), The Physioloqy of Fishes, 

Vol. I. Ac8demic Ress, Meu York. p. 411. 

Ruccner, F. 1963. Fundamenc8ls of Limnology, 3rd Rd. Tr8ns. by D. G. 

Frey and 1. E. J. Fry. University of Toronto Press, Toronto. 

Some rddirionrl v8lurs c8n be found in: 

Sculchorpe, C. 0. 1967. me Biology of Aqu8tic Vascular Plrncs. 

Arnold Publishing, Ltd., London. 

18. Haelink, J. L., ec 8L. 1971. A Propos81: txch8npe Equilibrir Coacrol 

the Deqrae Chlorin8eed Hydroc8rbons 8re Bioloqicrlly Mgnified in Lentic 

Environmenta. Tram. Am. Fish. Sot. 100:207-214. 

19. Lunsford, C. A. and C. R. Blea. 1982. &mu81 Cycle of Keponc Residue in 

Lipid Contenc of the Estu8riae Cl-, R8ngi8 cune8t8. Cscu8ries 

5:121-130. 

20. Qchnoor, J. L. 1982. Field V8lidrcion of Uacer Qu8licy Criterir Coi 

Hydrophobic PolLur8ntr. In: J. C. Pe8rson, cc 81. teds.), Aqu8tic 

Toxicolow snd H8r8rd Assessment. ASTH STP 766. Amcric8n Society for 

Testinq rnd Wceri8ls, Pttiladelphir. pp. 302-313. 

60 
21. &Well, V. 0. 1981. Chemical and Nutrieionr~ bmpori~iou of Finfishes, 

Males, Crustaceans, Ebllurks, and Their Products. NOM Technical 

Memorandum NM?S I/ SEC-1 1 l NAtionAl Marine Fisheries Service, Southersc 

Fisherier Cancer, Charleston, South Carolina. 

61 
ApDeadix 1. brideat North Aaeric8a Species of Aquatic Animala Used in Toxicicy and 

Bioconceacracioa Tests 

Incroduct ion 

~heae liscr identify species of aquatic animals which have reproducing wild populations in North America and have been used in toxicity or bioconcrncracin caacg. “Xorch 

America” includes only rhe 48 conciguoua SC~CIS, Clada, and Alaska; Hawaii and Puerto 

gico are aoc included. S~CV~CII (i.e., l scuarine l Dd crue’oarine) species ara 

considered tcsidenc ia Notch America Lf they rahabic or regularly ancer shore vacers on 

or above the coacineat81 shelf to a depth of 200 meters. Species do not have CO be 

nrcive co be resident. Unlisted species should be cooridered rrsidenc North .+srican 

species if they cao be similarly COnfind or if the C~SC orpaniswverc obtained from a 

wild populatioa in North -tiCa. 

The sequence for fishes is cakea fra A Lirc of Cornon and Scientific Names of 

Fishes from the United Scares and Canada. For ocher species, the sequence of phyla, 

claaaea, and families is caken frw the HODC Taxonoaic Code, Third Micion, National 

&eaDographic Data Ceacer, NOM, Waahiagcoa, DC 20235, July, 1981, aod the numbers given 

are from chat source co facilicace verificatioo. Uichia a family, genera are in 

alphabec ical order, as are species in a genus. 

The references given are chose u8ad ‘CO confim chat the rpecier is a residcnc North 

American species. (The NODC Taxonoaic Code coacaias foreign II wall u North knericaa 

species.1 If no such tefeface could be fouad, the qeciea was judged co be nonreridcnr. 

No reference is given for organisms uoc identified co species; these are considered 

reridenc only if obtained, Eros vild Notch Americaa populations. A fw noaresidenc species 

are listed io brackets and noted as “nonreaideoc” because they were aisrakenly identified 

as resideac in the put or co save ocher iavesciqators from doiag literature aearches on 

the saw spwies. 

Preshwater Specier 

Claar Fai ly Cowon Name 

Species 

Scieacific Name Reference 

PllnUu: PORInaA (36) 

hWSpO48 Spaugil lid&S 

3660 366303 

tphyderie LlwieciLir P93 

PKYLUN: CNIDAPIA tC0ELENTElUTA) (37) 

Bydrotoa Rydridae Wra 

3701 370602 

Hydra 

Eydra oligaccis 

IIrdra licroralis 

E318, P112 

E321, P112 

62 
Freshvecer (Coaciaued) 

CLdSS Fami ly Commoa Name 

Species 

Scientific Name Reference 

PHYLUM: PLATTRKLMINTRES ( 39 1 

Turbellaria 

3901 

Planariidae Plaaarian Dugeria dorotocephala 

Dendrocoelidae 

391501 

PRTLUM: GABTROTRICRA (44) 

Chaeconotoida Chaetoaocidar 

4402 440201 

PRTLUM: ROTIPEIU (ROTATORIA) (45) 

Bde lloidea Philodiaidae 

4503 450402 

Noaogononta Brachioaidae 

4506 450601 

PRTLUM: ANNELIDA (50) 

kchimnelida .Aeoloraaacidae 

5002 so0301 

01 igochaetr IUPbriculidav 

5004 500501 

Tubificidac 

so0902 

Planarian 

Plaarrira 

[Planarian) 

Planarian 

Castroerich Lepidodermella aquamecum E413 

Rocifer Philodiaa acucicorais Y 

Rot i fer Philodiaa roseola B4a7 

Rotifer Keracella cochlearis E442, P188 

Rocifar Kcracella l p . [Footaote 21 

uorp Aeolorom heodleyi ~528, e2a4 

worm Lumbriculur variegacur ES33, P290 

Tubificid vonn Brauchiura soverbyi E534, P289, 

GC‘ 

Tubificid vorm Liraodrilus hoffmeirteri E536, Cc 

Tubificid worm Quistadrilur multirecosus 8535, OG 

(Pelorcolex mulcirecorur) 

Dugeria lugubrir 

(Duqesia polychroo) 

Plaamia gonocephala 

[Polycelis felina] 

Procoryla fluvircilis 

(Deadrocoelum lacceum) 

022 

024 

[Foocnoce 1 I 

[noaresidenc I 

E334, P132, 

D63 

63 
Freshvscer (Couciausd) 

CLASS Femily Common Name 

Species 

Scientific Name Reference 

Naididae 

so0903 

Hirudiaea 

50 12 

trpobdellidae 

501601 

PHYLUH: ~OUUSCA (soas) 

Cestropoda Viviparidae 

51 s10306 

Bichyni idae 

(Amuicolidae) 

(Bulimidae) 

(Bydrobiidm) 

5 10317 

Pleuroceridae 

SlOwI 

Tubificid vorm Rhyscodrilus atoataaa 

Tubificid vans Spirosperma f crox 

(Peloscolex fctox) 

Tubificid vorm 

Tubificid uons 

Tubificid worm 

Tubificid vorm 

worm 

WOrp 

WOrlS 

[Leech] 

Snail 

Saail 

Baail 

Snail 

Saail 

Snail 

Spirosperma aikolskyi 

(Peloscolrx ymiegacus) 

Stylodrilus heriagiaaus 

Tubifex cubifex 

Verichsecs pacific8 

Peraasis sp. 

Pristias sp. 

[Erpobdells occoculecsI 

Campeloma decisum 

Amaicola sp. 

Goaiobasia livescens 

Coniobasis virgiaica 

Le tori8 crriaacr 

+ Nrtocrrs cariaata) 

(Mudelia cw 

Nitocris ep. 

cc 

GG 

ES34, GG 

GG 

ES36, P289, 

cc 

GG 

[Foocnocc 21 

[Poornote 21 

[Foocnoce 21 

[nonresident] 

(BB16) 

P731, Mz16 

[Foocaoce 2 I 

P732 

El.1 37 

X, El137 

[Foocnoce 21 

64 
Freshvacer (Conciaued) 

Class Family Common Name 

Species 

SC ienc i f ic Name Reference 

Lpnae idea [Snail] [Lymnaea l cumiaata] [aonres idenc ] 

511410 

Saail 

Snail 

[Snail] 

Gail 

Plaaorbidae 

511412 

Physidae. 

