thesis_presentation
DESCRIPTION
A brief outline of my thesis at VCUTRANSCRIPT
BY: BY:
VRUSHALI LELEVRUSHALI LELE
THESIS DIRECTOR: DR. PETER DEFURTHESIS DIRECTOR: DR. PETER DEFUR
INTRODUCTION/BACKGROUNDINTRODUCTION/BACKGROUND
METHODSMETHODS
RESULTSRESULTS
DISCUSSION/ CONCLUSIONDISCUSSION/ CONCLUSION
2
Framework developed by the U.S. EPA in 2003 EPA defines CRA as “an analysis, characterization,
and possible quantification of the combined risks to health or the environment from multiple agents or stressors”
Holistic Approach
3
www.epa.gov
Risk Characterization step widely used in Ecological/Human Risk Assessments
HQ= Estimated Exposure/Expected LevelsScreening Value Levels
E.g: HQ= Cd conc. measured at a site= 21.3 mg/kg Screening Toxicity Value = 1.9 mg/kg
HQ> 1 Adverse effects likely to occur Deer Mouse is at risk!
=11.2>1
4
SCIENTIFIC NAME:Crassostrea virginica
A.K.A : American Oyster DISTRIBUTION:
Gulf of St. Lawrence, Canada to Gulf of Mexico
TEMPERATURE RANGE: Between 1-36°C
SALINITY RANGE: Between 5-30 ppt
5
In 1608, Capt. John Smith wrote that “oysters lay as thick as stones”.
In 1701, a Swiss visitor to the Chesapeake Francis Louis Michel observed “The abundance of oysters is incredible. There are whole banks of them so that the ships must avoid them. . . . ”
By 1875, a total of 17 million bushels removed from the Chesapeake and grew into Oyster Wars.
About 1959, Oyster Wars ended.
6
ECOLOGICAL: Filter FeedersOyster Reefs ECONOMICAL:Creating Jobs
7
Three quarters of the Bay’s oyster reefs were removed between the Civil War and the 1920s, leaving huge mounds of shells like this
Adding up the cumulative annual losses over the last three decades shows that the decline of oysters has meant a loss of more than $4
billion for the economies of Maryland and Virginia. —NOAA
8
CBF Report
0
500
1000
1500
2000
2500
3000
35001947
1950
1960
1970
1980
1990
2000
2007
FACTORS FOR DECLINE: Overfishing, Pollution, Disturbance in Habitat, Diseases like MSX and Dermo
9
Hypoxia- Decrease in DO levels in water Hypercapnia- Coexists with hypoxia, increase in CO2
Acidosis- Decrease in pH
10
Temperature and salinity affects every physiological function including the oxygen uptake of oysters
Hypoxia makes them more vulnerable to infectious diseases ( like MSX and Dermo)
↑ Salinity, ↓ Temp ↓ Oxygen Uptake (hypoxia) Moderate hypercapnia ↓ Oxygen Uptake All co-exist, considered as “Multiple Stressors”
11
12
IMPACT OF MULTIPLE STRESSORS TO OYSTERS
Agricultural/Industrial
Runoff
Point/Non Point
Sources
Eutrophication
overharvesting of natural resources
Sources
Changes in Salinity, Temperature
Hypoxia, Hypercapnia, Acidosis
Vulnerability to infection
Water quality deterioration, habitat alteration
Physiological functions like reproduction, respiration
Eastern Oysters
Invertebrates depending on oyster reefs, fishes etc.
