https://www.enviro.wiki/api.php?action=feedcontributions&feedformat=atom&user=JhurleyEnviro Wiki - User contributions [en]2026-04-21T12:15:48ZUser contributionsMediaWiki 1.31.1https://www.enviro.wiki/index.php?title=User:Jhurley/sandbox&diff=18113User:Jhurley/sandbox2026-04-14T19:58:21Z<p>Jhurley: /* Recommended Approach */</p>
<hr />
<div>==Estimating PCE/TCE Abiotic First-Order Reductive Dechlorination Rate Constants in Clayey Soils Under Anoxic Conditions== <br />
The U.S. Department of Defense (DoD) faces many challenges in restoring aquifers at contaminated sites, often due to back-diffusion of tetrachloroethene (PCE) and trichloroethene (TCE) from low-permeability clay zones. The uptake, storage, and subsequent long-term release of these dissolved contaminants from clays are key processes in understanding the longevity, intensity, and risks associated with many persistent chlorinated ethene groundwater plumes. Although naturally occurring abiotic and biotic dechlorination processes in clays may reduce stored contaminant mass and significantly aid natural attenuation, no standardized field method currently exists to verify or quantify these reactions. It is critical to remediation design efforts to demonstrate and validate a cost-effective in situ approach for assessing these dechlorination processes using first-order rate constants. An approach was developed and applied across eight DoD sites to support Remedial Project Managers (RPMs) and regulators in evaluating natural attenuation potential in clay-rich environments.<br />
<div style="float:right;margin:0 0 2em 2em;">__TOC__</div><br />
<br />
'''Related Article(s):'''<br />
<br />
*[[Monitored Natural Attenuation (MNA)]]<br />
*[[Monitored Natural Attenuation (MNA) of Chlorinated Solvents]]<br />
*[[Monitored Natural Attenuation - Transitioning from Active Remedies]]<br />
*[[Matrix Diffusion]]<br />
*[[REMChlor - MD]]<br />
<br />
'''Contributors:''' Dani Tran, Dr. Charles Schaefer, Dr. Charles Werth<br />
<br />
'''Key Resource:'''<br />
*Schaefer, C.E, Tran, D., Nguyen, D., Latta, D.E., Werth, C.J., 2025. Evaluating Mineral and In Situ Indicators of Abiotic Dechlorination in Clayey Soils (3)<br />
<br />
==Introduction==<br />
Cost-effective methods are needed to verify the occurrence of natural dechlorination processes and quantify their dechlorination rates in clays under ambient in situ conditions in order to reliably predict their long-term influence on plume longevity and mass discharge. However, accurately determining these rates is challenging due to slow reaction kinetics, the transient nature of transformation products, and the interplay of biotic and abiotic mechanisms within the clay matrix or at clay-sand interfaces. Tools capable of quantifying these reactions and assessing their role in mitigating plume persistence would be a significant aid for long-term site management.<br />
<br />
For reductive abiotic dechlorination under anoxic conditions, a 1% hydrochloric acid (HCl) extraction of a sample of native clay coupled with X-ray diffraction (XRD) data can be used as a screening level tool to estimate reductive dechlorination rate constants. These rate constants can be inserted into fate and transport models such as [[REMChlor - MD]]<ref>Falta, R., and Wang, W., 2017. A semi-analytical method for simulating matrix diffusion in numerical transport models. Journal of Contaminant Hydrology, 197, pp. 39-49. [https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jconhyd.2016.12.007 doi: 10.1016/j.jconhyd.2016.12.007]&nbsp; [[Media: FaltaWang2017.pdf | Open Access Manuscript]]</ref><ref>Kulkarni, P.R., Adamson, D.T., Popovic, J., Newell, C.J., 2022. Modeling a well-charactized perfluorooctane sulfate (PFOS) source and plume using the REMChlor-MD model to account for matrix diffusion. Journal of Contaminant Hydrology, 247, Article 103986. [https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jconhyd.2022.103986 doi: 10.1016/j.jconhyd.2022.103986]&nbsp; [[Media: KulkarniEtAl2022.pdf | Open Access Manuscript]]</ref> to quantify abiotic dechlorination impacts within clay aquitards on chlorinated solvent plumes. Thus, determination of the abiotic reductive dechlorination rate constant for a particular clayey soil can be readily utilized to provide a more accurate assessment of aquifer cleanup timeframes for groundwater plumes that are being sustained by contaminant back-diffusion.<br />
<br />
==Recommended Approach==<br />
[[File: TranFig1.png | thumb | 600 px | Figure 1: First-order rate constants for abiotic reductive dechlorination of TCE under anaerobic conditions (data from this study and prior research)]]<br />
[[File: TranFig2.png | thumb | 600 px | Figure 2: Flowchart diagram of field screening procedures]]<br />
The recommended approach builds upon the methodology and findings of a recent study<ref name="SchaeferEtAl2025">Schaefer, C.E., Tran, D., Nguyen, D., Latta, D.E., Werth, C.J., 2025. Evaluating Mineral and In Situ Indicators of Abiotic Dechlorination in Clayey Soils. Groundwater Monitoring and Remediation, 45(2), pp. 31-39. [https://doi.org/10.1111/gwmr.12709 doi: 10.1111/gwmr.12709]</ref>, emphasizing field-based and analytical techniques to quantify abiotic first-order reductive dechlorination rate constants for PCE and TCE in clayey soils under anoxic conditions. Key components of this evaluation are listed below:<br />
#<u>Zone Identification:</u> The focus of the investigation should be to delineate clayey zones adjacent to hydraulically conductive zones.<br />
#<u>Ferrous Mineral Quantification:</u> Assess ferrous mineral context in clay via 1% HCl extraction at ambient temperature over a 10-minute interval.<br />
#<u>Mineralogical Characterization:</u> Conduct XRD analysis with the specific intent of identifying the presence of pyrite and biotite. <br />
#<u>Reduced Gas Analysis:</u> Measurement of reduced gases such as acetylene, ethene, and ethane concentrations in clay samples. Gas-tight sampling devices (e.g., En Core® soil samplers by En Novative Technologies, Inc.) should be used to ensure sample integrity during collection and transport. <br />
<br />
Clay samples should be collected within a few centimeters of the high-permeability interface, with optional additional sampling further inward. For mineralogical analysis, a defined interval may be collected and subsequently subsampled. To preserve sample integrity, exposure to air should be minimized during collection, transport, and handling. Homogenization should occur within an anaerobic chamber, and if subsamples are required for external analysis, they must be shipped in gas-tight, anaerobic containers.<br />
<br />
Estimation of the abiotic reductive first-order rate constant for PCE and TCE is based on the “reactive” ferrous content in the clay. Reactive ferrous content (Fe(II)<sub>r</sub>) is estimated as shown in Equation 1:<br />
<br />
::'''Equation 1:'''&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; <big>''Fe(II)<sub><small>r</small></sub> = DA + XRD<sub><small>pyr</small></sub> - XRD<sub><small>biotite</small></sub>''</big><br />
<br />
where ''DA'' is the ferrous content from the dilute acid (1% HCl) extraction, ''XRD<sub><small>pyr</small></sub>'' is the pyrite content from XRD analysis, and ''XRD<sub><small>biotite</small></sub>'' is the biotite content from XRD analysis<ref name="SchaeferEtAl2025"/>.<br />
<br />
Abiotic dechlorination is unlikely to contribute to mitigating contaminant back-diffusion when reactive ferrous iron (Fe(II)<sub><small>r</small></sub>) concentrations are below 100 mg/kg (Figure 1). For Fe(II)<sub><small>r</small></sub> above 100 mg/kg, the first-order rate constant for PCE and TCE reductive dechlorination can be estimated using the correlation shown in Figure 1<ref name="SchaeferEtAl2018">Schaefer, C.E., Ho, P., Berns, E., Werth, C., 2018. Mechanisms for abiotic dechlorination of trichloroethene by ferrous minerals under oxic and anoxic conditions in natural sediments. Environmental Science and Technology, 52(23), pp.13747-13755. [https://doi.org/10.1021/acs.est.8b04108 doi: 10.1021/acs.est.8b04108]</ref><ref>Borden, R.C., Cha, K.Y., 2021. Evaluating the impact of back diffusion on groundwater cleanup time. Journal of Contaminant Hydrology, 243, Article 103889. [https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jconhyd.2021.103889 doi: 10.1016/j.jconhyd.2021]&nbsp; [[Media: BordenCha2021.pdf | Open Access Manuscript]]</ref>. The rate constant exhibits a strong positive correlation with the logarithm of reactive Fe(II) content (Pearson’s ''r'' = 0.82), with a slope of 4.7 × 10⁻⁸ L g⁻¹ d⁻¹ (log mg kg⁻¹)⁻¹.<br />
<br />
Figure 2 presents a decision flowchart designed to evaluate the significance and extent of abiotic reductive dechlorination. By applying Equation 1 to the dilute acid extractable Fe(II) plus measured mineral species data from clay samples, the reactive ferrous iron content (Fe(II)<sub><small>r</small></sub>) can be quantified, enabling a streamlined assessment of the extent to which abiotic processes are contributing to the mitigation of contaminant back-diffusion.<br />
<br />
==Study Design Considerations==<br />
===Diagnostic Resin Treatments===<br />
Several commercially available resins have been verified for use in the iTIE system. Investigators can select resins based on stressor classes of interest at each site. Each resin selectively removes a CoC class from site water prior to organism exposure.<br />
*[https://www.dupont.com/products/ambersorb560.html DuPont Ambersorb 560] for removal of 1,4-dioxane and other organic chemicals<ref>Woodard, S., Mohr, T., Nickelsen, M.G., 2014. Synthetic media: A promising new treatment technology for 1,4-dioxane. Remediation Journal, 24(4), pp. 27-40. [https://doi.org/10.1002/rem.21402 doi: 10.1002/rem.21402]</ref><br />
*C18 for nonpolar organic chemicals<br />
*[https://www.bio-rad.com/en-us Bio-Rad] [https://www.bio-rad.com/en-us/product/chelex-100-resin?ID=6448ab3e-b96a-4162-9124-7b7d2330288e Chelex] for metals<br />
*Granular activated carbon for metals, general organic chemicals, sulfide<ref>Lemos, B.R.S., Teixeira, I.F., de Mesquita, J.P., Ribeiro, R.R., Donnici, C.L., Lago, R.M., 2012. Use of modified activated carbon for the oxidation of aqueous sulfide. Carbon, 50(3), pp. 1386-1393. [https://doi.org/10.1016/j.carbon.2011.11.011 doi: 10.1016/j.carbon.2011.11.011]</ref><br />
*[https://www.waters.com/nextgen/us/en.html Waters] [https://www.waters.com/nextgen/us/en/search.html?category=Shop&isocode=en_US&keyword=oasis%20hlb&multiselect=true&page=1&rows=12&sort=best-sellers&xcid=ppc-ppc_23916&gad_source=1&gad_campaignid=14746094146&gbraid=0AAAAAD_uR00nhlNwrhhegNh06pBODTgiN&gclid=CjwKCAiAtLvMBhB_EiwA1u6_PsppE0raci2IhvGnAAe5ijciNcetLaGZo5qA3g3r4Z_La7YAPJtzShoC6LoQAvD_BwE Oasis HLB] for general organic chemicals<ref name="SteigmeyerEtAl2017"/><br />
*[https://www.waters.com/nextgen/us/en.html Waters] [https://www.waters.com/nextgen/us/en/search.html?category=All&enableHL=true&isocode=en_US&keyword=Oasis%20WAX%20&multiselect=true&page=1&rows=12&sort=most-relevant Oasis WAX] for PFAS, organic chemicals of mixed polarity<ref>Iannone, A., Carriera, F., Di Fiore, C., Avino, P., 2024. Poly- and Perfluoroalkyl Substance (PFAS) Analysis in Environmental Matrices: An Overview of the Extraction and Chromatographic Detection Methods. Analytica, 5(2), pp. 187-202. [https://doi.org/10.3390/analytica5020012 doi: 10.3390/analytica5020012]&nbsp; [[Media: IannoneEtAl2024.pdf | Open Access Article]]</ref><br />
*Zeolite for ammonia, other organic chemicals<br />
<br />
Resins must be adequately conditioned prior to use. Otherwise, they may inadequately adsorb toxicants or cause stress to organisms. New resins should be tested for efficacy and toxicity before being used in an iTIE system. <br />
<br />
===Test Organism Species and Life Stages===<br />
Practitioners can also select different organism species and life stages for use in the iTIE system, depending on site characteristics and study goals. The iTIE system can accommodate various small test organisms, including embryo-stage fish and most macroinvertebrates. The following common toxicity tests can be adapted for application within iTIE systems<ref>U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Office of Solid Waste and Emergency Response, 1994. Catalogue of Standard Toxicity Tests for Ecological Risk Assessment. ECO Update, 2(2), 4 pages. Publication No. 9345.0.05I [https://www.epa.gov/sites/default/files/2015-09/documents/v2no2.pdf Free Download]&nbsp; [[Media: usepa1994.pdf | Report.pdf]]</ref>.<br />
<ul><u>Freshwater acute toxicity:</u></ul><br />
*[[Wikipedia: Daphnia magna | ''Daphnia magna'']] or [[Wikipedia: Daphnia pulex | ''Daphnia pulex'']] 24-, 48-, and 96-hour survival<br />
<ul><u>Freshwater chronic toxicity:</u></ul><br />
*[[Wikipedia: Ceriodaphnia dubia | ''Ceriodaphnia dubia'']] 7-day survival and reproduction<br />
*''D. magna'' 7-day survival and reproduction<br />
*[[Wikipedia: Fathead minnow | ''Pimephales promelas'']] 7-day embryo-larval survival and teratogenicity<br />
*[[Wikipedia: Hyalella azteca | ''Hyalella Azteca'']] 10- or 30-day survival and reproduction<br />
<ul><u>Marine acute toxicity:</u></ul><br />
*[[Wikipedia: Americamysis bahia | ''Americamysis bahia'']] 24- and 48-hour survival<br />
<ul><u>Marine chronic toxicity:</u></ul><br />
*''Americamysis'' survival, growth and fecundity<br />
*[[Wikipedia: Topsmelt silverside | ''Atherinops affinis'']] embryo-larval survival and growth <br />
<br />
Acute toxicity is quantifiable via organism survival rates immediately following the termination of an iTIE system field deployment. Chronic toxicity can be quantified by continuing to culture and observe test organisms in-lab. Common chronic endpoints include stunted growth, altered development such as teratogenicity in larval fish, decreased reproduction rates, and changes in gene expression. <br />
<br />
Several gene expression endpoints have been detectable in bioassays following an iTIE system deployment and in-lab culturing period. Steigmeyer ''et al.''<ref name="SteigmeyerEtAl2017"/> were able to detect changes in the expression of two genes in ''D. magna'' after a 24-hour exposure to bisphenol A. In a separate study, Nichols<ref>Nichols, E., 2023. Methods for Identification and Prioritization of Stressors at Impaired Sites. Masters thesis, University of Michigan. University of Michigan Library Deep Blue Documents. [https://deepblue.lib.umich.edu/bitstream/handle/2027.42/176142/Nichols_Elizabeth_thesis.pdf?sequence=1 Free Download]&nbsp; [[Media: Nichols2023.pdf | Report.pdf]]</ref> found a significant decline in acetylcholinesterase activity in ''H. azteca'' after a 24-hour exposure to chlorpyrifos. These results indicate a potential to adapt other gene expression bioassays for use in conjunction with iTIE system field exposures to prove stressor-causality linkages.<br />
<br />
===Cost Effectiveness Study===<br />
Burton ''et al.''<ref name="BurtonEtAl2020"/> conducted a cost effectiveness study comparing the iTIE technology with the traditional US EPA Phase 1 TIE method. Comparisons were based on the estimated time required to complete various sub-tasks within each method. Sub-tasks included organism care, equipment preparation, mobilization and deployment, test maintenance, test termination, demobilization, and test termination analyses. It was ultimately estimated that the iTIE protocol requires 47% less time (67 fewer hours) to complete than the Phase 1 TIE method, with the largest time differences in equipment preparation, deployment, test maintenance, and demobilization. It is important to note that the iTIE method may require additional initial costs for equipment and training.<br />
<br />
==Field Application==<br />
[[File: CraneFig6.png | thumb | left | 400px | Figure 6. iTIES deployment at the Rouge River, Detroit, MI. In the foreground is the iTIE Cooler Sub-System, which contains iTIE resin treatments and test organism groups, as well as the oxygenation coil and sample collection bottles. Next to the iTIE Cooler are the two pump cases. The Trident can be seen above the pump cases, installed in the river channel near shore.]]<br />
The&nbsp;iTIE&nbsp;system&nbsp;has&nbsp;been successfully deployed at a variety of marine and freshwater sites during the proof-of-concept phase of prototype development. One example is the 2024 iTIE system deployment completed near the mouth of the Rouge River in Detroit, MI (Figure 6). The Rouge River watershed has a long history of industrialization, with a legacy of chemical dumping, channelization, damming, and urban runoff<ref>Ridgway, J., Cave, K., DeMaria, A., O’Meara, J., Hartig, J. H., 2018. The Rouge River Area of Concern—A multi-year, multi-level successful approach to restoration of Impaired Beneficial Uses. Aquatic Ecosystem Health and Management, 21(4), pp. 398-408. [https://doi.org/10.1080/14634988.2018.1528816 doi: 10.1080/14634988.2018.1528816]</ref>. This has led to degraded environmental conditions, with previous detections of a wide range of chemicals including heavy metals and various organics.<br />
<br />
[[File: CraneFig7.png | thumb | 300px | Figure 7. Survival and healthy development of ''P. promelas'' embryos and larvae following a 48-hour iTIE exposure near the mouth of the Rouge River. Organisms were exposed to site porewater as embryos for 48 hours and cultured post-exposure for an additional 5 days.]]<br />
[[File: CraneFig8.png | thumb | 300px | Figure 8. Survival of ''C. dilutus'' larvae after an iTIE exposure near the mouth of the Rouge River. Organisms were exposed to site porewater for 48 hours and cultured post-exposure for an additional 5 days. Error bars show standard deviation.]]<br />
An&nbsp;iTIE&nbsp;system&nbsp;deployment&nbsp;was designed and completed to determine which chemical classes are most responsible for causing toxicity at the site. Resin treatments included glass wool (inert, non-fractionating substance), Chelex (metals sorption), Oasis HLB (general organics sorption), and Oasis WAX (organics sorption, with a high affinity for PFAS). The study utilized fathead minnow (''P. promelas'') embryos, due to their relative sensitivity to metals and PAHs, as well as second-instar midge ([[Wikipedia: Chironomus |''Chironomus dilutus'']]) larvae due to their relative sensitivity to PFAS. <br />
<br />
The test organisms were exposed to fractionated porewater ''in situ'' for 48 hours. Following exposure, organisms were cultured for an additional five days, and survival was recorded (Figures 7 and 8). Moderate declines in survival were seen in both species in the glass wool treatment, indicating toxicity at the site. For ''P. promelas'', the highest proportion of healthy development occurred in the Chelex treatment, supporting the hypothesis that metals are a dominant cause of toxicity. ''C. dilutus'' had the greatest survival in the Oasis WAX treatment, suggesting that an organic stressor class like PFAS is also present at harmful concentrations in the river.<br />
<br />
Water chemical analyses of fractionated and unfractionated water samples were completed to support biological results. Analyses were conducted for a range of stressor classes including metals, PAHs, PCBs, an organophosphate pesticide (chlorpyrifos), a PFAS compound (PFOS) and a pyrethroid insecticide (permethrin). Of these analytes, only heavy metals and PFOS were detected. Some chemical classes including PAHs and PCBs were not detected at the site.<br />
To reach similar conclusions using traditional Phase 1 TIE methods, one would need to complete the following tests: baseline toxicity, filtration, aeration, EDTA, C18 SPE, and methanol elution of C18 SPE. The iTIE method allows the same conclusions to be drawn with significantly less time and effort required.<br />
<br />
==Summary==<br />
The ''in situ'' Toxicity Identification Evaluation technology and protocol is a powerful tool that investigators can use to strengthen causal linkages between chemical stressors and ecological toxicity. By fractionating sampled water and exposing test organisms ''in situ'', investigators can gather toxicity response data while minimizing sample manipulation and accurately representing environmental conditions.<br />
<br clear="right"/><br />
<br />
==References==<br />
<references /><br />
<br />
==See Also==</div>Jhurleyhttps://www.enviro.wiki/index.php?title=User:Jhurley/sandbox&diff=18112User:Jhurley/sandbox2026-04-13T22:30:42Z<p>Jhurley: /* Recommended Approach */</p>
<hr />
<div>==Estimating PCE/TCE Abiotic First-Order Reductive Dechlorination Rate Constants in Clayey Soils Under Anoxic Conditions== <br />
The U.S. Department of Defense (DoD) faces many challenges in restoring aquifers at contaminated sites, often due to back-diffusion of tetrachloroethene (PCE) and trichloroethene (TCE) from low-permeability clay zones. The uptake, storage, and subsequent long-term release of these dissolved contaminants from clays are key processes in understanding the longevity, intensity, and risks associated with many persistent chlorinated ethene groundwater plumes. Although naturally occurring abiotic and biotic dechlorination processes in clays may reduce stored contaminant mass and significantly aid natural attenuation, no standardized field method currently exists to verify or quantify these reactions. It is critical to remediation design efforts to demonstrate and validate a cost-effective in situ approach for assessing these dechlorination processes using first-order rate constants. An approach was developed and applied across eight DoD sites to support Remedial Project Managers (RPMs) and regulators in evaluating natural attenuation potential in clay-rich environments.<br />
<div style="float:right;margin:0 0 2em 2em;">__TOC__</div><br />
<br />
'''Related Article(s):'''<br />
<br />
*[[Monitored Natural Attenuation (MNA)]]<br />
*[[Monitored Natural Attenuation (MNA) of Chlorinated Solvents]]<br />
*[[Monitored Natural Attenuation - Transitioning from Active Remedies]]<br />
*[[Matrix Diffusion]]<br />
*[[REMChlor - MD]]<br />
<br />
'''Contributors:''' Dani Tran, Dr. Charles Schaefer, Dr. Charles Werth<br />
<br />
'''Key Resource:'''<br />
*Schaefer, C.E, Tran, D., Nguyen, D., Latta, D.E., Werth, C.J., 2025. Evaluating Mineral and In Situ Indicators of Abiotic Dechlorination in Clayey Soils (3)<br />
<br />
==Introduction==<br />
Cost-effective methods are needed to verify the occurrence of natural dechlorination processes and quantify their dechlorination rates in clays under ambient in situ conditions in order to reliably predict their long-term influence on plume longevity and mass discharge. However, accurately determining these rates is challenging due to slow reaction kinetics, the transient nature of transformation products, and the interplay of biotic and abiotic mechanisms within the clay matrix or at clay-sand interfaces. Tools capable of quantifying these reactions and assessing their role in mitigating plume persistence would be a significant aid for long-term site management.<br />
<br />
For reductive abiotic dechlorination under anoxic conditions, a 1% hydrochloric acid (HCl) extraction of a sample of native clay coupled with X-ray diffraction (XRD) data can be used as a screening level tool to estimate reductive dechlorination rate constants. These rate constants can be inserted into fate and transport models such as [[REMChlor - MD]]<ref>Falta, R., and Wang, W., 2017. A semi-analytical method for simulating matrix diffusion in numerical transport models. Journal of Contaminant Hydrology, 197, pp. 39-49. [https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jconhyd.2016.12.007 doi: 10.1016/j.jconhyd.2016.12.007]&nbsp; [[Media: FaltaWang2017.pdf | Open Access Manuscript]]</ref><ref>Kulkarni, P.R., Adamson, D.T., Popovic, J., Newell, C.J., 2022. Modeling a well-charactized perfluorooctane sulfate (PFOS) source and plume using the REMChlor-MD model to account for matrix diffusion. Journal of Contaminant Hydrology, 247, Article 103986. [https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jconhyd.2022.103986 doi: 10.1016/j.jconhyd.2022.103986]&nbsp; [[Media: KulkarniEtAl2022.pdf | Open Access Manuscript]]</ref> to quantify abiotic dechlorination impacts within clay aquitards on chlorinated solvent plumes. Thus, determination of the abiotic reductive dechlorination rate constant for a particular clayey soil can be readily utilized to provide a more accurate assessment of aquifer cleanup timeframes for groundwater plumes that are being sustained by contaminant back-diffusion.<br />
<br />
==Recommended Approach==<br />
[[File: TranFig1.png | thumb | 600 px | Figure 1: First-order rate constants for abiotic reductive dechlorination of TCE under anaerobic conditions (data from this study and prior research)]]<br />
[[File: TranFig2.png | thumb | 600 px | Figure 2: Flowchart diagram of field screening procedures]]<br />
The recommended approach builds upon the methodology and findings of a recent study<ref name="SchaeferEtAl2025">Schaefer, C.E., Tran, D., Nguyen, D., Latta, D.E., Werth, C.J., 2025. Evaluating Mineral and In Situ Indicators of Abiotic Dechlorination in Clayey Soils. Groundwater Monitoring and Remediation, 45(2), pp. 31-39. [https://doi.org/10.1111/gwmr.12709 doi: 10.1111/gwmr.12709]</ref>, emphasizing field-based and analytical techniques to quantify abiotic first-order reductive dechlorination rate constants for PCE and TCE in clayey soils under anoxic conditions. Key components of this evaluation are listed below:<br />
#<u>Zone Identification:</u> The focus of the investigation should be to delineate clayey zones adjacent to hydraulically conductive zones.<br />
#<u>Ferrous Mineral Quantification:</u> Assess ferrous mineral context in clay via 1% HCl extraction at ambient temperature over a 10-minute interval.<br />
#<u>Mineralogical Characterization:</u> Conduct XRD analysis with the specific intent of identifying the presence of pyrite and biotite. <br />
#<u>Reduced Gas Analysis:</u> Measurement of reduced gases such as acetylene, ethene, and ethane concentrations in clay samples. Gas-tight sampling devices (e.g., En Core® soil samplers by En Novative Technologies, Inc.) should be used to ensure sample integrity during collection and transport. <br />
<br />
Clay samples should be collected within a few centimeters of the high-permeability interface, with optional additional sampling further inward. For mineralogical analysis, a defined interval may be collected and subsequently subsampled. To preserve sample integrity, exposure to air should be minimized during collection, transport, and handling. Homogenization should occur within an anaerobic chamber, and if subsamples are required for external analysis, they must be shipped in gas-tight, anaerobic containers.<br />
<br />
Estimation of the abiotic reductive first-order rate constant for PCE and TCE is based on the “reactive” ferrous content in the clay. Reactive ferrous content (Fe(II)<sub>r</sub>) is estimated as shown in Equation 1:<br />
<br />
::'''Equation 1:'''&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; <big>''Fe(II)<sub><small>r</small></sub> = DA + XRD<sub><small>pyr</small></sub> - XRD<sub><small>biotite</small></sub>''</big><br />
<br />
where ''DA'' is the ferrous content from the dilute acid (1% HCl) extraction, ''XRD<sub><small>pyr</small></sub>'' is the pyrite content from XRD analysis, and ''XRD<sub><small>biotite</small></sub>'' is the biotite content from XRD analysis<ref name="SchaeferEtAl2025"/>.<br />
<br />
Abiotic dechlorination is unlikely to contribute to mitigating contaminant back-diffusion when reactive ferrous iron (Fe(II)<sub><small>r</small></sub>) concentrations are below 100 mg/kg (Figure 1). For Fe(II)<sub><small>r</small></sub> above 100 mg/kg, the first-order rate constant for PCE and TCE reductive dechlorination can be estimated using the correlation shown in Figure 1<ref name="SchaeferEtAl2018">Schaefer, C.E., Ho, P., Berns, E., Werth, C., 2018. Mechanisms for abiotic dechlorination of trichloroethene by ferrous minerals under oxic and anoxic conditions in natural sediments. Environmental Science and Technology, 52(23), pp.13747-13755. [https://doi.org/10.1021/acs.est.8b04108 doi: 10.1021/acs.est.8b04108]</ref><ref>Borden, R.C., Cha, K.Y., 2021. Evaluating the impact of back diffusion on groundwater cleanup time. Journal of Contaminant Hydrology, 243, Article 103889. [https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jconhyd.2021.103889 doi: 10.1016/j.jconhyd.2021]&nbsp; [[Media: BordenCha2021.pdf | Open Access Manuscript]]</ref>. The rate constant exhibits a strong positive correlation with the logarithm of reactive Fe(II) content (Pearson’s r = 0.82), with a slope of 4.7 × 10⁻⁸ L g⁻¹ d⁻¹ (log mg kg⁻¹)⁻¹.<br />
<br />
==Study Design Considerations==<br />
===Diagnostic Resin Treatments===<br />
Several commercially available resins have been verified for use in the iTIE system. Investigators can select resins based on stressor classes of interest at each site. Each resin selectively removes a CoC class from site water prior to organism exposure.<br />
*[https://www.dupont.com/products/ambersorb560.html DuPont Ambersorb 560] for removal of 1,4-dioxane and other organic chemicals<ref>Woodard, S., Mohr, T., Nickelsen, M.G., 2014. Synthetic media: A promising new treatment technology for 1,4-dioxane. Remediation Journal, 24(4), pp. 27-40. [https://doi.org/10.1002/rem.21402 doi: 10.1002/rem.21402]</ref><br />
*C18 for nonpolar organic chemicals<br />
*[https://www.bio-rad.com/en-us Bio-Rad] [https://www.bio-rad.com/en-us/product/chelex-100-resin?ID=6448ab3e-b96a-4162-9124-7b7d2330288e Chelex] for metals<br />
*Granular activated carbon for metals, general organic chemicals, sulfide<ref>Lemos, B.R.S., Teixeira, I.F., de Mesquita, J.P., Ribeiro, R.R., Donnici, C.L., Lago, R.M., 2012. Use of modified activated carbon for the oxidation of aqueous sulfide. Carbon, 50(3), pp. 1386-1393. [https://doi.org/10.1016/j.carbon.2011.11.011 doi: 10.1016/j.carbon.2011.11.011]</ref><br />
*[https://www.waters.com/nextgen/us/en.html Waters] [https://www.waters.com/nextgen/us/en/search.html?category=Shop&isocode=en_US&keyword=oasis%20hlb&multiselect=true&page=1&rows=12&sort=best-sellers&xcid=ppc-ppc_23916&gad_source=1&gad_campaignid=14746094146&gbraid=0AAAAAD_uR00nhlNwrhhegNh06pBODTgiN&gclid=CjwKCAiAtLvMBhB_EiwA1u6_PsppE0raci2IhvGnAAe5ijciNcetLaGZo5qA3g3r4Z_La7YAPJtzShoC6LoQAvD_BwE Oasis HLB] for general organic chemicals<ref name="SteigmeyerEtAl2017"/><br />
*[https://www.waters.com/nextgen/us/en.html Waters] [https://www.waters.com/nextgen/us/en/search.html?category=All&enableHL=true&isocode=en_US&keyword=Oasis%20WAX%20&multiselect=true&page=1&rows=12&sort=most-relevant Oasis WAX] for PFAS, organic chemicals of mixed polarity<ref>Iannone, A., Carriera, F., Di Fiore, C., Avino, P., 2024. Poly- and Perfluoroalkyl Substance (PFAS) Analysis in Environmental Matrices: An Overview of the Extraction and Chromatographic Detection Methods. Analytica, 5(2), pp. 187-202. [https://doi.org/10.3390/analytica5020012 doi: 10.3390/analytica5020012]&nbsp; [[Media: IannoneEtAl2024.pdf | Open Access Article]]</ref><br />
*Zeolite for ammonia, other organic chemicals<br />
<br />
Resins must be adequately conditioned prior to use. Otherwise, they may inadequately adsorb toxicants or cause stress to organisms. New resins should be tested for efficacy and toxicity before being used in an iTIE system. <br />
<br />
===Test Organism Species and Life Stages===<br />
Practitioners can also select different organism species and life stages for use in the iTIE system, depending on site characteristics and study goals. The iTIE system can accommodate various small test organisms, including embryo-stage fish and most macroinvertebrates. The following common toxicity tests can be adapted for application within iTIE systems<ref>U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Office of Solid Waste and Emergency Response, 1994. Catalogue of Standard Toxicity Tests for Ecological Risk Assessment. ECO Update, 2(2), 4 pages. Publication No. 9345.0.05I [https://www.epa.gov/sites/default/files/2015-09/documents/v2no2.pdf Free Download]&nbsp; [[Media: usepa1994.pdf | Report.pdf]]</ref>.<br />
<ul><u>Freshwater acute toxicity:</u></ul><br />
*[[Wikipedia: Daphnia magna | ''Daphnia magna'']] or [[Wikipedia: Daphnia pulex | ''Daphnia pulex'']] 24-, 48-, and 96-hour survival<br />
<ul><u>Freshwater chronic toxicity:</u></ul><br />
*[[Wikipedia: Ceriodaphnia dubia | ''Ceriodaphnia dubia'']] 7-day survival and reproduction<br />
*''D. magna'' 7-day survival and reproduction<br />
*[[Wikipedia: Fathead minnow | ''Pimephales promelas'']] 7-day embryo-larval survival and teratogenicity<br />
*[[Wikipedia: Hyalella azteca | ''Hyalella Azteca'']] 10- or 30-day survival and reproduction<br />
<ul><u>Marine acute toxicity:</u></ul><br />
*[[Wikipedia: Americamysis bahia | ''Americamysis bahia'']] 24- and 48-hour survival<br />
<ul><u>Marine chronic toxicity:</u></ul><br />
*''Americamysis'' survival, growth and fecundity<br />
*[[Wikipedia: Topsmelt silverside | ''Atherinops affinis'']] embryo-larval survival and growth <br />
<br />
Acute toxicity is quantifiable via organism survival rates immediately following the termination of an iTIE system field deployment. Chronic toxicity can be quantified by continuing to culture and observe test organisms in-lab. Common chronic endpoints include stunted growth, altered development such as teratogenicity in larval fish, decreased reproduction rates, and changes in gene expression. <br />
<br />
Several gene expression endpoints have been detectable in bioassays following an iTIE system deployment and in-lab culturing period. Steigmeyer ''et al.''<ref name="SteigmeyerEtAl2017"/> were able to detect changes in the expression of two genes in ''D. magna'' after a 24-hour exposure to bisphenol A. In a separate study, Nichols<ref>Nichols, E., 2023. Methods for Identification and Prioritization of Stressors at Impaired Sites. Masters thesis, University of Michigan. University of Michigan Library Deep Blue Documents. [https://deepblue.lib.umich.edu/bitstream/handle/2027.42/176142/Nichols_Elizabeth_thesis.pdf?sequence=1 Free Download]&nbsp; [[Media: Nichols2023.pdf | Report.pdf]]</ref> found a significant decline in acetylcholinesterase activity in ''H. azteca'' after a 24-hour exposure to chlorpyrifos. These results indicate a potential to adapt other gene expression bioassays for use in conjunction with iTIE system field exposures to prove stressor-causality linkages.<br />
<br />
===Cost Effectiveness Study===<br />
Burton ''et al.''<ref name="BurtonEtAl2020"/> conducted a cost effectiveness study comparing the iTIE technology with the traditional US EPA Phase 1 TIE method. Comparisons were based on the estimated time required to complete various sub-tasks within each method. Sub-tasks included organism care, equipment preparation, mobilization and deployment, test maintenance, test termination, demobilization, and test termination analyses. It was ultimately estimated that the iTIE protocol requires 47% less time (67 fewer hours) to complete than the Phase 1 TIE method, with the largest time differences in equipment preparation, deployment, test maintenance, and demobilization. It is important to note that the iTIE method may require additional initial costs for equipment and training.<br />
<br />
==Field Application==<br />
[[File: CraneFig6.png | thumb | left | 400px | Figure 6. iTIES deployment at the Rouge River, Detroit, MI. In the foreground is the iTIE Cooler Sub-System, which contains iTIE resin treatments and test organism groups, as well as the oxygenation coil and sample collection bottles. Next to the iTIE Cooler are the two pump cases. The Trident can be seen above the pump cases, installed in the river channel near shore.]]<br />
The&nbsp;iTIE&nbsp;system&nbsp;has&nbsp;been successfully deployed at a variety of marine and freshwater sites during the proof-of-concept phase of prototype development. One example is the 2024 iTIE system deployment completed near the mouth of the Rouge River in Detroit, MI (Figure 6). The Rouge River watershed has a long history of industrialization, with a legacy of chemical dumping, channelization, damming, and urban runoff<ref>Ridgway, J., Cave, K., DeMaria, A., O’Meara, J., Hartig, J. H., 2018. The Rouge River Area of Concern—A multi-year, multi-level successful approach to restoration of Impaired Beneficial Uses. Aquatic Ecosystem Health and Management, 21(4), pp. 398-408. [https://doi.org/10.1080/14634988.2018.1528816 doi: 10.1080/14634988.2018.1528816]</ref>. This has led to degraded environmental conditions, with previous detections of a wide range of chemicals including heavy metals and various organics.<br />
<br />
[[File: CraneFig7.png | thumb | 300px | Figure 7. Survival and healthy development of ''P. promelas'' embryos and larvae following a 48-hour iTIE exposure near the mouth of the Rouge River. Organisms were exposed to site porewater as embryos for 48 hours and cultured post-exposure for an additional 5 days.]]<br />
[[File: CraneFig8.png | thumb | 300px | Figure 8. Survival of ''C. dilutus'' larvae after an iTIE exposure near the mouth of the Rouge River. Organisms were exposed to site porewater for 48 hours and cultured post-exposure for an additional 5 days. Error bars show standard deviation.]]<br />
An&nbsp;iTIE&nbsp;system&nbsp;deployment&nbsp;was designed and completed to determine which chemical classes are most responsible for causing toxicity at the site. Resin treatments included glass wool (inert, non-fractionating substance), Chelex (metals sorption), Oasis HLB (general organics sorption), and Oasis WAX (organics sorption, with a high affinity for PFAS). The study utilized fathead minnow (''P. promelas'') embryos, due to their relative sensitivity to metals and PAHs, as well as second-instar midge ([[Wikipedia: Chironomus |''Chironomus dilutus'']]) larvae due to their relative sensitivity to PFAS. <br />
<br />
The test organisms were exposed to fractionated porewater ''in situ'' for 48 hours. Following exposure, organisms were cultured for an additional five days, and survival was recorded (Figures 7 and 8). Moderate declines in survival were seen in both species in the glass wool treatment, indicating toxicity at the site. For ''P. promelas'', the highest proportion of healthy development occurred in the Chelex treatment, supporting the hypothesis that metals are a dominant cause of toxicity. ''C. dilutus'' had the greatest survival in the Oasis WAX treatment, suggesting that an organic stressor class like PFAS is also present at harmful concentrations in the river.<br />
<br />
Water chemical analyses of fractionated and unfractionated water samples were completed to support biological results. Analyses were conducted for a range of stressor classes including metals, PAHs, PCBs, an organophosphate pesticide (chlorpyrifos), a PFAS compound (PFOS) and a pyrethroid insecticide (permethrin). Of these analytes, only heavy metals and PFOS were detected. Some chemical classes including PAHs and PCBs were not detected at the site.<br />
To reach similar conclusions using traditional Phase 1 TIE methods, one would need to complete the following tests: baseline toxicity, filtration, aeration, EDTA, C18 SPE, and methanol elution of C18 SPE. The iTIE method allows the same conclusions to be drawn with significantly less time and effort required.<br />
<br />
==Summary==<br />
The ''in situ'' Toxicity Identification Evaluation technology and protocol is a powerful tool that investigators can use to strengthen causal linkages between chemical stressors and ecological toxicity. By fractionating sampled water and exposing test organisms ''in situ'', investigators can gather toxicity response data while minimizing sample manipulation and accurately representing environmental conditions.<br />
<br clear="right"/><br />
<br />
==References==<br />
<references /><br />
<br />
==See Also==</div>Jhurleyhttps://www.enviro.wiki/index.php?title=User:Jhurley/sandbox&diff=18111User:Jhurley/sandbox2026-04-13T22:27:59Z<p>Jhurley: /* Recommended Approach */</p>
<hr />
<div>==Estimating PCE/TCE Abiotic First-Order Reductive Dechlorination Rate Constants in Clayey Soils Under Anoxic Conditions== <br />
The U.S. Department of Defense (DoD) faces many challenges in restoring aquifers at contaminated sites, often due to back-diffusion of tetrachloroethene (PCE) and trichloroethene (TCE) from low-permeability clay zones. The uptake, storage, and subsequent long-term release of these dissolved contaminants from clays are key processes in understanding the longevity, intensity, and risks associated with many persistent chlorinated ethene groundwater plumes. Although naturally occurring abiotic and biotic dechlorination processes in clays may reduce stored contaminant mass and significantly aid natural attenuation, no standardized field method currently exists to verify or quantify these reactions. It is critical to remediation design efforts to demonstrate and validate a cost-effective in situ approach for assessing these dechlorination processes using first-order rate constants. An approach was developed and applied across eight DoD sites to support Remedial Project Managers (RPMs) and regulators in evaluating natural attenuation potential in clay-rich environments.<br />
<div style="float:right;margin:0 0 2em 2em;">__TOC__</div><br />
<br />
'''Related Article(s):'''<br />
<br />
*[[Monitored Natural Attenuation (MNA)]]<br />
*[[Monitored Natural Attenuation (MNA) of Chlorinated Solvents]]<br />
*[[Monitored Natural Attenuation - Transitioning from Active Remedies]]<br />
*[[Matrix Diffusion]]<br />
*[[REMChlor - MD]]<br />
<br />
'''Contributors:''' Dani Tran, Dr. Charles Schaefer, Dr. Charles Werth<br />
<br />
'''Key Resource:'''<br />
*Schaefer, C.E, Tran, D., Nguyen, D., Latta, D.E., Werth, C.J., 2025. Evaluating Mineral and In Situ Indicators of Abiotic Dechlorination in Clayey Soils (3)<br />
<br />
==Introduction==<br />
Cost-effective methods are needed to verify the occurrence of natural dechlorination processes and quantify their dechlorination rates in clays under ambient in situ conditions in order to reliably predict their long-term influence on plume longevity and mass discharge. However, accurately determining these rates is challenging due to slow reaction kinetics, the transient nature of transformation products, and the interplay of biotic and abiotic mechanisms within the clay matrix or at clay-sand interfaces. Tools capable of quantifying these reactions and assessing their role in mitigating plume persistence would be a significant aid for long-term site management.<br />
<br />
For reductive abiotic dechlorination under anoxic conditions, a 1% hydrochloric acid (HCl) extraction of a sample of native clay coupled with X-ray diffraction (XRD) data can be used as a screening level tool to estimate reductive dechlorination rate constants. These rate constants can be inserted into fate and transport models such as [[REMChlor - MD]]<ref>Falta, R., and Wang, W., 2017. A semi-analytical method for simulating matrix diffusion in numerical transport models. Journal of Contaminant Hydrology, 197, pp. 39-49. [https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jconhyd.2016.12.007 doi: 10.1016/j.jconhyd.2016.12.007]&nbsp; [[Media: FaltaWang2017.pdf | Open Access Manuscript]]</ref><ref>Kulkarni, P.R., Adamson, D.T., Popovic, J., Newell, C.J., 2022. Modeling a well-charactized perfluorooctane sulfate (PFOS) source and plume using the REMChlor-MD model to account for matrix diffusion. Journal of Contaminant Hydrology, 247, Article 103986. [https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jconhyd.2022.103986 doi: 10.1016/j.jconhyd.2022.103986]&nbsp; [[Media: KulkarniEtAl2022.pdf | Open Access Manuscript]]</ref> to quantify abiotic dechlorination impacts within clay aquitards on chlorinated solvent plumes. Thus, determination of the abiotic reductive dechlorination rate constant for a particular clayey soil can be readily utilized to provide a more accurate assessment of aquifer cleanup timeframes for groundwater plumes that are being sustained by contaminant back-diffusion.<br />
<br />
==Recommended Approach==<br />
[[File: TranFig1.png | thumb | 600 px | Figure 1: First-order rate constants for abiotic reductive dechlorination of TCE under anaerobic conditions (data from this study and prior research)]]<br />
[[File: TranFig2.png | thumb | 600 px | Figure 2: Flowchart diagram of field screening procedures]]<br />
The recommended approach builds upon the methodology and findings of a recent study<ref name="SchaeferEtAl2025">Schaefer, C.E., Tran, D., Nguyen, D., Latta, D.E., Werth, C.J., 2025. Evaluating Mineral and In Situ Indicators of Abiotic Dechlorination in Clayey Soils. Groundwater Monitoring and Remediation, 45(2), pp. 31-39. [https://doi.org/10.1111/gwmr.12709 doi: 10.1111/gwmr.12709]</ref>, emphasizing field-based and analytical techniques to quantify abiotic first-order reductive dechlorination rate constants for PCE and TCE in clayey soils under anoxic conditions. Key components of this evaluation are listed below:<br />
#<u>Zone Identification:</u> The focus of the investigation should be to delineate clayey zones adjacent to hydraulically conductive zones.<br />
#<u>Ferrous Mineral Quantification:</u> Assess ferrous mineral context in clay via 1% HCl extraction at ambient temperature over a 10-minute interval.<br />
#<u>Mineralogical Characterization:</u> Conduct XRD analysis with the specific intent of identifying the presence of pyrite and biotite. <br />
#<u>Reduced Gas Analysis:</u> Measurement of reduced gases such as acetylene, ethene, and ethane concentrations in clay samples. Gas-tight sampling devices (e.g., En Core® soil samplers by En Novative Technologies, Inc.) should be used to ensure sample integrity during collection and transport. <br />
<br />
Clay samples should be collected within a few centimeters of the high-permeability interface, with optional additional sampling further inward. For mineralogical analysis, a defined interval may be collected and subsequently subsampled. To preserve sample integrity, exposure to air should be minimized during collection, transport, and handling. Homogenization should occur within an anaerobic chamber, and if subsamples are required for external analysis, they must be shipped in gas-tight, anaerobic containers.<br />
<br />
Estimation of the abiotic reductive first-order rate constant for PCE and TCE is based on the “reactive” ferrous content in the clay. Reactive ferrous content (Fe(II)<sub>r</sub>) is estimated as shown in Equation 1:<br />
<br />
::'''Equation 1:'''&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; <big>''Fe(II)<sub><small>r</small></sub> = DA + XRD<sub><small>pyr</small></sub> - XRD<sub><small>biotite</small></sub>''</big><br />
<br />
where ''DA'' is the ferrous content from the dilute acid (1% HCl) extraction, ''XRD<sub><small>pyr</small></sub>'' is the pyrite content from XRD analysis, and ''XRD<sub><small>biotite</small></sub>'' is the biotite content from XRD analysis<ref name="SchaeferEtAl2025"/>.<br />
<br />
Abiotic dechlorination is unlikely to contribute to mitigating contaminant back-diffusion when reactive ferrous iron (Fe(II)<sub><small>r</small></sub>) concentrations are below 100 mg/kg (Figure 1). For Fe(II)<sub><small>r</small></sub> above 100 mg/kg, the first-order rate constant for PCE and TCE reductive dechlorination can be estimated using the correlation shown in Figure 1<br />
<br />
==Study Design Considerations==<br />
===Diagnostic Resin Treatments===<br />
Several commercially available resins have been verified for use in the iTIE system. Investigators can select resins based on stressor classes of interest at each site. Each resin selectively removes a CoC class from site water prior to organism exposure.<br />
*[https://www.dupont.com/products/ambersorb560.html DuPont Ambersorb 560] for removal of 1,4-dioxane and other organic chemicals<ref>Woodard, S., Mohr, T., Nickelsen, M.G., 2014. Synthetic media: A promising new treatment technology for 1,4-dioxane. Remediation Journal, 24(4), pp. 27-40. [https://doi.org/10.1002/rem.21402 doi: 10.1002/rem.21402]</ref><br />
*C18 for nonpolar organic chemicals<br />
*[https://www.bio-rad.com/en-us Bio-Rad] [https://www.bio-rad.com/en-us/product/chelex-100-resin?ID=6448ab3e-b96a-4162-9124-7b7d2330288e Chelex] for metals<br />
*Granular activated carbon for metals, general organic chemicals, sulfide<ref>Lemos, B.R.S., Teixeira, I.F., de Mesquita, J.P., Ribeiro, R.R., Donnici, C.L., Lago, R.M., 2012. Use of modified activated carbon for the oxidation of aqueous sulfide. Carbon, 50(3), pp. 1386-1393. [https://doi.org/10.1016/j.carbon.2011.11.011 doi: 10.1016/j.carbon.2011.11.011]</ref><br />
*[https://www.waters.com/nextgen/us/en.html Waters] [https://www.waters.com/nextgen/us/en/search.html?category=Shop&isocode=en_US&keyword=oasis%20hlb&multiselect=true&page=1&rows=12&sort=best-sellers&xcid=ppc-ppc_23916&gad_source=1&gad_campaignid=14746094146&gbraid=0AAAAAD_uR00nhlNwrhhegNh06pBODTgiN&gclid=CjwKCAiAtLvMBhB_EiwA1u6_PsppE0raci2IhvGnAAe5ijciNcetLaGZo5qA3g3r4Z_La7YAPJtzShoC6LoQAvD_BwE Oasis HLB] for general organic chemicals<ref name="SteigmeyerEtAl2017"/><br />
*[https://www.waters.com/nextgen/us/en.html Waters] [https://www.waters.com/nextgen/us/en/search.html?category=All&enableHL=true&isocode=en_US&keyword=Oasis%20WAX%20&multiselect=true&page=1&rows=12&sort=most-relevant Oasis WAX] for PFAS, organic chemicals of mixed polarity<ref>Iannone, A., Carriera, F., Di Fiore, C., Avino, P., 2024. Poly- and Perfluoroalkyl Substance (PFAS) Analysis in Environmental Matrices: An Overview of the Extraction and Chromatographic Detection Methods. Analytica, 5(2), pp. 187-202. [https://doi.org/10.3390/analytica5020012 doi: 10.3390/analytica5020012]&nbsp; [[Media: IannoneEtAl2024.pdf | Open Access Article]]</ref><br />
*Zeolite for ammonia, other organic chemicals<br />
<br />
Resins must be adequately conditioned prior to use. Otherwise, they may inadequately adsorb toxicants or cause stress to organisms. New resins should be tested for efficacy and toxicity before being used in an iTIE system. <br />
<br />
===Test Organism Species and Life Stages===<br />
Practitioners can also select different organism species and life stages for use in the iTIE system, depending on site characteristics and study goals. The iTIE system can accommodate various small test organisms, including embryo-stage fish and most macroinvertebrates. The following common toxicity tests can be adapted for application within iTIE systems<ref>U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Office of Solid Waste and Emergency Response, 1994. Catalogue of Standard Toxicity Tests for Ecological Risk Assessment. ECO Update, 2(2), 4 pages. Publication No. 9345.0.05I [https://www.epa.gov/sites/default/files/2015-09/documents/v2no2.pdf Free Download]&nbsp; [[Media: usepa1994.pdf | Report.pdf]]</ref>.<br />
<ul><u>Freshwater acute toxicity:</u></ul><br />
*[[Wikipedia: Daphnia magna | ''Daphnia magna'']] or [[Wikipedia: Daphnia pulex | ''Daphnia pulex'']] 24-, 48-, and 96-hour survival<br />
<ul><u>Freshwater chronic toxicity:</u></ul><br />
*[[Wikipedia: Ceriodaphnia dubia | ''Ceriodaphnia dubia'']] 7-day survival and reproduction<br />
*''D. magna'' 7-day survival and reproduction<br />
*[[Wikipedia: Fathead minnow | ''Pimephales promelas'']] 7-day embryo-larval survival and teratogenicity<br />
*[[Wikipedia: Hyalella azteca | ''Hyalella Azteca'']] 10- or 30-day survival and reproduction<br />
<ul><u>Marine acute toxicity:</u></ul><br />
*[[Wikipedia: Americamysis bahia | ''Americamysis bahia'']] 24- and 48-hour survival<br />
<ul><u>Marine chronic toxicity:</u></ul><br />
*''Americamysis'' survival, growth and fecundity<br />
*[[Wikipedia: Topsmelt silverside | ''Atherinops affinis'']] embryo-larval survival and growth <br />
<br />
Acute toxicity is quantifiable via organism survival rates immediately following the termination of an iTIE system field deployment. Chronic toxicity can be quantified by continuing to culture and observe test organisms in-lab. Common chronic endpoints include stunted growth, altered development such as teratogenicity in larval fish, decreased reproduction rates, and changes in gene expression. <br />
<br />
Several gene expression endpoints have been detectable in bioassays following an iTIE system deployment and in-lab culturing period. Steigmeyer ''et al.''<ref name="SteigmeyerEtAl2017"/> were able to detect changes in the expression of two genes in ''D. magna'' after a 24-hour exposure to bisphenol A. In a separate study, Nichols<ref>Nichols, E., 2023. Methods for Identification and Prioritization of Stressors at Impaired Sites. Masters thesis, University of Michigan. University of Michigan Library Deep Blue Documents. [https://deepblue.lib.umich.edu/bitstream/handle/2027.42/176142/Nichols_Elizabeth_thesis.pdf?sequence=1 Free Download]&nbsp; [[Media: Nichols2023.pdf | Report.pdf]]</ref> found a significant decline in acetylcholinesterase activity in ''H. azteca'' after a 24-hour exposure to chlorpyrifos. These results indicate a potential to adapt other gene expression bioassays for use in conjunction with iTIE system field exposures to prove stressor-causality linkages.<br />
<br />
===Cost Effectiveness Study===<br />
Burton ''et al.''<ref name="BurtonEtAl2020"/> conducted a cost effectiveness study comparing the iTIE technology with the traditional US EPA Phase 1 TIE method. Comparisons were based on the estimated time required to complete various sub-tasks within each method. Sub-tasks included organism care, equipment preparation, mobilization and deployment, test maintenance, test termination, demobilization, and test termination analyses. It was ultimately estimated that the iTIE protocol requires 47% less time (67 fewer hours) to complete than the Phase 1 TIE method, with the largest time differences in equipment preparation, deployment, test maintenance, and demobilization. It is important to note that the iTIE method may require additional initial costs for equipment and training.<br />
<br />
==Field Application==<br />
[[File: CraneFig6.png | thumb | left | 400px | Figure 6. iTIES deployment at the Rouge River, Detroit, MI. In the foreground is the iTIE Cooler Sub-System, which contains iTIE resin treatments and test organism groups, as well as the oxygenation coil and sample collection bottles. Next to the iTIE Cooler are the two pump cases. The Trident can be seen above the pump cases, installed in the river channel near shore.]]<br />
The&nbsp;iTIE&nbsp;system&nbsp;has&nbsp;been successfully deployed at a variety of marine and freshwater sites during the proof-of-concept phase of prototype development. One example is the 2024 iTIE system deployment completed near the mouth of the Rouge River in Detroit, MI (Figure 6). The Rouge River watershed has a long history of industrialization, with a legacy of chemical dumping, channelization, damming, and urban runoff<ref>Ridgway, J., Cave, K., DeMaria, A., O’Meara, J., Hartig, J. H., 2018. The Rouge River Area of Concern—A multi-year, multi-level successful approach to restoration of Impaired Beneficial Uses. Aquatic Ecosystem Health and Management, 21(4), pp. 398-408. [https://doi.org/10.1080/14634988.2018.1528816 doi: 10.1080/14634988.2018.1528816]</ref>. This has led to degraded environmental conditions, with previous detections of a wide range of chemicals including heavy metals and various organics.<br />
<br />
[[File: CraneFig7.png | thumb | 300px | Figure 7. Survival and healthy development of ''P. promelas'' embryos and larvae following a 48-hour iTIE exposure near the mouth of the Rouge River. Organisms were exposed to site porewater as embryos for 48 hours and cultured post-exposure for an additional 5 days.]]<br />
[[File: CraneFig8.png | thumb | 300px | Figure 8. Survival of ''C. dilutus'' larvae after an iTIE exposure near the mouth of the Rouge River. Organisms were exposed to site porewater for 48 hours and cultured post-exposure for an additional 5 days. Error bars show standard deviation.]]<br />
An&nbsp;iTIE&nbsp;system&nbsp;deployment&nbsp;was designed and completed to determine which chemical classes are most responsible for causing toxicity at the site. Resin treatments included glass wool (inert, non-fractionating substance), Chelex (metals sorption), Oasis HLB (general organics sorption), and Oasis WAX (organics sorption, with a high affinity for PFAS). The study utilized fathead minnow (''P. promelas'') embryos, due to their relative sensitivity to metals and PAHs, as well as second-instar midge ([[Wikipedia: Chironomus |''Chironomus dilutus'']]) larvae due to their relative sensitivity to PFAS. <br />
<br />
The test organisms were exposed to fractionated porewater ''in situ'' for 48 hours. Following exposure, organisms were cultured for an additional five days, and survival was recorded (Figures 7 and 8). Moderate declines in survival were seen in both species in the glass wool treatment, indicating toxicity at the site. For ''P. promelas'', the highest proportion of healthy development occurred in the Chelex treatment, supporting the hypothesis that metals are a dominant cause of toxicity. ''C. dilutus'' had the greatest survival in the Oasis WAX treatment, suggesting that an organic stressor class like PFAS is also present at harmful concentrations in the river.<br />
<br />
Water chemical analyses of fractionated and unfractionated water samples were completed to support biological results. Analyses were conducted for a range of stressor classes including metals, PAHs, PCBs, an organophosphate pesticide (chlorpyrifos), a PFAS compound (PFOS) and a pyrethroid insecticide (permethrin). Of these analytes, only heavy metals and PFOS were detected. Some chemical classes including PAHs and PCBs were not detected at the site.<br />
To reach similar conclusions using traditional Phase 1 TIE methods, one would need to complete the following tests: baseline toxicity, filtration, aeration, EDTA, C18 SPE, and methanol elution of C18 SPE. The iTIE method allows the same conclusions to be drawn with significantly less time and effort required.<br />
<br />
==Summary==<br />
The ''in situ'' Toxicity Identification Evaluation technology and protocol is a powerful tool that investigators can use to strengthen causal linkages between chemical stressors and ecological toxicity. By fractionating sampled water and exposing test organisms ''in situ'', investigators can gather toxicity response data while minimizing sample manipulation and accurately representing environmental conditions.<br />
<br clear="right"/><br />
<br />
==References==<br />
<references /><br />
<br />
==See Also==</div>Jhurleyhttps://www.enviro.wiki/index.php?title=User:Jhurley/sandbox&diff=18110User:Jhurley/sandbox2026-04-13T22:13:20Z<p>Jhurley: /* Recommended Approach */</p>
<hr />
<div>==Estimating PCE/TCE Abiotic First-Order Reductive Dechlorination Rate Constants in Clayey Soils Under Anoxic Conditions== <br />
The U.S. Department of Defense (DoD) faces many challenges in restoring aquifers at contaminated sites, often due to back-diffusion of tetrachloroethene (PCE) and trichloroethene (TCE) from low-permeability clay zones. The uptake, storage, and subsequent long-term release of these dissolved contaminants from clays are key processes in understanding the longevity, intensity, and risks associated with many persistent chlorinated ethene groundwater plumes. Although naturally occurring abiotic and biotic dechlorination processes in clays may reduce stored contaminant mass and significantly aid natural attenuation, no standardized field method currently exists to verify or quantify these reactions. It is critical to remediation design efforts to demonstrate and validate a cost-effective in situ approach for assessing these dechlorination processes using first-order rate constants. An approach was developed and applied across eight DoD sites to support Remedial Project Managers (RPMs) and regulators in evaluating natural attenuation potential in clay-rich environments.<br />
<div style="float:right;margin:0 0 2em 2em;">__TOC__</div><br />
<br />
'''Related Article(s):'''<br />
<br />
*[[Monitored Natural Attenuation (MNA)]]<br />
*[[Monitored Natural Attenuation (MNA) of Chlorinated Solvents]]<br />
*[[Monitored Natural Attenuation - Transitioning from Active Remedies]]<br />
*[[Matrix Diffusion]]<br />
*[[REMChlor - MD]]<br />
<br />
'''Contributors:''' Dani Tran, Dr. Charles Schaefer, Dr. Charles Werth<br />
<br />
'''Key Resource:'''<br />
*Schaefer, C.E, Tran, D., Nguyen, D., Latta, D.E., Werth, C.J., 2025. Evaluating Mineral and In Situ Indicators of Abiotic Dechlorination in Clayey Soils (3)<br />
<br />
==Introduction==<br />
Cost-effective methods are needed to verify the occurrence of natural dechlorination processes and quantify their dechlorination rates in clays under ambient in situ conditions in order to reliably predict their long-term influence on plume longevity and mass discharge. However, accurately determining these rates is challenging due to slow reaction kinetics, the transient nature of transformation products, and the interplay of biotic and abiotic mechanisms within the clay matrix or at clay-sand interfaces. Tools capable of quantifying these reactions and assessing their role in mitigating plume persistence would be a significant aid for long-term site management.<br />
<br />
For reductive abiotic dechlorination under anoxic conditions, a 1% hydrochloric acid (HCl) extraction of a sample of native clay coupled with X-ray diffraction (XRD) data can be used as a screening level tool to estimate reductive dechlorination rate constants. These rate constants can be inserted into fate and transport models such as [[REMChlor - MD]]<ref>Falta, R., and Wang, W., 2017. A semi-analytical method for simulating matrix diffusion in numerical transport models. Journal of Contaminant Hydrology, 197, pp. 39-49. [https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jconhyd.2016.12.007 doi: 10.1016/j.jconhyd.2016.12.007]&nbsp; [[Media: FaltaWang2017.pdf | Open Access Manuscript]]</ref><ref>Kulkarni, P.R., Adamson, D.T., Popovic, J., Newell, C.J., 2022. Modeling a well-charactized perfluorooctane sulfate (PFOS) source and plume using the REMChlor-MD model to account for matrix diffusion. Journal of Contaminant Hydrology, 247, Article 103986. [https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jconhyd.2022.103986 doi: 10.1016/j.jconhyd.2022.103986]&nbsp; [[Media: KulkarniEtAl2022.pdf | Open Access Manuscript]]</ref> to quantify abiotic dechlorination impacts within clay aquitards on chlorinated solvent plumes. Thus, determination of the abiotic reductive dechlorination rate constant for a particular clayey soil can be readily utilized to provide a more accurate assessment of aquifer cleanup timeframes for groundwater plumes that are being sustained by contaminant back-diffusion.<br />
<br />
==Recommended Approach==<br />
[[File: TranFig1.png | thumb | 600 px | Figure 1: First-order rate constants for abiotic reductive dechlorination of TCE under anaerobic conditions (data from this study and prior research)]]<br />
[[File: TranFig2.png | thumb | 600 px | Figure 2: Flowchart diagram of field screening procedures]]<br />
The recommended approach builds upon the methodology and findings of a recent study<ref name="SchaeferEtAl2025">Schaefer, C.E., Tran, D., Nguyen, D., Latta, D.E., Werth, C.J., 2025. Evaluating Mineral and In Situ Indicators of Abiotic Dechlorination in Clayey Soils. Groundwater Monitoring and Remediation, 45(2), pp. 31-39. [https://doi.org/10.1111/gwmr.12709 doi: 10.1111/gwmr.12709]</ref>, emphasizing field-based and analytical techniques to quantify abiotic first-order reductive dechlorination rate constants for PCE and TCE in clayey soils under anoxic conditions. Key components of this evaluation are listed below:<br />
#<u>Zone Identification:</u> The focus of the investigation should be to delineate clayey zones adjacent to hydraulically conductive zones.<br />
#<u>Ferrous Mineral Quantification:</u> Assess ferrous mineral context in clay via 1% HCl extraction at ambient temperature over a 10-minute interval.<br />
#<u>Mineralogical Characterization:</u> Conduct XRD analysis with the specific intent of identifying the presence of pyrite and biotite. <br />
#<u>Reduced Gas Analysis:</u> Measurement of reduced gases such as acetylene, ethene, and ethane concentrations in clay samples. Gas-tight sampling devices (e.g., En Core® soil samplers by En Novative Technologies, Inc.) should be used to ensure sample integrity during collection and transport. <br />
<br />
Clay samples should be collected within a few centimeters of the high-permeability interface, with optional additional sampling further inward. For mineralogical analysis, a defined interval may be collected and subsequently subsampled. To preserve sample integrity, exposure to air should be minimized during collection, transport, and handling. Homogenization should occur within an anaerobic chamber, and if subsamples are required for external analysis, they must be shipped in gas-tight, anaerobic containers.<br />
<br />
Estimation of the abiotic reductive first-order rate constant for PCE and TCE is based on the “reactive” ferrous content in the clay. Reactive ferrous content (Fe(II)<sub>r</sub>) is estimated as shown in Equation 1:<br />
<br />
::'''Equation 1:'''&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; <big>''Fe(II)<sub><small>r</small></sub> = DA + XRD<sub><small>pyr</small></sub> - XRD<sub><small>biotite</small></sub>''<br />
<br />
where ''DA'' is the ferrous content from the dilute acid (1% HCl) extraction, ''XRD<sub><small>pyr</small></sub>'' is the pyrite content from XRD analysis, and ''XRD<sub><small>biotite</small></sub>'' is the biotite content from XRD analysis<ref name="SchaeferEtAl2025"/>.<br />
<br />
==Study Design Considerations==<br />
===Diagnostic Resin Treatments===<br />
Several commercially available resins have been verified for use in the iTIE system. Investigators can select resins based on stressor classes of interest at each site. Each resin selectively removes a CoC class from site water prior to organism exposure.<br />
*[https://www.dupont.com/products/ambersorb560.html DuPont Ambersorb 560] for removal of 1,4-dioxane and other organic chemicals<ref>Woodard, S., Mohr, T., Nickelsen, M.G., 2014. Synthetic media: A promising new treatment technology for 1,4-dioxane. Remediation Journal, 24(4), pp. 27-40. [https://doi.org/10.1002/rem.21402 doi: 10.1002/rem.21402]</ref><br />
*C18 for nonpolar organic chemicals<br />
*[https://www.bio-rad.com/en-us Bio-Rad] [https://www.bio-rad.com/en-us/product/chelex-100-resin?ID=6448ab3e-b96a-4162-9124-7b7d2330288e Chelex] for metals<br />
*Granular activated carbon for metals, general organic chemicals, sulfide<ref>Lemos, B.R.S., Teixeira, I.F., de Mesquita, J.P., Ribeiro, R.R., Donnici, C.L., Lago, R.M., 2012. Use of modified activated carbon for the oxidation of aqueous sulfide. Carbon, 50(3), pp. 1386-1393. [https://doi.org/10.1016/j.carbon.2011.11.011 doi: 10.1016/j.carbon.2011.11.011]</ref><br />
*[https://www.waters.com/nextgen/us/en.html Waters] [https://www.waters.com/nextgen/us/en/search.html?category=Shop&isocode=en_US&keyword=oasis%20hlb&multiselect=true&page=1&rows=12&sort=best-sellers&xcid=ppc-ppc_23916&gad_source=1&gad_campaignid=14746094146&gbraid=0AAAAAD_uR00nhlNwrhhegNh06pBODTgiN&gclid=CjwKCAiAtLvMBhB_EiwA1u6_PsppE0raci2IhvGnAAe5ijciNcetLaGZo5qA3g3r4Z_La7YAPJtzShoC6LoQAvD_BwE Oasis HLB] for general organic chemicals<ref name="SteigmeyerEtAl2017"/><br />
*[https://www.waters.com/nextgen/us/en.html Waters] [https://www.waters.com/nextgen/us/en/search.html?category=All&enableHL=true&isocode=en_US&keyword=Oasis%20WAX%20&multiselect=true&page=1&rows=12&sort=most-relevant Oasis WAX] for PFAS, organic chemicals of mixed polarity<ref>Iannone, A., Carriera, F., Di Fiore, C., Avino, P., 2024. Poly- and Perfluoroalkyl Substance (PFAS) Analysis in Environmental Matrices: An Overview of the Extraction and Chromatographic Detection Methods. Analytica, 5(2), pp. 187-202. [https://doi.org/10.3390/analytica5020012 doi: 10.3390/analytica5020012]&nbsp; [[Media: IannoneEtAl2024.pdf | Open Access Article]]</ref><br />
*Zeolite for ammonia, other organic chemicals<br />
<br />
Resins must be adequately conditioned prior to use. Otherwise, they may inadequately adsorb toxicants or cause stress to organisms. New resins should be tested for efficacy and toxicity before being used in an iTIE system. <br />
<br />
===Test Organism Species and Life Stages===<br />
Practitioners can also select different organism species and life stages for use in the iTIE system, depending on site characteristics and study goals. The iTIE system can accommodate various small test organisms, including embryo-stage fish and most macroinvertebrates. The following common toxicity tests can be adapted for application within iTIE systems<ref>U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Office of Solid Waste and Emergency Response, 1994. Catalogue of Standard Toxicity Tests for Ecological Risk Assessment. ECO Update, 2(2), 4 pages. Publication No. 9345.0.05I [https://www.epa.gov/sites/default/files/2015-09/documents/v2no2.pdf Free Download]&nbsp; [[Media: usepa1994.pdf | Report.pdf]]</ref>.<br />
<ul><u>Freshwater acute toxicity:</u></ul><br />
*[[Wikipedia: Daphnia magna | ''Daphnia magna'']] or [[Wikipedia: Daphnia pulex | ''Daphnia pulex'']] 24-, 48-, and 96-hour survival<br />
<ul><u>Freshwater chronic toxicity:</u></ul><br />
*[[Wikipedia: Ceriodaphnia dubia | ''Ceriodaphnia dubia'']] 7-day survival and reproduction<br />
*''D. magna'' 7-day survival and reproduction<br />
*[[Wikipedia: Fathead minnow | ''Pimephales promelas'']] 7-day embryo-larval survival and teratogenicity<br />
*[[Wikipedia: Hyalella azteca | ''Hyalella Azteca'']] 10- or 30-day survival and reproduction<br />
<ul><u>Marine acute toxicity:</u></ul><br />
*[[Wikipedia: Americamysis bahia | ''Americamysis bahia'']] 24- and 48-hour survival<br />
<ul><u>Marine chronic toxicity:</u></ul><br />
*''Americamysis'' survival, growth and fecundity<br />
*[[Wikipedia: Topsmelt silverside | ''Atherinops affinis'']] embryo-larval survival and growth <br />
<br />
Acute toxicity is quantifiable via organism survival rates immediately following the termination of an iTIE system field deployment. Chronic toxicity can be quantified by continuing to culture and observe test organisms in-lab. Common chronic endpoints include stunted growth, altered development such as teratogenicity in larval fish, decreased reproduction rates, and changes in gene expression. <br />
<br />
Several gene expression endpoints have been detectable in bioassays following an iTIE system deployment and in-lab culturing period. Steigmeyer ''et al.''<ref name="SteigmeyerEtAl2017"/> were able to detect changes in the expression of two genes in ''D. magna'' after a 24-hour exposure to bisphenol A. In a separate study, Nichols<ref>Nichols, E., 2023. Methods for Identification and Prioritization of Stressors at Impaired Sites. Masters thesis, University of Michigan. University of Michigan Library Deep Blue Documents. [https://deepblue.lib.umich.edu/bitstream/handle/2027.42/176142/Nichols_Elizabeth_thesis.pdf?sequence=1 Free Download]&nbsp; [[Media: Nichols2023.pdf | Report.pdf]]</ref> found a significant decline in acetylcholinesterase activity in ''H. azteca'' after a 24-hour exposure to chlorpyrifos. These results indicate a potential to adapt other gene expression bioassays for use in conjunction with iTIE system field exposures to prove stressor-causality linkages.<br />
<br />
===Cost Effectiveness Study===<br />
Burton ''et al.''<ref name="BurtonEtAl2020"/> conducted a cost effectiveness study comparing the iTIE technology with the traditional US EPA Phase 1 TIE method. Comparisons were based on the estimated time required to complete various sub-tasks within each method. Sub-tasks included organism care, equipment preparation, mobilization and deployment, test maintenance, test termination, demobilization, and test termination analyses. It was ultimately estimated that the iTIE protocol requires 47% less time (67 fewer hours) to complete than the Phase 1 TIE method, with the largest time differences in equipment preparation, deployment, test maintenance, and demobilization. It is important to note that the iTIE method may require additional initial costs for equipment and training.<br />
<br />
==Field Application==<br />
[[File: CraneFig6.png | thumb | left | 400px | Figure 6. iTIES deployment at the Rouge River, Detroit, MI. In the foreground is the iTIE Cooler Sub-System, which contains iTIE resin treatments and test organism groups, as well as the oxygenation coil and sample collection bottles. Next to the iTIE Cooler are the two pump cases. The Trident can be seen above the pump cases, installed in the river channel near shore.]]<br />
The&nbsp;iTIE&nbsp;system&nbsp;has&nbsp;been successfully deployed at a variety of marine and freshwater sites during the proof-of-concept phase of prototype development. One example is the 2024 iTIE system deployment completed near the mouth of the Rouge River in Detroit, MI (Figure 6). The Rouge River watershed has a long history of industrialization, with a legacy of chemical dumping, channelization, damming, and urban runoff<ref>Ridgway, J., Cave, K., DeMaria, A., O’Meara, J., Hartig, J. H., 2018. The Rouge River Area of Concern—A multi-year, multi-level successful approach to restoration of Impaired Beneficial Uses. Aquatic Ecosystem Health and Management, 21(4), pp. 398-408. [https://doi.org/10.1080/14634988.2018.1528816 doi: 10.1080/14634988.2018.1528816]</ref>. This has led to degraded environmental conditions, with previous detections of a wide range of chemicals including heavy metals and various organics.<br />
<br />
[[File: CraneFig7.png | thumb | 300px | Figure 7. Survival and healthy development of ''P. promelas'' embryos and larvae following a 48-hour iTIE exposure near the mouth of the Rouge River. Organisms were exposed to site porewater as embryos for 48 hours and cultured post-exposure for an additional 5 days.]]<br />
[[File: CraneFig8.png | thumb | 300px | Figure 8. Survival of ''C. dilutus'' larvae after an iTIE exposure near the mouth of the Rouge River. Organisms were exposed to site porewater for 48 hours and cultured post-exposure for an additional 5 days. Error bars show standard deviation.]]<br />
An&nbsp;iTIE&nbsp;system&nbsp;deployment&nbsp;was designed and completed to determine which chemical classes are most responsible for causing toxicity at the site. Resin treatments included glass wool (inert, non-fractionating substance), Chelex (metals sorption), Oasis HLB (general organics sorption), and Oasis WAX (organics sorption, with a high affinity for PFAS). The study utilized fathead minnow (''P. promelas'') embryos, due to their relative sensitivity to metals and PAHs, as well as second-instar midge ([[Wikipedia: Chironomus |''Chironomus dilutus'']]) larvae due to their relative sensitivity to PFAS. <br />
<br />
The test organisms were exposed to fractionated porewater ''in situ'' for 48 hours. Following exposure, organisms were cultured for an additional five days, and survival was recorded (Figures 7 and 8). Moderate declines in survival were seen in both species in the glass wool treatment, indicating toxicity at the site. For ''P. promelas'', the highest proportion of healthy development occurred in the Chelex treatment, supporting the hypothesis that metals are a dominant cause of toxicity. ''C. dilutus'' had the greatest survival in the Oasis WAX treatment, suggesting that an organic stressor class like PFAS is also present at harmful concentrations in the river.<br />
<br />
Water chemical analyses of fractionated and unfractionated water samples were completed to support biological results. Analyses were conducted for a range of stressor classes including metals, PAHs, PCBs, an organophosphate pesticide (chlorpyrifos), a PFAS compound (PFOS) and a pyrethroid insecticide (permethrin). Of these analytes, only heavy metals and PFOS were detected. Some chemical classes including PAHs and PCBs were not detected at the site.<br />
To reach similar conclusions using traditional Phase 1 TIE methods, one would need to complete the following tests: baseline toxicity, filtration, aeration, EDTA, C18 SPE, and methanol elution of C18 SPE. The iTIE method allows the same conclusions to be drawn with significantly less time and effort required.<br />
<br />
==Summary==<br />
The ''in situ'' Toxicity Identification Evaluation technology and protocol is a powerful tool that investigators can use to strengthen causal linkages between chemical stressors and ecological toxicity. By fractionating sampled water and exposing test organisms ''in situ'', investigators can gather toxicity response data while minimizing sample manipulation and accurately representing environmental conditions.<br />
<br clear="right"/><br />
<br />
==References==<br />
<references /><br />
<br />
==See Also==</div>Jhurleyhttps://www.enviro.wiki/index.php?title=User:Jhurley/sandbox&diff=18109User:Jhurley/sandbox2026-04-09T20:10:49Z<p>Jhurley: /* Recommended Approach */</p>
<hr />
<div>==Estimating PCE/TCE Abiotic First-Order Reductive Dechlorination Rate Constants in Clayey Soils Under Anoxic Conditions== <br />
The U.S. Department of Defense (DoD) faces many challenges in restoring aquifers at contaminated sites, often due to back-diffusion of tetrachloroethene (PCE) and trichloroethene (TCE) from low-permeability clay zones. The uptake, storage, and subsequent long-term release of these dissolved contaminants from clays are key processes in understanding the longevity, intensity, and risks associated with many persistent chlorinated ethene groundwater plumes. Although naturally occurring abiotic and biotic dechlorination processes in clays may reduce stored contaminant mass and significantly aid natural attenuation, no standardized field method currently exists to verify or quantify these reactions. It is critical to remediation design efforts to demonstrate and validate a cost-effective in situ approach for assessing these dechlorination processes using first-order rate constants. An approach was developed and applied across eight DoD sites to support Remedial Project Managers (RPMs) and regulators in evaluating natural attenuation potential in clay-rich environments.<br />
<div style="float:right;margin:0 0 2em 2em;">__TOC__</div><br />
<br />
'''Related Article(s):'''<br />
<br />
*[[Monitored Natural Attenuation (MNA)]]<br />
*[[Monitored Natural Attenuation (MNA) of Chlorinated Solvents]]<br />
*[[Monitored Natural Attenuation - Transitioning from Active Remedies]]<br />
*[[Matrix Diffusion]]<br />
*[[REMChlor - MD]]<br />
<br />
'''Contributors:''' Dani Tran, Dr. Charles Schaefer, Dr. Charles Werth<br />
<br />
'''Key Resource:'''<br />
*Schaefer, C.E, Tran, D., Nguyen, D., Latta, D.E., Werth, C.J., 2025. Evaluating Mineral and In Situ Indicators of Abiotic Dechlorination in Clayey Soils (3)<br />
<br />
==Introduction==<br />
Cost-effective methods are needed to verify the occurrence of natural dechlorination processes and quantify their dechlorination rates in clays under ambient in situ conditions in order to reliably predict their long-term influence on plume longevity and mass discharge. However, accurately determining these rates is challenging due to slow reaction kinetics, the transient nature of transformation products, and the interplay of biotic and abiotic mechanisms within the clay matrix or at clay-sand interfaces. Tools capable of quantifying these reactions and assessing their role in mitigating plume persistence would be a significant aid for long-term site management.<br />
<br />
For reductive abiotic dechlorination under anoxic conditions, a 1% hydrochloric acid (HCl) extraction of a sample of native clay coupled with X-ray diffraction (XRD) data can be used as a screening level tool to estimate reductive dechlorination rate constants. These rate constants can be inserted into fate and transport models such as [[REMChlor - MD]]<ref>Falta, R., and Wang, W., 2017. A semi-analytical method for simulating matrix diffusion in numerical transport models. Journal of Contaminant Hydrology, 197, pp. 39-49. [https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jconhyd.2016.12.007 doi: 10.1016/j.jconhyd.2016.12.007]&nbsp; [[Media: FaltaWang2017.pdf | Open Access Manuscript]]</ref><ref>Kulkarni, P.R., Adamson, D.T., Popovic, J., Newell, C.J., 2022. Modeling a well-charactized perfluorooctane sulfate (PFOS) source and plume using the REMChlor-MD model to account for matrix diffusion. Journal of Contaminant Hydrology, 247, Article 103986. [https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jconhyd.2022.103986 doi: 10.1016/j.jconhyd.2022.103986]&nbsp; [[Media: KulkarniEtAl2022.pdf | Open Access Manuscript]]</ref> to quantify abiotic dechlorination impacts within clay aquitards on chlorinated solvent plumes. Thus, determination of the abiotic reductive dechlorination rate constant for a particular clayey soil can be readily utilized to provide a more accurate assessment of aquifer cleanup timeframes for groundwater plumes that are being sustained by contaminant back-diffusion.<br />
<br />
==Recommended Approach==<br />
[[File: TranFig1.png | thumb | 600 px | Figure 1: First-order rate constants for abiotic reductive dechlorination of TCE under anaerobic conditions (data from this study and prior research)]]<br />
[[File: TranFig2.png | thumb | 600 px | Figure 2: Flowchart diagram of field screening procedures]]<br />
The recommended approach builds upon the methodology and findings of a recent study<ref name="SchaeferEtAl2025">Schaefer, C.E., Tran, D., Nguyen, D., Latta, D.E., Werth, C.J., 2025. Evaluating Mineral and In Situ Indicators of Abiotic Dechlorination in Clayey Soils. Groundwater Monitoring and Remediation, 45(2), pp. 31-39. [https://doi.org/10.1111/gwmr.12709 doi: 10.1111/gwmr.12709]</ref>, emphasizing field-based and analytical techniques to quantify abiotic first-order reductive dechlorination rate constants for PCE and TCE in clayey soils under anoxic conditions. Key components of this evaluation are listed below:<br />
#<u>Zone Identification:</u> The focus of the investigation should be to delineate clayey zones adjacent to hydraulically conductive zones.<br />
#<u>Ferrous Mineral Quantification:</u> Assess ferrous mineral context in clay via 1% HCl extraction at ambient temperature over a 10-minute interval.<br />
#<u>Mineralogical Characterization:</u> Conduct XRD analysis with the specific intent of identifying the presence of pyrite and biotite. <br />
#<u>Reduced Gas Analysis:</u> Measurement of reduced gases such as acetylene, ethene, and ethane concentrations in clay samples. Gas-tight sampling devices (e.g., En Core® soil samplers by En Novative Technologies, Inc.) should be used to ensure sample integrity during collection and transport. <br />
<br />
Clay samples should be collected within a few centimeters of the high-permeability interface, with optional additional sampling further inward. For mineralogical analysis, a defined interval may be collected and subsequently subsampled. To preserve sample integrity, exposure to air should be minimized during collection, transport, and handling. Homogenization should occur within an anaerobic chamber, and if subsamples are required for external analysis, they must be shipped in gas-tight, anaerobic containers.<br />
<br />
<br />
===Porewater and Surface Water Collection Sub-system===<br />
[[File: CraneFig2.png | thumb | 600 px | Figure 2: a) Trident probe with auxiliary sensors attached, b) a Trident probe with end caps removed (the red arrow identifies the intermediate space where glass beads are packed to filter suspended solids), c) a Trident probe being installed using a series of push poles and a fence post driver]]<br />
Given&nbsp;the&nbsp;importance&nbsp;of sediment porewater to ecosystem structure and function, investigators may employ the iTIE system to evaluate the toxic effects associated with the impacted sediment porewater. To accomplish this, the iTIE system utilizes the Trident probe, originally developed for Department of Defense site characterization studies<ref>Chadwick, D.B., Harre, B., Smith, C.F., Groves, J.G., Paulsen, R.J., 2003. Coastal Contaminant Migration Monitoring: The Trident Probe and UltraSeep System. Hardware Description, Protocols, and Procedures. Technical Report 1902. Space and Naval Warfare Systems Center.</ref>. The main body of the Trident is comprised of a stainless-steel frame with six hollow probes (Figure 2). Each probe contains a layer of inert glass beads, which filters suspended solids from the sampled water. The water is drawn through each probe into a composite manifold and transported to the rest of the iTIE system using a high-precision peristaltic pump. <br />
<br />
The Trident also includes an adjustable stopper plate, which forms a seal against the sediment and prevents the inadvertent dilution of porewater samples with surface water. (Figure 2). Preliminary laboratory results indicate that the Trident is extremely effective in collecting porewater samples with minimal surface water infiltration in sediments ranging from coarse sand to fine clay. Underwater cameras, sensors, passive samplers, and other auxiliary equipment can be attached to the Trident probe frame to provide supplemental data.<br />
<br />
Alternatively, practitioners may employ the iTIE system to evaluate site surface water. To sample surface water, weighted intake tubes can collect surface water from the water column using a peristaltic pump.<br />
<br />
===Oxygen Coil, Overflow Bag and Drip Chamber===<br />
[[File: CraneFig3.png | thumb | left | 400 px | Figure 3. Contents of the iTIE system cooler. The pictured HDPE rack (47.6 cm length x 29.7 cm width x 33.7 cm height) is removable from the iTIE cooler. Water enters the system at the red circle, flows through the oxygen coil, and then travels to each of the individual iTIE units where diagnostic resins and organisms are located. The water then briefly leaves the cooler to travel through peristaltic regulation pumps before being gathered in sample collection bottles.]]<br />
Porewater&nbsp;is&nbsp;naturally&nbsp;anoxic due to limited mixing with aerated surface water and high oxygen demand of sediments, which may cause organism mortality and interfere with iTIE results. To preclude this, sampled porewater is exposed to an oxygen coil. This consists of an interior silicone tube connected to a pressurized oxygen canister, threaded through an exterior reinforced PVC tube through which water is slowly pumped (Figure 3). Pump rates are optimized to ensure adequate aeration of the water. In addition to elevating DO levels, the oxygen coil facilitates the oxidation of dissolved sulfides, which naturally occur in some marine sediments and may otherwise cause toxicity to organisms if left in its reduced form.<br />
<br />
Gas bubbles may form in the oxygen coil over the course of a deployment. These can be disruptive, decreasing water sample volumes and posing a danger to sensitive organisms like daphnids. To account for this, the water travels to a drip chamber after exiting the oxygen coil, which allows gas bubbles to be separated and diverted to an overflow system. The sample water then flows to a manifold which divides the flow into different paths to each of the treatment units for fractionation and organism exposure.<br />
<br />
===iTIE Units: Fractionation and Organism Exposure Chambers===<br />
[[File: CraneFig4.png | thumb | 300px | Figure 4. A diagram of the iTIE prototype. Water flows upward into each resin chamber through the unit bottom. After being chemically fractionated in the resin chamber, water travels into the organism chamber, where test organisms have been placed. Water is drawn through the units by high-precision peristaltic pumps.]]<br />
At&nbsp;the&nbsp;core&nbsp;of&nbsp;the&nbsp;iTIE&nbsp;system are separate dual-chamber iTIE units, each with a resin fractionation chamber and an organism exposure chamber (Figure 4). Developed by Burton ''et al.''<ref name="BurtonEtAl2020"/>, the iTIE prototype is constructed from acrylic, with rubber O-rings to connect each piece. Each iTIE unit can contain a different diagnostic resin matrix, customizable to remove specific chemical classes from the water. Sampled water flows into each unit through the bottom and is differentially fractionated by the resin matrix as it travels upward. Then it reaches the organism chamber, where test organisms are placed for exposure. The organism chamber inlet and outlet are covered by mesh to prevent the escape of the test organisms. This continuous flow-through design allows practitioners to capture the temporal heterogeneity of ambient water conditions over the duration of an ''in situ'' exposure. Currently, the iTIE system can support four independent iTIE treatment units.<br />
<br />
After being exposed to test organisms, water is collected in sample bottles. The bottles can be pre-loaded with preservation reagents to allow for later chemical analysis. Sample bottles can be composed of polyethylene, glass or other materials depending on the CoC.<br />
<br />
===Pumping Sub-system===<br />
[[File: CraneFig5.png | thumb | 300px | Figure 5. The iTIE system pumping sub-system. The sub-system consists of: A) a single booster pump, which is directly connected to the water sampling device and feeds water to the rest of the iTIE system, and B) a set of four regulation pumps, which each connect to the outflow of an individual iTIE unit. Each pump set is housed in a waterproof case with self-contained rechargeable battery power. A tablet is mounted inside the lid of the four pump case, which can be used to program and operate all of the pumps when connected to the internet.]]<br />
Water&nbsp;movement&nbsp;through&nbsp;the&nbsp;system is driven by a series of high-precision, programmable peristaltic pumps ([https://ecotechmarine.com/ EcoTech Marine]). Each pump set is housed in a Pelican storm travel case. Power is supplied to each pump by internal rechargeable lithium-iron phosphate batteries ([https://www.bioennopower.com/ Bioenno Power]).<br />
<br />
First, water is supplied to the system by a booster pump (Figure 5A). This pump is situated between the water sampling sub-system and the oxygen coil. The booster pump: 1) facilitates pore water collection, especially from sediments with high fine particle fractions; 2) helps water overcome vertical lifts to travel to the iTIE system; and 3) prevents vacuums from forming in the iTIE system interior, which can accelerate the formation of disruptive gas bubbles in the oxygen coil. The booster pump should be programmed to supply an excess of water to prevent vacuum formation.<br />
<br />
Second, a set of four regulation pumps ensure precise flow rates through each independent iTIE unit (Figure 5B). Each regulation pump pulls water from the top of an iTIE unit and then dispenses that water into a sample bottle for further analysis.<br />
<br />
==Study Design Considerations==<br />
===Diagnostic Resin Treatments===<br />
Several commercially available resins have been verified for use in the iTIE system. Investigators can select resins based on stressor classes of interest at each site. Each resin selectively removes a CoC class from site water prior to organism exposure.<br />
*[https://www.dupont.com/products/ambersorb560.html DuPont Ambersorb 560] for removal of 1,4-dioxane and other organic chemicals<ref>Woodard, S., Mohr, T., Nickelsen, M.G., 2014. Synthetic media: A promising new treatment technology for 1,4-dioxane. Remediation Journal, 24(4), pp. 27-40. [https://doi.org/10.1002/rem.21402 doi: 10.1002/rem.21402]</ref><br />
*C18 for nonpolar organic chemicals<br />
*[https://www.bio-rad.com/en-us Bio-Rad] [https://www.bio-rad.com/en-us/product/chelex-100-resin?ID=6448ab3e-b96a-4162-9124-7b7d2330288e Chelex] for metals<br />
*Granular activated carbon for metals, general organic chemicals, sulfide<ref>Lemos, B.R.S., Teixeira, I.F., de Mesquita, J.P., Ribeiro, R.R., Donnici, C.L., Lago, R.M., 2012. Use of modified activated carbon for the oxidation of aqueous sulfide. Carbon, 50(3), pp. 1386-1393. [https://doi.org/10.1016/j.carbon.2011.11.011 doi: 10.1016/j.carbon.2011.11.011]</ref><br />
*[https://www.waters.com/nextgen/us/en.html Waters] [https://www.waters.com/nextgen/us/en/search.html?category=Shop&isocode=en_US&keyword=oasis%20hlb&multiselect=true&page=1&rows=12&sort=best-sellers&xcid=ppc-ppc_23916&gad_source=1&gad_campaignid=14746094146&gbraid=0AAAAAD_uR00nhlNwrhhegNh06pBODTgiN&gclid=CjwKCAiAtLvMBhB_EiwA1u6_PsppE0raci2IhvGnAAe5ijciNcetLaGZo5qA3g3r4Z_La7YAPJtzShoC6LoQAvD_BwE Oasis HLB] for general organic chemicals<ref name="SteigmeyerEtAl2017"/><br />
*[https://www.waters.com/nextgen/us/en.html Waters] [https://www.waters.com/nextgen/us/en/search.html?category=All&enableHL=true&isocode=en_US&keyword=Oasis%20WAX%20&multiselect=true&page=1&rows=12&sort=most-relevant Oasis WAX] for PFAS, organic chemicals of mixed polarity<ref>Iannone, A., Carriera, F., Di Fiore, C., Avino, P., 2024. Poly- and Perfluoroalkyl Substance (PFAS) Analysis in Environmental Matrices: An Overview of the Extraction and Chromatographic Detection Methods. Analytica, 5(2), pp. 187-202. [https://doi.org/10.3390/analytica5020012 doi: 10.3390/analytica5020012]&nbsp; [[Media: IannoneEtAl2024.pdf | Open Access Article]]</ref><br />