511413 

*a*tris) 

[Lymnaea luteola] 

M2a 

El127, M51 

[nonreridenc] 

(X266) 

I 

Lymnaea sca~nalis E1127, P726 

M96 

Snail 

[Snail1 

Sari1 

Snai 1 

Snail 

Lymnaea sp. [Foocaoce 2] 

[Biomphalaria glabraca] [aonrea idenc 

(K390) 

Cyraulus circumscriacus P729, X397 

Iielisoma csmpanularum X445 

Relisoma crivolvis P729, MS2 

Saail 

[Saaill 

Snail 

Aplexa hypaorum 

(Physa foncinalis] 

Pbysa gyriaa 

E1126, P727, 

X373 

[noares idenc ] 

W73) 

E1126, P727, 

M373 

Bivalvi a 

(Pelecypoda) 

9s 

Saail Physa hecerostropha H378 

Saail Physa incegra P727 

Snail Physa sp. [ Foocaoce 2 1 

Margar.i~iferidae Mussel blar~ari~ifera Eil38, e748, 

551201 margaricifera Jll 

kpblmidae Mussel Amblema plicata Ml22 

65 
Freshwater (Continued) 

Class Family Common Name 

Species 

Scicncific Name Reference 

Corbicul idae 

551545 

Pisidiidae 

(Sphaeriidae) 

551546 

PRYLul4: ARTHROPODA (58-69) 

Crurcacea 

61 

tynctidat 

610701 

Sididat 

610901 

Damhnidte 

610902 

Unionidae 

551202 

Murrel 

%utstl 

Anodonca imbecillus 

Mussel 

Muhrrrel 

Asiatic clam 

Aaiacic clam 

Fingernail cltm 

Carunculina parva 

(Toxolarma ctxarensis) 

Cyrconaiar campicoenis 

Ellipcio complanata 

Corbicula fluminea 

Corbicula maniltnsis 

Finqernai 1 clam 

Eupera cubenrir 

(Eupera singlepi) 

Xurculiua cratsvtrsum 

In cransvtrrum) 

Fingernail clam Sphatrium corntum 

Conchorcrtcan Lynctut brachyurus 

Cltdoceraa 

Cl tdoceran 

Cltdoctrta 

Cladocerm 

Cladoctran 

[Cladoceranj 

Cladoctran 

CLadoctran 

Cladoctraa 

Diaphanotoma sp. 

Ceriodtphnia acanchina 

Ctriodaphnia rtciculara 

Dtphnia tmbigut 

Daphnia carinaca 

[Daphnia cucullataj 

Daphnia gtleara mendocae E610, P370 

Daphnia hyalina [Foocnoce 41 

Daphnia longirpina [Foocnoce 51 

J72, AA122 

J19, AA122 

P759, AA122 

313 

El159 

P749 

El158, P763, 

G9 

X160, Gll 

Cl2 

E5a0, P344 

[Foocnoce 21 

E618 

E618, P368 

E607, P369 

(Foocnoct 31 

[nonresident] 

66 
Freshwactr (Continued) 

Class Family Common Name 

Species 

Sciensific Name !Lefertnce 

Bosminidat 

610903 

Polyphtmidae 

610905 

Cyprididte 

'~QQ$"' 

Diapcomidtt 

611818 

Tewridte 

611820 

Cyclopidae 

612008 

CLadocrran 

Cladoceran 

Cltdoctrte 

Cladoctraa 

Cladoceran 

Cladoctran 

Cladoceran 

Cladoctran 

Cltdoctrm 

Cladoctran 

Cladoctran 

[Oaeracod] 

OtErtcod 

[Copepod] 

&PtPod 

Daphni a magna E605, P367 

Daphnia parvula E611 

Daphaia pultx E613, P367 

Daphni& pulicaria A 

Daphaia similis E606, P367 

Moina macrocopa E622, P372 

bina rtctirostris E623 

Simoctphalus strrularus E617, P370 

Sinoctphalur vtculur E617, P370 

Boynina lonqirostris E624, P373 

Palyphemur ptdiculur E599, P385 

[Clprtrta kawacai 1 

Cypridoptis vidua 

[Eudiaptomus padanus) 

[nonresident] 

(U) 

8720, P430 

[nonresidenE] 

fpitcburt ltcuttrit E751, P407 

[Cyclops abysrorum] 

Cyclops bicurpidarur 

Cyclops vtrnalis 

Cyc lopr viridia 

(Acanthocyclopr viridis) 

Acanrhocyclopr rp. 

[nonres idenr 1 

ESd'7, P405 

E804, P405 

E803, P397 

[FoomoEt 2 1 

67 
Frtshvac tr (Cow inutd) 

Class Flrni lp Common Ntmt 

Specie8 

Scitncific Name Reference 

Asellidat 

616302 

CoPepod 

Wepod 

CoP*Pd 

t 18OPodl 

Isopod 

Gamer idte 

616921 

Is opod 

Isopod 

fropod 

[ Isopod I 

KIOpOd 

XlOPod 

Aaphipod 

Ampbipod 

hmpbipod 

[Amphipodl 

Aaphipod 

bphipod 

Diacyclopr rp. 

Eucyclopr agilis 

F4tsocyclo~8 leuckarci 

(Astllut tquwicur I 

Attllut bicrtnaca NH 

(Catcidocea bicrenaca) (X1,2) 

A8ellur brevicaudur 

Astllur conmxnir 

A8ellur inctrmtdiur 

betllus wridianur] 

Aaellur rtcovicrti 

Lirctut l ltbtmat 

[Foocnocr 21 

P403 

E812, P403 

[nonresidtnc] 

(12) 

Ea75, ~447, 

I 

ea75, p448, 

I 

E875, P448, 

I 

[nonresidtnc ] 

P449, 1 

E875, I 

Crangoayx preudogracilis P459, T68, 

FF28 

Camurut f tmc iarur E877, P458, 

153 

Crurur ltcurtrir lS877, P458, 

FF23 

Camarur pseudolimoaeus tza77, ~458, 

T4a+ 

ICammtrur pultxl [nonrtridtnr] 

Gammarur cigriaur L51, FF17 

Cammarur rp. [Foocnoce 21 

68 
Frtshwtccr (Continued) 

Class 

_- 

Pami ly 

-_ 

Common Name 

Species 

Scitncific yam Reference 

Hytltllidat 

(TaLicridat) 

616923 

Amphi pod 

Pal ttmonidat 

617911 

[Prawn] 

A8cacidat 

618102 

InrectA 

62-65 

Htpcagtniidat 

621601 

Barr idat 

621602 

Malaysian pram 

Prawn 

CrSyf i8h 

Crapfiab 

Crayf irh 

craft ish 

Crtyf ish 

Crqfirh 

Crayfish 

Crtyfirh 

Crayf ith 

Crayfish 

CtAyfiSb 

Crtyf i8h 

Crayfish 

UYflY 

fiYflY 

fiYflY 

R altlla l zceca 

t--- 

E876, P457, 

Byalella knrcktrbockeri) T154 

[Hacrobrtchium lamarrti ] (nonresident] 

Htcrobrachiwn [Foocnoce 61 

rostnbtrgii 

Palatmonecer kadiaktnsis E881, P484 

Cambarur lac imnur E897 

Paxontlla clypeacus ES90 

Orconecter i-air E894, P482 

Orctmec~es limosus E893, P482 

Orcontcttr propinquus E894, P482 

Orcontcttr nair E894 

Orcontccer rusticus E893, ?482 

Orconectts virilir E894, P483 

Ptciftrtacur trowbridgii E883 

Proctmbtrus l cutus 

Procdmut c ltrki 

(Procabarur clarkri) 

Procaabarur 8imulaes E888, P482 

Procambarus rp. [Footnote 2 1 

Sctaoatmt ichaca S173, 0205 

Scenontmt rubrum S178, 0205 

Callibttt is skokiaeus S116, N9 

P4a2 

E885, P482 

69 
Freshuacer (Continued) 

Class Ptmi ly common Name 

Spec ier 

SC itnc if ic Name Reference 

Ltpcophlebiidte 

621701 

Ephemerellidte 

621702 

Ctenidtt 

621802 

Ephemeridtt 

622003 

Libel lul idtt 

622601 

Comqriooidu 

Ugrionidm) 

(Cmugtiidtt) 

622904 

Pterontrcidat 

(%:;;06;arcyidat) 

&YflY 

Yagfly 

Mayfly 

Callibatcir sp. 

Cloton diprtrum 

Psralto~opblebia 

prttpedita 

*Y flY 

!4Ayfly 

mYflY 

mYflY 

*1 flY 

.$ 

tphemertlla ‘doddri 

Ephemtrtlla grandir 

Ephtmertlla rubvaria 

Ephtaenlla Sp. 