Sea food consumers, economy
Oxygen Uptake of Oysters
Vulnerability to diseases
Stressors
Pathways
Receptors
Endpoints
CONCEPTUAL MODEL FOR THE STUDY 13
+
Study the cumulative risks to the Eastern Oysters in the James River subjected to multiple stressors (S, T, O2, CO2)
Calculate the oxygen uptake under multiple conditions
Evaluate the effectiveness of the HQ Method
14
INTRODUCTION/BACKGROUNDINTRODUCTION/BACKGROUND
METHODSMETHODS
RESULTSRESULTS
DISCUSSION/ CONCLUSIONDISCUSSION/ CONCLUSION
15
Water quality monitoring data collected from VA- Dept of Environmental Quality
Experimental Data from two studies :
Shumway and Koehn, 1982
Willson and Burnett, 2000 Data sorted on two conditions :
Salinity Range - 7 to 28 ppt
Temp Range - 10 to 30 °C
16
17
Map of monitoring stations used in the study
DO (Hypoxia)
Calculated slope (m), intercept (c), and substituted salinity values (x) from dataset (y = mx+c)
Multiplied Q10 values from the study with O2 uptake from step 1
Calculated relative change and multiplied with O2 uptake values from step 2
SEQUENCE OF STEPS USED TO CALCULATE FINAL OXYGEN UPTAKE
Temperature
Salinity
Shumway and Koehn, 1982Salinity: 7-28pptTemp: 10-30°C
18
Final O2 uptake in ml/hr gm-1 wet weight
Final O2 uptake in ml/hr gm-1 wet weight
Multiplied step 4 O2 uptake by 0.0224 to convert µmol/hr to ml/hr and 14.8 to convert dry weight to wet weight
Calculated the relative change and multiplied with O2 uptake value from step 3
CO2 (Hypercapnia)Willson and Burnett,2000Salinity: 25 pptTemp: 25°C
19
Final O2 uptake =
(mx+c)*Q10O2(S)* RC O2(T)*RC’*W*G
where RC & RC’= relative changes for adjusting O2 and CO2 levels
W = weight constant
G = gas constant
20
Final O2 uptake in ml/hr gm-1 wet weight (adjusted for S,T, O2, CO2)
Final O2 uptake in ml/hr gm-1 wet weight (adjusted for S,T, O2, CO2)
Statistical Analysis software (Oracle) that uses probability distributions for each parameter
Monte-Carlo Analysis: randomly generates values to produce a probability distribution
Using same model equation created the CB model Assumptions (uncertain variables): Salinity,
Temperature, and DO Forecast: Calculated Oxygen Uptake (ml/hr)
21
Triangular Distributions- choose min, max and likeliest values to accommodate S and T ranges
Ran 10,000 trials/simulations SENSITIVITY ANALYSIS:
Understand the influence and variance of each parameter (assumption) on the forecast and model
22
Normal Distribution Triangular Distribution
Screenshot of Crystal Ball Model In Excel
Final O2 uptake = (mx+c)*Q10O2(S)* RC O2(T)*RC’*W*G23
INTRODUCTION/BACKGROUNDINTRODUCTION/BACKGROUND
METHODSMETHODS
RESULTSRESULTS
DISCUSSION/ CONCLUSIONDISCUSSION/ CONCLUSION
24
CUMULATIVE PROBABILITY DISTRIBUTION OF OXYGEN UPTAKE USING CRYSTAL BALL
25
SENSITIVITY ANALYSIS CHART GENERATED BY CRYSTAL BALL
26
Salinity was the most influential assumption in the model followed by temperature
Conditions are favorable for pathogens growth and make the oysters “vulnerable” to diseases like MSX and Dermo
When multiple risks presented as probability, the risk could be the product of individual risks, not sum
27
Traditional Risk Assessment
Single endpoints, sources, stressors, pathways and route of exposure
One-size fits all responses Eg: Studying the health risks
of consuming methylmercury contaminated fish.
Emerging Risk Assessment
Multiple endpoints, sources, stressors, pathways and routes of exposure
Case-specific responses Eg: Present Study(Refer Conceptual Model Handout)
28
HQ= Site Exposure/Expected LevelsScreening Value Levels
E.g: HQ= Cd conc. measured at a site= 21.3 mg/kg Screening Toxicity Value = 1.9 mg/kg
HQ> 1 Adverse effects likely to occur LIMITATIONS
Does not represent magnitude of the risk
Measure of hazard and not risk
=11.2>1
29
Could be inappropriate for quantifying multiple risks LIMITATIONS:
Estimates calculated for single-stressor, single-response
Does not represent probability of the risk or vulnerability of populations exposed to the risk
Cannot capture risks associated to social, psychologic, economical stresses
DO Sat =
30
0.80.3
= ?
0.30.8
= 0.625 < 1
Add in more stressors like acidosis Trying the model on other river systems Explore vulnerability aspect Laboratory studies
31
Special thanks to Dr. Peter deFur, Dr. Clifford Fox and Dr. Jeffery Chanat. Dr. Greg Garman, Director of CES and ex-officio. My friends, Paras Gandhi, Dr. Richard Gayle, Monika Patel, Rachel Bullene, and Maurice Coles, Mr. and Mrs. Sarkozi and my
parents
32
33
?
Slide 3: www.epa.gov Slide 5: www.whoi.edu Slide 7: www.aquaviews.net, CBF Report, www.easternshoremagazine.com Slide 8: CBF Report Slide 9: http://www.chesapeakebay.net/status_oysterspatjames.aspx?
menuitem=19686 Slide 10: www.epa.qld.gov.au Slide 12: http://chesapeakebay.noaa.gov/oysters/oyster-reefs Slide 33: www. mchumor.com
34