*Zeolite for ammonia, other organic chemicals<br />
<br />
Resins must be adequately conditioned prior to use. Otherwise, they may inadequately adsorb toxicants or cause stress to organisms. New resins should be tested for efficacy and toxicity before being used in an iTIE system. <br />
<br />
===Test Organism Species and Life Stages===<br />
Practitioners can also select different organism species and life stages for use in the iTIE system, depending on site characteristics and study goals. The iTIE system can accommodate various small test organisms, including embryo-stage fish and most macroinvertebrates. The following common toxicity tests can be adapted for application within iTIE systems<ref>U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Office of Solid Waste and Emergency Response, 1994. Catalogue of Standard Toxicity Tests for Ecological Risk Assessment. ECO Update, 2(2), 4 pages. Publication No. 9345.0.05I [https://www.epa.gov/sites/default/files/2015-09/documents/v2no2.pdf Free Download]&nbsp; [[Media: usepa1994.pdf | Report.pdf]]</ref>.<br />
<ul><u>Freshwater acute toxicity:</u></ul><br />
*[[Wikipedia: Daphnia magna | ''Daphnia magna'']] or [[Wikipedia: Daphnia pulex | ''Daphnia pulex'']] 24-, 48-, and 96-hour survival<br />
<ul><u>Freshwater chronic toxicity:</u></ul><br />
*[[Wikipedia: Ceriodaphnia dubia | ''Ceriodaphnia dubia'']] 7-day survival and reproduction<br />
*''D. magna'' 7-day survival and reproduction<br />
*[[Wikipedia: Fathead minnow | ''Pimephales promelas'']] 7-day embryo-larval survival and teratogenicity<br />
*[[Wikipedia: Hyalella azteca | ''Hyalella Azteca'']] 10- or 30-day survival and reproduction<br />
<ul><u>Marine acute toxicity:</u></ul><br />
*[[Wikipedia: Americamysis bahia | ''Americamysis bahia'']] 24- and 48-hour survival<br />
<ul><u>Marine chronic toxicity:</u></ul><br />
*''Americamysis'' survival, growth and fecundity<br />
*[[Wikipedia: Topsmelt silverside | ''Atherinops affinis'']] embryo-larval survival and growth <br />
<br />
Acute toxicity is quantifiable via organism survival rates immediately following the termination of an iTIE system field deployment. Chronic toxicity can be quantified by continuing to culture and observe test organisms in-lab. Common chronic endpoints include stunted growth, altered development such as teratogenicity in larval fish, decreased reproduction rates, and changes in gene expression. <br />
<br />
Several gene expression endpoints have been detectable in bioassays following an iTIE system deployment and in-lab culturing period. Steigmeyer ''et al.''<ref name="SteigmeyerEtAl2017"/> were able to detect changes in the expression of two genes in ''D. magna'' after a 24-hour exposure to bisphenol A. In a separate study, Nichols<ref>Nichols, E., 2023. Methods for Identification and Prioritization of Stressors at Impaired Sites. Masters thesis, University of Michigan. University of Michigan Library Deep Blue Documents. [https://deepblue.lib.umich.edu/bitstream/handle/2027.42/176142/Nichols_Elizabeth_thesis.pdf?sequence=1 Free Download]&nbsp; [[Media: Nichols2023.pdf | Report.pdf]]</ref> found a significant decline in acetylcholinesterase activity in ''H. azteca'' after a 24-hour exposure to chlorpyrifos. These results indicate a potential to adapt other gene expression bioassays for use in conjunction with iTIE system field exposures to prove stressor-causality linkages.<br />
<br />
===Cost Effectiveness Study===<br />
Burton ''et al.''<ref name="BurtonEtAl2020"/> conducted a cost effectiveness study comparing the iTIE technology with the traditional US EPA Phase 1 TIE method. Comparisons were based on the estimated time required to complete various sub-tasks within each method. Sub-tasks included organism care, equipment preparation, mobilization and deployment, test maintenance, test termination, demobilization, and test termination analyses. It was ultimately estimated that the iTIE protocol requires 47% less time (67 fewer hours) to complete than the Phase 1 TIE method, with the largest time differences in equipment preparation, deployment, test maintenance, and demobilization. It is important to note that the iTIE method may require additional initial costs for equipment and training.<br />
<br />
==Field Application==<br />
[[File: CraneFig6.png | thumb | left | 400px | Figure 6. iTIES deployment at the Rouge River, Detroit, MI. In the foreground is the iTIE Cooler Sub-System, which contains iTIE resin treatments and test organism groups, as well as the oxygenation coil and sample collection bottles. Next to the iTIE Cooler are the two pump cases. The Trident can be seen above the pump cases, installed in the river channel near shore.]]<br />
The&nbsp;iTIE&nbsp;system&nbsp;has&nbsp;been successfully deployed at a variety of marine and freshwater sites during the proof-of-concept phase of prototype development. One example is the 2024 iTIE system deployment completed near the mouth of the Rouge River in Detroit, MI (Figure 6). The Rouge River watershed has a long history of industrialization, with a legacy of chemical dumping, channelization, damming, and urban runoff<ref>Ridgway, J., Cave, K., DeMaria, A., O’Meara, J., Hartig, J. H., 2018. The Rouge River Area of Concern—A multi-year, multi-level successful approach to restoration of Impaired Beneficial Uses. Aquatic Ecosystem Health and Management, 21(4), pp. 398-408. [https://doi.org/10.1080/14634988.2018.1528816 doi: 10.1080/14634988.2018.1528816]</ref>. This has led to degraded environmental conditions, with previous detections of a wide range of chemicals including heavy metals and various organics.<br />
<br />
[[File: CraneFig7.png | thumb | 300px | Figure 7. Survival and healthy development of ''P. promelas'' embryos and larvae following a 48-hour iTIE exposure near the mouth of the Rouge River. Organisms were exposed to site porewater as embryos for 48 hours and cultured post-exposure for an additional 5 days.]]<br />
[[File: CraneFig8.png | thumb | 300px | Figure 8. Survival of ''C. dilutus'' larvae after an iTIE exposure near the mouth of the Rouge River. Organisms were exposed to site porewater for 48 hours and cultured post-exposure for an additional 5 days. Error bars show standard deviation.]]<br />
An&nbsp;iTIE&nbsp;system&nbsp;deployment&nbsp;was designed and completed to determine which chemical classes are most responsible for causing toxicity at the site. Resin treatments included glass wool (inert, non-fractionating substance), Chelex (metals sorption), Oasis HLB (general organics sorption), and Oasis WAX (organics sorption, with a high affinity for PFAS). The study utilized fathead minnow (''P. promelas'') embryos, due to their relative sensitivity to metals and PAHs, as well as second-instar midge ([[Wikipedia: Chironomus |''Chironomus dilutus'']]) larvae due to their relative sensitivity to PFAS. <br />
<br />
The test organisms were exposed to fractionated porewater ''in situ'' for 48 hours. Following exposure, organisms were cultured for an additional five days, and survival was recorded (Figures 7 and 8). Moderate declines in survival were seen in both species in the glass wool treatment, indicating toxicity at the site. For ''P. promelas'', the highest proportion of healthy development occurred in the Chelex treatment, supporting the hypothesis that metals are a dominant cause of toxicity. ''C. dilutus'' had the greatest survival in the Oasis WAX treatment, suggesting that an organic stressor class like PFAS is also present at harmful concentrations in the river.<br />
<br />
Water chemical analyses of fractionated and unfractionated water samples were completed to support biological results. Analyses were conducted for a range of stressor classes including metals, PAHs, PCBs, an organophosphate pesticide (chlorpyrifos), a PFAS compound (PFOS) and a pyrethroid insecticide (permethrin). Of these analytes, only heavy metals and PFOS were detected. Some chemical classes including PAHs and PCBs were not detected at the site.<br />
To reach similar conclusions using traditional Phase 1 TIE methods, one would need to complete the following tests: baseline toxicity, filtration, aeration, EDTA, C18 SPE, and methanol elution of C18 SPE. The iTIE method allows the same conclusions to be drawn with significantly less time and effort required.<br />
<br />
==Summary==<br />
The ''in situ'' Toxicity Identification Evaluation technology and protocol is a powerful tool that investigators can use to strengthen causal linkages between chemical stressors and ecological toxicity. By fractionating sampled water and exposing test organisms ''in situ'', investigators can gather toxicity response data while minimizing sample manipulation and accurately representing environmental conditions.<br />
<br clear="right"/><br />
<br />
==References==<br />
<references /><br />
<br />
==See Also==</div>Jhurleyhttps://www.enviro.wiki/index.php?title=User:Jhurley/sandbox&diff=18108User:Jhurley/sandbox2026-04-09T20:00:39Z<p>Jhurley: /* Recommended Approach */</p>
<hr />
<div>==Estimating PCE/TCE Abiotic First-Order Reductive Dechlorination Rate Constants in Clayey Soils Under Anoxic Conditions== <br />
The U.S. Department of Defense (DoD) faces many challenges in restoring aquifers at contaminated sites, often due to back-diffusion of tetrachloroethene (PCE) and trichloroethene (TCE) from low-permeability clay zones. The uptake, storage, and subsequent long-term release of these dissolved contaminants from clays are key processes in understanding the longevity, intensity, and risks associated with many persistent chlorinated ethene groundwater plumes. Although naturally occurring abiotic and biotic dechlorination processes in clays may reduce stored contaminant mass and significantly aid natural attenuation, no standardized field method currently exists to verify or quantify these reactions. It is critical to remediation design efforts to demonstrate and validate a cost-effective in situ approach for assessing these dechlorination processes using first-order rate constants. An approach was developed and applied across eight DoD sites to support Remedial Project Managers (RPMs) and regulators in evaluating natural attenuation potential in clay-rich environments.<br />
<div style="float:right;margin:0 0 2em 2em;">__TOC__</div><br />
<br />
'''Related Article(s):'''<br />
<br />
*[[Monitored Natural Attenuation (MNA)]]<br />
*[[Monitored Natural Attenuation (MNA) of Chlorinated Solvents]]<br />
*[[Monitored Natural Attenuation - Transitioning from Active Remedies]]<br />
*[[Matrix Diffusion]]<br />
*[[REMChlor - MD]]<br />
<br />
'''Contributors:''' Dani Tran, Dr. Charles Schaefer, Dr. Charles Werth<br />
<br />
'''Key Resource:'''<br />
*Schaefer, C.E, Tran, D., Nguyen, D., Latta, D.E., Werth, C.J., 2025. Evaluating Mineral and In Situ Indicators of Abiotic Dechlorination in Clayey Soils (3)<br />
<br />
==Introduction==<br />
Cost-effective methods are needed to verify the occurrence of natural dechlorination processes and quantify their dechlorination rates in clays under ambient in situ conditions in order to reliably predict their long-term influence on plume longevity and mass discharge. However, accurately determining these rates is challenging due to slow reaction kinetics, the transient nature of transformation products, and the interplay of biotic and abiotic mechanisms within the clay matrix or at clay-sand interfaces. Tools capable of quantifying these reactions and assessing their role in mitigating plume persistence would be a significant aid for long-term site management.<br />
<br />
For reductive abiotic dechlorination under anoxic conditions, a 1% hydrochloric acid (HCl) extraction of a sample of native clay coupled with X-ray diffraction (XRD) data can be used as a screening level tool to estimate reductive dechlorination rate constants. These rate constants can be inserted into fate and transport models such as [[REMChlor - MD]]<ref>Falta, R., and Wang, W., 2017. A semi-analytical method for simulating matrix diffusion in numerical transport models. Journal of Contaminant Hydrology, 197, pp. 39-49. [https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jconhyd.2016.12.007 doi: 10.1016/j.jconhyd.2016.12.007]&nbsp; [[Media: FaltaWang2017.pdf | Open Access Manuscript]]</ref><ref>Kulkarni, P.R., Adamson, D.T., Popovic, J., Newell, C.J., 2022. Modeling a well-charactized perfluorooctane sulfate (PFOS) source and plume using the REMChlor-MD model to account for matrix diffusion. Journal of Contaminant Hydrology, 247, Article 103986. [https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jconhyd.2022.103986 doi: 10.1016/j.jconhyd.2022.103986]&nbsp; [[Media: KulkarniEtAl2022.pdf | Open Access Manuscript]]</ref> to quantify abiotic dechlorination impacts within clay aquitards on chlorinated solvent plumes. Thus, determination of the abiotic reductive dechlorination rate constant for a particular clayey soil can be readily utilized to provide a more accurate assessment of aquifer cleanup timeframes for groundwater plumes that are being sustained by contaminant back-diffusion.<br />
<br />
==Recommended Approach==<br />
[[File: TranFig1.png | thumb | 600 px | Figure 1: First-order rate constants for abiotic reductive dechlorination of TCE under anaerobic conditions (data from this study and prior research)]]<br />
The&nbsp;latest&nbsp;iTIE&nbsp;prototype consists of an array of sorptive resins that differentially fractionate sampled water, and a series of corresponding flow-through organism chambers that receive the treated water ''in situ''. Resin treatments can be selected depending on the chemicals suspected to be present at each site to selectively sequester certain chemical of concern (CoC) classes from the whole water, leaving a smaller subset of chemicals in the resulting water fraction for chemical and toxicological characterization. Test organism species and life stages can also be chosen depending on factors including site characteristics and study goals. In the full iTIE protocol, site water is continuously sampled either from the sediment pore spaces or the water column at a site, gently oxygenated, diverted to different iTIE units for fractionation and organism exposure, and collected in sample bottles for off-site chemical analysis (Figure 1). All iTIE system components are housed within waterproof Pelican cases, which allow for ease of transport and temperature control.<br />
<br />
===Porewater and Surface Water Collection Sub-system===<br />
[[File: CraneFig2.png | thumb | 600 px | Figure 2: a) Trident probe with auxiliary sensors attached, b) a Trident probe with end caps removed (the red arrow identifies the intermediate space where glass beads are packed to filter suspended solids), c) a Trident probe being installed using a series of push poles and a fence post driver]]<br />
Given&nbsp;the&nbsp;importance&nbsp;of sediment porewater to ecosystem structure and function, investigators may employ the iTIE system to evaluate the toxic effects associated with the impacted sediment porewater. To accomplish this, the iTIE system utilizes the Trident probe, originally developed for Department of Defense site characterization studies<ref>Chadwick, D.B., Harre, B., Smith, C.F., Groves, J.G., Paulsen, R.J., 2003. Coastal Contaminant Migration Monitoring: The Trident Probe and UltraSeep System. Hardware Description, Protocols, and Procedures. Technical Report 1902. Space and Naval Warfare Systems Center.</ref>. The main body of the Trident is comprised of a stainless-steel frame with six hollow probes (Figure 2). Each probe contains a layer of inert glass beads, which filters suspended solids from the sampled water. The water is drawn through each probe into a composite manifold and transported to the rest of the iTIE system using a high-precision peristaltic pump. <br />
<br />
The Trident also includes an adjustable stopper plate, which forms a seal against the sediment and prevents the inadvertent dilution of porewater samples with surface water. (Figure 2). Preliminary laboratory results indicate that the Trident is extremely effective in collecting porewater samples with minimal surface water infiltration in sediments ranging from coarse sand to fine clay. Underwater cameras, sensors, passive samplers, and other auxiliary equipment can be attached to the Trident probe frame to provide supplemental data.<br />
<br />
Alternatively, practitioners may employ the iTIE system to evaluate site surface water. To sample surface water, weighted intake tubes can collect surface water from the water column using a peristaltic pump.<br />
<br />
===Oxygen Coil, Overflow Bag and Drip Chamber===<br />
[[File: CraneFig3.png | thumb | left | 400 px | Figure 3. Contents of the iTIE system cooler. The pictured HDPE rack (47.6 cm length x 29.7 cm width x 33.7 cm height) is removable from the iTIE cooler. Water enters the system at the red circle, flows through the oxygen coil, and then travels to each of the individual iTIE units where diagnostic resins and organisms are located. The water then briefly leaves the cooler to travel through peristaltic regulation pumps before being gathered in sample collection bottles.]]<br />
Porewater&nbsp;is&nbsp;naturally&nbsp;anoxic due to limited mixing with aerated surface water and high oxygen demand of sediments, which may cause organism mortality and interfere with iTIE results. To preclude this, sampled porewater is exposed to an oxygen coil. This consists of an interior silicone tube connected to a pressurized oxygen canister, threaded through an exterior reinforced PVC tube through which water is slowly pumped (Figure 3). Pump rates are optimized to ensure adequate aeration of the water. In addition to elevating DO levels, the oxygen coil facilitates the oxidation of dissolved sulfides, which naturally occur in some marine sediments and may otherwise cause toxicity to organisms if left in its reduced form.<br />
<br />
Gas bubbles may form in the oxygen coil over the course of a deployment. These can be disruptive, decreasing water sample volumes and posing a danger to sensitive organisms like daphnids. To account for this, the water travels to a drip chamber after exiting the oxygen coil, which allows gas bubbles to be separated and diverted to an overflow system. The sample water then flows to a manifold which divides the flow into different paths to each of the treatment units for fractionation and organism exposure.<br />
<br />
===iTIE Units: Fractionation and Organism Exposure Chambers===<br />
[[File: CraneFig4.png | thumb | 300px | Figure 4. A diagram of the iTIE prototype. Water flows upward into each resin chamber through the unit bottom. After being chemically fractionated in the resin chamber, water travels into the organism chamber, where test organisms have been placed. Water is drawn through the units by high-precision peristaltic pumps.]]<br />
At&nbsp;the&nbsp;core&nbsp;of&nbsp;the&nbsp;iTIE&nbsp;system are separate dual-chamber iTIE units, each with a resin fractionation chamber and an organism exposure chamber (Figure 4). Developed by Burton ''et al.''<ref name="BurtonEtAl2020"/>, the iTIE prototype is constructed from acrylic, with rubber O-rings to connect each piece. Each iTIE unit can contain a different diagnostic resin matrix, customizable to remove specific chemical classes from the water. Sampled water flows into each unit through the bottom and is differentially fractionated by the resin matrix as it travels upward. Then it reaches the organism chamber, where test organisms are placed for exposure. The organism chamber inlet and outlet are covered by mesh to prevent the escape of the test organisms. This continuous flow-through design allows practitioners to capture the temporal heterogeneity of ambient water conditions over the duration of an ''in situ'' exposure. Currently, the iTIE system can support four independent iTIE treatment units.<br />
<br />
After being exposed to test organisms, water is collected in sample bottles. The bottles can be pre-loaded with preservation reagents to allow for later chemical analysis. Sample bottles can be composed of polyethylene, glass or other materials depending on the CoC.<br />
<br />
===Pumping Sub-system===<br />
[[File: CraneFig5.png | thumb | 300px | Figure 5. The iTIE system pumping sub-system. The sub-system consists of: A) a single booster pump, which is directly connected to the water sampling device and feeds water to the rest of the iTIE system, and B) a set of four regulation pumps, which each connect to the outflow of an individual iTIE unit. Each pump set is housed in a waterproof case with self-contained rechargeable battery power. A tablet is mounted inside the lid of the four pump case, which can be used to program and operate all of the pumps when connected to the internet.]]<br />
Water&nbsp;movement&nbsp;through&nbsp;the&nbsp;system is driven by a series of high-precision, programmable peristaltic pumps ([https://ecotechmarine.com/ EcoTech Marine]). Each pump set is housed in a Pelican storm travel case. Power is supplied to each pump by internal rechargeable lithium-iron phosphate batteries ([https://www.bioennopower.com/ Bioenno Power]).<br />
<br />
First, water is supplied to the system by a booster pump (Figure 5A). This pump is situated between the water sampling sub-system and the oxygen coil. The booster pump: 1) facilitates pore water collection, especially from sediments with high fine particle fractions; 2) helps water overcome vertical lifts to travel to the iTIE system; and 3) prevents vacuums from forming in the iTIE system interior, which can accelerate the formation of disruptive gas bubbles in the oxygen coil. The booster pump should be programmed to supply an excess of water to prevent vacuum formation.<br />
<br />
Second, a set of four regulation pumps ensure precise flow rates through each independent iTIE unit (Figure 5B). Each regulation pump pulls water from the top of an iTIE unit and then dispenses that water into a sample bottle for further analysis.<br />
<br />
==Study Design Considerations==<br />
===Diagnostic Resin Treatments===<br />
Several commercially available resins have been verified for use in the iTIE system. Investigators can select resins based on stressor classes of interest at each site. Each resin selectively removes a CoC class from site water prior to organism exposure.<br />
*[https://www.dupont.com/products/ambersorb560.html DuPont Ambersorb 560] for removal of 1,4-dioxane and other organic chemicals<ref>Woodard, S., Mohr, T., Nickelsen, M.G., 2014. Synthetic media: A promising new treatment technology for 1,4-dioxane. Remediation Journal, 24(4), pp. 27-40. [https://doi.org/10.1002/rem.21402 doi: 10.1002/rem.21402]</ref><br />
*C18 for nonpolar organic chemicals<br />
*[https://www.bio-rad.com/en-us Bio-Rad] [https://www.bio-rad.com/en-us/product/chelex-100-resin?ID=6448ab3e-b96a-4162-9124-7b7d2330288e Chelex] for metals<br />
*Granular activated carbon for metals, general organic chemicals, sulfide<ref>Lemos, B.R.S., Teixeira, I.F., de Mesquita, J.P., Ribeiro, R.R., Donnici, C.L., Lago, R.M., 2012. Use of modified activated carbon for the oxidation of aqueous sulfide. Carbon, 50(3), pp. 1386-1393. [https://doi.org/10.1016/j.carbon.2011.11.011 doi: 10.1016/j.carbon.2011.11.011]</ref><br />
*[https://www.waters.com/nextgen/us/en.html Waters] [https://www.waters.com/nextgen/us/en/search.html?category=Shop&isocode=en_US&keyword=oasis%20hlb&multiselect=true&page=1&rows=12&sort=best-sellers&xcid=ppc-ppc_23916&gad_source=1&gad_campaignid=14746094146&gbraid=0AAAAAD_uR00nhlNwrhhegNh06pBODTgiN&gclid=CjwKCAiAtLvMBhB_EiwA1u6_PsppE0raci2IhvGnAAe5ijciNcetLaGZo5qA3g3r4Z_La7YAPJtzShoC6LoQAvD_BwE Oasis HLB] for general organic chemicals<ref name="SteigmeyerEtAl2017"/><br />
*[https://www.waters.com/nextgen/us/en.html Waters] [https://www.waters.com/nextgen/us/en/search.html?category=All&enableHL=true&isocode=en_US&keyword=Oasis%20WAX%20&multiselect=true&page=1&rows=12&sort=most-relevant Oasis WAX] for PFAS, organic chemicals of mixed polarity<ref>Iannone, A., Carriera, F., Di Fiore, C., Avino, P., 2024. Poly- and Perfluoroalkyl Substance (PFAS) Analysis in Environmental Matrices: An Overview of the Extraction and Chromatographic Detection Methods. Analytica, 5(2), pp. 187-202. [https://doi.org/10.3390/analytica5020012 doi: 10.3390/analytica5020012]&nbsp; [[Media: IannoneEtAl2024.pdf | Open Access Article]]</ref><br />
*Zeolite for ammonia, other organic chemicals<br />
<br />
Resins must be adequately conditioned prior to use. Otherwise, they may inadequately adsorb toxicants or cause stress to organisms. New resins should be tested for efficacy and toxicity before being used in an iTIE system. <br />
<br />
===Test Organism Species and Life Stages===<br />
Practitioners can also select different organism species and life stages for use in the iTIE system, depending on site characteristics and study goals. The iTIE system can accommodate various small test organisms, including embryo-stage fish and most macroinvertebrates. The following common toxicity tests can be adapted for application within iTIE systems<ref>U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Office of Solid Waste and Emergency Response, 1994. Catalogue of Standard Toxicity Tests for Ecological Risk Assessment. ECO Update, 2(2), 4 pages. Publication No. 9345.0.05I [https://www.epa.gov/sites/default/files/2015-09/documents/v2no2.pdf Free Download]&nbsp; [[Media: usepa1994.pdf | Report.pdf]]</ref>.<br />
<ul><u>Freshwater acute toxicity:</u></ul><br />
*[[Wikipedia: Daphnia magna | ''Daphnia magna'']] or [[Wikipedia: Daphnia pulex | ''Daphnia pulex'']] 24-, 48-, and 96-hour survival<br />
<ul><u>Freshwater chronic toxicity:</u></ul><br />
*[[Wikipedia: Ceriodaphnia dubia | ''Ceriodaphnia dubia'']] 7-day survival and reproduction<br />
*''D. magna'' 7-day survival and reproduction<br />
*[[Wikipedia: Fathead minnow | ''Pimephales promelas'']] 7-day embryo-larval survival and teratogenicity<br />
*[[Wikipedia: Hyalella azteca | ''Hyalella Azteca'']] 10- or 30-day survival and reproduction<br />
<ul><u>Marine acute toxicity:</u></ul><br />
*[[Wikipedia: Americamysis bahia | ''Americamysis bahia'']] 24- and 48-hour survival<br />
<ul><u>Marine chronic toxicity:</u></ul><br />
*''Americamysis'' survival, growth and fecundity<br />
*[[Wikipedia: Topsmelt silverside | ''Atherinops affinis'']] embryo-larval survival and growth <br />
<br />
Acute toxicity is quantifiable via organism survival rates immediately following the termination of an iTIE system field deployment. Chronic toxicity can be quantified by continuing to culture and observe test organisms in-lab. Common chronic endpoints include stunted growth, altered development such as teratogenicity in larval fish, decreased reproduction rates, and changes in gene expression. <br />
<br />
Several gene expression endpoints have been detectable in bioassays following an iTIE system deployment and in-lab culturing period. Steigmeyer ''et al.''<ref name="SteigmeyerEtAl2017"/> were able to detect changes in the expression of two genes in ''D. magna'' after a 24-hour exposure to bisphenol A. In a separate study, Nichols<ref>Nichols, E., 2023. Methods for Identification and Prioritization of Stressors at Impaired Sites. Masters thesis, University of Michigan. University of Michigan Library Deep Blue Documents. [https://deepblue.lib.umich.edu/bitstream/handle/2027.42/176142/Nichols_Elizabeth_thesis.pdf?sequence=1 Free Download]&nbsp; [[Media: Nichols2023.pdf | Report.pdf]]</ref> found a significant decline in acetylcholinesterase activity in ''H. azteca'' after a 24-hour exposure to chlorpyrifos. These results indicate a potential to adapt other gene expression bioassays for use in conjunction with iTIE system field exposures to prove stressor-causality linkages.<br />
<br />
===Cost Effectiveness Study===<br />
Burton ''et al.''<ref name="BurtonEtAl2020"/> conducted a cost effectiveness study comparing the iTIE technology with the traditional US EPA Phase 1 TIE method. Comparisons were based on the estimated time required to complete various sub-tasks within each method. Sub-tasks included organism care, equipment preparation, mobilization and deployment, test maintenance, test termination, demobilization, and test termination analyses. It was ultimately estimated that the iTIE protocol requires 47% less time (67 fewer hours) to complete than the Phase 1 TIE method, with the largest time differences in equipment preparation, deployment, test maintenance, and demobilization. It is important to note that the iTIE method may require additional initial costs for equipment and training.<br />
<br />
==Field Application==<br />
[[File: CraneFig6.png | thumb | left | 400px | Figure 6. iTIES deployment at the Rouge River, Detroit, MI. In the foreground is the iTIE Cooler Sub-System, which contains iTIE resin treatments and test organism groups, as well as the oxygenation coil and sample collection bottles. Next to the iTIE Cooler are the two pump cases. The Trident can be seen above the pump cases, installed in the river channel near shore.]]<br />
The&nbsp;iTIE&nbsp;system&nbsp;has&nbsp;been successfully deployed at a variety of marine and freshwater sites during the proof-of-concept phase of prototype development. One example is the 2024 iTIE system deployment completed near the mouth of the Rouge River in Detroit, MI (Figure 6). The Rouge River watershed has a long history of industrialization, with a legacy of chemical dumping, channelization, damming, and urban runoff<ref>Ridgway, J., Cave, K., DeMaria, A., O’Meara, J., Hartig, J. H., 2018. The Rouge River Area of Concern—A multi-year, multi-level successful approach to restoration of Impaired Beneficial Uses. Aquatic Ecosystem Health and Management, 21(4), pp. 398-408. [https://doi.org/10.1080/14634988.2018.1528816 doi: 10.1080/14634988.2018.1528816]</ref>. This has led to degraded environmental conditions, with previous detections of a wide range of chemicals including heavy metals and various organics.<br />
<br />
[[File: CraneFig7.png | thumb | 300px | Figure 7. Survival and healthy development of ''P. promelas'' embryos and larvae following a 48-hour iTIE exposure near the mouth of the Rouge River. Organisms were exposed to site porewater as embryos for 48 hours and cultured post-exposure for an additional 5 days.]]<br />
[[File: CraneFig8.png | thumb | 300px | Figure 8. Survival of ''C. dilutus'' larvae after an iTIE exposure near the mouth of the Rouge River. Organisms were exposed to site porewater for 48 hours and cultured post-exposure for an additional 5 days. Error bars show standard deviation.]]<br />
An&nbsp;iTIE&nbsp;system&nbsp;deployment&nbsp;was designed and completed to determine which chemical classes are most responsible for causing toxicity at the site. Resin treatments included glass wool (inert, non-fractionating substance), Chelex (metals sorption), Oasis HLB (general organics sorption), and Oasis WAX (organics sorption, with a high affinity for PFAS). The study utilized fathead minnow (''P. promelas'') embryos, due to their relative sensitivity to metals and PAHs, as well as second-instar midge ([[Wikipedia: Chironomus |''Chironomus dilutus'']]) larvae due to their relative sensitivity to PFAS. <br />
<br />
The test organisms were exposed to fractionated porewater ''in situ'' for 48 hours. Following exposure, organisms were cultured for an additional five days, and survival was recorded (Figures 7 and 8). Moderate declines in survival were seen in both species in the glass wool treatment, indicating toxicity at the site. For ''P. promelas'', the highest proportion of healthy development occurred in the Chelex treatment, supporting the hypothesis that metals are a dominant cause of toxicity. ''C. dilutus'' had the greatest survival in the Oasis WAX treatment, suggesting that an organic stressor class like PFAS is also present at harmful concentrations in the river.<br />
<br />
Water chemical analyses of fractionated and unfractionated water samples were completed to support biological results. Analyses were conducted for a range of stressor classes including metals, PAHs, PCBs, an organophosphate pesticide (chlorpyrifos), a PFAS compound (PFOS) and a pyrethroid insecticide (permethrin). Of these analytes, only heavy metals and PFOS were detected. Some chemical classes including PAHs and PCBs were not detected at the site.<br />
To reach similar conclusions using traditional Phase 1 TIE methods, one would need to complete the following tests: baseline toxicity, filtration, aeration, EDTA, C18 SPE, and methanol elution of C18 SPE. The iTIE method allows the same conclusions to be drawn with significantly less time and effort required.<br />
<br />
==Summary==<br />
The ''in situ'' Toxicity Identification Evaluation technology and protocol is a powerful tool that investigators can use to strengthen causal linkages between chemical stressors and ecological toxicity. By fractionating sampled water and exposing test organisms ''in situ'', investigators can gather toxicity response data while minimizing sample manipulation and accurately representing environmental conditions.<br />
<br clear="right"/><br />
<br />
==References==<br />
<references /><br />
<br />
==See Also==</div>Jhurleyhttps://www.enviro.wiki/index.php?title=User:Jhurley/sandbox&diff=18107User:Jhurley/sandbox2026-04-09T19:38:29Z<p>Jhurley: /* Recommended Approach */</p>
<hr />
<div>==Estimating PCE/TCE Abiotic First-Order Reductive Dechlorination Rate Constants in Clayey Soils Under Anoxic Conditions== <br />
The U.S. Department of Defense (DoD) faces many challenges in restoring aquifers at contaminated sites, often due to back-diffusion of tetrachloroethene (PCE) and trichloroethene (TCE) from low-permeability clay zones. The uptake, storage, and subsequent long-term release of these dissolved contaminants from clays are key processes in understanding the longevity, intensity, and risks associated with many persistent chlorinated ethene groundwater plumes. Although naturally occurring abiotic and biotic dechlorination processes in clays may reduce stored contaminant mass and significantly aid natural attenuation, no standardized field method currently exists to verify or quantify these reactions. It is critical to remediation design efforts to demonstrate and validate a cost-effective in situ approach for assessing these dechlorination processes using first-order rate constants. An approach was developed and applied across eight DoD sites to support Remedial Project Managers (RPMs) and regulators in evaluating natural attenuation potential in clay-rich environments.<br />
<div style="float:right;margin:0 0 2em 2em;">__TOC__</div><br />
<br />
'''Related Article(s):'''<br />
<br />
*[[Monitored Natural Attenuation (MNA)]]<br />
*[[Monitored Natural Attenuation (MNA) of Chlorinated Solvents]]<br />
*[[Monitored Natural Attenuation - Transitioning from Active Remedies]]<br />
*[[Matrix Diffusion]]<br />
*[[REMChlor - MD]]<br />
<br />
'''Contributors:''' Dani Tran, Dr. Charles Schaefer, Dr. Charles Werth<br />
<br />
'''Key Resource:'''<br />
*Schaefer, C.E, Tran, D., Nguyen, D., Latta, D.E., Werth, C.J., 2025. Evaluating Mineral and In Situ Indicators of Abiotic Dechlorination in Clayey Soils (3)<br />
<br />
==Introduction==<br />
Cost-effective methods are needed to verify the occurrence of natural dechlorination processes and quantify their dechlorination rates in clays under ambient in situ conditions in order to reliably predict their long-term influence on plume longevity and mass discharge. However, accurately determining these rates is challenging due to slow reaction kinetics, the transient nature of transformation products, and the interplay of biotic and abiotic mechanisms within the clay matrix or at clay-sand interfaces. Tools capable of quantifying these reactions and assessing their role in mitigating plume persistence would be a significant aid for long-term site management.<br />
<br />
For reductive abiotic dechlorination under anoxic conditions, a 1% hydrochloric acid (HCl) extraction of a sample of native clay coupled with X-ray diffraction (XRD) data can be used as a screening level tool to estimate reductive dechlorination rate constants. These rate constants can be inserted into fate and transport models such as [[REMChlor - MD]]<ref>Falta, R., and Wang, W., 2017. A semi-analytical method for simulating matrix diffusion in numerical transport models. Journal of Contaminant Hydrology, 197, pp. 39-49. [https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jconhyd.2016.12.007 doi: 10.1016/j.jconhyd.2016.12.007]&nbsp; [[Media: FaltaWang2017.pdf | Open Access Manuscript]]</ref><ref>Kulkarni, P.R., Adamson, D.T., Popovic, J., Newell, C.J., 2022. Modeling a well-charactized perfluorooctane sulfate (PFOS) source and plume using the REMChlor-MD model to account for matrix diffusion. Journal of Contaminant Hydrology, 247, Article 103986. [https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jconhyd.2022.103986 doi: 10.1016/j.jconhyd.2022.103986]&nbsp; [[Media: KulkarniEtAl2022.pdf | Open Access Manuscript]]</ref> to quantify abiotic dechlorination impacts within clay aquitards on chlorinated solvent plumes. Thus, determination of the abiotic reductive dechlorination rate constant for a particular clayey soil can be readily utilized to provide a more accurate assessment of aquifer cleanup timeframes for groundwater plumes that are being sustained by contaminant back-diffusion.<br />
<br />
==Recommended Approach==<br />
[[File: TranFig1.png | thumb | 600 px | Figure 1: A schematic diagram of the iTIE system prototype. The system is divided into three sub-systems: 1) the Pore Water/Surface Water Collection Sub-System (blue); 2) the Pumping Sub-System (red); and 3) the iTIE Resin, Exposure, and Sampling Sub-System (green). Water first enters the system through the Pore Water/Surface Water Collection Sub-System. Porewater can be collected using Trident-style probes, or surface water can be collected using a simple weighted probe. The water is composited in a manifold before being pumped to the rest of the iTIE system by the booster pump. Once in the iTIE Resin, Exposure, and Sampling Sub-System, the water is gently oxygenated by the Oxygen Coil, separated from gas bubbles by the Drip Chamber, and diverted to separate iTIE Resin and Exposure Chambers (or iTIE units) by the Splitting Manifold. Water movement through each iTIE unit is controlled by a dedicated Regulation Pump. Finally, the water is gathered in Sample Collection bottles for analysis.]]<br />
The&nbsp;latest&nbsp;iTIE&nbsp;prototype consists of an array of sorptive resins that differentially fractionate sampled water, and a series of corresponding flow-through organism chambers that receive the treated water ''in situ''. Resin treatments can be selected depending on the chemicals suspected to be present at each site to selectively sequester certain chemical of concern (CoC) classes from the whole water, leaving a smaller subset of chemicals in the resulting water fraction for chemical and toxicological characterization. Test organism species and life stages can also be chosen depending on factors including site characteristics and study goals. In the full iTIE protocol, site water is continuously sampled either from the sediment pore spaces or the water column at a site, gently oxygenated, diverted to different iTIE units for fractionation and organism exposure, and collected in sample bottles for off-site chemical analysis (Figure 1). All iTIE system components are housed within waterproof Pelican cases, which allow for ease of transport and temperature control.<br />
<br />
===Porewater and Surface Water Collection Sub-system===<br />
[[File: CraneFig2.png | thumb | 600 px | Figure 2: a) Trident probe with auxiliary sensors attached, b) a Trident probe with end caps removed (the red arrow identifies the intermediate space where glass beads are packed to filter suspended solids), c) a Trident probe being installed using a series of push poles and a fence post driver]]<br />
Given&nbsp;the&nbsp;importance&nbsp;of sediment porewater to ecosystem structure and function, investigators may employ the iTIE system to evaluate the toxic effects associated with the impacted sediment porewater. To accomplish this, the iTIE system utilizes the Trident probe, originally developed for Department of Defense site characterization studies<ref>Chadwick, D.B., Harre, B., Smith, C.F., Groves, J.G., Paulsen, R.J., 2003. Coastal Contaminant Migration Monitoring: The Trident Probe and UltraSeep System. Hardware Description, Protocols, and Procedures. Technical Report 1902. Space and Naval Warfare Systems Center.</ref>. The main body of the Trident is comprised of a stainless-steel frame with six hollow probes (Figure 2). Each probe contains a layer of inert glass beads, which filters suspended solids from the sampled water. The water is drawn through each probe into a composite manifold and transported to the rest of the iTIE system using a high-precision peristaltic pump. <br />
<br />
The Trident also includes an adjustable stopper plate, which forms a seal against the sediment and prevents the inadvertent dilution of porewater samples with surface water. (Figure 2). Preliminary laboratory results indicate that the Trident is extremely effective in collecting porewater samples with minimal surface water infiltration in sediments ranging from coarse sand to fine clay. Underwater cameras, sensors, passive samplers, and other auxiliary equipment can be attached to the Trident probe frame to provide supplemental data.<br />
<br />
Alternatively, practitioners may employ the iTIE system to evaluate site surface water. To sample surface water, weighted intake tubes can collect surface water from the water column using a peristaltic pump.<br />
<br />
===Oxygen Coil, Overflow Bag and Drip Chamber===<br />
[[File: CraneFig3.png | thumb | left | 400 px | Figure 3. Contents of the iTIE system cooler. The pictured HDPE rack (47.6 cm length x 29.7 cm width x 33.7 cm height) is removable from the iTIE cooler. Water enters the system at the red circle, flows through the oxygen coil, and then travels to each of the individual iTIE units where diagnostic resins and organisms are located. The water then briefly leaves the cooler to travel through peristaltic regulation pumps before being gathered in sample collection bottles.]]<br />
Porewater&nbsp;is&nbsp;naturally&nbsp;anoxic due to limited mixing with aerated surface water and high oxygen demand of sediments, which may cause organism mortality and interfere with iTIE results. To preclude this, sampled porewater is exposed to an oxygen coil. This consists of an interior silicone tube connected to a pressurized oxygen canister, threaded through an exterior reinforced PVC tube through which water is slowly pumped (Figure 3). Pump rates are optimized to ensure adequate aeration of the water. In addition to elevating DO levels, the oxygen coil facilitates the oxidation of dissolved sulfides, which naturally occur in some marine sediments and may otherwise cause toxicity to organisms if left in its reduced form.<br />
<br />
Gas bubbles may form in the oxygen coil over the course of a deployment. These can be disruptive, decreasing water sample volumes and posing a danger to sensitive organisms like daphnids. To account for this, the water travels to a drip chamber after exiting the oxygen coil, which allows gas bubbles to be separated and diverted to an overflow system. The sample water then flows to a manifold which divides the flow into different paths to each of the treatment units for fractionation and organism exposure.<br />
<br />
===iTIE Units: Fractionation and Organism Exposure Chambers===<br />
[[File: CraneFig4.png | thumb | 300px | Figure 4. A diagram of the iTIE prototype. Water flows upward into each resin chamber through the unit bottom. After being chemically fractionated in the resin chamber, water travels into the organism chamber, where test organisms have been placed. Water is drawn through the units by high-precision peristaltic pumps.]]<br />
At&nbsp;the&nbsp;core&nbsp;of&nbsp;the&nbsp;iTIE&nbsp;system are separate dual-chamber iTIE units, each with a resin fractionation chamber and an organism exposure chamber (Figure 4). Developed by Burton ''et al.''<ref name="BurtonEtAl2020"/>, the iTIE prototype is constructed from acrylic, with rubber O-rings to connect each piece. Each iTIE unit can contain a different diagnostic resin matrix, customizable to remove specific chemical classes from the water. Sampled water flows into each unit through the bottom and is differentially fractionated by the resin matrix as it travels upward. Then it reaches the organism chamber, where test organisms are placed for exposure. The organism chamber inlet and outlet are covered by mesh to prevent the escape of the test organisms. This continuous flow-through design allows practitioners to capture the temporal heterogeneity of ambient water conditions over the duration of an ''in situ'' exposure. Currently, the iTIE system can support four independent iTIE treatment units.<br />
<br />
After being exposed to test organisms, water is collected in sample bottles. The bottles can be pre-loaded with preservation reagents to allow for later chemical analysis. Sample bottles can be composed of polyethylene, glass or other materials depending on the CoC.<br />
<br />
===Pumping Sub-system===<br />
[[File: CraneFig5.png | thumb | 300px | Figure 5. The iTIE system pumping sub-system. The sub-system consists of: A) a single booster pump, which is directly connected to the water sampling device and feeds water to the rest of the iTIE system, and B) a set of four regulation pumps, which each connect to the outflow of an individual iTIE unit. Each pump set is housed in a waterproof case with self-contained rechargeable battery power. A tablet is mounted inside the lid of the four pump case, which can be used to program and operate all of the pumps when connected to the internet.]]<br />
Water&nbsp;movement&nbsp;through&nbsp;the&nbsp;system is driven by a series of high-precision, programmable peristaltic pumps ([https://ecotechmarine.com/ EcoTech Marine]). Each pump set is housed in a Pelican storm travel case. Power is supplied to each pump by internal rechargeable lithium-iron phosphate batteries ([https://www.bioennopower.com/ Bioenno Power]).<br />
<br />
First, water is supplied to the system by a booster pump (Figure 5A). This pump is situated between the water sampling sub-system and the oxygen coil. The booster pump: 1) facilitates pore water collection, especially from sediments with high fine particle fractions; 2) helps water overcome vertical lifts to travel to the iTIE system; and 3) prevents vacuums from forming in the iTIE system interior, which can accelerate the formation of disruptive gas bubbles in the oxygen coil. The booster pump should be programmed to supply an excess of water to prevent vacuum formation.<br />
<br />
Second, a set of four regulation pumps ensure precise flow rates through each independent iTIE unit (Figure 5B). Each regulation pump pulls water from the top of an iTIE unit and then dispenses that water into a sample bottle for further analysis.<br />
<br />
==Study Design Considerations==<br />
===Diagnostic Resin Treatments===<br />
Several commercially available resins have been verified for use in the iTIE system. Investigators can select resins based on stressor classes of interest at each site. Each resin selectively removes a CoC class from site water prior to organism exposure.<br />
*[https://www.dupont.com/products/ambersorb560.html DuPont Ambersorb 560] for removal of 1,4-dioxane and other organic chemicals<ref>Woodard, S., Mohr, T., Nickelsen, M.G., 2014. Synthetic media: A promising new treatment technology for 1,4-dioxane. Remediation Journal, 24(4), pp. 27-40. [https://doi.org/10.1002/rem.21402 doi: 10.1002/rem.21402]</ref><br />
*C18 for nonpolar organic chemicals<br />
*[https://www.bio-rad.com/en-us Bio-Rad] [https://www.bio-rad.com/en-us/product/chelex-100-resin?ID=6448ab3e-b96a-4162-9124-7b7d2330288e Chelex] for metals<br />
*Granular activated carbon for metals, general organic chemicals, sulfide<ref>Lemos, B.R.S., Teixeira, I.F., de Mesquita, J.P., Ribeiro, R.R., Donnici, C.L., Lago, R.M., 2012. Use of modified activated carbon for the oxidation of aqueous sulfide. Carbon, 50(3), pp. 1386-1393. [https://doi.org/10.1016/j.carbon.2011.11.011 doi: 10.1016/j.carbon.2011.11.011]</ref><br />
*[https://www.waters.com/nextgen/us/en.html Waters] [https://www.waters.com/nextgen/us/en/search.html?category=Shop&isocode=en_US&keyword=oasis%20hlb&multiselect=true&page=1&rows=12&sort=best-sellers&xcid=ppc-ppc_23916&gad_source=1&gad_campaignid=14746094146&gbraid=0AAAAAD_uR00nhlNwrhhegNh06pBODTgiN&gclid=CjwKCAiAtLvMBhB_EiwA1u6_PsppE0raci2IhvGnAAe5ijciNcetLaGZo5qA3g3r4Z_La7YAPJtzShoC6LoQAvD_BwE Oasis HLB] for general organic chemicals<ref name="SteigmeyerEtAl2017"/><br />
*[https://www.waters.com/nextgen/us/en.html Waters] [https://www.waters.com/nextgen/us/en/search.html?category=All&enableHL=true&isocode=en_US&keyword=Oasis%20WAX%20&multiselect=true&page=1&rows=12&sort=most-relevant Oasis WAX] for PFAS, organic chemicals of mixed polarity<ref>Iannone, A., Carriera, F., Di Fiore, C., Avino, P., 2024. Poly- and Perfluoroalkyl Substance (PFAS) Analysis in Environmental Matrices: An Overview of the Extraction and Chromatographic Detection Methods. Analytica, 5(2), pp. 187-202. [https://doi.org/10.3390/analytica5020012 doi: 10.3390/analytica5020012]&nbsp; [[Media: IannoneEtAl2024.pdf | Open Access Article]]</ref><br />
*Zeolite for ammonia, other organic chemicals<br />
<br />
Resins must be adequately conditioned prior to use. Otherwise, they may inadequately adsorb toxicants or cause stress to organisms. New resins should be tested for efficacy and toxicity before being used in an iTIE system. <br />
<br />
===Test Organism Species and Life Stages===<br />
Practitioners can also select different organism species and life stages for use in the iTIE system, depending on site characteristics and study goals. The iTIE system can accommodate various small test organisms, including embryo-stage fish and most macroinvertebrates. The following common toxicity tests can be adapted for application within iTIE systems<ref>U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Office of Solid Waste and Emergency Response, 1994. Catalogue of Standard Toxicity Tests for Ecological Risk Assessment. ECO Update, 2(2), 4 pages. Publication No. 9345.0.05I [https://www.epa.gov/sites/default/files/2015-09/documents/v2no2.pdf Free Download]&nbsp; [[Media: usepa1994.pdf | Report.pdf]]</ref>.<br />
<ul><u>Freshwater acute toxicity:</u></ul><br />
*[[Wikipedia: Daphnia magna | ''Daphnia magna'']] or [[Wikipedia: Daphnia pulex | ''Daphnia pulex'']] 24-, 48-, and 96-hour survival<br />
<ul><u>Freshwater chronic toxicity:</u></ul><br />
*[[Wikipedia: Ceriodaphnia dubia | ''Ceriodaphnia dubia'']] 7-day survival and reproduction<br />
*''D. magna'' 7-day survival and reproduction<br />
*[[Wikipedia: Fathead minnow | ''Pimephales promelas'']] 7-day embryo-larval survival and teratogenicity<br />
*[[Wikipedia: Hyalella azteca | ''Hyalella Azteca'']] 10- or 30-day survival and reproduction<br />
<ul><u>Marine acute toxicity:</u></ul><br />
*[[Wikipedia: Americamysis bahia | ''Americamysis bahia'']] 24- and 48-hour survival<br />
<ul><u>Marine chronic toxicity:</u></ul><br />
*''Americamysis'' survival, growth and fecundity<br />
*[[Wikipedia: Topsmelt silverside | ''Atherinops affinis'']] embryo-larval survival and growth <br />
<br />
Acute toxicity is quantifiable via organism survival rates immediately following the termination of an iTIE system field deployment. Chronic toxicity can be quantified by continuing to culture and observe test organisms in-lab. Common chronic endpoints include stunted growth, altered development such as teratogenicity in larval fish, decreased reproduction rates, and changes in gene expression. <br />
<br />
Several gene expression endpoints have been detectable in bioassays following an iTIE system deployment and in-lab culturing period. Steigmeyer ''et al.''<ref name="SteigmeyerEtAl2017"/> were able to detect changes in the expression of two genes in ''D. magna'' after a 24-hour exposure to bisphenol A. In a separate study, Nichols<ref>Nichols, E., 2023. Methods for Identification and Prioritization of Stressors at Impaired Sites. Masters thesis, University of Michigan. University of Michigan Library Deep Blue Documents. [https://deepblue.lib.umich.edu/bitstream/handle/2027.42/176142/Nichols_Elizabeth_thesis.pdf?sequence=1 Free Download]&nbsp; [[Media: Nichols2023.pdf | Report.pdf]]</ref> found a significant decline in acetylcholinesterase activity in ''H. azteca'' after a 24-hour exposure to chlorpyrifos. These results indicate a potential to adapt other gene expression bioassays for use in conjunction with iTIE system field exposures to prove stressor-causality linkages.<br />
<br />
===Cost Effectiveness Study===<br />
Burton ''et al.''<ref name="BurtonEtAl2020"/> conducted a cost effectiveness study comparing the iTIE technology with the traditional US EPA Phase 1 TIE method. Comparisons were based on the estimated time required to complete various sub-tasks within each method. Sub-tasks included organism care, equipment preparation, mobilization and deployment, test maintenance, test termination, demobilization, and test termination analyses. It was ultimately estimated that the iTIE protocol requires 47% less time (67 fewer hours) to complete than the Phase 1 TIE method, with the largest time differences in equipment preparation, deployment, test maintenance, and demobilization. It is important to note that the iTIE method may require additional initial costs for equipment and training.<br />
<br />
==Field Application==<br />
[[File: CraneFig6.png | thumb | left | 400px | Figure 6. iTIES deployment at the Rouge River, Detroit, MI. In the foreground is the iTIE Cooler Sub-System, which contains iTIE resin treatments and test organism groups, as well as the oxygenation coil and sample collection bottles. Next to the iTIE Cooler are the two pump cases. The Trident can be seen above the pump cases, installed in the river channel near shore.]]<br />
The&nbsp;iTIE&nbsp;system&nbsp;has&nbsp;been successfully deployed at a variety of marine and freshwater sites during the proof-of-concept phase of prototype development. One example is the 2024 iTIE system deployment completed near the mouth of the Rouge River in Detroit, MI (Figure 6). The Rouge River watershed has a long history of industrialization, with a legacy of chemical dumping, channelization, damming, and urban runoff<ref>Ridgway, J., Cave, K., DeMaria, A., O’Meara, J., Hartig, J. H., 2018. The Rouge River Area of Concern—A multi-year, multi-level successful approach to restoration of Impaired Beneficial Uses. Aquatic Ecosystem Health and Management, 21(4), pp. 398-408. [https://doi.org/10.1080/14634988.2018.1528816 doi: 10.1080/14634988.2018.1528816]</ref>. This has led to degraded environmental conditions, with previous detections of a wide range of chemicals including heavy metals and various organics.<br />
<br />
[[File: CraneFig7.png | thumb | 300px | Figure 7. Survival and healthy development of ''P. promelas'' embryos and larvae following a 48-hour iTIE exposure near the mouth of the Rouge River. Organisms were exposed to site porewater as embryos for 48 hours and cultured post-exposure for an additional 5 days.]]<br />
[[File: CraneFig8.png | thumb | 300px | Figure 8. Survival of ''C. dilutus'' larvae after an iTIE exposure near the mouth of the Rouge River. Organisms were exposed to site porewater for 48 hours and cultured post-exposure for an additional 5 days. Error bars show standard deviation.]]<br />
An&nbsp;iTIE&nbsp;system&nbsp;deployment&nbsp;was designed and completed to determine which chemical classes are most responsible for causing toxicity at the site. Resin treatments included glass wool (inert, non-fractionating substance), Chelex (metals sorption), Oasis HLB (general organics sorption), and Oasis WAX (organics sorption, with a high affinity for PFAS). The study utilized fathead minnow (''P. promelas'') embryos, due to their relative sensitivity to metals and PAHs, as well as second-instar midge ([[Wikipedia: Chironomus |''Chironomus dilutus'']]) larvae due to their relative sensitivity to PFAS. <br />
<br />
The test organisms were exposed to fractionated porewater ''in situ'' for 48 hours. Following exposure, organisms were cultured for an additional five days, and survival was recorded (Figures 7 and 8). Moderate declines in survival were seen in both species in the glass wool treatment, indicating toxicity at the site. For ''P. promelas'', the highest proportion of healthy development occurred in the Chelex treatment, supporting the hypothesis that metals are a dominant cause of toxicity. ''C. dilutus'' had the greatest survival in the Oasis WAX treatment, suggesting that an organic stressor class like PFAS is also present at harmful concentrations in the river.<br />
<br />
Water chemical analyses of fractionated and unfractionated water samples were completed to support biological results. Analyses were conducted for a range of stressor classes including metals, PAHs, PCBs, an organophosphate pesticide (chlorpyrifos), a PFAS compound (PFOS) and a pyrethroid insecticide (permethrin). Of these analytes, only heavy metals and PFOS were detected. Some chemical classes including PAHs and PCBs were not detected at the site.<br />
To reach similar conclusions using traditional Phase 1 TIE methods, one would need to complete the following tests: baseline toxicity, filtration, aeration, EDTA, C18 SPE, and methanol elution of C18 SPE. The iTIE method allows the same conclusions to be drawn with significantly less time and effort required.<br />
<br />
==Summary==<br />
The ''in situ'' Toxicity Identification Evaluation technology and protocol is a powerful tool that investigators can use to strengthen causal linkages between chemical stressors and ecological toxicity. By fractionating sampled water and exposing test organisms ''in situ'', investigators can gather toxicity response data while minimizing sample manipulation and accurately representing environmental conditions.<br />
<br clear="right"/><br />
<br />
==References==<br />
<references /><br />
<br />
==See Also==</div>Jhurleyhttps://www.enviro.wiki/index.php?title=User:Jhurley/sandbox&diff=18106User:Jhurley/sandbox2026-04-09T19:35:38Z<p>Jhurley: /* System Components and Validation */</p>
<hr />
<div>==Estimating PCE/TCE Abiotic First-Order Reductive Dechlorination Rate Constants in Clayey Soils Under Anoxic Conditions== <br />
The U.S. Department of Defense (DoD) faces many challenges in restoring aquifers at contaminated sites, often due to back-diffusion of tetrachloroethene (PCE) and trichloroethene (TCE) from low-permeability clay zones. The uptake, storage, and subsequent long-term release of these dissolved contaminants from clays are key processes in understanding the longevity, intensity, and risks associated with many persistent chlorinated ethene groundwater plumes. Although naturally occurring abiotic and biotic dechlorination processes in clays may reduce stored contaminant mass and significantly aid natural attenuation, no standardized field method currently exists to verify or quantify these reactions. It is critical to remediation design efforts to demonstrate and validate a cost-effective in situ approach for assessing these dechlorination processes using first-order rate constants. An approach was developed and applied across eight DoD sites to support Remedial Project Managers (RPMs) and regulators in evaluating natural attenuation potential in clay-rich environments.<br />
<div style="float:right;margin:0 0 2em 2em;">__TOC__</div><br />
<br />
'''Related Article(s):'''<br />
<br />
*[[Monitored Natural Attenuation (MNA)]]<br />
*[[Monitored Natural Attenuation (MNA) of Chlorinated Solvents]]<br />
*[[Monitored Natural Attenuation - Transitioning from Active Remedies]]<br />
*[[Matrix Diffusion]]<br />
*[[REMChlor - MD]]<br />
<br />
'''Contributors:''' Dani Tran, Dr. Charles Schaefer, Dr. Charles Werth<br />
<br />
'''Key Resource:'''<br />
*Schaefer, C.E, Tran, D., Nguyen, D., Latta, D.E., Werth, C.J., 2025. Evaluating Mineral and In Situ Indicators of Abiotic Dechlorination in Clayey Soils (3)<br />
<br />
==Introduction==<br />
Cost-effective methods are needed to verify the occurrence of natural dechlorination processes and quantify their dechlorination rates in clays under ambient in situ conditions in order to reliably predict their long-term influence on plume longevity and mass discharge. However, accurately determining these rates is challenging due to slow reaction kinetics, the transient nature of transformation products, and the interplay of biotic and abiotic mechanisms within the clay matrix or at clay-sand interfaces. Tools capable of quantifying these reactions and assessing their role in mitigating plume persistence would be a significant aid for long-term site management.<br />
<br />
For reductive abiotic dechlorination under anoxic conditions, a 1% hydrochloric acid (HCl) extraction of a sample of native clay coupled with X-ray diffraction (XRD) data can be used as a screening level tool to estimate reductive dechlorination rate constants. These rate constants can be inserted into fate and transport models such as [[REMChlor - MD]]<ref>Falta, R., and Wang, W., 2017. A semi-analytical method for simulating matrix diffusion in numerical transport models. Journal of Contaminant Hydrology, 197, pp. 39-49. [https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jconhyd.2016.12.007 doi: 10.1016/j.jconhyd.2016.12.007]&nbsp; [[Media: FaltaWang2017.pdf | Open Access Manuscript]]</ref><ref>Kulkarni, P.R., Adamson, D.T., Popovic, J., Newell, C.J., 2022. Modeling a well-charactized perfluorooctane sulfate (PFOS) source and plume using the REMChlor-MD model to account for matrix diffusion. Journal of Contaminant Hydrology, 247, Article 103986. [https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jconhyd.2022.103986 doi: 10.1016/j.jconhyd.2022.103986]&nbsp; [[Media: KulkarniEtAl2022.pdf | Open Access Manuscript]]</ref> to quantify abiotic dechlorination impacts within clay aquitards on chlorinated solvent plumes. Thus, determination of the abiotic reductive dechlorination rate constant for a particular clayey soil can be readily utilized to provide a more accurate assessment of aquifer cleanup timeframes for groundwater plumes that are being sustained by contaminant back-diffusion.<br />
<br />
==Recommended Approach==<br />
[[File: CraneFig1.png | thumb | 600 px | Figure 1: A schematic diagram of the iTIE system prototype. The system is divided into three sub-systems: 1) the Pore Water/Surface Water Collection Sub-System (blue); 2) the Pumping Sub-System (red); and 3) the iTIE Resin, Exposure, and Sampling Sub-System (green). Water first enters the system through the Pore Water/Surface Water Collection Sub-System. Porewater can be collected using Trident-style probes, or surface water can be collected using a simple weighted probe. The water is composited in a manifold before being pumped to the rest of the iTIE system by the booster pump. Once in the iTIE Resin, Exposure, and Sampling Sub-System, the water is gently oxygenated by the Oxygen Coil, separated from gas bubbles by the Drip Chamber, and diverted to separate iTIE Resin and Exposure Chambers (or iTIE units) by the Splitting Manifold. Water movement through each iTIE unit is controlled by a dedicated Regulation Pump. Finally, the water is gathered in Sample Collection bottles for analysis.]]<br />
The&nbsp;latest&nbsp;iTIE&nbsp;prototype consists of an array of sorptive resins that differentially fractionate sampled water, and a series of corresponding flow-through organism chambers that receive the treated water ''in situ''. Resin treatments can be selected depending on the chemicals suspected to be present at each site to selectively sequester certain chemical of concern (CoC) classes from the whole water, leaving a smaller subset of chemicals in the resulting water fraction for chemical and toxicological characterization. Test organism species and life stages can also be chosen depending on factors including site characteristics and study goals. In the full iTIE protocol, site water is continuously sampled either from the sediment pore spaces or the water column at a site, gently oxygenated, diverted to different iTIE units for fractionation and organism exposure, and collected in sample bottles for off-site chemical analysis (Figure 1). All iTIE system components are housed within waterproof Pelican cases, which allow for ease of transport and temperature control.<br />
<br />
===Porewater and Surface Water Collection Sub-system===<br />
[[File: CraneFig2.png | thumb | 600 px | Figure 2: a) Trident probe with auxiliary sensors attached, b) a Trident probe with end caps removed (the red arrow identifies the intermediate space where glass beads are packed to filter suspended solids), c) a Trident probe being installed using a series of push poles and a fence post driver]]<br />
Given&nbsp;the&nbsp;importance&nbsp;of sediment porewater to ecosystem structure and function, investigators may employ the iTIE system to evaluate the toxic effects associated with the impacted sediment porewater. To accomplish this, the iTIE system utilizes the Trident probe, originally developed for Department of Defense site characterization studies<ref>Chadwick, D.B., Harre, B., Smith, C.F., Groves, J.G., Paulsen, R.J., 2003. Coastal Contaminant Migration Monitoring: The Trident Probe and UltraSeep System. Hardware Description, Protocols, and Procedures. Technical Report 1902. Space and Naval Warfare Systems Center.</ref>. The main body of the Trident is comprised of a stainless-steel frame with six hollow probes (Figure 2). Each probe contains a layer of inert glass beads, which filters suspended solids from the sampled water. The water is drawn through each probe into a composite manifold and transported to the rest of the iTIE system using a high-precision peristaltic pump. <br />
<br />
The Trident also includes an adjustable stopper plate, which forms a seal against the sediment and prevents the inadvertent dilution of porewater samples with surface water. (Figure 2). Preliminary laboratory results indicate that the Trident is extremely effective in collecting porewater samples with minimal surface water infiltration in sediments ranging from coarse sand to fine clay. Underwater cameras, sensors, passive samplers, and other auxiliary equipment can be attached to the Trident probe frame to provide supplemental data.<br />
<br />
Alternatively, practitioners may employ the iTIE system to evaluate site surface water. To sample surface water, weighted intake tubes can collect surface water from the water column using a peristaltic pump.<br />
<br />
===Oxygen Coil, Overflow Bag and Drip Chamber===<br />
[[File: CraneFig3.png | thumb | left | 400 px | Figure 3. Contents of the iTIE system cooler. The pictured HDPE rack (47.6 cm length x 29.7 cm width x 33.7 cm height) is removable from the iTIE cooler. Water enters the system at the red circle, flows through the oxygen coil, and then travels to each of the individual iTIE units where diagnostic resins and organisms are located. The water then briefly leaves the cooler to travel through peristaltic regulation pumps before being gathered in sample collection bottles.]]<br />
Porewater&nbsp;is&nbsp;naturally&nbsp;anoxic due to limited mixing with aerated surface water and high oxygen demand of sediments, which may cause organism mortality and interfere with iTIE results. To preclude this, sampled porewater is exposed to an oxygen coil. This consists of an interior silicone tube connected to a pressurized oxygen canister, threaded through an exterior reinforced PVC tube through which water is slowly pumped (Figure 3). Pump rates are optimized to ensure adequate aeration of the water. In addition to elevating DO levels, the oxygen coil facilitates the oxidation of dissolved sulfides, which naturally occur in some marine sediments and may otherwise cause toxicity to organisms if left in its reduced form.<br />
<br />
Gas bubbles may form in the oxygen coil over the course of a deployment. These can be disruptive, decreasing water sample volumes and posing a danger to sensitive organisms like daphnids. To account for this, the water travels to a drip chamber after exiting the oxygen coil, which allows gas bubbles to be separated and diverted to an overflow system. The sample water then flows to a manifold which divides the flow into different paths to each of the treatment units for fractionation and organism exposure.<br />
<br />
===iTIE Units: Fractionation and Organism Exposure Chambers===<br />
[[File: CraneFig4.png | thumb | 300px | Figure 4. A diagram of the iTIE prototype. Water flows upward into each resin chamber through the unit bottom. After being chemically fractionated in the resin chamber, water travels into the organism chamber, where test organisms have been placed. Water is drawn through the units by high-precision peristaltic pumps.]]<br />
At&nbsp;the&nbsp;core&nbsp;of&nbsp;the&nbsp;iTIE&nbsp;system are separate dual-chamber iTIE units, each with a resin fractionation chamber and an organism exposure chamber (Figure 4). Developed by Burton ''et al.''<ref name="BurtonEtAl2020"/>, the iTIE prototype is constructed from acrylic, with rubber O-rings to connect each piece. Each iTIE unit can contain a different diagnostic resin matrix, customizable to remove specific chemical classes from the water. Sampled water flows into each unit through the bottom and is differentially fractionated by the resin matrix as it travels upward. Then it reaches the organism chamber, where test organisms are placed for exposure. The organism chamber inlet and outlet are covered by mesh to prevent the escape of the test organisms. This continuous flow-through design allows practitioners to capture the temporal heterogeneity of ambient water conditions over the duration of an ''in situ'' exposure. Currently, the iTIE system can support four independent iTIE treatment units.<br />
<br />
After being exposed to test organisms, water is collected in sample bottles. The bottles can be pre-loaded with preservation reagents to allow for later chemical analysis. Sample bottles can be composed of polyethylene, glass or other materials depending on the CoC.<br />
<br />
===Pumping Sub-system===<br />
[[File: CraneFig5.png | thumb | 300px | Figure 5. The iTIE system pumping sub-system. The sub-system consists of: A) a single booster pump, which is directly connected to the water sampling device and feeds water to the rest of the iTIE system, and B) a set of four regulation pumps, which each connect to the outflow of an individual iTIE unit. Each pump set is housed in a waterproof case with self-contained rechargeable battery power. A tablet is mounted inside the lid of the four pump case, which can be used to program and operate all of the pumps when connected to the internet.]]<br />
Water&nbsp;movement&nbsp;through&nbsp;the&nbsp;system is driven by a series of high-precision, programmable peristaltic pumps ([https://ecotechmarine.com/ EcoTech Marine]). Each pump set is housed in a Pelican storm travel case. Power is supplied to each pump by internal rechargeable lithium-iron phosphate batteries ([https://www.bioennopower.com/ Bioenno Power]).<br />
<br />
First, water is supplied to the system by a booster pump (Figure 5A). This pump is situated between the water sampling sub-system and the oxygen coil. The booster pump: 1) facilitates pore water collection, especially from sediments with high fine particle fractions; 2) helps water overcome vertical lifts to travel to the iTIE system; and 3) prevents vacuums from forming in the iTIE system interior, which can accelerate the formation of disruptive gas bubbles in the oxygen coil. The booster pump should be programmed to supply an excess of water to prevent vacuum formation.<br />
<br />
Second, a set of four regulation pumps ensure precise flow rates through each independent iTIE unit (Figure 5B). Each regulation pump pulls water from the top of an iTIE unit and then dispenses that water into a sample bottle for further analysis.<br />
<br />
==Study Design Considerations==<br />
===Diagnostic Resin Treatments===<br />
Several commercially available resins have been verified for use in the iTIE system. Investigators can select resins based on stressor classes of interest at each site. Each resin selectively removes a CoC class from site water prior to organism exposure.<br />
*[https://www.dupont.com/products/ambersorb560.html DuPont Ambersorb 560] for removal of 1,4-dioxane and other organic chemicals<ref>Woodard, S., Mohr, T., Nickelsen, M.G., 2014. Synthetic media: A promising new treatment technology for 1,4-dioxane. Remediation Journal, 24(4), pp. 27-40. [https://doi.org/10.1002/rem.21402 doi: 10.1002/rem.21402]</ref><br />
*C18 for nonpolar organic chemicals<br />
*[https://www.bio-rad.com/en-us Bio-Rad] [https://www.bio-rad.com/en-us/product/chelex-100-resin?ID=6448ab3e-b96a-4162-9124-7b7d2330288e Chelex] for metals<br />
*Granular activated carbon for metals, general organic chemicals, sulfide<ref>Lemos, B.R.S., Teixeira, I.F., de Mesquita, J.P., Ribeiro, R.R., Donnici, C.L., Lago, R.M., 2012. Use of modified activated carbon for the oxidation of aqueous sulfide. Carbon, 50(3), pp. 1386-1393. [https://doi.org/10.1016/j.carbon.2011.11.011 doi: 10.1016/j.carbon.2011.11.011]</ref><br />
*[https://www.waters.com/nextgen/us/en.html Waters] [https://www.waters.com/nextgen/us/en/search.html?category=Shop&isocode=en_US&keyword=oasis%20hlb&multiselect=true&page=1&rows=12&sort=best-sellers&xcid=ppc-ppc_23916&gad_source=1&gad_campaignid=14746094146&gbraid=0AAAAAD_uR00nhlNwrhhegNh06pBODTgiN&gclid=CjwKCAiAtLvMBhB_EiwA1u6_PsppE0raci2IhvGnAAe5ijciNcetLaGZo5qA3g3r4Z_La7YAPJtzShoC6LoQAvD_BwE Oasis HLB] for general organic chemicals<ref name="SteigmeyerEtAl2017"/><br />
*[https://www.waters.com/nextgen/us/en.html Waters] [https://www.waters.com/nextgen/us/en/search.html?category=All&enableHL=true&isocode=en_US&keyword=Oasis%20WAX%20&multiselect=true&page=1&rows=12&sort=most-relevant Oasis WAX] for PFAS, organic chemicals of mixed polarity<ref>Iannone, A., Carriera, F., Di Fiore, C., Avino, P., 2024. Poly- and Perfluoroalkyl Substance (PFAS) Analysis in Environmental Matrices: An Overview of the Extraction and Chromatographic Detection Methods. Analytica, 5(2), pp. 187-202. [https://doi.org/10.3390/analytica5020012 doi: 10.3390/analytica5020012]&nbsp; [[Media: IannoneEtAl2024.pdf | Open Access Article]]</ref><br />
*Zeolite for ammonia, other organic chemicals<br />
<br />
Resins must be adequately conditioned prior to use. Otherwise, they may inadequately adsorb toxicants or cause stress to organisms. New resins should be tested for efficacy and toxicity before being used in an iTIE system. <br />
<br />
===Test Organism Species and Life Stages===<br />
Practitioners can also select different organism species and life stages for use in the iTIE system, depending on site characteristics and study goals. The iTIE system can accommodate various small test organisms, including embryo-stage fish and most macroinvertebrates. The following common toxicity tests can be adapted for application within iTIE systems<ref>U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Office of Solid Waste and Emergency Response, 1994. Catalogue of Standard Toxicity Tests for Ecological Risk Assessment. ECO Update, 2(2), 4 pages. Publication No. 9345.0.05I [https://www.epa.gov/sites/default/files/2015-09/documents/v2no2.pdf Free Download]&nbsp; [[Media: usepa1994.pdf | Report.pdf]]</ref>.<br />
<ul><u>Freshwater acute toxicity:</u></ul><br />
*[[Wikipedia: Daphnia magna | ''Daphnia magna'']] or [[Wikipedia: Daphnia pulex | ''Daphnia pulex'']] 24-, 48-, and 96-hour survival<br />
<ul><u>Freshwater chronic toxicity:</u></ul><br />
*[[Wikipedia: Ceriodaphnia dubia | ''Ceriodaphnia dubia'']] 7-day survival and reproduction<br />
*''D. magna'' 7-day survival and reproduction<br />
*[[Wikipedia: Fathead minnow | ''Pimephales promelas'']] 7-day embryo-larval survival and teratogenicity<br />
*[[Wikipedia: Hyalella azteca | ''Hyalella Azteca'']] 10- or 30-day survival and reproduction<br />
<ul><u>Marine acute toxicity:</u></ul><br />
*[[Wikipedia: Americamysis bahia | ''Americamysis bahia'']] 24- and 48-hour survival<br />
<ul><u>Marine chronic toxicity:</u></ul><br />
*''Americamysis'' survival, growth and fecundity<br />
*[[Wikipedia: Topsmelt silverside | ''Atherinops affinis'']] embryo-larval survival and growth <br />
<br />
Acute toxicity is quantifiable via organism survival rates immediately following the termination of an iTIE system field deployment. Chronic toxicity can be quantified by continuing to culture and observe test organisms in-lab. Common chronic endpoints include stunted growth, altered development such as teratogenicity in larval fish, decreased reproduction rates, and changes in gene expression. <br />
<br />
Several gene expression endpoints have been detectable in bioassays following an iTIE system deployment and in-lab culturing period. Steigmeyer ''et al.''<ref name="SteigmeyerEtAl2017"/> were able to detect changes in the expression of two genes in ''D. magna'' after a 24-hour exposure to bisphenol A. In a separate study, Nichols<ref>Nichols, E., 2023. Methods for Identification and Prioritization of Stressors at Impaired Sites. Masters thesis, University of Michigan. University of Michigan Library Deep Blue Documents. [https://deepblue.lib.umich.edu/bitstream/handle/2027.42/176142/Nichols_Elizabeth_thesis.pdf?sequence=1 Free Download]&nbsp; [[Media: Nichols2023.pdf | Report.pdf]]</ref> found a significant decline in acetylcholinesterase activity in ''H. azteca'' after a 24-hour exposure to chlorpyrifos. These results indicate a potential to adapt other gene expression bioassays for use in conjunction with iTIE system field exposures to prove stressor-causality linkages.<br />
<br />
===Cost Effectiveness Study===<br />
Burton ''et al.''<ref name="BurtonEtAl2020"/> conducted a cost effectiveness study comparing the iTIE technology with the traditional US EPA Phase 1 TIE method. Comparisons were based on the estimated time required to complete various sub-tasks within each method. Sub-tasks included organism care, equipment preparation, mobilization and deployment, test maintenance, test termination, demobilization, and test termination analyses. It was ultimately estimated that the iTIE protocol requires 47% less time (67 fewer hours) to complete than the Phase 1 TIE method, with the largest time differences in equipment preparation, deployment, test maintenance, and demobilization. It is important to note that the iTIE method may require additional initial costs for equipment and training.<br />
<br />
==Field Application==<br />
[[File: CraneFig6.png | thumb | left | 400px | Figure 6. iTIES deployment at the Rouge River, Detroit, MI. In the foreground is the iTIE Cooler Sub-System, which contains iTIE resin treatments and test organism groups, as well as the oxygenation coil and sample collection bottles. Next to the iTIE Cooler are the two pump cases. The Trident can be seen above the pump cases, installed in the river channel near shore.]]<br />
The&nbsp;iTIE&nbsp;system&nbsp;has&nbsp;been successfully deployed at a variety of marine and freshwater sites during the proof-of-concept phase of prototype development. One example is the 2024 iTIE system deployment completed near the mouth of the Rouge River in Detroit, MI (Figure 6). The Rouge River watershed has a long history of industrialization, with a legacy of chemical dumping, channelization, damming, and urban runoff<ref>Ridgway, J., Cave, K., DeMaria, A., O’Meara, J., Hartig, J. H., 2018. The Rouge River Area of Concern—A multi-year, multi-level successful approach to restoration of Impaired Beneficial Uses. Aquatic Ecosystem Health and Management, 21(4), pp. 398-408. [https://doi.org/10.1080/14634988.2018.1528816 doi: 10.1080/14634988.2018.1528816]</ref>. This has led to degraded environmental conditions, with previous detections of a wide range of chemicals including heavy metals and various organics.<br />
<br />
[[File: CraneFig7.png | thumb | 300px | Figure 7. Survival and healthy development of ''P. promelas'' embryos and larvae following a 48-hour iTIE exposure near the mouth of the Rouge River. Organisms were exposed to site porewater as embryos for 48 hours and cultured post-exposure for an additional 5 days.]]<br />
[[File: CraneFig8.png | thumb | 300px | Figure 8. Survival of ''C. dilutus'' larvae after an iTIE exposure near the mouth of the Rouge River. Organisms were exposed to site porewater for 48 hours and cultured post-exposure for an additional 5 days. Error bars show standard deviation.]]<br />
An&nbsp;iTIE&nbsp;system&nbsp;deployment&nbsp;was designed and completed to determine which chemical classes are most responsible for causing toxicity at the site. Resin treatments included glass wool (inert, non-fractionating substance), Chelex (metals sorption), Oasis HLB (general organics sorption), and Oasis WAX (organics sorption, with a high affinity for PFAS). The study utilized fathead minnow (''P. promelas'') embryos, due to their relative sensitivity to metals and PAHs, as well as second-instar midge ([[Wikipedia: Chironomus |''Chironomus dilutus'']]) larvae due to their relative sensitivity to PFAS. <br />
<br />
The test organisms were exposed to fractionated porewater ''in situ'' for 48 hours. Following exposure, organisms were cultured for an additional five days, and survival was recorded (Figures 7 and 8). Moderate declines in survival were seen in both species in the glass wool treatment, indicating toxicity at the site. For ''P. promelas'', the highest proportion of healthy development occurred in the Chelex treatment, supporting the hypothesis that metals are a dominant cause of toxicity. ''C. dilutus'' had the greatest survival in the Oasis WAX treatment, suggesting that an organic stressor class like PFAS is also present at harmful concentrations in the river.<br />
<br />
Water chemical analyses of fractionated and unfractionated water samples were completed to support biological results. Analyses were conducted for a range of stressor classes including metals, PAHs, PCBs, an organophosphate pesticide (chlorpyrifos), a PFAS compound (PFOS) and a pyrethroid insecticide (permethrin). Of these analytes, only heavy metals and PFOS were detected. Some chemical classes including PAHs and PCBs were not detected at the site.<br />
To reach similar conclusions using traditional Phase 1 TIE methods, one would need to complete the following tests: baseline toxicity, filtration, aeration, EDTA, C18 SPE, and methanol elution of C18 SPE. The iTIE method allows the same conclusions to be drawn with significantly less time and effort required.<br />
<br />
==Summary==<br />
The ''in situ'' Toxicity Identification Evaluation technology and protocol is a powerful tool that investigators can use to strengthen causal linkages between chemical stressors and ecological toxicity. By fractionating sampled water and exposing test organisms ''in situ'', investigators can gather toxicity response data while minimizing sample manipulation and accurately representing environmental conditions.<br />
<br clear="right"/><br />
<br />
==References==<br />
<references /><br />
<br />
==See Also==</div>Jhurleyhttps://www.enviro.wiki/index.php?title=User:Jhurley/sandbox&diff=18105User:Jhurley/sandbox2026-04-09T19:34:34Z<p>Jhurley: /* Introduction */</p>
<hr />
<div>==Estimating PCE/TCE Abiotic First-Order Reductive Dechlorination Rate Constants in Clayey Soils Under Anoxic Conditions== <br />
The U.S. Department of Defense (DoD) faces many challenges in restoring aquifers at contaminated sites, often due to back-diffusion of tetrachloroethene (PCE) and trichloroethene (TCE) from low-permeability clay zones. The uptake, storage, and subsequent long-term release of these dissolved contaminants from clays are key processes in understanding the longevity, intensity, and risks associated with many persistent chlorinated ethene groundwater plumes. Although naturally occurring abiotic and biotic dechlorination processes in clays may reduce stored contaminant mass and significantly aid natural attenuation, no standardized field method currently exists to verify or quantify these reactions. It is critical to remediation design efforts to demonstrate and validate a cost-effective in situ approach for assessing these dechlorination processes using first-order rate constants. An approach was developed and applied across eight DoD sites to support Remedial Project Managers (RPMs) and regulators in evaluating natural attenuation potential in clay-rich environments.<br />
<div style="float:right;margin:0 0 2em 2em;">__TOC__</div><br />
<br />
'''Related Article(s):'''<br />
<br />
*[[Monitored Natural Attenuation (MNA)]]<br />
*[[Monitored Natural Attenuation (MNA) of Chlorinated Solvents]]<br />
*[[Monitored Natural Attenuation - Transitioning from Active Remedies]]<br />
*[[Matrix Diffusion]]<br />
*[[REMChlor - MD]]<br />
<br />
'''Contributors:''' Dani Tran, Dr. Charles Schaefer, Dr. Charles Werth<br />
<br />
'''Key Resource:'''<br />
*Schaefer, C.E, Tran, D., Nguyen, D., Latta, D.E., Werth, C.J., 2025. Evaluating Mineral and In Situ Indicators of Abiotic Dechlorination in Clayey Soils (3)<br />
<br />
==Introduction==<br />
Cost-effective methods are needed to verify the occurrence of natural dechlorination processes and quantify their dechlorination rates in clays under ambient in situ conditions in order to reliably predict their long-term influence on plume longevity and mass discharge. However, accurately determining these rates is challenging due to slow reaction kinetics, the transient nature of transformation products, and the interplay of biotic and abiotic mechanisms within the clay matrix or at clay-sand interfaces. Tools capable of quantifying these reactions and assessing their role in mitigating plume persistence would be a significant aid for long-term site management.<br />
<br />
For reductive abiotic dechlorination under anoxic conditions, a 1% hydrochloric acid (HCl) extraction of a sample of native clay coupled with X-ray diffraction (XRD) data can be used as a screening level tool to estimate reductive dechlorination rate constants. These rate constants can be inserted into fate and transport models such as [[REMChlor - MD]]<ref>Falta, R., and Wang, W., 2017. A semi-analytical method for simulating matrix diffusion in numerical transport models. Journal of Contaminant Hydrology, 197, pp. 39-49. [https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jconhyd.2016.12.007 doi: 10.1016/j.jconhyd.2016.12.007]&nbsp; [[Media: FaltaWang2017.pdf | Open Access Manuscript]]</ref><ref>Kulkarni, P.R., Adamson, D.T., Popovic, J., Newell, C.J., 2022. Modeling a well-charactized perfluorooctane sulfate (PFOS) source and plume using the REMChlor-MD model to account for matrix diffusion. Journal of Contaminant Hydrology, 247, Article 103986. [https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jconhyd.2022.103986 doi: 10.1016/j.jconhyd.2022.103986]&nbsp; [[Media: KulkarniEtAl2022.pdf | Open Access Manuscript]]</ref> to quantify abiotic dechlorination impacts within clay aquitards on chlorinated solvent plumes. Thus, determination of the abiotic reductive dechlorination rate constant for a particular clayey soil can be readily utilized to provide a more accurate assessment of aquifer cleanup timeframes for groundwater plumes that are being sustained by contaminant back-diffusion.<br />
<br />
==System Components and Validation==<br />
[[File: CraneFig1.png | thumb | 600 px | Figure 1: A schematic diagram of the iTIE system prototype. The system is divided into three sub-systems: 1) the Pore Water/Surface Water Collection Sub-System (blue); 2) the Pumping Sub-System (red); and 3) the iTIE Resin, Exposure, and Sampling Sub-System (green). Water first enters the system through the Pore Water/Surface Water Collection Sub-System. Porewater can be collected using Trident-style probes, or surface water can be collected using a simple weighted probe. The water is composited in a manifold before being pumped to the rest of the iTIE system by the booster pump. Once in the iTIE Resin, Exposure, and Sampling Sub-System, the water is gently oxygenated by the Oxygen Coil, separated from gas bubbles by the Drip Chamber, and diverted to separate iTIE Resin and Exposure Chambers (or iTIE units) by the Splitting Manifold. Water movement through each iTIE unit is controlled by a dedicated Regulation Pump. Finally, the water is gathered in Sample Collection bottles for analysis.]]<br />
The&nbsp;latest&nbsp;iTIE&nbsp;prototype consists of an array of sorptive resins that differentially fractionate sampled water, and a series of corresponding flow-through organism chambers that receive the treated water ''in situ''. Resin treatments can be selected depending on the chemicals suspected to be present at each site to selectively sequester certain chemical of concern (CoC) classes from the whole water, leaving a smaller subset of chemicals in the resulting water fraction for chemical and toxicological characterization. Test organism species and life stages can also be chosen depending on factors including site characteristics and study goals. In the full iTIE protocol, site water is continuously sampled either from the sediment pore spaces or the water column at a site, gently oxygenated, diverted to different iTIE units for fractionation and organism exposure, and collected in sample bottles for off-site chemical analysis (Figure 1). All iTIE system components are housed within waterproof Pelican cases, which allow for ease of transport and temperature control.<br />
<br />
===Porewater and Surface Water Collection Sub-system===<br />
[[File: CraneFig2.png | thumb | 600 px | Figure 2: a) Trident probe with auxiliary sensors attached, b) a Trident probe with end caps removed (the red arrow identifies the intermediate space where glass beads are packed to filter suspended solids), c) a Trident probe being installed using a series of push poles and a fence post driver]]<br />
Given&nbsp;the&nbsp;importance&nbsp;of sediment porewater to ecosystem structure and function, investigators may employ the iTIE system to evaluate the toxic effects associated with the impacted sediment porewater. To accomplish this, the iTIE system utilizes the Trident probe, originally developed for Department of Defense site characterization studies<ref>Chadwick, D.B., Harre, B., Smith, C.F., Groves, J.G., Paulsen, R.J., 2003. Coastal Contaminant Migration Monitoring: The Trident Probe and UltraSeep System. Hardware Description, Protocols, and Procedures. Technical Report 1902. Space and Naval Warfare Systems Center.</ref>. The main body of the Trident is comprised of a stainless-steel frame with six hollow probes (Figure 2). Each probe contains a layer of inert glass beads, which filters suspended solids from the sampled water. The water is drawn through each probe into a composite manifold and transported to the rest of the iTIE system using a high-precision peristaltic pump. <br />
<br />
The Trident also includes an adjustable stopper plate, which forms a seal against the sediment and prevents the inadvertent dilution of porewater samples with surface water. (Figure 2). Preliminary laboratory results indicate that the Trident is extremely effective in collecting porewater samples with minimal surface water infiltration in sediments ranging from coarse sand to fine clay. Underwater cameras, sensors, passive samplers, and other auxiliary equipment can be attached to the Trident probe frame to provide supplemental data.<br />
<br />
Alternatively, practitioners may employ the iTIE system to evaluate site surface water. To sample surface water, weighted intake tubes can collect surface water from the water column using a peristaltic pump.<br />
<br />
===Oxygen Coil, Overflow Bag and Drip Chamber===<br />
[[File: CraneFig3.png | thumb | left | 400 px | Figure 3. Contents of the iTIE system cooler. The pictured HDPE rack (47.6 cm length x 29.7 cm width x 33.7 cm height) is removable from the iTIE cooler. Water enters the system at the red circle, flows through the oxygen coil, and then travels to each of the individual iTIE units where diagnostic resins and organisms are located. The water then briefly leaves the cooler to travel through peristaltic regulation pumps before being gathered in sample collection bottles.]]<br />
Porewater&nbsp;is&nbsp;naturally&nbsp;anoxic due to limited mixing with aerated surface water and high oxygen demand of sediments, which may cause organism mortality and interfere with iTIE results. To preclude this, sampled porewater is exposed to an oxygen coil. This consists of an interior silicone tube connected to a pressurized oxygen canister, threaded through an exterior reinforced PVC tube through which water is slowly pumped (Figure 3). Pump rates are optimized to ensure adequate aeration of the water. In addition to elevating DO levels, the oxygen coil facilitates the oxidation of dissolved sulfides, which naturally occur in some marine sediments and may otherwise cause toxicity to organisms if left in its reduced form.<br />