Catnir dimieuct 

Nayfly Ephemera rimulanr 

&Y flY litxagteia bi lintaca 

Hexagenia rigida 

fiYflY 

Dmgoclf ly 

Deutlfly 

~Darelflfl 

Dtmrtlfly 

Dtwtlfly 

Sronef ly 

Stonefly 

Sconafly 

Htxagtaia rp. 

Panida hmtett 

(Pancala hymeettt) 

Enelltgmt tapersum 

[~rcheurt shgaer] 

18chnurt vtrci&lir 

Ischnura ap. 

Pterontrctlla badit 

Pctron8rcyr californica 

Pttrontrcy8 dorrata 

70 

[Foocnoct 21 

0173 

S89, 0233 

0245 

0245 

N9, 0248, 

s71 

[Foocnoct 21 

s51, 0268 

S36, 19, 

0283 

N9, S39, 

0290 

0290, s41, 

N9. 

[Foocnoce 21 

Nl5, v603 

DD 

[noertridtnt] 

Nl5, e918 

[Foocnoce 21 

L172 

L173 

E947 
Freshwater (Coerinutd) 

Class Family Common Name 

sp8cits 

Scientific Name Reference 

Nemour idaa 

625204 

Perlidae 

625401 

Ptrlodidat 

625402 

Uepidae 

627206 

Dytircidae 

630506 

Elmidat 

(Elmiechidae) 

631604 

Byd ropaych idat 

641804 

Limetphil idae 

641807 

Brachycterridae 

64181s 

Tipul idtt 

650301 

Scoeef ly 

[Sconefly] 

Scontf ly 

Sconefly 

Sconef ly 

Scontfly 

Pttronarcys sp. [Foocnoce 21 

[Ntntoura cintrea) 1 nonres idenc 

Acroeeuria lycorias N4, E953 

Acrodeuria pacifica E953, us0 

Claasrenia sabulosa E953 

Ntophasganophora capitata E953, CC407 

Stonef ly 

(Pharganophort capirara) 

Arcynopctryx paralltla 

W8cer scorpion Raeacra tloegata 

BtetLt 

Bttclt Sctntlmir rtxlineara 

Caddie f ly Arccop8yche graudir 

Caddie fly Hydroprycht bttttei 

Caddisf ly gydroprycht c82iforaica 

Ctddir f ly HydroQsych8 rp . 

Caddiefly Clirtornia mtgnifica 

Ctddisfly 

Caddisfly 

Philarccur quaeris 

Brachycenrrur sp. 

Crane fly Tipula rp. 

E954 

[nonreaidtnt] 

[Footnort 21 

wzl 

L251, II98 

N24 

L253 

[Foornoct 21 

LIZ06 

II272 

[Foocaoce 21 

[Foornore 21 

71 
Fr&hmctr (Conciautd) 

Clrss F-i 17 Cmon Ntlat 

Species 

Scientific Name Reference 

Ctrtcopogonidte 

65OSO4 

Bi c ing midge 

Culicidtt 

650503 

Zbrquico 

Morqui co 

Qironomidtt 

(Ttndiptdidrt) 

650508 

Midge 

Uidgt 

[Midge] 

Rhtgionidtt 

(Ltpcidtt) 

651603 

PHTLrJH: IKTOPR~CTA (~1tY020~) (78 1 

Phyl teeLatlutr 

7817 

Ptccintrrlcidte 

Lophdpd idaa 

Plwtrollidw 

781701 

PETLOM: CHORDATA (8388) 

Agnrcht Pteraysootidtt 

86 860301 

Osctichchyrs lhguillidre 

8717 874101 

Stlmonidtt 

875501 

Uidge 

Midge 

(Ttadiptr plumorus 

Chiroaomur ctncana 

[Chironomur chatnil 

Chironomus sp. 

Ptrtc tnyt asus 

ptrthtaogtnrc lcu# 

Uidgt Ttnyctrrur dirrimilir 

Snipe fly Achtrix rp. 

Bryoroan 

Bryorota 

Bryorom 

Sea lamprey 

ibtrictn et 1 

Pink stlmon 

Coho rtlnon 

72 

Atdtr trgypci 

Culex pipitnr 

.c 

Ptctintttllt mtgnifico 

Lophopodellt ctrctri 

Pluutellt eurgin0ct 

Pteromyzon mtrinut 

Anguillt rostraa 

Oncorhynchur gorbuscht 

Oncorhynehut kisurch 

[ Foocnoct 2 1 

EE3 

EE3 

L423 

Q 

[nonrtridtac I 

[Foocnoct 21 

[Foocnoct 71 

x1 1 

[Foocnoct 21 

E502, P269 

ES02, P271 

ESOS, P272 

Fli 

F15 

Fld 

F18 
Freshwater (Concinutd) 

Class Family Common Name 

Species 

Scientific Name ReEerence 

Sockeye salmon Oncorhynchus ntrka 

- 

Chinook salmon Oncorhynchus cshawyc 

?louncain Prosopium williamsoni FL9 

whitefish 

Golden trout soloo -48 uabonica F19 

Cuethroat frouc Salmo clarki FL9 -- 

Rainbow trout Salmo gairdntri F19 

(Steelhead trout) 

Esocidtt 

875801 

Cyprinidat 

877601 

Atlantic salmon 

Brown trout 

Brook trout 

Lake trout 

Northern pike 

Salmo salar -- 

Salmo trutta -- 

Salvtlinus foneintlis 

Salvelinus namaycush 

Esox lucius -- 

Chistlwurh 

Longf in dact 

Central 

stontrolltr 

Acrochtilus alutactus 

Agosia chrysogtsctr 

Campos~om~ anomalum 

Goldfish 

Coma carp. 

Ctrassiur turatua 

Cyprinur carpio 

[Ztbrt danio] [Danio rtrio] 

[(Zebrafish)] [Ghydanio rtrio)l 

Silvtrjaw minnov Ericymba buccata 

Golden shiner NoCtmigonur crysoltucas 

Pugnost rhintr Notropis anogtnus 

F19 

F19 

F19 

FL9 

F20 

F21 

F21 

F21 

F21 

F21 

[nonresident] 

(F96) 

F21 

F23 

F23 

73 
Frtrhvtttr (Continued) 

Class Paai ly 

Species 

Commoa Ntmt Scitncific Name Rtfertnct 

Emerald shiner 

Scriped shiner 

Gnmou shiner 

Pugnort minaow 

Spotctil shiner 

Rtd rhiotr 

Spot f in shiner 

Sand shiner 

Sttelco~or 

shiner 

lot them 

rtdbtlly dtct 

Bluncnore minnow 

Ptchttd oiaaou 

Nor chern 

rqumfish 

Bttcknott dtct 

Speckled date 

Bictetliag 

Rudd 

Creek chub 

Pearl dact 

Teach 

Nocropir achtrinoidts F23 

Notropir chryroctphalus F23 

Noeropir coruucus 823 

Nocropir t&ire F24 

Notropis hudsonius F24 

Nocropir lucrtnris F24 

Nocropis rpilopttrus F25 

Nocrovir rcramintus F25 

Noeropir uhipplei P25 

Phoxinus eoa F25 

Pimephaler aocacus 

Piwphaler promtlas 

Ptychocbeilus 

ortsontnsit 

Rbinichchrt l traculus 

Rhiaichchyr osculut 

Rhodeoe rericeur 

F25 

F25 

PZS 

F25 

F25 

f26 

Scardiaiur F26 

trychrophchalmur 

Stmotilus arromaculacus 

Stmorilur margarita 

Tinca cinct -- 

F26 

F26 

F26 

74 
Frtshvacer (Concinutd) 

Class 

--- 

Family 

_--.- 

Common Name 

Sptc irs 

Scientific Yame Reference 

Cacoetomidat 

077604 

Ice l luridat 

877702 

Clariidat 

877712 

Oryziidae 

Cpprinodoncidat 

a80404 

Potciliidat 

880408 

Gtettrosctidtt 

881801 

Whict sucker Caco8eomus commtrsoni F26 

Mountain sucker Ctroscomus Dlatyrhynchus F26 

Black bullhttd 

Yellow bullhead 

Brown bullhead 

Channt 1 cocf ieh 

Walking cacf ish 

Mtdaka 

Banded killifish 

Flagf ish 

Hoequicofieh 

haron 1801 ly 

Sailfin molly 

Molly 

hPPY 

Iccalutus mtlas 

Icerlirrue nacalis 

Ictalurue ntbulosus 

Icralurue punccatus 

Clariae barrachus 

[Orytias lociper] 

Fundulus diaphanus 

Jordanella floridat 

Gambueia l ffinis 

Potcilia formoea 

Potcilia lacipinna 

Poecilia rp. 

