TY - JOUR
T1 - Use of traits-based bioassessment approaches in biomonitoring and ecological risk assessment
AU - van den Brink, P.J.
AU - Alexander, A.
AU - Desrosiers, M.
AU - Goedkoop, W.
AU - Goethals, P.L.M.
AU - Liess, M.
AU - Dyer, S.
PY - 2011
Y1 - 2011
N2 - We discuss the application of traits-based bioassessment approaches in retrospective bioassessment as well as in prospective
ecological risk assessments in regulatory frameworks. Both approaches address the interaction between species and stressors
and their consequences at different levels of biological organization, but the fact that a specific species may be less abundant in
a potentially impacted site compared with a reference site is, regrettably, insufficient to provide diagnostic information. Species
traits may, however, overcome the problems associated with taxonomy-based bioassessment. Trait-based approaches could
provide signals regarding what environmental factors may be responsible for the impairment and, thereby, provide causal
insight into the interaction between species and stressors. For development of traits-based (TBA), traits should correspond to
specific types of stressors or suites of stressors. In this paper, a strengths, weaknesses, opportunities, and threats (SWOT)
analysis of TBA in both applications was used to identify challenges and potentials. This paper is part of a series describing the
output of the TERA (Traits-based ecological risk assessment: Realising the potential of ecoinformatics approaches in
ecotoxicology) Workshop held between 7 and 11 September, 2009, in Burlington, Ontario, Canada. The recognized strengths
were that traits are transferrable across geographies, add mechanistic and diagnostic knowledge, require no new sampling
methodology, have an old tradition, and can supplement taxonomic analysis.Weaknesses include autocorrelation, redundancy,
and inability to protect biodiversity directly. Automated image analysis, combined with genetic and biotechnology tools and
improved data analysis to solve autocorrelation problems were identified as opportunities, whereas low availability of trait data,
their transferability, their quantitative interpretation, the risk of developing nonrelevant traits, low quality of historic databases,
and their standardization were listed as threats.
AB - We discuss the application of traits-based bioassessment approaches in retrospective bioassessment as well as in prospective
ecological risk assessments in regulatory frameworks. Both approaches address the interaction between species and stressors
and their consequences at different levels of biological organization, but the fact that a specific species may be less abundant in
a potentially impacted site compared with a reference site is, regrettably, insufficient to provide diagnostic information. Species
traits may, however, overcome the problems associated with taxonomy-based bioassessment. Trait-based approaches could
provide signals regarding what environmental factors may be responsible for the impairment and, thereby, provide causal
insight into the interaction between species and stressors. For development of traits-based (TBA), traits should correspond to
specific types of stressors or suites of stressors. In this paper, a strengths, weaknesses, opportunities, and threats (SWOT)
analysis of TBA in both applications was used to identify challenges and potentials. This paper is part of a series describing the
output of the TERA (Traits-based ecological risk assessment: Realising the potential of ecoinformatics approaches in
ecotoxicology) Workshop held between 7 and 11 September, 2009, in Burlington, Ontario, Canada. The recognized strengths
were that traits are transferrable across geographies, add mechanistic and diagnostic knowledge, require no new sampling
methodology, have an old tradition, and can supplement taxonomic analysis.Weaknesses include autocorrelation, redundancy,
and inability to protect biodiversity directly. Automated image analysis, combined with genetic and biotechnology tools and
improved data analysis to solve autocorrelation problems were identified as opportunities, whereas low availability of trait data,
their transferability, their quantitative interpretation, the risk of developing nonrelevant traits, low quality of historic databases,
and their standardization were listed as threats.
KW - Bioassessment
KW - Biomonitoring
KW - Ecological risk assessment
KW - Traits
U2 - 10.1002/ieam.109
DO - 10.1002/ieam.109
M3 - Article
SN - 1551-3793
VL - 7
SP - 198
EP - 208
JO - Integrated Environmental Assessment and Management
JF - Integrated Environmental Assessment and Management
IS - 2
ER -