<br />
Gas bubbles may form in the oxygen coil over the course of a deployment. These can be disruptive, decreasing water sample volumes and posing a danger to sensitive organisms like daphnids. To account for this, the water travels to a drip chamber after exiting the oxygen coil, which allows gas bubbles to be separated and diverted to an overflow system. The sample water then flows to a manifold which divides the flow into different paths to each of the treatment units for fractionation and organism exposure.<br />
<br />
===iTIE Units: Fractionation and Organism Exposure Chambers===<br />
[[File: CraneFig4.png | thumb | 300px | Figure 4. A diagram of the iTIE prototype. Water flows upward into each resin chamber through the unit bottom. After being chemically fractionated in the resin chamber, water travels into the organism chamber, where test organisms have been placed. Water is drawn through the units by high-precision peristaltic pumps.]]<br />
At&nbsp;the&nbsp;core&nbsp;of&nbsp;the&nbsp;iTIE&nbsp;system are separate dual-chamber iTIE units, each with a resin fractionation chamber and an organism exposure chamber (Figure 4). Developed by Burton ''et al.''<ref name="BurtonEtAl2020"/>, the iTIE prototype is constructed from acrylic, with rubber O-rings to connect each piece. Each iTIE unit can contain a different diagnostic resin matrix, customizable to remove specific chemical classes from the water. Sampled water flows into each unit through the bottom and is differentially fractionated by the resin matrix as it travels upward. Then it reaches the organism chamber, where test organisms are placed for exposure. The organism chamber inlet and outlet are covered by mesh to prevent the escape of the test organisms. This continuous flow-through design allows practitioners to capture the temporal heterogeneity of ambient water conditions over the duration of an ''in situ'' exposure. Currently, the iTIE system can support four independent iTIE treatment units.<br />
<br />
After being exposed to test organisms, water is collected in sample bottles. The bottles can be pre-loaded with preservation reagents to allow for later chemical analysis. Sample bottles can be composed of polyethylene, glass or other materials depending on the CoC.<br />
<br />
===Pumping Sub-system===<br />
[[File: CraneFig5.png | thumb | 300px | Figure 5. The iTIE system pumping sub-system. The sub-system consists of: A) a single booster pump, which is directly connected to the water sampling device and feeds water to the rest of the iTIE system, and B) a set of four regulation pumps, which each connect to the outflow of an individual iTIE unit. Each pump set is housed in a waterproof case with self-contained rechargeable battery power. A tablet is mounted inside the lid of the four pump case, which can be used to program and operate all of the pumps when connected to the internet.]]<br />
Water&nbsp;movement&nbsp;through&nbsp;the&nbsp;system is driven by a series of high-precision, programmable peristaltic pumps ([https://ecotechmarine.com/ EcoTech Marine]). Each pump set is housed in a Pelican storm travel case. Power is supplied to each pump by internal rechargeable lithium-iron phosphate batteries ([https://www.bioennopower.com/ Bioenno Power]).<br />
<br />
First, water is supplied to the system by a booster pump (Figure 5A). This pump is situated between the water sampling sub-system and the oxygen coil. The booster pump: 1) facilitates pore water collection, especially from sediments with high fine particle fractions; 2) helps water overcome vertical lifts to travel to the iTIE system; and 3) prevents vacuums from forming in the iTIE system interior, which can accelerate the formation of disruptive gas bubbles in the oxygen coil. The booster pump should be programmed to supply an excess of water to prevent vacuum formation.<br />
<br />
Second, a set of four regulation pumps ensure precise flow rates through each independent iTIE unit (Figure 5B). Each regulation pump pulls water from the top of an iTIE unit and then dispenses that water into a sample bottle for further analysis.<br />
<br />
==Study Design Considerations==<br />
===Diagnostic Resin Treatments===<br />
Several commercially available resins have been verified for use in the iTIE system. Investigators can select resins based on stressor classes of interest at each site. Each resin selectively removes a CoC class from site water prior to organism exposure.<br />
*[https://www.dupont.com/products/ambersorb560.html DuPont Ambersorb 560] for removal of 1,4-dioxane and other organic chemicals<ref>Woodard, S., Mohr, T., Nickelsen, M.G., 2014. Synthetic media: A promising new treatment technology for 1,4-dioxane. Remediation Journal, 24(4), pp. 27-40. [https://doi.org/10.1002/rem.21402 doi: 10.1002/rem.21402]</ref><br />
*C18 for nonpolar organic chemicals<br />
*[https://www.bio-rad.com/en-us Bio-Rad] [https://www.bio-rad.com/en-us/product/chelex-100-resin?ID=6448ab3e-b96a-4162-9124-7b7d2330288e Chelex] for metals<br />
*Granular activated carbon for metals, general organic chemicals, sulfide<ref>Lemos, B.R.S., Teixeira, I.F., de Mesquita, J.P., Ribeiro, R.R., Donnici, C.L., Lago, R.M., 2012. Use of modified activated carbon for the oxidation of aqueous sulfide. Carbon, 50(3), pp. 1386-1393. [https://doi.org/10.1016/j.carbon.2011.11.011 doi: 10.1016/j.carbon.2011.11.011]</ref><br />
*[https://www.waters.com/nextgen/us/en.html Waters] [https://www.waters.com/nextgen/us/en/search.html?category=Shop&isocode=en_US&keyword=oasis%20hlb&multiselect=true&page=1&rows=12&sort=best-sellers&xcid=ppc-ppc_23916&gad_source=1&gad_campaignid=14746094146&gbraid=0AAAAAD_uR00nhlNwrhhegNh06pBODTgiN&gclid=CjwKCAiAtLvMBhB_EiwA1u6_PsppE0raci2IhvGnAAe5ijciNcetLaGZo5qA3g3r4Z_La7YAPJtzShoC6LoQAvD_BwE Oasis HLB] for general organic chemicals<ref name="SteigmeyerEtAl2017"/><br />
*[https://www.waters.com/nextgen/us/en.html Waters] [https://www.waters.com/nextgen/us/en/search.html?category=All&enableHL=true&isocode=en_US&keyword=Oasis%20WAX%20&multiselect=true&page=1&rows=12&sort=most-relevant Oasis WAX] for PFAS, organic chemicals of mixed polarity<ref>Iannone, A., Carriera, F., Di Fiore, C., Avino, P., 2024. Poly- and Perfluoroalkyl Substance (PFAS) Analysis in Environmental Matrices: An Overview of the Extraction and Chromatographic Detection Methods. Analytica, 5(2), pp. 187-202. [https://doi.org/10.3390/analytica5020012 doi: 10.3390/analytica5020012]&nbsp; [[Media: IannoneEtAl2024.pdf | Open Access Article]]</ref><br />
*Zeolite for ammonia, other organic chemicals<br />
<br />
Resins must be adequately conditioned prior to use. Otherwise, they may inadequately adsorb toxicants or cause stress to organisms. New resins should be tested for efficacy and toxicity before being used in an iTIE system. <br />
<br />
===Test Organism Species and Life Stages===<br />
Practitioners can also select different organism species and life stages for use in the iTIE system, depending on site characteristics and study goals. The iTIE system can accommodate various small test organisms, including embryo-stage fish and most macroinvertebrates. The following common toxicity tests can be adapted for application within iTIE systems<ref>U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Office of Solid Waste and Emergency Response, 1994. Catalogue of Standard Toxicity Tests for Ecological Risk Assessment. ECO Update, 2(2), 4 pages. Publication No. 9345.0.05I [https://www.epa.gov/sites/default/files/2015-09/documents/v2no2.pdf Free Download]&nbsp; [[Media: usepa1994.pdf | Report.pdf]]</ref>.<br />
<ul><u>Freshwater acute toxicity:</u></ul><br />
*[[Wikipedia: Daphnia magna | ''Daphnia magna'']] or [[Wikipedia: Daphnia pulex | ''Daphnia pulex'']] 24-, 48-, and 96-hour survival<br />
<ul><u>Freshwater chronic toxicity:</u></ul><br />
*[[Wikipedia: Ceriodaphnia dubia | ''Ceriodaphnia dubia'']] 7-day survival and reproduction<br />
*''D. magna'' 7-day survival and reproduction<br />
*[[Wikipedia: Fathead minnow | ''Pimephales promelas'']] 7-day embryo-larval survival and teratogenicity<br />
*[[Wikipedia: Hyalella azteca | ''Hyalella Azteca'']] 10- or 30-day survival and reproduction<br />
<ul><u>Marine acute toxicity:</u></ul><br />
*[[Wikipedia: Americamysis bahia | ''Americamysis bahia'']] 24- and 48-hour survival<br />
<ul><u>Marine chronic toxicity:</u></ul><br />
*''Americamysis'' survival, growth and fecundity<br />
*[[Wikipedia: Topsmelt silverside | ''Atherinops affinis'']] embryo-larval survival and growth <br />
<br />
Acute toxicity is quantifiable via organism survival rates immediately following the termination of an iTIE system field deployment. Chronic toxicity can be quantified by continuing to culture and observe test organisms in-lab. Common chronic endpoints include stunted growth, altered development such as teratogenicity in larval fish, decreased reproduction rates, and changes in gene expression. <br />
<br />
Several gene expression endpoints have been detectable in bioassays following an iTIE system deployment and in-lab culturing period. Steigmeyer ''et al.''<ref name="SteigmeyerEtAl2017"/> were able to detect changes in the expression of two genes in ''D. magna'' after a 24-hour exposure to bisphenol A. In a separate study, Nichols<ref>Nichols, E., 2023. Methods for Identification and Prioritization of Stressors at Impaired Sites. Masters thesis, University of Michigan. University of Michigan Library Deep Blue Documents. [https://deepblue.lib.umich.edu/bitstream/handle/2027.42/176142/Nichols_Elizabeth_thesis.pdf?sequence=1 Free Download]&nbsp; [[Media: Nichols2023.pdf | Report.pdf]]</ref> found a significant decline in acetylcholinesterase activity in ''H. azteca'' after a 24-hour exposure to chlorpyrifos. These results indicate a potential to adapt other gene expression bioassays for use in conjunction with iTIE system field exposures to prove stressor-causality linkages.<br />
<br />
===Cost Effectiveness Study===<br />
Burton ''et al.''<ref name="BurtonEtAl2020"/> conducted a cost effectiveness study comparing the iTIE technology with the traditional US EPA Phase 1 TIE method. Comparisons were based on the estimated time required to complete various sub-tasks within each method. Sub-tasks included organism care, equipment preparation, mobilization and deployment, test maintenance, test termination, demobilization, and test termination analyses. It was ultimately estimated that the iTIE protocol requires 47% less time (67 fewer hours) to complete than the Phase 1 TIE method, with the largest time differences in equipment preparation, deployment, test maintenance, and demobilization. It is important to note that the iTIE method may require additional initial costs for equipment and training.<br />
<br />
==Field Application==<br />
[[File: CraneFig6.png | thumb | left | 400px | Figure 6. iTIES deployment at the Rouge River, Detroit, MI. In the foreground is the iTIE Cooler Sub-System, which contains iTIE resin treatments and test organism groups, as well as the oxygenation coil and sample collection bottles. Next to the iTIE Cooler are the two pump cases. The Trident can be seen above the pump cases, installed in the river channel near shore.]]<br />
The&nbsp;iTIE&nbsp;system&nbsp;has&nbsp;been successfully deployed at a variety of marine and freshwater sites during the proof-of-concept phase of prototype development. One example is the 2024 iTIE system deployment completed near the mouth of the Rouge River in Detroit, MI (Figure 6). The Rouge River watershed has a long history of industrialization, with a legacy of chemical dumping, channelization, damming, and urban runoff<ref>Ridgway, J., Cave, K., DeMaria, A., O’Meara, J., Hartig, J. H., 2018. The Rouge River Area of Concern—A multi-year, multi-level successful approach to restoration of Impaired Beneficial Uses. Aquatic Ecosystem Health and Management, 21(4), pp. 398-408. [https://doi.org/10.1080/14634988.2018.1528816 doi: 10.1080/14634988.2018.1528816]</ref>. This has led to degraded environmental conditions, with previous detections of a wide range of chemicals including heavy metals and various organics.<br />
<br />
[[File: CraneFig7.png | thumb | 300px | Figure 7. Survival and healthy development of ''P. promelas'' embryos and larvae following a 48-hour iTIE exposure near the mouth of the Rouge River. Organisms were exposed to site porewater as embryos for 48 hours and cultured post-exposure for an additional 5 days.]]<br />
[[File: CraneFig8.png | thumb | 300px | Figure 8. Survival of ''C. dilutus'' larvae after an iTIE exposure near the mouth of the Rouge River. Organisms were exposed to site porewater for 48 hours and cultured post-exposure for an additional 5 days. Error bars show standard deviation.]]<br />
An&nbsp;iTIE&nbsp;system&nbsp;deployment&nbsp;was designed and completed to determine which chemical classes are most responsible for causing toxicity at the site. Resin treatments included glass wool (inert, non-fractionating substance), Chelex (metals sorption), Oasis HLB (general organics sorption), and Oasis WAX (organics sorption, with a high affinity for PFAS). The study utilized fathead minnow (''P. promelas'') embryos, due to their relative sensitivity to metals and PAHs, as well as second-instar midge ([[Wikipedia: Chironomus |''Chironomus dilutus'']]) larvae due to their relative sensitivity to PFAS. <br />
<br />
The test organisms were exposed to fractionated porewater ''in situ'' for 48 hours. Following exposure, organisms were cultured for an additional five days, and survival was recorded (Figures 7 and 8). Moderate declines in survival were seen in both species in the glass wool treatment, indicating toxicity at the site. For ''P. promelas'', the highest proportion of healthy development occurred in the Chelex treatment, supporting the hypothesis that metals are a dominant cause of toxicity. ''C. dilutus'' had the greatest survival in the Oasis WAX treatment, suggesting that an organic stressor class like PFAS is also present at harmful concentrations in the river.<br />
<br />
Water chemical analyses of fractionated and unfractionated water samples were completed to support biological results. Analyses were conducted for a range of stressor classes including metals, PAHs, PCBs, an organophosphate pesticide (chlorpyrifos), a PFAS compound (PFOS) and a pyrethroid insecticide (permethrin). Of these analytes, only heavy metals and PFOS were detected. Some chemical classes including PAHs and PCBs were not detected at the site.<br />
To reach similar conclusions using traditional Phase 1 TIE methods, one would need to complete the following tests: baseline toxicity, filtration, aeration, EDTA, C18 SPE, and methanol elution of C18 SPE. The iTIE method allows the same conclusions to be drawn with significantly less time and effort required.<br />
<br />
==Summary==<br />
The ''in situ'' Toxicity Identification Evaluation technology and protocol is a powerful tool that investigators can use to strengthen causal linkages between chemical stressors and ecological toxicity. By fractionating sampled water and exposing test organisms ''in situ'', investigators can gather toxicity response data while minimizing sample manipulation and accurately representing environmental conditions.<br />
<br clear="right"/><br />
<br />
==References==<br />
<references /><br />
<br />
==See Also==</div>Jhurleyhttps://www.enviro.wiki/index.php?title=User:Jhurley/sandbox&diff=18104User:Jhurley/sandbox2026-04-09T19:32:30Z<p>Jhurley: /* Introduction */</p>
<hr />
<div>==Estimating PCE/TCE Abiotic First-Order Reductive Dechlorination Rate Constants in Clayey Soils Under Anoxic Conditions== <br />
The U.S. Department of Defense (DoD) faces many challenges in restoring aquifers at contaminated sites, often due to back-diffusion of tetrachloroethene (PCE) and trichloroethene (TCE) from low-permeability clay zones. The uptake, storage, and subsequent long-term release of these dissolved contaminants from clays are key processes in understanding the longevity, intensity, and risks associated with many persistent chlorinated ethene groundwater plumes. Although naturally occurring abiotic and biotic dechlorination processes in clays may reduce stored contaminant mass and significantly aid natural attenuation, no standardized field method currently exists to verify or quantify these reactions. It is critical to remediation design efforts to demonstrate and validate a cost-effective in situ approach for assessing these dechlorination processes using first-order rate constants. An approach was developed and applied across eight DoD sites to support Remedial Project Managers (RPMs) and regulators in evaluating natural attenuation potential in clay-rich environments.<br />
<div style="float:right;margin:0 0 2em 2em;">__TOC__</div><br />
<br />
'''Related Article(s):'''<br />
<br />
*[[Monitored Natural Attenuation (MNA)]]<br />
*[[Monitored Natural Attenuation (MNA) of Chlorinated Solvents]]<br />
*[[Monitored Natural Attenuation - Transitioning from Active Remedies]]<br />
*[[Matrix Diffusion]]<br />
*[[REMChlor - MD]]<br />
<br />
'''Contributors:''' Dani Tran, Dr. Charles Schaefer, Dr. Charles Werth<br />
<br />
'''Key Resource:'''<br />
*Schaefer, C.E, Tran, D., Nguyen, D., Latta, D.E., Werth, C.J., 2025. Evaluating Mineral and In Situ Indicators of Abiotic Dechlorination in Clayey Soils (3)<br />
<br />
==Introduction==<br />
Cost-effective methods are needed to verify the occurrence of natural dechlorination processes and quantify their dechlorination rates in clays under ambient in situ conditions in order to reliably predict their long-term influence on plume longevity and mass discharge. However, accurately determining these rates is challenging due to slow reaction kinetics, the transient nature of transformation products, and the interplay of biotic and abiotic mechanisms within the clay matrix or at clay-sand interfaces. Tools capable of quantifying these reactions and assessing their role in mitigating plume persistence would be a significant aid for long-term site management.<br />
<br />
For reductive abiotic dechlorination under anoxic conditions, a 1% hydrochloric acid (HCl) extraction of a sample of native clay coupled with X-ray diffraction (XRD) data can be used as a screening level tool to estimate reductive dechlorination rate constants. These rate constants can be inserted into fate and transport models such as [[REMChlor – MD]]<ref>Falta, R., and Wang, W., 2017. A semi-analytical method for simulating matrix diffusion in numerical transport models. Journal of Contaminant Hydrology, 197, pp. 39-49. [https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jconhyd.2016.12.007 doi: 10.1016/j.jconhyd.2016.12.007]&nbsp; [[Media: FaltaWang2017.pdf | Open Access Manuscript]]</ref>ref>Kulkarni, P.R., Adamson, D.T., Popovic, J., Newell, C.J., 2022. Modeling a well-charactized perfluorooctane sulfate (PFOS) source and plume using the REMChlor-MD model to account for matrix diffusion. Journal of Contaminant Hydrology, 247, Article 103986. [https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jconhyd.2022.103986 doi: 10.1016/j.jconhyd.2022.103986]&nbsp; [[Media: KulkarniEtAl2022.pdf | Open Access Manuscript]]</ref> to quantify abiotic dechlorination impacts within clay aquitards on chlorinated solvent plumes. Thus, determination of the abiotic reductive dechlorination rate constant for a particular clayey soil can be readily utilized to provide a more accurate assessment of aquifer cleanup timeframes for groundwater plumes that are being sustained by contaminant back-diffusion.<br />
<br />
==System Components and Validation==<br />
[[File: CraneFig1.png | thumb | 600 px | Figure 1: A schematic diagram of the iTIE system prototype. The system is divided into three sub-systems: 1) the Pore Water/Surface Water Collection Sub-System (blue); 2) the Pumping Sub-System (red); and 3) the iTIE Resin, Exposure, and Sampling Sub-System (green). Water first enters the system through the Pore Water/Surface Water Collection Sub-System. Porewater can be collected using Trident-style probes, or surface water can be collected using a simple weighted probe. The water is composited in a manifold before being pumped to the rest of the iTIE system by the booster pump. Once in the iTIE Resin, Exposure, and Sampling Sub-System, the water is gently oxygenated by the Oxygen Coil, separated from gas bubbles by the Drip Chamber, and diverted to separate iTIE Resin and Exposure Chambers (or iTIE units) by the Splitting Manifold. Water movement through each iTIE unit is controlled by a dedicated Regulation Pump. Finally, the water is gathered in Sample Collection bottles for analysis.]]<br />
The&nbsp;latest&nbsp;iTIE&nbsp;prototype consists of an array of sorptive resins that differentially fractionate sampled water, and a series of corresponding flow-through organism chambers that receive the treated water ''in situ''. Resin treatments can be selected depending on the chemicals suspected to be present at each site to selectively sequester certain chemical of concern (CoC) classes from the whole water, leaving a smaller subset of chemicals in the resulting water fraction for chemical and toxicological characterization. Test organism species and life stages can also be chosen depending on factors including site characteristics and study goals. In the full iTIE protocol, site water is continuously sampled either from the sediment pore spaces or the water column at a site, gently oxygenated, diverted to different iTIE units for fractionation and organism exposure, and collected in sample bottles for off-site chemical analysis (Figure 1). All iTIE system components are housed within waterproof Pelican cases, which allow for ease of transport and temperature control.<br />
<br />
===Porewater and Surface Water Collection Sub-system===<br />
[[File: CraneFig2.png | thumb | 600 px | Figure 2: a) Trident probe with auxiliary sensors attached, b) a Trident probe with end caps removed (the red arrow identifies the intermediate space where glass beads are packed to filter suspended solids), c) a Trident probe being installed using a series of push poles and a fence post driver]]<br />
Given&nbsp;the&nbsp;importance&nbsp;of sediment porewater to ecosystem structure and function, investigators may employ the iTIE system to evaluate the toxic effects associated with the impacted sediment porewater. To accomplish this, the iTIE system utilizes the Trident probe, originally developed for Department of Defense site characterization studies<ref>Chadwick, D.B., Harre, B., Smith, C.F., Groves, J.G., Paulsen, R.J., 2003. Coastal Contaminant Migration Monitoring: The Trident Probe and UltraSeep System. Hardware Description, Protocols, and Procedures. Technical Report 1902. Space and Naval Warfare Systems Center.</ref>. The main body of the Trident is comprised of a stainless-steel frame with six hollow probes (Figure 2). Each probe contains a layer of inert glass beads, which filters suspended solids from the sampled water. The water is drawn through each probe into a composite manifold and transported to the rest of the iTIE system using a high-precision peristaltic pump. <br />
<br />
The Trident also includes an adjustable stopper plate, which forms a seal against the sediment and prevents the inadvertent dilution of porewater samples with surface water. (Figure 2). Preliminary laboratory results indicate that the Trident is extremely effective in collecting porewater samples with minimal surface water infiltration in sediments ranging from coarse sand to fine clay. Underwater cameras, sensors, passive samplers, and other auxiliary equipment can be attached to the Trident probe frame to provide supplemental data.<br />
<br />
Alternatively, practitioners may employ the iTIE system to evaluate site surface water. To sample surface water, weighted intake tubes can collect surface water from the water column using a peristaltic pump.<br />
<br />
===Oxygen Coil, Overflow Bag and Drip Chamber===<br />
[[File: CraneFig3.png | thumb | left | 400 px | Figure 3. Contents of the iTIE system cooler. The pictured HDPE rack (47.6 cm length x 29.7 cm width x 33.7 cm height) is removable from the iTIE cooler. Water enters the system at the red circle, flows through the oxygen coil, and then travels to each of the individual iTIE units where diagnostic resins and organisms are located. The water then briefly leaves the cooler to travel through peristaltic regulation pumps before being gathered in sample collection bottles.]]<br />
Porewater&nbsp;is&nbsp;naturally&nbsp;anoxic due to limited mixing with aerated surface water and high oxygen demand of sediments, which may cause organism mortality and interfere with iTIE results. To preclude this, sampled porewater is exposed to an oxygen coil. This consists of an interior silicone tube connected to a pressurized oxygen canister, threaded through an exterior reinforced PVC tube through which water is slowly pumped (Figure 3). Pump rates are optimized to ensure adequate aeration of the water. In addition to elevating DO levels, the oxygen coil facilitates the oxidation of dissolved sulfides, which naturally occur in some marine sediments and may otherwise cause toxicity to organisms if left in its reduced form.<br />
<br />
Gas bubbles may form in the oxygen coil over the course of a deployment. These can be disruptive, decreasing water sample volumes and posing a danger to sensitive organisms like daphnids. To account for this, the water travels to a drip chamber after exiting the oxygen coil, which allows gas bubbles to be separated and diverted to an overflow system. The sample water then flows to a manifold which divides the flow into different paths to each of the treatment units for fractionation and organism exposure.<br />
<br />
===iTIE Units: Fractionation and Organism Exposure Chambers===<br />
[[File: CraneFig4.png | thumb | 300px | Figure 4. A diagram of the iTIE prototype. Water flows upward into each resin chamber through the unit bottom. After being chemically fractionated in the resin chamber, water travels into the organism chamber, where test organisms have been placed. Water is drawn through the units by high-precision peristaltic pumps.]]<br />
At&nbsp;the&nbsp;core&nbsp;of&nbsp;the&nbsp;iTIE&nbsp;system are separate dual-chamber iTIE units, each with a resin fractionation chamber and an organism exposure chamber (Figure 4). Developed by Burton ''et al.''<ref name="BurtonEtAl2020"/>, the iTIE prototype is constructed from acrylic, with rubber O-rings to connect each piece. Each iTIE unit can contain a different diagnostic resin matrix, customizable to remove specific chemical classes from the water. Sampled water flows into each unit through the bottom and is differentially fractionated by the resin matrix as it travels upward. Then it reaches the organism chamber, where test organisms are placed for exposure. The organism chamber inlet and outlet are covered by mesh to prevent the escape of the test organisms. This continuous flow-through design allows practitioners to capture the temporal heterogeneity of ambient water conditions over the duration of an ''in situ'' exposure. Currently, the iTIE system can support four independent iTIE treatment units.<br />
<br />
After being exposed to test organisms, water is collected in sample bottles. The bottles can be pre-loaded with preservation reagents to allow for later chemical analysis. Sample bottles can be composed of polyethylene, glass or other materials depending on the CoC.<br />
<br />
===Pumping Sub-system===<br />
[[File: CraneFig5.png | thumb | 300px | Figure 5. The iTIE system pumping sub-system. The sub-system consists of: A) a single booster pump, which is directly connected to the water sampling device and feeds water to the rest of the iTIE system, and B) a set of four regulation pumps, which each connect to the outflow of an individual iTIE unit. Each pump set is housed in a waterproof case with self-contained rechargeable battery power. A tablet is mounted inside the lid of the four pump case, which can be used to program and operate all of the pumps when connected to the internet.]]<br />
Water&nbsp;movement&nbsp;through&nbsp;the&nbsp;system is driven by a series of high-precision, programmable peristaltic pumps ([https://ecotechmarine.com/ EcoTech Marine]). Each pump set is housed in a Pelican storm travel case. Power is supplied to each pump by internal rechargeable lithium-iron phosphate batteries ([https://www.bioennopower.com/ Bioenno Power]).<br />
<br />
First, water is supplied to the system by a booster pump (Figure 5A). This pump is situated between the water sampling sub-system and the oxygen coil. The booster pump: 1) facilitates pore water collection, especially from sediments with high fine particle fractions; 2) helps water overcome vertical lifts to travel to the iTIE system; and 3) prevents vacuums from forming in the iTIE system interior, which can accelerate the formation of disruptive gas bubbles in the oxygen coil. The booster pump should be programmed to supply an excess of water to prevent vacuum formation.<br />
<br />
Second, a set of four regulation pumps ensure precise flow rates through each independent iTIE unit (Figure 5B). Each regulation pump pulls water from the top of an iTIE unit and then dispenses that water into a sample bottle for further analysis.<br />
<br />
==Study Design Considerations==<br />
===Diagnostic Resin Treatments===<br />
Several commercially available resins have been verified for use in the iTIE system. Investigators can select resins based on stressor classes of interest at each site. Each resin selectively removes a CoC class from site water prior to organism exposure.<br />
*[https://www.dupont.com/products/ambersorb560.html DuPont Ambersorb 560] for removal of 1,4-dioxane and other organic chemicals<ref>Woodard, S., Mohr, T., Nickelsen, M.G., 2014. Synthetic media: A promising new treatment technology for 1,4-dioxane. Remediation Journal, 24(4), pp. 27-40. [https://doi.org/10.1002/rem.21402 doi: 10.1002/rem.21402]</ref><br />
*C18 for nonpolar organic chemicals<br />
*[https://www.bio-rad.com/en-us Bio-Rad] [https://www.bio-rad.com/en-us/product/chelex-100-resin?ID=6448ab3e-b96a-4162-9124-7b7d2330288e Chelex] for metals<br />
*Granular activated carbon for metals, general organic chemicals, sulfide<ref>Lemos, B.R.S., Teixeira, I.F., de Mesquita, J.P., Ribeiro, R.R., Donnici, C.L., Lago, R.M., 2012. Use of modified activated carbon for the oxidation of aqueous sulfide. Carbon, 50(3), pp. 1386-1393. [https://doi.org/10.1016/j.carbon.2011.11.011 doi: 10.1016/j.carbon.2011.11.011]</ref><br />
*[https://www.waters.com/nextgen/us/en.html Waters] [https://www.waters.com/nextgen/us/en/search.html?category=Shop&isocode=en_US&keyword=oasis%20hlb&multiselect=true&page=1&rows=12&sort=best-sellers&xcid=ppc-ppc_23916&gad_source=1&gad_campaignid=14746094146&gbraid=0AAAAAD_uR00nhlNwrhhegNh06pBODTgiN&gclid=CjwKCAiAtLvMBhB_EiwA1u6_PsppE0raci2IhvGnAAe5ijciNcetLaGZo5qA3g3r4Z_La7YAPJtzShoC6LoQAvD_BwE Oasis HLB] for general organic chemicals<ref name="SteigmeyerEtAl2017"/><br />
*[https://www.waters.com/nextgen/us/en.html Waters] [https://www.waters.com/nextgen/us/en/search.html?category=All&enableHL=true&isocode=en_US&keyword=Oasis%20WAX%20&multiselect=true&page=1&rows=12&sort=most-relevant Oasis WAX] for PFAS, organic chemicals of mixed polarity<ref>Iannone, A., Carriera, F., Di Fiore, C., Avino, P., 2024. Poly- and Perfluoroalkyl Substance (PFAS) Analysis in Environmental Matrices: An Overview of the Extraction and Chromatographic Detection Methods. Analytica, 5(2), pp. 187-202. [https://doi.org/10.3390/analytica5020012 doi: 10.3390/analytica5020012]&nbsp; [[Media: IannoneEtAl2024.pdf | Open Access Article]]</ref><br />
*Zeolite for ammonia, other organic chemicals<br />
<br />
Resins must be adequately conditioned prior to use. Otherwise, they may inadequately adsorb toxicants or cause stress to organisms. New resins should be tested for efficacy and toxicity before being used in an iTIE system. <br />
<br />
===Test Organism Species and Life Stages===<br />
Practitioners can also select different organism species and life stages for use in the iTIE system, depending on site characteristics and study goals. The iTIE system can accommodate various small test organisms, including embryo-stage fish and most macroinvertebrates. The following common toxicity tests can be adapted for application within iTIE systems<ref>U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Office of Solid Waste and Emergency Response, 1994. Catalogue of Standard Toxicity Tests for Ecological Risk Assessment. ECO Update, 2(2), 4 pages. Publication No. 9345.0.05I [https://www.epa.gov/sites/default/files/2015-09/documents/v2no2.pdf Free Download]&nbsp; [[Media: usepa1994.pdf | Report.pdf]]</ref>.<br />
<ul><u>Freshwater acute toxicity:</u></ul><br />
*[[Wikipedia: Daphnia magna | ''Daphnia magna'']] or [[Wikipedia: Daphnia pulex | ''Daphnia pulex'']] 24-, 48-, and 96-hour survival<br />
<ul><u>Freshwater chronic toxicity:</u></ul><br />
*[[Wikipedia: Ceriodaphnia dubia | ''Ceriodaphnia dubia'']] 7-day survival and reproduction<br />
*''D. magna'' 7-day survival and reproduction<br />
*[[Wikipedia: Fathead minnow | ''Pimephales promelas'']] 7-day embryo-larval survival and teratogenicity<br />
*[[Wikipedia: Hyalella azteca | ''Hyalella Azteca'']] 10- or 30-day survival and reproduction<br />
<ul><u>Marine acute toxicity:</u></ul><br />
*[[Wikipedia: Americamysis bahia | ''Americamysis bahia'']] 24- and 48-hour survival<br />
<ul><u>Marine chronic toxicity:</u></ul><br />
*''Americamysis'' survival, growth and fecundity<br />
*[[Wikipedia: Topsmelt silverside | ''Atherinops affinis'']] embryo-larval survival and growth <br />
<br />
Acute toxicity is quantifiable via organism survival rates immediately following the termination of an iTIE system field deployment. Chronic toxicity can be quantified by continuing to culture and observe test organisms in-lab. Common chronic endpoints include stunted growth, altered development such as teratogenicity in larval fish, decreased reproduction rates, and changes in gene expression. <br />
<br />
Several gene expression endpoints have been detectable in bioassays following an iTIE system deployment and in-lab culturing period. Steigmeyer ''et al.''<ref name="SteigmeyerEtAl2017"/> were able to detect changes in the expression of two genes in ''D. magna'' after a 24-hour exposure to bisphenol A. In a separate study, Nichols<ref>Nichols, E., 2023. Methods for Identification and Prioritization of Stressors at Impaired Sites. Masters thesis, University of Michigan. University of Michigan Library Deep Blue Documents. [https://deepblue.lib.umich.edu/bitstream/handle/2027.42/176142/Nichols_Elizabeth_thesis.pdf?sequence=1 Free Download]&nbsp; [[Media: Nichols2023.pdf | Report.pdf]]</ref> found a significant decline in acetylcholinesterase activity in ''H. azteca'' after a 24-hour exposure to chlorpyrifos. These results indicate a potential to adapt other gene expression bioassays for use in conjunction with iTIE system field exposures to prove stressor-causality linkages.<br />
<br />
===Cost Effectiveness Study===<br />
Burton ''et al.''<ref name="BurtonEtAl2020"/> conducted a cost effectiveness study comparing the iTIE technology with the traditional US EPA Phase 1 TIE method. Comparisons were based on the estimated time required to complete various sub-tasks within each method. Sub-tasks included organism care, equipment preparation, mobilization and deployment, test maintenance, test termination, demobilization, and test termination analyses. It was ultimately estimated that the iTIE protocol requires 47% less time (67 fewer hours) to complete than the Phase 1 TIE method, with the largest time differences in equipment preparation, deployment, test maintenance, and demobilization. It is important to note that the iTIE method may require additional initial costs for equipment and training.<br />
<br />
==Field Application==<br />
[[File: CraneFig6.png | thumb | left | 400px | Figure 6. iTIES deployment at the Rouge River, Detroit, MI. In the foreground is the iTIE Cooler Sub-System, which contains iTIE resin treatments and test organism groups, as well as the oxygenation coil and sample collection bottles. Next to the iTIE Cooler are the two pump cases. The Trident can be seen above the pump cases, installed in the river channel near shore.]]<br />
The&nbsp;iTIE&nbsp;system&nbsp;has&nbsp;been successfully deployed at a variety of marine and freshwater sites during the proof-of-concept phase of prototype development. One example is the 2024 iTIE system deployment completed near the mouth of the Rouge River in Detroit, MI (Figure 6). The Rouge River watershed has a long history of industrialization, with a legacy of chemical dumping, channelization, damming, and urban runoff<ref>Ridgway, J., Cave, K., DeMaria, A., O’Meara, J., Hartig, J. H., 2018. The Rouge River Area of Concern—A multi-year, multi-level successful approach to restoration of Impaired Beneficial Uses. Aquatic Ecosystem Health and Management, 21(4), pp. 398-408. [https://doi.org/10.1080/14634988.2018.1528816 doi: 10.1080/14634988.2018.1528816]</ref>. This has led to degraded environmental conditions, with previous detections of a wide range of chemicals including heavy metals and various organics.<br />
<br />
[[File: CraneFig7.png | thumb | 300px | Figure 7. Survival and healthy development of ''P. promelas'' embryos and larvae following a 48-hour iTIE exposure near the mouth of the Rouge River. Organisms were exposed to site porewater as embryos for 48 hours and cultured post-exposure for an additional 5 days.]]<br />
[[File: CraneFig8.png | thumb | 300px | Figure 8. Survival of ''C. dilutus'' larvae after an iTIE exposure near the mouth of the Rouge River. Organisms were exposed to site porewater for 48 hours and cultured post-exposure for an additional 5 days. Error bars show standard deviation.]]<br />
An&nbsp;iTIE&nbsp;system&nbsp;deployment&nbsp;was designed and completed to determine which chemical classes are most responsible for causing toxicity at the site. Resin treatments included glass wool (inert, non-fractionating substance), Chelex (metals sorption), Oasis HLB (general organics sorption), and Oasis WAX (organics sorption, with a high affinity for PFAS). The study utilized fathead minnow (''P. promelas'') embryos, due to their relative sensitivity to metals and PAHs, as well as second-instar midge ([[Wikipedia: Chironomus |''Chironomus dilutus'']]) larvae due to their relative sensitivity to PFAS. <br />
<br />
The test organisms were exposed to fractionated porewater ''in situ'' for 48 hours. Following exposure, organisms were cultured for an additional five days, and survival was recorded (Figures 7 and 8). Moderate declines in survival were seen in both species in the glass wool treatment, indicating toxicity at the site. For ''P. promelas'', the highest proportion of healthy development occurred in the Chelex treatment, supporting the hypothesis that metals are a dominant cause of toxicity. ''C. dilutus'' had the greatest survival in the Oasis WAX treatment, suggesting that an organic stressor class like PFAS is also present at harmful concentrations in the river.<br />
<br />
Water chemical analyses of fractionated and unfractionated water samples were completed to support biological results. Analyses were conducted for a range of stressor classes including metals, PAHs, PCBs, an organophosphate pesticide (chlorpyrifos), a PFAS compound (PFOS) and a pyrethroid insecticide (permethrin). Of these analytes, only heavy metals and PFOS were detected. Some chemical classes including PAHs and PCBs were not detected at the site.<br />
To reach similar conclusions using traditional Phase 1 TIE methods, one would need to complete the following tests: baseline toxicity, filtration, aeration, EDTA, C18 SPE, and methanol elution of C18 SPE. The iTIE method allows the same conclusions to be drawn with significantly less time and effort required.<br />
<br />
==Summary==<br />
The ''in situ'' Toxicity Identification Evaluation technology and protocol is a powerful tool that investigators can use to strengthen causal linkages between chemical stressors and ecological toxicity. By fractionating sampled water and exposing test organisms ''in situ'', investigators can gather toxicity response data while minimizing sample manipulation and accurately representing environmental conditions.<br />
<br clear="right"/><br />
<br />
==References==<br />
<references /><br />
<br />
==See Also==</div>Jhurleyhttps://www.enviro.wiki/index.php?title=User:Jhurley/sandbox&diff=18103User:Jhurley/sandbox2026-04-09T19:03:57Z<p>Jhurley: /* Estimating PCE/TCE Abiotic First-Order Reductive Dechlorination Rate Constants in Clayey Soils Under Anoxic Conditions */</p>
<hr />
<div>==Estimating PCE/TCE Abiotic First-Order Reductive Dechlorination Rate Constants in Clayey Soils Under Anoxic Conditions== <br />
The U.S. Department of Defense (DoD) faces many challenges in restoring aquifers at contaminated sites, often due to back-diffusion of tetrachloroethene (PCE) and trichloroethene (TCE) from low-permeability clay zones. The uptake, storage, and subsequent long-term release of these dissolved contaminants from clays are key processes in understanding the longevity, intensity, and risks associated with many persistent chlorinated ethene groundwater plumes. Although naturally occurring abiotic and biotic dechlorination processes in clays may reduce stored contaminant mass and significantly aid natural attenuation, no standardized field method currently exists to verify or quantify these reactions. It is critical to remediation design efforts to demonstrate and validate a cost-effective in situ approach for assessing these dechlorination processes using first-order rate constants. An approach was developed and applied across eight DoD sites to support Remedial Project Managers (RPMs) and regulators in evaluating natural attenuation potential in clay-rich environments.<br />
<div style="float:right;margin:0 0 2em 2em;">__TOC__</div><br />
<br />
'''Related Article(s):'''<br />
<br />
*[[Monitored Natural Attenuation (MNA)]]<br />
*[[Monitored Natural Attenuation (MNA) of Chlorinated Solvents]]<br />
*[[Monitored Natural Attenuation - Transitioning from Active Remedies]]<br />
*[[Matrix Diffusion]]<br />
*[[REMChlor - MD]]<br />
<br />
'''Contributors:''' Dani Tran, Dr. Charles Schaefer, Dr. Charles Werth<br />
<br />
'''Key Resource:'''<br />
*Schaefer, C.E, Tran, D., Nguyen, D., Latta, D.E., Werth, C.J., 2025. Evaluating Mineral and In Situ Indicators of Abiotic Dechlorination in Clayey Soils (3)<br />
<br />
==Introduction==<br />
In waterways impacted by numerous naturally occurring and anthropogenic chemical stressors, it is crucial for environmental practitioners to be able to identify which chemical classes are causing the highest degrees of toxicity to aquatic life. Previously developed methods, including the Toxicity Identification Evaluation (TIE) protocol developed by the US Environmental Protection Agency (EPA)<ref>Norberg-King, T., Mount, D.I., Amato, J.R., Jensen, D.A., Thompson, J.A., 1992. Toxicity identification evaluation: Characterization of chronically toxic effluents: Phase I. Publication No. EPA/600/6-91/005F. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Office of Research and Development. [https://www.epa.gov/sites/default/files/2015-09/documents/owm0255.pdf Free Download from US EPA]&nbsp; [[Media: usepa1992.pdf | Report.pdf]]</ref>, can be confounded by sample manipulation artifacts and temporal limitations of ''ex situ'' organism exposures<ref name="BurtonEtAl2020"/>. These factors may disrupt causal linkages and mislead investigators during site characterization and management decision-making. The ''in situ'' Toxicity Identification Evaluation (iTIE) technology was developed to allow users to strengthen stressor-causality linkages and rank chemical classes of concern at impaired sites, with high degrees of ecological realism. <br />
<br />
The technology has undergone a series of improvements in recent years, with the most recent prototype being robust, operable in a wide variety of site conditions, and cost-effective compared to alternative site characterization methods<ref>Burton, G.A. Jr., Nordstrom, J.F., 2004. An in situ toxicity identification evaluation method part I: Laboratory validation. Environmental Toxicology and Chemistry, 23(12), pp. 2844-2850. [https://doi.org/10.1897/03-409.1 doi: 10.1897/03-409.1]</ref><ref>Burton, G.A. Jr., Nordstrom, J.F., 2004. An in situ toxicity identification evaluation method part II: Field validation. Environmental Toxicology and Chemistry, 23(12), pp. 2851-2855. [https://doi.org/10.1897/03-468.1 doi: 10.1897/03-468.1]</ref><ref name="BurtonEtAl2020"/><ref name="SteigmeyerEtAl2017"/>. The latest prototype can be used in any of the following settings: in marine, estuarine, or freshwater sites; to study surface water or sediment pore water; in shallow waters easily accessible by foot or in deep waters only accessible by pier or boat. It can be used to study sites impacted by a wide variety of stressors including ammonia, [[Metal and Metalloid Contaminants | metals]], pesticides, polychlorinated biphenyls (PCB), [[Polycyclic Aromatic Hydrocarbons (PAHs) | polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons (PAH)]], and [[Perfluoroalkyl and Polyfluoroalkyl Substances (PFAS) | per- and polyfluoroalkyl substances (PFAS)]], among others. The technology is applicable to studies of acute toxicity via organism survival or of chronic toxicity via responses in growth, reproduction, or gene expression<ref name="BurtonEtAl2020"/>.<br />
<br />
==System Components and Validation==<br />
[[File: CraneFig1.png | thumb | 600 px | Figure 1: A schematic diagram of the iTIE system prototype. The system is divided into three sub-systems: 1) the Pore Water/Surface Water Collection Sub-System (blue); 2) the Pumping Sub-System (red); and 3) the iTIE Resin, Exposure, and Sampling Sub-System (green). Water first enters the system through the Pore Water/Surface Water Collection Sub-System. Porewater can be collected using Trident-style probes, or surface water can be collected using a simple weighted probe. The water is composited in a manifold before being pumped to the rest of the iTIE system by the booster pump. Once in the iTIE Resin, Exposure, and Sampling Sub-System, the water is gently oxygenated by the Oxygen Coil, separated from gas bubbles by the Drip Chamber, and diverted to separate iTIE Resin and Exposure Chambers (or iTIE units) by the Splitting Manifold. Water movement through each iTIE unit is controlled by a dedicated Regulation Pump. Finally, the water is gathered in Sample Collection bottles for analysis.]]<br />
The&nbsp;latest&nbsp;iTIE&nbsp;prototype consists of an array of sorptive resins that differentially fractionate sampled water, and a series of corresponding flow-through organism chambers that receive the treated water ''in situ''. Resin treatments can be selected depending on the chemicals suspected to be present at each site to selectively sequester certain chemical of concern (CoC) classes from the whole water, leaving a smaller subset of chemicals in the resulting water fraction for chemical and toxicological characterization. Test organism species and life stages can also be chosen depending on factors including site characteristics and study goals. In the full iTIE protocol, site water is continuously sampled either from the sediment pore spaces or the water column at a site, gently oxygenated, diverted to different iTIE units for fractionation and organism exposure, and collected in sample bottles for off-site chemical analysis (Figure 1). All iTIE system components are housed within waterproof Pelican cases, which allow for ease of transport and temperature control.<br />
<br />
===Porewater and Surface Water Collection Sub-system===<br />
[[File: CraneFig2.png | thumb | 600 px | Figure 2: a) Trident probe with auxiliary sensors attached, b) a Trident probe with end caps removed (the red arrow identifies the intermediate space where glass beads are packed to filter suspended solids), c) a Trident probe being installed using a series of push poles and a fence post driver]]<br />
Given&nbsp;the&nbsp;importance&nbsp;of sediment porewater to ecosystem structure and function, investigators may employ the iTIE system to evaluate the toxic effects associated with the impacted sediment porewater. To accomplish this, the iTIE system utilizes the Trident probe, originally developed for Department of Defense site characterization studies<ref>Chadwick, D.B., Harre, B., Smith, C.F., Groves, J.G., Paulsen, R.J., 2003. Coastal Contaminant Migration Monitoring: The Trident Probe and UltraSeep System. Hardware Description, Protocols, and Procedures. Technical Report 1902. Space and Naval Warfare Systems Center.</ref>. The main body of the Trident is comprised of a stainless-steel frame with six hollow probes (Figure 2). Each probe contains a layer of inert glass beads, which filters suspended solids from the sampled water. The water is drawn through each probe into a composite manifold and transported to the rest of the iTIE system using a high-precision peristaltic pump. <br />
<br />
The Trident also includes an adjustable stopper plate, which forms a seal against the sediment and prevents the inadvertent dilution of porewater samples with surface water. (Figure 2). Preliminary laboratory results indicate that the Trident is extremely effective in collecting porewater samples with minimal surface water infiltration in sediments ranging from coarse sand to fine clay. Underwater cameras, sensors, passive samplers, and other auxiliary equipment can be attached to the Trident probe frame to provide supplemental data.<br />
<br />
Alternatively, practitioners may employ the iTIE system to evaluate site surface water. To sample surface water, weighted intake tubes can collect surface water from the water column using a peristaltic pump.<br />
<br />
===Oxygen Coil, Overflow Bag and Drip Chamber===<br />
[[File: CraneFig3.png | thumb | left | 400 px | Figure 3. Contents of the iTIE system cooler. The pictured HDPE rack (47.6 cm length x 29.7 cm width x 33.7 cm height) is removable from the iTIE cooler. Water enters the system at the red circle, flows through the oxygen coil, and then travels to each of the individual iTIE units where diagnostic resins and organisms are located. The water then briefly leaves the cooler to travel through peristaltic regulation pumps before being gathered in sample collection bottles.]]<br />
Porewater&nbsp;is&nbsp;naturally&nbsp;anoxic due to limited mixing with aerated surface water and high oxygen demand of sediments, which may cause organism mortality and interfere with iTIE results. To preclude this, sampled porewater is exposed to an oxygen coil. This consists of an interior silicone tube connected to a pressurized oxygen canister, threaded through an exterior reinforced PVC tube through which water is slowly pumped (Figure 3). Pump rates are optimized to ensure adequate aeration of the water. In addition to elevating DO levels, the oxygen coil facilitates the oxidation of dissolved sulfides, which naturally occur in some marine sediments and may otherwise cause toxicity to organisms if left in its reduced form.<br />
<br />
Gas bubbles may form in the oxygen coil over the course of a deployment. These can be disruptive, decreasing water sample volumes and posing a danger to sensitive organisms like daphnids. To account for this, the water travels to a drip chamber after exiting the oxygen coil, which allows gas bubbles to be separated and diverted to an overflow system. The sample water then flows to a manifold which divides the flow into different paths to each of the treatment units for fractionation and organism exposure.<br />
<br />
===iTIE Units: Fractionation and Organism Exposure Chambers===<br />
[[File: CraneFig4.png | thumb | 300px | Figure 4. A diagram of the iTIE prototype. Water flows upward into each resin chamber through the unit bottom. After being chemically fractionated in the resin chamber, water travels into the organism chamber, where test organisms have been placed. Water is drawn through the units by high-precision peristaltic pumps.]]<br />
At&nbsp;the&nbsp;core&nbsp;of&nbsp;the&nbsp;iTIE&nbsp;system are separate dual-chamber iTIE units, each with a resin fractionation chamber and an organism exposure chamber (Figure 4). Developed by Burton ''et al.''<ref name="BurtonEtAl2020"/>, the iTIE prototype is constructed from acrylic, with rubber O-rings to connect each piece. Each iTIE unit can contain a different diagnostic resin matrix, customizable to remove specific chemical classes from the water. Sampled water flows into each unit through the bottom and is differentially fractionated by the resin matrix as it travels upward. Then it reaches the organism chamber, where test organisms are placed for exposure. The organism chamber inlet and outlet are covered by mesh to prevent the escape of the test organisms. This continuous flow-through design allows practitioners to capture the temporal heterogeneity of ambient water conditions over the duration of an ''in situ'' exposure. Currently, the iTIE system can support four independent iTIE treatment units.<br />
<br />
After being exposed to test organisms, water is collected in sample bottles. The bottles can be pre-loaded with preservation reagents to allow for later chemical analysis. Sample bottles can be composed of polyethylene, glass or other materials depending on the CoC.<br />
<br />
===Pumping Sub-system===<br />
[[File: CraneFig5.png | thumb | 300px | Figure 5. The iTIE system pumping sub-system. The sub-system consists of: A) a single booster pump, which is directly connected to the water sampling device and feeds water to the rest of the iTIE system, and B) a set of four regulation pumps, which each connect to the outflow of an individual iTIE unit. Each pump set is housed in a waterproof case with self-contained rechargeable battery power. A tablet is mounted inside the lid of the four pump case, which can be used to program and operate all of the pumps when connected to the internet.]]<br />
Water&nbsp;movement&nbsp;through&nbsp;the&nbsp;system is driven by a series of high-precision, programmable peristaltic pumps ([https://ecotechmarine.com/ EcoTech Marine]). Each pump set is housed in a Pelican storm travel case. Power is supplied to each pump by internal rechargeable lithium-iron phosphate batteries ([https://www.bioennopower.com/ Bioenno Power]).<br />
<br />
First, water is supplied to the system by a booster pump (Figure 5A). This pump is situated between the water sampling sub-system and the oxygen coil. The booster pump: 1) facilitates pore water collection, especially from sediments with high fine particle fractions; 2) helps water overcome vertical lifts to travel to the iTIE system; and 3) prevents vacuums from forming in the iTIE system interior, which can accelerate the formation of disruptive gas bubbles in the oxygen coil. The booster pump should be programmed to supply an excess of water to prevent vacuum formation.<br />
<br />
Second, a set of four regulation pumps ensure precise flow rates through each independent iTIE unit (Figure 5B). Each regulation pump pulls water from the top of an iTIE unit and then dispenses that water into a sample bottle for further analysis.<br />
<br />
==Study Design Considerations==<br />
===Diagnostic Resin Treatments===<br />
Several commercially available resins have been verified for use in the iTIE system. Investigators can select resins based on stressor classes of interest at each site. Each resin selectively removes a CoC class from site water prior to organism exposure.<br />
*[https://www.dupont.com/products/ambersorb560.html DuPont Ambersorb 560] for removal of 1,4-dioxane and other organic chemicals<ref>Woodard, S., Mohr, T., Nickelsen, M.G., 2014. Synthetic media: A promising new treatment technology for 1,4-dioxane. Remediation Journal, 24(4), pp. 27-40. [https://doi.org/10.1002/rem.21402 doi: 10.1002/rem.21402]</ref><br />
*C18 for nonpolar organic chemicals<br />
*[https://www.bio-rad.com/en-us Bio-Rad] [https://www.bio-rad.com/en-us/product/chelex-100-resin?ID=6448ab3e-b96a-4162-9124-7b7d2330288e Chelex] for metals<br />
*Granular activated carbon for metals, general organic chemicals, sulfide<ref>Lemos, B.R.S., Teixeira, I.F., de Mesquita, J.P., Ribeiro, R.R., Donnici, C.L., Lago, R.M., 2012. Use of modified activated carbon for the oxidation of aqueous sulfide. Carbon, 50(3), pp. 1386-1393. [https://doi.org/10.1016/j.carbon.2011.11.011 doi: 10.1016/j.carbon.2011.11.011]</ref><br />
*[https://www.waters.com/nextgen/us/en.html Waters] [https://www.waters.com/nextgen/us/en/search.html?category=Shop&isocode=en_US&keyword=oasis%20hlb&multiselect=true&page=1&rows=12&sort=best-sellers&xcid=ppc-ppc_23916&gad_source=1&gad_campaignid=14746094146&gbraid=0AAAAAD_uR00nhlNwrhhegNh06pBODTgiN&gclid=CjwKCAiAtLvMBhB_EiwA1u6_PsppE0raci2IhvGnAAe5ijciNcetLaGZo5qA3g3r4Z_La7YAPJtzShoC6LoQAvD_BwE Oasis HLB] for general organic chemicals<ref name="SteigmeyerEtAl2017"/><br />
*[https://www.waters.com/nextgen/us/en.html Waters] [https://www.waters.com/nextgen/us/en/search.html?category=All&enableHL=true&isocode=en_US&keyword=Oasis%20WAX%20&multiselect=true&page=1&rows=12&sort=most-relevant Oasis WAX] for PFAS, organic chemicals of mixed polarity<ref>Iannone, A., Carriera, F., Di Fiore, C., Avino, P., 2024. Poly- and Perfluoroalkyl Substance (PFAS) Analysis in Environmental Matrices: An Overview of the Extraction and Chromatographic Detection Methods. Analytica, 5(2), pp. 187-202. [https://doi.org/10.3390/analytica5020012 doi: 10.3390/analytica5020012]&nbsp; [[Media: IannoneEtAl2024.pdf | Open Access Article]]</ref><br />
*Zeolite for ammonia, other organic chemicals<br />
<br />
Resins must be adequately conditioned prior to use. Otherwise, they may inadequately adsorb toxicants or cause stress to organisms. New resins should be tested for efficacy and toxicity before being used in an iTIE system. <br />
<br />
===Test Organism Species and Life Stages===<br />
Practitioners can also select different organism species and life stages for use in the iTIE system, depending on site characteristics and study goals. The iTIE system can accommodate various small test organisms, including embryo-stage fish and most macroinvertebrates. The following common toxicity tests can be adapted for application within iTIE systems<ref>U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Office of Solid Waste and Emergency Response, 1994. Catalogue of Standard Toxicity Tests for Ecological Risk Assessment. ECO Update, 2(2), 4 pages. Publication No. 9345.0.05I [https://www.epa.gov/sites/default/files/2015-09/documents/v2no2.pdf Free Download]&nbsp; [[Media: usepa1994.pdf | Report.pdf]]</ref>.<br />
<ul><u>Freshwater acute toxicity:</u></ul><br />
*[[Wikipedia: Daphnia magna | ''Daphnia magna'']] or [[Wikipedia: Daphnia pulex | ''Daphnia pulex'']] 24-, 48-, and 96-hour survival<br />
<ul><u>Freshwater chronic toxicity:</u></ul><br />
*[[Wikipedia: Ceriodaphnia dubia | ''Ceriodaphnia dubia'']] 7-day survival and reproduction<br />
*''D. magna'' 7-day survival and reproduction<br />
*[[Wikipedia: Fathead minnow | ''Pimephales promelas'']] 7-day embryo-larval survival and teratogenicity<br />
*[[Wikipedia: Hyalella azteca | ''Hyalella Azteca'']] 10- or 30-day survival and reproduction<br />
<ul><u>Marine acute toxicity:</u></ul><br />
*[[Wikipedia: Americamysis bahia | ''Americamysis bahia'']] 24- and 48-hour survival<br />
<ul><u>Marine chronic toxicity:</u></ul><br />
*''Americamysis'' survival, growth and fecundity<br />
*[[Wikipedia: Topsmelt silverside | ''Atherinops affinis'']] embryo-larval survival and growth <br />
<br />
Acute toxicity is quantifiable via organism survival rates immediately following the termination of an iTIE system field deployment. Chronic toxicity can be quantified by continuing to culture and observe test organisms in-lab. Common chronic endpoints include stunted growth, altered development such as teratogenicity in larval fish, decreased reproduction rates, and changes in gene expression. <br />
<br />
Several gene expression endpoints have been detectable in bioassays following an iTIE system deployment and in-lab culturing period. Steigmeyer ''et al.''<ref name="SteigmeyerEtAl2017"/> were able to detect changes in the expression of two genes in ''D. magna'' after a 24-hour exposure to bisphenol A. In a separate study, Nichols<ref>Nichols, E., 2023. Methods for Identification and Prioritization of Stressors at Impaired Sites. Masters thesis, University of Michigan. University of Michigan Library Deep Blue Documents. [https://deepblue.lib.umich.edu/bitstream/handle/2027.42/176142/Nichols_Elizabeth_thesis.pdf?sequence=1 Free Download]&nbsp; [[Media: Nichols2023.pdf | Report.pdf]]</ref> found a significant decline in acetylcholinesterase activity in ''H. azteca'' after a 24-hour exposure to chlorpyrifos. These results indicate a potential to adapt other gene expression bioassays for use in conjunction with iTIE system field exposures to prove stressor-causality linkages.<br />
<br />
===Cost Effectiveness Study===<br />
Burton ''et al.''<ref name="BurtonEtAl2020"/> conducted a cost effectiveness study comparing the iTIE technology with the traditional US EPA Phase 1 TIE method. Comparisons were based on the estimated time required to complete various sub-tasks within each method. Sub-tasks included organism care, equipment preparation, mobilization and deployment, test maintenance, test termination, demobilization, and test termination analyses. It was ultimately estimated that the iTIE protocol requires 47% less time (67 fewer hours) to complete than the Phase 1 TIE method, with the largest time differences in equipment preparation, deployment, test maintenance, and demobilization. It is important to note that the iTIE method may require additional initial costs for equipment and training.<br />
<br />
==Field Application==<br />
[[File: CraneFig6.png | thumb | left | 400px | Figure 6. iTIES deployment at the Rouge River, Detroit, MI. In the foreground is the iTIE Cooler Sub-System, which contains iTIE resin treatments and test organism groups, as well as the oxygenation coil and sample collection bottles. Next to the iTIE Cooler are the two pump cases. The Trident can be seen above the pump cases, installed in the river channel near shore.]]<br />
The&nbsp;iTIE&nbsp;system&nbsp;has&nbsp;been successfully deployed at a variety of marine and freshwater sites during the proof-of-concept phase of prototype development. One example is the 2024 iTIE system deployment completed near the mouth of the Rouge River in Detroit, MI (Figure 6). The Rouge River watershed has a long history of industrialization, with a legacy of chemical dumping, channelization, damming, and urban runoff<ref>Ridgway, J., Cave, K., DeMaria, A., O’Meara, J., Hartig, J. H., 2018. The Rouge River Area of Concern—A multi-year, multi-level successful approach to restoration of Impaired Beneficial Uses. Aquatic Ecosystem Health and Management, 21(4), pp. 398-408. [https://doi.org/10.1080/14634988.2018.1528816 doi: 10.1080/14634988.2018.1528816]</ref>. This has led to degraded environmental conditions, with previous detections of a wide range of chemicals including heavy metals and various organics.<br />
<br />
[[File: CraneFig7.png | thumb | 300px | Figure 7. Survival and healthy development of ''P. promelas'' embryos and larvae following a 48-hour iTIE exposure near the mouth of the Rouge River. Organisms were exposed to site porewater as embryos for 48 hours and cultured post-exposure for an additional 5 days.]]<br />
[[File: CraneFig8.png | thumb | 300px | Figure 8. Survival of ''C. dilutus'' larvae after an iTIE exposure near the mouth of the Rouge River. Organisms were exposed to site porewater for 48 hours and cultured post-exposure for an additional 5 days. Error bars show standard deviation.]]<br />
An&nbsp;iTIE&nbsp;system&nbsp;deployment&nbsp;was designed and completed to determine which chemical classes are most responsible for causing toxicity at the site. Resin treatments included glass wool (inert, non-fractionating substance), Chelex (metals sorption), Oasis HLB (general organics sorption), and Oasis WAX (organics sorption, with a high affinity for PFAS). The study utilized fathead minnow (''P. promelas'') embryos, due to their relative sensitivity to metals and PAHs, as well as second-instar midge ([[Wikipedia: Chironomus |''Chironomus dilutus'']]) larvae due to their relative sensitivity to PFAS. <br />
<br />
The test organisms were exposed to fractionated porewater ''in situ'' for 48 hours. Following exposure, organisms were cultured for an additional five days, and survival was recorded (Figures 7 and 8). Moderate declines in survival were seen in both species in the glass wool treatment, indicating toxicity at the site. For ''P. promelas'', the highest proportion of healthy development occurred in the Chelex treatment, supporting the hypothesis that metals are a dominant cause of toxicity. ''C. dilutus'' had the greatest survival in the Oasis WAX treatment, suggesting that an organic stressor class like PFAS is also present at harmful concentrations in the river.<br />
<br />
Water chemical analyses of fractionated and unfractionated water samples were completed to support biological results. Analyses were conducted for a range of stressor classes including metals, PAHs, PCBs, an organophosphate pesticide (chlorpyrifos), a PFAS compound (PFOS) and a pyrethroid insecticide (permethrin). Of these analytes, only heavy metals and PFOS were detected. Some chemical classes including PAHs and PCBs were not detected at the site.<br />
To reach similar conclusions using traditional Phase 1 TIE methods, one would need to complete the following tests: baseline toxicity, filtration, aeration, EDTA, C18 SPE, and methanol elution of C18 SPE. The iTIE method allows the same conclusions to be drawn with significantly less time and effort required.<br />
<br />
==Summary==<br />
The ''in situ'' Toxicity Identification Evaluation technology and protocol is a powerful tool that investigators can use to strengthen causal linkages between chemical stressors and ecological toxicity. By fractionating sampled water and exposing test organisms ''in situ'', investigators can gather toxicity response data while minimizing sample manipulation and accurately representing environmental conditions.<br />
<br clear="right"/><br />
<br />
==References==<br />
<references /><br />
<br />
==See Also==</div>Jhurleyhttps://www.enviro.wiki/index.php?title=User:Jhurley/sandbox&diff=18102User:Jhurley/sandbox2026-04-09T18:59:30Z<p>Jhurley: /* Estimating PCE/TCE Abiotic First-Order Reductive Dechlorination Rate Constants in Clayey Soils Under Anoxic Conditions */</p>
<hr />
<div>==Estimating PCE/TCE Abiotic First-Order Reductive Dechlorination Rate Constants in Clayey Soils Under Anoxic Conditions== <br />
The U.S. Department of Defense (DoD) faces many challenges in restoring aquifers at contaminated sites, often due to back-diffusion of tetrachloroethene (PCE) and trichloroethene (TCE) from low-permeability clay zones. The uptake, storage, and subsequent long-term release of these dissolved contaminants from clays are key processes in understanding the longevity, intensity, and risks associated with many persistent chlorinated ethene groundwater plumes. Although naturally occurring abiotic and biotic dechlorination processes in clays may reduce stored contaminant mass and significantly aid natural attenuation, no standardized field method currently exists to verify or quantify these reactions. It is critical to remediation design efforts to demonstrate and validate a cost-effective in situ approach for assessing these dechlorination processes using first-order rate constants. An approach was developed and applied across eight DoD sites to support Remedial Project Managers (RPMs) and regulators in evaluating natural attenuation potential in clay-rich environments.<br />
<div style="float:right;margin:0 0 2em 2em;">__TOC__</div><br />
<br />
'''Related Article(s):'''<br />
<br />
*[[Monitored Natural Attenuation (MNA)]]<br />
*[[Monitored Natural Attenuation (MNA) of Chlorinated Solvents]]<br />
*[[Monitored Natural Attenuation - Transitioning from Active Remedies]]<br />
*[[Matrix Diffusion]]<br />
*[[REMChlor - MD]]<br />
<br />
'''Contributors:''' Dani Tran, Dr. Charles Schaefer, Dr. Charles Werth<br />
<br />
'''Key Resources:'''<br />
*A Novel In Situ Toxicity Identification Evaluation (iTIE) System for Determining which Chemicals Drive Impairments at Contaminated Sites<ref name="BurtonEtAl2020">Burton, G.A., Cervi, E.C., Meyer, K., Steigmeyer, A., Verhamme, E., Daley, J., Hudson, M., Colvin, M., Rosen, G., 2020. A novel In Situ Toxicity Identification Evaluation (iTIE) System for Determining which Chemicals Drive Impairments at Contaminated Sites. Environmental Toxicology and Chemistry, 39(9), pp. 1746-1754. [https://doi.org/10.1002/etc.4799 doi: 10.1002/etc.4799]</ref> <br />
*An in situ toxicity identification and evaluation water analysis system: Laboratory validation<ref name="SteigmeyerEtAl2017">Steigmeyer, A.J., Zhang, J., Daley, J.M., Zhang, X., Burton, G.A. Jr., 2017. An in situ toxicity identification and evaluation water analysis system: Laboratory validation. Environmental Toxicology and Chemistry, 36(6), pp. 1636-1643. [https://doi.org/10.1002/etc.3696 doi: 10.1002/etc.3696]</ref> <br />
*Sediment Toxicity Identification Evaluation (TIE) Phases I, II, and III Guidance Document<ref>United States Environmental Protection Agency, 2007. Sediment Toxicity Identification Evaluation (TIE) Phases I, II, and III Guidance Document, EPA/600/R-07/080. 145 pages. [https://nepis.epa.gov/Exe/ZyPURL.cgi?Dockey=P1003GR1.txt Free Download]&nbsp; [[Media: EPA2007.pdf | Report.pdf]]</ref><br />
*In Situ Toxicity Identification Evaluation (iTIE) Technology for Assessing Contaminated Sediments, Remediation Success, Recontamination and Source Identification<ref>In Situ Toxicity Identification Evaluation (iTIE) Technology for Assessing Contaminated Sediments, Remediation Success, Recontamination and Source Identification [https://serdp-estcp.mil/projects/details/88a8f9ba-542b-4b98-bfa4-f693435535cd/er18-1181-project-overview Project Website]&nbsp; [[Media: ER18-1181Ph.II.pdf | Final Report.pdf]]</ref><br />
<br />
==Introduction==<br />
In waterways impacted by numerous naturally occurring and anthropogenic chemical stressors, it is crucial for environmental practitioners to be able to identify which chemical classes are causing the highest degrees of toxicity to aquatic life. Previously developed methods, including the Toxicity Identification Evaluation (TIE) protocol developed by the US Environmental Protection Agency (EPA)<ref>Norberg-King, T., Mount, D.I., Amato, J.R., Jensen, D.A., Thompson, J.A., 1992. Toxicity identification evaluation: Characterization of chronically toxic effluents: Phase I. Publication No. EPA/600/6-91/005F. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Office of Research and Development. [https://www.epa.gov/sites/default/files/2015-09/documents/owm0255.pdf Free Download from US EPA]&nbsp; [[Media: usepa1992.pdf | Report.pdf]]</ref>, can be confounded by sample manipulation artifacts and temporal limitations of ''ex situ'' organism exposures<ref name="BurtonEtAl2020"/>. These factors may disrupt causal linkages and mislead investigators during site characterization and management decision-making. The ''in situ'' Toxicity Identification Evaluation (iTIE) technology was developed to allow users to strengthen stressor-causality linkages and rank chemical classes of concern at impaired sites, with high degrees of ecological realism. <br />
<br />
The technology has undergone a series of improvements in recent years, with the most recent prototype being robust, operable in a wide variety of site conditions, and cost-effective compared to alternative site characterization methods<ref>Burton, G.A. Jr., Nordstrom, J.F., 2004. An in situ toxicity identification evaluation method part I: Laboratory validation. Environmental Toxicology and Chemistry, 23(12), pp. 2844-2850. [https://doi.org/10.1897/03-409.1 doi: 10.1897/03-409.1]</ref><ref>Burton, G.A. Jr., Nordstrom, J.F., 2004. An in situ toxicity identification evaluation method part II: Field validation. Environmental Toxicology and Chemistry, 23(12), pp. 2851-2855. [https://doi.org/10.1897/03-468.1 doi: 10.1897/03-468.1]</ref><ref name="BurtonEtAl2020"/><ref name="SteigmeyerEtAl2017"/>. The latest prototype can be used in any of the following settings: in marine, estuarine, or freshwater sites; to study surface water or sediment pore water; in shallow waters easily accessible by foot or in deep waters only accessible by pier or boat. It can be used to study sites impacted by a wide variety of stressors including ammonia, [[Metal and Metalloid Contaminants | metals]], pesticides, polychlorinated biphenyls (PCB), [[Polycyclic Aromatic Hydrocarbons (PAHs) | polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons (PAH)]], and [[Perfluoroalkyl and Polyfluoroalkyl Substances (PFAS) | per- and polyfluoroalkyl substances (PFAS)]], among others. The technology is applicable to studies of acute toxicity via organism survival or of chronic toxicity via responses in growth, reproduction, or gene expression<ref name="BurtonEtAl2020"/>.<br />
<br />
==System Components and Validation==<br />
[[File: CraneFig1.png | thumb | 600 px | Figure 1: A schematic diagram of the iTIE system prototype. The system is divided into three sub-systems: 1) the Pore Water/Surface Water Collection Sub-System (blue); 2) the Pumping Sub-System (red); and 3) the iTIE Resin, Exposure, and Sampling Sub-System (green). Water first enters the system through the Pore Water/Surface Water Collection Sub-System. Porewater can be collected using Trident-style probes, or surface water can be collected using a simple weighted probe. The water is composited in a manifold before being pumped to the rest of the iTIE system by the booster pump. Once in the iTIE Resin, Exposure, and Sampling Sub-System, the water is gently oxygenated by the Oxygen Coil, separated from gas bubbles by the Drip Chamber, and diverted to separate iTIE Resin and Exposure Chambers (or iTIE units) by the Splitting Manifold. Water movement through each iTIE unit is controlled by a dedicated Regulation Pump. Finally, the water is gathered in Sample Collection bottles for analysis.]]<br />
The&nbsp;latest&nbsp;iTIE&nbsp;prototype consists of an array of sorptive resins that differentially fractionate sampled water, and a series of corresponding flow-through organism chambers that receive the treated water ''in situ''. Resin treatments can be selected depending on the chemicals suspected to be present at each site to selectively sequester certain chemical of concern (CoC) classes from the whole water, leaving a smaller subset of chemicals in the resulting water fraction for chemical and toxicological characterization. Test organism species and life stages can also be chosen depending on factors including site characteristics and study goals. In the full iTIE protocol, site water is continuously sampled either from the sediment pore spaces or the water column at a site, gently oxygenated, diverted to different iTIE units for fractionation and organism exposure, and collected in sample bottles for off-site chemical analysis (Figure 1). All iTIE system components are housed within waterproof Pelican cases, which allow for ease of transport and temperature control.<br />
<br />
===Porewater and Surface Water Collection Sub-system===<br />
[[File: CraneFig2.png | thumb | 600 px | Figure 2: a) Trident probe with auxiliary sensors attached, b) a Trident probe with end caps removed (the red arrow identifies the intermediate space where glass beads are packed to filter suspended solids), c) a Trident probe being installed using a series of push poles and a fence post driver]]<br />
Given&nbsp;the&nbsp;importance&nbsp;of sediment porewater to ecosystem structure and function, investigators may employ the iTIE system to evaluate the toxic effects associated with the impacted sediment porewater. To accomplish this, the iTIE system utilizes the Trident probe, originally developed for Department of Defense site characterization studies<ref>Chadwick, D.B., Harre, B., Smith, C.F., Groves, J.G., Paulsen, R.J., 2003. Coastal Contaminant Migration Monitoring: The Trident Probe and UltraSeep System. Hardware Description, Protocols, and Procedures. Technical Report 1902. Space and Naval Warfare Systems Center.</ref>. The main body of the Trident is comprised of a stainless-steel frame with six hollow probes (Figure 2). Each probe contains a layer of inert glass beads, which filters suspended solids from the sampled water. The water is drawn through each probe into a composite manifold and transported to the rest of the iTIE system using a high-precision peristaltic pump. <br />
<br />
The Trident also includes an adjustable stopper plate, which forms a seal against the sediment and prevents the inadvertent dilution of porewater samples with surface water. (Figure 2). Preliminary laboratory results indicate that the Trident is extremely effective in collecting porewater samples with minimal surface water infiltration in sediments ranging from coarse sand to fine clay. Underwater cameras, sensors, passive samplers, and other auxiliary equipment can be attached to the Trident probe frame to provide supplemental data.<br />
<br />
Alternatively, practitioners may employ the iTIE system to evaluate site surface water. To sample surface water, weighted intake tubes can collect surface water from the water column using a peristaltic pump.<br />
<br />
===Oxygen Coil, Overflow Bag and Drip Chamber===<br />
[[File: CraneFig3.png | thumb | left | 400 px | Figure 3. Contents of the iTIE system cooler. The pictured HDPE rack (47.6 cm length x 29.7 cm width x 33.7 cm height) is removable from the iTIE cooler. Water enters the system at the red circle, flows through the oxygen coil, and then travels to each of the individual iTIE units where diagnostic resins and organisms are located. The water then briefly leaves the cooler to travel through peristaltic regulation pumps before being gathered in sample collection bottles.]]<br />
Porewater&nbsp;is&nbsp;naturally&nbsp;anoxic due to limited mixing with aerated surface water and high oxygen demand of sediments, which may cause organism mortality and interfere with iTIE results. To preclude this, sampled porewater is exposed to an oxygen coil. This consists of an interior silicone tube connected to a pressurized oxygen canister, threaded through an exterior reinforced PVC tube through which water is slowly pumped (Figure 3). Pump rates are optimized to ensure adequate aeration of the water. In addition to elevating DO levels, the oxygen coil facilitates the oxidation of dissolved sulfides, which naturally occur in some marine sediments and may otherwise cause toxicity to organisms if left in its reduced form.<br />
<br />
Gas bubbles may form in the oxygen coil over the course of a deployment. These can be disruptive, decreasing water sample volumes and posing a danger to sensitive organisms like daphnids. To account for this, the water travels to a drip chamber after exiting the oxygen coil, which allows gas bubbles to be separated and diverted to an overflow system. The sample water then flows to a manifold which divides the flow into different paths to each of the treatment units for fractionation and organism exposure.<br />
<br />
===iTIE Units: Fractionation and Organism Exposure Chambers===<br />
[[File: CraneFig4.png | thumb | 300px | Figure 4. A diagram of the iTIE prototype. Water flows upward into each resin chamber through the unit bottom. After being chemically fractionated in the resin chamber, water travels into the organism chamber, where test organisms have been placed. Water is drawn through the units by high-precision peristaltic pumps.]]<br />
At&nbsp;the&nbsp;core&nbsp;of&nbsp;the&nbsp;iTIE&nbsp;system are separate dual-chamber iTIE units, each with a resin fractionation chamber and an organism exposure chamber (Figure 4). Developed by Burton ''et al.''<ref name="BurtonEtAl2020"/>, the iTIE prototype is constructed from acrylic, with rubber O-rings to connect each piece. Each iTIE unit can contain a different diagnostic resin matrix, customizable to remove specific chemical classes from the water. Sampled water flows into each unit through the bottom and is differentially fractionated by the resin matrix as it travels upward. Then it reaches the organism chamber, where test organisms are placed for exposure. The organism chamber inlet and outlet are covered by mesh to prevent the escape of the test organisms. This continuous flow-through design allows practitioners to capture the temporal heterogeneity of ambient water conditions over the duration of an ''in situ'' exposure. Currently, the iTIE system can support four independent iTIE treatment units.<br />
<br />
After being exposed to test organisms, water is collected in sample bottles. The bottles can be pre-loaded with preservation reagents to allow for later chemical analysis. Sample bottles can be composed of polyethylene, glass or other materials depending on the CoC.<br />
<br />
===Pumping Sub-system===<br />
[[File: CraneFig5.png | thumb | 300px | Figure 5. The iTIE system pumping sub-system. The sub-system consists of: A) a single booster pump, which is directly connected to the water sampling device and feeds water to the rest of the iTIE system, and B) a set of four regulation pumps, which each connect to the outflow of an individual iTIE unit. Each pump set is housed in a waterproof case with self-contained rechargeable battery power. A tablet is mounted inside the lid of the four pump case, which can be used to program and operate all of the pumps when connected to the internet.]]<br />
Water&nbsp;movement&nbsp;through&nbsp;the&nbsp;system is driven by a series of high-precision, programmable peristaltic pumps ([https://ecotechmarine.com/ EcoTech Marine]). Each pump set is housed in a Pelican storm travel case. Power is supplied to each pump by internal rechargeable lithium-iron phosphate batteries ([https://www.bioennopower.com/ Bioenno Power]).<br />
<br />
First, water is supplied to the system by a booster pump (Figure 5A). This pump is situated between the water sampling sub-system and the oxygen coil. The booster pump: 1) facilitates pore water collection, especially from sediments with high fine particle fractions; 2) helps water overcome vertical lifts to travel to the iTIE system; and 3) prevents vacuums from forming in the iTIE system interior, which can accelerate the formation of disruptive gas bubbles in the oxygen coil. The booster pump should be programmed to supply an excess of water to prevent vacuum formation.<br />
<br />
Second, a set of four regulation pumps ensure precise flow rates through each independent iTIE unit (Figure 5B). Each regulation pump pulls water from the top of an iTIE unit and then dispenses that water into a sample bottle for further analysis.<br />
<br />
==Study Design Considerations==<br />
===Diagnostic Resin Treatments===<br />
Several commercially available resins have been verified for use in the iTIE system. Investigators can select resins based on stressor classes of interest at each site. Each resin selectively removes a CoC class from site water prior to organism exposure.<br />
*[https://www.dupont.com/products/ambersorb560.html DuPont Ambersorb 560] for removal of 1,4-dioxane and other organic chemicals<ref>Woodard, S., Mohr, T., Nickelsen, M.G., 2014. Synthetic media: A promising new treatment technology for 1,4-dioxane. Remediation Journal, 24(4), pp. 27-40. [https://doi.org/10.1002/rem.21402 doi: 10.1002/rem.21402]</ref><br />
*C18 for nonpolar organic chemicals<br />
*[https://www.bio-rad.com/en-us Bio-Rad] [https://www.bio-rad.com/en-us/product/chelex-100-resin?ID=6448ab3e-b96a-4162-9124-7b7d2330288e Chelex] for metals<br />
*Granular activated carbon for metals, general organic chemicals, sulfide<ref>Lemos, B.R.S., Teixeira, I.F., de Mesquita, J.P., Ribeiro, R.R., Donnici, C.L., Lago, R.M., 2012. Use of modified activated carbon for the oxidation of aqueous sulfide. Carbon, 50(3), pp. 1386-1393. [https://doi.org/10.1016/j.carbon.2011.11.011 doi: 10.1016/j.carbon.2011.11.011]</ref><br />
*[https://www.waters.com/nextgen/us/en.html Waters] [https://www.waters.com/nextgen/us/en/search.html?category=Shop&isocode=en_US&keyword=oasis%20hlb&multiselect=true&page=1&rows=12&sort=best-sellers&xcid=ppc-ppc_23916&gad_source=1&gad_campaignid=14746094146&gbraid=0AAAAAD_uR00nhlNwrhhegNh06pBODTgiN&gclid=CjwKCAiAtLvMBhB_EiwA1u6_PsppE0raci2IhvGnAAe5ijciNcetLaGZo5qA3g3r4Z_La7YAPJtzShoC6LoQAvD_BwE Oasis HLB] for general organic chemicals<ref name="SteigmeyerEtAl2017"/><br />
*[https://www.waters.com/nextgen/us/en.html Waters] [https://www.waters.com/nextgen/us/en/search.html?category=All&enableHL=true&isocode=en_US&keyword=Oasis%20WAX%20&multiselect=true&page=1&rows=12&sort=most-relevant Oasis WAX] for PFAS, organic chemicals of mixed polarity<ref>Iannone, A., Carriera, F., Di Fiore, C., Avino, P., 2024. Poly- and Perfluoroalkyl Substance (PFAS) Analysis in Environmental Matrices: An Overview of the Extraction and Chromatographic Detection Methods. Analytica, 5(2), pp. 187-202. [https://doi.org/10.3390/analytica5020012 doi: 10.3390/analytica5020012]&nbsp; [[Media: IannoneEtAl2024.pdf | Open Access Article]]</ref><br />
*Zeolite for ammonia, other organic chemicals<br />
<br />
Resins must be adequately conditioned prior to use. Otherwise, they may inadequately adsorb toxicants or cause stress to organisms. New resins should be tested for efficacy and toxicity before being used in an iTIE system. <br />
<br />
===Test Organism Species and Life Stages===<br />
Practitioners can also select different organism species and life stages for use in the iTIE system, depending on site characteristics and study goals. The iTIE system can accommodate various small test organisms, including embryo-stage fish and most macroinvertebrates. The following common toxicity tests can be adapted for application within iTIE systems<ref>U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Office of Solid Waste and Emergency Response, 1994. Catalogue of Standard Toxicity Tests for Ecological Risk Assessment. ECO Update, 2(2), 4 pages. Publication No. 9345.0.05I [https://www.epa.gov/sites/default/files/2015-09/documents/v2no2.pdf Free Download]&nbsp; [[Media: usepa1994.pdf | Report.pdf]]</ref>.<br />
<ul><u>Freshwater acute toxicity:</u></ul><br />
*[[Wikipedia: Daphnia magna | ''Daphnia magna'']] or [[Wikipedia: Daphnia pulex | ''Daphnia pulex'']] 24-, 48-, and 96-hour survival<br />
<ul><u>Freshwater chronic toxicity:</u></ul><br />
*[[Wikipedia: Ceriodaphnia dubia | ''Ceriodaphnia dubia'']] 7-day survival and reproduction<br />
*''D. magna'' 7-day survival and reproduction<br />
*[[Wikipedia: Fathead minnow | ''Pimephales promelas'']] 7-day embryo-larval survival and teratogenicity<br />
*[[Wikipedia: Hyalella azteca | ''Hyalella Azteca'']] 10- or 30-day survival and reproduction<br />
<ul><u>Marine acute toxicity:</u></ul><br />
*[[Wikipedia: Americamysis bahia | ''Americamysis bahia'']] 24- and 48-hour survival<br />
<ul><u>Marine chronic toxicity:</u></ul><br />
*''Americamysis'' survival, growth and fecundity<br />
*[[Wikipedia: Topsmelt silverside | ''Atherinops affinis'']] embryo-larval survival and growth <br />
<br />
Acute toxicity is quantifiable via organism survival rates immediately following the termination of an iTIE system field deployment. Chronic toxicity can be quantified by continuing to culture and observe test organisms in-lab. Common chronic endpoints include stunted growth, altered development such as teratogenicity in larval fish, decreased reproduction rates, and changes in gene expression. <br />
<br />
Several gene expression endpoints have been detectable in bioassays following an iTIE system deployment and in-lab culturing period. Steigmeyer ''et al.''<ref name="SteigmeyerEtAl2017"/> were able to detect changes in the expression of two genes in ''D. magna'' after a 24-hour exposure to bisphenol A. In a separate study, Nichols<ref>Nichols, E., 2023. Methods for Identification and Prioritization of Stressors at Impaired Sites. Masters thesis, University of Michigan. University of Michigan Library Deep Blue Documents. [https://deepblue.lib.umich.edu/bitstream/handle/2027.42/176142/Nichols_Elizabeth_thesis.pdf?sequence=1 Free Download]&nbsp; [[Media: Nichols2023.pdf | Report.pdf]]</ref> found a significant decline in acetylcholinesterase activity in ''H. azteca'' after a 24-hour exposure to chlorpyrifos. These results indicate a potential to adapt other gene expression bioassays for use in conjunction with iTIE system field exposures to prove stressor-causality linkages.<br />
<br />
===Cost Effectiveness Study===<br />
Burton ''et al.''<ref name="BurtonEtAl2020"/> conducted a cost effectiveness study comparing the iTIE technology with the traditional US EPA Phase 1 TIE method. Comparisons were based on the estimated time required to complete various sub-tasks within each method. Sub-tasks included organism care, equipment preparation, mobilization and deployment, test maintenance, test termination, demobilization, and test termination analyses. It was ultimately estimated that the iTIE protocol requires 47% less time (67 fewer hours) to complete than the Phase 1 TIE method, with the largest time differences in equipment preparation, deployment, test maintenance, and demobilization. It is important to note that the iTIE method may require additional initial costs for equipment and training.<br />
<br />
==Field Application==<br />
[[File: CraneFig6.png | thumb | left | 400px | Figure 6. iTIES deployment at the Rouge River, Detroit, MI. In the foreground is the iTIE Cooler Sub-System, which contains iTIE resin treatments and test organism groups, as well as the oxygenation coil and sample collection bottles. Next to the iTIE Cooler are the two pump cases. The Trident can be seen above the pump cases, installed in the river channel near shore.]]<br />
The&nbsp;iTIE&nbsp;system&nbsp;has&nbsp;been successfully deployed at a variety of marine and freshwater sites during the proof-of-concept phase of prototype development. One example is the 2024 iTIE system deployment completed near the mouth of the Rouge River in Detroit, MI (Figure 6). The Rouge River watershed has a long history of industrialization, with a legacy of chemical dumping, channelization, damming, and urban runoff<ref>Ridgway, J., Cave, K., DeMaria, A., O’Meara, J., Hartig, J. H., 2018. The Rouge River Area of Concern—A multi-year, multi-level successful approach to restoration of Impaired Beneficial Uses. Aquatic Ecosystem Health and Management, 21(4), pp. 398-408. [https://doi.org/10.1080/14634988.2018.1528816 doi: 10.1080/14634988.2018.1528816]</ref>. This has led to degraded environmental conditions, with previous detections of a wide range of chemicals including heavy metals and various organics.<br />
<br />
[[File: CraneFig7.png | thumb | 300px | Figure 7. Survival and healthy development of ''P. promelas'' embryos and larvae following a 48-hour iTIE exposure near the mouth of the Rouge River. Organisms were exposed to site porewater as embryos for 48 hours and cultured post-exposure for an additional 5 days.]]<br />
[[File: CraneFig8.png | thumb | 300px | Figure 8. Survival of ''C. dilutus'' larvae after an iTIE exposure near the mouth of the Rouge River. Organisms were exposed to site porewater for 48 hours and cultured post-exposure for an additional 5 days. Error bars show standard deviation.]]<br />
An&nbsp;iTIE&nbsp;system&nbsp;deployment&nbsp;was designed and completed to determine which chemical classes are most responsible for causing toxicity at the site. Resin treatments included glass wool (inert, non-fractionating substance), Chelex (metals sorption), Oasis HLB (general organics sorption), and Oasis WAX (organics sorption, with a high affinity for PFAS). The study utilized fathead minnow (''P. promelas'') embryos, due to their relative sensitivity to metals and PAHs, as well as second-instar midge ([[Wikipedia: Chironomus |''Chironomus dilutus'']]) larvae due to their relative sensitivity to PFAS. <br />
<br />
The test organisms were exposed to fractionated porewater ''in situ'' for 48 hours. Following exposure, organisms were cultured for an additional five days, and survival was recorded (Figures 7 and 8). Moderate declines in survival were seen in both species in the glass wool treatment, indicating toxicity at the site. For ''P. promelas'', the highest proportion of healthy development occurred in the Chelex treatment, supporting the hypothesis that metals are a dominant cause of toxicity. ''C. dilutus'' had the greatest survival in the Oasis WAX treatment, suggesting that an organic stressor class like PFAS is also present at harmful concentrations in the river.<br />