F27 

F27 

F27 

F27 

F28 

[nonrtsidtnc] 

(F96) 

F33 

F33 

F33 

F34 

F34 

Potcilit rtciculara F34 

‘7ETEe reticularus, Obe. 1 

Southern 

pltryfish 

Brook 

stickleback 

Yhretspint 

scickltback 

Nintspint 

stickleback 

Xiphophorur q aculatus F34 

Culata inconecans F35 

Gasttrosctus aculeacus F35 

Punqitius pungitius F35 

75 
Frtshvactr (Concinutd) 

Class Family. colmllou NJmt 

Species 

Scitncific Name Reference 

Ctncrrrchidat 

883516 

Ptrc idat 

883520 

Sciatnidat 

883544 

Ptrcichthyidat Whist perch 

Scriptd bass 

Rock b&es 

Green sunf ieh 

Pumpkinsttd 

Oranqtspocctd 

suaf ieh 

Bluegill 

Longttr 8uafieh 

Rtdrar sunf ieh 

Smalloourh bars 

Larqtmouch base 

Whirt crappie 

Black crappie 

Rainbow dtrcer 

Johoay dtrctr 

Or0ngethro0c 

darter 

Ytllov ptrch 

Walleye 

Frtshwactr drum 

Cichlidae 

883561 

Oec0r 

Moront untricana 

(Roccus americanus, Obs .I F36 

?iorone saxtcilis 

(Roccue saxrcilis, Ohs.) F36 

APbloplicee.pupc8rris F38 

Ltpomir cyantllus E38 

Ltpomie gibbosus E38 

Ltpomir humilis F38 

Ltpomis macrochirus 

Ltpomir mtgalocie 

Lepomis microlophus 

Micropctrus dolomitui 

Hicropttrus etlnoidte 

Pomoxis annularis 

Pomoxie niqromtculacus 

EchtOScopa CJtrUltum 

EchtOScoQt Uigrfm 

gtheoetou rptccabilc 

F38 

F38 

F38 

F39 

F39 

F39 

F39 

F39 

F40 

F40 

Ptrca f lavtsctne 

Scizorctdion virrtum 

vitrtum 

Aplodinotus grunnitns 

F41 

F41 

E45 

Aetronocue octl laws F47 

76 
FreshwaKer (Continued) 

Class Family Common Name 

Species 

Scientific Name Reference 

Amphibia 

89 

Coccidae 

883102 

Ranidae 

89.0302 

Blue cilapia 

Mozambique 

tilapia 

Mottled sculpin 

Bull frog 

Green fro9 

Pig frog 

River frog 

Hicrohyl idae 

890303 

Bufonidae 

890304 

Leopard frog 

Wood froq 

[ Frog1 

Leooard frog 

Narrow-mouched 

toad 

American toad 

[Toad] 

Green cod 

lowler’r toad 

Aplidae 

890305 

Tilapia aurea F47 

Tilapia mossambica F47 

Coccus bairdi 

-- 

,_- _ 7. 

Rana cacesbeiany 

,Tr 

u-’ 

Rana clamicans 

F60 

Rana heckrcheri 

Rana sylvacica 

[Rana cemporia] 

Rana rpenocephala 

8206 

8206 

8206 

B206 

B205 

8206 

[nonresident 

JJ 

Gas t rophryne 8192 

carolinensis 

Bufo americanus 

[Bufo bufo] -- 

Bufo debilis 

Bufo fowleri 

Red-sported toad Bufo punccacua 

Woodhouse’r toad Bufo voodhourei 

Northern cricket Acris crepicana 

frog 

Southern eray 

treefroq 

Ry& chrysoscelis 

Spring peeper I&& crucifer 

8196 

[nonresident 

8197 

B196 

B198 

8196 

8203 

B201 

8202 

77 
Freehvacer ( CoaCiaUrd) 

Claee Pmi ly Common Name 

Species 

Scientific Name Reference 

Pipidee 

Gray creafrog BJlr vereicdlor 

Norcheru chorus Peeudacrie trieeriaca 

frog 

Akrican clawed Xenopue leevie 

frog 

Aabyetoretidae Spotted 

890502 ealaeender 

Salaradridae 

890504 

Barking creefrog * greciorr 

Squirrel 

crerfrog 

KJ& equirella 

hmbyecma macularurn 

B201 

9201 

8200 

B202 

216 

8176 

[nonresident 1 

8176 

[Mexicen l xolotl] [Ambyrtoaa aaxicaaual 

Marbled 

e~lameadrr 

Aeabyetoma opacum 

Nevt Nocbphthaleuae virideeceae 8179 

(Tricurue virideecene) 

78 
Foocnoces: 

1. Apparently this is en oucdaced name (D19, 20). Organisms identified as such should only 

be used if they were obtained from Notch America. 

2. Organisms not identified co species are considered resident only if they were obtained 

from wild populations in North America. 

3. If from Notch America, ic is reeidenc and should be called g. similis (Cl. If not from 

North America, ic should be considered nonresidenr. 

4. If from Horch America, it is reeidenc and may be any one of a number of species such as 

D. laevie, D. dubia, or 1. galeace mendoca (Cl. 

Tonridered zonaeenc. 

If noc,,from Norrh America, ic should be 

5. If from North America, ic is resident and may be any one of a number of species, such as 

&. u, 2. lonqiremis, or 2. roeea (Cl. If not from Norrh America, ic should be 

considered nonrceidcnc. 

6. ‘Cbir species miqhc be established in uorcione of the southern United Scaces. 

7. The taxonomy of this species and chic and similar genera has not been clarified, but 

chic species should be considered resident. 

79 
A. 

B. 

C. 

D. 

E. 

F. 

c. 

R. 

I. 

J. 

K. 

L. 

n. 

NJ. 

0. 

P. 

Q. 

References for Freehwacer Species 

Brandlova, .J., 2. Brandl, and C. ti. Pernrndo. 1972. The Cladocera of Ontario with 

remarks on some species and distribution. Can. J. 2001. 50: 1373-1403. 

Blair, W. F., er al. 1968. Vercebraces of the Uaiced Scaces. 2nd Ed. l(cGraw-HiLL, 

Neu York. 

Brooks, 1. L. 1957. The Syecemacics of Horrh American Daphnia. Memoirs of the 

Connecticut Academy of Arts end Sciences, Voi. XIII. 

Kenk, R. 1972. Freshwater Planariane (Turbellaria) of North America. Bioca of 

Preehveter Ecoeyeceme Identification Menual No. 1. U.S. G.P.Qr 15501~0365. 

Edmondeon, W. 1. (cd.) 1965. Fresh-water Bioloqy. 2nd Ed. Wiley, New York. 

&meiccee on NPnee of Fishes. 1980. A List of Comon end Scientific Names of Fishes 

frm the United Scacee and Canada. 4ch Ed. Special Publication No. 12. American 

Fisheries Society . Bethesda, MD: 

Burch, J. B. 1972. Freshwater Sphaeriaceen Claee (Mollueca: Pelecypoda) of North 

America. Bioca of Freehvacer Ecoeyeceme Identificarion Menual No. 3. U.S. G.P.O. 

#5501-0367. 

Foecer, N. 1972. Freehvacer Polychaecee (Annelida) of North heerica. Bioca of 

Freshwater Ecosysrems Idencificarion Manual No. 4. U.S. G.P.O. #5501-0368. 

WiLlirne, V. D. 1972. Freehvacer Ieopode (Asellidae) of North America. Bioca of 

Freshvacer Ecoeysceme Identification Manual NO. 7. U.S. C.P.O. #5501-0390. 

Butch, J. 8. 1973. Freshwater Unionaceen Clame (Yol lueca: Pelecypoda) of North 

America. Bioce of Freehwacer Ecoeysceme Idencificacion Menual No. 11. ‘U.S. C.P.O. 

C5501-00588. 

Kudo, R. R. 1966. ProcozooLogy. 5th Ed. Thomas, Springfield, Illinois. 