<br />
Water chemical analyses of fractionated and unfractionated water samples were completed to support biological results. Analyses were conducted for a range of stressor classes including metals, PAHs, PCBs, an organophosphate pesticide (chlorpyrifos), a PFAS compound (PFOS) and a pyrethroid insecticide (permethrin). Of these analytes, only heavy metals and PFOS were detected. Some chemical classes including PAHs and PCBs were not detected at the site.<br />
To reach similar conclusions using traditional Phase 1 TIE methods, one would need to complete the following tests: baseline toxicity, filtration, aeration, EDTA, C18 SPE, and methanol elution of C18 SPE. The iTIE method allows the same conclusions to be drawn with significantly less time and effort required.<br />
<br />
==Summary==<br />
The ''in situ'' Toxicity Identification Evaluation technology and protocol is a powerful tool that investigators can use to strengthen causal linkages between chemical stressors and ecological toxicity. By fractionating sampled water and exposing test organisms ''in situ'', investigators can gather toxicity response data while minimizing sample manipulation and accurately representing environmental conditions.<br />
<br clear="right"/><br />
<br />
==References==<br />
<references /><br />
<br />
==See Also==</div>Jhurleyhttps://www.enviro.wiki/index.php?title=User:Jhurley/sandbox&diff=18101User:Jhurley/sandbox2026-04-09T18:57:22Z<p>Jhurley: /* Estimating PCE/TCE Abiotic First-Order Reductive Dechlorination Rate Constants in Clayey Soils Under Anoxic Conditions */</p>
<hr />
<div>==Estimating PCE/TCE Abiotic First-Order Reductive Dechlorination Rate Constants in Clayey Soils Under Anoxic Conditions== <br />
The U.S. Department of Defense (DoD) faces many challenges in restoring aquifers at contaminated sites, often due to back-diffusion of tetrachloroethene (PCE) and trichloroethene (TCE) from low-permeability clay zones. The uptake, storage, and subsequent long-term release of these dissolved contaminants from clays are key processes in understanding the longevity, intensity, and risks associated with many persistent chlorinated ethene groundwater plumes. Although naturally occurring abiotic and biotic dechlorination processes in clays may reduce stored contaminant mass and significantly aid natural attenuation, no standardized field method currently exists to verify or quantify these reactions. It is critical to remediation design efforts to demonstrate and validate a cost-effective in situ approach for assessing these dechlorination processes using first-order rate constants. An approach was developed and applied across eight DoD sites to support Remedial Project Managers (RPMs) and regulators in evaluating natural attenuation potential in clay-rich environments.<br />
<div style="float:right;margin:0 0 2em 2em;">__TOC__</div><br />
<br />
'''Related Article(s):'''<br />
<br />
*[[Monitored Natural Attenuation (MNA)]]<br />
*[[Monitored Natural Attenuation (MNA) of Chlorinated Solvents]]<br />
*[[Monitored Natural Attenuation - Transitioning from Active Remedies]]<br />
*[[Matrix Diffusion]]<br />
*[[RemCHLOR-MD]]<br />
<br />
'''Contributors:''' Dr. G. Allen Burton Jr., Austin Crane<br />
<br />
'''Key Resources:'''<br />
*A Novel In Situ Toxicity Identification Evaluation (iTIE) System for Determining which Chemicals Drive Impairments at Contaminated Sites<ref name="BurtonEtAl2020">Burton, G.A., Cervi, E.C., Meyer, K., Steigmeyer, A., Verhamme, E., Daley, J., Hudson, M., Colvin, M., Rosen, G., 2020. A novel In Situ Toxicity Identification Evaluation (iTIE) System for Determining which Chemicals Drive Impairments at Contaminated Sites. Environmental Toxicology and Chemistry, 39(9), pp. 1746-1754. [https://doi.org/10.1002/etc.4799 doi: 10.1002/etc.4799]</ref> <br />
*An in situ toxicity identification and evaluation water analysis system: Laboratory validation<ref name="SteigmeyerEtAl2017">Steigmeyer, A.J., Zhang, J., Daley, J.M., Zhang, X., Burton, G.A. Jr., 2017. An in situ toxicity identification and evaluation water analysis system: Laboratory validation. Environmental Toxicology and Chemistry, 36(6), pp. 1636-1643. [https://doi.org/10.1002/etc.3696 doi: 10.1002/etc.3696]</ref> <br />
*Sediment Toxicity Identification Evaluation (TIE) Phases I, II, and III Guidance Document<ref>United States Environmental Protection Agency, 2007. Sediment Toxicity Identification Evaluation (TIE) Phases I, II, and III Guidance Document, EPA/600/R-07/080. 145 pages. [https://nepis.epa.gov/Exe/ZyPURL.cgi?Dockey=P1003GR1.txt Free Download]&nbsp; [[Media: EPA2007.pdf | Report.pdf]]</ref><br />
*In Situ Toxicity Identification Evaluation (iTIE) Technology for Assessing Contaminated Sediments, Remediation Success, Recontamination and Source Identification<ref>In Situ Toxicity Identification Evaluation (iTIE) Technology for Assessing Contaminated Sediments, Remediation Success, Recontamination and Source Identification [https://serdp-estcp.mil/projects/details/88a8f9ba-542b-4b98-bfa4-f693435535cd/er18-1181-project-overview Project Website]&nbsp; [[Media: ER18-1181Ph.II.pdf | Final Report.pdf]]</ref><br />
<br />
==Introduction==<br />
In waterways impacted by numerous naturally occurring and anthropogenic chemical stressors, it is crucial for environmental practitioners to be able to identify which chemical classes are causing the highest degrees of toxicity to aquatic life. Previously developed methods, including the Toxicity Identification Evaluation (TIE) protocol developed by the US Environmental Protection Agency (EPA)<ref>Norberg-King, T., Mount, D.I., Amato, J.R., Jensen, D.A., Thompson, J.A., 1992. Toxicity identification evaluation: Characterization of chronically toxic effluents: Phase I. Publication No. EPA/600/6-91/005F. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Office of Research and Development. [https://www.epa.gov/sites/default/files/2015-09/documents/owm0255.pdf Free Download from US EPA]&nbsp; [[Media: usepa1992.pdf | Report.pdf]]</ref>, can be confounded by sample manipulation artifacts and temporal limitations of ''ex situ'' organism exposures<ref name="BurtonEtAl2020"/>. These factors may disrupt causal linkages and mislead investigators during site characterization and management decision-making. The ''in situ'' Toxicity Identification Evaluation (iTIE) technology was developed to allow users to strengthen stressor-causality linkages and rank chemical classes of concern at impaired sites, with high degrees of ecological realism. <br />
<br />
The technology has undergone a series of improvements in recent years, with the most recent prototype being robust, operable in a wide variety of site conditions, and cost-effective compared to alternative site characterization methods<ref>Burton, G.A. Jr., Nordstrom, J.F., 2004. An in situ toxicity identification evaluation method part I: Laboratory validation. Environmental Toxicology and Chemistry, 23(12), pp. 2844-2850. [https://doi.org/10.1897/03-409.1 doi: 10.1897/03-409.1]</ref><ref>Burton, G.A. Jr., Nordstrom, J.F., 2004. An in situ toxicity identification evaluation method part II: Field validation. Environmental Toxicology and Chemistry, 23(12), pp. 2851-2855. [https://doi.org/10.1897/03-468.1 doi: 10.1897/03-468.1]</ref><ref name="BurtonEtAl2020"/><ref name="SteigmeyerEtAl2017"/>. The latest prototype can be used in any of the following settings: in marine, estuarine, or freshwater sites; to study surface water or sediment pore water; in shallow waters easily accessible by foot or in deep waters only accessible by pier or boat. It can be used to study sites impacted by a wide variety of stressors including ammonia, [[Metal and Metalloid Contaminants | metals]], pesticides, polychlorinated biphenyls (PCB), [[Polycyclic Aromatic Hydrocarbons (PAHs) | polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons (PAH)]], and [[Perfluoroalkyl and Polyfluoroalkyl Substances (PFAS) | per- and polyfluoroalkyl substances (PFAS)]], among others. The technology is applicable to studies of acute toxicity via organism survival or of chronic toxicity via responses in growth, reproduction, or gene expression<ref name="BurtonEtAl2020"/>.<br />
<br />
==System Components and Validation==<br />
[[File: CraneFig1.png | thumb | 600 px | Figure 1: A schematic diagram of the iTIE system prototype. The system is divided into three sub-systems: 1) the Pore Water/Surface Water Collection Sub-System (blue); 2) the Pumping Sub-System (red); and 3) the iTIE Resin, Exposure, and Sampling Sub-System (green). Water first enters the system through the Pore Water/Surface Water Collection Sub-System. Porewater can be collected using Trident-style probes, or surface water can be collected using a simple weighted probe. The water is composited in a manifold before being pumped to the rest of the iTIE system by the booster pump. Once in the iTIE Resin, Exposure, and Sampling Sub-System, the water is gently oxygenated by the Oxygen Coil, separated from gas bubbles by the Drip Chamber, and diverted to separate iTIE Resin and Exposure Chambers (or iTIE units) by the Splitting Manifold. Water movement through each iTIE unit is controlled by a dedicated Regulation Pump. Finally, the water is gathered in Sample Collection bottles for analysis.]]<br />
The&nbsp;latest&nbsp;iTIE&nbsp;prototype consists of an array of sorptive resins that differentially fractionate sampled water, and a series of corresponding flow-through organism chambers that receive the treated water ''in situ''. Resin treatments can be selected depending on the chemicals suspected to be present at each site to selectively sequester certain chemical of concern (CoC) classes from the whole water, leaving a smaller subset of chemicals in the resulting water fraction for chemical and toxicological characterization. Test organism species and life stages can also be chosen depending on factors including site characteristics and study goals. In the full iTIE protocol, site water is continuously sampled either from the sediment pore spaces or the water column at a site, gently oxygenated, diverted to different iTIE units for fractionation and organism exposure, and collected in sample bottles for off-site chemical analysis (Figure 1). All iTIE system components are housed within waterproof Pelican cases, which allow for ease of transport and temperature control.<br />
<br />
===Porewater and Surface Water Collection Sub-system===<br />
[[File: CraneFig2.png | thumb | 600 px | Figure 2: a) Trident probe with auxiliary sensors attached, b) a Trident probe with end caps removed (the red arrow identifies the intermediate space where glass beads are packed to filter suspended solids), c) a Trident probe being installed using a series of push poles and a fence post driver]]<br />
Given&nbsp;the&nbsp;importance&nbsp;of sediment porewater to ecosystem structure and function, investigators may employ the iTIE system to evaluate the toxic effects associated with the impacted sediment porewater. To accomplish this, the iTIE system utilizes the Trident probe, originally developed for Department of Defense site characterization studies<ref>Chadwick, D.B., Harre, B., Smith, C.F., Groves, J.G., Paulsen, R.J., 2003. Coastal Contaminant Migration Monitoring: The Trident Probe and UltraSeep System. Hardware Description, Protocols, and Procedures. Technical Report 1902. Space and Naval Warfare Systems Center.</ref>. The main body of the Trident is comprised of a stainless-steel frame with six hollow probes (Figure 2). Each probe contains a layer of inert glass beads, which filters suspended solids from the sampled water. The water is drawn through each probe into a composite manifold and transported to the rest of the iTIE system using a high-precision peristaltic pump. <br />
<br />
The Trident also includes an adjustable stopper plate, which forms a seal against the sediment and prevents the inadvertent dilution of porewater samples with surface water. (Figure 2). Preliminary laboratory results indicate that the Trident is extremely effective in collecting porewater samples with minimal surface water infiltration in sediments ranging from coarse sand to fine clay. Underwater cameras, sensors, passive samplers, and other auxiliary equipment can be attached to the Trident probe frame to provide supplemental data.<br />
<br />
Alternatively, practitioners may employ the iTIE system to evaluate site surface water. To sample surface water, weighted intake tubes can collect surface water from the water column using a peristaltic pump.<br />
<br />
===Oxygen Coil, Overflow Bag and Drip Chamber===<br />
[[File: CraneFig3.png | thumb | left | 400 px | Figure 3. Contents of the iTIE system cooler. The pictured HDPE rack (47.6 cm length x 29.7 cm width x 33.7 cm height) is removable from the iTIE cooler. Water enters the system at the red circle, flows through the oxygen coil, and then travels to each of the individual iTIE units where diagnostic resins and organisms are located. The water then briefly leaves the cooler to travel through peristaltic regulation pumps before being gathered in sample collection bottles.]]<br />
Porewater&nbsp;is&nbsp;naturally&nbsp;anoxic due to limited mixing with aerated surface water and high oxygen demand of sediments, which may cause organism mortality and interfere with iTIE results. To preclude this, sampled porewater is exposed to an oxygen coil. This consists of an interior silicone tube connected to a pressurized oxygen canister, threaded through an exterior reinforced PVC tube through which water is slowly pumped (Figure 3). Pump rates are optimized to ensure adequate aeration of the water. In addition to elevating DO levels, the oxygen coil facilitates the oxidation of dissolved sulfides, which naturally occur in some marine sediments and may otherwise cause toxicity to organisms if left in its reduced form.<br />
<br />
Gas bubbles may form in the oxygen coil over the course of a deployment. These can be disruptive, decreasing water sample volumes and posing a danger to sensitive organisms like daphnids. To account for this, the water travels to a drip chamber after exiting the oxygen coil, which allows gas bubbles to be separated and diverted to an overflow system. The sample water then flows to a manifold which divides the flow into different paths to each of the treatment units for fractionation and organism exposure.<br />
<br />
===iTIE Units: Fractionation and Organism Exposure Chambers===<br />
[[File: CraneFig4.png | thumb | 300px | Figure 4. A diagram of the iTIE prototype. Water flows upward into each resin chamber through the unit bottom. After being chemically fractionated in the resin chamber, water travels into the organism chamber, where test organisms have been placed. Water is drawn through the units by high-precision peristaltic pumps.]]<br />
At&nbsp;the&nbsp;core&nbsp;of&nbsp;the&nbsp;iTIE&nbsp;system are separate dual-chamber iTIE units, each with a resin fractionation chamber and an organism exposure chamber (Figure 4). Developed by Burton ''et al.''<ref name="BurtonEtAl2020"/>, the iTIE prototype is constructed from acrylic, with rubber O-rings to connect each piece. Each iTIE unit can contain a different diagnostic resin matrix, customizable to remove specific chemical classes from the water. Sampled water flows into each unit through the bottom and is differentially fractionated by the resin matrix as it travels upward. Then it reaches the organism chamber, where test organisms are placed for exposure. The organism chamber inlet and outlet are covered by mesh to prevent the escape of the test organisms. This continuous flow-through design allows practitioners to capture the temporal heterogeneity of ambient water conditions over the duration of an ''in situ'' exposure. Currently, the iTIE system can support four independent iTIE treatment units.<br />
<br />
After being exposed to test organisms, water is collected in sample bottles. The bottles can be pre-loaded with preservation reagents to allow for later chemical analysis. Sample bottles can be composed of polyethylene, glass or other materials depending on the CoC.<br />
<br />
===Pumping Sub-system===<br />
[[File: CraneFig5.png | thumb | 300px | Figure 5. The iTIE system pumping sub-system. The sub-system consists of: A) a single booster pump, which is directly connected to the water sampling device and feeds water to the rest of the iTIE system, and B) a set of four regulation pumps, which each connect to the outflow of an individual iTIE unit. Each pump set is housed in a waterproof case with self-contained rechargeable battery power. A tablet is mounted inside the lid of the four pump case, which can be used to program and operate all of the pumps when connected to the internet.]]<br />
Water&nbsp;movement&nbsp;through&nbsp;the&nbsp;system is driven by a series of high-precision, programmable peristaltic pumps ([https://ecotechmarine.com/ EcoTech Marine]). Each pump set is housed in a Pelican storm travel case. Power is supplied to each pump by internal rechargeable lithium-iron phosphate batteries ([https://www.bioennopower.com/ Bioenno Power]).<br />
<br />
First, water is supplied to the system by a booster pump (Figure 5A). This pump is situated between the water sampling sub-system and the oxygen coil. The booster pump: 1) facilitates pore water collection, especially from sediments with high fine particle fractions; 2) helps water overcome vertical lifts to travel to the iTIE system; and 3) prevents vacuums from forming in the iTIE system interior, which can accelerate the formation of disruptive gas bubbles in the oxygen coil. The booster pump should be programmed to supply an excess of water to prevent vacuum formation.<br />
<br />
Second, a set of four regulation pumps ensure precise flow rates through each independent iTIE unit (Figure 5B). Each regulation pump pulls water from the top of an iTIE unit and then dispenses that water into a sample bottle for further analysis.<br />
<br />
==Study Design Considerations==<br />
===Diagnostic Resin Treatments===<br />
Several commercially available resins have been verified for use in the iTIE system. Investigators can select resins based on stressor classes of interest at each site. Each resin selectively removes a CoC class from site water prior to organism exposure.<br />
*[https://www.dupont.com/products/ambersorb560.html DuPont Ambersorb 560] for removal of 1,4-dioxane and other organic chemicals<ref>Woodard, S., Mohr, T., Nickelsen, M.G., 2014. Synthetic media: A promising new treatment technology for 1,4-dioxane. Remediation Journal, 24(4), pp. 27-40. [https://doi.org/10.1002/rem.21402 doi: 10.1002/rem.21402]</ref><br />
*C18 for nonpolar organic chemicals<br />
*[https://www.bio-rad.com/en-us Bio-Rad] [https://www.bio-rad.com/en-us/product/chelex-100-resin?ID=6448ab3e-b96a-4162-9124-7b7d2330288e Chelex] for metals<br />
*Granular activated carbon for metals, general organic chemicals, sulfide<ref>Lemos, B.R.S., Teixeira, I.F., de Mesquita, J.P., Ribeiro, R.R., Donnici, C.L., Lago, R.M., 2012. Use of modified activated carbon for the oxidation of aqueous sulfide. Carbon, 50(3), pp. 1386-1393. [https://doi.org/10.1016/j.carbon.2011.11.011 doi: 10.1016/j.carbon.2011.11.011]</ref><br />
*[https://www.waters.com/nextgen/us/en.html Waters] [https://www.waters.com/nextgen/us/en/search.html?category=Shop&isocode=en_US&keyword=oasis%20hlb&multiselect=true&page=1&rows=12&sort=best-sellers&xcid=ppc-ppc_23916&gad_source=1&gad_campaignid=14746094146&gbraid=0AAAAAD_uR00nhlNwrhhegNh06pBODTgiN&gclid=CjwKCAiAtLvMBhB_EiwA1u6_PsppE0raci2IhvGnAAe5ijciNcetLaGZo5qA3g3r4Z_La7YAPJtzShoC6LoQAvD_BwE Oasis HLB] for general organic chemicals<ref name="SteigmeyerEtAl2017"/><br />
*[https://www.waters.com/nextgen/us/en.html Waters] [https://www.waters.com/nextgen/us/en/search.html?category=All&enableHL=true&isocode=en_US&keyword=Oasis%20WAX%20&multiselect=true&page=1&rows=12&sort=most-relevant Oasis WAX] for PFAS, organic chemicals of mixed polarity<ref>Iannone, A., Carriera, F., Di Fiore, C., Avino, P., 2024. Poly- and Perfluoroalkyl Substance (PFAS) Analysis in Environmental Matrices: An Overview of the Extraction and Chromatographic Detection Methods. Analytica, 5(2), pp. 187-202. [https://doi.org/10.3390/analytica5020012 doi: 10.3390/analytica5020012]&nbsp; [[Media: IannoneEtAl2024.pdf | Open Access Article]]</ref><br />
*Zeolite for ammonia, other organic chemicals<br />
<br />
Resins must be adequately conditioned prior to use. Otherwise, they may inadequately adsorb toxicants or cause stress to organisms. New resins should be tested for efficacy and toxicity before being used in an iTIE system. <br />
<br />
===Test Organism Species and Life Stages===<br />
Practitioners can also select different organism species and life stages for use in the iTIE system, depending on site characteristics and study goals. The iTIE system can accommodate various small test organisms, including embryo-stage fish and most macroinvertebrates. The following common toxicity tests can be adapted for application within iTIE systems<ref>U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Office of Solid Waste and Emergency Response, 1994. Catalogue of Standard Toxicity Tests for Ecological Risk Assessment. ECO Update, 2(2), 4 pages. Publication No. 9345.0.05I [https://www.epa.gov/sites/default/files/2015-09/documents/v2no2.pdf Free Download]&nbsp; [[Media: usepa1994.pdf | Report.pdf]]</ref>.<br />
<ul><u>Freshwater acute toxicity:</u></ul><br />
*[[Wikipedia: Daphnia magna | ''Daphnia magna'']] or [[Wikipedia: Daphnia pulex | ''Daphnia pulex'']] 24-, 48-, and 96-hour survival<br />
<ul><u>Freshwater chronic toxicity:</u></ul><br />
*[[Wikipedia: Ceriodaphnia dubia | ''Ceriodaphnia dubia'']] 7-day survival and reproduction<br />
*''D. magna'' 7-day survival and reproduction<br />
*[[Wikipedia: Fathead minnow | ''Pimephales promelas'']] 7-day embryo-larval survival and teratogenicity<br />
*[[Wikipedia: Hyalella azteca | ''Hyalella Azteca'']] 10- or 30-day survival and reproduction<br />
<ul><u>Marine acute toxicity:</u></ul><br />
*[[Wikipedia: Americamysis bahia | ''Americamysis bahia'']] 24- and 48-hour survival<br />
<ul><u>Marine chronic toxicity:</u></ul><br />
*''Americamysis'' survival, growth and fecundity<br />
*[[Wikipedia: Topsmelt silverside | ''Atherinops affinis'']] embryo-larval survival and growth <br />
<br />
Acute toxicity is quantifiable via organism survival rates immediately following the termination of an iTIE system field deployment. Chronic toxicity can be quantified by continuing to culture and observe test organisms in-lab. Common chronic endpoints include stunted growth, altered development such as teratogenicity in larval fish, decreased reproduction rates, and changes in gene expression. <br />
<br />
Several gene expression endpoints have been detectable in bioassays following an iTIE system deployment and in-lab culturing period. Steigmeyer ''et al.''<ref name="SteigmeyerEtAl2017"/> were able to detect changes in the expression of two genes in ''D. magna'' after a 24-hour exposure to bisphenol A. In a separate study, Nichols<ref>Nichols, E., 2023. Methods for Identification and Prioritization of Stressors at Impaired Sites. Masters thesis, University of Michigan. University of Michigan Library Deep Blue Documents. [https://deepblue.lib.umich.edu/bitstream/handle/2027.42/176142/Nichols_Elizabeth_thesis.pdf?sequence=1 Free Download]&nbsp; [[Media: Nichols2023.pdf | Report.pdf]]</ref> found a significant decline in acetylcholinesterase activity in ''H. azteca'' after a 24-hour exposure to chlorpyrifos. These results indicate a potential to adapt other gene expression bioassays for use in conjunction with iTIE system field exposures to prove stressor-causality linkages.<br />
<br />
===Cost Effectiveness Study===<br />
Burton ''et al.''<ref name="BurtonEtAl2020"/> conducted a cost effectiveness study comparing the iTIE technology with the traditional US EPA Phase 1 TIE method. Comparisons were based on the estimated time required to complete various sub-tasks within each method. Sub-tasks included organism care, equipment preparation, mobilization and deployment, test maintenance, test termination, demobilization, and test termination analyses. It was ultimately estimated that the iTIE protocol requires 47% less time (67 fewer hours) to complete than the Phase 1 TIE method, with the largest time differences in equipment preparation, deployment, test maintenance, and demobilization. It is important to note that the iTIE method may require additional initial costs for equipment and training.<br />
<br />
==Field Application==<br />
[[File: CraneFig6.png | thumb | left | 400px | Figure 6. iTIES deployment at the Rouge River, Detroit, MI. In the foreground is the iTIE Cooler Sub-System, which contains iTIE resin treatments and test organism groups, as well as the oxygenation coil and sample collection bottles. Next to the iTIE Cooler are the two pump cases. The Trident can be seen above the pump cases, installed in the river channel near shore.]]<br />
The&nbsp;iTIE&nbsp;system&nbsp;has&nbsp;been successfully deployed at a variety of marine and freshwater sites during the proof-of-concept phase of prototype development. One example is the 2024 iTIE system deployment completed near the mouth of the Rouge River in Detroit, MI (Figure 6). The Rouge River watershed has a long history of industrialization, with a legacy of chemical dumping, channelization, damming, and urban runoff<ref>Ridgway, J., Cave, K., DeMaria, A., O’Meara, J., Hartig, J. H., 2018. The Rouge River Area of Concern—A multi-year, multi-level successful approach to restoration of Impaired Beneficial Uses. Aquatic Ecosystem Health and Management, 21(4), pp. 398-408. [https://doi.org/10.1080/14634988.2018.1528816 doi: 10.1080/14634988.2018.1528816]</ref>. This has led to degraded environmental conditions, with previous detections of a wide range of chemicals including heavy metals and various organics.<br />
<br />
[[File: CraneFig7.png | thumb | 300px | Figure 7. Survival and healthy development of ''P. promelas'' embryos and larvae following a 48-hour iTIE exposure near the mouth of the Rouge River. Organisms were exposed to site porewater as embryos for 48 hours and cultured post-exposure for an additional 5 days.]]<br />
[[File: CraneFig8.png | thumb | 300px | Figure 8. Survival of ''C. dilutus'' larvae after an iTIE exposure near the mouth of the Rouge River. Organisms were exposed to site porewater for 48 hours and cultured post-exposure for an additional 5 days. Error bars show standard deviation.]]<br />
An&nbsp;iTIE&nbsp;system&nbsp;deployment&nbsp;was designed and completed to determine which chemical classes are most responsible for causing toxicity at the site. Resin treatments included glass wool (inert, non-fractionating substance), Chelex (metals sorption), Oasis HLB (general organics sorption), and Oasis WAX (organics sorption, with a high affinity for PFAS). The study utilized fathead minnow (''P. promelas'') embryos, due to their relative sensitivity to metals and PAHs, as well as second-instar midge ([[Wikipedia: Chironomus |''Chironomus dilutus'']]) larvae due to their relative sensitivity to PFAS. <br />
<br />
The test organisms were exposed to fractionated porewater ''in situ'' for 48 hours. Following exposure, organisms were cultured for an additional five days, and survival was recorded (Figures 7 and 8). Moderate declines in survival were seen in both species in the glass wool treatment, indicating toxicity at the site. For ''P. promelas'', the highest proportion of healthy development occurred in the Chelex treatment, supporting the hypothesis that metals are a dominant cause of toxicity. ''C. dilutus'' had the greatest survival in the Oasis WAX treatment, suggesting that an organic stressor class like PFAS is also present at harmful concentrations in the river.<br />
<br />
Water chemical analyses of fractionated and unfractionated water samples were completed to support biological results. Analyses were conducted for a range of stressor classes including metals, PAHs, PCBs, an organophosphate pesticide (chlorpyrifos), a PFAS compound (PFOS) and a pyrethroid insecticide (permethrin). Of these analytes, only heavy metals and PFOS were detected. Some chemical classes including PAHs and PCBs were not detected at the site.<br />
To reach similar conclusions using traditional Phase 1 TIE methods, one would need to complete the following tests: baseline toxicity, filtration, aeration, EDTA, C18 SPE, and methanol elution of C18 SPE. The iTIE method allows the same conclusions to be drawn with significantly less time and effort required.<br />
<br />
==Summary==<br />
The ''in situ'' Toxicity Identification Evaluation technology and protocol is a powerful tool that investigators can use to strengthen causal linkages between chemical stressors and ecological toxicity. By fractionating sampled water and exposing test organisms ''in situ'', investigators can gather toxicity response data while minimizing sample manipulation and accurately representing environmental conditions.<br />
<br clear="right"/><br />
<br />
==References==<br />
<references /><br />
<br />
==See Also==</div>Jhurleyhttps://www.enviro.wiki/index.php?title=User:Jhurley/sandbox&diff=18100User:Jhurley/sandbox2026-04-09T18:55:20Z<p>Jhurley: /* Estimating PCE/TCE Abiotic First-Order Reductive Dechlorination Rate Constants in Clayey Soils Under Anoxic Conditions */</p>
<hr />
<div>==Estimating PCE/TCE Abiotic First-Order Reductive Dechlorination Rate Constants in Clayey Soils Under Anoxic Conditions== <br />
The U.S. Department of Defense (DoD) faces many challenges in restoring aquifers at contaminated sites, often due to back-diffusion of tetrachloroethene (PCE) and trichloroethene (TCE) from low-permeability clay zones. The uptake, storage, and subsequent long-term release of these dissolved contaminants from clays are key processes in understanding the longevity, intensity, and risks associated with many persistent chlorinated ethene groundwater plumes. Although naturally occurring abiotic and biotic dechlorination processes in clays may reduce stored contaminant mass and significantly aid natural attenuation, no standardized field method currently exists to verify or quantify these reactions. It is critical to remediation design efforts to demonstrate and validate a cost-effective in situ approach for assessing these dechlorination processes using first-order rate constants. An approach was developed and applied across eight DoD sites to support Remedial Project Managers (RPMs) and regulators in evaluating natural attenuation potential in clay-rich environments.<br />
<div style="float:right;margin:0 0 2em 2em;">__TOC__</div><br />
<br />
'''Related Article(s):'''<br />
<br />
*[[Monitored Natural Attenuation (MNA)]]<br />
*[[Monitored Natural Attenuation (MNA) of Chlorinated Solvents]]<br />
*[[Monitored Natural Attenuation - Transitioning from Active Remedies]]<br />
<br />
'''Contributors:''' Dr. G. Allen Burton Jr., Austin Crane<br />
<br />
'''Key Resources:'''<br />
*A Novel In Situ Toxicity Identification Evaluation (iTIE) System for Determining which Chemicals Drive Impairments at Contaminated Sites<ref name="BurtonEtAl2020">Burton, G.A., Cervi, E.C., Meyer, K., Steigmeyer, A., Verhamme, E., Daley, J., Hudson, M., Colvin, M., Rosen, G., 2020. A novel In Situ Toxicity Identification Evaluation (iTIE) System for Determining which Chemicals Drive Impairments at Contaminated Sites. Environmental Toxicology and Chemistry, 39(9), pp. 1746-1754. [https://doi.org/10.1002/etc.4799 doi: 10.1002/etc.4799]</ref> <br />
*An in situ toxicity identification and evaluation water analysis system: Laboratory validation<ref name="SteigmeyerEtAl2017">Steigmeyer, A.J., Zhang, J., Daley, J.M., Zhang, X., Burton, G.A. Jr., 2017. An in situ toxicity identification and evaluation water analysis system: Laboratory validation. Environmental Toxicology and Chemistry, 36(6), pp. 1636-1643. [https://doi.org/10.1002/etc.3696 doi: 10.1002/etc.3696]</ref> <br />
*Sediment Toxicity Identification Evaluation (TIE) Phases I, II, and III Guidance Document<ref>United States Environmental Protection Agency, 2007. Sediment Toxicity Identification Evaluation (TIE) Phases I, II, and III Guidance Document, EPA/600/R-07/080. 145 pages. [https://nepis.epa.gov/Exe/ZyPURL.cgi?Dockey=P1003GR1.txt Free Download]&nbsp; [[Media: EPA2007.pdf | Report.pdf]]</ref><br />
*In Situ Toxicity Identification Evaluation (iTIE) Technology for Assessing Contaminated Sediments, Remediation Success, Recontamination and Source Identification<ref>In Situ Toxicity Identification Evaluation (iTIE) Technology for Assessing Contaminated Sediments, Remediation Success, Recontamination and Source Identification [https://serdp-estcp.mil/projects/details/88a8f9ba-542b-4b98-bfa4-f693435535cd/er18-1181-project-overview Project Website]&nbsp; [[Media: ER18-1181Ph.II.pdf | Final Report.pdf]]</ref><br />
<br />
==Introduction==<br />
In waterways impacted by numerous naturally occurring and anthropogenic chemical stressors, it is crucial for environmental practitioners to be able to identify which chemical classes are causing the highest degrees of toxicity to aquatic life. Previously developed methods, including the Toxicity Identification Evaluation (TIE) protocol developed by the US Environmental Protection Agency (EPA)<ref>Norberg-King, T., Mount, D.I., Amato, J.R., Jensen, D.A., Thompson, J.A., 1992. Toxicity identification evaluation: Characterization of chronically toxic effluents: Phase I. Publication No. EPA/600/6-91/005F. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Office of Research and Development. [https://www.epa.gov/sites/default/files/2015-09/documents/owm0255.pdf Free Download from US EPA]&nbsp; [[Media: usepa1992.pdf | Report.pdf]]</ref>, can be confounded by sample manipulation artifacts and temporal limitations of ''ex situ'' organism exposures<ref name="BurtonEtAl2020"/>. These factors may disrupt causal linkages and mislead investigators during site characterization and management decision-making. The ''in situ'' Toxicity Identification Evaluation (iTIE) technology was developed to allow users to strengthen stressor-causality linkages and rank chemical classes of concern at impaired sites, with high degrees of ecological realism. <br />
<br />
The technology has undergone a series of improvements in recent years, with the most recent prototype being robust, operable in a wide variety of site conditions, and cost-effective compared to alternative site characterization methods<ref>Burton, G.A. Jr., Nordstrom, J.F., 2004. An in situ toxicity identification evaluation method part I: Laboratory validation. Environmental Toxicology and Chemistry, 23(12), pp. 2844-2850. [https://doi.org/10.1897/03-409.1 doi: 10.1897/03-409.1]</ref><ref>Burton, G.A. Jr., Nordstrom, J.F., 2004. An in situ toxicity identification evaluation method part II: Field validation. Environmental Toxicology and Chemistry, 23(12), pp. 2851-2855. [https://doi.org/10.1897/03-468.1 doi: 10.1897/03-468.1]</ref><ref name="BurtonEtAl2020"/><ref name="SteigmeyerEtAl2017"/>. The latest prototype can be used in any of the following settings: in marine, estuarine, or freshwater sites; to study surface water or sediment pore water; in shallow waters easily accessible by foot or in deep waters only accessible by pier or boat. It can be used to study sites impacted by a wide variety of stressors including ammonia, [[Metal and Metalloid Contaminants | metals]], pesticides, polychlorinated biphenyls (PCB), [[Polycyclic Aromatic Hydrocarbons (PAHs) | polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons (PAH)]], and [[Perfluoroalkyl and Polyfluoroalkyl Substances (PFAS) | per- and polyfluoroalkyl substances (PFAS)]], among others. The technology is applicable to studies of acute toxicity via organism survival or of chronic toxicity via responses in growth, reproduction, or gene expression<ref name="BurtonEtAl2020"/>.<br />
<br />
==System Components and Validation==<br />
[[File: CraneFig1.png | thumb | 600 px | Figure 1: A schematic diagram of the iTIE system prototype. The system is divided into three sub-systems: 1) the Pore Water/Surface Water Collection Sub-System (blue); 2) the Pumping Sub-System (red); and 3) the iTIE Resin, Exposure, and Sampling Sub-System (green). Water first enters the system through the Pore Water/Surface Water Collection Sub-System. Porewater can be collected using Trident-style probes, or surface water can be collected using a simple weighted probe. The water is composited in a manifold before being pumped to the rest of the iTIE system by the booster pump. Once in the iTIE Resin, Exposure, and Sampling Sub-System, the water is gently oxygenated by the Oxygen Coil, separated from gas bubbles by the Drip Chamber, and diverted to separate iTIE Resin and Exposure Chambers (or iTIE units) by the Splitting Manifold. Water movement through each iTIE unit is controlled by a dedicated Regulation Pump. Finally, the water is gathered in Sample Collection bottles for analysis.]]<br />
The&nbsp;latest&nbsp;iTIE&nbsp;prototype consists of an array of sorptive resins that differentially fractionate sampled water, and a series of corresponding flow-through organism chambers that receive the treated water ''in situ''. Resin treatments can be selected depending on the chemicals suspected to be present at each site to selectively sequester certain chemical of concern (CoC) classes from the whole water, leaving a smaller subset of chemicals in the resulting water fraction for chemical and toxicological characterization. Test organism species and life stages can also be chosen depending on factors including site characteristics and study goals. In the full iTIE protocol, site water is continuously sampled either from the sediment pore spaces or the water column at a site, gently oxygenated, diverted to different iTIE units for fractionation and organism exposure, and collected in sample bottles for off-site chemical analysis (Figure 1). All iTIE system components are housed within waterproof Pelican cases, which allow for ease of transport and temperature control.<br />
<br />
===Porewater and Surface Water Collection Sub-system===<br />
[[File: CraneFig2.png | thumb | 600 px | Figure 2: a) Trident probe with auxiliary sensors attached, b) a Trident probe with end caps removed (the red arrow identifies the intermediate space where glass beads are packed to filter suspended solids), c) a Trident probe being installed using a series of push poles and a fence post driver]]<br />
Given&nbsp;the&nbsp;importance&nbsp;of sediment porewater to ecosystem structure and function, investigators may employ the iTIE system to evaluate the toxic effects associated with the impacted sediment porewater. To accomplish this, the iTIE system utilizes the Trident probe, originally developed for Department of Defense site characterization studies<ref>Chadwick, D.B., Harre, B., Smith, C.F., Groves, J.G., Paulsen, R.J., 2003. Coastal Contaminant Migration Monitoring: The Trident Probe and UltraSeep System. Hardware Description, Protocols, and Procedures. Technical Report 1902. Space and Naval Warfare Systems Center.</ref>. The main body of the Trident is comprised of a stainless-steel frame with six hollow probes (Figure 2). Each probe contains a layer of inert glass beads, which filters suspended solids from the sampled water. The water is drawn through each probe into a composite manifold and transported to the rest of the iTIE system using a high-precision peristaltic pump. <br />
<br />
The Trident also includes an adjustable stopper plate, which forms a seal against the sediment and prevents the inadvertent dilution of porewater samples with surface water. (Figure 2). Preliminary laboratory results indicate that the Trident is extremely effective in collecting porewater samples with minimal surface water infiltration in sediments ranging from coarse sand to fine clay. Underwater cameras, sensors, passive samplers, and other auxiliary equipment can be attached to the Trident probe frame to provide supplemental data.<br />
<br />
Alternatively, practitioners may employ the iTIE system to evaluate site surface water. To sample surface water, weighted intake tubes can collect surface water from the water column using a peristaltic pump.<br />
<br />
===Oxygen Coil, Overflow Bag and Drip Chamber===<br />
[[File: CraneFig3.png | thumb | left | 400 px | Figure 3. Contents of the iTIE system cooler. The pictured HDPE rack (47.6 cm length x 29.7 cm width x 33.7 cm height) is removable from the iTIE cooler. Water enters the system at the red circle, flows through the oxygen coil, and then travels to each of the individual iTIE units where diagnostic resins and organisms are located. The water then briefly leaves the cooler to travel through peristaltic regulation pumps before being gathered in sample collection bottles.]]<br />
Porewater&nbsp;is&nbsp;naturally&nbsp;anoxic due to limited mixing with aerated surface water and high oxygen demand of sediments, which may cause organism mortality and interfere with iTIE results. To preclude this, sampled porewater is exposed to an oxygen coil. This consists of an interior silicone tube connected to a pressurized oxygen canister, threaded through an exterior reinforced PVC tube through which water is slowly pumped (Figure 3). Pump rates are optimized to ensure adequate aeration of the water. In addition to elevating DO levels, the oxygen coil facilitates the oxidation of dissolved sulfides, which naturally occur in some marine sediments and may otherwise cause toxicity to organisms if left in its reduced form.<br />
<br />
Gas bubbles may form in the oxygen coil over the course of a deployment. These can be disruptive, decreasing water sample volumes and posing a danger to sensitive organisms like daphnids. To account for this, the water travels to a drip chamber after exiting the oxygen coil, which allows gas bubbles to be separated and diverted to an overflow system. The sample water then flows to a manifold which divides the flow into different paths to each of the treatment units for fractionation and organism exposure.<br />
<br />
===iTIE Units: Fractionation and Organism Exposure Chambers===<br />
[[File: CraneFig4.png | thumb | 300px | Figure 4. A diagram of the iTIE prototype. Water flows upward into each resin chamber through the unit bottom. After being chemically fractionated in the resin chamber, water travels into the organism chamber, where test organisms have been placed. Water is drawn through the units by high-precision peristaltic pumps.]]<br />
At&nbsp;the&nbsp;core&nbsp;of&nbsp;the&nbsp;iTIE&nbsp;system are separate dual-chamber iTIE units, each with a resin fractionation chamber and an organism exposure chamber (Figure 4). Developed by Burton ''et al.''<ref name="BurtonEtAl2020"/>, the iTIE prototype is constructed from acrylic, with rubber O-rings to connect each piece. Each iTIE unit can contain a different diagnostic resin matrix, customizable to remove specific chemical classes from the water. Sampled water flows into each unit through the bottom and is differentially fractionated by the resin matrix as it travels upward. Then it reaches the organism chamber, where test organisms are placed for exposure. The organism chamber inlet and outlet are covered by mesh to prevent the escape of the test organisms. This continuous flow-through design allows practitioners to capture the temporal heterogeneity of ambient water conditions over the duration of an ''in situ'' exposure. Currently, the iTIE system can support four independent iTIE treatment units.<br />
<br />
After being exposed to test organisms, water is collected in sample bottles. The bottles can be pre-loaded with preservation reagents to allow for later chemical analysis. Sample bottles can be composed of polyethylene, glass or other materials depending on the CoC.<br />
<br />
===Pumping Sub-system===<br />
[[File: CraneFig5.png | thumb | 300px | Figure 5. The iTIE system pumping sub-system. The sub-system consists of: A) a single booster pump, which is directly connected to the water sampling device and feeds water to the rest of the iTIE system, and B) a set of four regulation pumps, which each connect to the outflow of an individual iTIE unit. Each pump set is housed in a waterproof case with self-contained rechargeable battery power. A tablet is mounted inside the lid of the four pump case, which can be used to program and operate all of the pumps when connected to the internet.]]<br />
Water&nbsp;movement&nbsp;through&nbsp;the&nbsp;system is driven by a series of high-precision, programmable peristaltic pumps ([https://ecotechmarine.com/ EcoTech Marine]). Each pump set is housed in a Pelican storm travel case. Power is supplied to each pump by internal rechargeable lithium-iron phosphate batteries ([https://www.bioennopower.com/ Bioenno Power]).<br />
<br />
First, water is supplied to the system by a booster pump (Figure 5A). This pump is situated between the water sampling sub-system and the oxygen coil. The booster pump: 1) facilitates pore water collection, especially from sediments with high fine particle fractions; 2) helps water overcome vertical lifts to travel to the iTIE system; and 3) prevents vacuums from forming in the iTIE system interior, which can accelerate the formation of disruptive gas bubbles in the oxygen coil. The booster pump should be programmed to supply an excess of water to prevent vacuum formation.<br />
<br />
Second, a set of four regulation pumps ensure precise flow rates through each independent iTIE unit (Figure 5B). Each regulation pump pulls water from the top of an iTIE unit and then dispenses that water into a sample bottle for further analysis.<br />
<br />
==Study Design Considerations==<br />
===Diagnostic Resin Treatments===<br />
Several commercially available resins have been verified for use in the iTIE system. Investigators can select resins based on stressor classes of interest at each site. Each resin selectively removes a CoC class from site water prior to organism exposure.<br />
*[https://www.dupont.com/products/ambersorb560.html DuPont Ambersorb 560] for removal of 1,4-dioxane and other organic chemicals<ref>Woodard, S., Mohr, T., Nickelsen, M.G., 2014. Synthetic media: A promising new treatment technology for 1,4-dioxane. Remediation Journal, 24(4), pp. 27-40. [https://doi.org/10.1002/rem.21402 doi: 10.1002/rem.21402]</ref><br />
*C18 for nonpolar organic chemicals<br />
*[https://www.bio-rad.com/en-us Bio-Rad] [https://www.bio-rad.com/en-us/product/chelex-100-resin?ID=6448ab3e-b96a-4162-9124-7b7d2330288e Chelex] for metals<br />
*Granular activated carbon for metals, general organic chemicals, sulfide<ref>Lemos, B.R.S., Teixeira, I.F., de Mesquita, J.P., Ribeiro, R.R., Donnici, C.L., Lago, R.M., 2012. Use of modified activated carbon for the oxidation of aqueous sulfide. Carbon, 50(3), pp. 1386-1393. [https://doi.org/10.1016/j.carbon.2011.11.011 doi: 10.1016/j.carbon.2011.11.011]</ref><br />
*[https://www.waters.com/nextgen/us/en.html Waters] [https://www.waters.com/nextgen/us/en/search.html?category=Shop&isocode=en_US&keyword=oasis%20hlb&multiselect=true&page=1&rows=12&sort=best-sellers&xcid=ppc-ppc_23916&gad_source=1&gad_campaignid=14746094146&gbraid=0AAAAAD_uR00nhlNwrhhegNh06pBODTgiN&gclid=CjwKCAiAtLvMBhB_EiwA1u6_PsppE0raci2IhvGnAAe5ijciNcetLaGZo5qA3g3r4Z_La7YAPJtzShoC6LoQAvD_BwE Oasis HLB] for general organic chemicals<ref name="SteigmeyerEtAl2017"/><br />
*[https://www.waters.com/nextgen/us/en.html Waters] [https://www.waters.com/nextgen/us/en/search.html?category=All&enableHL=true&isocode=en_US&keyword=Oasis%20WAX%20&multiselect=true&page=1&rows=12&sort=most-relevant Oasis WAX] for PFAS, organic chemicals of mixed polarity<ref>Iannone, A., Carriera, F., Di Fiore, C., Avino, P., 2024. Poly- and Perfluoroalkyl Substance (PFAS) Analysis in Environmental Matrices: An Overview of the Extraction and Chromatographic Detection Methods. Analytica, 5(2), pp. 187-202. [https://doi.org/10.3390/analytica5020012 doi: 10.3390/analytica5020012]&nbsp; [[Media: IannoneEtAl2024.pdf | Open Access Article]]</ref><br />
*Zeolite for ammonia, other organic chemicals<br />
<br />
Resins must be adequately conditioned prior to use. Otherwise, they may inadequately adsorb toxicants or cause stress to organisms. New resins should be tested for efficacy and toxicity before being used in an iTIE system. <br />
<br />
===Test Organism Species and Life Stages===<br />
Practitioners can also select different organism species and life stages for use in the iTIE system, depending on site characteristics and study goals. The iTIE system can accommodate various small test organisms, including embryo-stage fish and most macroinvertebrates. The following common toxicity tests can be adapted for application within iTIE systems<ref>U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Office of Solid Waste and Emergency Response, 1994. Catalogue of Standard Toxicity Tests for Ecological Risk Assessment. ECO Update, 2(2), 4 pages. Publication No. 9345.0.05I [https://www.epa.gov/sites/default/files/2015-09/documents/v2no2.pdf Free Download]&nbsp; [[Media: usepa1994.pdf | Report.pdf]]</ref>.<br />
<ul><u>Freshwater acute toxicity:</u></ul><br />
*[[Wikipedia: Daphnia magna | ''Daphnia magna'']] or [[Wikipedia: Daphnia pulex | ''Daphnia pulex'']] 24-, 48-, and 96-hour survival<br />
<ul><u>Freshwater chronic toxicity:</u></ul><br />
*[[Wikipedia: Ceriodaphnia dubia | ''Ceriodaphnia dubia'']] 7-day survival and reproduction<br />
*''D. magna'' 7-day survival and reproduction<br />
*[[Wikipedia: Fathead minnow | ''Pimephales promelas'']] 7-day embryo-larval survival and teratogenicity<br />
*[[Wikipedia: Hyalella azteca | ''Hyalella Azteca'']] 10- or 30-day survival and reproduction<br />
<ul><u>Marine acute toxicity:</u></ul><br />
*[[Wikipedia: Americamysis bahia | ''Americamysis bahia'']] 24- and 48-hour survival<br />
<ul><u>Marine chronic toxicity:</u></ul><br />
*''Americamysis'' survival, growth and fecundity<br />
*[[Wikipedia: Topsmelt silverside | ''Atherinops affinis'']] embryo-larval survival and growth <br />
<br />
Acute toxicity is quantifiable via organism survival rates immediately following the termination of an iTIE system field deployment. Chronic toxicity can be quantified by continuing to culture and observe test organisms in-lab. Common chronic endpoints include stunted growth, altered development such as teratogenicity in larval fish, decreased reproduction rates, and changes in gene expression. <br />
<br />
Several gene expression endpoints have been detectable in bioassays following an iTIE system deployment and in-lab culturing period. Steigmeyer ''et al.''<ref name="SteigmeyerEtAl2017"/> were able to detect changes in the expression of two genes in ''D. magna'' after a 24-hour exposure to bisphenol A. In a separate study, Nichols<ref>Nichols, E., 2023. Methods for Identification and Prioritization of Stressors at Impaired Sites. Masters thesis, University of Michigan. University of Michigan Library Deep Blue Documents. [https://deepblue.lib.umich.edu/bitstream/handle/2027.42/176142/Nichols_Elizabeth_thesis.pdf?sequence=1 Free Download]&nbsp; [[Media: Nichols2023.pdf | Report.pdf]]</ref> found a significant decline in acetylcholinesterase activity in ''H. azteca'' after a 24-hour exposure to chlorpyrifos. These results indicate a potential to adapt other gene expression bioassays for use in conjunction with iTIE system field exposures to prove stressor-causality linkages.<br />
<br />
===Cost Effectiveness Study===<br />
Burton ''et al.''<ref name="BurtonEtAl2020"/> conducted a cost effectiveness study comparing the iTIE technology with the traditional US EPA Phase 1 TIE method. Comparisons were based on the estimated time required to complete various sub-tasks within each method. Sub-tasks included organism care, equipment preparation, mobilization and deployment, test maintenance, test termination, demobilization, and test termination analyses. It was ultimately estimated that the iTIE protocol requires 47% less time (67 fewer hours) to complete than the Phase 1 TIE method, with the largest time differences in equipment preparation, deployment, test maintenance, and demobilization. It is important to note that the iTIE method may require additional initial costs for equipment and training.<br />
<br />
==Field Application==<br />
[[File: CraneFig6.png | thumb | left | 400px | Figure 6. iTIES deployment at the Rouge River, Detroit, MI. In the foreground is the iTIE Cooler Sub-System, which contains iTIE resin treatments and test organism groups, as well as the oxygenation coil and sample collection bottles. Next to the iTIE Cooler are the two pump cases. The Trident can be seen above the pump cases, installed in the river channel near shore.]]<br />
The&nbsp;iTIE&nbsp;system&nbsp;has&nbsp;been successfully deployed at a variety of marine and freshwater sites during the proof-of-concept phase of prototype development. One example is the 2024 iTIE system deployment completed near the mouth of the Rouge River in Detroit, MI (Figure 6). The Rouge River watershed has a long history of industrialization, with a legacy of chemical dumping, channelization, damming, and urban runoff<ref>Ridgway, J., Cave, K., DeMaria, A., O’Meara, J., Hartig, J. H., 2018. The Rouge River Area of Concern—A multi-year, multi-level successful approach to restoration of Impaired Beneficial Uses. Aquatic Ecosystem Health and Management, 21(4), pp. 398-408. [https://doi.org/10.1080/14634988.2018.1528816 doi: 10.1080/14634988.2018.1528816]</ref>. This has led to degraded environmental conditions, with previous detections of a wide range of chemicals including heavy metals and various organics.<br />
<br />
[[File: CraneFig7.png | thumb | 300px | Figure 7. Survival and healthy development of ''P. promelas'' embryos and larvae following a 48-hour iTIE exposure near the mouth of the Rouge River. Organisms were exposed to site porewater as embryos for 48 hours and cultured post-exposure for an additional 5 days.]]<br />
[[File: CraneFig8.png | thumb | 300px | Figure 8. Survival of ''C. dilutus'' larvae after an iTIE exposure near the mouth of the Rouge River. Organisms were exposed to site porewater for 48 hours and cultured post-exposure for an additional 5 days. Error bars show standard deviation.]]<br />
An&nbsp;iTIE&nbsp;system&nbsp;deployment&nbsp;was designed and completed to determine which chemical classes are most responsible for causing toxicity at the site. Resin treatments included glass wool (inert, non-fractionating substance), Chelex (metals sorption), Oasis HLB (general organics sorption), and Oasis WAX (organics sorption, with a high affinity for PFAS). The study utilized fathead minnow (''P. promelas'') embryos, due to their relative sensitivity to metals and PAHs, as well as second-instar midge ([[Wikipedia: Chironomus |''Chironomus dilutus'']]) larvae due to their relative sensitivity to PFAS. <br />
<br />
The test organisms were exposed to fractionated porewater ''in situ'' for 48 hours. Following exposure, organisms were cultured for an additional five days, and survival was recorded (Figures 7 and 8). Moderate declines in survival were seen in both species in the glass wool treatment, indicating toxicity at the site. For ''P. promelas'', the highest proportion of healthy development occurred in the Chelex treatment, supporting the hypothesis that metals are a dominant cause of toxicity. ''C. dilutus'' had the greatest survival in the Oasis WAX treatment, suggesting that an organic stressor class like PFAS is also present at harmful concentrations in the river.<br />
<br />
Water chemical analyses of fractionated and unfractionated water samples were completed to support biological results. Analyses were conducted for a range of stressor classes including metals, PAHs, PCBs, an organophosphate pesticide (chlorpyrifos), a PFAS compound (PFOS) and a pyrethroid insecticide (permethrin). Of these analytes, only heavy metals and PFOS were detected. Some chemical classes including PAHs and PCBs were not detected at the site.<br />
To reach similar conclusions using traditional Phase 1 TIE methods, one would need to complete the following tests: baseline toxicity, filtration, aeration, EDTA, C18 SPE, and methanol elution of C18 SPE. The iTIE method allows the same conclusions to be drawn with significantly less time and effort required.<br />
<br />
==Summary==<br />
The ''in situ'' Toxicity Identification Evaluation technology and protocol is a powerful tool that investigators can use to strengthen causal linkages between chemical stressors and ecological toxicity. By fractionating sampled water and exposing test organisms ''in situ'', investigators can gather toxicity response data while minimizing sample manipulation and accurately representing environmental conditions.<br />
<br clear="right"/><br />
<br />
==References==<br />
<references /><br />
<br />
==See Also==</div>Jhurleyhttps://www.enviro.wiki/index.php?title=User:Jhurley/sandbox&diff=18099User:Jhurley/sandbox2026-04-09T18:54:32Z<p>Jhurley: /* Estimating PCE/TCE Abiotic First-Order Reductive Dechlorination Rate Constants in Clayey Soils Under Anoxic Conditions */</p>
<hr />
<div>==Estimating PCE/TCE Abiotic First-Order Reductive Dechlorination Rate Constants in Clayey Soils Under Anoxic Conditions== <br />
The U.S. Department of Defense (DoD) faces many challenges in restoring aquifers at contaminated sites, often due to back-diffusion of tetrachloroethene (PCE) and trichloroethene (TCE) from low-permeability clay zones. The uptake, storage, and subsequent long-term release of these dissolved contaminants from clays are key processes in understanding the longevity, intensity, and risks associated with many persistent chlorinated ethene groundwater plumes. Although naturally occurring abiotic and biotic dechlorination processes in clays may reduce stored contaminant mass and significantly aid natural attenuation, no standardized field method currently exists to verify or quantify these reactions. It is critical to remediation design efforts to demonstrate and validate a cost-effective in situ approach for assessing these dechlorination processes using first-order rate constants. An approach was developed and applied across eight DoD sites to support Remedial Project Managers (RPMs) and regulators in evaluating natural attenuation potential in clay-rich environments.<br />
<div style="float:right;margin:0 0 2em 2em;">__TOC__</div><br />
<br />
'''Related Article(s):'''<br />
<br />
*[[Monitored Natural Attenuation (MNA)]]<br />
*[[Monitored Natural Attenuation (MNA) of Chlorinated Solvents]]<br />
*[[Passive Sampling of Sediments]]<br />
<br />
'''Contributors:''' Dr. G. Allen Burton Jr., Austin Crane<br />
<br />
'''Key Resources:'''<br />
*A Novel In Situ Toxicity Identification Evaluation (iTIE) System for Determining which Chemicals Drive Impairments at Contaminated Sites<ref name="BurtonEtAl2020">Burton, G.A., Cervi, E.C., Meyer, K., Steigmeyer, A., Verhamme, E., Daley, J., Hudson, M., Colvin, M., Rosen, G., 2020. A novel In Situ Toxicity Identification Evaluation (iTIE) System for Determining which Chemicals Drive Impairments at Contaminated Sites. Environmental Toxicology and Chemistry, 39(9), pp. 1746-1754. [https://doi.org/10.1002/etc.4799 doi: 10.1002/etc.4799]</ref> <br />
*An in situ toxicity identification and evaluation water analysis system: Laboratory validation<ref name="SteigmeyerEtAl2017">Steigmeyer, A.J., Zhang, J., Daley, J.M., Zhang, X., Burton, G.A. Jr., 2017. An in situ toxicity identification and evaluation water analysis system: Laboratory validation. Environmental Toxicology and Chemistry, 36(6), pp. 1636-1643. [https://doi.org/10.1002/etc.3696 doi: 10.1002/etc.3696]</ref> <br />
*Sediment Toxicity Identification Evaluation (TIE) Phases I, II, and III Guidance Document<ref>United States Environmental Protection Agency, 2007. Sediment Toxicity Identification Evaluation (TIE) Phases I, II, and III Guidance Document, EPA/600/R-07/080. 145 pages. [https://nepis.epa.gov/Exe/ZyPURL.cgi?Dockey=P1003GR1.txt Free Download]&nbsp; [[Media: EPA2007.pdf | Report.pdf]]</ref><br />
*In Situ Toxicity Identification Evaluation (iTIE) Technology for Assessing Contaminated Sediments, Remediation Success, Recontamination and Source Identification<ref>In Situ Toxicity Identification Evaluation (iTIE) Technology for Assessing Contaminated Sediments, Remediation Success, Recontamination and Source Identification [https://serdp-estcp.mil/projects/details/88a8f9ba-542b-4b98-bfa4-f693435535cd/er18-1181-project-overview Project Website]&nbsp; [[Media: ER18-1181Ph.II.pdf | Final Report.pdf]]</ref><br />
<br />
==Introduction==<br />
In waterways impacted by numerous naturally occurring and anthropogenic chemical stressors, it is crucial for environmental practitioners to be able to identify which chemical classes are causing the highest degrees of toxicity to aquatic life. Previously developed methods, including the Toxicity Identification Evaluation (TIE) protocol developed by the US Environmental Protection Agency (EPA)<ref>Norberg-King, T., Mount, D.I., Amato, J.R., Jensen, D.A., Thompson, J.A., 1992. Toxicity identification evaluation: Characterization of chronically toxic effluents: Phase I. Publication No. EPA/600/6-91/005F. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Office of Research and Development. [https://www.epa.gov/sites/default/files/2015-09/documents/owm0255.pdf Free Download from US EPA]&nbsp; [[Media: usepa1992.pdf | Report.pdf]]</ref>, can be confounded by sample manipulation artifacts and temporal limitations of ''ex situ'' organism exposures<ref name="BurtonEtAl2020"/>. These factors may disrupt causal linkages and mislead investigators during site characterization and management decision-making. The ''in situ'' Toxicity Identification Evaluation (iTIE) technology was developed to allow users to strengthen stressor-causality linkages and rank chemical classes of concern at impaired sites, with high degrees of ecological realism. <br />
<br />
The technology has undergone a series of improvements in recent years, with the most recent prototype being robust, operable in a wide variety of site conditions, and cost-effective compared to alternative site characterization methods<ref>Burton, G.A. Jr., Nordstrom, J.F., 2004. An in situ toxicity identification evaluation method part I: Laboratory validation. Environmental Toxicology and Chemistry, 23(12), pp. 2844-2850. [https://doi.org/10.1897/03-409.1 doi: 10.1897/03-409.1]</ref><ref>Burton, G.A. Jr., Nordstrom, J.F., 2004. An in situ toxicity identification evaluation method part II: Field validation. Environmental Toxicology and Chemistry, 23(12), pp. 2851-2855. [https://doi.org/10.1897/03-468.1 doi: 10.1897/03-468.1]</ref><ref name="BurtonEtAl2020"/><ref name="SteigmeyerEtAl2017"/>. The latest prototype can be used in any of the following settings: in marine, estuarine, or freshwater sites; to study surface water or sediment pore water; in shallow waters easily accessible by foot or in deep waters only accessible by pier or boat. It can be used to study sites impacted by a wide variety of stressors including ammonia, [[Metal and Metalloid Contaminants | metals]], pesticides, polychlorinated biphenyls (PCB), [[Polycyclic Aromatic Hydrocarbons (PAHs) | polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons (PAH)]], and [[Perfluoroalkyl and Polyfluoroalkyl Substances (PFAS) | per- and polyfluoroalkyl substances (PFAS)]], among others. The technology is applicable to studies of acute toxicity via organism survival or of chronic toxicity via responses in growth, reproduction, or gene expression<ref name="BurtonEtAl2020"/>.<br />
<br />
==System Components and Validation==<br />
[[File: CraneFig1.png | thumb | 600 px | Figure 1: A schematic diagram of the iTIE system prototype. The system is divided into three sub-systems: 1) the Pore Water/Surface Water Collection Sub-System (blue); 2) the Pumping Sub-System (red); and 3) the iTIE Resin, Exposure, and Sampling Sub-System (green). Water first enters the system through the Pore Water/Surface Water Collection Sub-System. Porewater can be collected using Trident-style probes, or surface water can be collected using a simple weighted probe. The water is composited in a manifold before being pumped to the rest of the iTIE system by the booster pump. Once in the iTIE Resin, Exposure, and Sampling Sub-System, the water is gently oxygenated by the Oxygen Coil, separated from gas bubbles by the Drip Chamber, and diverted to separate iTIE Resin and Exposure Chambers (or iTIE units) by the Splitting Manifold. Water movement through each iTIE unit is controlled by a dedicated Regulation Pump. Finally, the water is gathered in Sample Collection bottles for analysis.]]<br />
The&nbsp;latest&nbsp;iTIE&nbsp;prototype consists of an array of sorptive resins that differentially fractionate sampled water, and a series of corresponding flow-through organism chambers that receive the treated water ''in situ''. Resin treatments can be selected depending on the chemicals suspected to be present at each site to selectively sequester certain chemical of concern (CoC) classes from the whole water, leaving a smaller subset of chemicals in the resulting water fraction for chemical and toxicological characterization. Test organism species and life stages can also be chosen depending on factors including site characteristics and study goals. In the full iTIE protocol, site water is continuously sampled either from the sediment pore spaces or the water column at a site, gently oxygenated, diverted to different iTIE units for fractionation and organism exposure, and collected in sample bottles for off-site chemical analysis (Figure 1). All iTIE system components are housed within waterproof Pelican cases, which allow for ease of transport and temperature control.<br />
<br />
===Porewater and Surface Water Collection Sub-system===<br />
[[File: CraneFig2.png | thumb | 600 px | Figure 2: a) Trident probe with auxiliary sensors attached, b) a Trident probe with end caps removed (the red arrow identifies the intermediate space where glass beads are packed to filter suspended solids), c) a Trident probe being installed using a series of push poles and a fence post driver]]<br />
Given&nbsp;the&nbsp;importance&nbsp;of sediment porewater to ecosystem structure and function, investigators may employ the iTIE system to evaluate the toxic effects associated with the impacted sediment porewater. To accomplish this, the iTIE system utilizes the Trident probe, originally developed for Department of Defense site characterization studies<ref>Chadwick, D.B., Harre, B., Smith, C.F., Groves, J.G., Paulsen, R.J., 2003. Coastal Contaminant Migration Monitoring: The Trident Probe and UltraSeep System. Hardware Description, Protocols, and Procedures. Technical Report 1902. Space and Naval Warfare Systems Center.</ref>. The main body of the Trident is comprised of a stainless-steel frame with six hollow probes (Figure 2). Each probe contains a layer of inert glass beads, which filters suspended solids from the sampled water. The water is drawn through each probe into a composite manifold and transported to the rest of the iTIE system using a high-precision peristaltic pump. <br />
<br />
The Trident also includes an adjustable stopper plate, which forms a seal against the sediment and prevents the inadvertent dilution of porewater samples with surface water. (Figure 2). Preliminary laboratory results indicate that the Trident is extremely effective in collecting porewater samples with minimal surface water infiltration in sediments ranging from coarse sand to fine clay. Underwater cameras, sensors, passive samplers, and other auxiliary equipment can be attached to the Trident probe frame to provide supplemental data.<br />
<br />
Alternatively, practitioners may employ the iTIE system to evaluate site surface water. To sample surface water, weighted intake tubes can collect surface water from the water column using a peristaltic pump.<br />
<br />
===Oxygen Coil, Overflow Bag and Drip Chamber===<br />
[[File: CraneFig3.png | thumb | left | 400 px | Figure 3. Contents of the iTIE system cooler. The pictured HDPE rack (47.6 cm length x 29.7 cm width x 33.7 cm height) is removable from the iTIE cooler. Water enters the system at the red circle, flows through the oxygen coil, and then travels to each of the individual iTIE units where diagnostic resins and organisms are located. The water then briefly leaves the cooler to travel through peristaltic regulation pumps before being gathered in sample collection bottles.]]<br />
Porewater&nbsp;is&nbsp;naturally&nbsp;anoxic due to limited mixing with aerated surface water and high oxygen demand of sediments, which may cause organism mortality and interfere with iTIE results. To preclude this, sampled porewater is exposed to an oxygen coil. This consists of an interior silicone tube connected to a pressurized oxygen canister, threaded through an exterior reinforced PVC tube through which water is slowly pumped (Figure 3). Pump rates are optimized to ensure adequate aeration of the water. In addition to elevating DO levels, the oxygen coil facilitates the oxidation of dissolved sulfides, which naturally occur in some marine sediments and may otherwise cause toxicity to organisms if left in its reduced form.<br />
<br />
Gas bubbles may form in the oxygen coil over the course of a deployment. These can be disruptive, decreasing water sample volumes and posing a danger to sensitive organisms like daphnids. To account for this, the water travels to a drip chamber after exiting the oxygen coil, which allows gas bubbles to be separated and diverted to an overflow system. The sample water then flows to a manifold which divides the flow into different paths to each of the treatment units for fractionation and organism exposure.<br />
<br />
===iTIE Units: Fractionation and Organism Exposure Chambers===<br />
[[File: CraneFig4.png | thumb | 300px | Figure 4. A diagram of the iTIE prototype. Water flows upward into each resin chamber through the unit bottom. After being chemically fractionated in the resin chamber, water travels into the organism chamber, where test organisms have been placed. Water is drawn through the units by high-precision peristaltic pumps.]]<br />
At&nbsp;the&nbsp;core&nbsp;of&nbsp;the&nbsp;iTIE&nbsp;system are separate dual-chamber iTIE units, each with a resin fractionation chamber and an organism exposure chamber (Figure 4). Developed by Burton ''et al.''<ref name="BurtonEtAl2020"/>, the iTIE prototype is constructed from acrylic, with rubber O-rings to connect each piece. Each iTIE unit can contain a different diagnostic resin matrix, customizable to remove specific chemical classes from the water. Sampled water flows into each unit through the bottom and is differentially fractionated by the resin matrix as it travels upward. Then it reaches the organism chamber, where test organisms are placed for exposure. The organism chamber inlet and outlet are covered by mesh to prevent the escape of the test organisms. This continuous flow-through design allows practitioners to capture the temporal heterogeneity of ambient water conditions over the duration of an ''in situ'' exposure. Currently, the iTIE system can support four independent iTIE treatment units.<br />
<br />
After being exposed to test organisms, water is collected in sample bottles. The bottles can be pre-loaded with preservation reagents to allow for later chemical analysis. Sample bottles can be composed of polyethylene, glass or other materials depending on the CoC.<br />
<br />
===Pumping Sub-system===<br />
[[File: CraneFig5.png | thumb | 300px | Figure 5. The iTIE system pumping sub-system. The sub-system consists of: A) a single booster pump, which is directly connected to the water sampling device and feeds water to the rest of the iTIE system, and B) a set of four regulation pumps, which each connect to the outflow of an individual iTIE unit. Each pump set is housed in a waterproof case with self-contained rechargeable battery power. A tablet is mounted inside the lid of the four pump case, which can be used to program and operate all of the pumps when connected to the internet.]]<br />
Water&nbsp;movement&nbsp;through&nbsp;the&nbsp;system is driven by a series of high-precision, programmable peristaltic pumps ([https://ecotechmarine.com/ EcoTech Marine]). Each pump set is housed in a Pelican storm travel case. Power is supplied to each pump by internal rechargeable lithium-iron phosphate batteries ([https://www.bioennopower.com/ Bioenno Power]).<br />
<br />
First, water is supplied to the system by a booster pump (Figure 5A). This pump is situated between the water sampling sub-system and the oxygen coil. The booster pump: 1) facilitates pore water collection, especially from sediments with high fine particle fractions; 2) helps water overcome vertical lifts to travel to the iTIE system; and 3) prevents vacuums from forming in the iTIE system interior, which can accelerate the formation of disruptive gas bubbles in the oxygen coil. The booster pump should be programmed to supply an excess of water to prevent vacuum formation.<br />
<br />
Second, a set of four regulation pumps ensure precise flow rates through each independent iTIE unit (Figure 5B). Each regulation pump pulls water from the top of an iTIE unit and then dispenses that water into a sample bottle for further analysis.<br />
<br />
==Study Design Considerations==<br />
===Diagnostic Resin Treatments===<br />
Several commercially available resins have been verified for use in the iTIE system. Investigators can select resins based on stressor classes of interest at each site. Each resin selectively removes a CoC class from site water prior to organism exposure.<br />
*[https://www.dupont.com/products/ambersorb560.html DuPont Ambersorb 560] for removal of 1,4-dioxane and other organic chemicals<ref>Woodard, S., Mohr, T., Nickelsen, M.G., 2014. Synthetic media: A promising new treatment technology for 1,4-dioxane. Remediation Journal, 24(4), pp. 27-40. [https://doi.org/10.1002/rem.21402 doi: 10.1002/rem.21402]</ref><br />
*C18 for nonpolar organic chemicals<br />
*[https://www.bio-rad.com/en-us Bio-Rad] [https://www.bio-rad.com/en-us/product/chelex-100-resin?ID=6448ab3e-b96a-4162-9124-7b7d2330288e Chelex] for metals<br />
*Granular activated carbon for metals, general organic chemicals, sulfide<ref>Lemos, B.R.S., Teixeira, I.F., de Mesquita, J.P., Ribeiro, R.R., Donnici, C.L., Lago, R.M., 2012. Use of modified activated carbon for the oxidation of aqueous sulfide. Carbon, 50(3), pp. 1386-1393. [https://doi.org/10.1016/j.carbon.2011.11.011 doi: 10.1016/j.carbon.2011.11.011]</ref><br />
*[https://www.waters.com/nextgen/us/en.html Waters] [https://www.waters.com/nextgen/us/en/search.html?category=Shop&isocode=en_US&keyword=oasis%20hlb&multiselect=true&page=1&rows=12&sort=best-sellers&xcid=ppc-ppc_23916&gad_source=1&gad_campaignid=14746094146&gbraid=0AAAAAD_uR00nhlNwrhhegNh06pBODTgiN&gclid=CjwKCAiAtLvMBhB_EiwA1u6_PsppE0raci2IhvGnAAe5ijciNcetLaGZo5qA3g3r4Z_La7YAPJtzShoC6LoQAvD_BwE Oasis HLB] for general organic chemicals<ref name="SteigmeyerEtAl2017"/><br />
*[https://www.waters.com/nextgen/us/en.html Waters] [https://www.waters.com/nextgen/us/en/search.html?category=All&enableHL=true&isocode=en_US&keyword=Oasis%20WAX%20&multiselect=true&page=1&rows=12&sort=most-relevant Oasis WAX] for PFAS, organic chemicals of mixed polarity<ref>Iannone, A., Carriera, F., Di Fiore, C., Avino, P., 2024. Poly- and Perfluoroalkyl Substance (PFAS) Analysis in Environmental Matrices: An Overview of the Extraction and Chromatographic Detection Methods. Analytica, 5(2), pp. 187-202. [https://doi.org/10.3390/analytica5020012 doi: 10.3390/analytica5020012]&nbsp; [[Media: IannoneEtAl2024.pdf | Open Access Article]]</ref><br />
*Zeolite for ammonia, other organic chemicals<br />
<br />
Resins must be adequately conditioned prior to use. Otherwise, they may inadequately adsorb toxicants or cause stress to organisms. New resins should be tested for efficacy and toxicity before being used in an iTIE system. <br />
<br />
===Test Organism Species and Life Stages===<br />
Practitioners can also select different organism species and life stages for use in the iTIE system, depending on site characteristics and study goals. The iTIE system can accommodate various small test organisms, including embryo-stage fish and most macroinvertebrates. The following common toxicity tests can be adapted for application within iTIE systems<ref>U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Office of Solid Waste and Emergency Response, 1994. Catalogue of Standard Toxicity Tests for Ecological Risk Assessment. ECO Update, 2(2), 4 pages. Publication No. 9345.0.05I [https://www.epa.gov/sites/default/files/2015-09/documents/v2no2.pdf Free Download]&nbsp; [[Media: usepa1994.pdf | Report.pdf]]</ref>.<br />
<ul><u>Freshwater acute toxicity:</u></ul><br />
*[[Wikipedia: Daphnia magna | ''Daphnia magna'']] or [[Wikipedia: Daphnia pulex | ''Daphnia pulex'']] 24-, 48-, and 96-hour survival<br />
<ul><u>Freshwater chronic toxicity:</u></ul><br />
*[[Wikipedia: Ceriodaphnia dubia | ''Ceriodaphnia dubia'']] 7-day survival and reproduction<br />
*''D. magna'' 7-day survival and reproduction<br />
*[[Wikipedia: Fathead minnow | ''Pimephales promelas'']] 7-day embryo-larval survival and teratogenicity<br />
*[[Wikipedia: Hyalella azteca | ''Hyalella Azteca'']] 10- or 30-day survival and reproduction<br />
<ul><u>Marine acute toxicity:</u></ul><br />
*[[Wikipedia: Americamysis bahia | ''Americamysis bahia'']] 24- and 48-hour survival<br />
<ul><u>Marine chronic toxicity:</u></ul><br />
*''Americamysis'' survival, growth and fecundity<br />
*[[Wikipedia: Topsmelt silverside | ''Atherinops affinis'']] embryo-larval survival and growth <br />
<br />
Acute toxicity is quantifiable via organism survival rates immediately following the termination of an iTIE system field deployment. Chronic toxicity can be quantified by continuing to culture and observe test organisms in-lab. Common chronic endpoints include stunted growth, altered development such as teratogenicity in larval fish, decreased reproduction rates, and changes in gene expression. <br />
<br />
Several gene expression endpoints have been detectable in bioassays following an iTIE system deployment and in-lab culturing period. Steigmeyer ''et al.''<ref name="SteigmeyerEtAl2017"/> were able to detect changes in the expression of two genes in ''D. magna'' after a 24-hour exposure to bisphenol A. In a separate study, Nichols<ref>Nichols, E., 2023. Methods for Identification and Prioritization of Stressors at Impaired Sites. Masters thesis, University of Michigan. University of Michigan Library Deep Blue Documents. [https://deepblue.lib.umich.edu/bitstream/handle/2027.42/176142/Nichols_Elizabeth_thesis.pdf?sequence=1 Free Download]&nbsp; [[Media: Nichols2023.pdf | Report.pdf]]</ref> found a significant decline in acetylcholinesterase activity in ''H. azteca'' after a 24-hour exposure to chlorpyrifos. These results indicate a potential to adapt other gene expression bioassays for use in conjunction with iTIE system field exposures to prove stressor-causality linkages.<br />
<br />
===Cost Effectiveness Study===<br />
Burton ''et al.''<ref name="BurtonEtAl2020"/> conducted a cost effectiveness study comparing the iTIE technology with the traditional US EPA Phase 1 TIE method. Comparisons were based on the estimated time required to complete various sub-tasks within each method. Sub-tasks included organism care, equipment preparation, mobilization and deployment, test maintenance, test termination, demobilization, and test termination analyses. It was ultimately estimated that the iTIE protocol requires 47% less time (67 fewer hours) to complete than the Phase 1 TIE method, with the largest time differences in equipment preparation, deployment, test maintenance, and demobilization. It is important to note that the iTIE method may require additional initial costs for equipment and training.<br />
<br />
==Field Application==<br />
[[File: CraneFig6.png | thumb | left | 400px | Figure 6. iTIES deployment at the Rouge River, Detroit, MI. In the foreground is the iTIE Cooler Sub-System, which contains iTIE resin treatments and test organism groups, as well as the oxygenation coil and sample collection bottles. Next to the iTIE Cooler are the two pump cases. The Trident can be seen above the pump cases, installed in the river channel near shore.]]<br />
The&nbsp;iTIE&nbsp;system&nbsp;has&nbsp;been successfully deployed at a variety of marine and freshwater sites during the proof-of-concept phase of prototype development. One example is the 2024 iTIE system deployment completed near the mouth of the Rouge River in Detroit, MI (Figure 6). The Rouge River watershed has a long history of industrialization, with a legacy of chemical dumping, channelization, damming, and urban runoff<ref>Ridgway, J., Cave, K., DeMaria, A., O’Meara, J., Hartig, J. H., 2018. The Rouge River Area of Concern—A multi-year, multi-level successful approach to restoration of Impaired Beneficial Uses. Aquatic Ecosystem Health and Management, 21(4), pp. 398-408. [https://doi.org/10.1080/14634988.2018.1528816 doi: 10.1080/14634988.2018.1528816]</ref>. This has led to degraded environmental conditions, with previous detections of a wide range of chemicals including heavy metals and various organics.<br />
<br />
[[File: CraneFig7.png | thumb | 300px | Figure 7. Survival and healthy development of ''P. promelas'' embryos and larvae following a 48-hour iTIE exposure near the mouth of the Rouge River. Organisms were exposed to site porewater as embryos for 48 hours and cultured post-exposure for an additional 5 days.]]<br />
[[File: CraneFig8.png | thumb | 300px | Figure 8. Survival of ''C. dilutus'' larvae after an iTIE exposure near the mouth of the Rouge River. Organisms were exposed to site porewater for 48 hours and cultured post-exposure for an additional 5 days. Error bars show standard deviation.]]<br />
An&nbsp;iTIE&nbsp;system&nbsp;deployment&nbsp;was designed and completed to determine which chemical classes are most responsible for causing toxicity at the site. Resin treatments included glass wool (inert, non-fractionating substance), Chelex (metals sorption), Oasis HLB (general organics sorption), and Oasis WAX (organics sorption, with a high affinity for PFAS). The study utilized fathead minnow (''P. promelas'') embryos, due to their relative sensitivity to metals and PAHs, as well as second-instar midge ([[Wikipedia: Chironomus |''Chironomus dilutus'']]) larvae due to their relative sensitivity to PFAS. <br />
<br />
The test organisms were exposed to fractionated porewater ''in situ'' for 48 hours. Following exposure, organisms were cultured for an additional five days, and survival was recorded (Figures 7 and 8). Moderate declines in survival were seen in both species in the glass wool treatment, indicating toxicity at the site. For ''P. promelas'', the highest proportion of healthy development occurred in the Chelex treatment, supporting the hypothesis that metals are a dominant cause of toxicity. ''C. dilutus'' had the greatest survival in the Oasis WAX treatment, suggesting that an organic stressor class like PFAS is also present at harmful concentrations in the river.<br />
<br />
Water chemical analyses of fractionated and unfractionated water samples were completed to support biological results. Analyses were conducted for a range of stressor classes including metals, PAHs, PCBs, an organophosphate pesticide (chlorpyrifos), a PFAS compound (PFOS) and a pyrethroid insecticide (permethrin). Of these analytes, only heavy metals and PFOS were detected. Some chemical classes including PAHs and PCBs were not detected at the site.<br />
To reach similar conclusions using traditional Phase 1 TIE methods, one would need to complete the following tests: baseline toxicity, filtration, aeration, EDTA, C18 SPE, and methanol elution of C18 SPE. The iTIE method allows the same conclusions to be drawn with significantly less time and effort required.<br />
<br />
==Summary==<br />
The ''in situ'' Toxicity Identification Evaluation technology and protocol is a powerful tool that investigators can use to strengthen causal linkages between chemical stressors and ecological toxicity. By fractionating sampled water and exposing test organisms ''in situ'', investigators can gather toxicity response data while minimizing sample manipulation and accurately representing environmental conditions.<br />
<br clear="right"/><br />
<br />
==References==<br />
<references /><br />
<br />
==See Also==</div>Jhurleyhttps://www.enviro.wiki/index.php?title=User:Jhurley/sandbox&diff=18098User:Jhurley/sandbox2026-04-09T18:52:49Z<p>Jhurley: </p>
<hr />
<div>==Estimating PCE/TCE Abiotic First-Order Reductive Dechlorination Rate Constants in Clayey Soils Under Anoxic Conditions== <br />
The U.S. Department of Defense (DoD) faces many challenges in restoring aquifers at contaminated sites, often due to back-diffusion of tetrachloroethene (PCE) and trichloroethene (TCE) from low-permeability clay zones. The uptake, storage, and subsequent long-term release of these dissolved contaminants from clays are key processes in understanding the longevity, intensity, and risks associated with many persistent chlorinated ethene groundwater plumes. Although naturally occurring abiotic and biotic dechlorination processes in clays may reduce stored contaminant mass and significantly aid natural attenuation, no standardized field method currently exists to verify or quantify these reactions. It is critical to remediation design efforts to demonstrate and validate a cost-effective in situ approach for assessing these dechlorination processes using first-order rate constants. An approach was developed and applied across eight DoD sites to support Remedial Project Managers (RPMs) and regulators in evaluating natural attenuation potential in clay-rich environments.<br />
<div style="float:right;margin:0 0 2em 2em;">__TOC__</div><br />
<br />
'''Related Article(s):'''<br />
<br />
*[[Monitored Natural Attenuation (MNA)]]<br />
*[[Contaminated Sediment Risk Assessment]]<br />
*[[Passive Sampling of Sediments]]<br />
*[[Sediment Porewater Dialysis Passive Samplers for Inorganics (Peepers)]]<br />
<br />
'''Contributors:''' Dr. G. Allen Burton Jr., Austin Crane<br />
<br />
'''Key Resources:'''<br />
*A Novel In Situ Toxicity Identification Evaluation (iTIE) System for Determining which Chemicals Drive Impairments at Contaminated Sites<ref name="BurtonEtAl2020">Burton, G.A., Cervi, E.C., Meyer, K., Steigmeyer, A., Verhamme, E., Daley, J., Hudson, M., Colvin, M., Rosen, G., 2020. A novel In Situ Toxicity Identification Evaluation (iTIE) System for Determining which Chemicals Drive Impairments at Contaminated Sites. Environmental Toxicology and Chemistry, 39(9), pp. 1746-1754. [https://doi.org/10.1002/etc.4799 doi: 10.1002/etc.4799]</ref> <br />
*An in situ toxicity identification and evaluation water analysis system: Laboratory validation<ref name="SteigmeyerEtAl2017">Steigmeyer, A.J., Zhang, J., Daley, J.M., Zhang, X., Burton, G.A. Jr., 2017. An in situ toxicity identification and evaluation water analysis system: Laboratory validation. Environmental Toxicology and Chemistry, 36(6), pp. 1636-1643. [https://doi.org/10.1002/etc.3696 doi: 10.1002/etc.3696]</ref> <br />
*Sediment Toxicity Identification Evaluation (TIE) Phases I, II, and III Guidance Document<ref>United States Environmental Protection Agency, 2007. Sediment Toxicity Identification Evaluation (TIE) Phases I, II, and III Guidance Document, EPA/600/R-07/080. 145 pages. [https://nepis.epa.gov/Exe/ZyPURL.cgi?Dockey=P1003GR1.txt Free Download]&nbsp; [[Media: EPA2007.pdf | Report.pdf]]</ref><br />
*In Situ Toxicity Identification Evaluation (iTIE) Technology for Assessing Contaminated Sediments, Remediation Success, Recontamination and Source Identification<ref>In Situ Toxicity Identification Evaluation (iTIE) Technology for Assessing Contaminated Sediments, Remediation Success, Recontamination and Source Identification [https://serdp-estcp.mil/projects/details/88a8f9ba-542b-4b98-bfa4-f693435535cd/er18-1181-project-overview Project Website]&nbsp; [[Media: ER18-1181Ph.II.pdf | Final Report.pdf]]</ref><br />
<br />
==Introduction==<br />
In waterways impacted by numerous naturally occurring and anthropogenic chemical stressors, it is crucial for environmental practitioners to be able to identify which chemical classes are causing the highest degrees of toxicity to aquatic life. Previously developed methods, including the Toxicity Identification Evaluation (TIE) protocol developed by the US Environmental Protection Agency (EPA)<ref>Norberg-King, T., Mount, D.I., Amato, J.R., Jensen, D.A., Thompson, J.A., 1992. Toxicity identification evaluation: Characterization of chronically toxic effluents: Phase I. Publication No. EPA/600/6-91/005F. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Office of Research and Development. [https://www.epa.gov/sites/default/files/2015-09/documents/owm0255.pdf Free Download from US EPA]&nbsp; [[Media: usepa1992.pdf | Report.pdf]]</ref>, can be confounded by sample manipulation artifacts and temporal limitations of ''ex situ'' organism exposures<ref name="BurtonEtAl2020"/>. These factors may disrupt causal linkages and mislead investigators during site characterization and management decision-making. The ''in situ'' Toxicity Identification Evaluation (iTIE) technology was developed to allow users to strengthen stressor-causality linkages and rank chemical classes of concern at impaired sites, with high degrees of ecological realism. <br />
<br />
The technology has undergone a series of improvements in recent years, with the most recent prototype being robust, operable in a wide variety of site conditions, and cost-effective compared to alternative site characterization methods<ref>Burton, G.A. Jr., Nordstrom, J.F., 2004. An in situ toxicity identification evaluation method part I: Laboratory validation. Environmental Toxicology and Chemistry, 23(12), pp. 2844-2850. [https://doi.org/10.1897/03-409.1 doi: 10.1897/03-409.1]</ref><ref>Burton, G.A. Jr., Nordstrom, J.F., 2004. An in situ toxicity identification evaluation method part II: Field validation. Environmental Toxicology and Chemistry, 23(12), pp. 2851-2855. [https://doi.org/10.1897/03-468.1 doi: 10.1897/03-468.1]</ref><ref name="BurtonEtAl2020"/><ref name="SteigmeyerEtAl2017"/>. The latest prototype can be used in any of the following settings: in marine, estuarine, or freshwater sites; to study surface water or sediment pore water; in shallow waters easily accessible by foot or in deep waters only accessible by pier or boat. It can be used to study sites impacted by a wide variety of stressors including ammonia, [[Metal and Metalloid Contaminants | metals]], pesticides, polychlorinated biphenyls (PCB), [[Polycyclic Aromatic Hydrocarbons (PAHs) | polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons (PAH)]], and [[Perfluoroalkyl and Polyfluoroalkyl Substances (PFAS) | per- and polyfluoroalkyl substances (PFAS)]], among others. The technology is applicable to studies of acute toxicity via organism survival or of chronic toxicity via responses in growth, reproduction, or gene expression<ref name="BurtonEtAl2020"/>.<br />
<br />
==System Components and Validation==<br />
[[File: CraneFig1.png | thumb | 600 px | Figure 1: A schematic diagram of the iTIE system prototype. The system is divided into three sub-systems: 1) the Pore Water/Surface Water Collection Sub-System (blue); 2) the Pumping Sub-System (red); and 3) the iTIE Resin, Exposure, and Sampling Sub-System (green). Water first enters the system through the Pore Water/Surface Water Collection Sub-System. Porewater can be collected using Trident-style probes, or surface water can be collected using a simple weighted probe. The water is composited in a manifold before being pumped to the rest of the iTIE system by the booster pump. Once in the iTIE Resin, Exposure, and Sampling Sub-System, the water is gently oxygenated by the Oxygen Coil, separated from gas bubbles by the Drip Chamber, and diverted to separate iTIE Resin and Exposure Chambers (or iTIE units) by the Splitting Manifold. Water movement through each iTIE unit is controlled by a dedicated Regulation Pump. Finally, the water is gathered in Sample Collection bottles for analysis.]]<br />
The&nbsp;latest&nbsp;iTIE&nbsp;prototype consists of an array of sorptive resins that differentially fractionate sampled water, and a series of corresponding flow-through organism chambers that receive the treated water ''in situ''. Resin treatments can be selected depending on the chemicals suspected to be present at each site to selectively sequester certain chemical of concern (CoC) classes from the whole water, leaving a smaller subset of chemicals in the resulting water fraction for chemical and toxicological characterization. Test organism species and life stages can also be chosen depending on factors including site characteristics and study goals. In the full iTIE protocol, site water is continuously sampled either from the sediment pore spaces or the water column at a site, gently oxygenated, diverted to different iTIE units for fractionation and organism exposure, and collected in sample bottles for off-site chemical analysis (Figure 1). All iTIE system components are housed within waterproof Pelican cases, which allow for ease of transport and temperature control.<br />