Ueinqet, R. L. 1956. Aquetic Ineccce of California. Univereicy of ClLifornia Press, 

Berkeley. 

Clarke, A. Ii. 1973. TIM ?rrrhvecer klolluece of the Cemdiau Interior Beein. 

Melacologia 13: l-509. 

Hileenhoff, W. L. 1975. Aquecic Ineeccs of Wisconsin. Technical Bulletin No. 89. 

Dept. of Natural Resources. Medieon, Wisconsin. 

Edmunde, G. F., Jr:, et l l. 1976. The Hayfliee of Korth and Cenrrel America. 

Univereicy of Hinneeoca Press, Hinneapolie. 

Pennak, R. W. 1978. Fresh-Water Invercebracee of the United Scacee. 2nd Ed. Wiley, 

New York. 

Wentsell, R., l c al. 1977. tlydrobiologia 56: 153-156. 

80 
il. Johannsen, 0. A. 1937. Aquatic Dipceta. Part IV. Chironomidae: Subfamily 

Chironominle. Memoir 210. Cornell Univ. Agricultural Experimental Scacion, Ithaca, 

NY. 

S. Burks, 8. D. 1953. The Hayflies, or Ephemeropcerr, of Illinois. Bulletin of the 

Natural History Survey Division. Urbana, Illinois. 

T. Bous field, E. L. 1973. Shallow-Water Gammarideen Amphipods of New Enqland. Cornell 

University Press, Ithaca, New York. 

U. Sohn, I. C., and L. S. Kornicker. 1973. XorpholoJy of Cyprecca kawacai Sohn and 

Eornicker, 1972 (Cruscoceo, O~~racoda), with a Discussion of the Genus. Smithsonian 

Concribucionr CO Zoology, NO. 141. 

V. Needhsm, J. G., and H. J. Wescfatl, Jr. 1955. A Manual ofi- the Dragonflies of North 

America. Univ. of California Press, Berkeley. 

w. Brown, H. P. 1972. Aquatic Dryopoid Beetles (Coleopcera) of the United Scaces. 

Bioca of Freshwater Ecosystems Xdeacificrcion Manual No. 6. U.S.C.P.O. #5501-0370. 

X. Parodia, J. J. 1956. Nocer on the Freshwater Snail Lepcoxis (Xudalia) carinaca 

(Bruguiere). Annals of the Carnegie Museum 33: 391-405. 

Y. Myers, F. J. 1931. The Discribucion of Rocifera on Mouhc Dtserr Island. Am. Museum 

Nqvicaces 494: l-12. 

2. National Academy of Sciences. 1974. Amphib ins : Guidelines for the breeding, care, 

and management of laboratory animals. Washinqcon, D.C. 

AA. Home, F. R., and S. !4oIncosh. 1979. Factors Influencing Discribicion of Mussels in 

the Blanc0 giver in Central Texas. Nautilus 94: 119-133. 

88. Klems, D. J. 1972. Freshuacer Leeches (Annelida: Rirudinea) of North America. Bioca 

of Freshwaccr Ecospsccms Idencificacion Manual No. 8. U.S.C.P.O. #5501-0391. 

CC. Prison, T. El. 1935; Ihe Sconeflies, or Plecopcera, of Illinois. Bull. 111. Nat. 

History Survey, Vol. 20, Article 4. 

DD. White, A. W. Uanuscripc. John Cerroll University, University Weiqhcs, Ohio. 

ER. Dersia, 9. F., Jr., snd 1. A. Ward. 1981. Xdeacificacioa and Ccographical 

Discribucion of thr Hosquitoes of Notch herica, North of Hcxico. Ibcrican Mosquito 

Control Association, Fresno, C8lifornia. 

FP. Holsinger, J. R. 1972. The Freshwater Amphipod Crustaceans (Cammaridae) of North 

Americ8. Bioca of Prcshwacer Ecosysceos Identification Manual No. 5. U.S.C.P.O. 

#5501-0369. 

CC. Chapman, P. H., cc al. 1982. Relative Tolerances of Selected Aquatic Oligochaeces co 

Individual Pollucsncs and Environmental Paccors. Aquatic Toxicology 2: 47-67. 

HH. Bosnak, A. D., snd E. L. Morgan. 1981. Nscional Spelcological Society Bull. 43: 

12-18. 

81 
II. biiqgens, G. B. 1977. Larvae of the North American Caddisfly Genera (Tricopcera). 

University of Toronto Press, Toronto, Canada. 

JJ. till, R. J., and D. Svineford. 1980. Toxic Effects of Endrin and ToxaDhene on the 

Southern Leopard Frog Rana rphenocephala. Environ. Polluc. (Series A) 23: jj-6j. 

82 
Salcwacer Species 

Class Fami ly Cowon Name 

Species 

Scientific Name deference 

PHYLlTH: CNIDA~A (coELE~RATA) (37) 

Bydroooa 

3701 

Campanulariidae 

370401 

Campanulinidae 

370404 

PHYLUM: CTENOPHORA ( 38 1 

Tcncaculaca Pleurobrachi idae 

3801 380201 

Memi idae 

380302 

PHYLUM: RHYNCHOCOELA ( 4 3 ) 

kleceronemerces Lineidae 

4303 430302 

Hydroid Campanuldrin flexuosa 

Hydroid Laomedea lovcni 

Xydromedusa Phiaiidium sp. 

[Hydroidl [Eirene niridulr] 

Ccenophore 

Ct enophore 

Nemercine worm 

PHYLUM: iumnzu (RoTAT~RW (451 

Honogononca Brachionidre Rot i far 

4505 450601 

PHYLUM: ANNELIDA (50) 

POlJChseca Pl171 lodoc idre 

5001 500113 

Pol7chaete Yom 

Hereidae 

500124 

Polychaecc worm 

Pleurobrachia pileus 

Mnemiopsis mccrdayi 

Cerrbraculus fuscus 

Brachionus plicacilis 

Ph llodoce Mculacs 

ci 

(Nereiphylla maculaca) 

8122, E81 

[nonresident 1 

[ Foocnoce 11 

(E811 

[nonres idenc j 

6218, El62 

c39, 194 

B252 

B272 

E334 

Ncsnches arenaceodencaca E377 

(Nerris l rrnaceodencaca) 

[PoJychaece worm] [Neanches vaali] [nonresident] 

Polychaece uozm Nereis diversicolor 

(-es diversicolor) 

E337, F527 

83 
Sslcvacer (Continued) 

Class Femi ly Commou Name 

Species 

Scientific Nwe Reference 

Dorvilleidae 

500136 

Spionidae 

500143 

Cirraculidae 

500150 

Ccsnodrilidee 

500153 

Capicsllidae 

500160 

Arenicolidae 

500162 

Sabellidae 

500170 

Oligochsecs 

5004 

Tubificidee 

500902 

PRYLUH: mLLuscA (508s) 

Cascropode Ealiocidee 

51 510203 

Calppcraeidae 

510364 

Huric idae 

510501 

Sand vorm 

Polychaece uom 

Polycharce won 

[Polychaece worm] 

Polychaece worm 

Polychaece wns 

Polychaece votpl 

Polychaece uorm 

Polychaece worm 

Polychaaca worm 

01 igochaece uons 

Oligocheece worm 

Olipcbeeee uotl Tubificoider grbriallee Z 

Black abalone 

Red sbelona 

Cowan Acl8ncic 

slippershell 

Oyster drill 

Nereis virens 

GZTe~ns 1 

8317, E337, 

C58 

Harris sp. 