<br />
===Porewater and Surface Water Collection Sub-system===<br />
[[File: CraneFig2.png | thumb | 600 px | Figure 2: a) Trident probe with auxiliary sensors attached, b) a Trident probe with end caps removed (the red arrow identifies the intermediate space where glass beads are packed to filter suspended solids), c) a Trident probe being installed using a series of push poles and a fence post driver]]<br />
Given&nbsp;the&nbsp;importance&nbsp;of sediment porewater to ecosystem structure and function, investigators may employ the iTIE system to evaluate the toxic effects associated with the impacted sediment porewater. To accomplish this, the iTIE system utilizes the Trident probe, originally developed for Department of Defense site characterization studies<ref>Chadwick, D.B., Harre, B., Smith, C.F., Groves, J.G., Paulsen, R.J., 2003. Coastal Contaminant Migration Monitoring: The Trident Probe and UltraSeep System. Hardware Description, Protocols, and Procedures. Technical Report 1902. Space and Naval Warfare Systems Center.</ref>. The main body of the Trident is comprised of a stainless-steel frame with six hollow probes (Figure 2). Each probe contains a layer of inert glass beads, which filters suspended solids from the sampled water. The water is drawn through each probe into a composite manifold and transported to the rest of the iTIE system using a high-precision peristaltic pump. <br />
<br />
The Trident also includes an adjustable stopper plate, which forms a seal against the sediment and prevents the inadvertent dilution of porewater samples with surface water. (Figure 2). Preliminary laboratory results indicate that the Trident is extremely effective in collecting porewater samples with minimal surface water infiltration in sediments ranging from coarse sand to fine clay. Underwater cameras, sensors, passive samplers, and other auxiliary equipment can be attached to the Trident probe frame to provide supplemental data.<br />
<br />
Alternatively, practitioners may employ the iTIE system to evaluate site surface water. To sample surface water, weighted intake tubes can collect surface water from the water column using a peristaltic pump.<br />
<br />
===Oxygen Coil, Overflow Bag and Drip Chamber===<br />
[[File: CraneFig3.png | thumb | left | 400 px | Figure 3. Contents of the iTIE system cooler. The pictured HDPE rack (47.6 cm length x 29.7 cm width x 33.7 cm height) is removable from the iTIE cooler. Water enters the system at the red circle, flows through the oxygen coil, and then travels to each of the individual iTIE units where diagnostic resins and organisms are located. The water then briefly leaves the cooler to travel through peristaltic regulation pumps before being gathered in sample collection bottles.]]<br />
Porewater&nbsp;is&nbsp;naturally&nbsp;anoxic due to limited mixing with aerated surface water and high oxygen demand of sediments, which may cause organism mortality and interfere with iTIE results. To preclude this, sampled porewater is exposed to an oxygen coil. This consists of an interior silicone tube connected to a pressurized oxygen canister, threaded through an exterior reinforced PVC tube through which water is slowly pumped (Figure 3). Pump rates are optimized to ensure adequate aeration of the water. In addition to elevating DO levels, the oxygen coil facilitates the oxidation of dissolved sulfides, which naturally occur in some marine sediments and may otherwise cause toxicity to organisms if left in its reduced form.<br />
<br />
Gas bubbles may form in the oxygen coil over the course of a deployment. These can be disruptive, decreasing water sample volumes and posing a danger to sensitive organisms like daphnids. To account for this, the water travels to a drip chamber after exiting the oxygen coil, which allows gas bubbles to be separated and diverted to an overflow system. The sample water then flows to a manifold which divides the flow into different paths to each of the treatment units for fractionation and organism exposure.<br />
<br />
===iTIE Units: Fractionation and Organism Exposure Chambers===<br />
[[File: CraneFig4.png | thumb | 300px | Figure 4. A diagram of the iTIE prototype. Water flows upward into each resin chamber through the unit bottom. After being chemically fractionated in the resin chamber, water travels into the organism chamber, where test organisms have been placed. Water is drawn through the units by high-precision peristaltic pumps.]]<br />
At&nbsp;the&nbsp;core&nbsp;of&nbsp;the&nbsp;iTIE&nbsp;system are separate dual-chamber iTIE units, each with a resin fractionation chamber and an organism exposure chamber (Figure 4). Developed by Burton ''et al.''<ref name="BurtonEtAl2020"/>, the iTIE prototype is constructed from acrylic, with rubber O-rings to connect each piece. Each iTIE unit can contain a different diagnostic resin matrix, customizable to remove specific chemical classes from the water. Sampled water flows into each unit through the bottom and is differentially fractionated by the resin matrix as it travels upward. Then it reaches the organism chamber, where test organisms are placed for exposure. The organism chamber inlet and outlet are covered by mesh to prevent the escape of the test organisms. This continuous flow-through design allows practitioners to capture the temporal heterogeneity of ambient water conditions over the duration of an ''in situ'' exposure. Currently, the iTIE system can support four independent iTIE treatment units.<br />
<br />
After being exposed to test organisms, water is collected in sample bottles. The bottles can be pre-loaded with preservation reagents to allow for later chemical analysis. Sample bottles can be composed of polyethylene, glass or other materials depending on the CoC.<br />
<br />
===Pumping Sub-system===<br />
[[File: CraneFig5.png | thumb | 300px | Figure 5. The iTIE system pumping sub-system. The sub-system consists of: A) a single booster pump, which is directly connected to the water sampling device and feeds water to the rest of the iTIE system, and B) a set of four regulation pumps, which each connect to the outflow of an individual iTIE unit. Each pump set is housed in a waterproof case with self-contained rechargeable battery power. A tablet is mounted inside the lid of the four pump case, which can be used to program and operate all of the pumps when connected to the internet.]]<br />
Water&nbsp;movement&nbsp;through&nbsp;the&nbsp;system is driven by a series of high-precision, programmable peristaltic pumps ([https://ecotechmarine.com/ EcoTech Marine]). Each pump set is housed in a Pelican storm travel case. Power is supplied to each pump by internal rechargeable lithium-iron phosphate batteries ([https://www.bioennopower.com/ Bioenno Power]).<br />
<br />
First, water is supplied to the system by a booster pump (Figure 5A). This pump is situated between the water sampling sub-system and the oxygen coil. The booster pump: 1) facilitates pore water collection, especially from sediments with high fine particle fractions; 2) helps water overcome vertical lifts to travel to the iTIE system; and 3) prevents vacuums from forming in the iTIE system interior, which can accelerate the formation of disruptive gas bubbles in the oxygen coil. The booster pump should be programmed to supply an excess of water to prevent vacuum formation.<br />
<br />
Second, a set of four regulation pumps ensure precise flow rates through each independent iTIE unit (Figure 5B). Each regulation pump pulls water from the top of an iTIE unit and then dispenses that water into a sample bottle for further analysis.<br />
<br />
==Study Design Considerations==<br />
===Diagnostic Resin Treatments===<br />
Several commercially available resins have been verified for use in the iTIE system. Investigators can select resins based on stressor classes of interest at each site. Each resin selectively removes a CoC class from site water prior to organism exposure.<br />
*[https://www.dupont.com/products/ambersorb560.html DuPont Ambersorb 560] for removal of 1,4-dioxane and other organic chemicals<ref>Woodard, S., Mohr, T., Nickelsen, M.G., 2014. Synthetic media: A promising new treatment technology for 1,4-dioxane. Remediation Journal, 24(4), pp. 27-40. [https://doi.org/10.1002/rem.21402 doi: 10.1002/rem.21402]</ref><br />
*C18 for nonpolar organic chemicals<br />
*[https://www.bio-rad.com/en-us Bio-Rad] [https://www.bio-rad.com/en-us/product/chelex-100-resin?ID=6448ab3e-b96a-4162-9124-7b7d2330288e Chelex] for metals<br />
*Granular activated carbon for metals, general organic chemicals, sulfide<ref>Lemos, B.R.S., Teixeira, I.F., de Mesquita, J.P., Ribeiro, R.R., Donnici, C.L., Lago, R.M., 2012. Use of modified activated carbon for the oxidation of aqueous sulfide. Carbon, 50(3), pp. 1386-1393. [https://doi.org/10.1016/j.carbon.2011.11.011 doi: 10.1016/j.carbon.2011.11.011]</ref><br />
*[https://www.waters.com/nextgen/us/en.html Waters] [https://www.waters.com/nextgen/us/en/search.html?category=Shop&isocode=en_US&keyword=oasis%20hlb&multiselect=true&page=1&rows=12&sort=best-sellers&xcid=ppc-ppc_23916&gad_source=1&gad_campaignid=14746094146&gbraid=0AAAAAD_uR00nhlNwrhhegNh06pBODTgiN&gclid=CjwKCAiAtLvMBhB_EiwA1u6_PsppE0raci2IhvGnAAe5ijciNcetLaGZo5qA3g3r4Z_La7YAPJtzShoC6LoQAvD_BwE Oasis HLB] for general organic chemicals<ref name="SteigmeyerEtAl2017"/><br />
*[https://www.waters.com/nextgen/us/en.html Waters] [https://www.waters.com/nextgen/us/en/search.html?category=All&enableHL=true&isocode=en_US&keyword=Oasis%20WAX%20&multiselect=true&page=1&rows=12&sort=most-relevant Oasis WAX] for PFAS, organic chemicals of mixed polarity<ref>Iannone, A., Carriera, F., Di Fiore, C., Avino, P., 2024. Poly- and Perfluoroalkyl Substance (PFAS) Analysis in Environmental Matrices: An Overview of the Extraction and Chromatographic Detection Methods. Analytica, 5(2), pp. 187-202. [https://doi.org/10.3390/analytica5020012 doi: 10.3390/analytica5020012]&nbsp; [[Media: IannoneEtAl2024.pdf | Open Access Article]]</ref><br />
*Zeolite for ammonia, other organic chemicals<br />
<br />
Resins must be adequately conditioned prior to use. Otherwise, they may inadequately adsorb toxicants or cause stress to organisms. New resins should be tested for efficacy and toxicity before being used in an iTIE system. <br />
<br />
===Test Organism Species and Life Stages===<br />
Practitioners can also select different organism species and life stages for use in the iTIE system, depending on site characteristics and study goals. The iTIE system can accommodate various small test organisms, including embryo-stage fish and most macroinvertebrates. The following common toxicity tests can be adapted for application within iTIE systems<ref>U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Office of Solid Waste and Emergency Response, 1994. Catalogue of Standard Toxicity Tests for Ecological Risk Assessment. ECO Update, 2(2), 4 pages. Publication No. 9345.0.05I [https://www.epa.gov/sites/default/files/2015-09/documents/v2no2.pdf Free Download]&nbsp; [[Media: usepa1994.pdf | Report.pdf]]</ref>.<br />
<ul><u>Freshwater acute toxicity:</u></ul><br />
*[[Wikipedia: Daphnia magna | ''Daphnia magna'']] or [[Wikipedia: Daphnia pulex | ''Daphnia pulex'']] 24-, 48-, and 96-hour survival<br />
<ul><u>Freshwater chronic toxicity:</u></ul><br />
*[[Wikipedia: Ceriodaphnia dubia | ''Ceriodaphnia dubia'']] 7-day survival and reproduction<br />
*''D. magna'' 7-day survival and reproduction<br />
*[[Wikipedia: Fathead minnow | ''Pimephales promelas'']] 7-day embryo-larval survival and teratogenicity<br />
*[[Wikipedia: Hyalella azteca | ''Hyalella Azteca'']] 10- or 30-day survival and reproduction<br />
<ul><u>Marine acute toxicity:</u></ul><br />
*[[Wikipedia: Americamysis bahia | ''Americamysis bahia'']] 24- and 48-hour survival<br />
<ul><u>Marine chronic toxicity:</u></ul><br />
*''Americamysis'' survival, growth and fecundity<br />
*[[Wikipedia: Topsmelt silverside | ''Atherinops affinis'']] embryo-larval survival and growth <br />
<br />
Acute toxicity is quantifiable via organism survival rates immediately following the termination of an iTIE system field deployment. Chronic toxicity can be quantified by continuing to culture and observe test organisms in-lab. Common chronic endpoints include stunted growth, altered development such as teratogenicity in larval fish, decreased reproduction rates, and changes in gene expression. <br />
<br />
Several gene expression endpoints have been detectable in bioassays following an iTIE system deployment and in-lab culturing period. Steigmeyer ''et al.''<ref name="SteigmeyerEtAl2017"/> were able to detect changes in the expression of two genes in ''D. magna'' after a 24-hour exposure to bisphenol A. In a separate study, Nichols<ref>Nichols, E., 2023. Methods for Identification and Prioritization of Stressors at Impaired Sites. Masters thesis, University of Michigan. University of Michigan Library Deep Blue Documents. [https://deepblue.lib.umich.edu/bitstream/handle/2027.42/176142/Nichols_Elizabeth_thesis.pdf?sequence=1 Free Download]&nbsp; [[Media: Nichols2023.pdf | Report.pdf]]</ref> found a significant decline in acetylcholinesterase activity in ''H. azteca'' after a 24-hour exposure to chlorpyrifos. These results indicate a potential to adapt other gene expression bioassays for use in conjunction with iTIE system field exposures to prove stressor-causality linkages.<br />
<br />
===Cost Effectiveness Study===<br />
Burton ''et al.''<ref name="BurtonEtAl2020"/> conducted a cost effectiveness study comparing the iTIE technology with the traditional US EPA Phase 1 TIE method. Comparisons were based on the estimated time required to complete various sub-tasks within each method. Sub-tasks included organism care, equipment preparation, mobilization and deployment, test maintenance, test termination, demobilization, and test termination analyses. It was ultimately estimated that the iTIE protocol requires 47% less time (67 fewer hours) to complete than the Phase 1 TIE method, with the largest time differences in equipment preparation, deployment, test maintenance, and demobilization. It is important to note that the iTIE method may require additional initial costs for equipment and training.<br />
<br />
==Field Application==<br />
[[File: CraneFig6.png | thumb | left | 400px | Figure 6. iTIES deployment at the Rouge River, Detroit, MI. In the foreground is the iTIE Cooler Sub-System, which contains iTIE resin treatments and test organism groups, as well as the oxygenation coil and sample collection bottles. Next to the iTIE Cooler are the two pump cases. The Trident can be seen above the pump cases, installed in the river channel near shore.]]<br />
The&nbsp;iTIE&nbsp;system&nbsp;has&nbsp;been successfully deployed at a variety of marine and freshwater sites during the proof-of-concept phase of prototype development. One example is the 2024 iTIE system deployment completed near the mouth of the Rouge River in Detroit, MI (Figure 6). The Rouge River watershed has a long history of industrialization, with a legacy of chemical dumping, channelization, damming, and urban runoff<ref>Ridgway, J., Cave, K., DeMaria, A., O’Meara, J., Hartig, J. H., 2018. The Rouge River Area of Concern—A multi-year, multi-level successful approach to restoration of Impaired Beneficial Uses. Aquatic Ecosystem Health and Management, 21(4), pp. 398-408. [https://doi.org/10.1080/14634988.2018.1528816 doi: 10.1080/14634988.2018.1528816]</ref>. This has led to degraded environmental conditions, with previous detections of a wide range of chemicals including heavy metals and various organics.<br />
<br />
[[File: CraneFig7.png | thumb | 300px | Figure 7. Survival and healthy development of ''P. promelas'' embryos and larvae following a 48-hour iTIE exposure near the mouth of the Rouge River. Organisms were exposed to site porewater as embryos for 48 hours and cultured post-exposure for an additional 5 days.]]<br />
[[File: CraneFig8.png | thumb | 300px | Figure 8. Survival of ''C. dilutus'' larvae after an iTIE exposure near the mouth of the Rouge River. Organisms were exposed to site porewater for 48 hours and cultured post-exposure for an additional 5 days. Error bars show standard deviation.]]<br />
An&nbsp;iTIE&nbsp;system&nbsp;deployment&nbsp;was designed and completed to determine which chemical classes are most responsible for causing toxicity at the site. Resin treatments included glass wool (inert, non-fractionating substance), Chelex (metals sorption), Oasis HLB (general organics sorption), and Oasis WAX (organics sorption, with a high affinity for PFAS). The study utilized fathead minnow (''P. promelas'') embryos, due to their relative sensitivity to metals and PAHs, as well as second-instar midge ([[Wikipedia: Chironomus |''Chironomus dilutus'']]) larvae due to their relative sensitivity to PFAS. <br />
<br />
The test organisms were exposed to fractionated porewater ''in situ'' for 48 hours. Following exposure, organisms were cultured for an additional five days, and survival was recorded (Figures 7 and 8). Moderate declines in survival were seen in both species in the glass wool treatment, indicating toxicity at the site. For ''P. promelas'', the highest proportion of healthy development occurred in the Chelex treatment, supporting the hypothesis that metals are a dominant cause of toxicity. ''C. dilutus'' had the greatest survival in the Oasis WAX treatment, suggesting that an organic stressor class like PFAS is also present at harmful concentrations in the river.<br />
<br />
Water chemical analyses of fractionated and unfractionated water samples were completed to support biological results. Analyses were conducted for a range of stressor classes including metals, PAHs, PCBs, an organophosphate pesticide (chlorpyrifos), a PFAS compound (PFOS) and a pyrethroid insecticide (permethrin). Of these analytes, only heavy metals and PFOS were detected. Some chemical classes including PAHs and PCBs were not detected at the site.<br />
To reach similar conclusions using traditional Phase 1 TIE methods, one would need to complete the following tests: baseline toxicity, filtration, aeration, EDTA, C18 SPE, and methanol elution of C18 SPE. The iTIE method allows the same conclusions to be drawn with significantly less time and effort required.<br />
<br />
==Summary==<br />
The ''in situ'' Toxicity Identification Evaluation technology and protocol is a powerful tool that investigators can use to strengthen causal linkages between chemical stressors and ecological toxicity. By fractionating sampled water and exposing test organisms ''in situ'', investigators can gather toxicity response data while minimizing sample manipulation and accurately representing environmental conditions.<br />
<br clear="right"/><br />
<br />
==References==<br />
<references /><br />
<br />
==See Also==</div>Jhurleyhttps://www.enviro.wiki/index.php?title=Articles&diff=18097Articles2026-04-06T19:42:47Z<p>Jhurley: </p>
<hr />
<div>{| class="wikitable sortable"<br />
|-<br />
!Title!!First Author!!Linking Phrases<br />
|-<br />
|[[Groundwater Sampling - No-Purge/Passive]]||[[Dr. David Adamson, P.E. |Adamson, David, Ph.D., P.E.]]||passive sampling, no purge sampling, grab samplers, diffusion samplers, sorptive samplers<br />
|-<br />
|[[ Long-Term Monitoring (LTM)]]||[[Dr. David Adamson, P.E. |Adamson, David, Ph.D., P.E.]]||long-term monitoring, LTM, LTM objectives, LTM programs, LTM challenges<br />
|-<br />
|[[PFAS Monitored Retention (PMR) and PFAS Enhanced Retention (PER)]]<br />
|[[Dr. David Adamson, P.E. |Adamson, David, Ph.D., P.E.]]<br />
|PFAS, MNA, natural attenuation<br />
|-<br />
|[[Sorption of Organic Contaminants]]||[[Richelle Allen-King|Allen-King, Richelle]]||<br />
|-<br />
|[[PFAS Transport and Fate]]<br />
|[[Dr. Richard Anderson|Anderson, Richard, Ph.D.]]<br />
|PFAS, fate and transport<br />
|-<br />
|[[Mass Flux and Mass Discharge]]||[[Dr. Michael Annable, P.E. |Annable, Michael, Ph.D., P.E.]]||source reduction<br />
|-<br />
|[[PFAS Toxicology and Risk Assessment]]<br />
|[[Jennifer Arblaster|Arblaster, Jennifer]]<br />
|PFAS, toxicology, risk assessment<br />
|-<br />
|[[Metal(loid)s - Small Arms Ranges]]|| Dr. Amanda Barker |[[Dr. Amanda Barker|Barker, Amanda, Ph.D.]]<br />
|<br />
|-<br />
|[[Munitions Constituents – Photolysis|Munitions Constituents - Photolysis]]<br />
|[[Dr. Warren Kadoya|Kadoya, Warren, Ph.D.]]<br />
|<br />
|-<br />
|[[Munitions Constituents - Soil Sampling]]<br />
|[[Dr. Samuel Beal|Beal, Samuel, Ph.D.]]<br />
|<br />
|-<br />
|[[Vapor Intrusion – Sewers and Utility Tunnels as Preferential Pathways|Vapor Intrusion - Sewers and Utility Tunnels as Preferential Pathways]]<br />
|[[Lila Beckley|Beckley, Lila]]<br />
|vapor intrusion<br />
|-<br />
|[[Natural Attenuation in Source Zone and Groundwater Plume - Bemidji Crude Oil Spill]]<br />
|[[Dr. Barbara Bekins|Bekins, Barbara, Ph.D.]]||<br />
|-<br />
|[[Bioremediation - Anaerobic Secondary Water Quality Impacts]]||[[Dr. Robert Borden, P.E. |Borden, Robert, Ph.D., P.E.]]||secondary impacts, water quality (in regards to anaerobic conditions)<br />
|-<br />
|[[Design Tool - Base Addition for ERD]]||[[Dr. Robert Borden, P.E. |Borden, Robert, Ph.D., P.E.]]||aquifer acidity, base addition<br />
|-<br />
|[[Emulsified Vegetable Oil (EVO) for Anaerobic Bioremediation]]<br />
|[[Dr. Robert Borden, P.E. |Borden, Robert, Ph.D., P.E.]]||<br />
|-<br />
|[[Low pH Inhibition of Reductive Dechlorination]]||[[Dr. Robert Borden, P.E. |Borden, Robert, Ph.D., P.E.]]||low pH inhibition<br />
|-<br />
|[[In Situ Toxicity Identification Evaluation (iTIE)]]||[[Dr. G. Allen Burton |Burton, Allen, P.E.]]||toxicity evaluation<br />
|-<br />
|[[OPTically-based In-situ Characterization System (OPTICS)]]<br />
|[[Dr. Grace Chang|Chang, Grace, Ph.D.]]<br />
|<br />
|-<br />
|[[Munitions Constituents - Electrochemical Treatment]]<br />
|[[Dr. Brian P. Chaplin|Chaplin, Brian, Ph.D.]]<br />
|munitions constituents remediation<br />
|-<br />
|[[PFAS Sources]]<br />
|[[Dr. Dora Chiang|Chiang, Dora, Ph.D.]]<br />
|<br />
|-<br />
|[[Biodegradation - Cometabolic]]||[[Dr. Kung-Hui (Bella) Chu |Chu, Kung-Hui (Bella), Ph.D]]||cometabolic biodegradation<br />
|-<br />
|[[Munitions Constituents - Composting]]<br />
|[[Harry Craig|Craig, Harry]]<br />
|<br />
|-<br />
|[[Chemical Oxidation (In Situ - ISCO)]]||[[Dr. Michelle Crimi |Crimi, Michelle, Ph.D]]||ISCO, chemical oxidation<br />
|-<br />
|[[Chemical Oxidation Oxidant Selection (In Situ - ISCO)]]||[[Dr. Michelle Crimi |Crimi, Michelle, Ph.D]]||chemical oxidant, oxidant (in regards to ISCO)<br />
|-<br />
|[[Chemical Oxidation Design Considerations(In Situ - ISCO)]]||[[Dr. Michelle Crimi |Crimi, Michelle, Ph.D]]||screening, design, implementation, oxidant delivery (in regards to ISCO)<br />
|-<br />
|[[Perfluoroalkyl and Polyfluoroalkyl Substances (PFAS)]]||[[Dr. Rula Deeb |Deeb, Rula, Ph.D.]]||PFAS, perfluorooctanoic acid (PFOA), perfluorooctane sulfonate (PFOS)<br />
|-<br />
|[[Metal and Metalloid Contaminants]]||[[Dr. Miles Denham |Denham, Miles, Ph.D.]]||metal contaminant(s), metalloid contaminant(s), metal(s), metalloid(s),<br />
|-<br />
|[[Metals and Metalloids - Mobility in Groundwater]]||[[Dr. Miles Denham |Denham, Miles, Ph.D.]]||metal mobility, aqueous speciation, adsorption, precipitation, colloidal transport (in regards to metals)<br />
|-<br />
|[[Monitored Natural Attenuation (MNA) of Metal and Metalloids]]||[[Dr. Miles Denham |Denham, Miles, Ph.D.]]||MNA, attenuation of metal(s), natural attenuation processes, attenuation (in regards to metals)<br />
|-<br />
|[[Metal and Metalloids - Remediation]]||[[Dr. Miles Denham |Denham, Miles, Ph.D.]]||remediation, in situ technologies, contaminant removal (in regards to metals)<br />
|-<br />
|[[pH Buffering in Aquifers]]||[[Dr. Miles Denham |Denham, Miles, Ph.D.]]||ph buffer, natural pH buffer, engineered pH buffer<br />
|-<br />
|[[Munitions Constituents - Sorption]]||[[Dr. Katerina Dontsova |Dontsova, Katerina, Ph.D.]]||energetics, sorption<br />
|-<br />
|[[Biodegradation - Hydrocarbons]]||[[Dr. Elizabeth Edwards |Edwards, Elizabeth, Ph.D.]]||hydrocarbon, biodegradation<br />
|-<br />
|[[Source Zone Modeling]]||[[Dr. Ron Falta |Falta, Ron, Ph.D.]]||source zone modeling<br />
|-<br />
|[[Plume Response Modeling]]||[[Dr. Ron Falta |Falta, Ron, Ph.D.]]||plume response modeling<br />
|-<br />
|[[REMChlor - MD]]<br />
|[[Dr. Ron Falta|Falta, Ron, Ph.D.]]<br />
|<br />
|-<br />
|[[In Situ Groundwater Treatment with Activated Carbon]]<br />
|[[Dr. Dimin Fan|Fan, Dimin, Ph.D.]]<br />
|<br />
|-<br />
|[[LNAPL Remediation Technologies]]||[[Dr. Shahla Farhat |Farhat, Shahla, Ph.D.]]||<br />
|-<br />
|[[Sustainable Remediation]]||[[Paul Favara |Favara, Paul]]||sustainable remediation, social, economic and environmental impacts<br />
|-<br />
|[[Munitions Constituents]]||[[Dr. Kevin Finneran |Finneran, Kevin, Ph.D.]]||Explosives, energetics, insensitive munitions<br />
|-<br />
|[[Biodegradation - Reductive Processes]]||[[Dr. David Freedman |Freedman, David, Ph.D.]]||biotic reduction, biotic reductive processes, hydrogenolysis, dihaloelimination, coupling, organohalide respiration<br />
|-<br />
|[[Remediation of Stormwater Runoff Contaminated by Munition Constituents|Munitions Constituents - Remediation of Stormwater Runoff]]||Fuller, Mark, Ph.D.||energetics, insensitive munitions, stormwater runoff<br />
|-<br />
|[[Subgrade Biogeochemical Reactor (SBGR)]]||[[Jeff Gamlin |Gamlin, Jeff]]||SBGR, subgrade biogeochemical reactor, bioreactor<br />
|-<br />
|[[Thermal Remediation - Smoldering]]||[[Dr. Jason Gerhard |Gerhard, Jason, Ph.D.]]||smouldering remediation, self-sustaining treatment for active remediation, STAR<br />
|-<br />
|[[Contaminated Sediments - Introduction]]<br />
|[[Dr. Upal Ghosh|Ghosh, Upal, Ph.D.]]<br />
|<br />
|-<br />
|[[Contaminated Sediment Risk Assessment]]<br />
|[[Richard Wenning|Wenning, Richard]]<br />
|<br />
|-<br />
|[[In Situ Treatment of Contaminated Sediments with Activated Carbon]]<br />
|[[Dr. Upal Ghosh|Ghosh, Upal, Ph.D.]]<br />
|<br />
|-<br />
|[[PFAS Ex Situ Water Treatment]]<br />
|[[Dr. Scott Grieco |Grieco, Scott, Ph.D.]]<br />
|<br />
|-<br />
|[[Stream Restoration]]<br />
|[[Dr. Natalie Griffiths|Griffiths, Natalie, Ph.D.]]<br />
|<br />
|-<br />
|[[Passive Sampling of Sediments]]<br />
|[[Dr. Philip M. Gschwend|Gschwend, Philip]]<br />
|<br />
|-<br />
|[[Phytoplankton (Algae) Blooms]]<br />
|[[Dr. Nathan Hall|Hall, Nathan]]<br />
|<br />
|-<br />
|[[PFAS Soil Remediation Technologies]]||[[James_Hatton |Hatton, Jim]]||PFAS, Soil source zones<br />
|-<br />
|[[Proteomics and Proteogenomics]]<br />
|[[Dr. Kate Kucharzyk|Kucharzyk, Kate, Ph.D.]]<br />
|<br />
|-<br />
|[[N-nitrosodimethylamine (NDMA)]]<br />
|[[Paul Hatzinger|Hatzinger, Paul, Ph.D.]]<br />
|<br />
|-<br />
|[[Alternative Endpoints]]||[[Elisabeth Hawley |Hawley, Elisabeth]]||management of complex sites<br />
|-<br />
|[[Thermal Remediation]]||[[Dr. Gorm Heron |Heron, Gorm, Ph.D.]]||thermal remediation, in situ thermal<br />
|-<br />
|[[Thermal Remediation - Steam]]||[[Dr. Gorm Heron |Heron, Gorm, Ph.D.]]||Steam Enhanced Extraction<br />
|-<br />
|[[Thermal Remediation - Electrical Resistance Heating]]||[[Dr. Gorm Heron |Heron, Gorm, Ph.D.]]||Electrical Resistance Heating<br />
|-<br />
|[[Thermal Conduction Heating (TCH)]]||[[Dr. Gorm Heron |Heron, Gorm, Ph.D.]]||thermal desorption<br />
|-<br />
|[[Thermal Remediation - Combined Remedies]]||[[Dr. Gorm Heron |Heron, Gorm, Ph.D.]]||thermal remediation<br />
|-<br />
|[[Thermal Conduction Heating for Treatment of PFAS-Impacted Soil]]||[[Dr. Gorm Heron |Heron, Gorm, Ph.D.]]||thermal remediation, PFAS<br />
|-<br />
|[[Munitions Constituents- TREECS™ Fate and Risk Modeling|Munitions Constituents - TREECS™ Fate and Risk Modeling]]||[[Dr. Billy E. Johnson |Johnson, Billy, Ph.D.]]||munitions constituents fate and transport modeling, TREECS<br />
|-<br />
|[[Munitions Constituents - Alkaline Degradation]]<br />
|[[Jared Johnson|Johnson, Jared]]<br />
|<br />
|-<br />
|[[Assessing Vapor Intrusion (VI) Impacts in Neighborhoods with Groundwater Contaminated by Chlorinated Volatile Organic Chemicals (CVOCs)|Vapor Intrusion - Assessing VI Impacts in Neighborhoods with Groundwater Contaminated CVOCs]]<br />
|[[Dr. Paul C. Johnson|Johnson, Paul, Ph.D.]]<br />
|vapor intrusion<br />
|-<br />
|[[Munitions Constituents - IM Toxicology]]||-----||insensitive explosives, insensitive munitions, IMX-101, IMX<br />
|-<br />
|[[Landfarming]]<br />
|[[Dr. Roopa Kamath|Kamath, Roopa, Ph.D.]]<br />
|<br />
|-<br />
|[[NAPL Mobility]]<br />
|[[Andrew Kirkman|Kirkman, Andrew]]<br />
|<br />
|-<br />
|[[Perchlorate]]||[[Thomas Krug |Krug, Thomas]]||perchlorate<br />
|-<br />
|[[Injection Techniques for Liquid Amendments]]||[[Thomas Krug |Krug, Thomas]]||amendment injection<br />
|-<br />
|[[Transition of Aqueous Film Forming Foam (AFFF) Fire Suppression Infrastructure Impacted by Per and Polyfluoroalkyl Substances (PFAS)]]<br />
|[[Dr. Johnsie Ray Lang|Lang, Johnsie Ray, Ph.D.]]||PFAS<br />
|-<br />
|[[Characterization Methods – Hydraulic Conductivity]]<br />
|[[Dr. Gaisheng Liu|Liu, Gaisheng, Ph.D.]]<br />
|<br />
|-<br />
|[[Compound Specific Isotope Analysis (CSIA)]]||[[Dr. Barbara Sherwood Lollar, F.R.S.C. |Lollar, Barbara S., FRSC]]||Compound Specific Isotope Analysis (CSIA)<br />
|-<br />
|[[Passive Sampling of Munitions Constituents|Munitions Constituents - Passive Sampling]]<br />
|[[Dr. Guilherme Lotufo|Lotufo, Guilerme, Ph.D.]]<br />
|<br />
|-<br />
|[[Vapor Intrusion (VI)]]||[[Chris Lutes |Lutes, Chris]]||vapor intrusion<br />
|-<br />
|[[Bioremediation - Anaerobic]]||[[Leah MacKinnon, M.A.Sc., P. Eng.|MacKinnon, Leah]]||anaerobic bioremediation<br />
|-<br />
|[[Bioremediation - Anaerobic Design Considerations]]||[[Leah MacKinnon, M.A.Sc., P. Eng.|MacKinnon, Leah]]||<br />
|-<br />
|[[Biodegradation - 1,4-Dioxane]]<br />
|[[Dr. Shaily Mahendra|Mahendra, Shaily, Ph.D.]]<br />
|<br />
|-<br />
|[[Direct Push (DP) Technology]]||[[Wesley McCall, M.S., P.G. |McCall, Wesley, M.S., P.G.]]||direct push, DP, DP machines, DP technology<br />
|-<br />
|[[Direct Push Sampling]]||[[Wesley McCall, M.S., P.G. |McCall, Wesley, M.S., P.G.]]||direct push sampling, soil sampling, groundwater sampling, well installation, soil vapor sampling (in regards to DP)<br />
|-<br />
|[[Direct Push Logging]]||[[Wesley McCall, M.S., P.G. |McCall, Wesley, M.S., P.G.]]||direct push logging, Cone Penetration Testing, CPT, Electrical Conductivity, EC, Hydraulic Profiling Tool, HPT,<br>Membrane Interface Probe, MIP, Optical Imaging Profiler, OIP<br />
|-<br />
|[[Remediation Performance Assessment at Chlorinated Solvent Sites]]||[[Travis McGuire|McGuire, Travis]]||multi-site studies<br />
|-<br />
|[[LNAPL Conceptual Site Models]]<br />
|[[Dr. Charles Newell, P.E. |Newell, Charles, Ph.D., P.E.]]<br />
|<br />
|-<br />
|[[Long-Term Monitoring (LTM) - Data Analysis]]||[[Dr. Thomas McHugh |McHugh, Thomas, Ph.D.]]||data analysis, analysis methods (in regards to LTM)<br />
|-<br />
|[[Long-Term Monitoring (LTM) - Data Variability]]||[[Dr. Thomas McHugh |McHugh, Thomas, Ph.D.]]||data variability (in regards to LTM), LTM evaluation<br />
|-<br />
|[[Munitions Constituents - Abiotic Reduction]]||[[Dr. Jimmy Murillo-Gelvez |Murillo-Gelvez, Jimmy, Ph.D.]] ||<br />
|-<br />
|[[Supercritical Water Oxidation (SCWO)]]<br />
|Nagar, Kobe<br />
|<br />
|-<br />
|[[Matrix Diffusion]]<br />
|[[Dr. Charles Newell, P.E. |Newell, Charles, Ph.D., P.E.]]<br />
|<br />
|-<br />
|[[Groundwater Flow and Solute Transport]]||[[Dr. Charles Newell, P.E. |Newell, Charles, Ph.D., P.E.]]||groundwater flow, advection, dispersion, diffusion, molecular diffusion, mechanical dispersion<br />
|-<br />
|[[Molecular Biological Tools - MBTs]]||[[Dora Ogles-Taggart |Ogles-Taggart, Dora]]||MBT, Molecular Biological Tool(s)<br />
|-<br />
|[[Quantitative Polymerase Chain Reaction (qPCR)]]||[[Dora Ogles-Taggart |Ogles-Taggart, Dora]]||qPCR, Polymerase Chain Reaction<br />
|-<br />
|[[Sediment Capping]]<br />
|[[Dr. Danny Reible|Reible, Danny]]<br />
|<br />
|-<br />
|[[Stable Isotope Probing (SIP)]]||[[Dora Ogles-Taggart |Ogles-Taggart, Dora]]||SIP, Stable Isotope Probing<br />
|-<br />
|[[Metagenomics]]||[[Dora Ogles-Taggart |Ogles-Taggart, Dora]]||metagenomics<br />
|-<br />
|[[Natural Source Zone Depletion (NSZD)]]||[[Tom Palaia |Palaia, Tom]]||natural source zone depletion, NSZD<br />
|-<br />
|[[Amendment Distribution in Low Conductivity Materials]]||[[Dr. Stephen Richardson |Richardson, Stephen, Ph.D.]]||<br />
|-<br />
|[[Polycyclic Aromatic Hydrocarbons (PAHs)]]||[[Dr. Stephen Richardson |Richardson, Stephen, Ph.D.]]||polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons, PAH(s)<br />
|-<br />
|[[Sediment Porewater Dialysis Passive Samplers for Inorganics (Peepers)]]<br />
|[[Florent Risacher|Risacher, Florent, M.Sc.]]<br />
|<br />
|-<br />
|[[1,2,3-Trichloropropane]]||[[Dr. Alexandra Salter-Blanc |Salter-Blanc, Alexandra, Ph.D.]]||TCP, trichloropropane<br />
|-<br />
|[[Zerovalent Iron (ZVI) (Chemical Reduction - ISCR)]]||[[Dr. Alexandra Salter-Blanc |Salter-Blanc, Alexandra, Ph.D.]]||ZVI<br />
|-<br />
|[[Mercury in Sediments]]<br />
|[[Dr. Grace Schwartz|Schwartz, Grace, Ph.D.]]<br />
|<br />
|-<br />
|[[Munitions Constituents – Sample Extraction and Analytical Techniques|Munitions Constituents - Sample Extraction and Analytical Techniques]]<br />
|[[Dr. Austin Scircle|Scircle, Austin]]<br />
|<br />
|-<br />
|[[Geophysical Methods]]||[[Dr. Lee Slater |Slater, Lee, Ph.D.]]||geophysics<br />
|-<br />
|[[Geophysical Methods - Case Studies]]||[[Dr. Lee Slater |Slater, Lee, Ph.D.]]||geophysics<br />
|-<br />
|[[PFAS Treatment by Anion Exchange]]<br />
|[[Dr. Timothy J. Strathmann|Strathmann, Timothy, Ph.D.]]<br />
|PFAS<br />
|-<br />
|[[Munitions Constituents - Dissolution]]||[[Dr. Susan Taylor |Taylor, Susan, Ph.D.]]||explosive(s), dissolution<br />
|-<br />
|[[PFAS Treatment by Electrical Discharge Plasma]]<br />
|[[Dr. Selma Mededovic Thagard|Thagard, Selma Mededovic, Ph.D.]]<br />
|PFAS<br />
|-<br />
|[[Chemical Reduction (In Situ - ISCR)]]||[[Dr. Paul Tratnyek |Tratnyek, Paul, Ph.D.]]||In Situ Chemical Reduction, ISCR<br />
|-<br />
|[[Injection Techniques - Viscosity Modification]]||[[Michael Truex |Truex, Michael]]||viscosity, viscosity modifiers, viscosity modification<br />
|-<br />
|[[Soil Vapor Extraction (SVE)]]||[[Michael Truex |Truex, Michael]]||soil vapor extraction, SVE<br />
|-<br />
|[[Munitions Constituents - Deposition]]||[[Michael R. Walsh, P.E., M.E.|Walsh, Michael, P.E.]]||explosive deposition, energetics deposition<br />
|-<br />
|[[Vapor Intrusion - Separation Distances from Petroleum Sources]]<br />
|[[Dr. James Weaver|Weaver, James, Ph.D.]]<br />
|vapor intrusion<br />
|-<br />
|[[Zerovalent Iron Permeable Reactive Barriers]]<br />
|[[Dr. Richard Wilkin|Wilkin, Rick, Ph.D.]]<br />
|<br />
|-<br />
|[[Monitored Natural Attenuation (MNA)]]||[[Dr. John Wilson |Wilson, John, Ph.D.]]||MNA, In Situ MNA, natural attenuation, natural attenuation processes<br />
|-<br />
|[[Monitored Natural Attenuation (MNA) of Fuels]]||[[Dr. John Wilson |Wilson, John, Ph.D.]]||MNA, natural attenuation, attenuate (when used in context related to petroleum hydrocarbons and fuel components)<br />
|-<br />
|[[Monitored Natural Attenuation (MNA) of Chlorinated Solvents]]||[[Dr. John Wilson |Wilson, John, Ph.D.]]||MNA, natural attenuation, attenuate (when used in context related to chlorinated solvents)<br />
|-<br />
|[[Monitored Natural Attenuation - Transitioning from Active Remedies]]<br />
|[[Dr. John Wilson|Wilson, John, Ph.D.]]<br />
|MNA, natural attenuation<br />
|-<br />
|[[Chlorinated Solvents]]||[[Dr. Bilgen Yuncu, P.E. |Yuncu, Bilgen, Ph.D., P.E.]]||chlorinated solvents<br />
|-<br />
|[[Petroleum Hydrocarbons (PHCs)]]<br />
|[[Dr. Bilgen Yuncu, P.E.|Yuncu, Bilgen, Ph.D., P.E.]]<br />
|Petroleum Hydrocarbons (PHCs)<br />
|-<br />
|[[Photoactivated Reductive Defluorination - PFAS Destruction]]<br />
|[[Dr. Suzanne Witt|Witt, Suzanne, Ph.D.]]<br />
|PFAS destruction<br />
|-<br />
|[[Hydrogeophysical Methods for Characterization and Monitoring of Groundwater-Surface Water Exchanges]]<br />
|[[Dr. Lee Slater|Slater, Lee, Ph.D.]]<br />
|geophysics, hydrogeophysical methods <br />
|-<br />
|[[Hydrothermal Alkaline Treatment (HALT)]]<br />
|[[Dr. Brian Pinkard|Pinkard, Brian]]<br />
|<br />
|-<br />
|[[1,4-Dioxane]]<br />
|[[Matthew Zenker|Zenker, Matthew]]<br />
|<br />
|-<br />
|[[Lysimeters for Measuring PFAS Concentrations in the Vadose Zone]]<br />
|[[Dr. John F. Stults|Stults, Dr. John]]<br />
|PFAS, vadose zone, lysimeter, field investigation<br />
|-<br />
|[[PFAS Destruction by Ultraviolet/Sulfite Treatment]]||[[Dr. Yida Fang |Fang, Yida, Ph.D.]]||PFAS destruction<br />
|}</div>Jhurleyhttps://www.enviro.wiki/index.php?title=Articles&diff=18096Articles2026-04-06T19:33:58Z<p>Jhurley: </p>
<hr />
<div>{| class="wikitable sortable"<br />
|-<br />
!Title!!First Author!!Linking Phrases<br />
|-<br />
|[[Groundwater Sampling - No-Purge/Passive]]||[[Dr. David Adamson, P.E. |Adamson, David, Ph.D., P.E.]]||passive sampling, no purge sampling, grab samplers, diffusion samplers, sorptive samplers<br />
|-<br />
|[[ Long-Term Monitoring (LTM)]]||[[Dr. David Adamson, P.E. |Adamson, David, Ph.D., P.E.]]||long-term monitoring, LTM, LTM objectives, LTM programs, LTM challenges<br />
|-<br />
|[[PFAS Monitored Retention (PMR) and PFAS Enhanced Retention (PER)]]<br />
|[[Dr. David Adamson, P.E. |Adamson, David, Ph.D., P.E.]]<br />
|PFAS, MNA, natural attenuation<br />
|-<br />
|[[Sorption of Organic Contaminants]]||[[Richelle Allen-King|Allen-King, Richelle]]||<br />
|-<br />
|[[PFAS Transport and Fate]]<br />
|[[Dr. Richard Anderson|Anderson, Richard, Ph.D.]]<br />
|PFAS, fate and transport<br />
|-<br />
|[[Mass Flux and Mass Discharge]]||[[Dr. Michael Annable, P.E. |Annable, Michael, Ph.D., P.E.]]||source reduction<br />
|-<br />
|[[PFAS Toxicology and Risk Assessment]]<br />
|[[Jennifer Arblaster|Arblaster, Jennifer]]<br />
|PFAS, toxicology, risk assessment<br />
|-<br />
|[[Metal(loid)s - Small Arms Ranges]]|| Dr. Amanda Barker |[[Dr. Amanda Barker|Barker, Amanda, Ph.D.]]<br />
|<br />
|-<br />
|[[Munitions Constituents – Photolysis|Munitions Constituents - Photolysis]]<br />
|[[Dr. Warren Kadoya|Kadoya, Warren, Ph.D.]]<br />
|<br />
|-<br />
|[[Munitions Constituents - Soil Sampling]]<br />
|[[Dr. Samuel Beal|Beal, Samuel, Ph.D.]]<br />
|<br />
|-<br />
|[[Vapor Intrusion – Sewers and Utility Tunnels as Preferential Pathways|Vapor Intrusion - Sewers and Utility Tunnels as Preferential Pathways]]<br />
|[[Lila Beckley|Beckley, Lila]]<br />
|vapor intrusion<br />
|-<br />
|[[Natural Attenuation in Source Zone and Groundwater Plume - Bemidji Crude Oil Spill]]<br />
|[[Dr. Barbara Bekins|Bekins, Barbara, Ph.D.]]||<br />
|-<br />
|[[Bioremediation - Anaerobic Secondary Water Quality Impacts]]||[[Dr. Robert Borden, P.E. |Borden, Robert, Ph.D., P.E.]]||secondary impacts, water quality (in regards to anaerobic conditions)<br />
|-<br />
|[[Design Tool - Base Addition for ERD]]||[[Dr. Robert Borden, P.E. |Borden, Robert, Ph.D., P.E.]]||aquifer acidity, base addition<br />
|-<br />
|[[Emulsified Vegetable Oil (EVO) for Anaerobic Bioremediation]]<br />
|[[Dr. Robert Borden, P.E. |Borden, Robert, Ph.D., P.E.]]||<br />
|-<br />
|[[Low pH Inhibition of Reductive Dechlorination]]||[[Dr. Robert Borden, P.E. |Borden, Robert, Ph.D., P.E.]]||low pH inhibition<br />
|-<br />
|[[In Situ Toxicity Identification Evaluation (iTIE)]]||[[Dr. G. Allen Burton |Burton, Allen, P.E.]]||toxicity evaluation<br />
|-<br />
|[[OPTically-based In-situ Characterization System (OPTICS)]]<br />
|[[Dr. Grace Chang|Chang, Grace, Ph.D.]]<br />
|<br />
|-<br />
|[[Munitions Constituents - Electrochemical Treatment]]<br />
|[[Dr. Brian P. Chaplin|Chaplin, Brian, Ph.D.]]<br />
|munitions constituents remediation<br />
|-<br />
|[[PFAS Sources]]<br />
|[[Dr. Dora Chiang|Chiang, Dora, Ph.D.]]<br />
|<br />
|-<br />
|[[Biodegradation - Cometabolic]]||[[Dr. Kung-Hui (Bella) Chu |Chu, Kung-Hui (Bella), Ph.D]]||cometabolic biodegradation<br />
|-<br />
|[[Munitions Constituents - Composting]]<br />
|[[Harry Craig|Craig, Harry]]<br />
|<br />
|-<br />
|[[Chemical Oxidation (In Situ - ISCO)]]||[[Dr. Michelle Crimi |Crimi, Michelle, Ph.D]]||ISCO, chemical oxidation<br />
|-<br />
|[[Chemical Oxidation Oxidant Selection (In Situ - ISCO)]]||[[Dr. Michelle Crimi |Crimi, Michelle, Ph.D]]||chemical oxidant, oxidant (in regards to ISCO)<br />
|-<br />
|[[Chemical Oxidation Design Considerations(In Situ - ISCO)]]||[[Dr. Michelle Crimi |Crimi, Michelle, Ph.D]]||screening, design, implementation, oxidant delivery (in regards to ISCO)<br />
|-<br />
|[[Perfluoroalkyl and Polyfluoroalkyl Substances (PFAS)]]||[[Dr. Rula Deeb |Deeb, Rula, Ph.D.]]||PFAS, perfluorooctanoic acid (PFOA), perfluorooctane sulfonate (PFOS)<br />
|-<br />
|[[Metal and Metalloid Contaminants]]||[[Dr. Miles Denham |Denham, Miles, Ph.D.]]||metal contaminant(s), metalloid contaminant(s), metal(s), metalloid(s),<br />
|-<br />
|[[Metals and Metalloids - Mobility in Groundwater]]||[[Dr. Miles Denham |Denham, Miles, Ph.D.]]||metal mobility, aqueous speciation, adsorption, precipitation, colloidal transport (in regards to metals)<br />
|-<br />
|[[Monitored Natural Attenuation (MNA) of Metal and Metalloids]]||[[Dr. Miles Denham |Denham, Miles, Ph.D.]]||MNA, attenuation of metal(s), natural attenuation processes, attenuation (in regards to metals)<br />
|-<br />
|[[Metal and Metalloids - Remediation]]||[[Dr. Miles Denham |Denham, Miles, Ph.D.]]||remediation, in situ technologies, contaminant removal (in regards to metals)<br />
|-<br />
|[[pH Buffering in Aquifers]]||[[Dr. Miles Denham |Denham, Miles, Ph.D.]]||ph buffer, natural pH buffer, engineered pH buffer<br />
|-<br />
|[[Munitions Constituents - Sorption]]||[[Dr. Katerina Dontsova |Dontsova, Katerina, Ph.D.]]||energetics, sorption<br />
|-<br />
|[[Biodegradation - Hydrocarbons]]||[[Dr. Elizabeth Edwards |Edwards, Elizabeth, Ph.D.]]||hydrocarbon, biodegradation<br />
|-<br />
|[[Source Zone Modeling]]||[[Dr. Ron Falta |Falta, Ron, Ph.D.]]||source zone modeling<br />
|-<br />
|[[Plume Response Modeling]]||[[Dr. Ron Falta |Falta, Ron, Ph.D.]]||plume response modeling<br />
|-<br />
|[[REMChlor - MD]]<br />
|[[Dr. Ron Falta|Falta, Ron, Ph.D.]]<br />
|<br />
|-<br />
|[[In Situ Groundwater Treatment with Activated Carbon]]<br />
|[[Dr. Dimin Fan|Fan, Dimin, Ph.D.]]<br />
|<br />
|-<br />
|[[LNAPL Remediation Technologies]]||[[Dr. Shahla Farhat |Farhat, Shahla, Ph.D.]]||<br />
|-<br />
|[[Sustainable Remediation]]||[[Paul Favara |Favara, Paul]]||sustainable remediation, social, economic and environmental impacts<br />
|-<br />
|[[Munitions Constituents]]||[[Dr. Kevin Finneran |Finneran, Kevin, Ph.D.]]||Explosives, energetics, insensitive munitions<br />
|-<br />
|[[Biodegradation - Reductive Processes]]||[[Dr. David Freedman |Freedman, David, Ph.D.]]||biotic reduction, biotic reductive processes, hydrogenolysis, dihaloelimination, coupling, organohalide respiration<br />
|-<br />
|[[Remediation of Stormwater Runoff Contaminated by Munition Constituents|Munitions Constituents - Remediation of Stormwater Runoff]]||Fuller, Mark, Ph.D.||energetics, insensitive munitions, stormwater runoff<br />
|-<br />
|[[Subgrade Biogeochemical Reactor (SBGR)]]||[[Jeff Gamlin |Gamlin, Jeff]]||SBGR, subgrade biogeochemical reactor, bioreactor<br />
|-<br />
|[[Thermal Remediation - Smoldering]]||[[Dr. Jason Gerhard |Gerhard, Jason, Ph.D.]]||smouldering remediation, self-sustaining treatment for active remediation, STAR<br />
|-<br />
|[[Contaminated Sediments - Introduction]]<br />
|[[Dr. Upal Ghosh|Ghosh, Upal, Ph.D.]]<br />
|<br />
|-<br />
|[[Contaminated Sediment Risk Assessment]]<br />
|[[Richard Wenning|Wenning, Richard]]<br />
|<br />
|-<br />
|[[In Situ Treatment of Contaminated Sediments with Activated Carbon]]<br />
|[[Dr. Upal Ghosh|Ghosh, Upal, Ph.D.]]<br />
|<br />
|-<br />
|[[PFAS Ex Situ Water Treatment]]<br />
|[[Dr. Scott Grieco |Grieco, Scott, Ph.D.]]<br />
|<br />
|-<br />
|[[Stream Restoration]]<br />
|[[Dr. Natalie Griffiths|Griffiths, Natalie, Ph.D.]]<br />
|<br />
|-<br />
|[[Passive Sampling of Sediments]]<br />
|[[Dr. Philip M. Gschwend|Gschwend, Philip]]<br />
|<br />
|-<br />
|[[Phytoplankton (Algae) Blooms]]<br />
|[[Dr. Nathan Hall|Hall, Nathan]]<br />
|<br />
|-<br />
|[[PFAS Soil Remediation Technologies]]||[[James_Hatton |Hatton, Jim]]||PFAS, Soil source zones<br />
|-<br />
|[[Proteomics and Proteogenomics]]<br />
|[[Dr. Kate Kucharzyk|Kucharzyk, Kate, Ph.D.]]<br />
|<br />
|-<br />
|[[N-nitrosodimethylamine (NDMA)]]<br />
|[[Paul Hatzinger|Hatzinger, Paul, Ph.D.]]<br />
|<br />
|-<br />
|[[Alternative Endpoints]]||[[Elisabeth Hawley |Hawley, Elisabeth]]||management of complex sites<br />
|-<br />
|[[Thermal Remediation]]||[[Dr. Gorm Heron |Heron, Gorm, Ph.D.]]||thermal remediation, in situ thermal<br />
|-<br />
|[[Thermal Remediation - Steam]]||[[Dr. Gorm Heron |Heron, Gorm, Ph.D.]]||Steam Enhanced Extraction<br />
|-<br />
|[[Thermal Remediation - Electrical Resistance Heating]]||[[Dr. Gorm Heron |Heron, Gorm, Ph.D.]]||Electrical Resistance Heating<br />
|-<br />
|[[Thermal Conduction Heating (TCH)]]||[[Dr. Gorm Heron |Heron, Gorm, Ph.D.]]||thermal desorption<br />
|-<br />
|[[Thermal Remediation - Combined Remedies]]||[[Dr. Gorm Heron |Heron, Gorm, Ph.D.]]||thermal remediation<br />
|-<br />
|[[Thermal Conduction Heating for Treatment of PFAS-Impacted Soil]]||[[Dr. Gorm Heron |Heron, Gorm, Ph.D.]]||thermal remediation, PFAS<br />
|-<br />
|[[Predicting Species Responses to Climate Change with Population Models]]<br />
|[[Dr. Brian Hudgens|Hudgens, Brian, Ph.D.]]<br />
|climate change<br />
|-<br />
|[[Infrastructure Resilience]]<br />
|[[Dr. John Hummel|Hummel, John, Ph.D.]]<br />
|<br />
|-<br />
|[[Munitions Constituents- TREECS™ Fate and Risk Modeling|Munitions Constituents - TREECS™ Fate and Risk Modeling]]||[[Dr. Billy E. Johnson |Johnson, Billy, Ph.D.]]||munitions constituents fate and transport modeling, TREECS<br />
|-<br />
|[[Munitions Constituents - Alkaline Degradation]]<br />
|[[Jared Johnson|Johnson, Jared]]<br />
|<br />
|-<br />
|[[Assessing Vapor Intrusion (VI) Impacts in Neighborhoods with Groundwater Contaminated by Chlorinated Volatile Organic Chemicals (CVOCs)|Vapor Intrusion - Assessing VI Impacts in Neighborhoods with Groundwater Contaminated CVOCs]]<br />
|[[Dr. Paul C. Johnson|Johnson, Paul, Ph.D.]]<br />
|vapor intrusion<br />
|-<br />
|[[Munitions Constituents - IM Toxicology]]||-----||insensitive explosives, insensitive munitions, IMX-101, IMX<br />
|-<br />
|[[Landfarming]]<br />
|[[Dr. Roopa Kamath|Kamath, Roopa, Ph.D.]]<br />
|<br />
|-<br />
|[[NAPL Mobility]]<br />
|[[Andrew Kirkman|Kirkman, Andrew]]<br />
|<br />
|-<br />
|[[Climate Change Primer]]<br />
|[[Dr. Rao Kotamarthi|Kotamarthi, Rao, Ph.D.]]<br />
|<br />
|-<br />
|[[Perchlorate]]||[[Thomas Krug |Krug, Thomas]]||perchlorate<br />
|-<br />
|[[Injection Techniques for Liquid Amendments]]||[[Thomas Krug |Krug, Thomas]]||amendment injection<br />
|-<br />
|[[Transition of Aqueous Film Forming Foam (AFFF) Fire Suppression Infrastructure Impacted by Per and Polyfluoroalkyl Substances (PFAS)]]<br />
|[[Dr. Johnsie Ray Lang|Lang, Johnsie Ray, Ph.D.]]||PFAS<br />
|-<br />
|[[Characterization Methods – Hydraulic Conductivity]]<br />
|[[Dr. Gaisheng Liu|Liu, Gaisheng, Ph.D.]]<br />
|<br />
|-<br />
|[[Compound Specific Isotope Analysis (CSIA)]]||[[Dr. Barbara Sherwood Lollar, F.R.S.C. |Lollar, Barbara S., FRSC]]||Compound Specific Isotope Analysis (CSIA)<br />
|-<br />
|[[Passive Sampling of Munitions Constituents|Munitions Constituents - Passive Sampling]]<br />
|[[Dr. Guilherme Lotufo|Lotufo, Guilerme, Ph.D.]]<br />
|<br />
|-<br />
|[[Vapor Intrusion (VI)]]||[[Chris Lutes |Lutes, Chris]]||vapor intrusion<br />
|-<br />
|[[Bioremediation - Anaerobic]]||[[Leah MacKinnon, M.A.Sc., P. Eng.|MacKinnon, Leah]]||anaerobic bioremediation<br />
|-<br />
|[[Bioremediation - Anaerobic Design Considerations]]||[[Leah MacKinnon, M.A.Sc., P. Eng.|MacKinnon, Leah]]||<br />
|-<br />
|[[Biodegradation - 1,4-Dioxane]]<br />
|[[Dr. Shaily Mahendra|Mahendra, Shaily, Ph.D.]]<br />
|<br />
|-<br />
|[[Direct Push (DP) Technology]]||[[Wesley McCall, M.S., P.G. |McCall, Wesley, M.S., P.G.]]||direct push, DP, DP machines, DP technology<br />
|-<br />
|[[Direct Push Sampling]]||[[Wesley McCall, M.S., P.G. |McCall, Wesley, M.S., P.G.]]||direct push sampling, soil sampling, groundwater sampling, well installation, soil vapor sampling (in regards to DP)<br />
|-<br />
|[[Direct Push Logging]]||[[Wesley McCall, M.S., P.G. |McCall, Wesley, M.S., P.G.]]||direct push logging, Cone Penetration Testing, CPT, Electrical Conductivity, EC, Hydraulic Profiling Tool, HPT,<br>Membrane Interface Probe, MIP, Optical Imaging Profiler, OIP<br />
|-<br />
|[[Downscaled High Resolution Datasets for Climate Change Projections]]<br />
|[[Dr. Rao Kotamarthi|Kotamarthi, Rao, Ph.D.]]<br />
|<br />
|-<br />
|[[Remediation Performance Assessment at Chlorinated Solvent Sites]]||[[Travis McGuire|McGuire, Travis]]||multi-site studies<br />
|-<br />
|[[LNAPL Conceptual Site Models]]<br />
|[[Dr. Charles Newell, P.E. |Newell, Charles, Ph.D., P.E.]]<br />
|<br />
|-<br />
|[[Long-Term Monitoring (LTM) - Data Analysis]]||[[Dr. Thomas McHugh |McHugh, Thomas, Ph.D.]]||data analysis, analysis methods (in regards to LTM)<br />
|-<br />
|[[Long-Term Monitoring (LTM) - Data Variability]]||[[Dr. Thomas McHugh |McHugh, Thomas, Ph.D.]]||data variability (in regards to LTM), LTM evaluation<br />
|-<br />
|[[Munitions Constituents - Abiotic Reduction]]||[[Dr. Jimmy Murillo-Gelvez |Murillo-Gelvez, Jimmy, Ph.D.]] ||<br />
|-<br />
|[[Supercritical Water Oxidation (SCWO)]]<br />
|Nagar, Kobe<br />
|<br />
|-<br />
|[[Matrix Diffusion]]<br />
|[[Dr. Charles Newell, P.E. |Newell, Charles, Ph.D., P.E.]]<br />
|<br />
|-<br />
|[[Groundwater Flow and Solute Transport]]||[[Dr. Charles Newell, P.E. |Newell, Charles, Ph.D., P.E.]]||groundwater flow, advection, dispersion, diffusion, molecular diffusion, mechanical dispersion<br />
|-<br />
|[[Molecular Biological Tools - MBTs]]||[[Dora Ogles-Taggart |Ogles-Taggart, Dora]]||MBT, Molecular Biological Tool(s)<br />
|-<br />
|[[Quantitative Polymerase Chain Reaction (qPCR)]]||[[Dora Ogles-Taggart |Ogles-Taggart, Dora]]||qPCR, Polymerase Chain Reaction<br />
|-<br />
|[[Sediment Capping]]<br />
|[[Dr. Danny Reible|Reible, Danny]]<br />
|<br />
|-<br />
|[[Stable Isotope Probing (SIP)]]||[[Dora Ogles-Taggart |Ogles-Taggart, Dora]]||SIP, Stable Isotope Probing<br />
|-<br />
|[[Metagenomics]]||[[Dora Ogles-Taggart |Ogles-Taggart, Dora]]||metagenomics<br />
|-<br />
|[[Natural Source Zone Depletion (NSZD)]]||[[Tom Palaia |Palaia, Tom]]||natural source zone depletion, NSZD<br />
|-<br />
|[[Climate Change Effects on Wildlife]]<br />
|[[Dr. Breanna F. Powers|Powers, Breanna, PhD.]]<br />
|<br />
|-<br />
|[[Amendment Distribution in Low Conductivity Materials]]||[[Dr. Stephen Richardson |Richardson, Stephen, Ph.D.]]||<br />
|-<br />
|[[Polycyclic Aromatic Hydrocarbons (PAHs)]]||[[Dr. Stephen Richardson |Richardson, Stephen, Ph.D.]]||polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons, PAH(s)<br />
|-<br />
|[[Sediment Porewater Dialysis Passive Samplers for Inorganics (Peepers)]]<br />
|[[Florent Risacher|Risacher, Florent, M.Sc.]]<br />
|<br />
|-<br />
|[[1,2,3-Trichloropropane]]||[[Dr. Alexandra Salter-Blanc |Salter-Blanc, Alexandra, Ph.D.]]||TCP, trichloropropane<br />
|-<br />
|[[Zerovalent Iron (ZVI) (Chemical Reduction - ISCR)]]||[[Dr. Alexandra Salter-Blanc |Salter-Blanc, Alexandra, Ph.D.]]||ZVI<br />
|-<br />
|[[Mercury in Sediments]]<br />
|[[Dr. Grace Schwartz|Schwartz, Grace, Ph.D.]]<br />
|<br />
|-<br />
|[[Munitions Constituents – Sample Extraction and Analytical Techniques|Munitions Constituents - Sample Extraction and Analytical Techniques]]<br />
|[[Dr. Austin Scircle|Scircle, Austin]]<br />
|<br />
|-<br />
|[[Geophysical Methods]]||[[Dr. Lee Slater |Slater, Lee, Ph.D.]]||geophysics<br />
|-<br />
|[[Geophysical Methods - Case Studies]]||[[Dr. Lee Slater |Slater, Lee, Ph.D.]]||geophysics<br />
|-<br />
|[[PFAS Treatment by Anion Exchange]]<br />
|[[Dr. Timothy J. Strathmann|Strathmann, Timothy, Ph.D.]]<br />
|PFAS<br />
|-<br />
|[[Munitions Constituents - Dissolution]]||[[Dr. Susan Taylor |Taylor, Susan, Ph.D.]]||explosive(s), dissolution<br />
|-<br />
|[[PFAS Treatment by Electrical Discharge Plasma]]<br />
|[[Dr. Selma Mededovic Thagard|Thagard, Selma Mededovic, Ph.D.]]<br />
|PFAS<br />
|-<br />
|[[Restoration of Ecological Function in Terrestrial Systems Impacted by Invasive Species]]<br />
|Thierry, Hugo, Ph.D.<br />
|climate change, invasive species, restoration ecology<br />
|-<br />
|[[Chemical Reduction (In Situ - ISCR)]]||[[Dr. Paul Tratnyek |Tratnyek, Paul, Ph.D.]]||In Situ Chemical Reduction, ISCR<br />
|-<br />
|[[Injection Techniques - Viscosity Modification]]||[[Michael Truex |Truex, Michael]]||viscosity, viscosity modifiers, viscosity modification<br />
|-<br />
|[[Soil Vapor Extraction (SVE)]]||[[Michael Truex |Truex, Michael]]||soil vapor extraction, SVE<br />
|-<br />
|[[Munitions Constituents - Deposition]]||[[Michael R. Walsh, P.E., M.E.|Walsh, Michael, P.E.]]||explosive deposition, energetics deposition<br />
|-<br />
|[[Vapor Intrusion - Separation Distances from Petroleum Sources]]<br />
|[[Dr. James Weaver|Weaver, James, Ph.D.]]<br />
|vapor intrusion<br />
|-<br />
|[[Zerovalent Iron Permeable Reactive Barriers]]<br />
|[[Dr. Richard Wilkin|Wilkin, Rick, Ph.D.]]<br />
|<br />
|-<br />
|[[Monitored Natural Attenuation (MNA)]]||[[Dr. John Wilson |Wilson, John, Ph.D.]]||MNA, In Situ MNA, natural attenuation, natural attenuation processes<br />
|-<br />
|[[Monitored Natural Attenuation (MNA) of Fuels]]||[[Dr. John Wilson |Wilson, John, Ph.D.]]||MNA, natural attenuation, attenuate (when used in context related to petroleum hydrocarbons and fuel components)<br />
|-<br />
|[[Monitored Natural Attenuation (MNA) of Chlorinated Solvents]]||[[Dr. John Wilson |Wilson, John, Ph.D.]]||MNA, natural attenuation, attenuate (when used in context related to chlorinated solvents)<br />
|-<br />
|[[Monitored Natural Attenuation - Transitioning from Active Remedies]]<br />
|[[Dr. John Wilson|Wilson, John, Ph.D.]]<br />
|MNA, natural attenuation<br />
|-<br />
|[[Chlorinated Solvents]]||[[Dr. Bilgen Yuncu, P.E. |Yuncu, Bilgen, Ph.D., P.E.]]||chlorinated solvents<br />
|-<br />
|[[Petroleum Hydrocarbons (PHCs)]]<br />
|[[Dr. Bilgen Yuncu, P.E.|Yuncu, Bilgen, Ph.D., P.E.]]<br />
|Petroleum Hydrocarbons (PHCs)<br />
|-<br />
|[[Photoactivated Reductive Defluorination - PFAS Destruction]]<br />
|[[Dr. Suzanne Witt|Witt, Suzanne, Ph.D.]]<br />
|PFAS destruction<br />
|-<br />
|[[Hydrogeophysical Methods for Characterization and Monitoring of Groundwater-Surface Water Exchanges]]<br />
|[[Dr. Lee Slater|Slater, Lee, Ph.D.]]<br />
|geophysics, hydrogeophysical methods <br />
|-<br />
|[[Hydrothermal Alkaline Treatment (HALT)]]<br />
|[[Dr. Brian Pinkard|Pinkard, Brian]]<br />
|<br />
|-<br />
|[[1,4-Dioxane]]<br />
|[[Matthew Zenker|Zenker, Matthew]]<br />
|<br />
|-<br />
|[[Lysimeters for Measuring PFAS Concentrations in the Vadose Zone]]<br />
|[[Dr. John F. Stults|Stults, Dr. John]]<br />
|PFAS, vadose zone, lysimeter, field investigation<br />
|-<br />
|[[PFAS Destruction by Ultraviolet/Sulfite Treatment]]||[[Dr. Yida Fang |Fang, Yida, Ph.D.]]||PFAS destruction<br />
|}</div>Jhurleyhttps://www.enviro.wiki/index.php?title=Articles&diff=18095Articles2026-04-06T19:26:04Z<p>Jhurley: </p>
<hr />
<div>{| class="wikitable sortable"<br />
|-<br />
!Title!!First Author!!Linking Phrases<br />
|-<br />
|[[Groundwater Sampling - No-Purge/Passive]]||[[Dr. David Adamson, P.E. |Adamson, David, Ph.D., P.E.]]||passive sampling, no purge sampling, grab samplers, diffusion samplers, sorptive samplers<br />
|-<br />
|[[ Long-Term Monitoring (LTM)]]||[[Dr. David Adamson, P.E. |Adamson, David, Ph.D., P.E.]]||long-term monitoring, LTM, LTM objectives, LTM programs, LTM challenges<br />
|-<br />
|[[PFAS Monitored Retention (PMR) and PFAS Enhanced Retention (PER)]]<br />
|[[Dr. David Adamson, P.E. |Adamson, David, Ph.D., P.E.]]<br />
|PFAS, MNA, natural attenuation<br />
|-<br />
|[[Sorption of Organic Contaminants]]||[[Richelle Allen-King|Allen-King, Richelle]]||<br />
|-<br />
|[[PFAS Transport and Fate]]<br />
|[[Dr. Richard Anderson|Anderson, Richard, Ph.D.]]<br />
|PFAS, fate and transport<br />
|-<br />
|[[Mass Flux and Mass Discharge]]||[[Dr. Michael Annable, P.E. |Annable, Michael, Ph.D., P.E.]]||source reduction<br />
|-<br />
|[[PFAS Toxicology and Risk Assessment]]<br />
|[[Jennifer Arblaster|Arblaster, Jennifer]]<br />
|PFAS, toxicology, risk assessment<br />
|-<br />
|[[Metal(loid)s - Small Arms Ranges]]|| Dr. Amanda Barker |[[Dr. Amanda Barker|Barker, Amanda, Ph.D.]]<br />
|<br />
|-<br />
|[[Munitions Constituents – Photolysis|Munitions Constituents - Photolysis]]<br />
|[[Dr. Warren Kadoya|Kadoya, Warren, Ph.D.]]<br />
|<br />
|-<br />
|[[Munitions Constituents - Soil Sampling]]<br />
|[[Dr. Samuel Beal|Beal, Samuel, Ph.D.]]<br />
|<br />
|-<br />
|[[Vapor Intrusion – Sewers and Utility Tunnels as Preferential Pathways|Vapor Intrusion - Sewers and Utility Tunnels as Preferential Pathways]]<br />
|[[Lila Beckley|Beckley, Lila]]<br />
|vapor intrusion<br />
|-<br />
|[[Natural Attenuation in Source Zone and Groundwater Plume - Bemidji Crude Oil Spill]]<br />
|[[Dr. Barbara Bekins|Bekins, Barbara, Ph.D.]]||<br />
|-<br />
|[[Bioremediation - Anaerobic Secondary Water Quality Impacts]]||[[Dr. Robert Borden, P.E. |Borden, Robert, Ph.D., P.E.]]||secondary impacts, water quality (in regards to anaerobic conditions)<br />
|-<br />
|[[Design Tool - Base Addition for ERD]]||[[Dr. Robert Borden, P.E. |Borden, Robert, Ph.D., P.E.]]||aquifer acidity, base addition<br />
|-<br />
|[[Emulsified Vegetable Oil (EVO) for Anaerobic Bioremediation]]<br />
|[[Dr. Robert Borden, P.E. |Borden, Robert, Ph.D., P.E.]]||<br />
|-<br />
|[[Low pH Inhibition of Reductive Dechlorination]]||[[Dr. Robert Borden, P.E. |Borden, Robert, Ph.D., P.E.]]||low pH inhibition<br />
|-<br />
|[[In Situ Toxicity Identification Evaluation (iTIE)]]||[[Dr. G. Allen Burton |Burton, Allen, P.E.]]||toxicity evaluation<br />
|-<br />
|[[OPTically-based In-situ Characterization System (OPTICS)]]<br />
|[[Dr. Grace Chang|Chang, Grace, Ph.D.]]<br />
|<br />
|-<br />
|[[Munitions Constituents - Electrochemical Treatment]]<br />
|[[Dr. Brian P. Chaplin|Chaplin, Brian, Ph.D.]]<br />
|munitions constituents remediation<br />
|-<br />
|[[PFAS Sources]]<br />
|[[Dr. Dora Chiang|Chiang, Dora, Ph.D.]]<br />
|<br />
|-<br />
|[[Biodegradation - Cometabolic]]||[[Dr. Kung-Hui (Bella) Chu |Chu, Kung-Hui (Bella), Ph.D]]||cometabolic biodegradation<br />
|-<br />
|[[Munitions Constituents - Composting]]<br />
|[[Harry Craig|Craig, Harry]]<br />
|<br />
|-<br />
|[[Chemical Oxidation (In Situ - ISCO)]]||[[Dr. Michelle Crimi |Crimi, Michelle, Ph.D]]||ISCO, chemical oxidation<br />
|-<br />
|[[Chemical Oxidation Oxidant Selection (In Situ - ISCO)]]||[[Dr. Michelle Crimi |Crimi, Michelle, Ph.D]]||chemical oxidant, oxidant (in regards to ISCO)<br />
|-<br />
|[[Chemical Oxidation Design Considerations(In Situ - ISCO)]]||[[Dr. Michelle Crimi |Crimi, Michelle, Ph.D]]||screening, design, implementation, oxidant delivery (in regards to ISCO)<br />
|-<br />
|[[Perfluoroalkyl and Polyfluoroalkyl Substances (PFAS)]]||[[Dr. Rula Deeb |Deeb, Rula, Ph.D.]]||PFAS, perfluorooctanoic acid (PFOA), perfluorooctane sulfonate (PFOS)<br />
|-<br />
|[[Metal and Metalloid Contaminants]]||[[Dr. Miles Denham |Denham, Miles, Ph.D.]]||metal contaminant(s), metalloid contaminant(s), metal(s), metalloid(s),<br />
|-<br />
|[[Metals and Metalloids - Mobility in Groundwater]]||[[Dr. Miles Denham |Denham, Miles, Ph.D.]]||metal mobility, aqueous speciation, adsorption, precipitation, colloidal transport (in regards to metals)<br />
|-<br />
|[[Monitored Natural Attenuation (MNA) of Metal and Metalloids]]||[[Dr. Miles Denham |Denham, Miles, Ph.D.]]||MNA, attenuation of metal(s), natural attenuation processes, attenuation (in regards to metals)<br />
|-<br />
|[[Metal and Metalloids - Remediation]]||[[Dr. Miles Denham |Denham, Miles, Ph.D.]]||remediation, in situ technologies, contaminant removal (in regards to metals)<br />
|-<br />
|[[pH Buffering in Aquifers]]||[[Dr. Miles Denham |Denham, Miles, Ph.D.]]||ph buffer, natural pH buffer, engineered pH buffer<br />
|-<br />
|[[Munitions Constituents - Sorption]]||[[Dr. Katerina Dontsova |Dontsova, Katerina, Ph.D.]]||energetics, sorption<br />
|-<br />
|[[Biodegradation - Hydrocarbons]]||[[Dr. Elizabeth Edwards |Edwards, Elizabeth, Ph.D.]]||hydrocarbon, biodegradation<br />
|-<br />
|[[Source Zone Modeling]]||[[Dr. Ron Falta |Falta, Ron, Ph.D.]]||source zone modeling<br />
|-<br />
|[[Plume Response Modeling]]||[[Dr. Ron Falta |Falta, Ron, Ph.D.]]||plume response modeling<br />
|-<br />
|[[REMChlor - MD]]<br />
|[[Dr. Ron Falta|Falta, Ron, Ph.D.]]<br />
|<br />
|-<br />
|[[In Situ Groundwater Treatment with Activated Carbon]]<br />
|[[Dr. Dimin Fan|Fan, Dimin, Ph.D.]]<br />
|<br />
|-<br />
|[[LNAPL Remediation Technologies]]||[[Dr. Shahla Farhat |Farhat, Shahla, Ph.D.]]||<br />
|-<br />
|[[Sustainable Remediation]]||[[Paul Favara |Favara, Paul]]||sustainable remediation, social, economic and environmental impacts<br />
|-<br />
|[[Munitions Constituents]]||[[Dr. Kevin Finneran |Finneran, Kevin, Ph.D.]]||Explosives, energetics, insensitive munitions<br />
|-<br />
|[[Biodegradation - Reductive Processes]]||[[Dr. David Freedman |Freedman, David, Ph.D.]]||biotic reduction, biotic reductive processes, hydrogenolysis, dihaloelimination, coupling, organohalide respiration<br />
|-<br />
|[[Remediation of Stormwater Runoff Contaminated by Munition Constituents|Munitions Constituents - Remediation of Stormwater Runoff]]||Fuller, Mark, Ph.D.||energetics, insensitive munitions, stormwater runoff<br />
|-<br />
|[[Subgrade Biogeochemical Reactor (SBGR)]]||[[Jeff Gamlin |Gamlin, Jeff]]||SBGR, subgrade biogeochemical reactor, bioreactor<br />
|-<br />
|[[Thermal Remediation - Smoldering]]||[[Dr. Jason Gerhard |Gerhard, Jason, Ph.D.]]||smouldering remediation, self-sustaining treatment for active remediation, STAR<br />
|-<br />
|[[Contaminated Sediments - Introduction]]<br />
|[[Dr. Upal Ghosh|Ghosh, Upal, Ph.D.]]<br />
|<br />
|-<br />
|[[Contaminated Sediment Risk Assessment]]<br />
|[[Richard Wenning|Wenning, Richard]]<br />
|<br />
|-<br />
|[[In Situ Treatment of Contaminated Sediments with Activated Carbon]]<br />
|[[Dr. Upal Ghosh|Ghosh, Upal, Ph.D.]]<br />
|<br />
|-<br />
|[[PFAS Ex Situ Water Treatment]]<br />
|[[Dr. Scott Grieco |Grieco, Scott, Ph.D.]]<br />
|<br />
|-<br />
|[[Stream Restoration]]<br />
|[[Dr. Natalie Griffiths|Griffiths, Natalie, Ph.D.]]<br />
|<br />
|-<br />
|[[Passive Sampling of Sediments]]<br />
|[[Dr. Philip M. Gschwend|Gschwend, Philip]]<br />
|<br />
|-<br />
|[[Phytoplankton (Algae) Blooms]]<br />
|[[Dr. Nathan Hall|Hall, Nathan]]<br />
|<br />
|-<br />
|[[PFAS Soil Remediation Technologies]]||[[James_Hatton |Hatton, Jim]]||PFAS, Soil source zones<br />
|-<br />
|[[Proteomics and Proteogenomics]]<br />
|[[Dr. Kate Kucharzyk|Kucharzyk, Kate, Ph.D.]]<br />
|<br />
|-<br />
|[[N-nitrosodimethylamine (NDMA)]]<br />
|[[Paul Hatzinger|Hatzinger, Paul, Ph.D.]]<br />
|<br />
|-<br />
|[[Alternative Endpoints]]||[[Elisabeth Hawley |Hawley, Elisabeth]]||management of complex sites||<br />
|-<br />
|[[Thermal Remediation]]||[[Dr. Gorm Heron |Heron, Gorm, Ph.D.]]||thermal remediation, in situ thermal<br />
|-<br />
|[[Thermal Remediation - Steam]]||[[Dr. Gorm Heron |Heron, Gorm, Ph.D.]]||Steam Enhanced Extraction<br />
|-<br />
|[[Thermal Remediation - Electrical Resistance Heating]]||[[Dr. Gorm Heron |Heron, Gorm, Ph.D.]]||Electrical Resistance Heating<br />
|-<br />
|[[Thermal Conduction Heating (TCH)]]||[[Dr. Gorm Heron |Heron, Gorm, Ph.D.]]||thermal desorption<br />
|-<br />
|[[Thermal Remediation - Combined Remedies]]||[[Dr. Gorm Heron |Heron, Gorm, Ph.D.]]||thermal remediation<br />
|-<br />
|[[Thermal Conduction Heating for Treatment of PFAS-Impacted Soil]]||[[Dr. Gorm Heron |Heron, Gorm, Ph.D.]]||thermal remediation, PFAS<br />
|-<br />
|[[Predicting Species Responses to Climate Change with Population Models]]<br />
|[[Dr. Brian Hudgens|Hudgens, Brian, Ph.D.]]<br />
|climate change<br />
|-<br />
|[[Infrastructure Resilience]]<br />
|[[Dr. John Hummel|Hummel, John, Ph.D.]]<br />
|<br />
|-<br />
|[[Munitions Constituents- TREECS™ Fate and Risk Modeling|Munitions Constituents - TREECS™ Fate and Risk Modeling]]||[[Dr. Billy E. Johnson |Johnson, Billy, Ph.D.]]||munitions constituents fate and transport modeling, TREECS<br />
|-<br />
|[[Munitions Constituents - Alkaline Degradation]]<br />
|[[Jared Johnson|Johnson, Jared]]<br />
|<br />
|-<br />
|[[Assessing Vapor Intrusion (VI) Impacts in Neighborhoods with Groundwater Contaminated by Chlorinated Volatile Organic Chemicals (CVOCs)|Vapor Intrusion - Assessing VI Impacts in Neighborhoods with Groundwater Contaminated CVOCs]]<br />
|[[Dr. Paul C. Johnson|Johnson, Paul, Ph.D.]]<br />
|vapor intrusion<br />
|-<br />
|[[Munitions Constituents - IM Toxicology]]||-----||insensitive explosives, insensitive munitions, IMX-101, IMX<br />
|-<br />
|[[Landfarming]]<br />
|[[Dr. Roopa Kamath|Kamath, Roopa, Ph.D.]]<br />
|<br />
|-<br />
|[[NAPL Mobility]]<br />
|[[Andrew Kirkman|Kirkman, Andrew]]<br />
|<br />
|-<br />
|[[Climate Change Primer]]<br />
|[[Dr. Rao Kotamarthi|Kotamarthi, Rao, Ph.D.]]<br />
|<br />
|-<br />
|[[Perchlorate]]||[[Thomas Krug |Krug, Thomas]]||perchlorate<br />
|-<br />
|[[Injection Techniques for Liquid Amendments]]||[[Thomas Krug |Krug, Thomas]]||amendment injection<br />
|-<br />
|[[Transition of Aqueous Film Forming Foam (AFFF) Fire Suppression Infrastructure Impacted by Per and Polyfluoroalkyl Substances (PFAS)]]<br />
|[[Dr. Johnsie Ray Lang|Lang, Johnsie Ray, Ph.D.]]||PFAS<br />
|<br />
|-<br />
|[[Characterization Methods – Hydraulic Conductivity]]<br />
|[[Dr. Gaisheng Liu|Liu, Gaisheng, Ph.D.]]<br />
|<br />
|-<br />
|[[Compound Specific Isotope Analysis (CSIA)]]||[[Dr. Barbara Sherwood Lollar, F.R.S.C. |Lollar, Barbara S., FRSC]]||Compound Specific Isotope Analysis (CSIA)<br />
|-<br />
|[[Passive Sampling of Munitions Constituents|Munitions Constituents - Passive Sampling]]<br />
|[[Dr. Guilherme Lotufo|Lotufo, Guilerme, Ph.D.]]<br />
|<br />
|-<br />
|[[Vapor Intrusion (VI)]]||[[Chris Lutes |Lutes, Chris]]||vapor intrusion<br />
|-<br />
|[[Bioremediation - Anaerobic]]||[[Leah MacKinnon, M.A.Sc., P. Eng.|MacKinnon, Leah]]||anaerobic bioremediation<br />
|-<br />
|[[Bioremediation - Anaerobic Design Considerations]]||[[Leah MacKinnon, M.A.Sc., P. Eng.|MacKinnon, Leah]]||<br />
|-<br />
|[[Biodegradation - 1,4-Dioxane]]<br />
|[[Dr. Shaily Mahendra|Mahendra, Shaily, Ph.D.]]<br />
|<br />
|-<br />
|[[Direct Push (DP) Technology]]||[[Wesley McCall, M.S., P.G. |McCall, Wesley, M.S., P.G.]]||direct push, DP, DP machines, DP technology<br />
|-<br />
|[[Direct Push Sampling]]||[[Wesley McCall, M.S., P.G. |McCall, Wesley, M.S., P.G.]]||direct push sampling, soil sampling, groundwater sampling, well installation, soil vapor sampling (in regards to DP)<br />
|-<br />
|[[Direct Push Logging]]||[[Wesley McCall, M.S., P.G. |McCall, Wesley, M.S., P.G.]]||direct push logging, Cone Penetration Testing, CPT, Electrical Conductivity, EC, Hydraulic Profiling Tool, HPT,<br>Membrane Interface Probe, MIP, Optical Imaging Profiler, OIP<br />
|-<br />
|[[Downscaled High Resolution Datasets for Climate Change Projections]]<br />
|[[Dr. Rao Kotamarthi|Kotamarthi, Rao, Ph.D.]]<br />
|<br />
|-<br />
|[[Remediation Performance Assessment at Chlorinated Solvent Sites]]||[[Travis McGuire|McGuire, Travis]]||multi-site studies<br />
|-<br />
|[[LNAPL Conceptual Site Models]]<br />
|[[Dr. Charles Newell, P.E. |Newell, Charles, Ph.D., P.E.]]<br />
|<br />
|-<br />
|[[Long-Term Monitoring (LTM) - Data Analysis]]||[[Dr. Thomas McHugh |McHugh, Thomas, Ph.D.]]||data analysis, analysis methods (in regards to LTM)<br />
|-<br />
|[[Long-Term Monitoring (LTM) - Data Variability]]||[[Dr. Thomas McHugh |McHugh, Thomas, Ph.D.]]||data variability (in regards to LTM), LTM evaluation<br />
|-<br />
|-<br />
|[[Munitions Constituents - Abiotic Reduction]]||[[Dr. Jimmy Murillo-Gelvez |Murillo-Gelvez, Jimmy, Ph.D.]] ||<br />
|-<br />
|[[Supercritical Water Oxidation (SCWO)]]<br />
|Nagar, Kobe<br />
|<br />
|-<br />
|[[Matrix Diffusion]]<br />
|[[Dr. Charles Newell, P.E. |Newell, Charles, Ph.D., P.E.]]<br />
|<br />
|-<br />
|[[Groundwater Flow and Solute Transport]]||[[Dr. Charles Newell, P.E. |Newell, Charles, Ph.D., P.E.]]||groundwater flow, advection, dispersion, diffusion, molecular diffusion, mechanical dispersion<br />
|-<br />
|[[Molecular Biological Tools - MBTs]]||[[Dora Ogles-Taggart |Ogles-Taggart, Dora]]||MBT, Molecular Biological Tool(s)<br />
|-<br />
|[[Quantitative Polymerase Chain Reaction (qPCR)]]||[[Dora Ogles-Taggart |Ogles-Taggart, Dora]]||qPCR, Polymerase Chain Reaction<br />
|-<br />
|[[Sediment Capping]]<br />
|[[Dr. Danny Reible|Reible, Danny]]<br />
|<br />
|-<br />
|[[Stable Isotope Probing (SIP)]]||[[Dora Ogles-Taggart |Ogles-Taggart, Dora]]||SIP, Stable Isotope Probing<br />
|-<br />
|[[Metagenomics]]||[[Dora Ogles-Taggart |Ogles-Taggart, Dora]]||metagenomics<br />
|-<br />
|[[Natural Source Zone Depletion (NSZD)]]||[[Tom Palaia |Palaia, Tom]]||natural source zone depletion, NSZD<br />
|-<br />
|[[Climate Change Effects on Wildlife]]<br />
|[[Dr. Breanna F. Powers|Powers, Breanna, PhD.]]<br />
|<br />
|-<br />
|[[Amendment Distribution in Low Conductivity Materials]]||[[Dr. Stephen Richardson |Richardson, Stephen, Ph.D.]]||<br />
|-<br />
|[[Polycyclic Aromatic Hydrocarbons (PAHs)]]||[[Dr. Stephen Richardson |Richardson, Stephen, Ph.D.]]||polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons, PAH(s)<br />
|-<br />
|[[Sediment Porewater Dialysis Passive Samplers for Inorganics (Peepers)]]<br />
|[[Florent Risacher|Risacher, Florent, M.Sc.]]<br />
|<br />
|-<br />
|[[1,2,3-Trichloropropane]]||[[Dr. Alexandra Salter-Blanc |Salter-Blanc, Alexandra, Ph.D.]]||TCP, trichloropropane<br />
|-<br />
|[[Zerovalent Iron (ZVI) (Chemical Reduction - ISCR)]]||[[Dr. Alexandra Salter-Blanc |Salter-Blanc, Alexandra, Ph.D.]]||ZVI<br />
|-<br />
|[[Mercury in Sediments]]<br />
|[[Dr. Grace Schwartz|Schwartz, Grace, Ph.D.]]<br />
|<br />
|-<br />
|[[Munitions Constituents – Sample Extraction and Analytical Techniques|Munitions Constituents - Sample Extraction and Analytical Techniques]]<br />
|[[Dr. Austin Scircle|Scircle, Austin]]<br />
|<br />
|-<br />
|[[Geophysical Methods]]||[[Dr. Lee Slater |Slater, Lee, Ph.D.]]||geophysics<br />
|-<br />
|[[Geophysical Methods - Case Studies]]||[[Dr. Lee Slater |Slater, Lee, Ph.D.]]||geophysics<br />
|-<br />
|[[PFAS Treatment by Anion Exchange]]<br />
|[[Dr. Timothy J. Strathmann|Strathmann, Timothy, Ph.D.]]<br />
|PFAS<br />
|-<br />
|[[Munitions Constituents - Dissolution]]||[[Dr. Susan Taylor |Taylor, Susan, Ph.D.]]||explosive(s), dissolution<br />
|-<br />
|[[PFAS Treatment by Electrical Discharge Plasma]]<br />
|[[Dr. Selma Mededovic Thagard|Thagard, Selma Mededovic, Ph.D.]]<br />
|PFAS<br />
|-<br />
|[[Restoration of Ecological Function in Terrestrial Systems Impacted by Invasive Species]]<br />
|Thierry, Hugo, Ph.D.<br />
|climate change, invasive species, restoration ecology<br />
|-<br />
|[[Chemical Reduction (In Situ - ISCR)]]||[[Dr. Paul Tratnyek |Tratnyek, Paul, Ph.D.]]||In Situ Chemical Reduction, ISCR<br />
|-<br />
|[[Injection Techniques - Viscosity Modification]]||[[Michael Truex |Truex, Michael]]||viscosity, viscosity modifiers, viscosity modification<br />
|-<br />
|[[Soil Vapor Extraction (SVE)]]||[[Michael Truex |Truex, Michael]]||soil vapor extraction, SVE<br />
|-<br />
|[[Munitions Constituents - Deposition]]||[[Michael R. Walsh, P.E., M.E.|Walsh, Michael, P.E.]]||explosive deposition, energetics deposition<br />
|-<br />
|[[Vapor Intrusion - Separation Distances from Petroleum Sources]]<br />
|[[Dr. James Weaver|Weaver, James, Ph.D.]]<br />
|vapor intrusion<br />
|-<br />
|[[Zerovalent Iron Permeable Reactive Barriers]]<br />
|[[Dr. Richard Wilkin|Wilkin, Rick, Ph.D.]]<br />
|<br />
|-<br />
|[[Monitored Natural Attenuation (MNA)]]||[[Dr. John Wilson |Wilson, John, Ph.D.]]||MNA, In Situ MNA, natural attenuation, natural attenuation processes<br />
|-<br />
|[[Monitored Natural Attenuation (MNA) of Fuels]]||[[Dr. John Wilson |Wilson, John, Ph.D.]]||MNA, natural attenuation, attenuate (when used in context related to petroleum hydrocarbons and fuel components)<br />
|-<br />
|[[Monitored Natural Attenuation (MNA) of Chlorinated Solvents]]||[[Dr. John Wilson |Wilson, John, Ph.D.]]||MNA, natural attenuation, attenuate (when used in context related to chlorinated solvents)<br />
|-<br />
|[[Monitored Natural Attenuation - Transitioning from Active Remedies]]<br />
|[[Dr. John Wilson|Wilson, John, Ph.D.]]<br />
|MNA, natural attenuation<br />
|-<br />
|[[Chlorinated Solvents]]||[[Dr. Bilgen Yuncu, P.E. |Yuncu, Bilgen, Ph.D., P.E.]]||chlorinated solvents<br />
|-<br />
|[[Petroleum Hydrocarbons (PHCs)]]<br />
|[[Dr. Bilgen Yuncu, P.E.|Yuncu, Bilgen, Ph.D., P.E.]]<br />
|Petroleum Hydrocarbons (PHCs)<br />
|-<br />
|[[Photoactivated Reductive Defluorination - PFAS Destruction]]<br />
|[[Dr. Suzanne Witt|Witt, Suzanne, Ph.D.]]<br />
|PFAS destruction<br />
|-<br />
|[[Hydrogeophysical Methods for Characterization and Monitoring of Groundwater-Surface Water Exchanges]]<br />
|[[Dr. Lee Slater|Slater, Lee, Ph.D.]]<br />
|geophysics, hydrogeophysical methods <br />
|-<br />
|[[Hydrothermal Alkaline Treatment (HALT)]]<br />
|[[Dr. Brian Pinkard|Pinkard, Brian]]<br />
|<br />
|-<br />
|[[1,4-Dioxane]]<br />
|[[Matthew Zenker|Zenker, Matthew]]<br />
|<br />
|-<br />
|[[Lysimeters for Measuring PFAS Concentrations in the Vadose Zone]]<br />
|[[Dr. John F. Stults|Stults, Dr. John]]<br />
|PFAS, vadose zone, lysimeter, field investigation<br />
|-<br />
|[[PFAS Destruction by Ultraviolet/Sulfite Treatment]]||[[Dr. Yida Fang |Fang, Yida, Ph.D.]]||PFAS destruction<br />
|-<br />
|}</div>Jhurleyhttps://www.enviro.wiki/index.php?title=Articles&diff=18094Articles2026-04-06T19:17:25Z<p>Jhurley: </p>
<hr />
<div>{| class="wikitable sortable"<br />
|-<br />
!Title!!First Author!!Linking Phrases<br />
|-<br />
|[[Groundwater Sampling - No-Purge/Passive]]||[[Dr. David Adamson, P.E. |Adamson, David, Ph.D., P.E.]]||passive sampling, no purge sampling, grab samplers, diffusion samplers, sorptive samplers<br />
|-<br />
|[[ Long-Term Monitoring (LTM)]]||[[Dr. David Adamson, P.E. |Adamson, David, Ph.D., P.E.]]||long-term monitoring, LTM, LTM objectives, LTM programs, LTM challenges<br />
|-<br />
|[[PFAS Monitored Retention (PMR) and PFAS Enhanced Retention (PER)]]<br />
|[[Dr. David Adamson, P.E. |Adamson, David, Ph.D., P.E.]]<br />
|PFAS, MNA, natural attenuation<br />
|-<br />
|[[Sorption of Organic Contaminants]]||[[Richelle Allen-King|Allen-King, Richelle]]||<br />
|-<br />
|[[PFAS Transport and Fate]]<br />
|[[Dr. Richard Anderson|Anderson, Richard, Ph.D.]]<br />
|PFAS, fate and transport<br />
|-<br />
|[[Mass Flux and Mass Discharge]]||[[Dr. Michael Annable, P.E. |Annable, Michael, Ph.D., P.E.]]||source reduction<br />
|-<br />
|[[PFAS Toxicology and Risk Assessment]]<br />
|[[Jennifer Arblaster|Arblaster, Jennifer]]<br />
|PFAS, toxicology, risk assessment<br />
|-<br />
|[[Metal(loid)s - Small Arms Ranges]]|| Dr. Amanda Barker |[[Dr. Amanda Barker|Barker, Amanda, Ph.D.]]<br />
|<br />
|-<br />
|[[Munitions Constituents – Photolysis|Munitions Constituents - Photolysis]]<br />
|[[Dr. Warren Kadoya|Kadoya, Warren, Ph.D.]]<br />
|<br />
|-<br />
|[[Munitions Constituents - Soil Sampling]]<br />
|[[Dr. Samuel Beal|Beal, Samuel, Ph.D.]]<br />
|<br />
|-<br />
|[[Vapor Intrusion – Sewers and Utility Tunnels as Preferential Pathways|Vapor Intrusion - Sewers and Utility Tunnels as Preferential Pathways]]<br />
|[[Lila Beckley|Beckley, Lila]]<br />
|vapor intrusion<br />
|-<br />
|[[Natural Attenuation in Source Zone and Groundwater Plume - Bemidji Crude Oil Spill]]<br />
|[[Dr. Barbara Bekins|Bekins, Barbara, Ph.D.]]||<br />
|-<br />
|[[Bioremediation - Anaerobic Secondary Water Quality Impacts]]||[[Dr. Robert Borden, P.E. |Borden, Robert, Ph.D., P.E.]]||secondary impacts, water quality (in regards to anaerobic conditions)<br />
|-<br />
|[[Design Tool - Base Addition for ERD]]||[[Dr. Robert Borden, P.E. |Borden, Robert, Ph.D., P.E.]]||aquifer acidity, base addition<br />
|-<br />
|[[Emulsified Vegetable Oil (EVO) for Anaerobic Bioremediation]]<br />
|[[Dr. Robert Borden, P.E. |Borden, Robert, Ph.D., P.E.]]||<br />
|-<br />
|[[Low pH Inhibition of Reductive Dechlorination]]||[[Dr. Robert Borden, P.E. |Borden, Robert, Ph.D., P.E.]]||low pH inhibition<br />
|-<br />
|[[In Situ Toxicity Identification Evaluation (iTIE)]]||[[Dr. G. Allen Burton |Burton, Allen, P.E.]]||toxicity evaluation<br />
|-<br />
|[[OPTically-based In-situ Characterization System (OPTICS)]]<br />
|[[Dr. Grace Chang|Chang, Grace, Ph.D.]]<br />
|<br />
|-<br />
|[[Munitions Constituents - Electrochemical Treatment]]<br />
|[[Dr. Brian P. Chaplin|Chaplin, Brian, Ph.D.]]<br />
|munitions constituents remediation<br />
|-<br />
|[[PFAS Sources]]<br />
|[[Dr. Dora Chiang|Chiang, Dora, Ph.D.]]<br />
|<br />
|-<br />
|[[Biodegradation - Cometabolic]]||[[Dr. Kung-Hui (Bella) Chu |Chu, Kung-Hui (Bella), Ph.D]]||cometabolic biodegradation<br />
|-<br />
|[[Munitions Constituents - Composting]]<br />
|[[Harry Craig|Craig, Harry]]<br />
|<br />
|-<br />
|[[Chemical Oxidation (In Situ - ISCO)]]||[[Dr. Michelle Crimi |Crimi, Michelle, Ph.D]]||ISCO, chemical oxidation<br />
|-<br />
|[[Chemical Oxidation Oxidant Selection (In Situ - ISCO)]]||[[Dr. Michelle Crimi |Crimi, Michelle, Ph.D]]||chemical oxidant, oxidant (in regards to ISCO)<br />
|-<br />
|[[Chemical Oxidation Design Considerations(In Situ - ISCO)]]||[[Dr. Michelle Crimi |Crimi, Michelle, Ph.D]]||screening, design, implementation, oxidant delivery (in regards to ISCO)<br />
|-<br />
|[[Perfluoroalkyl and Polyfluoroalkyl Substances (PFAS)]]||[[Dr. Rula Deeb |Deeb, Rula, Ph.D.]]||PFAS, perfluorooctanoic acid (PFOA), perfluorooctane sulfonate (PFOS)<br />
|-<br />
|[[Metal and Metalloid Contaminants]]||[[Dr. Miles Denham |Denham, Miles, Ph.D.]]||metal contaminant(s), metalloid contaminant(s), metal(s), metalloid(s),<br />
|-<br />
|[[Metals and Metalloids - Mobility in Groundwater]]||[[Dr. Miles Denham |Denham, Miles, Ph.D.]]||metal mobility, aqueous speciation, adsorption, precipitation, colloidal transport (in regards to metals)<br />
|-<br />
|[[Monitored Natural Attenuation (MNA) of Metal and Metalloids]]||[[Dr. Miles Denham |Denham, Miles, Ph.D.]]||MNA, attenuation of metal(s), natural attenuation processes, attenuation (in regards to metals)<br />
|-<br />
|[[Metal and Metalloids - Remediation]]||[[Dr. Miles Denham |Denham, Miles, Ph.D.]]||remediation, in situ technologies, contaminant removal (in regards to metals)<br />
|-<br />
|[[pH Buffering in Aquifers]]||[[Dr. Miles Denham |Denham, Miles, Ph.D.]]||ph buffer, natural pH buffer, engineered pH buffer<br />
|-<br />
|[[Munitions Constituents - Sorption]]||[[Dr. Katerina Dontsova |Dontsova, Katerina, Ph.D.]]||energetics, sorption<br />
|-<br />
|[[Biodegradation - Hydrocarbons]]||[[Dr. Elizabeth Edwards |Edwards, Elizabeth, Ph.D.]]||hydrocarbon, biodegradation<br />
|-<br />
|[[Source Zone Modeling]]||[[Dr. Ron Falta |Falta, Ron, Ph.D.]]||source zone modeling<br />
|-<br />
|[[Plume Response Modeling]]||[[Dr. Ron Falta |Falta, Ron, Ph.D.]]||plume response modeling<br />
|-<br />
|[[REMChlor - MD]]<br />
|[[Dr. Ron Falta|Falta, Ron, Ph.D.]]<br />
|<br />
|-<br />
|[[In Situ Groundwater Treatment with Activated Carbon]]<br />
|[[Dr. Dimin Fan|Fan, Dimin, Ph.D.]]<br />
|<br />
|-<br />
|[[LNAPL Remediation Technologies]]||[[Dr. Shahla Farhat |Farhat, Shahla, Ph.D.]]||<br />
|-<br />
|[[Sustainable Remediation]]||[[Paul Favara |Favara, Paul]]||sustainable remediation, social, economic and environmental impacts<br />
|-<br />
|[[Munitions Constituents]]||[[Dr. Kevin Finneran |Finneran, Kevin, Ph.D.]]||Explosives, energetics, insensitive munitions<br />
|-<br />
|[[Biodegradation - Reductive Processes]]||[[Dr. David Freedman |Freedman, David, Ph.D.]]||biotic reduction, biotic reductive processes, hydrogenolysis, dihaloelimination, coupling, organohalide respiration<br />
|-<br />
|[[Remediation of Stormwater Runoff Contaminated by Munition Constituents|Munitions Constituents - Remediation of Stormwater Runoff]]||Fuller, Mark, Ph.D.||energetics, insensitive munitions, stormwater runoff<br />
|-<br />
|[[Subgrade Biogeochemical Reactor (SBGR)]]||[[Jeff Gamlin |Gamlin, Jeff]]||SBGR, subgrade biogeochemical reactor, bioreactor<br />
|-<br />
|[[Thermal Remediation - Smoldering]]||[[Dr. Jason Gerhard |Gerhard, Jason, Ph.D.]]||smouldering remediation, self-sustaining treatment for active remediation, STAR<br />
|-<br />
|[[Contaminated Sediments - Introduction]]<br />
|[[Dr. Upal Ghosh|Ghosh, Upal, Ph.D.]]<br />
|<br />
|-<br />
|[[Contaminated Sediment Risk Assessment]]<br />
|[[Richard Wenning|Wenning, Richard]]<br />
|<br />
|-<br />
|[[In Situ Treatment of Contaminated Sediments with Activated Carbon]]<br />
|[[Dr. Upal Ghosh|Ghosh, Upal, Ph.D.]]<br />
|<br />
|-<br />
|[[PFAS Ex Situ Water Treatment]]<br />
|[[Dr. Scott Grieco |Grieco, Scott, Ph.D.]]<br />
|<br />
|-<br />
|[[Stream Restoration]]<br />
|[[Dr. Natalie Griffiths|Griffiths, Natalie, Ph.D.]]<br />
|<br />
|-<br />
|[[Passive Sampling of Sediments]]<br />
|[[Dr. Philip M. Gschwend|Gschwend, Philip]]<br />
|<br />
|-<br />
|[[Phytoplankton (Algae) Blooms]]<br />
|[[Dr. Nathan Hall|Hall, Nathan]]<br />
|<br />
|-<br />
|[[PFAS Soil Remediation Technologies]]||[[James_Hatton |Hatton, Jim]]||PFAS, Soil source zones<br />
|-<br />
|[[Proteomics and Proteogenomics]]<br />
|[[Dr. Kate Kucharzyk|Kucharzyk, Kate, Ph.D.]]<br />
|<br />
|-<br />
|[[N-nitrosodimethylamine (NDMA)]]<br />
|[[Paul Hatzinger|Hatzinger, Paul, Ph.D.]]<br />
|<br />
|-<br />
|[[Alternative Endpoints]]||[[Elisabeth Hawley |Hawley, Elisabeth]]||management of complex sites||<br />
|-<br />
|[[Thermal Remediation]]||[[Dr. Gorm Heron |Heron, Gorm, Ph.D.]]||thermal remediation, in situ thermal<br />
|-<br />
|[[Thermal Remediation - Steam]]||[[Dr. Gorm Heron |Heron, Gorm, Ph.D.]]||Steam Enhanced Extraction<br />
|-<br />
|[[Thermal Remediation - Electrical Resistance Heating]]||[[Dr. Gorm Heron |Heron, Gorm, Ph.D.]]||Electrical Resistance Heating<br />
|-<br />
|[[Thermal Conduction Heating (TCH)]]||[[Dr. Gorm Heron |Heron, Gorm, Ph.D.]]||thermal desorption<br />
|-<br />
|[[Thermal Remediation - Combined Remedies]]||[[Dr. Gorm Heron |Heron, Gorm, Ph.D.]]||thermal remediation<br />
|-<br />
|[[Thermal Conduction Heating for Treatment of PFAS-Impacted Soil]]||[[Dr. Gorm Heron |Heron, Gorm, Ph.D.]]||thermal remediation, PFAS<br />
|-<br />
|[[Predicting Species Responses to Climate Change with Population Models]]<br />
|[[Dr. Brian Hudgens|Hudgens, Brian, Ph.D.]]<br />
|climate change<br />
|-<br />
|[[Infrastructure Resilience]]<br />
|[[Dr. John Hummel|Hummel, John, Ph.D.]]<br />
|<br />
|-<br />
|[[Munitions Constituents- TREECS™ Fate and Risk Modeling|Munitions Constituents - TREECS™ Fate and Risk Modeling]]||[[Dr. Billy E. Johnson |Johnson, Billy, Ph.D.]]||munitions constituents fate and transport modeling, TREECS<br />
|-<br />
|[[Munitions Constituents - Alkaline Degradation]]<br />
|[[Jared Johnson|Johnson, Jared]]<br />
|<br />
|-<br />
|[[Assessing Vapor Intrusion (VI) Impacts in Neighborhoods with Groundwater Contaminated by Chlorinated Volatile Organic Chemicals (CVOCs)|Vapor Intrusion - Assessing VI Impacts in Neighborhoods with Groundwater Contaminated CVOCs]]<br />
|[[Dr. Paul C. Johnson|Johnson, Paul, Ph.D.]]<br />
|vapor intrusion<br />
|-<br />
|[[Munitions Constituents - IM Toxicology]]||-----||insensitive explosives, insensitive munitions, IMX-101, IMX<br />
|-<br />
|[[Landfarming]]<br />
|[[Dr. Roopa Kamath|Kamath, Roopa, Ph.D.]]<br />
|<br />
|-<br />
|[[NAPL Mobility]]<br />
|[[Andrew Kirkman|Kirkman, Andrew]]<br />
|<br />
|-<br />
|[[Climate Change Primer]]<br />
|[[Dr. Rao Kotamarthi|Kotamarthi, Rao, Ph.D.]]<br />
|<br />
|-<br />
|[[Perchlorate]]||[[Thomas Krug |Krug, Thomas]]||perchlorate<br />
|-<br />
|[[Injection Techniques for Liquid Amendments]]||[[Thomas Krug |Krug, Thomas]]||amendment injection<br />
|-<br />
|[[Transition of Aqueous Film Forming Foam (AFFF) Fire Suppression Infrastructure Impacted by Per and Polyfluoroalkyl Substances (PFAS)]]<br />
|[[Dr. Johnsie Ray Lang|Lang, Johnsie Ray, Ph.D.]]||PFAS<br />
|<br />
|-<br />
|[[Characterization Methods – Hydraulic Conductivity]]<br />
|[[Dr. Gaisheng Liu|Liu, Gaisheng, Ph.D.]]<br />
|<br />
|-<br />
|[[Compound Specific Isotope Analysis (CSIA)]]||[[Dr. Barbara Sherwood Lollar, F.R.S.C. |Lollar, Barbara S., FRSC]]||Compound Specific Isotope Analysis (CSIA)<br />
|-<br />
|[[Passive Sampling of Munitions Constituents|Munitions Constituents - Passive Sampling]]<br />
|[[Dr. Guilherme Lotufo|Lotufo, Guilerme, Ph.D.]]<br />
|<br />
|-<br />
|[[Vapor Intrusion (VI)]]||[[Chris Lutes |Lutes, Chris]]||vapor intrusion<br />
|-<br />
|[[Bioremediation - Anaerobic]]||[[Leah MacKinnon, M.A.Sc., P. Eng.|MacKinnon, Leah]]||anaerobic bioremediation<br />
|-<br />
|[[Bioremediation - Anaerobic Design Considerations]]||[[Leah MacKinnon, M.A.Sc., P. Eng.|MacKinnon, Leah]]||<br />
|-<br />
|[[Biodegradation - 1,4-Dioxane]]<br />
|[[Dr. Shaily Mahendra|Mahendra, Shaily, Ph.D.]]<br />
|<br />
|-<br />
|[[Direct Push (DP) Technology]]||[[Wesley McCall, M.S., P.G. |McCall, Wesley, M.S., P.G.]]||direct push, DP, DP machines, DP technology<br />
|-<br />
|[[Direct Push Sampling]]||[[Wesley McCall, M.S., P.G. |McCall, Wesley, M.S., P.G.]]||direct push sampling, soil sampling, groundwater sampling, well installation, soil vapor sampling (in regards to DP)<br />
|-<br />
|[[Direct Push Logging]]||[[Wesley McCall, M.S., P.G. |McCall, Wesley, M.S., P.G.]]||direct push logging, Cone Penetration Testing, CPT, Electrical Conductivity, EC, Hydraulic Profiling Tool, HPT,<br>Membrane Interface Probe, MIP, Optical Imaging Profiler, OIP<br />
|-<br />
|[[Downscaled High Resolution Datasets for Climate Change Projections]]<br />
|[[Dr. Rao Kotamarthi|Kotamarthi, Rao, Ph.D.]]<br />
|<br />
|-<br />
|[[Remediation Performance Assessment at Chlorinated Solvent Sites]]||[[Travis McGuire|McGuire, Travis]]||multi-site studies<br />
|-<br />
|[[LNAPL Conceptual Site Models]]<br />
|[[Dr. Charles Newell, P.E. |Newell, Charles, Ph.D., P.E.]]<br />
|<br />
|-<br />
|[[Long-Term Monitoring (LTM) - Data Analysis]]||[[Dr. Thomas McHugh |McHugh, Thomas, Ph.D.]]||data analysis, analysis methods (in regards to LTM)<br />
|-<br />
|[[Long-Term Monitoring (LTM) - Data Variability]]||[[Dr. Thomas McHugh |McHugh, Thomas, Ph.D.]]||data variability (in regards to LTM), LTM evaluation<br />
|-<br />
|-<br />
|[[Munitions Constituents - Abiotic Reduction]]||[[Dr. Jimmy Murillo-Gelvez |Murillo-Gelvez, Jimmy, Ph.D.]]<br />
|-<br />
|[[Supercritical Water Oxidation (SCWO)]]<br />
|Nagar, Kobe<br />
|<br />
|-<br />
|[[Matrix Diffusion]]<br />
|[[Dr. Charles Newell, P.E. |Newell, Charles, Ph.D., P.E.]]<br />
|<br />
|-<br />
|[[Groundwater Flow and Solute Transport]]||[[Dr. Charles Newell, P.E. |Newell, Charles, Ph.D., P.E.]]||groundwater flow, advection, dispersion, diffusion, molecular diffusion, mechanical dispersion<br />
|-<br />
|[[Molecular Biological Tools - MBTs]]||[[Dora Ogles-Taggart |Ogles-Taggart, Dora]]||MBT, Molecular Biological Tool(s)<br />
|-<br />
|[[Quantitative Polymerase Chain Reaction (qPCR)]]||[[Dora Ogles-Taggart |Ogles-Taggart, Dora]]||qPCR, Polymerase Chain Reaction<br />
|-<br />
|[[Sediment Capping]]<br />
|[[Dr. Danny Reible|Reible, Danny]]<br />
|<br />
|-<br />
|[[Stable Isotope Probing (SIP)]]||[[Dora Ogles-Taggart |Ogles-Taggart, Dora]]||SIP, Stable Isotope Probing<br />
|-<br />
|[[Metagenomics]]||[[Dora Ogles-Taggart |Ogles-Taggart, Dora]]||metagenomics<br />
|-<br />
|[[Natural Source Zone Depletion (NSZD)]]||[[Tom Palaia |Palaia, Tom]]||natural source zone depletion, NSZD<br />
|-<br />
|[[Climate Change Effects on Wildlife]]<br />
|[[Dr. Breanna F. Powers|Powers, Breanna, PhD.]]<br />
|<br />
|-<br />
|[[Amendment Distribution in Low Conductivity Materials]]||[[Dr. Stephen Richardson |Richardson, Stephen, Ph.D.]]||<br />
|-<br />
|[[Polycyclic Aromatic Hydrocarbons (PAHs)]]||[[Dr. Stephen Richardson |Richardson, Stephen, Ph.D.]]||polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons, PAH(s)<br />
|-<br />
|[[Sediment Porewater Dialysis Passive Samplers for Inorganics (Peepers)]]<br />
|[[Florent Risacher|Risacher, Florent, M.Sc.]]<br />
|<br />
|-<br />
|[[1,2,3-Trichloropropane]]||[[Dr. Alexandra Salter-Blanc |Salter-Blanc, Alexandra, Ph.D.]]||TCP, trichloropropane<br />
|-<br />
|[[Zerovalent Iron (ZVI) (Chemical Reduction - ISCR)]]||[[Dr. Alexandra Salter-Blanc |Salter-Blanc, Alexandra, Ph.D.]]||ZVI<br />
|-<br />
|[[Mercury in Sediments]]<br />
|[[Dr. Grace Schwartz|Schwartz, Grace, Ph.D.]]<br />
|<br />
|-<br />
|[[Munitions Constituents – Sample Extraction and Analytical Techniques|Munitions Constituents - Sample Extraction and Analytical Techniques]]<br />
|[[Dr. Austin Scircle|Scircle, Austin]]<br />
|<br />
|-<br />
|[[Geophysical Methods]]||[[Dr. Lee Slater |Slater, Lee, Ph.D.]]||geophysics<br />
|-<br />
|[[Geophysical Methods - Case Studies]]||[[Dr. Lee Slater |Slater, Lee, Ph.D.]]||geophysics<br />
|-<br />
|[[PFAS Treatment by Anion Exchange]]<br />
|[[Dr. Timothy J. Strathmann|Strathmann, Timothy, Ph.D.]]<br />
|PFAS<br />
|-<br />
|[[Munitions Constituents - Dissolution]]||[[Dr. Susan Taylor |Taylor, Susan, Ph.D.]]||explosive(s), dissolution,<br />
|-<br />
|[[PFAS Treatment by Electrical Discharge Plasma]]<br />
|[[Dr. Selma Mededovic Thagard|Thagard, Selma Mededovic, Ph.D.]]<br />
|PFAS<br />
|-<br />
|[[Restoration of Ecological Function in Terrestrial Systems Impacted by Invasive Species]]<br />
|Thierry, Hugo, Ph.D.<br />
|climate change, invasive species, restoration ecology<br />
|-<br />
|[[Chemical Reduction (In Situ - ISCR)]]||[[Dr. Paul Tratnyek |Tratnyek, Paul, Ph.D.]]||In Situ Chemical Reduction, ISCR<br />
|-<br />
|[[Injection Techniques - Viscosity Modification]]||[[Michael Truex |Truex, Michael]]||viscosity, viscosity modifiers, viscosity modification<br />
|-<br />
|[[Soil Vapor Extraction (SVE)]]||[[Michael Truex |Truex, Michael]]||soil vapor extraction, SVE<br />
|-<br />
|[[Munitions Constituents - Deposition]]||[[Michael R. Walsh, P.E., M.E.|Walsh, Michael, P.E.]]||explosive deposition, energetics deposition<br />
|-<br />
|[[Vapor Intrusion - Separation Distances from Petroleum Sources]]<br />
|[[Dr. James Weaver|Weaver, James, Ph.D.]]<br />
|vapor intrusion<br />
|-<br />
|[[Zerovalent Iron Permeable Reactive Barriers]]<br />
|[[Dr. Richard Wilkin|Wilkin, Rick, Ph.D.]]<br />
|<br />
|-<br />
|[[Monitored Natural Attenuation (MNA)]]||[[Dr. John Wilson |Wilson, John, Ph.D.]]||MNA, In Situ MNA, natural attenuation, natural attenuation processes<br />
|-<br />
|[[Monitored Natural Attenuation (MNA) of Fuels]]||[[Dr. John Wilson |Wilson, John, Ph.D.]]||MNA, natural attenuation, attenuate (when used in context related to petroleum hydrocarbons and fuel components)<br />
|-<br />
|[[Monitored Natural Attenuation (MNA) of Chlorinated Solvents]]||[[Dr. John Wilson |Wilson, John, Ph.D.]]||MNA, natural attenuation, attenuate (when used in context related to chlorinated solvents)<br />
|-<br />
|[[Monitored Natural Attenuation - Transitioning from Active Remedies]]<br />
|[[Dr. John Wilson|Wilson, John, Ph.D.]]<br />
|MNA, natural attenuation<br />
|-<br />
|[[Chlorinated Solvents]]||[[Dr. Bilgen Yuncu, P.E. |Yuncu, Bilgen, Ph.D., P.E.]]||chlorinated solvents<br />
|-<br />
|[[Petroleum Hydrocarbons (PHCs)]]<br />
|[[Dr. Bilgen Yuncu, P.E.|Yuncu, Bilgen, Ph.D., P.E.]]<br />
|Petroleum Hydrocarbons (PHCs)<br />
|-<br />
|[[Photoactivated Reductive Defluorination - PFAS Destruction]]<br />
|[[Dr. Suzanne Witt|Witt, Suzanne, Ph.D.]]<br />
|PFAS destruction<br />
|<br />
|-<br />
|[[Hydrogeophysical Methods for Characterization and Monitoring of Groundwater-Surface Water Exchanges]]<br />
|[[Dr. Lee Slater|Slater, Lee, Ph.D.]]<br />
|geophysics, hydrogeophysical methods, <br />
|<br />
|-<br />
|[[Hydrothermal Alkaline Treatment (HALT)]]<br />
|[[Dr. Brian Pinkard|Pinkard, Brian]]<br />
|<br />
|-<br />
|[[1,4-Dioxane]]<br />
|[[Matthew Zenker|Zenker, Matthew]]<br />
|<br />
|-<br />
|[[Lysimeters for Measuring PFAS Concentrations in the Vadose Zone]]<br />
|[[Dr. John F. Stults|Stults, Dr. John]]<br />
|PFAS, vadose zone, lysimeter, field investigation<br />
|<br />
|-<br />
|[[PFAS Destruction by Ultraviolet/Sulfite Treatment]]||[[Dr. Yida Fang |Fang, Yida, Ph.D.]]||PFAS destruction<br />
|<br />
|-<br />
|}</div>Jhurleyhttps://www.enviro.wiki/index.php?title=Articles&diff=18093Articles2026-04-06T19:13:55Z<p>Jhurley: </p>
<hr />
<div>{| class="wikitable sortable"<br />