Ophryocrochs diadema P23 

[Ophryocrocha labrunica] [nonresident] 

Polydora vebsceri E338 

Cirriformia spirabranchio C253 

Ccenodrilus aerrscus C275 

Capicell* cspicaca B358, E337 

Arenicola marina B369, E337 

Eudiscylie vancouveri DD 

Limnodriloides 2 

verruco8us 

2 

Aaliocis cracherodii 

?laliocis rufcsccns 

Crepidula fornicaca 

C88, D17 

D18 

C90, D14L 

Urosal inx cinerca 

+- 

8646, D179, 

Urosalprnx cinereus) E264 
salcwrcer (Continued) 

Class Family Common Name 

Species 

Scienrific Name Reference 

Melonglcpidac 

(Nepcuaeidae) 

510507 

Nassariidoe 

(Nassidoc) 

510508 

Bivalvio 

(Pelecypoda) 

55 

Hyrilidac 

550701 

Peccinidae 

550905 

Oscreid8e 

551002 

Cardi idae 

551522 

Hacridae 

551525 

Tellinidae 

551531 

Veneridae 

551547 

ChAnneled whelk 

+hd snail 

Northern horse 

inurrel 

Hodiolus modiolus 

Blue mare1 Mycilus edulis 

Bay scallop 

Pacific oyster 

Earcern oyrcer 

Oyster 

Oyr cer 

[Cockle] 

Cl= 

Common rangia 

Surf clam 

Cl- 

[Bivalve] 

Quahog clas 

Busycon canaliculatum 

Narrarius obsolecus 

~solecP) 

(Garra obroleca) 

[Mytilus 

galloprovinciallisl 

Argopeccen irradians 

Crassoscrea gigas 

Crarsorcrea virninica 

Crarroscre8 ap. 

Oscrei edulis -- 

(Cardim edulel 

Muliaa laceralir 

Raagir cuneaca 

Spirula rolidissima 

Hacoma inquinwa 

[Telliaa tenuis] 

Hercenar ia mercenar ia 

B655, 0223, 

E264 

8649, 0226, 

E264 

0434 

B566, ClOl, 

0428, E299 

[nonresident 

0447 

C102, D456, 

E300 

0456, E300 

[Footnote 1 I 

moo 

[nonresident 

D491 

0491, E301 

8599, 0489, 

E301 

0507 

[nonresident: 

0523, E301 

85 
Salcwecer (Continued) 

Class Fami lp Common Name 

Soecies 

Scientific Name ileference 

Fly idae 

(Hyec idle) 

551701 

PHYLUM: ARTHROPODA (58-69) 

Merorcomete Limulidee 

58 580201 

Cruscacea Artemi idae 

61 610401 

Cal eaidee 

611801 

Eucalanidae 

611803 

Pseudocalanidae 

611805 

tuchaecidaa 

611808 

Hecridiidee 

611816 

Couuon Pacific 

liccleneck 

Japanese 

1 i cc leneck 

Soft-shell 

ClHorseshoe crab Limulus polyphemus 

[Brine shrimp] [Arcemia salina] 

Copepod 

Copepod 

WePd 

Copepod 

Ww-J 

Paeudodi-•pcaidae Copepod 

611819 

Temoridee 

611820 

Wepod 

Pontellidee 

611827 

Copepod 

Acrrtiidee 

611829 

Copepod 

Procothaca scaminea 

Tapes philippinarum 

& l renaria 

Caleaue helaolendicus 

Undinule vulqaris 

Eucalanus elongacus 

Eucelanus pileacus 

Pseudocalenur minucus 

Euchaeca marine 

Mecridie puifica 

Pseudodiapcomur 

coronacun 

Eurycemore l ffinis 

Lebidocera scocci 

Acrrcie clausi 

0526 

0527 

8602, 0536, 

ii302 

8533, E403, 

ii30 

[Foocnoce 2) 

425 

429 

AA 

AA 

E447, 1155, 

443 

Q63 

x179, Y 

E447, 1154, 

QlOl 

E450, 1155, 

Qlll 

R157 

E447 

86 
salcwarer (Conciaued) 

Class Femi ly Comeon Name 

Species 

Scientific Name Reference 

Herpeccicidee 

611910 

Tirbidae 

611913 

Cenchocempc idee 

611929 

Belen~.dee 

613402 

My s id 86. 

615301 

Idoceidee 

616202 

Jeoiridee 

616306 

Ampeliecidee 

616902 

QveP~ Acercia tons8 

Cwwd Tigriopus celifornicus 

[Copepod] [Tiqriopus jepenicus] 

Cwvd Tisbe holochuriee 

Copepod Nicocre spinipes 

Bernecle 

Barnacle 

Beraec le 

Beraec Le 

Mysid 

Myrid 

Mye id 

Mysid 

Isopod 

[Iaopodl 

[ trop4 

[Ieopadl 

[fsopod] 

[ Isopod] 

Amphipod 

Balenur belenoides 

Belenur crenecus 

Belenue eburneur 

Beleaur improvisus 

Heteroetysir form088 

Hyeidopeia behie 

Mysidopsis bigelovi 

Neomyris sp. 

Idocee belcice 

[Idocee l marqinece] 

[Idocee aeslec~e] 

(Jeere l lbifrone] 

(Jeer8 elbifrone sensu] 

[ Jeer8 nordmenni] 

Ampelisce ebdice 

E447, 1154 

578 

[nonresident 

BB 

4240 

B424, E457 

8426, E457 

8424, E457 

B426, E457 

E513, K720 

U173 

E513, R720 

[Foocnoce l] 

8446, E483 

[nonreridenc] 

[nonresident] 

[amreeidenc I 

[nonresident] 

(nonresident] 

E488, L136 

87 
Salcvecer (Coacinued) 

Class Femily Common Name 

Species 

Scientific Name Reference 

Euriridee Amphipod 

(Poncoqtatiidee) 

616920 

Gaeener idae Amphipod 

616921 

Amph ipod 

Aaphipod 

bphipodl 

-hipod 

Lysiaaessidee hephipod 

616934 

Cupheuriidee Eupheuri id 

(Thyrenopodidee) 

6 17402 

Pen l e idre 

617701 

Peletmonidee 

617911 

Brown shrimp 

Pink shrimp 

Uhice shrimp 

Blue shrimp 

1 Bhriapl 

[Pram1 

Pram 

Korean shrimp 

Creer shrimp 

Crers’ shrimp 

Poncogentia sp. [Footnoct 11 

Gamerus duebeni L56 

Gmnerus oceenicur E489, L50 

Ganmerus tigrinus L51 

[G-rur zeddachi] [nonrtsidenc] 

?4erinogmmnerus obcusecus L58 

Anonyx l p. [Foocnoct 11 

Eupheurie pacific8 

Penecus efc ecus 

Peaaeua duorerum 

Ptnetus l eciftrus 

Penecur rcylirorcris 

[Leender peucidens] 

[Leeader ssuille] 

[7ZiZon l lcgene 1 I 

Hecrobrecbium 

roembergii 

Pelaemon mecrodecrylur 

Pelaemoaeier pugio 

Peleemoaecer vulgaris 

Ml5 

E518, N17 

E518, N17 

E518, N17 

[nonrtsidtnc] 

[nonrtsidenc ] 

[nonrts idtnc 1 

rFoornoce 3 I 

T380 

E521, N59 

8500, E521, 

N56 

88 
Selcwecer (Cont,iaued) 

Clear Fmilp Common Name 

Sotcits 

Scientific Name Reference 

Hippolycidae 

617916 

Panda1 idea 

617918 

Crengoaidae 

617922 

Nephropridee 

(Nephropidee) 

(Boateridae) 

618101 

Peguridu 

618306 

Cencridee 

618803 

Portuaidee 

618901 

Xenthidee 

(Pilutaidee) 

618902 

Sergessun shrimp Lrcreuces fucorum N78 

Coon script 

shrimp 

Sbr imp 

Pink shrimp 

[Send shrimp] 

Pendelus danat 

Pendelus qoniurus 

Pandeius moncegui 

[Crengon crengonl 

Crengon frenciscorum 

(Crag0 frencircorum) 

T306, U163 

W163 

B494, E522, 

W163 

[nonrtsidenc 

Bay shrimp V176, W164 

Shrimp Crengon nigriceuda 

Send shrimp Crengoa repctmepinosa 

kericao lobster Hodtarur americanus 

[Lobseer] 

Bermic crab 

Rock crab 

hugeness crab 

Blue crab 

Green crab 

Hud crab 

Crab 

Mud crab 

(Homerus gammerur 1 

Pagurus lonqicerpus 

Cancer irrorecus 

Cancer maqircar 

Calliaecrer repidur 

Carcinus meener 

Eurypenopeur deprtssus 

Lepcodiur floridanus 

V176, U164 

8500, E522, 

B502, E532 

[nonrtsidenc] 

B514, E537, 

N125 

8518, E543, 

N175 

T166, V185, 

w177 

B521, C80, 

E543, N168 

CSij, E543 

8522, E543, 

N195 

S80 

Rhichropenopeur harrisii E543, N187 

89 
Salcweeer (Coaeiaued) 

Class Family Common Nata 

Species 

Scitncific Name Reference 

Grepsidae 

618907 

Ocypodiclae 

618909 

PRYLIRI: LCHINODtA (8 1) 

luctroidte Asceriidee 

8104 811703 

Ophiuroidee Dphiochricidee 

8120 812904 

Echinoidte Arbaciidee 

8136 814701 

Toxopneuscidee 

814802 

Echinidu 

814901 

[Echinoderm] 

Ichinontridu (Coral reef 

814902 echiooid ] 

Sc roaqylocentrocidee 

814903 

See urchin 

Dtndrer~eridee 

815501 

Sand dollar 

PHYLUM: CXAETOGNATHA (83) Arrow worm 

Short crab 

Short crab 

Drift line crab 

Crab] 

Fiddler crab 

Starfish 

Brittle scar 

See urchin] 

See urchin 

See urchin 

[See urchin] 

Remigrepsus nudus 

Htmigrepsur ortgontnsir 

Stsanse cintrtum 

(Sesenxe heemarochtir] 

Uca pugiletor 

Ascaries forbesi 

Ophiorhrix rpiculace 

(Arbecie lixule] 

Arbecie puncculete 

Lyrechinur piceus 

[Pseudocenerocur 

depressus] 

[Parecencrocur lividur] 

[Echimmetra urheeil 

Scrongylocencrotur 

purpurecus 

Dendresctr exctncricus 

Segicta hirpide 

cc 

cc 

B526, E544, 

N222 

[nonresident 

8526, E544, 

N232 

0728, E578, 

0392 

0672, T526 

[nonres idtnc 

8762, E572 

T253 

nonresidencl 

nooresidencl 

[noarerideac] 

[Heurii only] 

0574, T202 

0537, V363 

E218 

90 
Selcvecrr (Coaciaued) 

Class Femily Common Name 

Species 

SC i tat i f ic Name Reference 

P?IYLUH: CHORDATA (8388 1 

Choadrichchyts Rejidee 

8701 871304 

Osctichchyer Aaguillidee 

8717 874101 

Clupeidee 

874701 

Engreulidee 

874702 

Selmoaidee 

875501 

Cedidee 

879103 

Cyprinodont idat 

880404 

[Thornbeck ray] [a clavaca] [nonrtsidtnc 

Americeu eel Anguille roscraca A15 

Aclencic q enheden Brevdbrcie cyrennus Al 7 

Gulf mtnheden Brevoorcie pacronus Al7 

Acleacic herring Clupee hertngur herengur Al7 

Pacific herring Clupee hertngus pelleri Al.7 

Berriag Clupre harengur Al7 

Northern anchovy Engreulis q ordex Al8 

[Nehu] 

Pink salmon 

Qua reLmoa 

Coho salmon 

Sockeye salmon 

Qiaook eelmon 

Reinbou trout 

[Scolephorur purpureus) (nonrtsidenc 1 

[Haveii only ] 

Oacorhpachur gorburcha Al8 

Oacorhyachur ktte Al8 

Oncorhynchus kisurch Al8 

Oncorhyachur nerka A19 

Oacorhyachus trheuycrcha A19 

Selmo geirdaeri Al9 

(Steelheed Lrouc 1 

Aclencic salmon Salmo seler A19 -- 

Acleacic cod Cadur morhue A30 -- 

EIeddock 

Sheeprheed 

niIUlOW 

Helenogremmus atgltfinus A30 

Cypriaodon veritgecus A33 

91 
Saltvaccr (Continued) 

Class Femi ly Common Name 

Species 

Scicac if ic Name Reference 

Potciliidae 

880408 

Achcrinidee 

880502 

Gescerorceidee 

881801 

Syaqaeehidae 

882002 

Percichchpidre 

Iuhliidu 

aa3sl4 

Gatangidw 

883S28 

Sparidae 

883543 

SC irenidre 

883544 

Huawnichog 

Scr iped 

killifish 

Lonqnore 

killifish 

Worquicofirh 

Seilfin molly 

In 1 and 

rilverside 

Aclmcic 

rilverride 

Tidevacer 

silverside 

Threespine 

scicklebeck 

Fourrpine 

rcickleback 

Nor chern 

pipefirh 

Scriped beer 

Florida Pompeno 

Piafirh 

Spot 

Fundulus heccroclicus A33 

Fundulur mejelis A.33 

Fundulur s imi lir .A33 

Gaburir affinir 

Poecilie lecipinna 

Menidir beryllinr 

A33 

A34 

A34 

Henidie menidis A34 

Ueaidia peninrulee A34 

Garcerosceur aculcacur A35 

Apelter quedracur A35 

Synenachur fuscur A36 

Morone sexacilir 

(Baccus sexecllia, Obs.1 

(Iuhlie rendvicearirl 

Trrchinocus crrolinus 

LeRodoo rhomboidee 

Leiorcomur xanchurur 

Aclencic croaker Micropogonier undulrcur 

A36 

[nonresident I 

[Heveii only) 

A43 

A45 

A46 

A46 

92 
Saltwater (Continued) 

Class Family Common Name 

Species 

Scientific Name Reference 

Embiotocidae 

.883560 

Pomacentridae 

883562 

Labridae 

883901 

Mugilidae 

883601 

Ammodytidae 

884501 

Gobiidae 

884701 

Cottidae 

883102 

Bothidae 

885703 

Pleuronectidae 

885704 

Balistidae 

886002 

Red drum Sciaenops ocellatus 

Shiner perch Cymatogaster aggregata 

Dwarf perch 

Blacksmith 

Gunner 

Bluehead 

[Mullet] 

Striped mullet 

White mullet 

Pacific sand 

Lance 

Micrometrus minimus 

chromis punctipinnis 

Tautogolabrus adspersus 

Thalassoma bifasciatum 

[Aldrichetts forsteri] 

Mugil cephalus 

Mugil curema 

Ammodytes hexapterus 

Longjaw mudsucker Gillichthys mirabilis 

Naked goby Gobiosoma boaci 

Tidepool aculpin Oligocottus maculosus 

Spackled sanddab Citharichthys stigmaeus 

Summer flounder Paralichthys dentatus 

(Dab] [Limanda limanda] 

[Plaice] [Pleuronecctes platessa 

Engliah sole Parophrys vetulus 

Winter flounder Pseudopleuronecces 

americanus 

Planehead Monacanthus hispidus 

A46 

A47 

A48 

A48 

A49 

A49 

[nonresident] 

A49 

A49 

A53 

A54 

A54 

A61 

A64 

A64 

[nonresident] 

[nonresident] 

A65 

A65 

A66 

filefish 

93 
Saltwater (Continued) 

Class Family Common Name 

Species 

Scientific Name Reference 

Tettaodonridae 

886101 

Northern puffer Sphoeroides maculatus A66 

Footnotes : 

1. Organisms not identified to species are considered resident only ‘if obtained from wild 

populations in North America. 

2. This species should not be used because it might be too atypical. 

3. This species might be established in portions of the southern United states. 

94 
Rtfertncta for Salcvaccr Species 

A. 

B. 

C. 

0. 

E. 

F. 

G. 

IL 

I. 

J. 

K. 

L. 

n. 

N. 

0. 

amiccet on Names of Fishes. 1980. A List of Common and Scientific Names of Fishes 

from the United Scaces and Canada. 4th Ed. Special Publication No. 12. American 

Fisheries Society, Bethesda, $HD. 

Miner, R. W. 1950. Field Book of Seashore Life. Van Rtts Press, New York. 

George, Da, and J. George. 1979. !Urine Life: An Itluacraced Encyclopedia of 

Invtrcebracea in the Sea. Wiley-Incerscienct, New York. 

&+bocc, I(. T. 1974. American Seashells. 2nd Ed. Van Norcrand Reinhold Company, Xew 

York. 

Goaner, K. L. 1971. Guide co Idencificacion of tirine and Eacuarint Xnvercebraces: 

Cape tlacceraa co the Bay of Fundy. Wiley-Inccrrcience, Nev York; Gosner, K. L. 1979. 

A Field Guide co cha Atlantic Seaahora. Houghton Mifflin, Boacon. 

Harcaunn, 0. 1968. Aclaa of cht Erranciace Polychatcoua Anntlida from California. 

filan Hancock Found&c ion, Uaivtrsicy of Souchtrn California, Los Angeles, California. 

Harcmann, 0. 1969. Aclaa of the Stdencariacc Polychattous Annelids from California. 