|-<br />
!Title!!First Author!!Linking Phrases<br />
|-<br />
|[[Groundwater Sampling - No-Purge/Passive]]||[[Dr. David Adamson, P.E. |Adamson, David, Ph.D., P.E.]]||passive sampling, no purge sampling, grab samplers, diffusion samplers, sorptive samplers<br />
|-<br />
|[[ Long-Term Monitoring (LTM)]]||[[Dr. David Adamson, P.E. |Adamson, David, Ph.D., P.E.]]||long-term monitoring, LTM, LTM objectives, LTM programs, LTM challenges<br />
|-<br />
|[[PFAS Monitored Retention (PMR) and PFAS Enhanced Retention (PER)]]<br />
|[[Dr. David Adamson, P.E. |Adamson, David, Ph.D., P.E.]]<br />
|PFAS, MNA, natural attenuation<br />
|-<br />
|[[Sorption of Organic Contaminants]]||[[Richelle Allen-King|Allen-King, Richelle]]||<br />
|-<br />
|[[PFAS Transport and Fate]]<br />
|[[Dr. Richard Anderson|Anderson, Richard, Ph.D.]]<br />
|PFAS, fate and transport<br />
|-<br />
|[[Mass Flux and Mass Discharge]]||[[Dr. Michael Annable, P.E. |Annable, Michael, Ph.D., P.E.]]||source reduction<br />
|-<br />
|[[PFAS Toxicology and Risk Assessment]]<br />
|[[Jennifer Arblaster|Arblaster, Jennifer]]<br />
|PFAS, toxicology, risk assessment<br />
|-<br />
|[[Metal(loid)s - Small Arms Ranges]]|| Dr. Amanda Barker |[[Dr. Amanda Barker|Barker, Amanda, Ph.D.]]<br />
|<br />
|-<br />
|[[Munitions Constituents – Photolysis|Munitions Constituents - Photolysis]]<br />
|[[Dr. Warren Kadoya|Kadoya, Warren, Ph.D.]]<br />
|<br />
|-<br />
|[[Munitions Constituents - Soil Sampling]]<br />
|[[Dr. Samuel Beal|Beal, Samuel, Ph.D.]]<br />
|<br />
|-<br />
|[[Vapor Intrusion – Sewers and Utility Tunnels as Preferential Pathways|Vapor Intrusion - Sewers and Utility Tunnels as Preferential Pathways]]<br />
|[[Lila Beckley|Beckley, Lila]]<br />
|vapor intrusion<br />
|-<br />
|[[Natural Attenuation in Source Zone and Groundwater Plume - Bemidji Crude Oil Spill]]<br />
|[[Dr. Barbara Bekins|Bekins, Barbara, Ph.D.]]||<br />
|-<br />
|[[Bioremediation - Anaerobic Secondary Water Quality Impacts]]||[[Dr. Robert Borden, P.E. |Borden, Robert, Ph.D., P.E.]]||secondary impacts, water quality (in regards to anaerobic conditions)<br />
|-<br />
|[[Design Tool - Base Addition for ERD]]||[[Dr. Robert Borden, P.E. |Borden, Robert, Ph.D., P.E.]]||aquifer acidity, base addition<br />
|-<br />
|[[Emulsified Vegetable Oil (EVO) for Anaerobic Bioremediation]]<br />
|[[Dr. Robert Borden, P.E. |Borden, Robert, Ph.D., P.E.]]||<br />
|-<br />
|[[Low pH Inhibition of Reductive Dechlorination]]||[[Dr. Robert Borden, P.E. |Borden, Robert, Ph.D., P.E.]]||low pH inhibition<br />
|-<br />
|[[In Situ Toxicity Identification Evaluation (iTIE)]]||[[Dr. G. Allen Burton |Burton, Allen, P.E.]]||toxicity evaluation<br />
|-<br />
|[[OPTically-based In-situ Characterization System (OPTICS)]]<br />
|[[Dr. Grace Chang|Chang, Grace, Ph.D.]]<br />
|<br />
|-<br />
|[[Munitions Constituents - Electrochemical Treatment]]<br />
|[[Dr. Brian P. Chaplin|Chaplin, Brian, Ph.D.]]<br />
|munitions constituents remediation<br />
|-<br />
|[[PFAS Sources]]<br />
|[[Dr. Dora Chiang|Chiang, Dora, Ph.D.]]<br />
|<br />
|-<br />
|[[Biodegradation - Cometabolic]]||[[Dr. Kung-Hui (Bella) Chu |Chu, Kung-Hui (Bella), Ph.D]]||cometabolic biodegradation<br />
|-<br />
|[[Munitions Constituents - Composting]]<br />
|[[Harry Craig|Craig, Harry]]<br />
|<br />
|-<br />
|[[Chemical Oxidation (In Situ - ISCO)]]||[[Dr. Michelle Crimi |Crimi, Michelle, Ph.D]]||ISCO, chemical oxidation<br />
|-<br />
|[[Chemical Oxidation Oxidant Selection (In Situ - ISCO)]]||[[Dr. Michelle Crimi |Crimi, Michelle, Ph.D]]||chemical oxidant, oxidant (in regards to ISCO)<br />
|-<br />
|[[Chemical Oxidation Design Considerations(In Situ - ISCO)]]||[[Dr. Michelle Crimi |Crimi, Michelle, Ph.D]]||screening, design, implementation, oxidant delivery (in regards to ISCO)<br />
|-<br />
|[[Perfluoroalkyl and Polyfluoroalkyl Substances (PFAS)]]||[[Dr. Rula Deeb |Deeb, Rula, Ph.D.]]||PFAS, perfluorooctanoic acid (PFOA), perfluorooctane sulfonate (PFOS)<br />
|-<br />
|[[Metal and Metalloid Contaminants]]||[[Dr. Miles Denham |Denham, Miles, Ph.D.]]||metal contaminant(s), metalloid contaminant(s), metal(s), metalloid(s),<br />
|-<br />
|[[Metals and Metalloids - Mobility in Groundwater]]||[[Dr. Miles Denham |Denham, Miles, Ph.D.]]||metal mobility, aqueous speciation, adsorption, precipitation, colloidal transport (in regards to metals)<br />
|-<br />
|[[Monitored Natural Attenuation (MNA) of Metal and Metalloids]]||[[Dr. Miles Denham |Denham, Miles, Ph.D.]]||MNA, attenuation of metal(s), natural attenuation processes, attenuation (in regards to metals)<br />
|-<br />
|[[Metal and Metalloids - Remediation]]||[[Dr. Miles Denham |Denham, Miles, Ph.D.]]||remediation, in situ technologies, contaminant removal (in regards to metals)<br />
|-<br />
|[[pH Buffering in Aquifers]]||[[Dr. Miles Denham |Denham, Miles, Ph.D.]]||ph buffer, natural pH buffer, engineered pH buffer<br />
|-<br />
|[[Munitions Constituents - Sorption]]||[[Dr. Katerina Dontsova |Dontsova, Katerina, Ph.D.]]||energetics, sorption<br />
|-<br />
|[[Biodegradation - Hydrocarbons]]||[[Dr. Elizabeth Edwards |Edwards, Elizabeth, Ph.D.]]||hydrocarbon, biodegradation<br />
|-<br />
|[[Source Zone Modeling]]||[[Dr. Ron Falta |Falta, Ron, Ph.D.]]||source zone modeling<br />
|-<br />
|[[Plume Response Modeling]]||[[Dr. Ron Falta |Falta, Ron, Ph.D.]]||plume response modeling<br />
|-<br />
|[[REMChlor - MD]]<br />
|[[Dr. Ron Falta|Falta, Ron, Ph.D.]]<br />
|<br />
|-<br />
|[[In Situ Groundwater Treatment with Activated Carbon]]<br />
|[[Dr. Dimin Fan|Fan, Dimin, Ph.D.]]<br />
|<br />
|-<br />
|[[LNAPL Remediation Technologies]]||[[Dr. Shahla Farhat |Farhat, Shahla, Ph.D.]]||<br />
|-<br />
|[[Sustainable Remediation]]||[[Paul Favara |Favara, Paul]]||sustainable remediation, social, economic and environmental impacts<br />
|-<br />
|[[Munitions Constituents]]||[[Dr. Kevin Finneran |Finneran, Kevin, Ph.D.]]||Explosives, energetics, insensitive munitions<br />
|-<br />
|[[Biodegradation - Reductive Processes]]||[[Dr. David Freedman |Freedman, David, Ph.D.]]||biotic reduction, biotic reductive processes, hydrogenolysis, dihaloelimination, coupling, organohalide respiration<br />
|-<br />
|[[Remediation of Stormwater Runoff Contaminated by Munition Constituents|Munitions Constituents - Remediation of Stormwater Runoff]]||Fuller, Mark, Ph.D.||energetics, insensitive munitions, stormwater runoff<br />
|-<br />
|[[Subgrade Biogeochemical Reactor (SBGR)]]||[[Jeff Gamlin |Gamlin, Jeff]]||SBGR, subgrade biogeochemical reactor, bioreactor<br />
|-<br />
|[[Thermal Remediation - Smoldering]]||[[Dr. Jason Gerhard |Gerhard, Jason, Ph.D.]]||smouldering remediation, self-sustaining treatment for active remediation, STAR<br />
|-<br />
|[[Contaminated Sediments - Introduction]]<br />
|[[Dr. Upal Ghosh|Ghosh, Upal, Ph.D.]]<br />
|<br />
|-<br />
|[[Contaminated Sediment Risk Assessment]]<br />
|[[Richard Wenning|Wenning, Richard]]<br />
|<br />
|-<br />
|[[In Situ Treatment of Contaminated Sediments with Activated Carbon]]<br />
|[[Dr. Upal Ghosh|Ghosh, Upal, Ph.D.]]<br />
|<br />
|-<br />
|[[PFAS Ex Situ Water Treatment]]<br />
|[[Dr. Scott Grieco |Grieco, Scott, Ph.D.]]<br />
|<br />
|-<br />
|[[Stream Restoration]]<br />
|[[Dr. Natalie Griffiths|Griffiths, Natalie, Ph.D.]]<br />
|<br />
|-<br />
|[[Passive Sampling of Sediments]]<br />
|[[Dr. Philip M. Gschwend|Gschwend, Philip]]<br />
|<br />
|-<br />
|[[Phytoplankton (Algae) Blooms]]<br />
|[[Dr. Nathan Hall|Hall, Nathan]]<br />
|<br />
|-<br />
|[[PFAS Soil Remediation Technologies]]||[[James_Hatton |Hatton, Jim]]||PFAS, Soil source zones<br />
|-<br />
|[[Proteomics and Proteogenomics]]<br />
|[[Dr. Kate Kucharzyk|Kucharzyk, Kate, Ph.D.]]<br />
|<br />
|-<br />
|[[N-nitrosodimethylamine (NDMA)]]<br />
|[[Paul Hatzinger|Hatzinger, Paul, Ph.D.]]<br />
|<br />
|-<br />
|[[Alternative Endpoints]]||[[Elisabeth Hawley |Hawley, Elisabeth]]||management of complex sites||<br />
|-<br />
|[[Thermal Remediation]]||[[Dr. Gorm Heron |Heron, Gorm, Ph.D.]]||thermal remediation, in situ thermal<br />
|-<br />
|[[Thermal Remediation - Steam]]||[[Dr. Gorm Heron |Heron, Gorm, Ph.D.]]||Steam Enhanced Extraction<br />
|-<br />
|[[Thermal Remediation - Electrical Resistance Heating]]||[[Dr. Gorm Heron |Heron, Gorm, Ph.D.]]||Electrical Resistance Heating<br />
|-<br />
|[[Thermal Conduction Heating (TCH)]]||[[Dr. Gorm Heron |Heron, Gorm, Ph.D.]]||thermal desorption<br />
|-<br />
|[[Thermal Remediation - Combined Remedies]]||[[Dr. Gorm Heron |Heron, Gorm, Ph.D.]]||thermal remediation<br />
|-<br />
|[[Thermal Conduction Heating for Treatment of PFAS-Impacted Soil]]||[[Dr. Gorm Heron |Heron, Gorm, Ph.D.]]||thermal remediation, PFAS<br />
|<br />
// |-<br />
// |[[Predicting Species Responses to Climate Change with Population Models]]<br />
// |[[Dr. Brian Hudgens|Hudgens, Brian, Ph.D.]]<br />
// |climate change<br />
// |-<br />
// |[[Infrastructure Resilience]]<br />
// |[[Dr. John Hummel|Hummel, John, Ph.D.]]<br />
// |<br />
|-<br />
|[[Munitions Constituents- TREECS™ Fate and Risk Modeling|Munitions Constituents - TREECS™ Fate and Risk Modeling]]||[[Dr. Billy E. Johnson |Johnson, Billy, Ph.D.]]||munitions constituents fate and transport modeling, TREECS<br />
|-<br />
|[[Munitions Constituents - Alkaline Degradation]]<br />
|[[Jared Johnson|Johnson, Jared]]<br />
|<br />
|-<br />
|[[Assessing Vapor Intrusion (VI) Impacts in Neighborhoods with Groundwater Contaminated by Chlorinated Volatile Organic Chemicals (CVOCs)|Vapor Intrusion - Assessing VI Impacts in Neighborhoods with Groundwater Contaminated CVOCs]]<br />
|[[Dr. Paul C. Johnson|Johnson, Paul, Ph.D.]]<br />
|vapor intrusion<br />
|-<br />
|[[Munitions Constituents - IM Toxicology]]||-----||insensitive explosives, insensitive munitions, IMX-101, IMX<br />
|-<br />
|[[Landfarming]]<br />
|[[Dr. Roopa Kamath|Kamath, Roopa, Ph.D.]]<br />
|<br />
|-<br />
|[[NAPL Mobility]]<br />
|[[Andrew Kirkman|Kirkman, Andrew]]<br />
|<br />
// |-<br />
// |[[Climate Change Primer]]<br />
// |[[Dr. Rao Kotamarthi|Kotamarthi, Rao, Ph.D.]]<br />
// |<br />
|-<br />
|[[Perchlorate]]||[[Thomas Krug |Krug, Thomas]]||perchlorate<br />
|-<br />
|[[Injection Techniques for Liquid Amendments]]||[[Thomas Krug |Krug, Thomas]]||amendment injection<br />
|-<br />
|[[Transition of Aqueous Film Forming Foam (AFFF) Fire Suppression Infrastructure Impacted by Per and Polyfluoroalkyl Substances (PFAS)]]<br />
|[[Dr. Johnsie Ray Lang|Lang, Johnsie Ray, Ph.D.]]||PFAS<br />
|<br />
|-<br />
|[[Characterization Methods – Hydraulic Conductivity]]<br />
|[[Dr. Gaisheng Liu|Liu, Gaisheng, Ph.D.]]<br />
|<br />
|-<br />
|[[Compound Specific Isotope Analysis (CSIA)]]||[[Dr. Barbara Sherwood Lollar, F.R.S.C. |Lollar, Barbara S., FRSC]]||Compound Specific Isotope Analysis (CSIA)<br />
|-<br />
|[[Passive Sampling of Munitions Constituents|Munitions Constituents - Passive Sampling]]<br />
|[[Dr. Guilherme Lotufo|Lotufo, Guilerme, Ph.D.]]<br />
|<br />
|-<br />
|[[Vapor Intrusion (VI)]]||[[Chris Lutes |Lutes, Chris]]||vapor intrusion<br />
|-<br />
|[[Bioremediation - Anaerobic]]||[[Leah MacKinnon, M.A.Sc., P. Eng.|MacKinnon, Leah]]||anaerobic bioremediation<br />
|-<br />
|[[Bioremediation - Anaerobic Design Considerations]]||[[Leah MacKinnon, M.A.Sc., P. Eng.|MacKinnon, Leah]]||<br />
|-<br />
|[[Biodegradation - 1,4-Dioxane]]<br />
|[[Dr. Shaily Mahendra|Mahendra, Shaily, Ph.D.]]<br />
|<br />
|-<br />
|[[Direct Push (DP) Technology]]||[[Wesley McCall, M.S., P.G. |McCall, Wesley, M.S., P.G.]]||direct push, DP, DP machines, DP technology<br />
|-<br />
|[[Direct Push Sampling]]||[[Wesley McCall, M.S., P.G. |McCall, Wesley, M.S., P.G.]]||direct push sampling, soil sampling, groundwater sampling, well installation, soil vapor sampling (in regards to DP)<br />
|-<br />
|[[Direct Push Logging]]||[[Wesley McCall, M.S., P.G. |McCall, Wesley, M.S., P.G.]]||direct push logging, Cone Penetration Testing, CPT, Electrical Conductivity, EC, Hydraulic Profiling Tool, HPT,<br>Membrane Interface Probe, MIP, Optical Imaging Profiler, OIP<br />
// |-<br />
// |[[Downscaled High Resolution Datasets for Climate Change Projections]]<br />
// |[[Dr. Rao Kotamarthi|Kotamarthi, Rao, Ph.D.]]<br />
// |<br />
|-<br />
|[[Remediation Performance Assessment at Chlorinated Solvent Sites]]||[[Travis McGuire|McGuire, Travis]]||multi-site studies<br />
|-<br />
|[[LNAPL Conceptual Site Models]]<br />
|[[Dr. Charles Newell, P.E. |Newell, Charles, Ph.D., P.E.]]<br />
|<br />
|-<br />
|[[Long-Term Monitoring (LTM) - Data Analysis]]||[[Dr. Thomas McHugh |McHugh, Thomas, Ph.D.]]||data analysis, analysis methods (in regards to LTM)<br />
|-<br />
|[[Long-Term Monitoring (LTM) - Data Variability]]||[[Dr. Thomas McHugh |McHugh, Thomas, Ph.D.]]||data variability (in regards to LTM), LTM evaluation<br />
|-<br />
|-<br />
|[[Munitions Constituents - Abiotic Reduction]]||[[Dr. Jimmy Murillo-Gelvez |Murillo-Gelvez, Jimmy, Ph.D.]]<br />
|-<br />
|[[Supercritical Water Oxidation (SCWO)]]<br />
|Nagar, Kobe<br />
|<br />
|-<br />
|[[Matrix Diffusion]]<br />
|[[Dr. Charles Newell, P.E. |Newell, Charles, Ph.D., P.E.]]<br />
|<br />
|-<br />
|[[Groundwater Flow and Solute Transport]]||[[Dr. Charles Newell, P.E. |Newell, Charles, Ph.D., P.E.]]||groundwater flow, advection, dispersion, diffusion, molecular diffusion, mechanical dispersion<br />
|-<br />
|[[Molecular Biological Tools - MBTs]]||[[Dora Ogles-Taggart |Ogles-Taggart, Dora]]||MBT, Molecular Biological Tool(s)<br />
|-<br />
|[[Quantitative Polymerase Chain Reaction (qPCR)]]||[[Dora Ogles-Taggart |Ogles-Taggart, Dora]]||qPCR, Polymerase Chain Reaction<br />
|-<br />
|[[Sediment Capping]]<br />
|[[Dr. Danny Reible|Reible, Danny]]<br />
|<br />
|-<br />
|[[Stable Isotope Probing (SIP)]]||[[Dora Ogles-Taggart |Ogles-Taggart, Dora]]||SIP, Stable Isotope Probing<br />
|-<br />
|[[Metagenomics]]||[[Dora Ogles-Taggart |Ogles-Taggart, Dora]]||metagenomics<br />
|-<br />
|[[Natural Source Zone Depletion (NSZD)]]||[[Tom Palaia |Palaia, Tom]]||natural source zone depletion, NSZD<br />
// |-<br />
// |[[Climate Change Effects on Wildlife]]<br />
// |[[Dr. Breanna F. Powers|Powers, Breanna, PhD.]]<br />
// |<br />
|-<br />
|[[Amendment Distribution in Low Conductivity Materials]]||[[Dr. Stephen Richardson |Richardson, Stephen, Ph.D.]]||<br />
|-<br />
|[[Polycyclic Aromatic Hydrocarbons (PAHs)]]||[[Dr. Stephen Richardson |Richardson, Stephen, Ph.D.]]||polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons, PAH(s)<br />
|-<br />
|[[Sediment Porewater Dialysis Passive Samplers for Inorganics (Peepers)]]<br />
|[[Florent Risacher|Risacher, Florent, M.Sc.]]<br />
|<br />
|-<br />
|[[1,2,3-Trichloropropane]]||[[Dr. Alexandra Salter-Blanc |Salter-Blanc, Alexandra, Ph.D.]]||TCP, trichloropropane<br />
|-<br />
|[[Zerovalent Iron (ZVI) (Chemical Reduction - ISCR)]]||[[Dr. Alexandra Salter-Blanc |Salter-Blanc, Alexandra, Ph.D.]]||ZVI<br />
|-<br />
|[[Mercury in Sediments]]<br />
|[[Dr. Grace Schwartz|Schwartz, Grace, Ph.D.]]<br />
|<br />
|-<br />
|[[Munitions Constituents – Sample Extraction and Analytical Techniques|Munitions Constituents - Sample Extraction and Analytical Techniques]]<br />
|[[Dr. Austin Scircle|Scircle, Austin]]<br />
|<br />
|-<br />
|[[Geophysical Methods]]||[[Dr. Lee Slater |Slater, Lee, Ph.D.]]||geophysics<br />
|-<br />
|[[Geophysical Methods - Case Studies]]||[[Dr. Lee Slater |Slater, Lee, Ph.D.]]||geophysics<br />
|-<br />
|[[PFAS Treatment by Anion Exchange]]<br />
|[[Dr. Timothy J. Strathmann|Strathmann, Timothy, Ph.D.]]<br />
|PFAS<br />
|-<br />
|[[Munitions Constituents - Dissolution]]||[[Dr. Susan Taylor |Taylor, Susan, Ph.D.]]||explosive(s), dissolution,<br />
|-<br />
|[[PFAS Treatment by Electrical Discharge Plasma]]<br />
|[[Dr. Selma Mededovic Thagard|Thagard, Selma Mededovic, Ph.D.]]<br />
|PFAS<br />
// |-<br />
// |[[Restoration of Ecological Function in Terrestrial Systems Impacted by Invasive Species]]<br />
// |Thierry, Hugo, Ph.D.<br />
// |climate change, invasive species, restoration ecology<br />
|-<br />
|[[Chemical Reduction (In Situ - ISCR)]]||[[Dr. Paul Tratnyek |Tratnyek, Paul, Ph.D.]]||In Situ Chemical Reduction, ISCR<br />
|-<br />
|[[Injection Techniques - Viscosity Modification]]||[[Michael Truex |Truex, Michael]]||viscosity, viscosity modifiers, viscosity modification<br />
|-<br />
|[[Soil Vapor Extraction (SVE)]]||[[Michael Truex |Truex, Michael]]||soil vapor extraction, SVE<br />
|-<br />
|[[Munitions Constituents - Deposition]]||[[Michael R. Walsh, P.E., M.E.|Walsh, Michael, P.E.]]||explosive deposition, energetics deposition<br />
|-<br />
|[[Vapor Intrusion - Separation Distances from Petroleum Sources]]<br />
|[[Dr. James Weaver|Weaver, James, Ph.D.]]<br />
|vapor intrusion<br />
|-<br />
|[[Zerovalent Iron Permeable Reactive Barriers]]<br />
|[[Dr. Richard Wilkin|Wilkin, Rick, Ph.D.]]<br />
|<br />
|-<br />
|[[Monitored Natural Attenuation (MNA)]]||[[Dr. John Wilson |Wilson, John, Ph.D.]]||MNA, In Situ MNA, natural attenuation, natural attenuation processes<br />
|-<br />
|[[Monitored Natural Attenuation (MNA) of Fuels]]||[[Dr. John Wilson |Wilson, John, Ph.D.]]||MNA, natural attenuation, attenuate (when used in context related to petroleum hydrocarbons and fuel components)<br />
|-<br />
|[[Monitored Natural Attenuation (MNA) of Chlorinated Solvents]]||[[Dr. John Wilson |Wilson, John, Ph.D.]]||MNA, natural attenuation, attenuate (when used in context related to chlorinated solvents)<br />
|-<br />
|[[Monitored Natural Attenuation - Transitioning from Active Remedies]]<br />
|[[Dr. John Wilson|Wilson, John, Ph.D.]]<br />
|MNA, natural attenuation<br />
|-<br />
|[[Chlorinated Solvents]]||[[Dr. Bilgen Yuncu, P.E. |Yuncu, Bilgen, Ph.D., P.E.]]||chlorinated solvents<br />
|-<br />
|[[Petroleum Hydrocarbons (PHCs)]]<br />
|[[Dr. Bilgen Yuncu, P.E.|Yuncu, Bilgen, Ph.D., P.E.]]<br />
|Petroleum Hydrocarbons (PHCs)<br />
|-<br />
|[[Photoactivated Reductive Defluorination - PFAS Destruction]]<br />
|[[Dr. Suzanne Witt|Witt, Suzanne, Ph.D.]]<br />
|PFAS destruction<br />
|<br />
|-<br />
|[[Hydrogeophysical Methods for Characterization and Monitoring of Groundwater-Surface Water Exchanges]]<br />
|[[Dr. Lee Slater|Slater, Lee, Ph.D.]]<br />
|geophysics, hydrogeophysical methods, <br />
|<br />
|-<br />
|[[Hydrothermal Alkaline Treatment (HALT)]]<br />
|[[Dr. Brian Pinkard|Pinkard, Brian]]<br />
|<br />
|-<br />
|[[1,4-Dioxane]]<br />
|[[Matthew Zenker|Zenker, Matthew]]<br />
|<br />
|-<br />
|[[Lysimeters for Measuring PFAS Concentrations in the Vadose Zone]]<br />
|[[Dr. John F. Stults|Stults, Dr. John]]<br />
|PFAS, vadose zone, lysimeter, field investigation<br />
|<br />
|-<br />
|[[PFAS Destruction by Ultraviolet/Sulfite Treatment]]||[[Dr. Yida Fang |Fang, Yida, Ph.D.]]||PFAS destruction<br />
|<br />
|-<br />
|}</div>Jhurleyhttps://www.enviro.wiki/index.php?title=Articles&diff=18092Articles2026-04-06T19:11:59Z<p>Jhurley: Undo revision 18091 by Jhurley (talk)</p>
<hr />
<div>{| class="wikitable sortable"<br />
|-<br />
!Title!!First Author!!Linking Phrases<br />
|-<br />
|[[Groundwater Sampling - No-Purge/Passive]]||[[Dr. David Adamson, P.E. |Adamson, David, Ph.D., P.E.]]||passive sampling, no purge sampling, grab samplers, diffusion samplers, sorptive samplers<br />
|-<br />
|[[ Long-Term Monitoring (LTM)]]||[[Dr. David Adamson, P.E. |Adamson, David, Ph.D., P.E.]]||long-term monitoring, LTM, LTM objectives, LTM programs, LTM challenges<br />
|-<br />
|[[PFAS Monitored Retention (PMR) and PFAS Enhanced Retention (PER)]]<br />
|[[Dr. David Adamson, P.E. |Adamson, David, Ph.D., P.E.]]<br />
|PFAS, MNA, natural attenuation<br />
|-<br />
|[[Sorption of Organic Contaminants]]||[[Richelle Allen-King|Allen-King, Richelle]]||<br />
|-<br />
|[[PFAS Transport and Fate]]<br />
|[[Dr. Richard Anderson|Anderson, Richard, Ph.D.]]<br />
|PFAS, fate and transport<br />
|-<br />
|[[Mass Flux and Mass Discharge]]||[[Dr. Michael Annable, P.E. |Annable, Michael, Ph.D., P.E.]]||source reduction<br />
|-<br />
|[[PFAS Toxicology and Risk Assessment]]<br />
|[[Jennifer Arblaster|Arblaster, Jennifer]]<br />
|PFAS, toxicology, risk assessment<br />
|-<br />
|[[Metal(loid)s - Small Arms Ranges]]|| Dr. Amanda Barker |[[Dr. Amanda Barker|Barker, Amanda, Ph.D.]]<br />
|<br />
|-<br />
|[[Munitions Constituents – Photolysis|Munitions Constituents - Photolysis]]<br />
|[[Dr. Warren Kadoya|Kadoya, Warren, Ph.D.]]<br />
|<br />
|-<br />
|[[Munitions Constituents - Soil Sampling]]<br />
|[[Dr. Samuel Beal|Beal, Samuel, Ph.D.]]<br />
|<br />
|-<br />
|[[Vapor Intrusion – Sewers and Utility Tunnels as Preferential Pathways|Vapor Intrusion - Sewers and Utility Tunnels as Preferential Pathways]]<br />
|[[Lila Beckley|Beckley, Lila]]<br />
|vapor intrusion<br />
|-<br />
|[[Natural Attenuation in Source Zone and Groundwater Plume - Bemidji Crude Oil Spill]]<br />
|[[Dr. Barbara Bekins|Bekins, Barbara, Ph.D.]]||<br />
|-<br />
|[[Bioremediation - Anaerobic Secondary Water Quality Impacts]]||[[Dr. Robert Borden, P.E. |Borden, Robert, Ph.D., P.E.]]||secondary impacts, water quality (in regards to anaerobic conditions)<br />
|-<br />
|[[Design Tool - Base Addition for ERD]]||[[Dr. Robert Borden, P.E. |Borden, Robert, Ph.D., P.E.]]||aquifer acidity, base addition<br />
|-<br />
|[[Emulsified Vegetable Oil (EVO) for Anaerobic Bioremediation]]<br />
|[[Dr. Robert Borden, P.E. |Borden, Robert, Ph.D., P.E.]]||<br />
|-<br />
|[[Low pH Inhibition of Reductive Dechlorination]]||[[Dr. Robert Borden, P.E. |Borden, Robert, Ph.D., P.E.]]||low pH inhibition<br />
|-<br />
|[[In Situ Toxicity Identification Evaluation (iTIE)]]||[[Dr. G. Allen Burton |Burton, Allen, P.E.]]||toxicity evaluation<br />
|-<br />
|[[OPTically-based In-situ Characterization System (OPTICS)]]<br />
|[[Dr. Grace Chang|Chang, Grace, Ph.D.]]<br />
|<br />
|-<br />
|[[Munitions Constituents - Electrochemical Treatment]]<br />
|[[Dr. Brian P. Chaplin|Chaplin, Brian, Ph.D.]]<br />
|munitions constituents remediation<br />
|-<br />
|[[PFAS Sources]]<br />
|[[Dr. Dora Chiang|Chiang, Dora, Ph.D.]]<br />
|<br />
|-<br />
|[[Biodegradation - Cometabolic]]||[[Dr. Kung-Hui (Bella) Chu |Chu, Kung-Hui (Bella), Ph.D]]||cometabolic biodegradation<br />
|-<br />
|[[Munitions Constituents - Composting]]<br />
|[[Harry Craig|Craig, Harry]]<br />
|<br />
|-<br />
|[[Chemical Oxidation (In Situ - ISCO)]]||[[Dr. Michelle Crimi |Crimi, Michelle, Ph.D]]||ISCO, chemical oxidation<br />
|-<br />
|[[Chemical Oxidation Oxidant Selection (In Situ - ISCO)]]||[[Dr. Michelle Crimi |Crimi, Michelle, Ph.D]]||chemical oxidant, oxidant (in regards to ISCO)<br />
|-<br />
|[[Chemical Oxidation Design Considerations(In Situ - ISCO)]]||[[Dr. Michelle Crimi |Crimi, Michelle, Ph.D]]||screening, design, implementation, oxidant delivery (in regards to ISCO)<br />
|-<br />
|[[Perfluoroalkyl and Polyfluoroalkyl Substances (PFAS)]]||[[Dr. Rula Deeb |Deeb, Rula, Ph.D.]]||PFAS, perfluorooctanoic acid (PFOA), perfluorooctane sulfonate (PFOS)<br />
|-<br />
|[[Metal and Metalloid Contaminants]]||[[Dr. Miles Denham |Denham, Miles, Ph.D.]]||metal contaminant(s), metalloid contaminant(s), metal(s), metalloid(s),<br />
|-<br />
|[[Metals and Metalloids - Mobility in Groundwater]]||[[Dr. Miles Denham |Denham, Miles, Ph.D.]]||metal mobility, aqueous speciation, adsorption, precipitation, colloidal transport (in regards to metals)<br />
|-<br />
|[[Monitored Natural Attenuation (MNA) of Metal and Metalloids]]||[[Dr. Miles Denham |Denham, Miles, Ph.D.]]||MNA, attenuation of metal(s), natural attenuation processes, attenuation (in regards to metals)<br />
|-<br />
|[[Metal and Metalloids - Remediation]]||[[Dr. Miles Denham |Denham, Miles, Ph.D.]]||remediation, in situ technologies, contaminant removal (in regards to metals)<br />
|-<br />
|[[pH Buffering in Aquifers]]||[[Dr. Miles Denham |Denham, Miles, Ph.D.]]||ph buffer, natural pH buffer, engineered pH buffer<br />
|-<br />
|[[Munitions Constituents - Sorption]]||[[Dr. Katerina Dontsova |Dontsova, Katerina, Ph.D.]]||energetics, sorption<br />
|-<br />
|[[Biodegradation - Hydrocarbons]]||[[Dr. Elizabeth Edwards |Edwards, Elizabeth, Ph.D.]]||hydrocarbon, biodegradation<br />
|-<br />
|[[Source Zone Modeling]]||[[Dr. Ron Falta |Falta, Ron, Ph.D.]]||source zone modeling<br />
|-<br />
|[[Plume Response Modeling]]||[[Dr. Ron Falta |Falta, Ron, Ph.D.]]||plume response modeling<br />
|-<br />
|[[REMChlor - MD]]<br />
|[[Dr. Ron Falta|Falta, Ron, Ph.D.]]<br />
|<br />
|-<br />
|[[In Situ Groundwater Treatment with Activated Carbon]]<br />
|[[Dr. Dimin Fan|Fan, Dimin, Ph.D.]]<br />
|<br />
|-<br />
|[[LNAPL Remediation Technologies]]||[[Dr. Shahla Farhat |Farhat, Shahla, Ph.D.]]||<br />
|-<br />
|[[Sustainable Remediation]]||[[Paul Favara |Favara, Paul]]||sustainable remediation, social, economic and environmental impacts<br />
|-<br />
|[[Munitions Constituents]]||[[Dr. Kevin Finneran |Finneran, Kevin, Ph.D.]]||Explosives, energetics, insensitive munitions<br />
|-<br />
|[[Biodegradation - Reductive Processes]]||[[Dr. David Freedman |Freedman, David, Ph.D.]]||biotic reduction, biotic reductive processes, hydrogenolysis, dihaloelimination, coupling, organohalide respiration<br />
|-<br />
|[[Remediation of Stormwater Runoff Contaminated by Munition Constituents|Munitions Constituents - Remediation of Stormwater Runoff]]||Fuller, Mark, Ph.D.||energetics, insensitive munitions, stormwater runoff<br />
|-<br />
|[[Subgrade Biogeochemical Reactor (SBGR)]]||[[Jeff Gamlin |Gamlin, Jeff]]||SBGR, subgrade biogeochemical reactor, bioreactor<br />
|-<br />
|[[Thermal Remediation - Smoldering]]||[[Dr. Jason Gerhard |Gerhard, Jason, Ph.D.]]||smouldering remediation, self-sustaining treatment for active remediation, STAR<br />
|-<br />
|[[Contaminated Sediments - Introduction]]<br />
|[[Dr. Upal Ghosh|Ghosh, Upal, Ph.D.]]<br />
|<br />
|-<br />
|[[Contaminated Sediment Risk Assessment]]<br />
|[[Richard Wenning|Wenning, Richard]]<br />
|<br />
|-<br />
|[[In Situ Treatment of Contaminated Sediments with Activated Carbon]]<br />
|[[Dr. Upal Ghosh|Ghosh, Upal, Ph.D.]]<br />
|<br />
|-<br />
|[[PFAS Ex Situ Water Treatment]]<br />
|[[Dr. Scott Grieco |Grieco, Scott, Ph.D.]]<br />
|<br />
|-<br />
|[[Stream Restoration]]<br />
|[[Dr. Natalie Griffiths|Griffiths, Natalie, Ph.D.]]<br />
|<br />
|-<br />
|[[Passive Sampling of Sediments]]<br />
|[[Dr. Philip M. Gschwend|Gschwend, Philip]]<br />
|<br />
|-<br />
|[[Phytoplankton (Algae) Blooms]]<br />
|[[Dr. Nathan Hall|Hall, Nathan]]<br />
|<br />
|-<br />
|[[PFAS Soil Remediation Technologies]]||[[James_Hatton |Hatton, Jim]]||PFAS, Soil source zones<br />
|-<br />
|[[Proteomics and Proteogenomics]]<br />
|[[Dr. Kate Kucharzyk|Kucharzyk, Kate, Ph.D.]]<br />
|<br />
|-<br />
|[[N-nitrosodimethylamine (NDMA)]]<br />
|[[Paul Hatzinger|Hatzinger, Paul, Ph.D.]]<br />
|<br />
|-<br />
|[[Alternative Endpoints]]||[[Elisabeth Hawley |Hawley, Elisabeth]]||management of complex sites||<br />
|-<br />
|[[Thermal Remediation]]||[[Dr. Gorm Heron |Heron, Gorm, Ph.D.]]||thermal remediation, in situ thermal<br />
|-<br />
|[[Thermal Remediation - Steam]]||[[Dr. Gorm Heron |Heron, Gorm, Ph.D.]]||Steam Enhanced Extraction<br />
|-<br />
|[[Thermal Remediation - Electrical Resistance Heating]]||[[Dr. Gorm Heron |Heron, Gorm, Ph.D.]]||Electrical Resistance Heating<br />
|-<br />
|[[Thermal Conduction Heating (TCH)]]||[[Dr. Gorm Heron |Heron, Gorm, Ph.D.]]||thermal desorption<br />
|-<br />
|[[Thermal Remediation - Combined Remedies]]||[[Dr. Gorm Heron |Heron, Gorm, Ph.D.]]||thermal remediation<br />
|-<br />
|[[Thermal Conduction Heating for Treatment of PFAS-Impacted Soil]]||[[Dr. Gorm Heron |Heron, Gorm, Ph.D.]]||thermal remediation, PFAS<br />
// |-<br />
// |[[Predicting Species Responses to Climate Change with Population Models]]<br />
// |[[Dr. Brian Hudgens|Hudgens, Brian, Ph.D.]]<br />
// |climate change<br />
// |-<br />
// |[[Infrastructure Resilience]]<br />
// |[[Dr. John Hummel|Hummel, John, Ph.D.]]<br />
// |<br />
|-<br />
|[[Munitions Constituents- TREECS™ Fate and Risk Modeling|Munitions Constituents - TREECS™ Fate and Risk Modeling]]||[[Dr. Billy E. Johnson |Johnson, Billy, Ph.D.]]||munitions constituents fate and transport modeling, TREECS<br />
|-<br />
|[[Munitions Constituents - Alkaline Degradation]]<br />
|[[Jared Johnson|Johnson, Jared]]<br />
|<br />
|-<br />
|[[Assessing Vapor Intrusion (VI) Impacts in Neighborhoods with Groundwater Contaminated by Chlorinated Volatile Organic Chemicals (CVOCs)|Vapor Intrusion - Assessing VI Impacts in Neighborhoods with Groundwater Contaminated CVOCs]]<br />
|[[Dr. Paul C. Johnson|Johnson, Paul, Ph.D.]]<br />
|vapor intrusion<br />
|-<br />
|[[Munitions Constituents - IM Toxicology]]||-----||insensitive explosives, insensitive munitions, IMX-101, IMX<br />
|-<br />
|[[Landfarming]]<br />
|[[Dr. Roopa Kamath|Kamath, Roopa, Ph.D.]]<br />
|<br />
|-<br />
|[[NAPL Mobility]]<br />
|[[Andrew Kirkman|Kirkman, Andrew]]<br />
|<br />
// |-<br />
// |[[Climate Change Primer]]<br />
// |[[Dr. Rao Kotamarthi|Kotamarthi, Rao, Ph.D.]]<br />
// |<br />
|-<br />
|[[Perchlorate]]||[[Thomas Krug |Krug, Thomas]]||perchlorate<br />
|-<br />
|[[Injection Techniques for Liquid Amendments]]||[[Thomas Krug |Krug, Thomas]]||amendment injection<br />
|-<br />
|[[Transition of Aqueous Film Forming Foam (AFFF) Fire Suppression Infrastructure Impacted by Per and Polyfluoroalkyl Substances (PFAS)]]<br />
|[[Dr. Johnsie Ray Lang|Lang, Johnsie Ray, Ph.D.]]||PFAS<br />
|<br />
|-<br />
|[[Characterization Methods – Hydraulic Conductivity]]<br />
|[[Dr. Gaisheng Liu|Liu, Gaisheng, Ph.D.]]<br />
|<br />
|-<br />
|[[Compound Specific Isotope Analysis (CSIA)]]||[[Dr. Barbara Sherwood Lollar, F.R.S.C. |Lollar, Barbara S., FRSC]]||Compound Specific Isotope Analysis (CSIA)<br />
|-<br />
|[[Passive Sampling of Munitions Constituents|Munitions Constituents - Passive Sampling]]<br />
|[[Dr. Guilherme Lotufo|Lotufo, Guilerme, Ph.D.]]<br />
|<br />
|-<br />
|[[Vapor Intrusion (VI)]]||[[Chris Lutes |Lutes, Chris]]||vapor intrusion<br />
|-<br />
|[[Bioremediation - Anaerobic]]||[[Leah MacKinnon, M.A.Sc., P. Eng.|MacKinnon, Leah]]||anaerobic bioremediation<br />
|-<br />
|[[Bioremediation - Anaerobic Design Considerations]]||[[Leah MacKinnon, M.A.Sc., P. Eng.|MacKinnon, Leah]]||<br />
|-<br />
|[[Biodegradation - 1,4-Dioxane]]<br />
|[[Dr. Shaily Mahendra|Mahendra, Shaily, Ph.D.]]<br />
|<br />
|-<br />
|[[Direct Push (DP) Technology]]||[[Wesley McCall, M.S., P.G. |McCall, Wesley, M.S., P.G.]]||direct push, DP, DP machines, DP technology<br />
|-<br />
|[[Direct Push Sampling]]||[[Wesley McCall, M.S., P.G. |McCall, Wesley, M.S., P.G.]]||direct push sampling, soil sampling, groundwater sampling, well installation, soil vapor sampling (in regards to DP)<br />
|-<br />
|[[Direct Push Logging]]||[[Wesley McCall, M.S., P.G. |McCall, Wesley, M.S., P.G.]]||direct push logging, Cone Penetration Testing, CPT, Electrical Conductivity, EC, Hydraulic Profiling Tool, HPT,<br>Membrane Interface Probe, MIP, Optical Imaging Profiler, OIP<br />
// |-<br />
// |[[Downscaled High Resolution Datasets for Climate Change Projections]]<br />
// |[[Dr. Rao Kotamarthi|Kotamarthi, Rao, Ph.D.]]<br />
// |<br />
|-<br />
|[[Remediation Performance Assessment at Chlorinated Solvent Sites]]||[[Travis McGuire|McGuire, Travis]]||multi-site studies<br />
|-<br />
|[[LNAPL Conceptual Site Models]]<br />
|[[Dr. Charles Newell, P.E. |Newell, Charles, Ph.D., P.E.]]<br />
|<br />
|-<br />
|[[Long-Term Monitoring (LTM) - Data Analysis]]||[[Dr. Thomas McHugh |McHugh, Thomas, Ph.D.]]||data analysis, analysis methods (in regards to LTM)<br />
|-<br />
|[[Long-Term Monitoring (LTM) - Data Variability]]||[[Dr. Thomas McHugh |McHugh, Thomas, Ph.D.]]||data variability (in regards to LTM), LTM evaluation<br />
|-<br />
|-<br />
|[[Munitions Constituents - Abiotic Reduction]]||[[Dr. Jimmy Murillo-Gelvez |Murillo-Gelvez, Jimmy, Ph.D.]]<br />
|-<br />
|[[Supercritical Water Oxidation (SCWO)]]<br />
|Nagar, Kobe<br />
|<br />
|-<br />
|[[Matrix Diffusion]]<br />
|[[Dr. Charles Newell, P.E. |Newell, Charles, Ph.D., P.E.]]<br />
|<br />
|-<br />
|[[Groundwater Flow and Solute Transport]]||[[Dr. Charles Newell, P.E. |Newell, Charles, Ph.D., P.E.]]||groundwater flow, advection, dispersion, diffusion, molecular diffusion, mechanical dispersion<br />
|-<br />
|[[Molecular Biological Tools - MBTs]]||[[Dora Ogles-Taggart |Ogles-Taggart, Dora]]||MBT, Molecular Biological Tool(s)<br />
|-<br />
|[[Quantitative Polymerase Chain Reaction (qPCR)]]||[[Dora Ogles-Taggart |Ogles-Taggart, Dora]]||qPCR, Polymerase Chain Reaction<br />
|-<br />
|[[Sediment Capping]]<br />
|[[Dr. Danny Reible|Reible, Danny]]<br />
|<br />
|-<br />
|[[Stable Isotope Probing (SIP)]]||[[Dora Ogles-Taggart |Ogles-Taggart, Dora]]||SIP, Stable Isotope Probing<br />
|-<br />
|[[Metagenomics]]||[[Dora Ogles-Taggart |Ogles-Taggart, Dora]]||metagenomics<br />
|-<br />
|[[Natural Source Zone Depletion (NSZD)]]||[[Tom Palaia |Palaia, Tom]]||natural source zone depletion, NSZD<br />
// |-<br />
// |[[Climate Change Effects on Wildlife]]<br />
// |[[Dr. Breanna F. Powers|Powers, Breanna, PhD.]]<br />
// |<br />
|-<br />
|[[Amendment Distribution in Low Conductivity Materials]]||[[Dr. Stephen Richardson |Richardson, Stephen, Ph.D.]]||<br />
|-<br />
|[[Polycyclic Aromatic Hydrocarbons (PAHs)]]||[[Dr. Stephen Richardson |Richardson, Stephen, Ph.D.]]||polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons, PAH(s)<br />
|-<br />
|[[Sediment Porewater Dialysis Passive Samplers for Inorganics (Peepers)]]<br />
|[[Florent Risacher|Risacher, Florent, M.Sc.]]<br />
|<br />
|-<br />
|[[1,2,3-Trichloropropane]]||[[Dr. Alexandra Salter-Blanc |Salter-Blanc, Alexandra, Ph.D.]]||TCP, trichloropropane<br />
|-<br />
|[[Zerovalent Iron (ZVI) (Chemical Reduction - ISCR)]]||[[Dr. Alexandra Salter-Blanc |Salter-Blanc, Alexandra, Ph.D.]]||ZVI<br />
|-<br />
|[[Mercury in Sediments]]<br />
|[[Dr. Grace Schwartz|Schwartz, Grace, Ph.D.]]<br />
|<br />
|-<br />
|[[Munitions Constituents – Sample Extraction and Analytical Techniques|Munitions Constituents - Sample Extraction and Analytical Techniques]]<br />
|[[Dr. Austin Scircle|Scircle, Austin]]<br />
|<br />
|-<br />
|[[Geophysical Methods]]||[[Dr. Lee Slater |Slater, Lee, Ph.D.]]||geophysics<br />
|-<br />
|[[Geophysical Methods - Case Studies]]||[[Dr. Lee Slater |Slater, Lee, Ph.D.]]||geophysics<br />
|-<br />
|[[PFAS Treatment by Anion Exchange]]<br />
|[[Dr. Timothy J. Strathmann|Strathmann, Timothy, Ph.D.]]<br />
|PFAS<br />
|-<br />
|[[Munitions Constituents - Dissolution]]||[[Dr. Susan Taylor |Taylor, Susan, Ph.D.]]||explosive(s), dissolution,<br />
|-<br />
|[[PFAS Treatment by Electrical Discharge Plasma]]<br />
|[[Dr. Selma Mededovic Thagard|Thagard, Selma Mededovic, Ph.D.]]<br />
|PFAS<br />
// |-<br />
// |[[Restoration of Ecological Function in Terrestrial Systems Impacted by Invasive Species]]<br />
// |Thierry, Hugo, Ph.D.<br />
// |climate change, invasive species, restoration ecology<br />
|-<br />
|[[Chemical Reduction (In Situ - ISCR)]]||[[Dr. Paul Tratnyek |Tratnyek, Paul, Ph.D.]]||In Situ Chemical Reduction, ISCR<br />
|-<br />
|[[Injection Techniques - Viscosity Modification]]||[[Michael Truex |Truex, Michael]]||viscosity, viscosity modifiers, viscosity modification<br />
|-<br />
|[[Soil Vapor Extraction (SVE)]]||[[Michael Truex |Truex, Michael]]||soil vapor extraction, SVE<br />
|-<br />
|[[Munitions Constituents - Deposition]]||[[Michael R. Walsh, P.E., M.E.|Walsh, Michael, P.E.]]||explosive deposition, energetics deposition<br />
|-<br />
|[[Vapor Intrusion - Separation Distances from Petroleum Sources]]<br />
|[[Dr. James Weaver|Weaver, James, Ph.D.]]<br />
|vapor intrusion<br />
|-<br />
|[[Zerovalent Iron Permeable Reactive Barriers]]<br />
|[[Dr. Richard Wilkin|Wilkin, Rick, Ph.D.]]<br />
|<br />
|-<br />
|[[Monitored Natural Attenuation (MNA)]]||[[Dr. John Wilson |Wilson, John, Ph.D.]]||MNA, In Situ MNA, natural attenuation, natural attenuation processes<br />
|-<br />
|[[Monitored Natural Attenuation (MNA) of Fuels]]||[[Dr. John Wilson |Wilson, John, Ph.D.]]||MNA, natural attenuation, attenuate (when used in context related to petroleum hydrocarbons and fuel components)<br />
|-<br />
|[[Monitored Natural Attenuation (MNA) of Chlorinated Solvents]]||[[Dr. John Wilson |Wilson, John, Ph.D.]]||MNA, natural attenuation, attenuate (when used in context related to chlorinated solvents)<br />
|-<br />
|[[Monitored Natural Attenuation - Transitioning from Active Remedies]]<br />
|[[Dr. John Wilson|Wilson, John, Ph.D.]]<br />
|MNA, natural attenuation<br />
|-<br />
|[[Chlorinated Solvents]]||[[Dr. Bilgen Yuncu, P.E. |Yuncu, Bilgen, Ph.D., P.E.]]||chlorinated solvents<br />
|-<br />
|[[Petroleum Hydrocarbons (PHCs)]]<br />
|[[Dr. Bilgen Yuncu, P.E.|Yuncu, Bilgen, Ph.D., P.E.]]<br />
|Petroleum Hydrocarbons (PHCs)<br />
|-<br />
|[[Photoactivated Reductive Defluorination - PFAS Destruction]]<br />
|[[Dr. Suzanne Witt|Witt, Suzanne, Ph.D.]]<br />
|PFAS destruction<br />
|<br />
|-<br />
|[[Hydrogeophysical Methods for Characterization and Monitoring of Groundwater-Surface Water Exchanges]]<br />
|[[Dr. Lee Slater|Slater, Lee, Ph.D.]]<br />
|geophysics, hydrogeophysical methods, <br />
|<br />
|-<br />
|[[Hydrothermal Alkaline Treatment (HALT)]]<br />
|[[Dr. Brian Pinkard|Pinkard, Brian]]<br />
|<br />
|-<br />
|[[1,4-Dioxane]]<br />
|[[Matthew Zenker|Zenker, Matthew]]<br />
|<br />
|-<br />
|[[Lysimeters for Measuring PFAS Concentrations in the Vadose Zone]]<br />
|[[Dr. John F. Stults|Stults, Dr. John]]<br />
|PFAS, vadose zone, lysimeter, field investigation<br />
|<br />
|-<br />
|[[PFAS Destruction by Ultraviolet/Sulfite Treatment]]||[[Dr. Yida Fang |Fang, Yida, Ph.D.]]||PFAS destruction<br />
|<br />
|-<br />
|}</div>Jhurleyhttps://www.enviro.wiki/index.php?title=Articles&diff=18091Articles2026-04-06T19:09:30Z<p>Jhurley: </p>
<hr />
<div>{| class="wikitable sortable"<br />
|-<br />
!Title!!First Author!!Linking Phrases<br />
|-<br />
|[[Groundwater Sampling - No-Purge/Passive]]||[[Dr. David Adamson, P.E. |Adamson, David, Ph.D., P.E.]]||passive sampling, no purge sampling, grab samplers, diffusion samplers, sorptive samplers<br />
|-<br />
|[[ Long-Term Monitoring (LTM)]]||[[Dr. David Adamson, P.E. |Adamson, David, Ph.D., P.E.]]||long-term monitoring, LTM, LTM objectives, LTM programs, LTM challenges<br />
|-<br />
|[[PFAS Monitored Retention (PMR) and PFAS Enhanced Retention (PER)]]<br />
|[[Dr. David Adamson, P.E. |Adamson, David, Ph.D., P.E.]]<br />
|PFAS, MNA, natural attenuation<br />
|-<br />
|[[Sorption of Organic Contaminants]]||[[Richelle Allen-King|Allen-King, Richelle]]||<br />
|-<br />
|[[PFAS Transport and Fate]]<br />
|[[Dr. Richard Anderson|Anderson, Richard, Ph.D.]]<br />
|PFAS, fate and transport<br />
|-<br />
|[[Mass Flux and Mass Discharge]]||[[Dr. Michael Annable, P.E. |Annable, Michael, Ph.D., P.E.]]||source reduction<br />
|-<br />
|[[PFAS Toxicology and Risk Assessment]]<br />
|[[Jennifer Arblaster|Arblaster, Jennifer]]<br />
|PFAS, toxicology, risk assessment<br />
|-<br />
|[[Metal(loid)s - Small Arms Ranges]]|| Dr. Amanda Barker |[[Dr. Amanda Barker|Barker, Amanda, Ph.D.]]<br />
|<br />
|-<br />
|[[Munitions Constituents – Photolysis|Munitions Constituents - Photolysis]]<br />
|[[Dr. Warren Kadoya|Kadoya, Warren, Ph.D.]]<br />
|<br />
|-<br />
|[[Munitions Constituents - Soil Sampling]]<br />
|[[Dr. Samuel Beal|Beal, Samuel, Ph.D.]]<br />
|<br />
|-<br />
|[[Vapor Intrusion – Sewers and Utility Tunnels as Preferential Pathways|Vapor Intrusion - Sewers and Utility Tunnels as Preferential Pathways]]<br />
|[[Lila Beckley|Beckley, Lila]]<br />
|vapor intrusion<br />
|-<br />
|[[Natural Attenuation in Source Zone and Groundwater Plume - Bemidji Crude Oil Spill]]<br />
|[[Dr. Barbara Bekins|Bekins, Barbara, Ph.D.]]||<br />
|-<br />
|[[Bioremediation - Anaerobic Secondary Water Quality Impacts]]||[[Dr. Robert Borden, P.E. |Borden, Robert, Ph.D., P.E.]]||secondary impacts, water quality (in regards to anaerobic conditions)<br />
|-<br />
|[[Design Tool - Base Addition for ERD]]||[[Dr. Robert Borden, P.E. |Borden, Robert, Ph.D., P.E.]]||aquifer acidity, base addition<br />
|-<br />
|[[Emulsified Vegetable Oil (EVO) for Anaerobic Bioremediation]]<br />
|[[Dr. Robert Borden, P.E. |Borden, Robert, Ph.D., P.E.]]||<br />
|-<br />
|[[Low pH Inhibition of Reductive Dechlorination]]||[[Dr. Robert Borden, P.E. |Borden, Robert, Ph.D., P.E.]]||low pH inhibition<br />
|-<br />
|[[In Situ Toxicity Identification Evaluation (iTIE)]]||[[Dr. G. Allen Burton |Burton, Allen, P.E.]]||toxicity evaluation<br />
|-<br />
|[[OPTically-based In-situ Characterization System (OPTICS)]]<br />
|[[Dr. Grace Chang|Chang, Grace, Ph.D.]]<br />
|<br />
|-<br />
|[[Munitions Constituents - Electrochemical Treatment]]<br />
|[[Dr. Brian P. Chaplin|Chaplin, Brian, Ph.D.]]<br />
|munitions constituents remediation<br />
|-<br />
|[[PFAS Sources]]<br />
|[[Dr. Dora Chiang|Chiang, Dora, Ph.D.]]<br />
|<br />
|-<br />
|[[Biodegradation - Cometabolic]]||[[Dr. Kung-Hui (Bella) Chu |Chu, Kung-Hui (Bella), Ph.D]]||cometabolic biodegradation<br />
|-<br />
|[[Munitions Constituents - Composting]]<br />
|[[Harry Craig|Craig, Harry]]<br />
|<br />
|-<br />
|[[Chemical Oxidation (In Situ - ISCO)]]||[[Dr. Michelle Crimi |Crimi, Michelle, Ph.D]]||ISCO, chemical oxidation<br />
|-<br />
|[[Chemical Oxidation Oxidant Selection (In Situ - ISCO)]]||[[Dr. Michelle Crimi |Crimi, Michelle, Ph.D]]||chemical oxidant, oxidant (in regards to ISCO)<br />
|-<br />
|[[Chemical Oxidation Design Considerations(In Situ - ISCO)]]||[[Dr. Michelle Crimi |Crimi, Michelle, Ph.D]]||screening, design, implementation, oxidant delivery (in regards to ISCO)<br />
|-<br />
|[[Perfluoroalkyl and Polyfluoroalkyl Substances (PFAS)]]||[[Dr. Rula Deeb |Deeb, Rula, Ph.D.]]||PFAS, perfluorooctanoic acid (PFOA), perfluorooctane sulfonate (PFOS)<br />
|-<br />
|[[Metal and Metalloid Contaminants]]||[[Dr. Miles Denham |Denham, Miles, Ph.D.]]||metal contaminant(s), metalloid contaminant(s), metal(s), metalloid(s),<br />
|-<br />
|[[Metals and Metalloids - Mobility in Groundwater]]||[[Dr. Miles Denham |Denham, Miles, Ph.D.]]||metal mobility, aqueous speciation, adsorption, precipitation, colloidal transport (in regards to metals)<br />
|-<br />
|[[Monitored Natural Attenuation (MNA) of Metal and Metalloids]]||[[Dr. Miles Denham |Denham, Miles, Ph.D.]]||MNA, attenuation of metal(s), natural attenuation processes, attenuation (in regards to metals)<br />
|-<br />
|[[Metal and Metalloids - Remediation]]||[[Dr. Miles Denham |Denham, Miles, Ph.D.]]||remediation, in situ technologies, contaminant removal (in regards to metals)<br />
|-<br />
|[[pH Buffering in Aquifers]]||[[Dr. Miles Denham |Denham, Miles, Ph.D.]]||ph buffer, natural pH buffer, engineered pH buffer<br />
|-<br />
|[[Munitions Constituents - Sorption]]||[[Dr. Katerina Dontsova |Dontsova, Katerina, Ph.D.]]||energetics, sorption<br />
|-<br />
|[[Biodegradation - Hydrocarbons]]||[[Dr. Elizabeth Edwards |Edwards, Elizabeth, Ph.D.]]||hydrocarbon, biodegradation<br />
|-<br />
|[[Source Zone Modeling]]||[[Dr. Ron Falta |Falta, Ron, Ph.D.]]||source zone modeling<br />
|-<br />
|[[Plume Response Modeling]]||[[Dr. Ron Falta |Falta, Ron, Ph.D.]]||plume response modeling<br />
|-<br />
|[[REMChlor - MD]]<br />
|[[Dr. Ron Falta|Falta, Ron, Ph.D.]]<br />
|<br />
|-<br />
|[[In Situ Groundwater Treatment with Activated Carbon]]<br />
|[[Dr. Dimin Fan|Fan, Dimin, Ph.D.]]<br />
|<br />
|-<br />
|[[LNAPL Remediation Technologies]]||[[Dr. Shahla Farhat |Farhat, Shahla, Ph.D.]]||<br />
|-<br />
|[[Sustainable Remediation]]||[[Paul Favara |Favara, Paul]]||sustainable remediation, social, economic and environmental impacts<br />
|-<br />
|[[Munitions Constituents]]||[[Dr. Kevin Finneran |Finneran, Kevin, Ph.D.]]||Explosives, energetics, insensitive munitions<br />
|-<br />
|[[Biodegradation - Reductive Processes]]||[[Dr. David Freedman |Freedman, David, Ph.D.]]||biotic reduction, biotic reductive processes, hydrogenolysis, dihaloelimination, coupling, organohalide respiration<br />
|-<br />
|[[Remediation of Stormwater Runoff Contaminated by Munition Constituents|Munitions Constituents - Remediation of Stormwater Runoff]]||Fuller, Mark, Ph.D.||energetics, insensitive munitions, stormwater runoff<br />
|-<br />
|[[Subgrade Biogeochemical Reactor (SBGR)]]||[[Jeff Gamlin |Gamlin, Jeff]]||SBGR, subgrade biogeochemical reactor, bioreactor<br />
|-<br />
|[[Thermal Remediation - Smoldering]]||[[Dr. Jason Gerhard |Gerhard, Jason, Ph.D.]]||smouldering remediation, self-sustaining treatment for active remediation, STAR<br />
|-<br />
|[[Contaminated Sediments - Introduction]]<br />
|[[Dr. Upal Ghosh|Ghosh, Upal, Ph.D.]]<br />
|<br />
|-<br />
|[[Contaminated Sediment Risk Assessment]]<br />
|[[Richard Wenning|Wenning, Richard]]<br />
|<br />
|-<br />
|[[In Situ Treatment of Contaminated Sediments with Activated Carbon]]<br />
|[[Dr. Upal Ghosh|Ghosh, Upal, Ph.D.]]<br />
|<br />
|-<br />
|[[PFAS Ex Situ Water Treatment]]<br />
|[[Dr. Scott Grieco |Grieco, Scott, Ph.D.]]<br />
|<br />
|-<br />
|[[Stream Restoration]]<br />
|[[Dr. Natalie Griffiths|Griffiths, Natalie, Ph.D.]]<br />
|<br />
|-<br />
|[[Passive Sampling of Sediments]]<br />
|[[Dr. Philip M. Gschwend|Gschwend, Philip]]<br />
|<br />
|-<br />
|[[Phytoplankton (Algae) Blooms]]<br />
|[[Dr. Nathan Hall|Hall, Nathan]]<br />
|<br />
|-<br />
|[[PFAS Soil Remediation Technologies]]||[[James_Hatton |Hatton, Jim]]||PFAS, Soil source zones<br />
|-<br />
|[[Proteomics and Proteogenomics]]<br />
|[[Dr. Kate Kucharzyk|Kucharzyk, Kate, Ph.D.]]<br />
|<br />
|-<br />
|[[N-nitrosodimethylamine (NDMA)]]<br />
|[[Paul Hatzinger|Hatzinger, Paul, Ph.D.]]<br />
|<br />
|-<br />
|[[Alternative Endpoints]]||[[Elisabeth Hawley |Hawley, Elisabeth]]||management of complex sites||<br />
|-<br />
|[[Thermal Remediation]]||[[Dr. Gorm Heron |Heron, Gorm, Ph.D.]]||thermal remediation, in situ thermal<br />
|-<br />
|[[Thermal Remediation - Steam]]||[[Dr. Gorm Heron |Heron, Gorm, Ph.D.]]||Steam Enhanced Extraction<br />
|-<br />
|[[Thermal Remediation - Electrical Resistance Heating]]||[[Dr. Gorm Heron |Heron, Gorm, Ph.D.]]||Electrical Resistance Heating<br />
|-<br />
|[[Thermal Conduction Heating (TCH)]]||[[Dr. Gorm Heron |Heron, Gorm, Ph.D.]]||thermal desorption<br />
|-<br />
|[[Thermal Remediation - Combined Remedies]]||[[Dr. Gorm Heron |Heron, Gorm, Ph.D.]]||thermal remediation<br />
|-<br />
|[[Thermal Conduction Heating for Treatment of PFAS-Impacted Soil]]||[[Dr. Gorm Heron |Heron, Gorm, Ph.D.]]||thermal remediation, PFAS |<br />
|-<br />
// |[[Predicting Species Responses to Climate Change with Population Models]]<br />
// |[[Dr. Brian Hudgens|Hudgens, Brian, Ph.D.]]<br />
// |climate change<br />
// |-<br />
// |[[Infrastructure Resilience]]<br />
// |[[Dr. John Hummel|Hummel, John, Ph.D.]]<br />
// |<br />
|[[Munitions Constituents- TREECS™ Fate and Risk Modeling|Munitions Constituents - TREECS™ Fate and Risk Modeling]]||[[Dr. Billy E. Johnson |Johnson, Billy, Ph.D.]]||munitions constituents fate and transport modeling, TREECS<br />
|-<br />
|[[Munitions Constituents - Alkaline Degradation]]<br />
|[[Jared Johnson|Johnson, Jared]]<br />
|<br />
|-<br />
|[[Assessing Vapor Intrusion (VI) Impacts in Neighborhoods with Groundwater Contaminated by Chlorinated Volatile Organic Chemicals (CVOCs)|Vapor Intrusion - Assessing VI Impacts in Neighborhoods with Groundwater Contaminated CVOCs]]<br />
|[[Dr. Paul C. Johnson|Johnson, Paul, Ph.D.]]<br />
|vapor intrusion<br />
|-<br />
|[[Munitions Constituents - IM Toxicology]]||-----||insensitive explosives, insensitive munitions, IMX-101, IMX<br />
|-<br />
|[[Landfarming]]<br />
|[[Dr. Roopa Kamath|Kamath, Roopa, Ph.D.]]<br />
|<br />
|-<br />
|[[NAPL Mobility]]<br />
|[[Andrew Kirkman|Kirkman, Andrew]]<br />
|<br />
|-<br />
// |[[Climate Change Primer]]<br />
// |[[Dr. Rao Kotamarthi|Kotamarthi, Rao, Ph.D.]]<br />
// | <br />
|[[Perchlorate]]||[[Thomas Krug |Krug, Thomas]]||perchlorate<br />
|-<br />
|[[Injection Techniques for Liquid Amendments]]||[[Thomas Krug |Krug, Thomas]]||amendment injection<br />
|-<br />
|[[Transition of Aqueous Film Forming Foam (AFFF) Fire Suppression Infrastructure Impacted by Per and Polyfluoroalkyl Substances (PFAS)]]<br />
|[[Dr. Johnsie Ray Lang|Lang, Johnsie Ray, Ph.D.]]||PFAS<br />
|<br />
|-<br />
|[[Characterization Methods – Hydraulic Conductivity]]<br />
|[[Dr. Gaisheng Liu|Liu, Gaisheng, Ph.D.]]<br />
|<br />
|-<br />
|[[Compound Specific Isotope Analysis (CSIA)]]||[[Dr. Barbara Sherwood Lollar, F.R.S.C. |Lollar, Barbara S., FRSC]]||Compound Specific Isotope Analysis (CSIA)<br />
|-<br />
|[[Passive Sampling of Munitions Constituents|Munitions Constituents - Passive Sampling]]<br />
|[[Dr. Guilherme Lotufo|Lotufo, Guilerme, Ph.D.]]<br />
|<br />
|-<br />
|[[Vapor Intrusion (VI)]]||[[Chris Lutes |Lutes, Chris]]||vapor intrusion<br />
|-<br />
|[[Bioremediation - Anaerobic]]||[[Leah MacKinnon, M.A.Sc., P. Eng.|MacKinnon, Leah]]||anaerobic bioremediation<br />
|-<br />
|[[Bioremediation - Anaerobic Design Considerations]]||[[Leah MacKinnon, M.A.Sc., P. Eng.|MacKinnon, Leah]]||<br />
|-<br />
|[[Biodegradation - 1,4-Dioxane]]<br />
|[[Dr. Shaily Mahendra|Mahendra, Shaily, Ph.D.]]<br />
|<br />
|-<br />
|[[Direct Push (DP) Technology]]||[[Wesley McCall, M.S., P.G. |McCall, Wesley, M.S., P.G.]]||direct push, DP, DP machines, DP technology<br />
|-<br />
|[[Direct Push Sampling]]||[[Wesley McCall, M.S., P.G. |McCall, Wesley, M.S., P.G.]]||direct push sampling, soil sampling, groundwater sampling, well installation, soil vapor sampling (in regards to DP)<br />
|-<br />
|[[Direct Push Logging]]||[[Wesley McCall, M.S., P.G. |McCall, Wesley, M.S., P.G.]]||direct push logging, Cone Penetration Testing, CPT, Electrical Conductivity, EC, Hydraulic Profiling Tool, HPT,<br>Membrane Interface Probe, MIP, Optical Imaging Profiler, OIP<br />
|-<br />
// |[[Downscaled High Resolution Datasets for Climate Change Projections]]<br />
// |[[Dr. Rao Kotamarthi|Kotamarthi, Rao, Ph.D.]]<br />
// |<br />
|[[Remediation Performance Assessment at Chlorinated Solvent Sites]]||[[Travis McGuire|McGuire, Travis]]||multi-site studies<br />
|-<br />
|[[LNAPL Conceptual Site Models]]<br />
|[[Dr. Charles Newell, P.E. |Newell, Charles, Ph.D., P.E.]]<br />
|<br />
|-<br />
|[[Long-Term Monitoring (LTM) - Data Analysis]]||[[Dr. Thomas McHugh |McHugh, Thomas, Ph.D.]]||data analysis, analysis methods (in regards to LTM)<br />
|-<br />
|[[Long-Term Monitoring (LTM) - Data Variability]]||[[Dr. Thomas McHugh |McHugh, Thomas, Ph.D.]]||data variability (in regards to LTM), LTM evaluation<br />
|-<br />
|-<br />
|[[Munitions Constituents - Abiotic Reduction]]||[[Dr. Jimmy Murillo-Gelvez |Murillo-Gelvez, Jimmy, Ph.D.]]<br />
|-<br />
|[[Supercritical Water Oxidation (SCWO)]]<br />
|Nagar, Kobe<br />
|<br />
|-<br />
|[[Matrix Diffusion]]<br />
|[[Dr. Charles Newell, P.E. |Newell, Charles, Ph.D., P.E.]]<br />
|<br />
|-<br />
|[[Groundwater Flow and Solute Transport]]||[[Dr. Charles Newell, P.E. |Newell, Charles, Ph.D., P.E.]]||groundwater flow, advection, dispersion, diffusion, molecular diffusion, mechanical dispersion<br />
|-<br />
|[[Molecular Biological Tools - MBTs]]||[[Dora Ogles-Taggart |Ogles-Taggart, Dora]]||MBT, Molecular Biological Tool(s)<br />
|-<br />
|[[Quantitative Polymerase Chain Reaction (qPCR)]]||[[Dora Ogles-Taggart |Ogles-Taggart, Dora]]||qPCR, Polymerase Chain Reaction<br />
|-<br />
|[[Sediment Capping]]<br />
|[[Dr. Danny Reible|Reible, Danny]]<br />
|<br />
|-<br />
|[[Stable Isotope Probing (SIP)]]||[[Dora Ogles-Taggart |Ogles-Taggart, Dora]]||SIP, Stable Isotope Probing<br />
|-<br />
|[[Metagenomics]]||[[Dora Ogles-Taggart |Ogles-Taggart, Dora]]||metagenomics<br />
|-<br />
|[[Natural Source Zone Depletion (NSZD)]]||[[Tom Palaia |Palaia, Tom]]||natural source zone depletion, NSZD<br />
|-<br />
// |[[Climate Change Effects on Wildlife]]<br />
// |[[Dr. Breanna F. Powers|Powers, Breanna, PhD.]]<br />
// |<br />
|[[Amendment Distribution in Low Conductivity Materials]]||[[Dr. Stephen Richardson |Richardson, Stephen, Ph.D.]]||<br />
|-<br />
|[[Polycyclic Aromatic Hydrocarbons (PAHs)]]||[[Dr. Stephen Richardson |Richardson, Stephen, Ph.D.]]||polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons, PAH(s)<br />
|-<br />
|[[Sediment Porewater Dialysis Passive Samplers for Inorganics (Peepers)]]<br />
|[[Florent Risacher|Risacher, Florent, M.Sc.]]<br />
|<br />
|-<br />
|[[1,2,3-Trichloropropane]]||[[Dr. Alexandra Salter-Blanc |Salter-Blanc, Alexandra, Ph.D.]]||TCP, trichloropropane<br />
|-<br />
|[[Zerovalent Iron (ZVI) (Chemical Reduction - ISCR)]]||[[Dr. Alexandra Salter-Blanc |Salter-Blanc, Alexandra, Ph.D.]]||ZVI<br />
|-<br />
|[[Mercury in Sediments]]<br />
|[[Dr. Grace Schwartz|Schwartz, Grace, Ph.D.]]<br />
|<br />
|-<br />
|[[Munitions Constituents – Sample Extraction and Analytical Techniques|Munitions Constituents - Sample Extraction and Analytical Techniques]]<br />
|[[Dr. Austin Scircle|Scircle, Austin]]<br />
|<br />
|-<br />
|[[Geophysical Methods]]||[[Dr. Lee Slater |Slater, Lee, Ph.D.]]||geophysics<br />
|-<br />
|[[Geophysical Methods - Case Studies]]||[[Dr. Lee Slater |Slater, Lee, Ph.D.]]||geophysics<br />
|-<br />
|[[PFAS Treatment by Anion Exchange]]<br />
|[[Dr. Timothy J. Strathmann|Strathmann, Timothy, Ph.D.]]<br />
|PFAS<br />
|-<br />
|[[Munitions Constituents - Dissolution]]||[[Dr. Susan Taylor |Taylor, Susan, Ph.D.]]||explosive(s), dissolution,<br />
|-<br />
|[[PFAS Treatment by Electrical Discharge Plasma]]<br />
|[[Dr. Selma Mededovic Thagard|Thagard, Selma Mededovic, Ph.D.]]<br />
|PFAS<br />
|-<br />
// |[[Restoration of Ecological Function in Terrestrial Systems Impacted by Invasive Species]]<br />
// |Thierry, Hugo, Ph.D.<br />
// |climate change, invasive species, restoration ecology<br />
|[[Chemical Reduction (In Situ - ISCR)]]||[[Dr. Paul Tratnyek |Tratnyek, Paul, Ph.D.]]||In Situ Chemical Reduction, ISCR<br />
|-<br />
|[[Injection Techniques - Viscosity Modification]]||[[Michael Truex |Truex, Michael]]||viscosity, viscosity modifiers, viscosity modification<br />
|-<br />
|[[Soil Vapor Extraction (SVE)]]||[[Michael Truex |Truex, Michael]]||soil vapor extraction, SVE<br />
|-<br />
|[[Munitions Constituents - Deposition]]||[[Michael R. Walsh, P.E., M.E.|Walsh, Michael, P.E.]]||explosive deposition, energetics deposition<br />
|-<br />
|[[Vapor Intrusion - Separation Distances from Petroleum Sources]]<br />
|[[Dr. James Weaver|Weaver, James, Ph.D.]]<br />
|vapor intrusion<br />
|-<br />
|[[Zerovalent Iron Permeable Reactive Barriers]]<br />
|[[Dr. Richard Wilkin|Wilkin, Rick, Ph.D.]]<br />
|<br />
|-<br />
|[[Monitored Natural Attenuation (MNA)]]||[[Dr. John Wilson |Wilson, John, Ph.D.]]||MNA, In Situ MNA, natural attenuation, natural attenuation processes<br />
|-<br />
|[[Monitored Natural Attenuation (MNA) of Fuels]]||[[Dr. John Wilson |Wilson, John, Ph.D.]]||MNA, natural attenuation, attenuate (when used in context related to petroleum hydrocarbons and fuel components)<br />
|-<br />
|[[Monitored Natural Attenuation (MNA) of Chlorinated Solvents]]||[[Dr. John Wilson |Wilson, John, Ph.D.]]||MNA, natural attenuation, attenuate (when used in context related to chlorinated solvents)<br />
|-<br />
|[[Monitored Natural Attenuation - Transitioning from Active Remedies]]<br />
|[[Dr. John Wilson|Wilson, John, Ph.D.]]<br />
|MNA, natural attenuation<br />
|-<br />
|[[Chlorinated Solvents]]||[[Dr. Bilgen Yuncu, P.E. |Yuncu, Bilgen, Ph.D., P.E.]]||chlorinated solvents<br />
|-<br />
|[[Petroleum Hydrocarbons (PHCs)]]<br />
|[[Dr. Bilgen Yuncu, P.E.|Yuncu, Bilgen, Ph.D., P.E.]]<br />
|Petroleum Hydrocarbons (PHCs)<br />
|-<br />
|[[Photoactivated Reductive Defluorination - PFAS Destruction]]<br />
|[[Dr. Suzanne Witt|Witt, Suzanne, Ph.D.]]<br />
|PFAS destruction<br />
|<br />
|-<br />
|[[Hydrogeophysical Methods for Characterization and Monitoring of Groundwater-Surface Water Exchanges]]<br />
|[[Dr. Lee Slater|Slater, Lee, Ph.D.]]<br />
|geophysics, hydrogeophysical methods, <br />
|<br />
|-<br />
|[[Hydrothermal Alkaline Treatment (HALT)]]<br />
|[[Dr. Brian Pinkard|Pinkard, Brian]]<br />
|<br />
|-<br />
|[[1,4-Dioxane]]<br />
|[[Matthew Zenker|Zenker, Matthew]]<br />
|<br />
|-<br />
|[[Lysimeters for Measuring PFAS Concentrations in the Vadose Zone]]<br />
|[[Dr. John F. Stults|Stults, Dr. John]]<br />
|PFAS, vadose zone, lysimeter, field investigation<br />
|<br />
|-<br />
|[[PFAS Destruction by Ultraviolet/Sulfite Treatment]]||[[Dr. Yida Fang |Fang, Yida, Ph.D.]]||PFAS destruction<br />
|<br />
|-<br />
|}</div>Jhurleyhttps://www.enviro.wiki/index.php?title=Infrastructure_Resilience&diff=18090Infrastructure Resilience2026-04-06T18:57:08Z<p>Jhurley: Blanked the page</p>
<hr />
<div></div>Jhurleyhttps://www.enviro.wiki/index.php?title=Predicting_Species_Responses_to_Climate_Change_with_Population_Models&diff=18089Predicting Species Responses to Climate Change with Population Models2026-04-06T18:56:09Z<p>Jhurley: Blanked the page</p>
<hr />
<div></div>Jhurleyhttps://www.enviro.wiki/index.php?title=Climate_Change&diff=18088Climate Change2026-04-06T18:55:07Z<p>Jhurley: Blanked the page</p>
<hr />
<div></div>Jhurleyhttps://www.enviro.wiki/index.php?title=Climate_Change_Primer&diff=18087Climate Change Primer2026-04-06T18:54:10Z<p>Jhurley: Blanked the page</p>
<hr />
<div></div>Jhurleyhttps://www.enviro.wiki/index.php?title=Climate_Change_Effects_on_Wildlife&diff=18086Climate Change Effects on Wildlife2026-04-06T18:52:50Z<p>Jhurley: Blanked the page</p>
<hr />
<div></div>Jhurleyhttps://www.enviro.wiki/index.php?title=Restoration_of_Ecological_Function_in_Terrestrial_Systems_Impacted_by_Invasive_Species&diff=18085Restoration of Ecological Function in Terrestrial Systems Impacted by Invasive Species2026-04-06T18:49:56Z<p>Jhurley: Blanked the page</p>
<hr />
<div></div>Jhurleyhttps://www.enviro.wiki/index.php?title=Downscaled_High_Resolution_Datasets_for_Climate_Change_Projections&diff=18084Downscaled High Resolution Datasets for Climate Change Projections2026-04-06T18:45:22Z<p>Jhurley: Blanked the page</p>
<hr />
<div></div>Jhurleyhttps://www.enviro.wiki/index.php?title=Contributors&diff=18082Contributors2026-04-04T00:41:36Z<p>Jhurley: </p>
<hr />
<div><center><span style="font-size:350%"> <span style="color:#008566"> Welcome to '''ENVIRO'''</span> <span style="color:#762a87">'''Wiki'''</span></span></center><br />
<br />
ENVIRO.wiki aims to connect users with the most current and credible science and engineering research into the design and implementation of environmental projects. Articles are written by nationally and internationally recognized experts who provide a concise summary of the current State-of-Practice and relevant research results. Many of these authors have written similar articles for SERDP-ESTCP as part of the existing monograph series or for other publications. All articles are reviewed by outside technical reviewers as described in the [[Editorial_Policy|editorial policy]]. Day to day administration is provided by [https://www.trccompanies.com/ TRC].<br />
<br />
::::::{| id="mp-upper" style="margin:auto; width: 95%; margin-top:3px; border-spacing: 0px; "<br />
|-<br />
|<br />
{| id="mp-left" style="width:80%; margin:4px 0; background:none; border-spacing: 0px;" <br />
| style="border:1px solid transparent; " |<br />
| class="MainPageBG" style="border:1px solid #cedff2; background:#f5faff; vertical-align:top;" |<br />
{| id="mp-left" style="width:100%; vertical-align:top; background:#f5faff;" <br />
|-<br />
| style="padding:2px; width:80%" |<h2 id="mp-otd-h2" style="margin:3px; background:#cedff2; font-family:inherit; font-size:120%; font-weight:bold; border:1px solid #a3b0bf; text-align:left; color:#000; padding:0.2em 0.4em;">Editorial Board</h2><br />
|-<br />
| colspan="3" |<br />
----<br />
<!-- {| style="margin: left; text-align:left;" --><br />
|-<br />
| colspan="3" |<span style="line-height: 1em;">'''Editor-in-Chief'''<br /><span style="line-height: 1.2em;">[[Dr. Robert Borden, P.E.|Robert C. Borden, PhD, PE]]<br />
|-<br />
| colspan="3" |<br />
----<br />
|-<br />
|}<br />
{|<br />
|-<br />
||'''Editors'''<br />
| style="width:40px;" | ||<br />
|-<br />
||<span style="line-height: 1.1em;">[[Dr. Jason Barnes|Jason Barnes, PhD]]<br />Cascadia College || ||[[Dr. Samuel Beal|Samuel Beal, PhD]]<br />CRREL Research and Development Center<br />
|-<br />
|| || ||<br />
|-<br />
||<span style="line-height: 1.1em;">[[Craig E. Divine, Ph.D., PG|Craig E. Divine, PhD, PG]]<br />Arcadis || ||[[Dr. Kevin Finneran|Kevin Finneran, PhD]]<br />Finneran Environmental, LLC<br />
|-<br />
|| || ||<br />
|-<br />
||<span style="line-height: 1.1em;">[[Dr. Upal Ghosh|Upal Ghosh, PhD]]<br />University of Maryland, Baltimore County || ||[[Dr. Rao Kotamarthi| Rao Kotamarthi, PhD]]<br />Argonne National Lab<br />
|-<br />
|| || ||<br />
|-<br />
||<span style="line-height: 1.1em;">[[Kim Matthews| Kim Matthews]]<br />RTI International || ||[[Dr. Charles Newell, P.E.|Charles Newell, PhD, PE]]<br />GSI Environmental<br />
|-<br />
|| || ||<br />
|-<br />
||<span style="line-height: 1.1em;"> [[Dr. Alexandra Salter-Blanc|Alexandra Salter-Blanc, PhD]]<br />Jacobs || ||[[Dr. John Wilson|John Wilson, PhD]]<br />Scissortail Environmental Solutions, LLC<br />
|}<br />
| style="width:20px;" |<br />
|<br />
{| id="mp-upper" style="width:100% margin:4px 0 0 0; background:none; border-spacing: 0px;" <br />
| style="border:1px solid transparent; " |<br />
| class="MainPageBG" style="border:1px solid #cedff2; background:#f5faff; vertical-align:top;" |<br />
{| id="mp-left" style="width:100%; vertical-align:top; background:#f5faff;" <br />
|-<br />
| style="padding:2px; width:400px;" |<h2 id="mp-otd-h2_2" style="margin:3px; background:#cedff2; font-family:inherit; font-size:120%; font-weight:bold; border:1px solid #a3b0bf; text-align:left; color:#000; padding:0.2em 0.4em;">Development&nbsp;Team&nbsp;&nbsp;</h2><br />
|-<br />
|<br />
----<br />
|-<br />
|'''Executive Editor'''<br />
|-<br />
|[[Dr. Bilgen Yuncu, P.E. | Bilgen Yuncu, PhD, PE]]<br />
|-<br />
|TRC, Cary NC<br />
|-<br />
|<br />
----<br />
|-<br />
||<br />
|-<br />
||<br />
|-<br />
||<br />
|-<br />
||<br />
|-<br />
|''Technical Editor''<br />
|-<br />
|Jim Hurley, MS, EIT<br />
|-<br />
|TRC, Cary NC<br />
|-<br />
||<br />
|-<br />
||<br />
|-<br />
||<br />
|- <br />
||<br />
|-<br />
|''Administrative Assistant''<br />
|-<br />
|Debra Tabron<br />
|-<br />
|TRC, Cary NC<br />
|-<br />
||<br />
|-<br />
||<br />
|}<br><br><br><br><br><br><br />
|}<br />
|}<br />
|}<br />
<br />
__NOTOC__<br />
<br />
{| id="mp-upper" style="width: 100%; margin:4px 0 0 0; background:none; border-spacing: 0px;"<br />
| style="border:1px solid transparent;" |<br />
<br />
| class="MainPageBG" style="width:100%; border:1px solid #cedff2; background:#f5faff; vertical-align:top;" |<br />
{| id="mp-right" style="width:100%; vertical-align:top; background:#f5faff;"<br />
|-<br />
| style="padding:2px;" |<h2 id="mp-otd-h2_2_2" style="margin:3px; background:#cedff2; font-family:inherit; font-size:120%; font-weight:bold; border:1px solid #a3b0bf; text-align:left; color:#000; padding:0.2em 0.4em;">Authors</h2><br />
|-<br />
|<br />
---- <br />
<br />
{| style="width: 100%;margin: left; text-align:left;"<br />
|-<br />
| style="width:13.3%" |[[Dr._David_Adamson,_P.E.|David Adamson]]<br />
| style="width:13.3%" |[[Dr. Dora Chiang|Dora Chiang]]<br />
| style="width:13.3%" |[[Dr._Ron_Falta|Ron Falta]]<br />
| style="width:13.3%" |[[Dr. Julie A. Heath|Julie A. Heath]]<br />
| style="width:13.3%" |[[Dr. Kate Kucharzyk|Kate Kucharzyk]]<br />
| style="width:13.3%" |[[Henry Moore]]<br />
| style="width:13.3%" |[[Dr. Timothy J. Strathmann|Timothy Strathmann]]<br />
|-<br />
|[[Richelle Allen-King]]<br />
|[[Tom_Christy,_P.E.|Tom Christy]]<br />
|[[Dr._Dimin_Fan|Dimin Fan]]<br />
|[[Dr. Brian Helms|Brian Helms]]<br />
|[[Poonam Kulkarni|Poonam Kulkarni]]<br />
|[[Larry Mullins]]<br />
|[[Dr. Hans Stroo|Hans Stroo]]<br />
|-<br />
|[[Dr. Richard Anderson|Richard "Hunter" Anderson]]<br />
|[[Dr. Pei Chiu|Pei Chiu]]<br />
|[[Dr. Shahla Farhat |Shahla Farhat]]<br />
|[[Dr._Gorm_Heron|Gorm Heron]]<br />
|[[Dr. Johnsie Ray Lang|Johnsie Ray Lang]]<br />
|[[Dr. Fadime Murdoch|Fadime Murdoch]]<br />
|[[Dr._Susan_Taylor|Susan Taylor]]<br />
|-<br />
|[[Dr. Michael Annable, P.E.|Michael Annable]]<br />
|[[Dr._Kung-Hui_(Bella)_Chu|Bella Chu]]<br />
|[[Paul Favara|Paul Favara]]<br />
|[[Dr._Christopher_Higgins|Christopher Higgins]]<br />
|[[M. Tony Lieberman|Tony Lieberman]]<br />
|[[Dr. Robert Murdoch|Robert Murdoch]]<br />
|[[Dr. Selma Mededovic Thagard|Selma Thagard]]<br />
|-<br />
|[[Dr. Sabine E. Apitz|Sabine E. Apitz]]<br />
|[[Dr. Jason Conder|Jason Conder]]<br />
|[[Dr. Jack Feminella|Jack Feminella]]<br />
|[[Dr. Thomas Holsen|Thomas Holsen]]<br />
|[[Dr. Gaisheng Liu|Gaisheng Liu]]<br />
|[[Kobe Nagar]]<br />
|[[Dr._Paul_Tratnyek|Paul Tratnyek]]<br />
|-<br />
|[[Dr._Brett_Baldwin|Brett Baldwin]]<br />
|[[Dr._Michelle_Crimi|Michelle Crimi]]<br />
|[[Dr._Jennifer_Field|Jennifer Field]]<br />
|[[Dr. Brian Hudgens|Brian Hudgens]]<br />
|[[Dr._Barbara_Sherwood_Lollar,_F.R.S.C.|Barbara Lollar]]<br />
|[[Dr._Charles_Newell,_P.E.|Charles Newell]]<br />
|[[Michael_Truex|Michael Truex]]<br />
<br />
|-<br />
|[[Dr. Amanda Barker|Amanda Barker]]<br />
|[[Harry Craig]]<br />
|[[Dr._Kevin_Finneran|Kevin Finneran]]<br />
|[[Dr. John Hummel|John Hummel]]<br />
|[[Dr. Guilherme Lotufo|Guilherme Lotufo]]<br />
|[[Dr. Dimitrios Ntarlagiannis|Dimitrios Ntarlagiannis]]<br />
|[[Michael_R._Walsh,_P.E.,_M.E.|Michael Walsh]]<br />
|-<br />
|[[Dr. Samuel Beal|Samuel Beal]]<br />
|[[Dr. Paul Dahlen|Paul Dahlen]]<br />
|[[Jeff_Fitzgibbons|Jeff Fitzgibbons]]<br />
|[[Dr. Michael Hyman|Michael Hyman]]<br />
|[[John Lowe|John Lowe]]<br />
|[[Dora_Ogles-Taggart|Dora Ogles-Taggart]]<br />
|[[Dr. Meng Wang|Meng Wang]]<br />
|-<br />
|[[Lila Beckley]]<br />
|[[Dr. Phillip de Blanc, P.E. |Phil de Blanc]]<br />
|[[Dr._David_L._Freedman|David Freedman]]<br />
|[[Dan Isenberg]]<br />
|[[Dr. Loren Lund|Loren Lund]]<br />
|[[Tom_Palaia|Tom Palaia]]<br />
|[[Dr. James Weaver|James Weaver]]<br />
|-<br />
|[[Dr. Barbara Bekins|Barbara Bekins]]<br />
|[[Dr. Rula Deeb|Rula Deeb]]<br />
|[[Jeff Gamlin, P.G.|Jeff Gamlin]]<br />
|[[S. M. Mohaiminul Islam]]<br />
|[[Chris_Lutes|Chris Lutes]]<br />
|[[Dr. Frederic Petit|Frederic Petit]]<br />
|[[Richard Wenning]]<br />
|-<br />
|[[Rene Bernier]]<br />
|[[Dr._Miles_Denham|Miles Denham]]<br />
|[[Dr._Jason_Gerhard|Jason Gerhard]]<br />
|[[Dr._Billy_E._Johnson|Billy Johnson]]<br />
|[[Leah_MacKinnon,_M.A.Sc.,_P._Eng.|Leah MacKinnon]]<br />
|[[Kien Pham]]<br />
|[[Dr. Katie van Werkhoven|Katie van Werkhoven]]<br />
|-<br />
|[[Sam Bickley]]<br />
|[[Dr. Marc A. Deshusses|Marc Deshusses]]<br />
|[[Dr. Upal Ghosh|Upal Ghosh]]<br />
|[[Dr. Paul C. Johnson|Paul C. Johnson]]<br />
|[[Elisse_Magnuson|Elisse Magnuson]]<br />
|[[Dr. Breanna F. Powers|Breanna F. Powers]]<br />
|[[Dr. Hal White|Hal White]]<br />
|-<br />
|[[Dr. Robert Borden, P.E.|Robert Borden]]<br />
|[[William DiGuiseppi]]<br />
|[[Dr. Scott Grieco|Scott Grieco]]<br />
|[[Jared Johnson]]<br />
|[[Dr. Shaily Mahendra|Shaily Mahendra]]<br />
|[[Dr. Danny Reible|Danny Reible]]<br />
|[[Dr. Richard Wilkin|Rick Wilkin]]<br />
|-<br />
|[[Dr. Treavor H. Boyer|Treavor Boyer]]<br />
|[[Craig E. Divine, Ph.D., PG|Craig E. Divine]]<br />
|[[Dr. Natalie Griffiths|Natalie Griffiths]]<br />
|[[Dr. Warren Kadoya|Warren Kadoya]]<br />
|[[Todd Martin]]<br />
|[[Dr._Stephen_Richardson|Stephen Richardson]]<br />
|[[Dr._John_Wilson|John Wilson]]<br />
|-<br />
|[[Dr. Mark Brusseau|Mark Brusseau]]<br />
|[[Dr._Katerina_Dontsova|Katerina Dontsova]]<br />
|[[Dr. Philip M. Gschwend|Philip M. Gschwend]]<br />
|[[Dr. Roopa Kamath|Roopa Kamath]]<br />
|[[Wesley_McCall,_M.S.,_P.G.|Wesley McCall]]<br />
|[[Florent Risacher]]<br />
|[[Dr. Suzanne Witt|Suzanne Witt]]<br />
|-<br />
|[[Dr. James Butler, Jr.|James Butler]]<br />
|[[Dr. Mark S. Dortch, PE, D.WRE|Mark Dortch]]<br />
|[[Dr. Yuanming Guo|Yuanming Guo]]<br />
|[[Dr. Denise Kay|Denise Kay]]<br />
|[[Travis_McGuire|Travis McGuire]]<br />
|[[Gunther Rosen]]<br />
|[[Dr. Bilgen Yuncu, P.E.|Bilgen Yuncu]]<br />
|-<br />
|[[Dr. Richard F. Carbonaro|Richard F. Carbonaro]]<br />
|[[Doug_Downey,_P.E.|Doug Downey]]<br />
|[[Dr. Nathan Hall|Nathan Hall]]<br />
|[[Andrew Kirkman]]<br />
|[[Dr._Thomas_McHugh|Thomas McHugh]]<br />
|[[Dr._Alexandra_Salter-Blanc|Alexandra Salter-Blanc]]<br />
|[[Matthew Zenker]]<br />
|-<br />
|[[Paula Andrea Cárdenas-Hernández|Paula A. Cárdenas-Hernández]]<br />
|[[Dr. Elizabeth_Edwards|Elizabeth Edwards]]<br />
|[[James Hatton]]<br />
|[[Deyuan Kong]]<br />
|[[Michaye_McMaster,_M.Sc.|Michaye McMaster]]<br />
|[[Dr. Grace Schwartz|Grace Schwartz]]<br />
|<br />
|-<br />
|[[Dr. Grace Chang|Grace Chang]]<br />
|[[Dr. Anderson Ellis|Anderson Ellis]]<br />
|[[Paul Hatzinger]]<br />
|[[Dr. Rao Kotamarthi|Rao Kotamarthi]]<br />
|[[Sara McMillen]]<br />
|[[Dr. Austin Scircle|Austin Scircle]]<br />
|<br />
|-<br />
|[[Dr. Brian P. Chaplin|Brian P. Chaplin]]<br />
|[[Dr. Morgan Evans|Morgan Evans]]<br />
|[[Elisabeth_Hawley|Elisabeth Hawley]]<br />
|[[Thomas_Krug|Thomas Krug]]<br />
|[[Dr. Jonathan Miles|Jonathan Miles]]<br />
|[[Dr._Lee_Slater|Lee Slater]]<br />
|<br />
|}<br />
|}<br />
|}</div>Jhurleyhttps://www.enviro.wiki/index.php?title=Contributors&diff=18081Contributors2026-04-04T00:40:32Z<p>Jhurley: </p>
<hr />
<div><center><span style="font-size:350%"> <span style="color:#008566"> Welcome to '''ENVIRO'''</span> <span style="color:#762a87">'''Wiki'''</span></span></center><br />
// <center><span style="font-size:90%">''Developed and brought to you by ''<br />
// </span></center><br /><span style="font-size:100%"></span>[[File:MainLogo-serdp-estcp.png|link=https://www.serdp-estcp.org |frameless|center|350px]]<br />
<br />
ENVIRO.wiki aims to connect users with the most current and credible science and engineering research into the design and implementation of environmental projects. Articles are written by nationally and internationally recognized experts who provide a concise summary of the current State-of-Practice and relevant research results. Many of these authors have written similar articles for SERDP-ESTCP as part of the existing monograph series or for other publications. All articles are reviewed by outside technical reviewers as described in the [[Editorial_Policy|editorial policy]]. Day to day administration is provided by [https://www.trccompanies.com/ TRC].<br />
<br />
::::::{| id="mp-upper" style="margin:auto; width: 95%; margin-top:3px; border-spacing: 0px; "<br />
|-<br />
|<br />
{| id="mp-left" style="width:80%; margin:4px 0; background:none; border-spacing: 0px;" <br />
| style="border:1px solid transparent; " |<br />
| class="MainPageBG" style="border:1px solid #cedff2; background:#f5faff; vertical-align:top;" |<br />
{| id="mp-left" style="width:100%; vertical-align:top; background:#f5faff;" <br />
|-<br />
| style="padding:2px; width:80%" |<h2 id="mp-otd-h2" style="margin:3px; background:#cedff2; font-family:inherit; font-size:120%; font-weight:bold; border:1px solid #a3b0bf; text-align:left; color:#000; padding:0.2em 0.4em;">Editorial Board</h2><br />
|-<br />
| colspan="3" |<br />
----<br />
<!-- {| style="margin: left; text-align:left;" --><br />
|-<br />
| colspan="3" |<span style="line-height: 1em;">'''Editor-in-Chief'''<br /><span style="line-height: 1.2em;">[[Dr. Robert Borden, P.E.|Robert C. Borden, PhD, PE]]<br />
|-<br />
| colspan="3" |<br />
----<br />
|-<br />
|}<br />
{|<br />
|-<br />
||'''Editors'''<br />
| style="width:40px;" | ||<br />
|-<br />
||<span style="line-height: 1.1em;">[[Dr. Jason Barnes|Jason Barnes, PhD]]<br />Cascadia College || ||[[Dr. Samuel Beal|Samuel Beal, PhD]]<br />CRREL Research and Development Center<br />
|-<br />
|| || ||<br />
|-<br />
||<span style="line-height: 1.1em;">[[Craig E. Divine, Ph.D., PG|Craig E. Divine, PhD, PG]]<br />Arcadis || ||[[Dr. Kevin Finneran|Kevin Finneran, PhD]]<br />Finneran Environmental, LLC<br />
|-<br />
|| || ||<br />
|-<br />
||<span style="line-height: 1.1em;">[[Dr. Upal Ghosh|Upal Ghosh, PhD]]<br />University of Maryland, Baltimore County || ||[[Dr. Rao Kotamarthi| Rao Kotamarthi, PhD]]<br />Argonne National Lab<br />
|-<br />
|| || ||<br />
|-<br />
||<span style="line-height: 1.1em;">[[Kim Matthews| Kim Matthews]]<br />RTI International || ||[[Dr. Charles Newell, P.E.|Charles Newell, PhD, PE]]<br />GSI Environmental<br />
|-<br />
|| || ||<br />
|-<br />
||<span style="line-height: 1.1em;"> [[Dr. Alexandra Salter-Blanc|Alexandra Salter-Blanc, PhD]]<br />Jacobs || ||[[Dr. John Wilson|John Wilson, PhD]]<br />Scissortail Environmental Solutions, LLC<br />
|}<br />
| style="width:20px;" |<br />
|<br />
{| id="mp-upper" style="width:100% margin:4px 0 0 0; background:none; border-spacing: 0px;" <br />
| style="border:1px solid transparent; " |<br />
| class="MainPageBG" style="border:1px solid #cedff2; background:#f5faff; vertical-align:top;" |<br />
{| id="mp-left" style="width:100%; vertical-align:top; background:#f5faff;" <br />
|-<br />
| style="padding:2px; width:400px;" |<h2 id="mp-otd-h2_2" style="margin:3px; background:#cedff2; font-family:inherit; font-size:120%; font-weight:bold; border:1px solid #a3b0bf; text-align:left; color:#000; padding:0.2em 0.4em;">Development&nbsp;Team&nbsp;&nbsp;</h2><br />
|-<br />
|<br />
----<br />
|-<br />
|'''Executive Editor'''<br />
|-<br />
|[[Dr. Bilgen Yuncu, P.E. | Bilgen Yuncu, PhD, PE]]<br />
|-<br />
|TRC, Cary NC<br />
|-<br />
|<br />
----<br />
|-<br />
||<br />
|-<br />
||<br />
|-<br />
||<br />
|-<br />
||<br />
|-<br />
|''Technical Editor''<br />
|-<br />
|Jim Hurley, MS, EIT<br />
|-<br />
|TRC, Cary NC<br />
|-<br />
||<br />
|-<br />
||<br />
|-<br />
||<br />
|- <br />
||<br />
|-<br />
|''Administrative Assistant''<br />
|-<br />
|Debra Tabron<br />
|-<br />
|TRC, Cary NC<br />
|-<br />
||<br />
|-<br />
||<br />
|}<br><br><br><br><br><br><br />
|}<br />
|}<br />
|}<br />
<br />
__NOTOC__<br />
<br />
{| id="mp-upper" style="width: 100%; margin:4px 0 0 0; background:none; border-spacing: 0px;"<br />
| style="border:1px solid transparent;" |<br />
<br />
| class="MainPageBG" style="width:100%; border:1px solid #cedff2; background:#f5faff; vertical-align:top;" |<br />
{| id="mp-right" style="width:100%; vertical-align:top; background:#f5faff;"<br />
|-<br />
| style="padding:2px;" |<h2 id="mp-otd-h2_2_2" style="margin:3px; background:#cedff2; font-family:inherit; font-size:120%; font-weight:bold; border:1px solid #a3b0bf; text-align:left; color:#000; padding:0.2em 0.4em;">Authors</h2><br />
|-<br />
|<br />
---- <br />
<br />
{| style="width: 100%;margin: left; text-align:left;"<br />
|-<br />
| style="width:13.3%" |[[Dr._David_Adamson,_P.E.|David Adamson]]<br />
| style="width:13.3%" |[[Dr. Dora Chiang|Dora Chiang]]<br />
| style="width:13.3%" |[[Dr._Ron_Falta|Ron Falta]]<br />
| style="width:13.3%" |[[Dr. Julie A. Heath|Julie A. Heath]]<br />
| style="width:13.3%" |[[Dr. Kate Kucharzyk|Kate Kucharzyk]]<br />
| style="width:13.3%" |[[Henry Moore]]<br />
| style="width:13.3%" |[[Dr. Timothy J. Strathmann|Timothy Strathmann]]<br />
|-<br />
|[[Richelle Allen-King]]<br />
|[[Tom_Christy,_P.E.|Tom Christy]]<br />
|[[Dr._Dimin_Fan|Dimin Fan]]<br />
|[[Dr. Brian Helms|Brian Helms]]<br />
|[[Poonam Kulkarni|Poonam Kulkarni]]<br />
|[[Larry Mullins]]<br />
|[[Dr. Hans Stroo|Hans Stroo]]<br />
|-<br />
|[[Dr. Richard Anderson|Richard "Hunter" Anderson]]<br />
|[[Dr. Pei Chiu|Pei Chiu]]<br />
|[[Dr. Shahla Farhat |Shahla Farhat]]<br />
|[[Dr._Gorm_Heron|Gorm Heron]]<br />
|[[Dr. Johnsie Ray Lang|Johnsie Ray Lang]]<br />
|[[Dr. Fadime Murdoch|Fadime Murdoch]]<br />
|[[Dr._Susan_Taylor|Susan Taylor]]<br />
|-<br />
|[[Dr. Michael Annable, P.E.|Michael Annable]]<br />
|[[Dr._Kung-Hui_(Bella)_Chu|Bella Chu]]<br />
|[[Paul Favara|Paul Favara]]<br />
|[[Dr._Christopher_Higgins|Christopher Higgins]]<br />
|[[M. Tony Lieberman|Tony Lieberman]]<br />
|[[Dr. Robert Murdoch|Robert Murdoch]]<br />
|[[Dr. Selma Mededovic Thagard|Selma Thagard]]<br />
|-<br />
|[[Dr. Sabine E. Apitz|Sabine E. Apitz]]<br />
|[[Dr. Jason Conder|Jason Conder]]<br />
|[[Dr. Jack Feminella|Jack Feminella]]<br />
|[[Dr. Thomas Holsen|Thomas Holsen]]<br />
|[[Dr. Gaisheng Liu|Gaisheng Liu]]<br />
|[[Kobe Nagar]]<br />
|[[Dr._Paul_Tratnyek|Paul Tratnyek]]<br />
|-<br />
|[[Dr._Brett_Baldwin|Brett Baldwin]]<br />
|[[Dr._Michelle_Crimi|Michelle Crimi]]<br />
|[[Dr._Jennifer_Field|Jennifer Field]]<br />
|[[Dr. Brian Hudgens|Brian Hudgens]]<br />
|[[Dr._Barbara_Sherwood_Lollar,_F.R.S.C.|Barbara Lollar]]<br />
|[[Dr._Charles_Newell,_P.E.|Charles Newell]]<br />
|[[Michael_Truex|Michael Truex]]<br />
<br />
|-<br />
|[[Dr. Amanda Barker|Amanda Barker]]<br />
|[[Harry Craig]]<br />
|[[Dr._Kevin_Finneran|Kevin Finneran]]<br />
|[[Dr. John Hummel|John Hummel]]<br />
|[[Dr. Guilherme Lotufo|Guilherme Lotufo]]<br />
|[[Dr. Dimitrios Ntarlagiannis|Dimitrios Ntarlagiannis]]<br />
|[[Michael_R._Walsh,_P.E.,_M.E.|Michael Walsh]]<br />
|-<br />
|[[Dr. Samuel Beal|Samuel Beal]]<br />
|[[Dr. Paul Dahlen|Paul Dahlen]]<br />
|[[Jeff_Fitzgibbons|Jeff Fitzgibbons]]<br />
|[[Dr. Michael Hyman|Michael Hyman]]<br />
|[[John Lowe|John Lowe]]<br />
|[[Dora_Ogles-Taggart|Dora Ogles-Taggart]]<br />
|[[Dr. Meng Wang|Meng Wang]]<br />
|-<br />
|[[Lila Beckley]]<br />
|[[Dr. Phillip de Blanc, P.E. |Phil de Blanc]]<br />
|[[Dr._David_L._Freedman|David Freedman]]<br />
|[[Dan Isenberg]]<br />
|[[Dr. Loren Lund|Loren Lund]]<br />
|[[Tom_Palaia|Tom Palaia]]<br />
|[[Dr. James Weaver|James Weaver]]<br />
|-<br />
|[[Dr. Barbara Bekins|Barbara Bekins]]<br />
|[[Dr. Rula Deeb|Rula Deeb]]<br />
|[[Jeff Gamlin, P.G.|Jeff Gamlin]]<br />
|[[S. M. Mohaiminul Islam]]<br />
|[[Chris_Lutes|Chris Lutes]]<br />
|[[Dr. Frederic Petit|Frederic Petit]]<br />
|[[Richard Wenning]]<br />
|-<br />
|[[Rene Bernier]]<br />
|[[Dr._Miles_Denham|Miles Denham]]<br />
|[[Dr._Jason_Gerhard|Jason Gerhard]]<br />
|[[Dr._Billy_E._Johnson|Billy Johnson]]<br />
|[[Leah_MacKinnon,_M.A.Sc.,_P._Eng.|Leah MacKinnon]]<br />
|[[Kien Pham]]<br />
|[[Dr. Katie van Werkhoven|Katie van Werkhoven]]<br />
|-<br />
|[[Sam Bickley]]<br />
|[[Dr. Marc A. Deshusses|Marc Deshusses]]<br />
|[[Dr. Upal Ghosh|Upal Ghosh]]<br />
|[[Dr. Paul C. Johnson|Paul C. Johnson]]<br />
|[[Elisse_Magnuson|Elisse Magnuson]]<br />
|[[Dr. Breanna F. Powers|Breanna F. Powers]]<br />
|[[Dr. Hal White|Hal White]]<br />
|-<br />
|[[Dr. Robert Borden, P.E.|Robert Borden]]<br />
|[[William DiGuiseppi]]<br />
|[[Dr. Scott Grieco|Scott Grieco]]<br />
|[[Jared Johnson]]<br />
|[[Dr. Shaily Mahendra|Shaily Mahendra]]<br />
|[[Dr. Danny Reible|Danny Reible]]<br />
|[[Dr. Richard Wilkin|Rick Wilkin]]<br />
|-<br />
|[[Dr. Treavor H. Boyer|Treavor Boyer]]<br />
|[[Craig E. Divine, Ph.D., PG|Craig E. Divine]]<br />
|[[Dr. Natalie Griffiths|Natalie Griffiths]]<br />
|[[Dr. Warren Kadoya|Warren Kadoya]]<br />
|[[Todd Martin]]<br />
|[[Dr._Stephen_Richardson|Stephen Richardson]]<br />
|[[Dr._John_Wilson|John Wilson]]<br />
|-<br />
|[[Dr. Mark Brusseau|Mark Brusseau]]<br />
|[[Dr._Katerina_Dontsova|Katerina Dontsova]]<br />
|[[Dr. Philip M. Gschwend|Philip M. Gschwend]]<br />
|[[Dr. Roopa Kamath|Roopa Kamath]]<br />
|[[Wesley_McCall,_M.S.,_P.G.|Wesley McCall]]<br />
|[[Florent Risacher]]<br />
|[[Dr. Suzanne Witt|Suzanne Witt]]<br />
|-<br />
|[[Dr. James Butler, Jr.|James Butler]]<br />
|[[Dr. Mark S. Dortch, PE, D.WRE|Mark Dortch]]<br />
|[[Dr. Yuanming Guo|Yuanming Guo]]<br />
|[[Dr. Denise Kay|Denise Kay]]<br />
|[[Travis_McGuire|Travis McGuire]]<br />
|[[Gunther Rosen]]<br />
|[[Dr. Bilgen Yuncu, P.E.|Bilgen Yuncu]]<br />
|-<br />
|[[Dr. Richard F. Carbonaro|Richard F. Carbonaro]]<br />
|[[Doug_Downey,_P.E.|Doug Downey]]<br />
|[[Dr. Nathan Hall|Nathan Hall]]<br />
|[[Andrew Kirkman]]<br />
|[[Dr._Thomas_McHugh|Thomas McHugh]]<br />
|[[Dr._Alexandra_Salter-Blanc|Alexandra Salter-Blanc]]<br />
|[[Matthew Zenker]]<br />
|-<br />
|[[Paula Andrea Cárdenas-Hernández|Paula A. Cárdenas-Hernández]]<br />
|[[Dr. Elizabeth_Edwards|Elizabeth Edwards]]<br />
|[[James Hatton]]<br />
|[[Deyuan Kong]]<br />
|[[Michaye_McMaster,_M.Sc.|Michaye McMaster]]<br />
|[[Dr. Grace Schwartz|Grace Schwartz]]<br />
|<br />
|-<br />
|[[Dr. Grace Chang|Grace Chang]]<br />
|[[Dr. Anderson Ellis|Anderson Ellis]]<br />
|[[Paul Hatzinger]]<br />
|[[Dr. Rao Kotamarthi|Rao Kotamarthi]]<br />
|[[Sara McMillen]]<br />
|[[Dr. Austin Scircle|Austin Scircle]]<br />
|<br />
|-<br />
|[[Dr. Brian P. Chaplin|Brian P. Chaplin]]<br />
|[[Dr. Morgan Evans|Morgan Evans]]<br />
|[[Elisabeth_Hawley|Elisabeth Hawley]]<br />
|[[Thomas_Krug|Thomas Krug]]<br />
|[[Dr. Jonathan Miles|Jonathan Miles]]<br />
|[[Dr._Lee_Slater|Lee Slater]]<br />
|<br />
|}<br />
|}<br />
|}</div>Jhurleyhttps://www.enviro.wiki/index.php?title=Restoration_of_Ecological_Function_in_Terrestrial_Systems_Impacted_by_Invasive_Species&diff=18080Restoration of Ecological Function in Terrestrial Systems Impacted by Invasive Species2026-04-04T00:24:27Z<p>Jhurley: </p>
<hr />
<div>Invasive species are responsible for the decline or extirpation of many species around the world. When those lost species provide essential ecological functions, the system may further degrade over time. Restoration ecology aims to restore these systems and associated ecological functions. It is important to first understand the invaders and their direct and indirect impacts to the native ecosystems. This requires a thorough understanding of the system and functions pre-invasion. Once these links and mechanisms are understood, managers must decide on a course of action to control or halt the spread of the invasive species and prevent further ecological degradation. Managers must determine what types of control are most appropriate for their systems as well as to what levels an invader must be controlled before restoration actions lead to improved ecological function. Deciding on specific restoration actions will vary considerably from system to system, but must involve considerations such as topography, landcover, feasibility, scale, social impacts, and timing. Specific details about habitats and species natural history are important to incorporate into planning models. Finally, monitoring and adaptive management throughout the course of the restoration and beyond are crucial to long-term success.<br />
<div style="float:right;margin:0 0 2em 2em;">__TOC__</div><br />
<br />
'''Related Article(s)''': <br />
<br />
*[[Climate Change Primer|Climate Change]]<br />
*[[Climate Change Effects on Wildlife]]<br />
<br />
'''Contributors''': Dr. Hugo Thierry, McKayla M. Spencer, Ann Marie Gawel, and Dr. Haldre Rogers<br />
<br />
'''Key Resources''': <br />
<br />
*[//www.enviro.wiki/images/e/e4/Hobbs2011.pdf Intervention Ecology: Applying Ecological Science in the Twenty-first Century]<ref name=":0">Hobbs, R.J., Hallett, L.M., Ehrlich, P.R., and Mooney, H.A., 2011. Intervention Ecology: Applying Ecological Science in The Twenty-first Century. BioScience, 61(6), pp. 442–450. [https://doi.org/10.1525/bio.2011.61.6.6 doi: 10.1525/bio.2011.61.6.6] [//www.enviro.wiki/images/e/e4/Hobbs2011.pdf Article pdf]</ref><br />
*[//www.enviro.wiki/images/a/a1/Rogers2017.pdf Effects of An Invasive Predator Cascade to Plants Via Mutualism Disruption]<ref name=":2">Rogers, H.S., Buhle, E.R., HilleRisLambers, J., Fricke, E.C., Miller, R.H., and Tewksbury, J.J., 2017. Effects of an invasive predator cascade to plants via mutualism disruption. Nature Communications, 8:14557. [https://doi.org/10.1038/ncomms14557 doi: 10.1038/ncomms14557] [//www.enviro.wiki/images/a/a1/Rogers2017.pdf Article pdf]</ref><br />
*[//www.enviro.wiki/images/2/21/Thierry2020.pdf Where to Rewild? A Conceptual Framework to Spatially Optimize Ecological Function]<ref name=":7">Thierry, H., and Rogers, H., 2020. Where to rewild? A conceptual framework to spatially optimize ecological function. Proceedings of the Royal Society B: Biological Sciences, 287:20193017. [https://doi.org/10.1098/rspb.2019.3017 doi: 10.1098/rspb.2019.3017] [[Media:Thierry2020.pdf | Article pdf]]</ref><br />
<br />
==Introduction- Invasion Biology==<br />
<onlyinclude>Because of the increased ease and frequency of transportation of people and goods across the globe, almost all ecosystems have species introduced by humans that do not share an evolutionary history with the native members of the ecosystem. Only some of these species survive to reproduce, and even fewer cause harm</onlyinclude><ref>Williamson, M., and Fitter, A.,1996. The varying success of invaders. Ecology, 77(6), pp. 1661–1666.[https://doi.org/10.2307/2265769 | doi:10.2307/2265769]</ref><onlyinclude>. It is this subset of species that have been </onlyinclude>transported to a novel geographic area, established in that area, and then cause ecological or economic harm to the systems in that geographic region that are <onlyinclude>deemed “invasive”</onlyinclude><ref>Blackburn, T.M., Pyšek, P., Bacher, S., Carlton, J.T., Duncan, R.P., Jarošík, V., Wilson, J.R., and Richardson, D.M., 2011. A proposed unified framework for biological invasions. Trends in Ecology & Evolution, 26(7), pp. 333–339. [https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tree.2011.03.023 doi: 10.1016/j.tree.2011.03.023]<br />
</ref><ref>Kraus, F., 2008. Alien Reptiles and Amphibians: A Scientific Compendium and Analysis. Springer, Dordrecht, Netherlands. ISBN: 978-1-4020-8945-9/eISBN: 978-1-4020-8946-6 [https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4020-8946-6 doi:10.1007/978-1-4020-8946-6]</ref><ref>Kraus, F., 2015. Impacts from Invasive Reptiles and Amphibians. Annual Review of Ecology, Evolution, and Systematics, 46(1), pp. 75–97. [https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev-ecolsys-112414-054450 doi:10.1146/annurev-ecolsys-112414-054450]</ref>. Several attempts have been made by researchers in the field to distinguish “invasive” from “non-native,” “alien” and “exotic”<ref>Colautti, R.I., and MacIsaac, H.J., 2004. A neutral terminology to define ‘invasive’species. Diversity and Distributions, 10(2), pp. 135–141. [https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1366-9516.2004.00061.x doi:10.1111/j.1366-9516.2004.00061.x] [//www.enviro.wiki/images/5/58/Colautti_2004.pdf Article pdf]</ref><ref>Richardson, D.M., Pyšek, P., Rejmánek, M., Barbour, M.G., Panetta, F.D., and West, C.J., 2000. Naturalization and invasion of alien plants: concepts and definitions. Diversity and Distributions, 6(2), pp. 93–107. [https://doi.org/10.1046/j.1472-4642.2000.00083.x doi: 10.1046/j.1472-4642.2000.00083.x] [//www.enviro.wiki/images/8/80/Richardson2000.pdf Article pdf]</ref>. Invasive species were defined in The President's [https://www.invasivespeciesinfo.gov/executive-order-13112#:~:text=On%20Feb%203%2C%201999%2C%20Executive,11987%20of%20May%2024%2C%201977. Executive Order 13112] (1999) as, “an alien species whose introduction does or is likely to cause economic or environmental harm or harm to human health”. The [https://www.gisp.org/ Global Invasive Species Program] of the [https://www.iucn.org/ International Union for the Conservation of Nature] accepts a similar definition of “invasive alien species” as “This subset of alien species that become established in a new environment, then proliferate and spread in ways that are destructive to native ecosystems, human health, and ultimately human welfare…”<ref>McNeely, J.A., 2000. The future of alien invasive species: changing social views. In: H.A. Mooney and R.J. Hobbs (eds), Invasive Species in a Changing World. Island Press, Washington, DC, pp. 171–190. ISBN: 978-1559637824.</ref><onlyinclude>. Invasive species can be one of the greatest threats to ecological and economic well-being of the planet. </onlyinclude>Developing common definitions was essential given the prevalence and urgency of the impacts.<br />
<br />
<onlyinclude>Efforts focused on early detection and rapid response are preferable to trying to control a species once it has established</onlyinclude><ref>Simberloff, D., Martin, J.-L., Genovesi, P., Maris, V., Wardle, D.A., Aronson, J., Courchamp, F., Galil, B., García-Berthou, E., Pascal, M., Pyšek, P., Sousa, R., Tabacchi, E., and Vilà, M., 2013. Impacts of biological invasions: what’s what and the way forward. Trends in Ecology & Evolution, 28(1), pp. 58–66. [https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tree.2012.07.013 doi: 10.1016/j.tree.2012.07.013]</ref><onlyinclude>. However, in many cases, it can be difficult to identify potential invasive species until they have started causing obvious detrimental effects. </onlyinclude><br />
<br />
Once a species has been identified as invasive, there are some key questions that need to be asked (Figure 1). The first is whether the return of ecosystems to their original state is financially feasible or even technically possible; often extinctions, invasive species, climate change, or cost limit the ability to restore back to an earlier baseline. In places where the causes of species loss and species endangerment are still present and the invasive species removal appears intractable, the next question is whether the invasive species is affecting ecological function. Because it has been deemed “invasive”, by definition, it must cause ecological or economic harm. But, invasive species could theoretically have economic impacts without having significant ecological impacts (e.g. some invasive weeds in agricultural fields). Alternatively, an invasive species could have an ecological impact on a single species without affecting broader ecological processes (e.g. food webs, mutualisms) and thus the stability of the whole community. For example, an invasive parasite/predator could cause the decline of a species that does not play any major ecological role in the community, leading to a novel but stable species assemblage. The distinction here is the longer-term impacts – if the presence of the invasive leads to continued degradation and species decline/loss in the system because important processes have been altered or lost, then managers may need to utilize the strategy of “intervention ecology”<ref name=":0" />, restoring function within these novel systems without attempting to restore the original ecosystem <ref>Marris, E. (2011). Rambunctious Garden: Saving Nature in a Post-wild World. Bloomsbury, New York. ISBN: 978-1-6081-9454-4/eISBN: 978-1-6081-9455-1</ref>. Invaded ecosystems still have tremendous value<ref name=":0" />, and managing them to maximize that value requires an understanding of how these systems function. <br />
[[File: ThierryFig1.png|thumb|650px|left | Figure 1. When an invasive species cannot be eradicated, and disrupts important ecological processes, then, an intervention ecology approach is required to restore function and stability to the system.]]<br />
<br />
<onlyinclude>A well-known example of an invasive species that caused detrimental effects to an entire ecosystem, where the intervention ecology approach is now being applied, is the [[wikipedia:Brown_tree_snake|brown treesnake]] (''Boiga irregularis'') on the island of Guam. The snake was introduced to the island at the end of WWII, likely a stowaway aboard U.S. military cargo ships. Within approximately 40 years the snake had spread throughout the entire island and eliminated 9 of the 11 species of native forest birds</onlyinclude><ref name=":3">Savidge, J.A., 1987. Extinction of an Island Forest Avifauna by an Introduced Snake. Ecology 68(3), pp. 660–668. [https://doi.org/10.2307/1938471 doi: 10.2307/1938471]</ref><ref>Wiles, G.J., Bart, J., Beck, R.E., and Aguon, C.F., 2003. Impacts of the Brown Tree Snake: Patterns of Decline and Species Persistence in Guam’s Avifauna. Conservation Biology, 17(5), pp. 1350–1360. [https://doi.org/10.1046/j.1523-1739.2003.01526.x doi: 10.1046/j.1523-1739.2003.01526.x]</ref>. While the brown treesnake may be the most infamous, other introduced species also have detrimental effects on Guam’s ecosystems. Rats (Rattus sp.), [[wikipedia:Wild_boar|feral pigs]] (''Sus scrofa''), and [[wikipedia:Philippine_deer|Philippine deer]] (''Rusa mariannae'') are well-established and numerous arthropod pests, including the little fire ant and coconut rhinoceros beetle are taking a noticeable toll on local species<onlyinclude>. </onlyinclude><br />
<br />
==Identifying the Impacts of Non-native Species on the Ecosystem==<br />
When a species has been identified in an ecosystem, it is essential to determine how it has impacted the stability, composition, and diversity of the ecosystem. This may be done by comparing changes over time, if data exist from prior to the invasion, or comparing across space if comparable areas exist nearby. Experiments that compare areas where the invasive is excluded to areas where it is present (aka ‘exclosure experiments’) may also shed light on how the system would operate in the absence of the invader. <br />
<onlyinclude>Invasive species may cause the decline or extirpation of native species that provide essential ecological functions in the ecosystem. For example, the [http://ky-caps.ca.uky.edu/hemlock-woolly-adelgid Hemlock Woolly Adelgid] (''Adelges tsugae''), an invasive insect from Asia, has led to the destruction of up to 80% of the hemlock trees in the Eastern United States, which then impacted overall forest composition. </onlyinclude>In Florida, the [[wikipedia:Python_molurus|burmese python]] (''Python molurus'') became a destructive invasive species in less than 20 years by causing severe declines in mammal populations through predation<ref>Hoyer, I.J., Blosser, E.M., Acevedo, C., Thompson, A.C., Reeves, L.E., and Burkett-Cadena, N.D., 2017. Mammal decline, linked to invasive Burmese python, shifts host use of vector mosquito towards reservoir hosts of a zoonotic disease. Biology Letters, 13(10):20170353.[https://doi.org/10.1098/rsbl.2017.0353 doi: 10.1098/rsbl.2017.0353] [//www.enviro.wiki/images/c/c2/Hoyer2017.pdf Article pdf]</ref>.<br />
<br />
<onlyinclude>Invasive species also cause problems for human health and economies. </onlyinclude>They can be disease vectors, such as the [http://cisr.ucr.edu/asian_tiger_mosquito.html Asian tiger mosquito] (''Aedes albopictus''), which can transmit [[wikipedia:Dengue_fever|Dengue Fever]] and [[wikipedia:Chikungunya|Chikungunya]]. Invasive species can impact local and even large economies<ref>Crowl, T.A., Crist, T.O., Parmenter, R.R., Belovsky, G., and Lugo, A.E., 2008. The spread of invasive species and infectious disease as drivers of ecosystem change. Frontiers in Ecology and the Environment, 6(5), pp. 238–246. [https://doi.org/10.1890/070151 doi: 10.1890/070151] [//www.enviro.wiki/images/b/b7/Crowl2008.pdf Article pdf]</ref><ref name=":1">Pimentel, D., Zuniga, R., and Morrison, D., 2005. Update on the environmental and economic costs associated with alien-invasive species in the United States. Ecological Economics, 52(3), pp. 273–288. [https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecolecon.2004.10.002 doi: 10.1016/j.ecolecon.2004.10.002]</ref>. Brown treesnakes on Guam climb onto powerlines or into transistor stations, and are linked to nearly 200 power outages per year costing approximately $4.5 million<ref>Fritts, T.H. (2002). Economic costs of electrical system instability and power outages caused by snakes on the island of Guam. International Biodeterioration & Biodegradation, 49(2-3), pp. 93–100. [https://doi.org/10.1016/S0964-8305(01)00108-1 doi: 10.1016/S0964-8305(01)00108-1]</ref>. Species may also impact economically important animals and plants<ref name=":1" />. <br />
<br />
The nearby islands of Saipan, Rota, and Tinian, together with Guam, comprise the inhabited southern islands of the Mariana Island archipelago. Saipan, Tinian, and Rota have flora and fauna similar to Guam but do not have the invasive snake. Comparing Guam, Saipan, Rota, and Tinian offers a unique accidental experiment to test the effects of an invasive predator and its cascading effects on a forest system, particularly through the loss of native forest birds and their accompanying ecological roles. We use this as an example for designing restoration approaches to restore function to a system with an intractable invasive species problem. <br />
<br />
It took several decades after the introduction of the brown treesnake to Guam for it to be identified as the culprit behind bird declines, and even longer to identify the cascading ecological effects of bird loss. Because the islands to the north of Guam have similar forests but still retain their bird populations, it was possible to set up comparative studies to determine impacts. Since 5 of the impacted bird species were frugivores, the loss of seed dispersal stands out as a major impact on the forests of Guam<ref>Caves, E.M., Jennings, S.B., HilleRisLambers, J., Tewksbury, J.J., and Rogers, H.S., 2013. Natural Experiment Demonstrates That Bird Loss Leads to Cessation of Dispersal of Native Seeds from Intact to Degraded Forests. PLoS One, 8(5), e65618. [https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0065618 doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0065618] [//www.enviro.wiki/images/8/8a/Caves2013.pdf Article pdf]</ref>. With reduced seed dispersal, seeds fall underneath their parent tree unhandled by frugivores, which results in a lower chance of germination<ref name=":2" />. In addition, treefall gaps are filled almost exclusively by the trees adjacent to the gap, which has led to reduced species richness in treefall gap seedling communities<ref name=":5">Wandrag, E.M., Dunham, A.E., Duncan, R.P., and Rogers, H.S., 2017. Seed dispersal increases local species richness and reduces spatial turnover of tropical tree seedlings. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences 114(40), pp. 10689–10694. [https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.1709584114 doi: 10.1073/pnas.1709584114] [//www.enviro.wiki/images/1/14/Wandrag2017.pdf Article pdf]</ref>. In addition, spiders are more numerous in Guam compared to the other islands, presumably due to a lack of vertebrate predators<ref>Rogers, H., Lambers, J.H.R., Miller, R., and Tewksbury, J.J., 2012. ‘Natural Experiment’ Demonstrates Top-Down Control of Spiders by Birds on a Landscape Level. PLoS One, 7(9):e43446. [https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0043446 doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0043446] [//www.enviro.wiki/images/7/71/Rogers2012.pdf Article pdf]</ref>. The full impact of the snake is still being uncovered.<br />
<br />
==Preventing Further Degradation by Managing the Invasive Species==<br />
Once a species has been identified as being invasive in an ecosystem, it is essential to act as quickly as possible in order to prevent further impacts. In some systems, eradication may be impossible, in which case control methods should aim at containing the population. This step is challenging and calls for the cooperation of many actors such as scientists, policy holders and funding agencies to identify methods to control the invasive species across the landscape.<br />
<br />
Many tools exist and are being developed to manage invasive species<ref>Wittenberg, R., and Cock, M.J., 2001. Invasive alien species: a toolkit of best prevention and management practices. CAB International, Wallingford, Oxon, UK. ISBN: 0 85199 569 1 [https://doi.org/10.1079/9780851995694.0000 doi: 10.1079/9780851995694.0000]</ref>, but the specific tools to use depend on the species and habitat. Mechanical control methods, such as hunting and invasive plant removal, are manually intensive and can be costly if an invasive species has reached high densities. Chemical control methods such as application of herbicides and pesticides have proven effective but are often costly and may be socially unpalatable<ref name=":1" />. <br />
<br />
Sterilization and gene drive techniques are being developed for use in invasive species control. Sterilization involves sterilizing either males or females of a species and releasing those sterilized individuals into a population where they are mating but not physically able to produce offspring. Sterilization has been used successfully to suppress fruit fly populations<ref><br />
Zacharopoulou, A., Augustinos, A.A., Drosopoulou, E., Tsoumani, K.T., Gariou‐Papalexiou, A., Franz, G., Mathiopoulos, K.D., Bourtzis, K., and Mavragani‐Tsipidou, P.,2017. A review of more than 30 years of cytogenetic studies of T ephritidae in support of sterile insect technique and global trade. Entomologia Experimentalis et Applicata, 164(3), pp. 204–225. [https://doi.org/10.1111/eea.12616 doi: 10.1111/eea.12616] [//www.enviro.wiki/images/a/ad/Zacharopoulou_2017.pdf Article pdf]</ref> and has shown some success in pilot studies targeting mosquitoes<ref>Lees, R.S., Gilles, J.R., Hendrichs, J., Vreysen, M.J., and Bourtzis, K., 2015. Back to the future: the sterile insect technique against mosquito disease vectors. Current Opinion in Insect Science, 10, pp.156–162. [https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cois.2015.05.011 doi: 10.1016/j.cois.2015.05.011] [//www.enviro.wiki/images/2/21/Lees2015.pdf Article pdf]</ref>. Gene drive approaches manipulate a genome to increase the likelihood specific alleles will be inherited<ref><br />
Champer, J., Buchman, A., and Akbari, O.S., 2016. Cheating evolution: engineering gene drives to manipulate the fate of wild populations. Nature Reviews Genetics, 17, pp. 146-159. [https://doi.org/10.1038/nrg.2015.34 doi: 10.1038/nrg.2015.34] [//www.enviro.wiki/images/f/fd/Champer2016.pdf Article pdf]</ref>. Gene drive control methods are being pursued for rats and some other invasive species<ref>Harvey-Samuel, T., Ant, T., and Alphey, L., 2017. Towards the genetic control of invasive species. Biological Invasions, 19, pp. 1683–1703. [https://doi.org/10.1007/s10530-017-1384-6 doi: 10.1007/s10530-017-1384-6] [[Media:Harvey2017.pdf | Article pdf]</ref><ref>Leitschuh, C.M., Kanavy, D., Backus, G.A., Valdez, R.X., Serr, M., Pitts, E.A., Threadgill, D., and Godwin, J., 2018. Developing gene drive technologies to eradicate invasive rodents from islands. Journal of Responsible Innovation, 5(S1), pp. S121–S138. [https://doi.org/10.1080/23299460.2017.1365232 doi: 10.1080/23299460.2017.1365232] [//www.enviro.wiki/images/6/6f/Leitschuh2018.pdf Article pdf]</ref>, but remain controversial because of uncertainty of its safety and fears that effects may reach beyond target populations<ref>Esvelt, K.M., and Gemmell, N.J., 2017. Conservation demands safe gene drive. PLoS Biology, 15(11), e2003850. [https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pbio.2003850 doi: 10.1371/journal.pbio.2003850] [//www.enviro.wiki/images/8/85/Esvelt2017.pdf Article pdf]</ref>. <br />
<br />
In the case of invasive brown treesnakes on Guam, the snakes already occupied the majority of the island by the time management began, so management efforts were directed at control rather than eradication. The snake had spread throughout the entire island by the time it was linked to the loss of birds in the mid-1980’s. Dr. Julie Savidge ruled out other suspected agents such as disease and pathogens, and temporally and geographically aligned the spread of the snake with the disappearance of birds across the island<ref name=":3" />, making a convincing case that the snake was the culprit. However, she still faced difficulties convincing others that a single species of introduced snake was responsible for the alarming disappearance of native birds, so control of the snake didn’t start occurring until 1993. The goal of control has largely been to keep the snakes from establishing on other islands, such as Hawaii. Initial control methods implemented included snake trapping, visual searching, and detector dogs to inspect cargo and planes leaving the island, and concrete barriers to quarantine cargo originating from Guam on snake-free islands<ref>Clark, C., Clark, L., and Siers, S., 2018. Brown Tree Snakes: Methods and Approaches for Control. In: W.C. Pitt, J.C. Beasley, and G.W Witmer (eds), Ecology and Management of terrestrial vertebrate invasive species in the United States. CRC Press, Boca Raton, FL. pp. 107–134. eISBN: 978-1-3151-5707-8 [https://doi.org/10.1201/9781315157078 doi: 10.1201/9781315157078] [//www.enviro.wiki/images/a/aa/Clark2018.pdf Chapter pdf]<br />
</ref>. Recently a chemical control method has been developed. This method consists of dropping dead mice with an attached acetaminophen tablet (a toxin for brown treesnakes) from helicopters to the forest canopy where snakes will encounter and consume them. These “mouse-drops” need to occur at regular intervals over a prolonged period to ensure all snakes in an area will be affected<ref><br />
Siers, S.R., Barnhart, P.D., Shiels, A.B., Rabon, J.A., Volsteadt, R.M., Chlarson, F.M., Larimer, J.R., Dixon, J.C., and Gosnell, R.J., 2018. Monitoring Brown Treesnake Activity Before and After an Automated Aerial Toxicant Treatment. Final Report QA-2621. USDA, APHIS, WS, NWRC. Hilo, HI. [//www.enviro.wiki/images/5/5a/Siers2018.pdf Report pdf]</ref>. Areas may be enclosed with snake barriers in order to prevent incursion and reach eradication. The barriers erected for this purpose in Guam also serve as effective exclosures for invasive deer and pigs. Researchers are also trying to predict indirect effects of invasive control that may require further management, such as increases in invasive small mammals with the eradication of snakes or increases in weedy plant species with the eradication of ungulates. <br />
<br />
==Restoring Degraded Ecological Functions in the Ecosystem ==<br />
[[File: ThierryFig2revised.png|thumb|650px|right | Figure 2. Conceptual framework for restoring ecological functions in an ecosystem. First, it is essential to identify the ecological services that need to be restored (e.g. seed dispersal, pollination) and the species that may be able to provide those services. The next step is to conduct a landscape-level evaluation of the potential spatial distribution of both the service and its provider. Then, both should be combined to identify optimal rewilding areas. Finally, societal constraints should be considered to develop effective management strategies and policies.]] <br />
In an ideal situation, the invasive species would be eradicated, and then native species restored across the landscape, in turn restoring ecological function. However, complete eradication is often impossible. Instead, invasive population reduction or local eradication combined with restoration of native species or surrogate species within protected areas may be possible. In this section, we describe a proposed conceptual framework (Figure 2) to use when planning invasive control and rewilding scenarios for the purposes of restoring ecological functions. Local expertise is an invaluable resource, and local involvement increases the chance of success for any project, therefore we recommend local involvement from the very beginning of every project. <br />
<br />
===Identifying the Key Ecosystem Function Providers===<br />
The degradation of an ecosystem is often caused by the extirpation of ecological functions provided by keystone or foundational species. If these functionally important species are not entirely extirpated from the system, the first step is to identify strategies for increasing their population, via conserving or enhancing essential habitats for these species and controlling the invasive species. In an ideal situation, one would be able to conduct an ecological function analysis to assess the abundance of the species required to provide sufficient ecological function<ref>Brodie, J.F., Redford K. H., and Doak, D.F., 2018. Ecological Function Analysis: Incorporating Species Roles into Conservation. Trends in Ecology and Evolution, 33(11), pp.840–850. [https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tree.2018.08.013 doi: 10.1016/j.tree.2018.08.013] [[Media:Brodie2018.pdf | Article pdf]}</ref>. On the other hand, if these species are already extinct from the ecosystem, then rewilding will be necessary to restore the extirpated ecological functions. Rewilding can be defined as introducing locally extinct or ecologically similar species to perform ecosystem functions analogous to those of extinct species<ref>Seddon, P.J., Griffiths, C.J., Soorae, P.S., and Armstrong, D.P., 2014. Reversing defaunation: Restoring species in a changing world. Science, 345(6195), pp. 406–412. [https://doi.org/10.1126/science.1251818 doi: 10.1126/science.1251818]</ref><ref>Sobral-Souza, T., Lautenschlager, L., Morcatty, T.Q., Bello, C., Hansen, D., and Galetti, M., 2017. Rewilding defaunated Atlantic Forests with tortoises to restore lost seed dispersal functions. Perspectives in Ecology and Conservation, 15(4), pp. 300–307. [https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pecon.2017.08.005 doi: 10.1016/j.pecon.2017.08.005] [//www.enviro.wiki/images/3/33/Sobral2017.pdf Article pdf]</ref><ref name=":4">Svenning, J.-C., Pedersen, P.B., Donlan, C.J., Ejrnæs, R., Faurby, S., Galetti, M., Hansen, D.M., Sandel, B., Sandom, C.J., and Terborgh, J.W., 2016. Science for a wilder Anthropocene: Synthesis and future directions for trophic rewilding research. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 113(4), pp. 898–906. [https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.1502556112 doi: 10.1073/pnas.1502556112] [//www.enviro.wiki/images/c/c7/Svenning2016.pdf Article pdf]</ref> . In some cases, the species that has been extirpated can be found in their systems. This is the most favorable case, with the possibility of translocating populations back into the ecosystem from these other sources. In other cases, if the species is globally extinct, rewilding can be done by selecting a species that can perform the same ecological function. This requires a great deal of caution, however, since predicting the extent of possible impacts on an ecosystem is very difficult. Many case studies have underlined the risks of such an approach<ref name=":4" />. <br />
<br />
The first step towards restoring a functional ecosystem in Guam was to identify frugivorous species that were effective seed dispersers<ref name=":6">Rehm, E.M., Chojnacki, J., Rogers, H.S., and Savidge, J.A., 2018. Differences among avian frugivores in seed dispersal to degraded habitats. Restoration Ecology, 26(4), pp. 760–766. [https://doi.org/10.1111/rec.12623 doi: 10.1111/rec.12623]</ref> . Nearby islands to Guam were unaffected by the brown treesnake and host avian communities similar to those historically present in Guam. This allowed us to prioritize reintroducing native species over introducing non-native species to Guam, and to assess which native frugivores were the most effective dispersers. We conducted studies to evaluate the effect of gut passage on germination of native forest tree species<ref>Fricke, E.C., Bender, J., Rehm, E.M. and Rogers, H.S., 2019. Functional outcomes of mutualistic network interactions: A community-scale study of frugivore gut passage on germination. Journal of Ecology, 107(2), pp. 757–767. [https://besjournals.onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/1365-2745.13108 doi:10.1111/1365-2745.13108] [[Media:Fricke2019.pdf | Article pdf]]</ref>, and to study the movement of the candidate avian frugivore species <ref>Rehm, E., Fricke, E., Bender, J., Savidge, J., and Rogers, H., 2019. Animal movement drives variation in seed dispersal distance in a plant–animal network. Proceedings of the Royal Society B, 286(1894):20182007. [https://doi.org/10.1098/rspb.2018.2007 doi: 10.1098/rspb.2018.2007] [//www.enviro.wiki/images/7/7d/Rehm2019.pdf Article pdf]</ref>. The Micronesian Starling was identified as an ideal candidate for rewilding because of its extensive diet, probability of dispersing seeds a long distance, and propensity for crossing from native to degraded forest, and thus assisting with forest regeneration<ref name=":6" />. Other strong candidates for rewilding are the [[wikipedia:Mariana_fruit_dove|Mariana Fruit Dove]] (''Ptilinopus roseicapilla'') and the [[wikipedia:Mariana_fruit_bat|Mariana Fruit Bat]] (''Pteropus mariannus''), because they also disperse many tree species. Furthermore, [[wikipedia:Micronesian_starling|Micronesian Starlings]] and [[wikipedia:Mariana_fruit_bat|Mariana Fruit Bats]] are still present in small populations on the island of Guam, even in the presence of the brown treesnake. Restoration of seed dispersal could be accomplished through a combination of increasing the population and extending the range of the two extant species and rewilding the extirpated species<ref name=":2" /><ref name=":5" /><ref>Wandrag, E.M., Dunham, A.E., Miller, R.H., and Rogers, H.S., 2015. Vertebrate seed dispersers maintain the composition of tropical forest seedbanks. AoB Plants, 7. [https://doi.org/10.1093/aobpla/plv130 doi: 10.1093/aobpla/plv130] [//www.enviro.wiki/images/e/e9/Wandrag2015.pdf Article pdf]</ref>.<br />
<br />
===Identifying Key Areas in Need of Restoration===<br />
Restoration projects, and thus rewilding scenarios, are often limited in terms of financial resources. Future funding often relies on successful rewilding efforts, so projects should attempt to maximize success. To do so, rewilding should be spatially optimized to aim at restoring functions at key locations within the landscape. Misplacing rewilded species within the landscape can not only potentially lead to insufficient ecological function benefits but could also lead to negative ecological effects. For example, pollinators and seed dispersers may pollinate or disperse non-native plants, exacerbating the ecological problems. Thus, it is essential to understand the spatial pattern of lost ecological function, along with the habitat and desired and undesired effects of the rewilded species.<br />
<br />
[[File: ThierryFig3.png|thumb|500px|right| Figure 3. Visual representation of scores assigned to different areas (here cells) of a landscape with (a) a service score representing areas that should be prioritized for functional restoration based on the state of the forest (land cover class), distance to native seed sources and density of native seed sources (native limestone forest) and (b) a reintroduction score for areas where rewilding would maximize functional restoration, which is calculated by drawing the potential home range of starlings if they were to be reintroduced in the cell and assigning a score based on the service scores of the cells contained within the home range. Colors represent landcover types.]]<br />
In the case of Guam, an important goal is to reintroduce seed dispersal of native plant species across the island. Therefore, our first decision was that native forest should be prioritized since it provides the source of native seeds. We first focused on the dispersal behavior and the seed gut passage time of the one remaining native avian frugivore species– [[wikipedia:Micronesian_starling|Micronesian starlings]] (''Aplonis opaca''). Some of the important criteria that were taken into account were:<br />
<br />
*Landcover type: represents different levels of forest degradation. Some landcover types were considered too degraded to benefit from seed dispersal.<br />
*Distance to native forest and density of surrounding native forest: represents the probability of starlings efficiently dispersing native seeds into the focal area.<br />
<br />
Using this information, we identified areas across the island where the restoration of seed dispersal should be prioritized (Figure 3a)<ref name=":7" />.<br />
<br />
===Identifying Potential Habitats for The Function Providers===<br />
In combination to the previously identified areas of interest for restoring ecological function, it is necessary to identify all potential areas that could successfully host the reintroduction of the desired service providers<ref>Hirzel, A.H., and Le Lay, G., 2008. Habitat suitability modelling and niche theory. Journal of Applied Ecology, 45(5), pp. 1372–1381. [https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-2664.2008.01524.x doi: 10.1111/j.1365-2664.2008.01524.x] [[Media:Hirzel2008.pdf | Article pdf]</ref>. Thus, habitat suitability should be mapped across the studied ecosystem. Habitat models allow evaluating the quality of habitat for a species within the studied landscape. These models can take into account a wide variety of parameters such as landcover, elevation, water availability, tolerance to disturbed habitats, and climate. Published methodologies are available as guidance to conceptualize a habitat suitability index that fits the biology of a wide range of function providers<ref>Donovan, M.L., Rabe, D.L., and Olson, C.E., 1987. Use of Geographic Information Systems to Develop Habitat Suitability Models. Wildlife Society Bulletin, 15(4), pp. 574–579.</ref><ref><br />
Rondinini, C., Di Marco, M., Chiozza, F., Santulli, G., Baisero, D., Visconti, P., Hoffmann, M., Schipper, J., Stuart, S.N., and Tognelli, M.F. (2011). Global habitat suitability models of terrestrial mammals. Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society of London B: Biological Sciences, 366(1578), pp. 2633–2641. [https://doi.org/10.1098/rstb.2011.0113 doi: 10.1098/rstb.2011.0113] [//www.enviro.wiki/images/4/45/Rondinini2011.pdf Article pdf]</ref><ref>Van Horne, B., and Wiens, J.A., 1991. Forest bird habitat suitability models and the development of general habitat models. Fish and Wildlife Research, 8. [https://apps.dtic.mil/sti/citations/ADA322800 ADA322800] [//www.enviro.wiki/images/5/55/VanHorne1991.pdf Report pdf]</ref>.<br />
<br />
In a Guam case study, we mapped habitat suitability as a binary function of either “suitable” or “non-suitable” for each potential service provider. This was done essentially by using landcover maps and assessing the different types of resource and habitats potentially used by the studied species within a virtual home range. For example, habitat suitability for starlings, a generalist species, was defined by landcover types and the amount of native forest (food resource) present around the evaluated area.<br />
<br />
===Identifying the Optimal Areas for Rewilding to Maximize the Restoration of Ecological Functions===<br />
Steps described in Sections 4.2 and 4.3 produce two maps: one identifies the areas that could host the service provider and the other shows where the function is most needed in our landscape. Planners can then overlay both maps and use this to estimate where rewilding would bring maximal functional restorations. To do so, scores can be assigned to each area (Figure 3a), based on the how much areas in need of functional restoration would be potentially impacted by rewilding.<br />
<br />
In the Guam example (Figure 3b), a score was assigned to each spatial entity that could host starlings, by drawing their potential home range if they inhabited each cell, then assigning a score based on the proportion of their home range that contained areas needing the ecological function, as identified in Section 4.1.<br />
<br />
===Linking Ecology to Decision-Making to Efficiently Restore Ecological Function Across an Area===<br />
When it comes to resource management or conservation projects, many entities and stakeholders are involved at a wide variety of scales. Scientists and managers may be able to identify spatial areas where rewilding would optimally restore ecological function, but the ecological optimum may not be feasible for financial, logistical, social, or political reasons. This leads to the emergence of social-ecological systems that each follow their own specific set of rules<ref>Folke, C., Hahn, T., Olsson, P., and Norberg, J., 2005. Adaptive Governance of Social-Ecological Systems. Annual Review of Environment and Resources, 30, pp. 441–473. [https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev.energy.30.050504.144511 doi: 10.1146/annurev.energy.30.050504.144511] [//www.enviro.wiki/images/0/0f/Folke2005.pdf Article pdf]</ref><ref>Folke, C., 2006. Resilience: The emergence of a perspective for social–ecological systems analyses. Global Environmental Change, 16(3), pp. 253–267. [https://doi.org/10.1016/j.gloenvcha.2006.04.002 doi: 10.1016/j.gloenvcha.2006.04.002] [//www.enviro.wiki/images/e/e9/Folke2006.pdf Article pdf]</ref><ref>Walker, B., Holling, C.S., Carpenter, S.R., and Kinzig, A., 2004. Resilience, adaptability and transformability in social–ecological systems. Ecology and Society, 9(2):5. [https://doi.org/10.5751/ES-00650-090205 doi: 10.5751/ES-00650-090205] [[Special:FilePath/Walker.pdf| Article pdf]]</ref>. Having so many different actors and interactions can lead to many difficulties when identifying efficient management decisions<ref>Adger, W.N., Brown, K., and Tompkins, E.L., 2005. The political economy of cross-scale networks in resource co-management. Ecology and Society, 10(2): 9. [https://doi.org/10.5751/ES-01465-100209 doi:10.5751/ES-01465-100209] [//www.enviro.wiki/images/1/15/Adger2005.pdf Article pdf]</ref><ref>Anderies, J.M., Walker, B.H., and Kinzig, A.P., 2006. Fifteen weddings and a funeral: case studies and resilience-based management. Ecology and Society, 11(1): 21. [https://doi.org/10.5751/ES-01690-110121 doi:10.5751/ES-01690-110121] [[Media: Anderies2006.pdf | Article pdf]]</ref><ref>Pahl-Wostl, C., Sendzimir, J., and Jeffrey, P., 2009. Resources Management in Transition. Ecology and Society, 14(1):46. [https://doi.org/10.5751/ES-02898-140146 doi: 10.5751/ES-02898-140146] [//www.enviro.wiki/images/0/0c/Pahl-Wostl2009.pdf Article pdf]</ref>.<br />
<br />
To encapsulate some of these difficulties, aggregating individual ecological spatial units into more social entities should be considered to facilitate decision-making. Thus, management units, or clusters of previously identified small areas of interest that share common characteristics, should be identified based on all of the parameters that could influence management decisions. Typical examples of factors of importance to consider that can influence a management strategy applied to that area:<br />
<br />
*Land ownership<br />
*Accessibility<br />
*Land cover<br />
*Topography<br />
*Budget<br />
<br />
For example, land ownership might exclude any type of intervention on private land. Thus, all inaccessible areas should be excluded from the model. Topography might render specific management methods useless and thus reduce the amount of possibilities. This should considered and management units should be separated into different categories based on topography. Each of these factors will be taken into account to identify management unit types, each requiring a unique management approach. Once the social and geographic factors are taken into consideration, and managers decide which management types are relevant for the area, then the individual ecological areas identified in Section 4.4 should be aggregated into management units. Scoring these spatial entities is also recommended, by using the scores of all the smaller areas of interests, in order to be able to rank the management units by order of priority.<br />
<br />
[[File: ThierryFig4.png|thumb|650px|right | Figure 4. Map of the management units identified throughout the island of Guam when considering (a) both management unit types together and (b) Forest and non-forest management units separately. Management units are then ranked by management score and put into the following categories: Best (Top 10% of total area assigned to management units), Great (10-25%), Good (25-50%), Average (50-75%), and Poor (75-100%).]]<br />
In Guam, management units have been identified based on the methods that will be used to control the brown tree snake (Figure 4). Several management methods are possible, ranging from traps to the aerial distribution of toxicant drops across large areas. These methods are detailed in Section 3. The main method considered for the control of brown tree snake throughout the island is the aerial distribution of toxicant drops. This method may be socially unacceptable to carry out in or near urban habitats, thus land cover (urban) is one of the main drivers that defines which management approach will be considered for rewilding. The current restoration projects are led by the Department of Defense and thus will be conducted on military-owned land. Finally, fencing can be used as a method of regulation of snake population, in combination with other methods, but can be extremely costly. Topography, and especially steep cliff lines can act as potential natural barriers, reduce fencing cost, and thus should be considered when designing management units.<br />
<br />
Another step to consider is the importance of listening to local actors and involving communities<ref>Bryan, T.A., 2004. Tragedy Averted: The Promise of Collaboration. Society & Natural Resources, 17(10), pp. 881–896. [https://doi.org/10.1080/08941920490505284 doi: 10.1080/08941920490505284]</ref><ref>Conley, A., and Moote, M.A., 2003. Evaluating Collaborative Natural Resource Management. Society &Natural Resources, 16(5), pp. 371–386. [https://doi.org/10.1080/08941920309181 doi: 10.1080/08941920309181] [//www.enviro.wiki/images/c/ca/Conley2003.pdf Article pdf]</ref><ref name=":8"><br />
Frame, T.M., Gunton, T., and Day, J.C., 2004. The Role of Collaboration in Environmental Management: An Evaluation of Land And Resource Planning In British Columbia. Journal of Environmental Planning and Management, 47(1), pp. 59–82. [https://doi.org/10.1080/0964056042000189808 doi: 10.1080/0964056042000189808] [//www.enviro.wiki/images/0/07/Frame2004.pdf Article pdf]</ref>. Local expertise is an invaluable resource, and their involvement increases the chance of success for any project. Frame et al. (2004)<ref name=":8" /> illustrates a detailed example of how collaborative planning of land-use in British Columbia has led to resolving environmental conflict and produced significant additional benefits such as improved stakeholder relations, skills, and knowledge. Many tools, ranging from surveys to participatory board games, are available to decision-makers and land managers to involve community members and obtain feedback<ref>Brandt, E., 2006. Designing Exploratory Design Games: a framework for participation in participatory design? In: Proceedings of the Ninth Conference on Participatory Design: Expanding Boundaries in Design- Volume 1, PDC 2006, Trento, Italy, pp. 57–66. [https://doi.org/10.1145/1147261.1147271 doi:10.1145/1147261.1147271] [//www.enviro.wiki/images/f/f7/Brandt2006.pdf Article pdf]</ref><ref>Mendoza, G.A., and Prabhu, R., 2006. Participatory modeling and analysis for sustainable forest management: Overview of soft system dynamics models and applications. Forest Policy and Economics, 9(2), pp. 179–196. [https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1468-2885.2003.tb00290.x doi: 10.1111/j.1468-2885.2003.tb00290.x]</ref><ref>Morris, N., 2003. A Comparative Analysis of The Diffusion and Participatory Models in Development Communication. Communication Theory, 13(2), pp. 225–248. [https://doi.org/10.1016/j.forpol.2005.06.006 doi: 10.1016/j.forpol.2005.06.006]</ref>.<br />
<br />
Results from recent small group discussions on Guam suggested that some Guam residents had doubts about the extent of the impact of brown treesnakes, confusion about the effectiveness of current management actions, and distrust of certain entities carrying out research and management<ref>Wald, D.M., Nelson, K.A., Gawel, A.M., and Rogers, H.S., 2019. The role of trust in public attitudes toward invasive species management on Guam: A case study. Journal of Environmental Management, 229, pp. 133–144. [https://doi.org/110.1016/j.jenvman.2018.06.047 doi: 10.1016/j.jenvman.2018.06.047]</ref>. Given this disconnect between conservation managers and members of the public, we decided to test a participatory approach with multiple stakeholders. Surveys were distributed that presented a wide range of charismatic species, asking people to identify they deemed important as a conservation priority. This was done by selecting eight emblematic species (e.g. birds, plants, insects). Each participant could only pick a total of 8 stickers (but multiple of one species if desired) and place them on a map of Guam. This indicated both their preference regarding which species to prioritize but also the areas where conservation should be prioritized according to them. Participants could delve further into management scenarios with a board game that focused on sequentially developing conservation towards achieving participants’ vision of the Guam in ten years. The main goal of the game was to have players work as a team to conserve threatened species across Guam. Each round, the players received funds that they could allocate to control invasive species and restore key species in different regions of Guam. Event cards were created to simulate some of the key constraints or beneficial events that could occur when dealing with conservation. These participatory activities served to bring new voices into the conversation and provided managers with community perspectives.<br />
<br />
==Long-term Monitoring==<br />
Finally, once areas have been chosen for rewilding, strategies have been applied, and species have been brought within the ecosystem, it is essential to keep monitoring long-term progress. Eradication and rewilding projects can appear to be successful at first but fail in the long term because of a lack of effective monitoring and adaptive management. Re-invasion can happen, with impacts on rewilded species and further degradation of the system. The consequences of failed eradications or rewilding projects can extend beyond just the species within an ecosystem – public support, future funding, and trust in managers and researchers can be adversely impacted as well.<br />
<br />
==Summary==<br />
Restoration of ecological function in terrestrial systems impacted by invasive species is a multi-step process. After identifying an invasive species that is affecting ecological function, the following steps include managing the invasive to prevent further degradation, identifying which ecological functions have been disrupted, identifying the role native and non-native species could play in restoring ecological function, and managing the invasive to the extent that species can be restored that provide the missing ecological function. Finally, long-term monitoring and adaptive management is necessary to prevent re-invasion and further degradation. <br />
<br />
==References==<br />
<references /><br />
<br />
==See Also==<br />
[https://www.invasivespeciesinfo.gov/ United States Department of Agriculture (USDA), National Invasive Species Information Center (NISIC)]<br />
<br />
[http://www.iucngisd.org/gisd/ Global Invasive Species Database]</div>Jhurleyhttps://www.enviro.wiki/index.php?title=Predicting_Species_Responses_to_Climate_Change_with_Population_Models&diff=18079Predicting Species Responses to Climate Change with Population Models2026-04-04T00:17:12Z<p>Jhurley: </p>
<hr />
<div><onlyinclude>As&nbsp;the&nbsp;global&nbsp;climate continues to warm, changes in local climate conditions put populations of many species at risk of severe decline and even extinction. Predicting which species are most vulnerable to changing conditions is challenging, because climate interacts with different life stages in complex ways. Population models allow natural resource managers to integrate the effects of climate across life stages and provide a powerful tool to inform management decisions. However, care must be taken to match model structure to a species’ biology and recognize the limitations of the data used to parameterize models when interpreting predictions.<br />
<br /></onlyinclude><br />
<div style="float:right;margin:0 0 2em 2em;">__TOC__</div><br />
<br />
'''Related Article(s):'''<br />
<br />
*[[Climate Change Primer|Climate Change]]<br />
*[[Climate Change Effects on Wildlife]]<br />
<br />
'''Contributor(s):''' [[Dr. Brian Hudgens]]<br />
<br />
'''Key Resource(s):'''<br />
<br />
*Quantitative Conservation Biology<ref>Morris, W.F., and Doak, D.F., 2002. Quantitative Conservation Biology: Theory and Practice of Population Viability Analysis. Sinauer Associates, Inc. Publishers, Sunderland, Massachusetts, USA. ISBN: 978-087893546-8</ref><br />
*[https://www.serdp-estcp.org/Program-Areas/Resource-Conservation-and-Resiliency/Natural-Resources/Species-Ecology-and-Management/RC-2512 Evaluating the Use of Spatially Explicit Population Models to Predict Conservation Reliant Species in Nonanalogue Future Environments on DoD Lands], Strategic Environmental Research and Development Program (SERDP)<ref name=":10"><br />
SERDP, 2020. Evaluating the Use of Spatially Explicit Population Models to Predict Conservation Reliant Species in Nonanalogue Future Environments on DoD Lands. Prepared by B. Hudgens, J. Abbott, N. Haddad, E. Kiekebusch, A. Louthan, W. Morris, L. Stenzel, and J. Walters, [https://www.serdp-estcp.org/Program-Areas/Resource-Conservation-and-Resiliency/Natural-Resources/Species-Ecology-and-Management/RC-2512 Project No. RC-2512] Strategic Environmental Research and Development, Arlington, VA, August 2020. [//www.enviro.wiki/images/0/04/RC-2512FinalReport.pdf Final Report pdf]</ref>.<br />
<br />
==Climate Change and No-Analogue Environmental Conditions==<br />
<onlyinclude>The global climate has been changing throughout the past century, with continued changes predicted over coming decades. </onlyinclude>Generally, temperatures are getting warmer throughout United States (US) and worldwide<ref name=":0"><br />
IPCC, 2013. Climate Change 2013: The Physical Science Basis. Contribution of Working Group I to the Fifth Assessment Report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change. Stocker, T.F., D. Qin, G.-K. Plattner, M. Tignor, S.K. Allen, J. Boschung, A. Nauels, Y. Xia, V. Bex and P.M. Midgley (eds.). Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, United Kingdom and New York, NY, USA, 1535 pp. [//www.enviro.wiki/images/5/58/2013-IPCC-Climate_Change-The_Physical_science_basis.pdf Report pdf] <br />
</ref>. Precipitation patterns are also changing, with some regions of the US getting drier, others getting wetter<ref name=":0" /><ref name=":1"><br />
Abatzoglou, J. T., 2013. Development of gridded surface meteorological data for ecological applications and modelling. International Journal of Climatology, 33(1), pp. 121–131. [https://doi.org/10.1002/joc.3413 doi: 10.1002/joc.3413]</ref>. <onlyinclude>Further changes are occurring in the timing and duration of precipitation events, with extreme weather events becoming more common</onlyinclude><ref name=":0" /><ref name=":1" /><onlyinclude>.</onlyinclude><br />
<br />
<onlyinclude>As a result of these changes, populations, even entire species, are likely to experience novel conditions that impact individual fitness and population viability. </onlyinclude>In the case of polar bears, extended periods of low sea ice resulting from atmospheric and oceanic warming have led to the species being protected under [[wikipedia:Endangered_Species_Act_of_1973|the Endangered Species Act]]<ref>U.S. Fish and Wildlife (USFWS), 2016. Polar Bear (Ursus maritimus) Conservation Management Plan, Final. U.S. Fish and Wildlife, Region 7, Anchorage, Alaska. 104 pp. [https://ecos.fws.gov/docs/recovery_plan/PBRT%20Recovery%20Plan%20Book.FINAL.signed.pdf Report pdf]</ref>.<br />
<br />
The potential for a [[Climate Change Primer|changing climate]] to put populations at risk of extinction creates two imperatives for natural resource managers: 1) detecting climate effects on vital rates such as fecundity, growth and survival, and 2) predicting the overall impact of changing climate on managed species. Importantly, changing climate conditions may have different short and long term effects on populations. For example, a population of eastern [[wikipedia:Tiger_salamander|tiger salamanders]] (''Ambystoma tigrinum'') studied at a breeding pond in Fort Bragg, NC, has been observed to suffer consecutive years of no successful offspring when breeding ponds dry out before larvae could undergo [[wikipedia:Metamorphosis|metamorphosis]]<ref>Woodward, D., Hudgens, B., and Haddad, N., 2005. Status and ecology of the Northern Pine Snake, Southern Hognose Snake, Tiger Salamander, and Carolina Gopher Frog on Ft. Bragg, NC. Unpublished report to Ft. Bragg Endangered Species Branch. </ref><ref>Haddad, N., Woodward, D., Hudgens, B., Davidai, N., Fields, W., Chesser, M., 2007. Status and ecology of the Northern Pine Snake, Southern Hognose Snake, Tiger Salamander, and Carolina Gopher Frog on Ft. Bragg, NC. Unpublished report to Ft. Bragg Endangered Species Branch.</ref>. This population would initially benefit from increases in precipitation leading to higher fecundity (reproductive success). However, if higher levels of precipitation convert ephemeral ponds to permanent ponds, many resident amphibians would become vulnerable to increased mortality due to predation by fish and [[wikipedia:American_bullfrog|bullfrogs]] (''Lithobates catesbeianus)''<ref><br />
Fisher, R.N., and Shaffer, H.B., 1996. The Decline of Amphibians in California’s Great Central Valley. Conservation Biology, 10(5), pp. 1387-1397. [https://doi.org/10.1046/j.1523-1739.1996.10051387.x doi:10.1046/J.1523-1739.1996.10051387.X]<br />
</ref><ref>Cook, M.T., Heppell, S.S., and Garcia, T.S., 2013. Invasive Bullfrog Larvae Lack Developmental Plasticity to Changing Hydroperiod. The Journal of Wildlife Management, 77(4), pp. 655-662. [https://doi.org/10.1002/jwmg.509 doi:10.1002/jwmg.509] [//www.enviro.wiki/images/e/e4/Cook2013.pdf Article pdf]</ref>.<br />
<br />
Previous studies have shown that the effect of changing environmental conditions on a species is best understood by monitoring effects on all life stages<ref>Brown, L.M., Breed, G.A., Severns, P.M. and Crone, E.E., 2017. Losing a battle but winning the war: moving past preference–performance to understand native herbivore–novel host plant interactions. Oecologia, 183(2), pp. 441-453. [https://doi.org/10.1007/s00442-016-3787-y doi: 10.1007/s00442-016-3787-y]</ref>. This is particularly true for understanding how a changing climate may impact a species. <onlyinclude>Climate change typically involves simultaneous changes in numerous climate variables (e.g. temperature and precipitation), which may interact with a species at different points of its life-cycle. </onlyinclude>For example, summer temperatures impact young (small) plant growth of the tundra plant [[wikipedia:Silene_acaulis|moss campion]] (''Silene acaulis'') while snow cover influences growth and survival of larger plants<ref name=":2">Doak, D.F., and Morris, W.F., 2010. Demographic compensation and tipping points in climate-induced range shifts. Nature, 467, p.p. 959-962. [https://doi.org/10.1038/nature09439 doi:10.1038/nature09439]</ref>.<br />
<br />
<onlyinclude>Even when there is a single, highly dominant climate driver, it is likely to have different effects on different stages of a species life-cycle. </onlyinclude>For example, drought reduced San Clemente [[wikipedia:Bell's_sparrow|Bell's sparrow]] fecundity, but not adult survival<ref name=":6">Hudgens, B., Beaudry, F., George, T.L., Kaiser, S., and Munkwitz, N.M., 2011. Shifting threats faced by the San Clemente sage sparrow. The Journal of Wildlife Management, 75(6), pp. 1350-1360. [https://doi.org/10.1002/jwmg.165 doi: 10.1002/jwmg.165] [//www.enviro.wiki/images/a/ae/Hudgens2011.pdf Article pdf]</ref>. Moreover, the variation in the same climate variable can have opposing effects on different life stages. For example, warmer summer temperatures tend to help moss campion plants grow larger, but decrease the number of fruits produced by plants of a given size<ref name=":2" />.<br />
<br />
==Population Models Integrating Effects Across Different Life-Stages==<br />
The complex ways in which climate change can impact different species creates a significant challenge to predicting future management needs. Population models can provide a powerful tool for meeting this challenge. Generally, more complex population models capable of integrating climate effects on different life stages are the most useful for predicting species' responses to climate change. The two types of population models most commonly used for integrating across different life stages are matrix models<ref name=":4"><br />
Ehrlén, J., and Morris, W.F., 2015. Predicting changes in the distribution and abundance of species under environmental change. Ecology Letters, 18(3), pp. 303-314. [https://doi.org/10.1111/ele.12410 doi: 10.1111/ele.12410] [[Media:Ehrlen2015.pdf | Article pdf]]</ref> and individual-based simulations.<br />
<br />
===Matrix Models===<br />
[[wikipedia:Matrix_model|Matrix models]] are widely used because there are algebraic tools that facilitate evaluating these models and they have a flexible enough structure to accommodate a wide range of life history strategies<ref>Caswell, H., 2001. Matrix Population Models – Construction, Analysis, and Interpretation. Sinauer Associates, Sunderland, MA, USA, 722 pp. ISBN: 0-87893-096-5</ref><ref><br />
Cochran, M.E., and Ellner, S., 1992. Simple Methods for Calculating Age‐Based Life History Parameters for Stage‐Structured Populations: Ecological Archives M062-002. Ecological monographs, 62(3), pp. 345-364. [https://doi.org/10.2307/2937115 doi: 10.2307/2937115]</ref>. One of the appeals to matrix models is that the long term growth rate and the proportion of individuals expected to be in each stage class (known as the stable stage distribution) can be calculated directly using matrix algebraic tools, with the long term population growth rate given by the dominant [[wikipedia:Eigenvalues_and_eigenvectors|eigenvalue]] of the matrix model and stable stage distribution given by the corresponding [[wikipedia:Eigenvalues_and_eigenvectors|eigenvector]]<ref>Leslie, P.H., 1945. On the Use of Matrices in Certain Population Mathematics. Biometrika, 33(3), pp.183-212. [https://doi.org/10.2307/2332297 doi: 10.2307/2332297]</ref>. A key assumption in estimating long term growth rates and stable stage distributions from matrix models is that the transition rates from one life stage to the next represented by the matrix elements are constant through time. Differences in observed proportions of a population in different stages from the predicted stable stage distributions can be used to detect differences in past and present transition rates caused by changing climatic conditions<ref>Doak, D.F., and Morris, W., 1999. Detecting Population‐Level Consequences of Ongoing Environmental Change Without Long‐Term Monitoring. Ecology, 80(5), pp. 1537-1551. <br />
[https://doi.org/10.2307/176545 doi: 10.2307/176545]</ref>. <br />
<br />
Given that climate does influence vital rates, predicting how climate change will impact population growth requires evaluating matrix models reflecting changing transition rates. One approach is to take advantage of year to year variation in climate conditions and use models fit to data during different periods— perhaps corresponding to wet and dry years, or to cool and warm years<ref name=":3"><br />
Gaillard, J.M., Mark Hewison, A.J., Klein, F., Plard, F., Douhard, M., Davison, R., and Bonenfant, C., 2013. How does climate change influence demographic processes of widespread species? Lessons from the comparative analysis of contrasted populations of roe deer. Ecology Letters, 16(1), pp.48-57. [https://doi.org/10.1111/ele.12059 doi: 10.1111/ele.12059] [//www.enviro.wiki/images/5/59/Gaillard2013.pdf Article pdf]</ref>. The same technique can be used to evaluate changes in the timing of seasonal shifts in climate. For example, Gaillard et al.<ref name=":3" /> used matrix models to show that the impact of earlier onset of spring weather on [[wikipedia:Roe_deer|roe deer]] (''Capreolus capreolus'') was almost entirely due to differences in fecundity between periods of earlier and later spring weather conditions. This observation highlights another key assumption about using sensitivity or elasticity values to determine monitoring or management priorities with respect to climate change: that climate-driven changes in different vital rates are of the same, relatively small, magnitude. <br />
<br />
A more general approach better suited to using population models to predict climate change is to make matrix elements functions of climate variables<ref name=":4" /><ref name=":5">Merow, C., Latimer, A.M., Wilson, A.M., McMahon, S.M., Rebelo, A.G., and Silander Jr, J.A., 2014. On using integral projection models to generate demographically driven predictions of species' distributions: development and validation using sparse data. Ecography, 37(12), pp. 1167-1183.[https://doi.org/10.1111/ecog.00839 doi: 10.1111/ecog.00839] [//www.enviro.wiki/images/1/12/Merow2014.pdf Article pdf]</ref>. This approach has additional advantage that other factors influencing vital rates, such as individual size, density dependence, local soil conditions or management activities, can be readily incorporated and corresponding model parameters efficiently estimated from relatively sparse data<ref name=":7">Gross, K., Morris, W.F., Wolosin, M.S., and Doak, D.F., 2006. Modeling vital rates improves estimation of population projection matrices. Population Ecology, 48(1), pp. 79-89. [https://doi.org/10.1007/s10144-005-0238-8 doi: 10.1007/s10144-005-0238-8] [//www.enviro.wiki/images/6/6d/Gross2006.pdf Article pdf]</ref> and iterating the population projection forward through time with climate variables changing each time step as predicted by downscaled climate projection models<ref name=":5" />. <br />
<br />
===Individual Based Models===<br />
Individual based simulation models provide an even more general modeling framework. In an individual based model the fate of each individual is tracked through time. Movement and other individual behaviors can be directly incorporated into spatially explicit individual based models, which facilitates looking at interactions between the effects of climate and microhabitat characteristic, on future vital rates. Individual based models are also useful for directly incorporating the effects of demographic stochasticity in small populations. The use of individual based models (also referred to as [[wikipedia:Agent-based_model|agent based models]]) has been facilitated by the development of user-friendly software such as [https://scti.tools/vortex/ VORTEX]<ref>Lacy, R.C., and Pollak, J.P., 2014. Vortex: A Stochastic Simulation of the Extinction Process. Version 10.0. Chicago Zoological Society, Brookfield, Illinois, USA. [https://scti.tools/vortex/ Vortex software]</ref>and NetLogo<ref>Railsback, S.F., and Grimm, V., 2011. Agent-Based and Individual-Based Modeling: A Practical Introduction. Princeton University Press. ISBN: 978-069119083-9</ref>. Hudgens et al.<ref name=":6" /> used VORTEX to simulate San Clemente sage sparrow (since renamed San Clemente Bell's sparrow) population dynamics to highlight the impacts of introduced predators and potential of more frequent drought under different management scenarios. Social interactions often require custom models, such as the model developed to inform management of [[wikipedia:Red-cockaded_woodpecker|red-cockaded woodpeckers]] (''Picoides borealis)''<ref> Walters, J.R., Crowder, L.B., and Priddy, J.A., 2002. Population viability analysis for red‐cockaded woodpeckers using an individual‐based model. Ecological Applications, 12(1), pp. 249-260.[https://doi.org/10.2307/3061150 doi: 10.2307/3061150]</ref><ref>Letcher, B.H., Priddy, J.A., Walters, J.R., and Crowder, L.B., 1998. An individual-based, spatially-explicit simulation model of the population dynamics of the endangered red-cockaded woodpecker, ''Picoides borealis''. Biological Conservation, 86(1), pp.1-14. [https://doi.org/10.1016/S0006-3207(98)00019-6 doi: 10.1016/S0006-3207(98)00019-6]</ref>.<br />
<br />
==Promises and Pitfalls of Population Models==<br />
The primary purpose of population models is to integrate our knowledge of a species' ecology. As such, the axiom "garbage-in, garbage-out" applies to population models. Population models that mischaracterize a species' biology are doomed to make inaccurate predictions. Two common modeling mistakes are to oversimplify population structure and failing to account for correlations in how vital rates vary from year to year. <br />
<br />
===Oversimplifying Population Structure===<br />
Oversimplifying population structure often leads to observed variation in population growth rate being misattributed to factors of management interest. Especially in small populations, failing to account for age structure can lead to models that poorly reflect reality. <br />
<br />
For example, following removal of [[wikipedia:Golden_eagle|golden eagles]] (''Aquila chrysaetos'') from Santa Cruz Island, [[wikipedia:Island_fox|island foxes]] (''Urocyon littoralis'') expanded rapidly from 2000 to 2005. A subsequent decline in population growth rates by 2008 as fox numbers approached 1000 animals<ref>Coonan, T.J., Schwemm, C.A., and Garcelon, D.K., 2010. Decline and Recovery of The Island Fox: A case Study for Population Recovery. Cambridge University Press. eISBN: 9780511781612 [https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511781612 doi: 10.1017/CBO9780511781612]</ref> led to speculation among agencies responsible their recovery that the population was approaching carrying capacity. However, an age-structured matrix model showed that changes in the proportion of foxes in different age classes could also lead to the same reduction in population growth rates<ref>Hudgens, B., Ferrara, F., and Garcelon, D., 2008. Digital radio-telemetry monitoring of San Nicolas Island foxes. Final Report. Department of Defense. December 2008. [//www.enviro.wiki/images/0/07/Hudgens2008.pdf Report pdf]</ref>and subsequent surveys have supported the latter explanation. The near ubiquity of age-related population structure in creatures with lifespans longer than 1-2 years contributes to the widespread use of matrix models in conservation. <br />
<br />
===Oversimplifying Social Structure===<br />
Social structures represent another aspect of the biology of many species that, if not properly accounted for, can lead to model failure. In a dramatic example, Zeigler and Walters<ref name=":8"><br />
Zeigler, S.L., and Walters, J.R., 2014. Population models for social species: lessons learned from models of Red‐cockaded Woodpeckers (''Picoides borealis''). Ecological Applications, 24(8), pp. 2144-2154.<br />
[https://doi.org/10.1890/13-1275.1 doi: 10.1890/13-1275.1]</ref>compared predicted population trajectories for red-cockaded woodpeckers from four population models to observed population dynamics in the Sandhills region of North Carolina. Population projections from the two models that did not incorporate social structure in the form of adult helpers at breeding colonies performed significantly worse than the two models incorporating social structure, even when it was a more complex model.<br />
<br />
===Correlations Among Vital Rates===<br />
[[File: HudgensFig1v1.png|thumb|900px|right| Figure 1. Comparison of population model predictions with and without compensatory breeding. (Left panel) Population trajectory over 12 years (solid line) plotted with predicted trajectories from models with (dashed line, solid circles) and without (dashed line, empty circles) compensatory breeding. Note how model with compensatory breeding captures observed population increase from 2007-2008, while model without does not. (Right panel) Predicted risk of the population dipping below a critical threshold of 500 birds based is higher in simulations without compensatory breeding than in simulations incorporating compensatory breeding.]]<br />
When using population models to predict a species response to climate change, it is particularly important to consider correlations among vital rates. In many species vital rates are inexorably linked such that changes in one are always associated with changes in others<ref>Stearns, S.C., 1989. Trade-offs in life-history evolution. Functional ecology, 3(3), pp.259-268.<br />
[https://doi.org/10.2307/2389364 doi: 10.2307/2389364]</ref>. This kind of tradeoff may also lead to correlations between years in fecundity or growth. A population model presented by Hudgens et al.<ref name=":6" /> predicted a high risk of extinction for San Clemente Bell's sparrows associated in part with lack of reproduction during drought years. However, field biologists monitoring the population for the U.S. Navy have subsequently reported extremely high reproductive output in years following drought years. Incorporating this compensatory breeding into the population model substantially lowers both the predicted risk of extinction and predicted potential impact of increased drought frequency on the population (Figure 1).<br />
<br />
===Data Quality===<br />
A final potential issue is the quality of data used to parameterize population models. Small sample sizes divided among numerous classes impose limits on both the precision and certainty of parameter estimates<ref>Morris, W.F., and Doak, D.F., 2002. Quantitative Conservation Biology: Theory and Practice of Population Viability Analysis. Sinauer Associates, Inc. Publishers, Sunderland, Massachusetts, USA. ISBN: 978-087893546-8</ref>. However, Crone et al.<ref name=":9">Crone, E.E., Ellis, M.M., Morris, W.F., Stanley, A., Bell, T., Bierzychudek, P., Ehrlén, J., Kaye, T.N., Knight, T.M., Lesica, P., and Oostermeijer, G., 2013. Ability of matrix models to explain the past and predict the future of plant populations. Conservation Biology, 27(5), pp. 968-978. [https://doi.org/10.1111/cobi.12049 doi: 10.1111/cobi.12049]</ref> found that sample size did not predict the ability of models to forecast future dynamics of plant populations, perhaps in part because sample size issues may be mitigated by fitting data to smooth functions instead of size classes to increase the precision and reduces the uncertainty of parameter estimates<ref name=":7" />. <br />
<br />
A more subtle, and potentially more problematic aspect of data quality concerns the applicability of climate-vital rate relationships in non-analogue conditions. For example, Kiekebusch and her colleagues have found that butterfly reproduction did not vary with temperature between 20<sup>o</sup>C and 28<sup>o</sup>C in both field and greenhouse experiments<ref name=":10" /><ref>Kiekebusch, E.M., 2020. Effects of Temperature, Phenology, and Geography on Butterfly Population Dynamics under Climate Change. North Carolina State University. [//www.enviro.wiki/images/f/f8/Kiekebusch2020.pdf Dissertation pdf]</ref>. However, butterfly fecundity showed a sharp decline with warming temperatures in greenhouse experiments where temperatures exceeded 28<sup>o</sup>C (Figure 2). <br />
[[File: HudgensFig2.png|thumb|450px|left | Figure 2. Egg hatching rates from field experiments (orange circles) and greenhouse experiments (open circles). Bar above the graph shows observed field temperatures during study.]]<br />
<br />
===Lessons From Imperfect Models===<br />
Multiple reviews have concluded that it is extraordinarily difficult to precisely predict future population trajectories using population models<ref>Coulson, T., Mace, G.M., Hudson, E., and Possingham, H., 2001. The use and abuse of population viability analysis. Trends in Ecology & Evolution, 16(5), pp. 219-221. [https://doi.org/10.1016/S0169-5347(01)02137-1 doi: 10.1016/S0169-5347(01)02137-1]</ref><ref>Ellner, S.P., Fieberg, J., Ludwig, D., and Wilcox, C., 2002. Precision of Population Viability Analysis. Conservation Biology, 16(1), pp.258-261.</ref>even when models accurately describe present population dynamics<ref name=":9" />. A significant reason for the historically poor record of population models as predictors is that environmental conditions change<ref name=":9" />, and these changes are often related to changing climate patterns. As such, models incorporating both a changing climate and the influence of climate on vital rates are poised to fair better in future assessments. <br />
<br />
Moreover, even when population models do not precisely forecast future population trajectories, they still represent useful management tools<ref>Brook, B.W., Burgman, M.A., Akçakaya, H.R., O'grady, J.J., and Frankham, R., 2002. Critiques of PVA Ask the Wrong Questions: Throwing the Heuristic Baby Out With The Numerical Bath Water. Conservation Biology, 16(1), pp. 262-263. [https://doi.org/10.1046/j.1523-1739.2002.01426.x DOI: 10.1046/j.1523-1739.2002.01426.x]</ref>. For example, the San Clemente Bell's sparrow model by Hudgens et al.<ref name=":6" /> that failed to incorporate compensatory breeding nonetheless identified predation as the primary driver of extinction risk. In the seven years that followed the development of that model, increasing nest survival rates were associated with sustained population expansion<ref>Meiman, S.T., Munoz, S.A., Bridges, A.S., Garcelon, D.K. 2016. San Clemente Bell's sparrow population monitoring breeding season report- 2016. U.S. Navy Environmental Department, Naval Facilities Engineering Command Southwest. Unpublished report.</ref><ref>Ehlers, S.E., Bridges A.S., Hudgens B.R., Garcelon D.K. 2013. Population monitoring of the San Clemente Bell's sparrow- 2012. U.S. Navy Environmental Department, Naval Facilities Engineering Command Southwest. Unpublished report.</ref>. <br />
<br />
In some cases, the failure of a model to predict future trajectories points to a lack of understanding of a critical aspect of a species' ecology. For example, the contrast between models with and without social structure highlights the importance of incorporating social structure into red-cockaded woodpecker management practices<ref name=":8" />. In a similar vein, comparisons of population models including and omitting climate effects on vital rates may point to the susceptibility of a species to future climate change and importance of considering climate when planning management actions. <br />
<br />
==New Directions==<br />
When used appropriately, population models have great potential to increase our understanding of how different species will respond to climate change. This potential is largely untapped as the application of population models linked to a changing climate is still in its nascent stages<ref name=":4" />. It is becoming increasingly common to include climate-drivers of vital rates into population models<ref>Bakker, V.J., Doak, D.F., Roemer, G.W., Garcelon, D.K., Coonan, T.J., Morrison, S.A., Lynch, C., Ralls, K., and Shaw, R., 2009. Incorporating ecological drivers and uncertainty into a demographic population viability analysis for the island fox. Ecological Monographs, 79(1), pp. 77-108. [https://doi.org/10.1890/07-0817.1 doi: 10.1890/07-0817.1]</ref><ref>Lytle, D.A., Merritt, D.M., Tonkin, J.D., Olden, J.D., and Reynolds, L.V., 2017. Linking river flow regimes to riparian plant guilds: a community‐wide modeling approach. Ecological Applications, 27(4), pp. 1338-1350. [https://doi.org/10.1002/eap.1528 doi: 10.1002/eap.1528]</ref><ref>Louthan, A.M. and Morris, W., 2021. Climate change impacts on population growth across a species’ range differ due to nonlinear responses of populations to climate and variation in rates of climate change. PloS one, 16(3), p.e0247290. [https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0247290 doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0247290] [//www.enviro.wiki/images/b/b0/Louthan2021.pdf Article pdf]</ref>. Early examples of population models directly linking population and climate projection models have focused on predicting how changing levels of sea ice are likely to impact [[wikipedia:Polar_bear|polar bears]]<ref>Hunter, C.M., Caswell, H., Runge, M.C., Regehr, E.V., Amstrup, S.C., and Stirling, I., 2010. Climate change threatens polar bear populations: a stochastic demographic analysis. Ecology, 91(10), pp. 2883-2897. [https://doi.org/10.1890/09-1641.1 doi: 10.1890/09-1641.1]</ref> or [[wikipedia:Emperor_penguin|emperor penguins]]<ref>Jenouvrier, S., Holland, M., Stroeve, J., Serreze, M., Barbraud, C., Weimerskirch, H., and Caswell, H., 2014. Projected continent-wide declines of the emperor penguin under climate change. Nature Climate Change, 4(8), p.p. 715-718. [https://doi.org/10.1038/NCLIMATE2280 doi: 10.1038/NCLIMATE2280]</ref>. Ultimately, the utility of these and other modeling methods as tools to predict species' responses to climate change rests on our understanding of the underlying processes, and hence, maintaining an ongoing feedback loop between model development and evaluation, and population monitoring and experimental studies.<br />
<br />
==References==<br />
<references /><br />
<br />
==See Also==<br />
*[https://climatetoolbox.org/ The Climate Toolbox: Web tools for visualizing past and projected climate and hydrology of the contiguous United States]<br />
*[//www.enviro.wiki/images/e/e7/RC-2511GuidanceDocument.pdf Web tools for riparian and aquatic population modeling]</div>Jhurleyhttps://www.enviro.wiki/index.php?title=Infrastructure_Resilience&diff=18078Infrastructure Resilience2026-04-04T00:12:55Z<p>Jhurley: </p>
<hr />
<div>Infrastructure systems have been major contributors to the growth of the United States. [[wikipedia:Hoover Dam | Hoover Dam]] helped desert regions in the west to bloom. The [[wikipedia:Interstate Highway System | Interstate Highway System]] spanned the states and opened up the country to growth and provided corridors for trade. As the country grew, new technologies developed, and infrastructures developed around them that are integral to our daily lives. These infrastructures can be vulnerable to a variety of disruptions, including human events, earthquakes, extreme weather events and [[Climate Change Primer | climate change]] impacts. The creation of the President’s Commission on Critical Infrastructure Protection (PCCIP) in 1996<ref name="EO13010">[https://itlaw.fandom.com/wiki/Executive_Order_13010 Executive Order 13010]. Critical Infrastructure Protection, 61 Fed. Reg., No. 138, July 17, 1996</ref> resulted in the development of a national plan to identify the critical infrastructure sectors and how to identify and reduce their vulnerabilities to natural or deliberate threats. Subsequent extreme natural disasters like Hurricanes [[wikipedia:Hurricane Katrina | Katrina]] and [[wikipedia:Hurricane Sandy | Sandy]] pointed out additional limitations in the resilience of infrastructure due to the interconnected nature of infrastructure systems. Infrastructure cannot be made totally immune to disruptive events, but it can be made more resilient by considering the dependencies and interdependencies within and between systems and by taking a system-of-systems view of the vulnerabilities and threats to them.<br />
<div style="float:right;margin:0 0 2em 2em;">__TOC__</div><br />
<br />
'''Related Article(s):'''<br />
<br />
*[[Climate Change Primer]]<br />
*[[Downscaled High Resolution Datasets for Climate Change Projections]]<br />
<br />
'''Contributor(s):''' [[Dr. John Hummel]] and [[Dr. Frederic Petit]]<br />
<br />
'''Key Resources(s):'''<br />
<br />
*[https://itlaw.fandom.com/wiki/Executive_Order_13010 President’s Commission on Critical Infrastructure Protection (Executive Order 13010)]<ref name="EO13010" /><br />
*[https://obamawhitehouse.archives.gov/the-press-office/2013/02/12/presidential-policy-directive-critical-infrastructure-security-and-resil Presidential Policy Directive (PPD-21) – Critical Infrastructure Security and Resilience]<ref name="PPD2013">[https://obamawhitehouse.archives.gov/the-press-office/2013/02/12/presidential-policy-directive-critical-infrastructure-security-and-resil Presidential Policy Directive – Critical Infrastructure Security and Resilience]. The White House Office of the Press Secretary, February 12, 2013.</ref><br />
<br />
==Introduction==<br />
Infrastructure systems have always been an important aspect of the United States and signature elements of the country’s growth—examples such as [[wikipedia:Hoover Dam | Hoover Dam]], [[wikipedia:Grand Central Terminal | Grand Central Station]], and the [[wikipedia:Interstate Highway System | Interstate Highway System]]. As the country grew and evolved, other infrastructure elements took on important aspects of everyday life, such as [[wikipedia: Global Positioning System | Global Positioning System (GPS)]] and the [[wikipedia:World Wide Web | World Wide Web (WWW)]]. Vulnerabilities in these systems were largely taken for granted until terrorist events such as the [https://www.britannica.com/event/Tokyo-subway-attack-of-1995 Tokyo sarin gas subway attacks], the [[wikipedia:1993 World Trade Center bombing | 1993 terrorist bombing of the U.S. World Trade Center]], and [[Wikipedia: Oklahoma City bombing | the bombing of the Federal Building in Oklahoma City]] demonstrated the reality of threats from human elements. The subsequent creation of the President’s Commission on Critical Infrastructure Protection (PCCIP) in 1996<ref name="EO13010" /> resulted in the development of a national plan to identify the critical infrastructure sectors and how to identify and reduce their vulnerabilities to natural or deliberate threats. Subsequent extreme natural disasters like Hurricanes [[wikipedia:Hurricane Katrina | Katrina]] and [[wikipedia:Hurricane Sandy | Sandy]] pointed out additional limitations in the resilience of infrastructure due to the interconnected nature of infrastructure systems. <br />
In its October 1997 report, the PCCIP<ref name="PCCIP1997">President’s Commission on Critical Infrastructure Protection, 1997. Critical Foundations: Protecting America’s Infrastructures. Washington,DC. [//www.enviro.wiki/images/6/6d/PCCIP1997.pdf Report pdf]</ref> defined an infrastructure as “a network of independent, mostly privately owned, man-made systems and processes that function collaboratively and synergistically to produce and distribute a continuous flow of essential goods and services.”<br />
In the original PCCIP assessments considered eight critical infrastructures whose “…incapacity or destruction would have a debilitating impact on our defense and economic security”<ref name="EO13010" />. The [[wikipedia:United States Department of Homeland Security | U.S. Department of Homeland Security]] has subsequently increased the number of critical infrastructures to the 16 sectors<ref name="CISAcis">U.S. Department of Homeland Security, Cybersecurity & Infrastructure Security Agency, [https://www.cisa.gov/critical-infrastructure-sectors “Critical Infrastructure Sectors”.]</ref>, listed in Table 1, and detailed a plan to strengthen and maintain, secure, functioning, and resilient critical infrastructure.<ref name="PPD2013" /><br />
{| class="wikitable" style="float:left; text-align: center; margin-right: 20px;"<br />
|+Table 1. DHS Critical Infrastructure Sectors<ref name="CISAcis" /><br />
|-<br />
|Chemical||Commercial Facilities||Communications||Critical<br>Manufacturing<br />
|-<br />
|Dams||Defense Industrial<br>Base||Emergency Services||Energy<br />
|-<br />
|Financial Services||Food and Agriculture||Government Facilities<br />
||Healthcare and Public<br>Health<br />
|-<br />
|Information Technology||Nuclear Reactors, Materials,<br>and Waster||Transportation Systems||Water and Wastewater<br>Systems<br />
|}<br />
<br />
==Analyzing Infrastructure Vulnerabilities==<br />
Early studies on critical infrastructure vulnerabilities focused on physical threats, and the strategies to mitigate those vulnerabilities focused primarily on providing physical protection with “guns, gates, and guards.” As the array of potential threats expanded to include factors such as cyber, chemical, biological, radiological, and nuclear attacks, the vulnerability assessment methodologies evolved and expanded to include the consideration of the dependencies and interdependencies within and between infrastructure assets. The myriad of interdependencies in infrastructure systems can result in a disruption in a component of one infrastructure cascading through a network of dependencies and resulting in the taking down of a larger infrastructure, such as [[wikipedia: Northeast blackout of 2003 | the northeast blackout in August 2003]]. The cause of the blackout was attributed to a software bug in a control room alarm system in Ohio, which made operators unaware of a need to redistribute the electrical load after transmission lines drooped into foliage. Events like this demonstrate that protecting infrastructure from all hazards is impossible. Instead, one must understand the dependencies and interdependencies in infrastructures, and how they differ, so they can be designed to be resilient to disruptions when they inevitably occur. <br />
==System View of Infrastructure Resilience==<br />
Numerous definitions can be found for resilience that depends upon the perspective of the problem being addressed, such as material physics, ecosystems, engineering, and psychological well-being, to name just a few. For the study of infrastructure resilience and how it contributes to regional and community resilience, the following definition is used<ref name="Hummel2013"> Hummel, J. R. and Lewis, L.P., 2013. Analytical Support for Societal and Regional Resilience in Support of National Security. Phalanx, 46(3), pp 10-17. [https://www.jstor.org/stable/24911162 Article]</ref>:<br />
''“Resilience is the ability of an entity—e.g., asset, organization, community, region—to anticipate, resist, absorb, respond to, adapt to, and recover from a disturbance from either natural or man-made events.” ''<br />
Analyses of the resilience of infrastructure should be taken from an integrated systems perspective<ref name="PPD2013" /> of the infrastructure and the community and region being supported. Figure 1 provides a schematic representation of the systems that support resilience<ref name="Hummel2016">Hummel, J.R., 2016. The Last Word Resilience: Buzz Word or Critical Analytical Issue? Phalanx, 49(3), pp. 60–63. [https://www.jstor.org/stable/24910216 Article]</ref>. The high-level systems shown in Figure 1 can be expanded to finer scale system as needed. The Governing System in Figure 1 is deliberately '''not''' called a Government System because the intent is to be able to represent governing systems at multiple levels of population granularity—groups, villages, tribes, communities, countries, etc. These groups have different ways in which they organize themselves, and the organizing details may or may not be formalized and may or may not be codified. Organized criminal networks, for example, have strong governing and enforcement mechanisms that members clearly understand, but these mechanisms are not codified in any written form. <br />
[[File: InfrastrFig1.png | thumb | 650px | Figure 1. Schematic Representation of the Interconnected Systems that Contribute to Resilience<ref name="Hummel2016" />.]] <br />
The Human Landscape System is often the most overlooked system in resilience assessments of communities and infrastructure, yet it is probably the most important. It represents the actors who are the decision makers, the implementers of plans and activities, and the groups in the general population that will be impacted by the plans and the external forces that can disrupt the community <ref name="CIP2016"> Hummel, J.R. and Schneider, J.L., 2016. The Human Landscape – The Functional Bridge between the Physical, Economic, and Social Elements of Community Resilience. Center for Infrastructure Protection and Homeland Security Report. [//www.enviro.wiki/images/b/b7/Hummel2016.pdf Report pdf]</ref>. The Human Landscape is also the system where the measures of effectiveness of resilience activities are assessed. For example, during the COVID-19 pandemic, the efforts to reduce the spread of the virus depended upon the collective behaviors of people to shelter in place, practice social distancing, and wear facial masks in public. The basic measures of the effectiveness of the efforts to control the spread of the virus were the number of cases of infection hospital strain and lives lost. <br />
The Natural Environment system in Figure 1 consists of the terrain, air, ocean, and space environments where the infrastructure and community systems are located and operated. The natural environment can be a driver for where an infrastructure is located and will be the source of the natural forces to which it must respond.<br />
<br />
==Assessing and Mitigating Climate Impacts on Infrastructure==<br />
The DHS Regional Resiliency Assessment Program<ref name="CISArrap">U.S. Department of Homeland Security, Cybersecurity & Infrastructure Security Agency, [https://www.cisa.gov/regional-resiliency-assessment-program “Regional Resilience Assessment Program”].</ref> (RRAP) has conducted analyses of the vulnerabilities of infrastructure to a variety of disruptions, including earthquakes, climate impacts, and extreme weather events. These assessments utilize a variety of models and tools in the resiliency assessments, depending upon the context of the study.<br />
For example, an RRAP study done in the Casco Bay Region of Maine examined the disruptions to infrastructure from projections of coastal flooding triggered by sea level rise and heavy precipitation. In that study, inundation models driven by sea level and precipitation projections generated areas of flooding in the Casco Bay area. Overlays of the existing infrastructure elements were then used to identify the locations of electric power assets that could be disrupted by the projected flooding.<br />
[[File: InfrastrFig2.png | left | thumb | 500px | Figure 2. Potential Impacts from Flooding of Electric Assets in the Casco Bay Region of Maine.]] <br />
In California, an integrated water system was developed in the second half of the 20th century, the [[wikipedia:California State Water Project | California State Water Project (SWP)]], to collect and store water from the northern portion of the state and deliver it to communities in the central and southern regions of the state. The SWP was developed based on the climatic conditions of the time and the locations of the dams, reservoirs, canals, and aqueduct were selected based on the historic precipitation patterns of the mid-20th century. The effectiveness of the SWP to continue to collect and deliver water under projected climate conditions has been studied by combining high-resolution climate projections and overlaying the results against the SWP elements. The projections of 21st mid-century and end-of-century climate conditions<ref name="Reich2018"> Reich, K.D., Berg, N., Walton D.B., Schwartz, M., Sun, F., Huang, X., and Hall, A., 2018. “Climate Change in the Sierra Nevada: California’s Water Future. UCLA (University of California at Los Angeles) Center for Climate Science. [//www.enviro.wiki/images/7/75/Reich2018.pdf Report pdf]</ref> indicate changes in the timing of precipitation in California and how it falls (rain or snow). The changes in timing indicate that more of the precipitation may fall earlier in the year and in the form of rain, when the existing SWP is least able to collect and store the water because the reservoirs are required to have lower storage levels for flood control purposes. This could result in a requirement for significant investment in new reservoirs at new locations better able to capture and store the precipitation.<br />
<br />
The [[wikipedia: 2021 Texas power crisis | 2021 power crisis in Texas]] pointed to the importance of the role of the natural environment in energy system planning. Energy grids are a combination of numerous nodes and links and disruptions in any component can potentially cascade through the system. Energy planning in Texas has traditionally considered only historical environmental factors when planning for future energy needs in terms of estimating future energy loads and did not include the consideration of extreme weather events—hot or cold—in planning. The extreme cold weather event resulted in two significant issues for the energy planners. First, many natural gas wells and pipelines were not winterized and failed or shutdown, depriving the electrical generating facilities of the natural gas to power the facilities. Second, it takes far more energy to warm households up from near freezing temperatures than it does to cool them down from a summer heat wave, increasing the demand load on the electric grid. Tools such EPfAST <ref name="Portante2011"> Portante, E.C., Craig B.A., Talaber Malone L., Kavicky, J., Folga S.F., and Cedres S., 2011. EPfast: A model for simulating uncontrolled islanding in large power systems. Proceedings of the 2011 Winter Simulation Conference (WSC), pp. 1758-1769. [https://ieeexplore.ieee.org/document/6147891 doi: 10.1109/WSC.2011.6147891]</ref> and NGFast <ref name="Portante2017"> Portante, E. C., Kavicky J.A., Craig B.A., Talaber L.E., and Folga, S.M., 2017. Modeling Electric Power and Natural Gas System Interdependencies. Journal of Infrastructure Systems, 23(4), 04017035 [https://ascelibrary.org/doi/full/10.1061/%28ASCE%29IS.1943-555X.0000395 doi:10.1061/(ASCE)IS.1943-555X.0000395] [//www.enviro.wiki/images/2/26/Portante2017.pdf Article pdf] </ref> can be used to study integrated electric power and natural gas system interdependencies.<br />
<br />
In many coastal areas of the country, transportation systems are having to contend with disruptions from storm surges and high-tide flooding <ref name="Toolkit2021"> U.S. Federal Government, 2021. [https://toolkit.climate.gov/topics/coastal-flood-risk/shallow-coastal-flooding-nuisance-flooding High-Tide Flooding. U.S. Climate Resilience Toolkit.]</ref>, which occurs when local sea level rises above a given threshold in the absence of storm surge or riverine flooding. This type of flooding is occurring on a regular basis along portions of the U.S. east coast and portions of the south Florida coast and is expected to worsen as sea levels rise. In south Florida, the problem is made worse because much of the area sits on porous limestone which allows the ocean to seep up from the ground – meaning that residents face the climate impacts from storm surges from the sea and rising ground waters from below. The intrusion of ocean water into the aquifers can impact the availability of potable water from aquifers as well as reduce the ability of the ground to absorb runoff, so floodwaters will remain longer<ref name="Mazzei2021"> A 20-Foot Sea Wall? Miami Faces the Hard Choices of Climate Change, New York Times. [https://www.nytimes.com/2021/06/02/us/miami-fl-seawall-hurricanes.html Article]</ref>.<br />
In developing mitigation strategies for [[Climate Change Primer | climate change]] impacts, infrastructure developers look at ways to protect or retrofit existing systems and how to develop new systems that take into account potential [[Climate Change Primer | climate change]] impacts. As an example, the predictions of higher summer temperatures from [[Climate Change Primer | climate change]] can mean that the operating ranges for heat, ventilation, and air-conditioning systems may change and require new designs for such systems. These changes may also result in changes in building codes in different areas<ref name="CCA">Ministry of Environment of Denmark/Environmental Protection Agency. [https://en.klimatilpasning.dk/sectors/buildings/climate-change-impact-on-buildings/ Climate Change Adaptation, Climate Change Impact on Buildings and Constructions]</ref><ref name="Enker2020">Enker, R.A., and Morrison G.M., 2020. The potential contribution of building codes to climate change response policies for the built environment. Energy Efficiency, 13, pp. 789-807. [https://doi.org/10.1007/s12053-020-09871-7 doi:10.1007/s12053-020-09871-7]</ref><ref name="Myers2020"> Myers, A., 2020. Building Codes: A Powerful yet Underused Climate Policy that Could Save Billions. Forbes. [https://www.forbes.com/sites/energyinnovation/2020/12/02/a-powerful-yet-underused-climate-tool-building-codes/?sh=363a2c1d978c Article]</ref>.<br />
[[wikipedia:Hurricane Sandy | Hurricane Sandy]] provided a number of critical lessons for infrastructure developers. One major lesson learned was that basements in building should not be used for any back-up or critical systems – power, computers, or telecommunications. Many of the hospitals in New York City lost power because their reserve generators were in basements which flooded. Another one was that waterproof doors should be installed at entrances to subway stations.<br />
One of the major challenges facing developers is what environmental conditions should they build for. The majority of building codes are based on analyses based on historical environmental conditions and are not representative of current conditions.<br />
The Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) has the responsibility to update floodplain maps every five years. These maps are used to identify flood prone areas and locations where flood insurance is required. However, it was estimated in early 2020 that only one-third of nation’s 3.5 million miles of streams and 46% of shoreline have had maps generated<ref name="ASFPM2020"> Association of State Floodplain Managers. 2020. Flood Mapping for the Nation: A Cost Analysis for Completing and Maintaining the Nation’s NFIP Flood Map Inventory. Madison, WI. [//www.enviro.wiki/images/a/af/ASFPM2020.pdf Report pdf]</ref>. In addition, climate projections are pointing towards more frequent severe precipitation events and in urban areas where developments are changing runoff patterns, the chances for flooding events may increase.<br />
<br />
==Climate Change and National Security==<br />
The CNA Military Advisory Board, a group of retired three- and four-star military officers, stated in 2007<ref name="CNA2007"> CNA Military Advisory Board, 2007. National Security and the Threat of Climate Change. CNA Corporation, Arlington, VA. [//www.enviro.wiki/images/6/6e/CNA2007.pdf Report pdf] </ref> and reaffirmed in 2014<ref name="CNA2014">CNA Military Advisory Board, 2014. National Security and the Accelerating Risks of Climate Change. CNA Corporation, Arlington, VA. [//www.enviro.wiki/images/2/26/CNA2014.pdf Report pdf]</ref> that [[Climate Change Primer | climate change]] will impact U.S. national security interests by increasing the chances for conflict around the world and by threatening U.S. military facilities. These assessments were also noted in a report from the National Intelligence Council in 2008<ref name="NIC2008"> National Intelligence Council, 2008. Global Trends 2025: A Transformed World. US Government Printing Office, Washington, DC. [//www.enviro.wiki/images/f/f3/GlobalTrends2008.pdf Report pdf]</ref>. As an example, a prolonged drought that hit the Mediterranean area near Syria from 2006 to 2011 is now felt to have been the precursor of factors that led to the civil war in Syria. As crops were destroyed, rural residents moved to the cities where tensions over lack of food and jobs ultimately triggered the political tensions that led to the Syrian civil war<ref name="Polk2013"> Polk, W. R., 2013. Understanding Syria: From Pre-Civil War to Post-Assad. The Atlantic. [https://www.theatlantic.com/international/archive/2013/12/understanding-syria-from-pre-civil-war-to-post-assad/281989/ Article]</ref>.<br />
<br />
The Department of Defense (DoD) conducted a survey in 2018<ref name="SLVAS2018"> Department of Defense, 2018. Climate-Related risk to DoD Infrastructure Initial Vulnerability Assessment Survey (SLVAS) Report. Office of the Undersecretary of Defense for Acquisition, Technology, and Logistics. [//www.enviro.wiki/images/a/a4/SLVAS2018.pdf Report pdf]</ref> to determine which DoD facilities have experienced negative effects from past extreme weather events in order to identify facilities that might be vulnerable to future extreme weather event. The impact of extreme weather events on military operations was demonstrated in October 2018 when [[wikipedia:Hurricane Michael | Hurricane Michael]], a Category 5 hurricane, devastated Tyndall AFB, damaging or destroying 95% of the base’s 1,300 structures and forcing the primary support missions to be relocated to other military installations. Tyndall AFB is home to two F-22 fighter squadrons, and it was estimated that about 10% of the U.S. F-22 inventory was damaged or destroyed by [[wikipedia:Hurricane Michael | Hurricane Michael]]<ref name="Panda2018"> Panda, A., 2018. Nearly 20 Percent of the US F-22 Inventory Was Damaged or Destroyed in Hurricane Michael. The Diplomat. [https://thediplomat.com/2018/10/nearly-10-percent-of-the-us-f-22-inventory-was-damaged-or-destroyed-in-hurricane-michael/ Article]</ref>. In addition to the U.S.-based facilities, DoD operates a number of facilities around the world. Some of them involve unique facilities located at strategic locations. One example is [[Wikipedia:Diego Garcia | Diego Garcia]], an island in the British Indian Ocean Territory that is part of Chagos Archipelago. Diego Garcia is home to U.S. naval and air facilities that provide critical force projection activities in the Asia Pacific region. Analyses of the impact of [[Climate Change Primer | climate change]] indicate that many Pacific atolls could be rendered uninhabitable by sea level rise and wave-driven flooding<ref name="Storlazzi2018"> Storlazzi, C.D., Gingerich, S.B., van Dongeren, A., Cheriton, O.M., Swarzenski, P. W., Quataert, E., Voss, C. I., Field, D. W., Annamalai, H., Piniak, G. A., and McCall, R., 2018. Most atolls will be uninhabitable by the mid-21st century because of sea-level rise exacerbating wave-driven flooding. Science Advances, 4(4). [https://www.science.org/doi/10.1126/sciadv.aap9741| doi: 10.1126/sciadv.aap9741] [//www.enviro.wiki/images/8/82/Storlazzi2018.pdf Article pdf]</ref>.<br />
U.S. based military facilities are already facing [[Climate Change Primer | climate change]] impacts. In 2019, the U.S. Government Accountability Office (GAO) released a report to Congress detailing how DoD installation managers need to assess the risks from climate change to their facilities and to incorporate those risks into the master plans for the facilities (GAO, 2019)<ref name="gao2019"> United States Government Accountability Office, 2019. Climate Resilience, DOD Needs to Assess Risk and Provide Guidance on Use of Climate projections in Installation Master Plans and Facilities Designs, GAO-19-453. [//www.enviro.wiki/images/d/de/Gao2019.pdf Report pdf]</ref>.<br />
<br />
Naval Station Norfolk in Virginia has been on the front line of [[Climate Change Primer | climate change]] impacts, having dealt with high tide flooding for a number of years in which low-lying areas are flooded during high tides. This problem is not unique to the Norfolk area but is being felt in a number of areas along the east coast of the United States. The majority of the Norfolk area is under 10 feet (ft) above sea level and the worst-case scenario estimates that sea level rise by the end of the century could be on the order of 6 ft. Under these conditions, portions of the Norfolk area could experience flooding during any high tide. This flooding could result in land loss as the flooded area become part of the tidal zone. The high sea level could also expose previously unexposed areas to storm surge flooding<ref name="kramer2016"> Kramer, D., 2016. Norfolk: A case study in sea-level rise. Physics Today, 69(5), pp. 22-25. [https://doi.org/10.1063/PT.3.3163 doi: 10.1063/PT.3.3163] [//www.enviro.wiki/images/5/50/Kramer2016.pdf Article pdf]</ref>.<br />