Allen Hancock Foundation, Univtraicy of Southern California, Los Angeles, California. 

coolay, N. R. 1978. An Ittvenrory of the Eacuarim Fauna in chc Vicinity of 

Pensacola, Florida. Florida ?iarine Research Publicscion No. 31. Florida Departmtnc 

of Nacutal Resources, SC. Pccersbutg, Florida. 

Ziaqmark, R. C. (cd.) 1978. An Annocactd Chtcklisc of the Biora of cht Coerce1 Zone 

of South Carolina. University of South Carolina Press, Columbia, South Carolina. 

Monk, C. R. 1941. Marine RarDaccicoid Copepoda from California. Trans. Amer. 

Microac. Sot. 60:75-99. 

Wiqlty, R. , and B. R. Burns. 1971. Diacribucion and Biology of Mysida (Cruscacea, 

?(gsidacra) from the Aclancic Coaac of cht United Scaces in the NHFS Woods Hole 

Co1 ltccioa. Fish. Bull. 69(4):717-746. 

Bouafield, E. L. 1973. Shallow-Uactr Gamaaridean Amphipoda of Ntv England. Cornell 

Univerairy Press. Ithaca, Hew York. 

Poucmartve, L. A. tupbauaida of the North Pacific, their Diacribucion, and Ecology. 

Jtruaalm: Israel ProgrrP for Scientific Tranalationa. 1966. Traaalaced from chc 

Russian by S. Ntmchonok. ‘M’6S-30098. NTIS, Springfield, VA. 

Williams, A. 8. 1965. Marine Decapod Cruacactans of the Carolinaa. Fish. Bull. 

65(1):1-298. 

Syman, L. H. 1955. The Invercebraces: Echinodennaca. Vol. IV. McGraw-Hi 11, New 

York. 

95 
P. 

C!. 

A. 

s. 

T. 

u. 

V. 

u. 

X. 

Y. 

7 . . 

AA. 

BB. 

cc. 

DD. 

Akesson, 8. 1976. Horpholopy and Life Cycle of 0 hr ocrocha di8dtm8, a New 

PoLycb8tce Species from CtLiforni8. Ophtli8 L5( Le 

‘Wilson, C. B. 1932. The Copepodr of the Woods Hole Region, 38ssrchuseccs. U.S. sac. 

Hug. BULL. L58: L-635. 

Fleainqer, A. 1956. Ttxoaomic and Disrribuciontl Studier on the Epiplankconic 

C8Lanoid Copepods (Crustace8) of the Gulf of Mexico. Disserc8cion. Harvard 

University, Ctmbridqe. 

Xtnrel, R. W. 1956. Annocrced Checklist of the ?ltrine Flu118 and Flora of the Sc. 

Georqe ’ I Sound - Ap8Lrchee B8y resion, Florid8 Gulf C08sc. Concrib. Xo. 61. FLa. 

Scsce Univ. Octmopr. IasC. 

Rickectr, E. F., 8nd .I. C8lvin. (Rtvistd by Jot1 W. Sdqptrh). 1968. Becwten 

Ptcific Tides. Sc8oford Uaivtrricy Prtst, Sctaford, Ctlifotnit. 

Price, H. W. 1978. Occurrence of HysidoQsir 8lmYr8 Bouman, 2. b8hi8 LHoLeenock and 

Boum8niellr brrriliensir Btcttcu (Crurttcet, Hysid8ct8) from chtmern Gulf of 

Htxico. hlf bs. ILporct 6(2): 173-175. 

Light, S. F. (Ravirtd by R. I. Smith, l c 81.1. 1961. Iactrcid8L Invercebracts of 

the Ctncr81 CaLiforni8 Co8rc. Univtrsicp of C8liforni8 Prtsa, Los Angeles, 

Ctl ifornit. 

Korloff, I!. N. 1976. Ktpr to cbt Maine Inverctbr8ctr of Puptc Sound, cht S8n Ju8n 

.Arehiptl8go, and Mjrctnc Rtqionr. Waiversicy of Wtshingcon Prtsr, SttCcLt, 

W8rhinqcon. 

C8lcofi AcL88. No. 19. Ctliforni8 Cooptr8cive Oct8nic Fisheries Invcstiqacions, 

Scrct of Ctliforni8.Htrint Rttttrch Cormicctt. pp. 179-185. 

Brodrkii, K. A. 1967. C818noido of cht P8r E8sccrn Sttt rnd Polar B8sin of the 

U.S.S.R. Jtrustltm Series, Keys co cht Fauna of cht U.S.S.R. ZoologicaL Inrc., 

Actdaay Scitnctr, U.S.S.R. No. 35. 

Chapnan, P. M., ec 81. 1982. RtL8civt Toler8acta of ScJtcttd Aqurric Oliqoch8eces co 

Ind ividurl PoLluc8nct 8nd Environmtncrl Fsccorr . Aqutcic Toxicology 2: 47-67. 

Vtnk8c8r8&8k, A., tc 8L. 1982. Scudicr on Toxicity of OTEC PLaac Components on 

tuc~lmur rp. fra cbt Gulf of Htxico. Octtn Scitnct tad tnginrtring. 

Ziaqmank, P. C. (td.). 1978. An Annotard Checklist of the Bfocs of the Co8ac81 Zone 

of Souch Cttoliot. Uuiverrity of South Ctrolint Prttr. 

Thtcchtr, 1. 0. 1978. The Rtlrcive Sensieivicy of P8cific Norchwtsc Fishes andInvtrctbrrctt co Chlorintctd St8 Wtctr. In: 1. L. JolLty, l c tL. (tdr.), Wocer 

Chlorin8cion: Enviroumenc81 Imptcc l d Rerlch Effeccr. Vol. 2. Ann Arbor Science 

Publishers, Ann Arbor, Hichig8n. p. 341. 

Young, J. S., te al, 1979. Effeccr of Copper on chc S8btlltd Polychatce, Eudiscylir 

vancouveri: 1. Conctncrtcion Limits for Copper Accuwl8tion. Arch. Environ. Concorn. 

Toxicol. 8: 97-106. 

96 
Appendix 2. Example Calculation of Final Acute Value, Compurer Program, and 

Princoucs 

A. Rx8mple calculation 

N * coca1 number of WWs in data set - 8 

Rank WV 1nuAv (lnMm2 PR/(N+lI r P 

4 6.4 1.8S63 3.4458 0.44444 0.66667 

3 6.2 1.8245 3.3290 0.33333 0.57735 

2 4.8 1.5686 2.4606 0.22222 0.47140 

1 0.4 -0.9163 0.8396 0.11111 0.33333 

SULR: 4.3331 10.07so 1.11110 2.04875 

- 87.134 

S - 9.3346 

L = 14.3331 - (9.3346)(2.04875)1/4 - -3.6978 

A - (9.3346)(m) - 3.6978 - -1.6105 

FAV = c -1.6105 w 0.1998 

97 
B. gxsnple computer program in BASIC language for calculating the PAV 

10 BEW THIS PWGRAM CALCULATES THE FAV WXEN THERE ARg LESS TM 

20 REM 59 MAVS IN THE DATA SET. 

30 x-o 

40 x2-0 

50 Y-0 

60 Y2-0 

70 PRINT "HOW MANY MAVS AM IN THE DATA SET?" 

80 INPUT N 

90 PRINT "WHAT AlU T'ElR FODR LOWEST HAVS?" 

100 FOR B-1 To 4 

110 INPUT V 

120 X=X+LCG(V) 

130 Kz-Xz+(U)G(V))*(LOG(V)) 

140 P-R/(N+l) 

150 YZ-Y 2+P 

160 Y-Y+SQR(P) 

170 NgXT R 

180 S-SQR((X2-X*X/4)/(Y2-Y*Y/4)) 

190 L- (x-SY) /4 

200 A-SWQR(O.OS)+L 

210 F-EXP(A) 

220 PRINT “FAV - “F 

230 END 

C. Exanple priacouts from program 

EloW MANY MAVS ARB IN TIE DATA SET? 

? 8 

WHAT AUS THE FODR LOWBST HAVS? 

? 6.4 

? 6.2 

? 4.8 

? .4 

FAV - 0.1998 

L’W? MANY C4AVS AU IN TEg DATA SET? 

1 16 

UELAT ARE TEfg FOUR LeOWEST MAVS? 

1 6.4 

? 6.2 

? 4.8 

? .4 

FAV = 0.4365 

98