<br />
==References==<br />
<references /><br />
<br />
==See Also==<br />
*U.S. Department of Defense, 2019.[//www.enviro.wiki/images/2/2f/DoD2019.PDF Report on Effects of a Changing Climate to the Department of Defense]<br />
*Naval Facilities Engineering Command, 2017. [//www.enviro.wiki/images/3/37/NAVFACHandbook2017.pdf Climate Change Planning Handbook Installation Adaptation and Resilience]<br />
*[https://www.serdp-estcp.org/Program-Areas/Resource-Conservation-and-Resiliency/Infrastructure-Resiliency/(language)/eng-US Strategic Environmental Research and Development Program (SERDP) and Environmental Security Technology Certification Program (ESTCP) – Infrastructure Resiliency]<br />
*U.S. Department of Homeland Security, 2012. [//www.enviro.wiki/images/a/af/CCAR2012.pdf Climate Change Adaptation Roadmap]</div>Jhurleyhttps://www.enviro.wiki/index.php?title=Climate_Change_Effects_on_Wildlife&diff=18077Climate Change Effects on Wildlife2026-04-03T23:12:08Z<p>Jhurley: Removed redirect to Article Not Available</p>
<hr />
<div>Climate change affects both terrestrial<ref>Diffenbaugh, N. S. and Field, C. B., 2013. Changes in Ecologically Critical Terrestrial Climate Conditions. Science, 341(6145), pp. 486-492. [https://doi.org/10.1126/science.1237123 doi: 10.1126/science.1237123]</ref> and aquatic biomes<ref>Hoegh-Guldberg, O., and Bruno, J. F., 2010. The Impact of Climate Change on the World’s Marine Ecosystem. Science, 328(5985), pp. 1523-1528. [https://doi.org/10.1126/science.1189930 doi: 10.1126/science.1189930]</ref> causing significant effects on ecosystem functions and biodiversity<ref name=":0">Bellard, C., Berteslsmeier, C., Leadley, P., Thuiller, W., and Courchamp, F., 2012. Impacts of climate change on the future of biodiversity. Ecological Letters, 15(4), pp. 365-377. [https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1461-0248.2011.01736.x doi: 10.1111/j.1461-0248.2011.01736.x] [//www.enviro.wiki/images/a/a4/Bellard2012.pdf Article pdf]</ref>. Climate change is affecting several key ecological processes and patterns that will have cascading impacts on wildlife and habitat<ref name=":1">Inkley, D. B., Anderson, M. G., Blaustein, A. R., Burkett, V. R., Felzer, B., Griffith, B., Price, J., and Root, T. L., 2004. Global Climate Change and Wildlife in North America. Wildlife Society Technical Review 04-2. The Wildlife Society, Bethesda, MD, 26 pp. [//www.enviro.wiki/images/f/f1/Inkley2004.pdf Report pdf]</ref>. For example, sea-level rise, changes in the timing and duration of growing seasons, and changes in primary production are mainly driven by changes to global environmental variables (e.g., temperature and atmospheric CO<sub>2</sub>). Climate-induced changes in the environment ultimately impact wildlife population abundance and distributions.<br />
<div style="float:right;margin:0 0 2em 2em;">__TOC__</div><br />
'''Related Article(s):'''<br />
<br />
*[[Climate Change Primer|Climate Change]]<br />
*[[Downscaled High Resolution Datasets for Climate Change Projections]]<br />
*[[Predicting Species Responses to Climate Change with Population Models]]<br />
*[[Restoration of Ecological Function in Terrestrial Systems Impacted by Invasive Species]]<br />
<br />
'''Contributor(s):''' [[Dr. Breanna F. Powers]] and [[Dr. Julie A. Heath]]<br />
<br />
'''Key Resource(s):'''<br />
<br />
*[https://www.enviro.wiki/images/f/f1/Inkley2004.pdf Global climate change and wildlife in North America. Wildlife Society Technical Review 04-2]<ref name=":1" /><br />
*[https://www.enviro.wiki/images/a/a4/Bellard2012.pdf Impacts of climate change on the future of biodiversity]<ref name=":0" /><br />
<br />
==Introduction==<br />
[[File:PowersFig1.png|thumb|900px|left | Figure 1. The predicted extinction risk (by percentage with 95% CIs) from climate change by different regions, colors represent a gradient from least to most extinction risks (green to red) based upon the number of relevant studies (n). Figure is from Urban (2015)<ref name=":2" />. Reprinted with permission from AAAS. Any use of this figure requires the prior written permission of AAAS]]<br />
[[File:PowersFig2.png|thumb|900px|right| Figure 2. Conceptual diagram showing how increased water temperatures and pCO₂ (partial pressure of carbon dioxide) affect the early life stages of fish. Where arrow direction indicated increasing rate ( ↑ ), decreasing rate ( ↓ ), or both directions depending on other environmental variables ( ↕️ ). Figure is from Pankhurst and Munday (2011)<ref name=":4" />.]]<br />
<br />
Global&nbsp;climate&nbsp;change&nbsp;will affect ecosystem functions and cycles such as nutrient, hydraulic, and carbon cycles, changing aspects of environmental conditions such as temperature, soil moisture, and precipitation<ref>Davidson, E. A. and Janssens, I. A., 2006. Temperature sensitivity of soil carbon decomposition and feedbacks to climate change. Nature, 440, pp. 165-173.[https://doi.org/10.1038/nature04514 doi: 10.1038/nature04514]</ref><ref>Melillo, J. M., McGuire, A. D., Kicklighter, D. W., Moore, B., Vorosmarty, C. J., and Schloss, A. L., 1993. Global climate change and terrestrial net primary production. Nature, 363, pp. 234-240. [https://doi.org/10.1038/363234a0 doi: 10.1038/363234a0]</ref>. Wildlife species are adapted to their environments and changes to the environment and habitat conditions will mediate effects, either directly or indirectly, on species survival, fecundity and ultimately population persistence<ref>Alig, R. J., Technical Coordinator, 2011. Effects of Climate Change on Natural Resources and Communities: A Compendium of Briefing Papers. U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Pacific Northwest Research Station, General Technical Report, [https://www.fs.usda.gov/treesearch/pubs/37513 PNW-GTR-837], Portland, OR, 169p. [https://doi.org/10.2737/PNW-GTR-837 doi:10.2737/PNW-GTR-837] [//www.enviro.wiki/images/f/f2/Pnwgtr837.pdf Report pdf]</ref><ref>Acevedo-Whitehouse, K., and Duffus, A. L. J., 2009. Effects of environmental change on wildlife health. Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society B: Biological Sciences, 364(1534), pp. 3429-3438. [https://doi.org/10.1098/rstb.2009.0128 doi: 10.1098/rstb.2009.0128]</ref><ref>Milligan, S. R., Holt, W. V., and Lloyd, R., 2009. Impacts of climate change and environmental factors on reproduction and development in wildlife. Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society B: Biological Sciences, 364(1534), pp. 3313-3319. [https://doi.org/10.1098/rstb.2009.0175 doi: 10.1098/rstb.2009.0175] [//www.enviro.wiki/images/a/ad/Milligan2009.pdf Article pdf]</ref>. The ability to adapt to changing habitat conditions as a result of climate change will differ across individual species and between populations. Some wildlife species may be more vulnerable to climate change than other species (Figure 1). Vulnerability is often linked to particular life-history traits (e.g., specialized habitat needs or limited dispersal abilities, see Pacifici et al. 2015P<ref>Pacifici, M., Foden, W., and Visconti, P., 2015. Assessing species vulnerability to climate change. Nature Climate Change 5, pp. 215-225. [https://doi.org/10.1038/nclimate2448 doi: 10.1038/nclimate2448]</ref> for a review on species vulnerability to climate change) or genetic composition. For example, grassland birds may be more vulnerable to changing climate than forest birds as forests can buffer change more so than grasslands<ref>Jarzyna, M. A., Zuckerberg, B., Finley, A. O., and Porter, W. F., 2016. Synergistic effects of climate change and land cover: grassland birds are more vulnerable to climate change. Landscape Ecology, 31(10), pp. 2275-2290. [https://doi.org/10.1007/s10980-016-0399-1 doi: 10.1007/s10980-016-0399-1]</ref>. Projected changes in the climate will generally have adverse effects of wildlife populations<ref>IPCC, 2001. Climate Change 2001: Synthesis Report. A Contribution of Working Groups I, II, and III to the Third Assessment Report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change. R.T. Watson and the Core Writing Team (eds.). Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, United Kingdom, and New York, NY, USA, 398p. [//www.enviro.wiki/images/5/56/IPCC2001.pdf Report pdf]</ref>, though there are some species coping with climate change or benefitting from environmental change. For example, American kestrels (Falco sparverius) have shifted their breeding phenology to earlier in the year and may now raise two broods of young within a breeding season<ref>Smith, S. H., Steenhof, K., McClure, C. J. W., and Heath, J. A. 2017. Earlier nesting by generalist predatory bird is associated with human responses to climate change. Journal of Animal Ecology, 86(1), pp. 98-107. [https://doi.org/10.1111/1365-2656.12604 doi: 10.1111/1365-2656.12604] [//www.enviro.wiki/images/5/5d/Smith2017.pdf Article pdf]</ref>.<br />
<br />
==The Influence of Climate Change on Wildlife and Habitats==<br />
Climate change effects on wildlife include increases in disease and changes to pathogen distributions, patterns, and outbreaks in wildlife<ref>Bradley, B. A., Wilcove, D. S., and Oppenheimer, M., 2010. Climate change increases risk of plant invasion in the Eastern United States. Biological Invasions, 12, pp.1855-1872. [https://doi.org/10.1007/s10530-009-9597-y doi: 10.1007/s10530-009-9597-y]</ref><ref>Cudmore, T. J., Björklund, N., Carroll, A. L., and Lindgren, B. S., 2010. Climate change and the range expansion of an aggressive bark beetle: evidence of higher beetle reproduction in naïve host tree populations. Journal of Applied Ecology, 47(5), pp. 1036-1043. [https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-2664.2010.01848.x doi: 10.1111/j.1365-2664.2010.01848.x] [//www.enviro.wiki/images/b/b3/Cudmore2010.pdf Article pdf]</ref><ref>Price, S. J., Leung, W. T., Owen, C. J., Puschendorf, R., Sergeant, C., Cunningham, A. A., Balloux, F., Garner, T. W., and Nichols, R. A., 2019. Effects of historic and projected climate change on the range and impacts of an emerging wildlife disease. Global Change Biology, 25(8), pp. 2648-2660. [https://doi.org/10.1111/gcb.14651 doi: 10.1111/gcb.14651]</ref> changes in range distributions and shifts in latitudinal and elevational gradients; changes in phenology or the timing of life cycle events that may create phenological mismatches<ref>Renner, S. S., and Zohner, C. M., 2018. Climate Change and Phenological Mismatch in Trophic Interactions Among Plants, Insects, and Vertebrates. Annual Review of Ecology, Evolution, and Systematics, 49, pp. 165-182. [https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev-ecolsys-110617-062535 doi: 10.1146/annurev-ecolsys-110617-062535]</ref> and extinction or population reduction<ref name=":2">Urban, M. C., 2015. Accelerating extinction risk from climate change. Science, 348(6234), pp. 571-573. [https://doi.org/ 10.1126/science.aaa4984 doi: 10.1126/science.aaa4984] [//www.enviro.wiki/images/1/15/Urban2015.pdf Article pdf]</ref>. The effects of climate change across a species’ range will most likely not be homogenous, meaning it can vary substantially, especially if a species’ range spans across different continents as exhibited by many migratory birds. <br />
<br />
Other changes in habitat include shifting vegetation (i.e., tree-lines are shifting to higher elevations), changes in nutrients in plants, earlier snowmelt and run-off, increase in invasive species, warming of streams and rivers, reduction or degradation of habitat (i.e., glacial melt), and an increase in large wildfires<ref>Barbero, R., Abatzoglou, J. T., Larkin, N. K., Kolden, C. A., and Stocks, B., 2015. Climate change presents increased potential for very large fires in the contiguous United States. International Journal of Wildland Fire, 24(7), pp. 892-899. [https://doi.org/10.1071/WF150830128 doi: 10.1071/WF150830128] [//www.enviro.wiki/images/0/08/Barbero2015.pdf Article pdf]</ref> and droughts<ref>Schlaepfer, D. R., Bradford, J. B., Lauenroth, W. K., Munson, S. M., Tietjen, B., Hall, S. A., Wilson, S. D., Duniway, M. C., Jia, G., Pyke, D. A., Lkhagva, A., and Jamiyansharav, K., 2017. Climate change reduces extent of temperate drylands and intensifies drought in deep soils. Nature Communications, 8, pp. 14196. [https://doi.org/10.1038/ncomms14196 doi: 10.1038/ncomms14196]</ref>.<br />
<br />
Although climate change effects on wildlife often are linked to species-specific traits, there are general impacts associated with taxonomic groups<ref name=":1" />. For fish it can affect reproduction<ref name=":4">Pankhurst, N. W., and Munday, P. L., 2011. Effects of climate change on fish reproduction and early life history stages. Marine and Freshwater Research, 62(9), pp. 1015-1026. [https://doi.org/10.1071/MF10269 doi: 10.1071/MF10269] [[Special:FilePath/Pankhurst2011.pdf| Article pdf]]</ref>, growth, and recruitment<ref name=":3">Lynch, A. J., Myers, B. J. E., Chu, C., Eby, L. A., Falke, J. A., Kovach, R. P., Krabbenhoft, T. J., Kwak, T. J., Lyons, J., Paukert, C. P., and Whitney, J. E., 2016. Climate Change Effects on North American Inland Fish Populations and Assemblages. Fisheries, 41(7), pp. 346-361. [https://doi.org/10.1080/03632415.2016.1186016 doi: 10.1080/03632415.2016.1186016]</ref>(Figure 2). Cold-water fish such as inland North American species are highly affected with the warming of streams and rivers<ref name=":3" />. Amphibians are highly sensitive to their environment and changes in temperature and moisture can affect development, range, abundance, and phenology<ref>Blaustein, A.R., Walls, S.C., Bancroft, B.A., Lawler, J.J., Searle, C.L., and Gervasi, S.S., 2010. Direct and Indirect Effects of Climate Change on Amphibian Populations. Diversity, 2(2), pp. 281-313.[https://doi.org/10.3390/d2020281 doi: 10.3390/d2020281] [[Special:FilePath/Blaustein 2010.pdf| Article pdf]]</ref><ref name=":1" /><ref>Ficetola, G. F., and Maiorano, L., 2016. Contrasting effects of temperature and precipitation change on amphibian phenology, abundance and performance. Oecologia, 181(3), pp. 683-693. [https://doi.org/10.1007/s00442-016-3610-9 doi: 10.1007/s00442-016-3610-9]</ref>. In reptiles, climate change effects can alter thermoregulation patterns, affect female reproduction and in some species, change sex ratios with increasing temperature<ref name=":1" />. Furthermore, for many bird species the timing of migration and other phenological events are affected by climate change<ref>Crick, H. Q. P., 2004. The impact of climate change on birds. Ibis, 146(s1), pp. 48-56. [https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1474-919X.2004.00327.x doi: 10.1111/j.1474-919X.2004.00327.x] [//www.enviro.wiki/images/c/c9/Crick2004.pdf Article pdf]</ref>. Range shifts, growth size, and survival are linked to climate change for mammals<ref name=":1" />. Arctic marine mammals are closely linked to sea ice dynamics and a changing climate will affect these dynamics<ref>Kovacs, K. M., Lydersen, C., Overland, J. E., and Moore, S. E., 2011. Impacts of changing sea-ice conditions on Arctic marine mammals. Marine Biodiversity, 41, pp. 81-194. [https://doi.org/10.1007/s12526-010-0061-0 doi: 10.1007/s12526-010-0061-0]</ref>. Therefore, it is increasingly important for conservation and management plans to consider the effects of climate change on wildlife and habitat for the geographic location<ref>Mawdsley, J. R., O’Malley, R., and Ojima, D. S. 2009. A Review of Climate-Change Adaptations Strategies For Wildlife Management and Biodiversity Conservation. Conservation Biology, 23(5), pp. 1080-1089. [https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1523-1739.2009.01264.x doi: 10.1111/j.1523-1739.2009.01264.x]</ref>.<br />
<br />
==References==<br />
<references /><br />
<br />
==See Also==</div>Jhurleyhttps://www.enviro.wiki/index.php?title=Climate_Change_Effects_on_Wildlife&diff=18076Climate Change Effects on Wildlife2026-04-03T21:53:32Z<p>Jhurley: Redirected page to Article Not Available</p>
<hr />
<div>#REDIRECT [[Article Not Available]]<br />
Climate change affects both terrestrial<ref>Diffenbaugh, N. S. and Field, C. B., 2013. Changes in Ecologically Critical Terrestrial Climate Conditions. Science, 341(6145), pp. 486-492. [https://doi.org/10.1126/science.1237123 doi: 10.1126/science.1237123]</ref> and aquatic biomes<ref>Hoegh-Guldberg, O., and Bruno, J. F., 2010. The Impact of Climate Change on the World’s Marine Ecosystem. Science, 328(5985), pp. 1523-1528. [https://doi.org/10.1126/science.1189930 doi: 10.1126/science.1189930]</ref> causing significant effects on ecosystem functions and biodiversity<ref name=":0">Bellard, C., Berteslsmeier, C., Leadley, P., Thuiller, W., and Courchamp, F., 2012. Impacts of climate change on the future of biodiversity. Ecological Letters, 15(4), pp. 365-377. [https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1461-0248.2011.01736.x doi: 10.1111/j.1461-0248.2011.01736.x] [//www.enviro.wiki/images/a/a4/Bellard2012.pdf Article pdf]</ref>. Climate change is affecting several key ecological processes and patterns that will have cascading impacts on wildlife and habitat<ref name=":1">Inkley, D. B., Anderson, M. G., Blaustein, A. R., Burkett, V. R., Felzer, B., Griffith, B., Price, J., and Root, T. L., 2004. Global Climate Change and Wildlife in North America. Wildlife Society Technical Review 04-2. The Wildlife Society, Bethesda, MD, 26 pp. [//www.enviro.wiki/images/f/f1/Inkley2004.pdf Report pdf]</ref>. For example, sea-level rise, changes in the timing and duration of growing seasons, and changes in primary production are mainly driven by changes to global environmental variables (e.g., temperature and atmospheric CO<sub>2</sub>). Climate-induced changes in the environment ultimately impact wildlife population abundance and distributions.<br />
<div style="float:right;margin:0 0 2em 2em;">__TOC__</div><br />
'''Related Article(s):'''<br />
<br />
*[[Climate Change Primer|Climate Change]]<br />
*[[Downscaled High Resolution Datasets for Climate Change Projections]]<br />
*[[Predicting Species Responses to Climate Change with Population Models]]<br />
*[[Restoration of Ecological Function in Terrestrial Systems Impacted by Invasive Species]]<br />
<br />
'''Contributor(s):''' [[Dr. Breanna F. Powers]] and [[Dr. Julie A. Heath]]<br />
<br />
'''Key Resource(s):'''<br />
<br />
*[https://www.enviro.wiki/images/f/f1/Inkley2004.pdf Global climate change and wildlife in North America. Wildlife Society Technical Review 04-2]<ref name=":1" /><br />
*[https://www.enviro.wiki/images/a/a4/Bellard2012.pdf Impacts of climate change on the future of biodiversity]<ref name=":0" /><br />
<br />
==Introduction==<br />
[[File:PowersFig1.png|thumb|900px|left | Figure 1. The predicted extinction risk (by percentage with 95% CIs) from climate change by different regions, colors represent a gradient from least to most extinction risks (green to red) based upon the number of relevant studies (n). Figure is from Urban (2015)<ref name=":2" />. Reprinted with permission from AAAS. Any use of this figure requires the prior written permission of AAAS]]<br />
[[File:PowersFig2.png|thumb|900px|right| Figure 2. Conceptual diagram showing how increased water temperatures and pCO₂ (partial pressure of carbon dioxide) affect the early life stages of fish. Where arrow direction indicated increasing rate ( ↑ ), decreasing rate ( ↓ ), or both directions depending on other environmental variables ( ↕️ ). Figure is from Pankhurst and Munday (2011)<ref name=":4" />.]]<br />
<br />
Global&nbsp;climate&nbsp;change&nbsp;will affect ecosystem functions and cycles such as nutrient, hydraulic, and carbon cycles, changing aspects of environmental conditions such as temperature, soil moisture, and precipitation<ref>Davidson, E. A. and Janssens, I. A., 2006. Temperature sensitivity of soil carbon decomposition and feedbacks to climate change. Nature, 440, pp. 165-173.[https://doi.org/10.1038/nature04514 doi: 10.1038/nature04514]</ref><ref>Melillo, J. M., McGuire, A. D., Kicklighter, D. W., Moore, B., Vorosmarty, C. J., and Schloss, A. L., 1993. Global climate change and terrestrial net primary production. Nature, 363, pp. 234-240. [https://doi.org/10.1038/363234a0 doi: 10.1038/363234a0]</ref>. Wildlife species are adapted to their environments and changes to the environment and habitat conditions will mediate effects, either directly or indirectly, on species survival, fecundity and ultimately population persistence<ref>Alig, R. J., Technical Coordinator, 2011. Effects of Climate Change on Natural Resources and Communities: A Compendium of Briefing Papers. U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Pacific Northwest Research Station, General Technical Report, [https://www.fs.usda.gov/treesearch/pubs/37513 PNW-GTR-837], Portland, OR, 169p. [https://doi.org/10.2737/PNW-GTR-837 doi:10.2737/PNW-GTR-837] [//www.enviro.wiki/images/f/f2/Pnwgtr837.pdf Report pdf]</ref><ref>Acevedo-Whitehouse, K., and Duffus, A. L. J., 2009. Effects of environmental change on wildlife health. Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society B: Biological Sciences, 364(1534), pp. 3429-3438. [https://doi.org/10.1098/rstb.2009.0128 doi: 10.1098/rstb.2009.0128]</ref><ref>Milligan, S. R., Holt, W. V., and Lloyd, R., 2009. Impacts of climate change and environmental factors on reproduction and development in wildlife. Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society B: Biological Sciences, 364(1534), pp. 3313-3319. [https://doi.org/10.1098/rstb.2009.0175 doi: 10.1098/rstb.2009.0175] [//www.enviro.wiki/images/a/ad/Milligan2009.pdf Article pdf]</ref>. The ability to adapt to changing habitat conditions as a result of climate change will differ across individual species and between populations. Some wildlife species may be more vulnerable to climate change than other species (Figure 1). Vulnerability is often linked to particular life-history traits (e.g., specialized habitat needs or limited dispersal abilities, see Pacifici et al. 2015P<ref>Pacifici, M., Foden, W., and Visconti, P., 2015. Assessing species vulnerability to climate change. Nature Climate Change 5, pp. 215-225. [https://doi.org/10.1038/nclimate2448 doi: 10.1038/nclimate2448]</ref> for a review on species vulnerability to climate change) or genetic composition. For example, grassland birds may be more vulnerable to changing climate than forest birds as forests can buffer change more so than grasslands<ref>Jarzyna, M. A., Zuckerberg, B., Finley, A. O., and Porter, W. F., 2016. Synergistic effects of climate change and land cover: grassland birds are more vulnerable to climate change. Landscape Ecology, 31(10), pp. 2275-2290. [https://doi.org/10.1007/s10980-016-0399-1 doi: 10.1007/s10980-016-0399-1]</ref>. Projected changes in the climate will generally have adverse effects of wildlife populations<ref>IPCC, 2001. Climate Change 2001: Synthesis Report. A Contribution of Working Groups I, II, and III to the Third Assessment Report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change. R.T. Watson and the Core Writing Team (eds.). Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, United Kingdom, and New York, NY, USA, 398p. [//www.enviro.wiki/images/5/56/IPCC2001.pdf Report pdf]</ref>, though there are some species coping with climate change or benefitting from environmental change. For example, American kestrels (Falco sparverius) have shifted their breeding phenology to earlier in the year and may now raise two broods of young within a breeding season<ref>Smith, S. H., Steenhof, K., McClure, C. J. W., and Heath, J. A. 2017. Earlier nesting by generalist predatory bird is associated with human responses to climate change. Journal of Animal Ecology, 86(1), pp. 98-107. [https://doi.org/10.1111/1365-2656.12604 doi: 10.1111/1365-2656.12604] [//www.enviro.wiki/images/5/5d/Smith2017.pdf Article pdf]</ref>.<br />
<br />
==The Influence of Climate Change on Wildlife and Habitats==<br />
Climate change effects on wildlife include increases in disease and changes to pathogen distributions, patterns, and outbreaks in wildlife<ref>Bradley, B. A., Wilcove, D. S., and Oppenheimer, M., 2010. Climate change increases risk of plant invasion in the Eastern United States. Biological Invasions, 12, pp.1855-1872. [https://doi.org/10.1007/s10530-009-9597-y doi: 10.1007/s10530-009-9597-y]</ref><ref>Cudmore, T. J., Björklund, N., Carroll, A. L., and Lindgren, B. S., 2010. Climate change and the range expansion of an aggressive bark beetle: evidence of higher beetle reproduction in naïve host tree populations. Journal of Applied Ecology, 47(5), pp. 1036-1043. [https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-2664.2010.01848.x doi: 10.1111/j.1365-2664.2010.01848.x] [//www.enviro.wiki/images/b/b3/Cudmore2010.pdf Article pdf]</ref><ref>Price, S. J., Leung, W. T., Owen, C. J., Puschendorf, R., Sergeant, C., Cunningham, A. A., Balloux, F., Garner, T. W., and Nichols, R. A., 2019. Effects of historic and projected climate change on the range and impacts of an emerging wildlife disease. Global Change Biology, 25(8), pp. 2648-2660. [https://doi.org/10.1111/gcb.14651 doi: 10.1111/gcb.14651]</ref> changes in range distributions and shifts in latitudinal and elevational gradients; changes in phenology or the timing of life cycle events that may create phenological mismatches<ref>Renner, S. S., and Zohner, C. M., 2018. Climate Change and Phenological Mismatch in Trophic Interactions Among Plants, Insects, and Vertebrates. Annual Review of Ecology, Evolution, and Systematics, 49, pp. 165-182. [https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev-ecolsys-110617-062535 doi: 10.1146/annurev-ecolsys-110617-062535]</ref> and extinction or population reduction<ref name=":2">Urban, M. C., 2015. Accelerating extinction risk from climate change. Science, 348(6234), pp. 571-573. [https://doi.org/ 10.1126/science.aaa4984 doi: 10.1126/science.aaa4984] [//www.enviro.wiki/images/1/15/Urban2015.pdf Article pdf]</ref>. The effects of climate change across a species’ range will most likely not be homogenous, meaning it can vary substantially, especially if a species’ range spans across different continents as exhibited by many migratory birds. <br />
<br />
Other changes in habitat include shifting vegetation (i.e., tree-lines are shifting to higher elevations), changes in nutrients in plants, earlier snowmelt and run-off, increase in invasive species, warming of streams and rivers, reduction or degradation of habitat (i.e., glacial melt), and an increase in large wildfires<ref>Barbero, R., Abatzoglou, J. T., Larkin, N. K., Kolden, C. A., and Stocks, B., 2015. Climate change presents increased potential for very large fires in the contiguous United States. International Journal of Wildland Fire, 24(7), pp. 892-899. [https://doi.org/10.1071/WF150830128 doi: 10.1071/WF150830128] [//www.enviro.wiki/images/0/08/Barbero2015.pdf Article pdf]</ref> and droughts<ref>Schlaepfer, D. R., Bradford, J. B., Lauenroth, W. K., Munson, S. M., Tietjen, B., Hall, S. A., Wilson, S. D., Duniway, M. C., Jia, G., Pyke, D. A., Lkhagva, A., and Jamiyansharav, K., 2017. Climate change reduces extent of temperate drylands and intensifies drought in deep soils. Nature Communications, 8, pp. 14196. [https://doi.org/10.1038/ncomms14196 doi: 10.1038/ncomms14196]</ref>.<br />
<br />
Although climate change effects on wildlife often are linked to species-specific traits, there are general impacts associated with taxonomic groups<ref name=":1" />. For fish it can affect reproduction<ref name=":4">Pankhurst, N. W., and Munday, P. L., 2011. Effects of climate change on fish reproduction and early life history stages. Marine and Freshwater Research, 62(9), pp. 1015-1026. [https://doi.org/10.1071/MF10269 doi: 10.1071/MF10269] [[Special:FilePath/Pankhurst2011.pdf| Article pdf]]</ref>, growth, and recruitment<ref name=":3">Lynch, A. J., Myers, B. J. E., Chu, C., Eby, L. A., Falke, J. A., Kovach, R. P., Krabbenhoft, T. J., Kwak, T. J., Lyons, J., Paukert, C. P., and Whitney, J. E., 2016. Climate Change Effects on North American Inland Fish Populations and Assemblages. Fisheries, 41(7), pp. 346-361. [https://doi.org/10.1080/03632415.2016.1186016 doi: 10.1080/03632415.2016.1186016]</ref>(Figure 2). Cold-water fish such as inland North American species are highly affected with the warming of streams and rivers<ref name=":3" />. Amphibians are highly sensitive to their environment and changes in temperature and moisture can affect development, range, abundance, and phenology<ref>Blaustein, A.R., Walls, S.C., Bancroft, B.A., Lawler, J.J., Searle, C.L., and Gervasi, S.S., 2010. Direct and Indirect Effects of Climate Change on Amphibian Populations. Diversity, 2(2), pp. 281-313.[https://doi.org/10.3390/d2020281 doi: 10.3390/d2020281] [[Special:FilePath/Blaustein 2010.pdf| Article pdf]]</ref><ref name=":1" /><ref>Ficetola, G. F., and Maiorano, L., 2016. Contrasting effects of temperature and precipitation change on amphibian phenology, abundance and performance. Oecologia, 181(3), pp. 683-693. [https://doi.org/10.1007/s00442-016-3610-9 doi: 10.1007/s00442-016-3610-9]</ref>. In reptiles, climate change effects can alter thermoregulation patterns, affect female reproduction and in some species, change sex ratios with increasing temperature<ref name=":1" />. Furthermore, for many bird species the timing of migration and other phenological events are affected by climate change<ref>Crick, H. Q. P., 2004. The impact of climate change on birds. Ibis, 146(s1), pp. 48-56. [https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1474-919X.2004.00327.x doi: 10.1111/j.1474-919X.2004.00327.x] [//www.enviro.wiki/images/c/c9/Crick2004.pdf Article pdf]</ref>. Range shifts, growth size, and survival are linked to climate change for mammals<ref name=":1" />. Arctic marine mammals are closely linked to sea ice dynamics and a changing climate will affect these dynamics<ref>Kovacs, K. M., Lydersen, C., Overland, J. E., and Moore, S. E., 2011. Impacts of changing sea-ice conditions on Arctic marine mammals. Marine Biodiversity, 41, pp. 81-194. [https://doi.org/10.1007/s12526-010-0061-0 doi: 10.1007/s12526-010-0061-0]</ref>. Therefore, it is increasingly important for conservation and management plans to consider the effects of climate change on wildlife and habitat for the geographic location<ref>Mawdsley, J. R., O’Malley, R., and Ojima, D. S. 2009. A Review of Climate-Change Adaptations Strategies For Wildlife Management and Biodiversity Conservation. Conservation Biology, 23(5), pp. 1080-1089. [https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1523-1739.2009.01264.x doi: 10.1111/j.1523-1739.2009.01264.x]</ref>.<br />
<br />
==References==<br />
<references /><br />
<br />
==See Also==</div>Jhurleyhttps://www.enviro.wiki/index.php?title=Article_Not_Available&diff=18075Article Not Available2026-04-03T21:52:10Z<p>Jhurley: Created blank page</p>
<hr />
<div></div>Jhurleyhttps://www.enviro.wiki/index.php?title=Climate_Change_Effects_on_Wildlife&diff=18074Climate Change Effects on Wildlife2026-04-03T21:35:53Z<p>Jhurley: </p>
<hr />
<div>Climate change affects both terrestrial<ref>Diffenbaugh, N. S. and Field, C. B., 2013. Changes in Ecologically Critical Terrestrial Climate Conditions. Science, 341(6145), pp. 486-492. [https://doi.org/10.1126/science.1237123 doi: 10.1126/science.1237123]</ref> and aquatic biomes<ref>Hoegh-Guldberg, O., and Bruno, J. F., 2010. The Impact of Climate Change on the World’s Marine Ecosystem. Science, 328(5985), pp. 1523-1528. [https://doi.org/10.1126/science.1189930 doi: 10.1126/science.1189930]</ref> causing significant effects on ecosystem functions and biodiversity<ref name=":0">Bellard, C., Berteslsmeier, C., Leadley, P., Thuiller, W., and Courchamp, F., 2012. Impacts of climate change on the future of biodiversity. Ecological Letters, 15(4), pp. 365-377. [https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1461-0248.2011.01736.x doi: 10.1111/j.1461-0248.2011.01736.x] [//www.enviro.wiki/images/a/a4/Bellard2012.pdf Article pdf]</ref>. Climate change is affecting several key ecological processes and patterns that will have cascading impacts on wildlife and habitat<ref name=":1">Inkley, D. B., Anderson, M. G., Blaustein, A. R., Burkett, V. R., Felzer, B., Griffith, B., Price, J., and Root, T. L., 2004. Global Climate Change and Wildlife in North America. Wildlife Society Technical Review 04-2. The Wildlife Society, Bethesda, MD, 26 pp. [//www.enviro.wiki/images/f/f1/Inkley2004.pdf Report pdf]</ref>. For example, sea-level rise, changes in the timing and duration of growing seasons, and changes in primary production are mainly driven by changes to global environmental variables (e.g., temperature and atmospheric CO<sub>2</sub>). Climate-induced changes in the environment ultimately impact wildlife population abundance and distributions.<br />
<div style="float:right;margin:0 0 2em 2em;">__TOC__</div><br />
'''Related Article(s):'''<br />
<br />
*[[Climate Change Primer|Climate Change]]<br />
*[[Downscaled High Resolution Datasets for Climate Change Projections]]<br />
*[[Predicting Species Responses to Climate Change with Population Models]]<br />
*[[Restoration of Ecological Function in Terrestrial Systems Impacted by Invasive Species]]<br />
<br />
'''Contributor(s):''' [[Dr. Breanna F. Powers]] and [[Dr. Julie A. Heath]]<br />
<br />
'''Key Resource(s):'''<br />
<br />
*[https://www.enviro.wiki/images/f/f1/Inkley2004.pdf Global climate change and wildlife in North America. Wildlife Society Technical Review 04-2]<ref name=":1" /><br />
*[https://www.enviro.wiki/images/a/a4/Bellard2012.pdf Impacts of climate change on the future of biodiversity]<ref name=":0" /><br />
<br />
==Introduction==<br />
[[File:PowersFig1.png|thumb|900px|left | Figure 1. The predicted extinction risk (by percentage with 95% CIs) from climate change by different regions, colors represent a gradient from least to most extinction risks (green to red) based upon the number of relevant studies (n). Figure is from Urban (2015)<ref name=":2" />. Reprinted with permission from AAAS. Any use of this figure requires the prior written permission of AAAS]]<br />
[[File:PowersFig2.png|thumb|900px|right| Figure 2. Conceptual diagram showing how increased water temperatures and pCO₂ (partial pressure of carbon dioxide) affect the early life stages of fish. Where arrow direction indicated increasing rate ( ↑ ), decreasing rate ( ↓ ), or both directions depending on other environmental variables ( ↕️ ). Figure is from Pankhurst and Munday (2011)<ref name=":4" />.]]<br />
<br />
Global&nbsp;climate&nbsp;change&nbsp;will affect ecosystem functions and cycles such as nutrient, hydraulic, and carbon cycles, changing aspects of environmental conditions such as temperature, soil moisture, and precipitation<ref>Davidson, E. A. and Janssens, I. A., 2006. Temperature sensitivity of soil carbon decomposition and feedbacks to climate change. Nature, 440, pp. 165-173.[https://doi.org/10.1038/nature04514 doi: 10.1038/nature04514]</ref><ref>Melillo, J. M., McGuire, A. D., Kicklighter, D. W., Moore, B., Vorosmarty, C. J., and Schloss, A. L., 1993. Global climate change and terrestrial net primary production. Nature, 363, pp. 234-240. [https://doi.org/10.1038/363234a0 doi: 10.1038/363234a0]</ref>. Wildlife species are adapted to their environments and changes to the environment and habitat conditions will mediate effects, either directly or indirectly, on species survival, fecundity and ultimately population persistence<ref>Alig, R. J., Technical Coordinator, 2011. Effects of Climate Change on Natural Resources and Communities: A Compendium of Briefing Papers. U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Pacific Northwest Research Station, General Technical Report, [https://www.fs.usda.gov/treesearch/pubs/37513 PNW-GTR-837], Portland, OR, 169p. [https://doi.org/10.2737/PNW-GTR-837 doi:10.2737/PNW-GTR-837] [//www.enviro.wiki/images/f/f2/Pnwgtr837.pdf Report pdf]</ref><ref>Acevedo-Whitehouse, K., and Duffus, A. L. J., 2009. Effects of environmental change on wildlife health. Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society B: Biological Sciences, 364(1534), pp. 3429-3438. [https://doi.org/10.1098/rstb.2009.0128 doi: 10.1098/rstb.2009.0128]</ref><ref>Milligan, S. R., Holt, W. V., and Lloyd, R., 2009. Impacts of climate change and environmental factors on reproduction and development in wildlife. Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society B: Biological Sciences, 364(1534), pp. 3313-3319. [https://doi.org/10.1098/rstb.2009.0175 doi: 10.1098/rstb.2009.0175] [//www.enviro.wiki/images/a/ad/Milligan2009.pdf Article pdf]</ref>. The ability to adapt to changing habitat conditions as a result of climate change will differ across individual species and between populations. Some wildlife species may be more vulnerable to climate change than other species (Figure 1). Vulnerability is often linked to particular life-history traits (e.g., specialized habitat needs or limited dispersal abilities, see Pacifici et al. 2015P<ref>Pacifici, M., Foden, W., and Visconti, P., 2015. Assessing species vulnerability to climate change. Nature Climate Change 5, pp. 215-225. [https://doi.org/10.1038/nclimate2448 doi: 10.1038/nclimate2448]</ref> for a review on species vulnerability to climate change) or genetic composition. For example, grassland birds may be more vulnerable to changing climate than forest birds as forests can buffer change more so than grasslands<ref>Jarzyna, M. A., Zuckerberg, B., Finley, A. O., and Porter, W. F., 2016. Synergistic effects of climate change and land cover: grassland birds are more vulnerable to climate change. Landscape Ecology, 31(10), pp. 2275-2290. [https://doi.org/10.1007/s10980-016-0399-1 doi: 10.1007/s10980-016-0399-1]</ref>. Projected changes in the climate will generally have adverse effects of wildlife populations<ref>IPCC, 2001. Climate Change 2001: Synthesis Report. A Contribution of Working Groups I, II, and III to the Third Assessment Report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change. R.T. Watson and the Core Writing Team (eds.). Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, United Kingdom, and New York, NY, USA, 398p. [//www.enviro.wiki/images/5/56/IPCC2001.pdf Report pdf]</ref>, though there are some species coping with climate change or benefitting from environmental change. For example, American kestrels (Falco sparverius) have shifted their breeding phenology to earlier in the year and may now raise two broods of young within a breeding season<ref>Smith, S. H., Steenhof, K., McClure, C. J. W., and Heath, J. A. 2017. Earlier nesting by generalist predatory bird is associated with human responses to climate change. Journal of Animal Ecology, 86(1), pp. 98-107. [https://doi.org/10.1111/1365-2656.12604 doi: 10.1111/1365-2656.12604] [//www.enviro.wiki/images/5/5d/Smith2017.pdf Article pdf]</ref>.<br />
<br />
==The Influence of Climate Change on Wildlife and Habitats==<br />
Climate change effects on wildlife include increases in disease and changes to pathogen distributions, patterns, and outbreaks in wildlife<ref>Bradley, B. A., Wilcove, D. S., and Oppenheimer, M., 2010. Climate change increases risk of plant invasion in the Eastern United States. Biological Invasions, 12, pp.1855-1872. [https://doi.org/10.1007/s10530-009-9597-y doi: 10.1007/s10530-009-9597-y]</ref><ref>Cudmore, T. J., Björklund, N., Carroll, A. L., and Lindgren, B. S., 2010. Climate change and the range expansion of an aggressive bark beetle: evidence of higher beetle reproduction in naïve host tree populations. Journal of Applied Ecology, 47(5), pp. 1036-1043. [https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-2664.2010.01848.x doi: 10.1111/j.1365-2664.2010.01848.x] [//www.enviro.wiki/images/b/b3/Cudmore2010.pdf Article pdf]</ref><ref>Price, S. J., Leung, W. T., Owen, C. J., Puschendorf, R., Sergeant, C., Cunningham, A. A., Balloux, F., Garner, T. W., and Nichols, R. A., 2019. Effects of historic and projected climate change on the range and impacts of an emerging wildlife disease. Global Change Biology, 25(8), pp. 2648-2660. [https://doi.org/10.1111/gcb.14651 doi: 10.1111/gcb.14651]</ref> changes in range distributions and shifts in latitudinal and elevational gradients; changes in phenology or the timing of life cycle events that may create phenological mismatches<ref>Renner, S. S., and Zohner, C. M., 2018. Climate Change and Phenological Mismatch in Trophic Interactions Among Plants, Insects, and Vertebrates. Annual Review of Ecology, Evolution, and Systematics, 49, pp. 165-182. [https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev-ecolsys-110617-062535 doi: 10.1146/annurev-ecolsys-110617-062535]</ref> and extinction or population reduction<ref name=":2">Urban, M. C., 2015. Accelerating extinction risk from climate change. Science, 348(6234), pp. 571-573. [https://doi.org/ 10.1126/science.aaa4984 doi: 10.1126/science.aaa4984] [//www.enviro.wiki/images/1/15/Urban2015.pdf Article pdf]</ref>. The effects of climate change across a species’ range will most likely not be homogenous, meaning it can vary substantially, especially if a species’ range spans across different continents as exhibited by many migratory birds. <br />
<br />
Other changes in habitat include shifting vegetation (i.e., tree-lines are shifting to higher elevations), changes in nutrients in plants, earlier snowmelt and run-off, increase in invasive species, warming of streams and rivers, reduction or degradation of habitat (i.e., glacial melt), and an increase in large wildfires<ref>Barbero, R., Abatzoglou, J. T., Larkin, N. K., Kolden, C. A., and Stocks, B., 2015. Climate change presents increased potential for very large fires in the contiguous United States. International Journal of Wildland Fire, 24(7), pp. 892-899. [https://doi.org/10.1071/WF150830128 doi: 10.1071/WF150830128] [//www.enviro.wiki/images/0/08/Barbero2015.pdf Article pdf]</ref> and droughts<ref>Schlaepfer, D. R., Bradford, J. B., Lauenroth, W. K., Munson, S. M., Tietjen, B., Hall, S. A., Wilson, S. D., Duniway, M. C., Jia, G., Pyke, D. A., Lkhagva, A., and Jamiyansharav, K., 2017. Climate change reduces extent of temperate drylands and intensifies drought in deep soils. Nature Communications, 8, pp. 14196. [https://doi.org/10.1038/ncomms14196 doi: 10.1038/ncomms14196]</ref>.<br />
<br />
Although climate change effects on wildlife often are linked to species-specific traits, there are general impacts associated with taxonomic groups<ref name=":1" />. For fish it can affect reproduction<ref name=":4">Pankhurst, N. W., and Munday, P. L., 2011. Effects of climate change on fish reproduction and early life history stages. Marine and Freshwater Research, 62(9), pp. 1015-1026. [https://doi.org/10.1071/MF10269 doi: 10.1071/MF10269] [[Special:FilePath/Pankhurst2011.pdf| Article pdf]]</ref>, growth, and recruitment<ref name=":3">Lynch, A. J., Myers, B. J. E., Chu, C., Eby, L. A., Falke, J. A., Kovach, R. P., Krabbenhoft, T. J., Kwak, T. J., Lyons, J., Paukert, C. P., and Whitney, J. E., 2016. Climate Change Effects on North American Inland Fish Populations and Assemblages. Fisheries, 41(7), pp. 346-361. [https://doi.org/10.1080/03632415.2016.1186016 doi: 10.1080/03632415.2016.1186016]</ref>(Figure 2). Cold-water fish such as inland North American species are highly affected with the warming of streams and rivers<ref name=":3" />. Amphibians are highly sensitive to their environment and changes in temperature and moisture can affect development, range, abundance, and phenology<ref>Blaustein, A.R., Walls, S.C., Bancroft, B.A., Lawler, J.J., Searle, C.L., and Gervasi, S.S., 2010. Direct and Indirect Effects of Climate Change on Amphibian Populations. Diversity, 2(2), pp. 281-313.[https://doi.org/10.3390/d2020281 doi: 10.3390/d2020281] [[Special:FilePath/Blaustein 2010.pdf| Article pdf]]</ref><ref name=":1" /><ref>Ficetola, G. F., and Maiorano, L., 2016. Contrasting effects of temperature and precipitation change on amphibian phenology, abundance and performance. Oecologia, 181(3), pp. 683-693. [https://doi.org/10.1007/s00442-016-3610-9 doi: 10.1007/s00442-016-3610-9]</ref>. In reptiles, climate change effects can alter thermoregulation patterns, affect female reproduction and in some species, change sex ratios with increasing temperature<ref name=":1" />. Furthermore, for many bird species the timing of migration and other phenological events are affected by climate change<ref>Crick, H. Q. P., 2004. The impact of climate change on birds. Ibis, 146(s1), pp. 48-56. [https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1474-919X.2004.00327.x doi: 10.1111/j.1474-919X.2004.00327.x] [//www.enviro.wiki/images/c/c9/Crick2004.pdf Article pdf]</ref>. Range shifts, growth size, and survival are linked to climate change for mammals<ref name=":1" />. Arctic marine mammals are closely linked to sea ice dynamics and a changing climate will affect these dynamics<ref>Kovacs, K. M., Lydersen, C., Overland, J. E., and Moore, S. E., 2011. Impacts of changing sea-ice conditions on Arctic marine mammals. Marine Biodiversity, 41, pp. 81-194. [https://doi.org/10.1007/s12526-010-0061-0 doi: 10.1007/s12526-010-0061-0]</ref>. Therefore, it is increasingly important for conservation and management plans to consider the effects of climate change on wildlife and habitat for the geographic location<ref>Mawdsley, J. R., O’Malley, R., and Ojima, D. S. 2009. A Review of Climate-Change Adaptations Strategies For Wildlife Management and Biodiversity Conservation. Conservation Biology, 23(5), pp. 1080-1089. [https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1523-1739.2009.01264.x doi: 10.1111/j.1523-1739.2009.01264.x]</ref>.<br />
<br />
==References==<br />
<references /><br />
<br />
==See Also==</div>Jhurleyhttps://www.enviro.wiki/index.php?title=Climate_Change_Effects_on_Wildlife&diff=18073Climate Change Effects on Wildlife2026-04-03T21:34:23Z<p>Jhurley: </p>
<hr />
<div>/**<br />
Climate change affects both terrestrial<ref>Diffenbaugh, N. S. and Field, C. B., 2013. Changes in Ecologically Critical Terrestrial Climate Conditions. Science, 341(6145), pp. 486-492. [https://doi.org/10.1126/science.1237123 doi: 10.1126/science.1237123]</ref> and aquatic biomes<ref>Hoegh-Guldberg, O., and Bruno, J. F., 2010. The Impact of Climate Change on the World’s Marine Ecosystem. Science, 328(5985), pp. 1523-1528. [https://doi.org/10.1126/science.1189930 doi: 10.1126/science.1189930]</ref> causing significant effects on ecosystem functions and biodiversity<ref name=":0">Bellard, C., Berteslsmeier, C., Leadley, P., Thuiller, W., and Courchamp, F., 2012. Impacts of climate change on the future of biodiversity. Ecological Letters, 15(4), pp. 365-377. [https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1461-0248.2011.01736.x doi: 10.1111/j.1461-0248.2011.01736.x] [//www.enviro.wiki/images/a/a4/Bellard2012.pdf Article pdf]</ref>. Climate change is affecting several key ecological processes and patterns that will have cascading impacts on wildlife and habitat<ref name=":1">Inkley, D. B., Anderson, M. G., Blaustein, A. R., Burkett, V. R., Felzer, B., Griffith, B., Price, J., and Root, T. L., 2004. Global Climate Change and Wildlife in North America. Wildlife Society Technical Review 04-2. The Wildlife Society, Bethesda, MD, 26 pp. [//www.enviro.wiki/images/f/f1/Inkley2004.pdf Report pdf]</ref>. For example, sea-level rise, changes in the timing and duration of growing seasons, and changes in primary production are mainly driven by changes to global environmental variables (e.g., temperature and atmospheric CO<sub>2</sub>). Climate-induced changes in the environment ultimately impact wildlife population abundance and distributions.<br />
*/<br />
<div style="float:right;margin:0 0 2em 2em;">__TOC__</div><br />
'''Related Article(s):'''<br />
<br />
*[[Climate Change Primer|Climate Change]]<br />
*[[Downscaled High Resolution Datasets for Climate Change Projections]]<br />
*[[Predicting Species Responses to Climate Change with Population Models]]<br />
*[[Restoration of Ecological Function in Terrestrial Systems Impacted by Invasive Species]]<br />
<br />
<br />
'''Contributor(s):''' [[Dr. Breanna F. Powers]] and [[Dr. Julie A. Heath]]<br />
<br />
<br />
'''Key Resource(s):'''<br />
<br />
*[https://www.enviro.wiki/images/f/f1/Inkley2004.pdf Global climate change and wildlife in North America. Wildlife Society Technical Review 04-2]<ref name=":1" /><br />
*[https://www.enviro.wiki/images/a/a4/Bellard2012.pdf Impacts of climate change on the future of biodiversity]<ref name=":0" /><br />
<br />
==Introduction==<br />
[[File:PowersFig1.png|thumb|900px|left | Figure 1. The predicted extinction risk (by percentage with 95% CIs) from climate change by different regions, colors represent a gradient from least to most extinction risks (green to red) based upon the number of relevant studies (n). Figure is from Urban (2015)<ref name=":2" />. Reprinted with permission from AAAS. Any use of this figure requires the prior written permission of AAAS]]<br />
[[File:PowersFig2.png|thumb|900px|right| Figure 2. Conceptual diagram showing how increased water temperatures and pCO₂ (partial pressure of carbon dioxide) affect the early life stages of fish. Where arrow direction indicated increasing rate ( ↑ ), decreasing rate ( ↓ ), or both directions depending on other environmental variables ( ↕️ ). Figure is from Pankhurst and Munday (2011)<ref name=":4" />.]]<br />
Global&nbsp;climate&nbsp;change&nbsp;will affect ecosystem functions and cycles such as nutrient, hydraulic, and carbon cycles, changing aspects of environmental conditions such as temperature, soil moisture, and precipitation<ref>Davidson, E. A. and Janssens, I. A., 2006. Temperature sensitivity of soil carbon decomposition and feedbacks to climate change. Nature, 440, pp. 165-173.[https://doi.org/10.1038/nature04514 doi: 10.1038/nature04514]</ref><ref>Melillo, J. M., McGuire, A. D., Kicklighter, D. W., Moore, B., Vorosmarty, C. J., and Schloss, A. L., 1993. Global climate change and terrestrial net primary production. Nature, 363, pp. 234-240. [https://doi.org/10.1038/363234a0 doi: 10.1038/363234a0]</ref>. Wildlife species are adapted to their environments and changes to the environment and habitat conditions will mediate effects, either directly or indirectly, on species survival, fecundity and ultimately population persistence<ref>Alig, R. J., Technical Coordinator, 2011. Effects of Climate Change on Natural Resources and Communities: A Compendium of Briefing Papers. U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Pacific Northwest Research Station, General Technical Report, [https://www.fs.usda.gov/treesearch/pubs/37513 PNW-GTR-837], Portland, OR, 169p. [https://doi.org/10.2737/PNW-GTR-837 doi:10.2737/PNW-GTR-837] [//www.enviro.wiki/images/f/f2/Pnwgtr837.pdf Report pdf]</ref><ref>Acevedo-Whitehouse, K., and Duffus, A. L. J., 2009. Effects of environmental change on wildlife health. Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society B: Biological Sciences, 364(1534), pp. 3429-3438. [https://doi.org/10.1098/rstb.2009.0128 doi: 10.1098/rstb.2009.0128]</ref><ref>Milligan, S. R., Holt, W. V., and Lloyd, R., 2009. Impacts of climate change and environmental factors on reproduction and development in wildlife. Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society B: Biological Sciences, 364(1534), pp. 3313-3319. [https://doi.org/10.1098/rstb.2009.0175 doi: 10.1098/rstb.2009.0175] [//www.enviro.wiki/images/a/ad/Milligan2009.pdf Article pdf]</ref>. The ability to adapt to changing habitat conditions as a result of climate change will differ across individual species and between populations. Some wildlife species may be more vulnerable to climate change than other species (Figure 1). Vulnerability is often linked to particular life-history traits (e.g., specialized habitat needs or limited dispersal abilities, see Pacifici et al. 2015P<ref>Pacifici, M., Foden, W., and Visconti, P., 2015. Assessing species vulnerability to climate change. Nature Climate Change 5, pp. 215-225. [https://doi.org/10.1038/nclimate2448 doi: 10.1038/nclimate2448]</ref> for a review on species vulnerability to climate change) or genetic composition. For example, grassland birds may be more vulnerable to changing climate than forest birds as forests can buffer change more so than grasslands<ref>Jarzyna, M. A., Zuckerberg, B., Finley, A. O., and Porter, W. F., 2016. Synergistic effects of climate change and land cover: grassland birds are more vulnerable to climate change. Landscape Ecology, 31(10), pp. 2275-2290. [https://doi.org/10.1007/s10980-016-0399-1 doi: 10.1007/s10980-016-0399-1]</ref>. Projected changes in the climate will generally have adverse effects of wildlife populations<ref>IPCC, 2001. Climate Change 2001: Synthesis Report. A Contribution of Working Groups I, II, and III to the Third Assessment Report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change. R.T. Watson and the Core Writing Team (eds.). Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, United Kingdom, and New York, NY, USA, 398p. [//www.enviro.wiki/images/5/56/IPCC2001.pdf Report pdf]</ref>, though there are some species coping with climate change or benefitting from environmental change. For example, American kestrels (Falco sparverius) have shifted their breeding phenology to earlier in the year and may now raise two broods of young within a breeding season<ref>Smith, S. H., Steenhof, K., McClure, C. J. W., and Heath, J. A. 2017. Earlier nesting by generalist predatory bird is associated with human responses to climate change. Journal of Animal Ecology, 86(1), pp. 98-107. [https://doi.org/10.1111/1365-2656.12604 doi: 10.1111/1365-2656.12604] [//www.enviro.wiki/images/5/5d/Smith2017.pdf Article pdf]</ref>.<br />
<br />
==The Influence of Climate Change on Wildlife and Habitats==<br />
Climate change effects on wildlife include increases in disease and changes to pathogen distributions, patterns, and outbreaks in wildlife<ref>Bradley, B. A., Wilcove, D. S., and Oppenheimer, M., 2010. Climate change increases risk of plant invasion in the Eastern United States. Biological Invasions, 12, pp.1855-1872. [https://doi.org/10.1007/s10530-009-9597-y doi: 10.1007/s10530-009-9597-y]</ref><ref>Cudmore, T. J., Björklund, N., Carroll, A. L., and Lindgren, B. S., 2010. Climate change and the range expansion of an aggressive bark beetle: evidence of higher beetle reproduction in naïve host tree populations. Journal of Applied Ecology, 47(5), pp. 1036-1043. [https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-2664.2010.01848.x doi: 10.1111/j.1365-2664.2010.01848.x] [//www.enviro.wiki/images/b/b3/Cudmore2010.pdf Article pdf]</ref><ref>Price, S. J., Leung, W. T., Owen, C. J., Puschendorf, R., Sergeant, C., Cunningham, A. A., Balloux, F., Garner, T. W., and Nichols, R. A., 2019. Effects of historic and projected climate change on the range and impacts of an emerging wildlife disease. Global Change Biology, 25(8), pp. 2648-2660. [https://doi.org/10.1111/gcb.14651 doi: 10.1111/gcb.14651]</ref> changes in range distributions and shifts in latitudinal and elevational gradients; changes in phenology or the timing of life cycle events that may create phenological mismatches<ref>Renner, S. S., and Zohner, C. M., 2018. Climate Change and Phenological Mismatch in Trophic Interactions Among Plants, Insects, and Vertebrates. Annual Review of Ecology, Evolution, and Systematics, 49, pp. 165-182. [https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev-ecolsys-110617-062535 doi: 10.1146/annurev-ecolsys-110617-062535]</ref> and extinction or population reduction<ref name=":2">Urban, M. C., 2015. Accelerating extinction risk from climate change. Science, 348(6234), pp. 571-573. [https://doi.org/ 10.1126/science.aaa4984 doi: 10.1126/science.aaa4984] [//www.enviro.wiki/images/1/15/Urban2015.pdf Article pdf]</ref>. The effects of climate change across a species’ range will most likely not be homogenous, meaning it can vary substantially, especially if a species’ range spans across different continents as exhibited by many migratory birds. <br />
Other changes in habitat include shifting vegetation (i.e., tree-lines are shifting to higher elevations), changes in nutrients in plants, earlier snowmelt and run-off, increase in invasive species, warming of streams and rivers, reduction or degradation of habitat (i.e., glacial melt), and an increase in large wildfires<ref>Barbero, R., Abatzoglou, J. T., Larkin, N. K., Kolden, C. A., and Stocks, B., 2015. Climate change presents increased potential for very large fires in the contiguous United States. International Journal of Wildland Fire, 24(7), pp. 892-899. [https://doi.org/10.1071/WF150830128 doi: 10.1071/WF150830128] [//www.enviro.wiki/images/0/08/Barbero2015.pdf Article pdf]</ref> and droughts<ref>Schlaepfer, D. R., Bradford, J. B., Lauenroth, W. K., Munson, S. M., Tietjen, B., Hall, S. A., Wilson, S. D., Duniway, M. C., Jia, G., Pyke, D. A., Lkhagva, A., and Jamiyansharav, K., 2017. Climate change reduces extent of temperate drylands and intensifies drought in deep soils. Nature Communications, 8, pp. 14196. [https://doi.org/10.1038/ncomms14196 doi: 10.1038/ncomms14196]</ref>.<br />
<br />
Although climate change effects on wildlife often are linked to species-specific traits, there are general impacts associated with taxonomic groups<ref name=":1" />. For fish it can affect reproduction<ref name=":4">Pankhurst, N. W., and Munday, P. L., 2011. Effects of climate change on fish reproduction and early life history stages. Marine and Freshwater Research, 62(9), pp. 1015-1026. [https://doi.org/10.1071/MF10269 doi: 10.1071/MF10269] [[Special:FilePath/Pankhurst2011.pdf| Article pdf]]</ref>, growth, and recruitment<ref name=":3">Lynch, A. J., Myers, B. J. E., Chu, C., Eby, L. A., Falke, J. A., Kovach, R. P., Krabbenhoft, T. J., Kwak, T. J., Lyons, J., Paukert, C. P., and Whitney, J. E., 2016. Climate Change Effects on North American Inland Fish Populations and Assemblages. Fisheries, 41(7), pp. 346-361. [https://doi.org/10.1080/03632415.2016.1186016 doi: 10.1080/03632415.2016.1186016]</ref>(Figure 2). Cold-water fish such as inland North American species are highly affected with the warming of streams and rivers<ref name=":3" />. Amphibians are highly sensitive to their environment and changes in temperature and moisture can affect development, range, abundance, and phenology<ref>Blaustein, A.R., Walls, S.C., Bancroft, B.A., Lawler, J.J., Searle, C.L., and Gervasi, S.S., 2010. Direct and Indirect Effects of Climate Change on Amphibian Populations. Diversity, 2(2), pp. 281-313.[https://doi.org/10.3390/d2020281 doi: 10.3390/d2020281] [[Special:FilePath/Blaustein 2010.pdf| Article pdf]]</ref><ref name=":1" /><ref>Ficetola, G. F., and Maiorano, L., 2016. Contrasting effects of temperature and precipitation change on amphibian phenology, abundance and performance. Oecologia, 181(3), pp. 683-693. [https://doi.org/10.1007/s00442-016-3610-9 doi: 10.1007/s00442-016-3610-9]</ref>. In reptiles, climate change effects can alter thermoregulation patterns, affect female reproduction and in some species, change sex ratios with increasing temperature<ref name=":1" />. Furthermore, for many bird species the timing of migration and other phenological events are affected by climate change<ref>Crick, H. Q. P., 2004. The impact of climate change on birds. Ibis, 146(s1), pp. 48-56. [https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1474-919X.2004.00327.x doi: 10.1111/j.1474-919X.2004.00327.x] [//www.enviro.wiki/images/c/c9/Crick2004.pdf Article pdf]</ref>. Range shifts, growth size, and survival are linked to climate change for mammals<ref name=":1" />. Arctic marine mammals are closely linked to sea ice dynamics and a changing climate will affect these dynamics<ref>Kovacs, K. M., Lydersen, C., Overland, J. E., and Moore, S. E., 2011. Impacts of changing sea-ice conditions on Arctic marine mammals. Marine Biodiversity, 41, pp. 81-194. [https://doi.org/10.1007/s12526-010-0061-0 doi: 10.1007/s12526-010-0061-0]</ref>. Therefore, it is increasingly important for conservation and management plans to consider the effects of climate change on wildlife and habitat for the geographic location<ref>Mawdsley, J. R., O’Malley, R., and Ojima, D. S. 2009. A Review of Climate-Change Adaptations Strategies For Wildlife Management and Biodiversity Conservation. Conservation Biology, 23(5), pp. 1080-1089. [https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1523-1739.2009.01264.x doi: 10.1111/j.1523-1739.2009.01264.x]</ref>.<br />
<br />
==References==<br />
<references /><br />
<br />
==See Also==</div>Jhurleyhttps://www.enviro.wiki/index.php?title=Climate_Change_Effects_on_Wildlife&diff=18072Climate Change Effects on Wildlife2026-04-03T21:33:52Z<p>Jhurley: </p>
<hr />
<div>/**<br />
* Climate change affects both terrestrial<ref>Diffenbaugh, N. S. and Field, C. B., 2013. Changes in Ecologically Critical Terrestrial Climate Conditions. Science, 341(6145), pp. 486-492. [https://doi.org/10.1126/science.1237123 doi: 10.1126/science.1237123]</ref> and aquatic biomes<ref>Hoegh-Guldberg, O., and Bruno, J. F., 2010. The Impact of Climate Change on the World’s Marine Ecosystem. Science, 328(5985), pp. 1523-1528. [https://doi.org/10.1126/science.1189930 doi: 10.1126/science.1189930]</ref> causing significant effects on ecosystem functions and biodiversity<ref name=":0">Bellard, C., Berteslsmeier, C., Leadley, P., Thuiller, W., and Courchamp, F., 2012. Impacts of climate change on the future of biodiversity. Ecological Letters, 15(4), pp. 365-377. [https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1461-0248.2011.01736.x doi: 10.1111/j.1461-0248.2011.01736.x] [//www.enviro.wiki/images/a/a4/Bellard2012.pdf Article pdf]</ref>. Climate change is affecting several key ecological processes and patterns that will have cascading impacts on wildlife and habitat<ref name=":1">Inkley, D. B., Anderson, M. G., Blaustein, A. R., Burkett, V. R., Felzer, B., Griffith, B., Price, J., and Root, T. L., 2004. Global Climate Change and Wildlife in North America. Wildlife Society Technical Review 04-2. The Wildlife Society, Bethesda, MD, 26 pp. [//www.enviro.wiki/images/f/f1/Inkley2004.pdf Report pdf]</ref>. For example, sea-level rise, changes in the timing and duration of growing seasons, and changes in primary production are mainly driven by changes to global environmental variables (e.g., temperature and atmospheric CO<sub>2</sub>). Climate-induced changes in the environment ultimately impact wildlife population abundance and distributions.<br />
*/<br />
<div style="float:right;margin:0 0 2em 2em;">__TOC__</div><br />
'''Related Article(s):'''<br />
<br />
*[[Climate Change Primer|Climate Change]]<br />
*[[Downscaled High Resolution Datasets for Climate Change Projections]]<br />
*[[Predicting Species Responses to Climate Change with Population Models]]<br />
*[[Restoration of Ecological Function in Terrestrial Systems Impacted by Invasive Species]]<br />
<br />
<br />
'''Contributor(s):''' [[Dr. Breanna F. Powers]] and [[Dr. Julie A. Heath]]<br />
<br />
<br />
'''Key Resource(s):'''<br />
<br />
*[https://www.enviro.wiki/images/f/f1/Inkley2004.pdf Global climate change and wildlife in North America. Wildlife Society Technical Review 04-2]<ref name=":1" /><br />
*[https://www.enviro.wiki/images/a/a4/Bellard2012.pdf Impacts of climate change on the future of biodiversity]<ref name=":0" /><br />
<br />
==Introduction==<br />
[[File:PowersFig1.png|thumb|900px|left | Figure 1. The predicted extinction risk (by percentage with 95% CIs) from climate change by different regions, colors represent a gradient from least to most extinction risks (green to red) based upon the number of relevant studies (n). Figure is from Urban (2015)<ref name=":2" />. Reprinted with permission from AAAS. Any use of this figure requires the prior written permission of AAAS]]<br />
[[File:PowersFig2.png|thumb|900px|right| Figure 2. Conceptual diagram showing how increased water temperatures and pCO₂ (partial pressure of carbon dioxide) affect the early life stages of fish. Where arrow direction indicated increasing rate ( ↑ ), decreasing rate ( ↓ ), or both directions depending on other environmental variables ( ↕️ ). Figure is from Pankhurst and Munday (2011)<ref name=":4" />.]]<br />
Global&nbsp;climate&nbsp;change&nbsp;will affect ecosystem functions and cycles such as nutrient, hydraulic, and carbon cycles, changing aspects of environmental conditions such as temperature, soil moisture, and precipitation<ref>Davidson, E. A. and Janssens, I. A., 2006. Temperature sensitivity of soil carbon decomposition and feedbacks to climate change. Nature, 440, pp. 165-173.[https://doi.org/10.1038/nature04514 doi: 10.1038/nature04514]</ref><ref>Melillo, J. M., McGuire, A. D., Kicklighter, D. W., Moore, B., Vorosmarty, C. J., and Schloss, A. L., 1993. Global climate change and terrestrial net primary production. Nature, 363, pp. 234-240. [https://doi.org/10.1038/363234a0 doi: 10.1038/363234a0]</ref>. Wildlife species are adapted to their environments and changes to the environment and habitat conditions will mediate effects, either directly or indirectly, on species survival, fecundity and ultimately population persistence<ref>Alig, R. J., Technical Coordinator, 2011. Effects of Climate Change on Natural Resources and Communities: A Compendium of Briefing Papers. U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Pacific Northwest Research Station, General Technical Report, [https://www.fs.usda.gov/treesearch/pubs/37513 PNW-GTR-837], Portland, OR, 169p. [https://doi.org/10.2737/PNW-GTR-837 doi:10.2737/PNW-GTR-837] [//www.enviro.wiki/images/f/f2/Pnwgtr837.pdf Report pdf]</ref><ref>Acevedo-Whitehouse, K., and Duffus, A. L. J., 2009. Effects of environmental change on wildlife health. Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society B: Biological Sciences, 364(1534), pp. 3429-3438. [https://doi.org/10.1098/rstb.2009.0128 doi: 10.1098/rstb.2009.0128]</ref><ref>Milligan, S. R., Holt, W. V., and Lloyd, R., 2009. Impacts of climate change and environmental factors on reproduction and development in wildlife. Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society B: Biological Sciences, 364(1534), pp. 3313-3319. [https://doi.org/10.1098/rstb.2009.0175 doi: 10.1098/rstb.2009.0175] [//www.enviro.wiki/images/a/ad/Milligan2009.pdf Article pdf]</ref>. The ability to adapt to changing habitat conditions as a result of climate change will differ across individual species and between populations. Some wildlife species may be more vulnerable to climate change than other species (Figure 1). Vulnerability is often linked to particular life-history traits (e.g., specialized habitat needs or limited dispersal abilities, see Pacifici et al. 2015P<ref>Pacifici, M., Foden, W., and Visconti, P., 2015. Assessing species vulnerability to climate change. Nature Climate Change 5, pp. 215-225. [https://doi.org/10.1038/nclimate2448 doi: 10.1038/nclimate2448]</ref> for a review on species vulnerability to climate change) or genetic composition. For example, grassland birds may be more vulnerable to changing climate than forest birds as forests can buffer change more so than grasslands<ref>Jarzyna, M. A., Zuckerberg, B., Finley, A. O., and Porter, W. F., 2016. Synergistic effects of climate change and land cover: grassland birds are more vulnerable to climate change. Landscape Ecology, 31(10), pp. 2275-2290. [https://doi.org/10.1007/s10980-016-0399-1 doi: 10.1007/s10980-016-0399-1]</ref>. Projected changes in the climate will generally have adverse effects of wildlife populations<ref>IPCC, 2001. Climate Change 2001: Synthesis Report. A Contribution of Working Groups I, II, and III to the Third Assessment Report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change. R.T. Watson and the Core Writing Team (eds.). Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, United Kingdom, and New York, NY, USA, 398p. [//www.enviro.wiki/images/5/56/IPCC2001.pdf Report pdf]</ref>, though there are some species coping with climate change or benefitting from environmental change. For example, American kestrels (Falco sparverius) have shifted their breeding phenology to earlier in the year and may now raise two broods of young within a breeding season<ref>Smith, S. H., Steenhof, K., McClure, C. J. W., and Heath, J. A. 2017. Earlier nesting by generalist predatory bird is associated with human responses to climate change. Journal of Animal Ecology, 86(1), pp. 98-107. [https://doi.org/10.1111/1365-2656.12604 doi: 10.1111/1365-2656.12604] [//www.enviro.wiki/images/5/5d/Smith2017.pdf Article pdf]</ref>.<br />
<br />
==The Influence of Climate Change on Wildlife and Habitats==<br />
Climate change effects on wildlife include increases in disease and changes to pathogen distributions, patterns, and outbreaks in wildlife<ref>Bradley, B. A., Wilcove, D. S., and Oppenheimer, M., 2010. Climate change increases risk of plant invasion in the Eastern United States. Biological Invasions, 12, pp.1855-1872. [https://doi.org/10.1007/s10530-009-9597-y doi: 10.1007/s10530-009-9597-y]</ref><ref>Cudmore, T. J., Björklund, N., Carroll, A. L., and Lindgren, B. S., 2010. Climate change and the range expansion of an aggressive bark beetle: evidence of higher beetle reproduction in naïve host tree populations. Journal of Applied Ecology, 47(5), pp. 1036-1043. [https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-2664.2010.01848.x doi: 10.1111/j.1365-2664.2010.01848.x] [//www.enviro.wiki/images/b/b3/Cudmore2010.pdf Article pdf]</ref><ref>Price, S. J., Leung, W. T., Owen, C. J., Puschendorf, R., Sergeant, C., Cunningham, A. A., Balloux, F., Garner, T. W., and Nichols, R. A., 2019. Effects of historic and projected climate change on the range and impacts of an emerging wildlife disease. Global Change Biology, 25(8), pp. 2648-2660. [https://doi.org/10.1111/gcb.14651 doi: 10.1111/gcb.14651]</ref> changes in range distributions and shifts in latitudinal and elevational gradients; changes in phenology or the timing of life cycle events that may create phenological mismatches<ref>Renner, S. S., and Zohner, C. M., 2018. Climate Change and Phenological Mismatch in Trophic Interactions Among Plants, Insects, and Vertebrates. Annual Review of Ecology, Evolution, and Systematics, 49, pp. 165-182. [https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev-ecolsys-110617-062535 doi: 10.1146/annurev-ecolsys-110617-062535]</ref> and extinction or population reduction<ref name=":2">Urban, M. C., 2015. Accelerating extinction risk from climate change. Science, 348(6234), pp. 571-573. [https://doi.org/ 10.1126/science.aaa4984 doi: 10.1126/science.aaa4984] [//www.enviro.wiki/images/1/15/Urban2015.pdf Article pdf]</ref>. The effects of climate change across a species’ range will most likely not be homogenous, meaning it can vary substantially, especially if a species’ range spans across different continents as exhibited by many migratory birds. <br />
Other changes in habitat include shifting vegetation (i.e., tree-lines are shifting to higher elevations), changes in nutrients in plants, earlier snowmelt and run-off, increase in invasive species, warming of streams and rivers, reduction or degradation of habitat (i.e., glacial melt), and an increase in large wildfires<ref>Barbero, R., Abatzoglou, J. T., Larkin, N. K., Kolden, C. A., and Stocks, B., 2015. Climate change presents increased potential for very large fires in the contiguous United States. International Journal of Wildland Fire, 24(7), pp. 892-899. [https://doi.org/10.1071/WF150830128 doi: 10.1071/WF150830128] [//www.enviro.wiki/images/0/08/Barbero2015.pdf Article pdf]</ref> and droughts<ref>Schlaepfer, D. R., Bradford, J. B., Lauenroth, W. K., Munson, S. M., Tietjen, B., Hall, S. A., Wilson, S. D., Duniway, M. C., Jia, G., Pyke, D. A., Lkhagva, A., and Jamiyansharav, K., 2017. Climate change reduces extent of temperate drylands and intensifies drought in deep soils. Nature Communications, 8, pp. 14196. [https://doi.org/10.1038/ncomms14196 doi: 10.1038/ncomms14196]</ref>.<br />
<br />
Although climate change effects on wildlife often are linked to species-specific traits, there are general impacts associated with taxonomic groups<ref name=":1" />. For fish it can affect reproduction<ref name=":4">Pankhurst, N. W., and Munday, P. L., 2011. Effects of climate change on fish reproduction and early life history stages. Marine and Freshwater Research, 62(9), pp. 1015-1026. [https://doi.org/10.1071/MF10269 doi: 10.1071/MF10269] [[Special:FilePath/Pankhurst2011.pdf| Article pdf]]</ref>, growth, and recruitment<ref name=":3">Lynch, A. J., Myers, B. J. E., Chu, C., Eby, L. A., Falke, J. A., Kovach, R. P., Krabbenhoft, T. J., Kwak, T. J., Lyons, J., Paukert, C. P., and Whitney, J. E., 2016. Climate Change Effects on North American Inland Fish Populations and Assemblages. Fisheries, 41(7), pp. 346-361. [https://doi.org/10.1080/03632415.2016.1186016 doi: 10.1080/03632415.2016.1186016]</ref>(Figure 2). Cold-water fish such as inland North American species are highly affected with the warming of streams and rivers<ref name=":3" />. Amphibians are highly sensitive to their environment and changes in temperature and moisture can affect development, range, abundance, and phenology<ref>Blaustein, A.R., Walls, S.C., Bancroft, B.A., Lawler, J.J., Searle, C.L., and Gervasi, S.S., 2010. Direct and Indirect Effects of Climate Change on Amphibian Populations. Diversity, 2(2), pp. 281-313.[https://doi.org/10.3390/d2020281 doi: 10.3390/d2020281] [[Special:FilePath/Blaustein 2010.pdf| Article pdf]]</ref><ref name=":1" /><ref>Ficetola, G. F., and Maiorano, L., 2016. Contrasting effects of temperature and precipitation change on amphibian phenology, abundance and performance. Oecologia, 181(3), pp. 683-693. [https://doi.org/10.1007/s00442-016-3610-9 doi: 10.1007/s00442-016-3610-9]</ref>. In reptiles, climate change effects can alter thermoregulation patterns, affect female reproduction and in some species, change sex ratios with increasing temperature<ref name=":1" />. Furthermore, for many bird species the timing of migration and other phenological events are affected by climate change<ref>Crick, H. Q. P., 2004. The impact of climate change on birds. Ibis, 146(s1), pp. 48-56. [https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1474-919X.2004.00327.x doi: 10.1111/j.1474-919X.2004.00327.x] [//www.enviro.wiki/images/c/c9/Crick2004.pdf Article pdf]</ref>. Range shifts, growth size, and survival are linked to climate change for mammals<ref name=":1" />. Arctic marine mammals are closely linked to sea ice dynamics and a changing climate will affect these dynamics<ref>Kovacs, K. M., Lydersen, C., Overland, J. E., and Moore, S. E., 2011. Impacts of changing sea-ice conditions on Arctic marine mammals. Marine Biodiversity, 41, pp. 81-194. [https://doi.org/10.1007/s12526-010-0061-0 doi: 10.1007/s12526-010-0061-0]</ref>. Therefore, it is increasingly important for conservation and management plans to consider the effects of climate change on wildlife and habitat for the geographic location<ref>Mawdsley, J. R., O’Malley, R., and Ojima, D. S. 2009. A Review of Climate-Change Adaptations Strategies For Wildlife Management and Biodiversity Conservation. Conservation Biology, 23(5), pp. 1080-1089. [https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1523-1739.2009.01264.x doi: 10.1111/j.1523-1739.2009.01264.x]</ref>.<br />
<br />
==References==<br />
<references /><br />
<br />
==See Also==</div>Jhurleyhttps://www.enviro.wiki/index.php?title=Climate_Change_Effects_on_Wildlife&diff=18071Climate Change Effects on Wildlife2026-04-03T21:23:23Z<p>Jhurley: </p>
<hr />
<div>Climate change affects both terrestrial<ref>Diffenbaugh, N. S. and Field, C. B., 2013. Changes in Ecologically Critical Terrestrial Climate Conditions. Science, 341(6145), pp. 486-492. [https://doi.org/10.1126/science.1237123 doi: 10.1126/science.1237123]</ref> and aquatic biomes<ref>Hoegh-Guldberg, O., and Bruno, J. F., 2010. The Impact of Climate Change on the World’s Marine Ecosystem. Science, 328(5985), pp. 1523-1528. [https://doi.org/10.1126/science.1189930 doi: 10.1126/science.1189930]</ref> causing significant effects on ecosystem functions and biodiversity<ref name=":0">Bellard, C., Berteslsmeier, C., Leadley, P., Thuiller, W., and Courchamp, F., 2012. Impacts of climate change on the future of biodiversity. Ecological Letters, 15(4), pp. 365-377. [https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1461-0248.2011.01736.x doi: 10.1111/j.1461-0248.2011.01736.x] [//www.enviro.wiki/images/a/a4/Bellard2012.pdf Article pdf]</ref>. Climate change is affecting several key ecological processes and patterns that will have cascading impacts on wildlife and habitat<ref name=":1">Inkley, D. B., Anderson, M. G., Blaustein, A. R., Burkett, V. R., Felzer, B., Griffith, B., Price, J., and Root, T. L., 2004. Global Climate Change and Wildlife in North America. Wildlife Society Technical Review 04-2. The Wildlife Society, Bethesda, MD, 26 pp. [//www.enviro.wiki/images/f/f1/Inkley2004.pdf Report pdf]</ref>. For example, sea-level rise, changes in the timing and duration of growing seasons, and changes in primary production are mainly driven by changes to global environmental variables (e.g., temperature and atmospheric CO<sub>2</sub>). Climate-induced changes in the environment ultimately impact wildlife population abundance and distributions.<br />
<br />
<div style="float:right;margin:0 0 2em 2em;">__TOC__</div><br />
'''Related Article(s):'''<br />
<br />
*[[Climate Change Primer|Climate Change]]<br />
*[[Downscaled High Resolution Datasets for Climate Change Projections]]<br />
*[[Predicting Species Responses to Climate Change with Population Models]]<br />
*[[Restoration of Ecological Function in Terrestrial Systems Impacted by Invasive Species]]<br />
<br />
<br />
'''Contributor(s):''' [[Dr. Breanna F. Powers]] and [[Dr. Julie A. Heath]]<br />
<br />
<br />
'''Key Resource(s):'''<br />
<br />
*[https://www.enviro.wiki/images/f/f1/Inkley2004.pdf Global climate change and wildlife in North America. Wildlife Society Technical Review 04-2]<ref name=":1" /><br />
*[https://www.enviro.wiki/images/a/a4/Bellard2012.pdf Impacts of climate change on the future of biodiversity]<ref name=":0" /><br />
<br />
==Introduction==<br />
[[File:PowersFig1.png|thumb|900px|left | Figure 1. The predicted extinction risk (by percentage with 95% CIs) from climate change by different regions, colors represent a gradient from least to most extinction risks (green to red) based upon the number of relevant studies (n). Figure is from Urban (2015)<ref name=":2" />. Reprinted with permission from AAAS. Any use of this figure requires the prior written permission of AAAS]]<br />
[[File:PowersFig2.png|thumb|900px|right| Figure 2. Conceptual diagram showing how increased water temperatures and pCO₂ (partial pressure of carbon dioxide) affect the early life stages of fish. Where arrow direction indicated increasing rate ( ↑ ), decreasing rate ( ↓ ), or both directions depending on other environmental variables ( ↕️ ). Figure is from Pankhurst and Munday (2011)<ref name=":4" />.]]<br />
Global&nbsp;climate&nbsp;change&nbsp;will affect ecosystem functions and cycles such as nutrient, hydraulic, and carbon cycles, changing aspects of environmental conditions such as temperature, soil moisture, and precipitation<ref>Davidson, E. A. and Janssens, I. A., 2006. Temperature sensitivity of soil carbon decomposition and feedbacks to climate change. Nature, 440, pp. 165-173.[https://doi.org/10.1038/nature04514 doi: 10.1038/nature04514]</ref><ref>Melillo, J. M., McGuire, A. D., Kicklighter, D. W., Moore, B., Vorosmarty, C. J., and Schloss, A. L., 1993. Global climate change and terrestrial net primary production. Nature, 363, pp. 234-240. [https://doi.org/10.1038/363234a0 doi: 10.1038/363234a0]</ref>. Wildlife species are adapted to their environments and changes to the environment and habitat conditions will mediate effects, either directly or indirectly, on species survival, fecundity and ultimately population persistence<ref>Alig, R. J., Technical Coordinator, 2011. Effects of Climate Change on Natural Resources and Communities: A Compendium of Briefing Papers. U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Pacific Northwest Research Station, General Technical Report, [https://www.fs.usda.gov/treesearch/pubs/37513 PNW-GTR-837], Portland, OR, 169p. [https://doi.org/10.2737/PNW-GTR-837 doi:10.2737/PNW-GTR-837] [//www.enviro.wiki/images/f/f2/Pnwgtr837.pdf Report pdf]</ref><ref>Acevedo-Whitehouse, K., and Duffus, A. L. J., 2009. Effects of environmental change on wildlife health. Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society B: Biological Sciences, 364(1534), pp. 3429-3438. [https://doi.org/10.1098/rstb.2009.0128 doi: 10.1098/rstb.2009.0128]</ref><ref>Milligan, S. R., Holt, W. V., and Lloyd, R., 2009. Impacts of climate change and environmental factors on reproduction and development in wildlife. Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society B: Biological Sciences, 364(1534), pp. 3313-3319. [https://doi.org/10.1098/rstb.2009.0175 doi: 10.1098/rstb.2009.0175] [//www.enviro.wiki/images/a/ad/Milligan2009.pdf Article pdf]</ref>. The ability to adapt to changing habitat conditions as a result of climate change will differ across individual species and between populations. Some wildlife species may be more vulnerable to climate change than other species (Figure 1). Vulnerability is often linked to particular life-history traits (e.g., specialized habitat needs or limited dispersal abilities, see Pacifici et al. 2015P<ref>Pacifici, M., Foden, W., and Visconti, P., 2015. Assessing species vulnerability to climate change. Nature Climate Change 5, pp. 215-225. [https://doi.org/10.1038/nclimate2448 doi: 10.1038/nclimate2448]</ref> for a review on species vulnerability to climate change) or genetic composition. For example, grassland birds may be more vulnerable to changing climate than forest birds as forests can buffer change more so than grasslands<ref>Jarzyna, M. A., Zuckerberg, B., Finley, A. O., and Porter, W. F., 2016. Synergistic effects of climate change and land cover: grassland birds are more vulnerable to climate change. Landscape Ecology, 31(10), pp. 2275-2290. [https://doi.org/10.1007/s10980-016-0399-1 doi: 10.1007/s10980-016-0399-1]</ref>. Projected changes in the climate will generally have adverse effects of wildlife populations<ref>IPCC, 2001. Climate Change 2001: Synthesis Report. A Contribution of Working Groups I, II, and III to the Third Assessment Report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change. R.T. Watson and the Core Writing Team (eds.). Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, United Kingdom, and New York, NY, USA, 398p. [//www.enviro.wiki/images/5/56/IPCC2001.pdf Report pdf]</ref>, though there are some species coping with climate change or benefitting from environmental change. For example, American kestrels (Falco sparverius) have shifted their breeding phenology to earlier in the year and may now raise two broods of young within a breeding season<ref>Smith, S. H., Steenhof, K., McClure, C. J. W., and Heath, J. A. 2017. Earlier nesting by generalist predatory bird is associated with human responses to climate change. Journal of Animal Ecology, 86(1), pp. 98-107. [https://doi.org/10.1111/1365-2656.12604 doi: 10.1111/1365-2656.12604] [//www.enviro.wiki/images/5/5d/Smith2017.pdf Article pdf]</ref>.<br />
<br />
==The Influence of Climate Change on Wildlife and Habitats==<br />
Climate change effects on wildlife include increases in disease and changes to pathogen distributions, patterns, and outbreaks in wildlife<ref>Bradley, B. A., Wilcove, D. S., and Oppenheimer, M., 2010. Climate change increases risk of plant invasion in the Eastern United States. Biological Invasions, 12, pp.1855-1872. [https://doi.org/10.1007/s10530-009-9597-y doi: 10.1007/s10530-009-9597-y]</ref><ref>Cudmore, T. J., Björklund, N., Carroll, A. L., and Lindgren, B. S., 2010. Climate change and the range expansion of an aggressive bark beetle: evidence of higher beetle reproduction in naïve host tree populations. Journal of Applied Ecology, 47(5), pp. 1036-1043. [https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-2664.2010.01848.x doi: 10.1111/j.1365-2664.2010.01848.x] [//www.enviro.wiki/images/b/b3/Cudmore2010.pdf Article pdf]</ref><ref>Price, S. J., Leung, W. T., Owen, C. J., Puschendorf, R., Sergeant, C., Cunningham, A. A., Balloux, F., Garner, T. W., and Nichols, R. A., 2019. Effects of historic and projected climate change on the range and impacts of an emerging wildlife disease. Global Change Biology, 25(8), pp. 2648-2660. [https://doi.org/10.1111/gcb.14651 doi: 10.1111/gcb.14651]</ref> changes in range distributions and shifts in latitudinal and elevational gradients; changes in phenology or the timing of life cycle events that may create phenological mismatches<ref>Renner, S. S., and Zohner, C. M., 2018. Climate Change and Phenological Mismatch in Trophic Interactions Among Plants, Insects, and Vertebrates. Annual Review of Ecology, Evolution, and Systematics, 49, pp. 165-182. [https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev-ecolsys-110617-062535 doi: 10.1146/annurev-ecolsys-110617-062535]</ref> and extinction or population reduction<ref name=":2">Urban, M. C., 2015. Accelerating extinction risk from climate change. Science, 348(6234), pp. 571-573. [https://doi.org/ 10.1126/science.aaa4984 doi: 10.1126/science.aaa4984] [//www.enviro.wiki/images/1/15/Urban2015.pdf Article pdf]</ref>. The effects of climate change across a species’ range will most likely not be homogenous, meaning it can vary substantially, especially if a species’ range spans across different continents as exhibited by many migratory birds. <br />
Other changes in habitat include shifting vegetation (i.e., tree-lines are shifting to higher elevations), changes in nutrients in plants, earlier snowmelt and run-off, increase in invasive species, warming of streams and rivers, reduction or degradation of habitat (i.e., glacial melt), and an increase in large wildfires<ref>Barbero, R., Abatzoglou, J. T., Larkin, N. K., Kolden, C. A., and Stocks, B., 2015. Climate change presents increased potential for very large fires in the contiguous United States. International Journal of Wildland Fire, 24(7), pp. 892-899. [https://doi.org/10.1071/WF150830128 doi: 10.1071/WF150830128] [//www.enviro.wiki/images/0/08/Barbero2015.pdf Article pdf]</ref> and droughts<ref>Schlaepfer, D. R., Bradford, J. B., Lauenroth, W. K., Munson, S. M., Tietjen, B., Hall, S. A., Wilson, S. D., Duniway, M. C., Jia, G., Pyke, D. A., Lkhagva, A., and Jamiyansharav, K., 2017. Climate change reduces extent of temperate drylands and intensifies drought in deep soils. Nature Communications, 8, pp. 14196. [https://doi.org/10.1038/ncomms14196 doi: 10.1038/ncomms14196]</ref>.<br />
<br />
Although climate change effects on wildlife often are linked to species-specific traits, there are general impacts associated with taxonomic groups<ref name=":1" />. For fish it can affect reproduction<ref name=":4">Pankhurst, N. W., and Munday, P. L., 2011. Effects of climate change on fish reproduction and early life history stages. Marine and Freshwater Research, 62(9), pp. 1015-1026. [https://doi.org/10.1071/MF10269 doi: 10.1071/MF10269] [[Special:FilePath/Pankhurst2011.pdf| Article pdf]]</ref>, growth, and recruitment<ref name=":3">Lynch, A. J., Myers, B. J. E., Chu, C., Eby, L. A., Falke, J. A., Kovach, R. P., Krabbenhoft, T. J., Kwak, T. J., Lyons, J., Paukert, C. P., and Whitney, J. E., 2016. Climate Change Effects on North American Inland Fish Populations and Assemblages. Fisheries, 41(7), pp. 346-361. [https://doi.org/10.1080/03632415.2016.1186016 doi: 10.1080/03632415.2016.1186016]</ref>(Figure 2). Cold-water fish such as inland North American species are highly affected with the warming of streams and rivers<ref name=":3" />. Amphibians are highly sensitive to their environment and changes in temperature and moisture can affect development, range, abundance, and phenology<ref>Blaustein, A.R., Walls, S.C., Bancroft, B.A., Lawler, J.J., Searle, C.L., and Gervasi, S.S., 2010. Direct and Indirect Effects of Climate Change on Amphibian Populations. Diversity, 2(2), pp. 281-313.[https://doi.org/10.3390/d2020281 doi: 10.3390/d2020281] [[Special:FilePath/Blaustein 2010.pdf| Article pdf]]</ref><ref name=":1" /><ref>Ficetola, G. F., and Maiorano, L., 2016. Contrasting effects of temperature and precipitation change on amphibian phenology, abundance and performance. Oecologia, 181(3), pp. 683-693. [https://doi.org/10.1007/s00442-016-3610-9 doi: 10.1007/s00442-016-3610-9]</ref>. In reptiles, climate change effects can alter thermoregulation patterns, affect female reproduction and in some species, change sex ratios with increasing temperature<ref name=":1" />. Furthermore, for many bird species the timing of migration and other phenological events are affected by climate change<ref>Crick, H. Q. P., 2004. The impact of climate change on birds. Ibis, 146(s1), pp. 48-56. [https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1474-919X.2004.00327.x doi: 10.1111/j.1474-919X.2004.00327.x] [//www.enviro.wiki/images/c/c9/Crick2004.pdf Article pdf]</ref>. Range shifts, growth size, and survival are linked to climate change for mammals<ref name=":1" />. Arctic marine mammals are closely linked to sea ice dynamics and a changing climate will affect these dynamics<ref>Kovacs, K. M., Lydersen, C., Overland, J. E., and Moore, S. E., 2011. Impacts of changing sea-ice conditions on Arctic marine mammals. Marine Biodiversity, 41, pp. 81-194. [https://doi.org/10.1007/s12526-010-0061-0 doi: 10.1007/s12526-010-0061-0]</ref>. Therefore, it is increasingly important for conservation and management plans to consider the effects of climate change on wildlife and habitat for the geographic location<ref>Mawdsley, J. R., O’Malley, R., and Ojima, D. S. 2009. A Review of Climate-Change Adaptations Strategies For Wildlife Management and Biodiversity Conservation. Conservation Biology, 23(5), pp. 1080-1089. [https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1523-1739.2009.01264.x doi: 10.1111/j.1523-1739.2009.01264.x]</ref>.<br />
<br />
==References==<br />
<references /><br />
<br />
==See Also==</div>Jhurleyhttps://www.enviro.wiki/index.php?title=Climate_Change_Effects_on_Wildlife&diff=18070Climate Change Effects on Wildlife2026-04-03T21:21:49Z<p>Jhurley: </p>
<hr />
<div>Climate change affects both terrestrial<ref>Diffenbaugh, N. S. and Field, C. B., 2013. Changes in Ecologically Critical Terrestrial Climate Conditions. Science, 341(6145), pp. 486-492. [https://doi.org/10.1126/science.1237123 doi: 10.1126/science.1237123]</ref> and aquatic biomes<ref>Hoegh-Guldberg, O., and Bruno, J. F., 2010. The Impact of Climate Change on the World’s Marine Ecosystem. Science, 328(5985), pp. 1523-1528. [https://doi.org/10.1126/science.1189930 doi: 10.1126/science.1189930]</ref> causing significant effects on ecosystem functions and biodiversity<ref name=":0">Bellard, C., Berteslsmeier, C., Leadley, P., Thuiller, W., and Courchamp, F., 2012. Impacts of climate change on the future of biodiversity. Ecological Letters, 15(4), pp. 365-377. [https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1461-0248.2011.01736.x doi: 10.1111/j.1461-0248.2011.01736.x] [//www.enviro.wiki/images/a/a4/Bellard2012.pdf Article pdf]</ref>. Climate change is affecting several key ecological processes and patterns that will have cascading impacts on wildlife and habitat<ref name=":1">Inkley, D. B., Anderson, M. G., Blaustein, A. R., Burkett, V. R., Felzer, B., Griffith, B., Price, J., and Root, T. L., 2004. Global Climate Change and Wildlife in North America. Wildlife Society Technical Review 04-2. The Wildlife Society, Bethesda, MD, 26 pp. [//www.enviro.wiki/images/f/f1/Inkley2004.pdf Report pdf]</ref>. For example, sea-level rise, changes in the timing and duration of growing seasons, and changes in primary production are mainly driven by changes to global environmental variables (e.g., temperature and atmospheric CO<sub>2</sub>). Climate-induced changes in the environment ultimately impact wildlife population abundance and distributions.<br />
<div style="float:right;margin:0 0 2em 2em;">__TOC__</div><br />
'''Related Article(s):'''<br />
<br />
*[[Climate Change Primer|Climate Change]]<br />
*[[Downscaled High Resolution Datasets for Climate Change Projections]]<br />
*[[Predicting Species Responses to Climate Change with Population Models]]<br />
*[[Restoration of Ecological Function in Terrestrial Systems Impacted by Invasive Species]]<br />
<br />
<br />
'''Contributor(s):''' [[Dr. Breanna F. Powers]] and [[Dr. Julie A. Heath]]<br />
<br />
<br />
'''Key Resource(s):'''<br />
<br />
*[https://www.enviro.wiki/images/f/f1/Inkley2004.pdf Global climate change and wildlife in North America. Wildlife Society Technical Review 04-2]<ref name=":1" /><br />
*[https://www.enviro.wiki/images/a/a4/Bellard2012.pdf Impacts of climate change on the future of biodiversity]<ref name=":0" /><br />
<br />
==Introduction==<br />
[[File:PowersFig1.png|thumb|900px|left | Figure 1. The predicted extinction risk (by percentage with 95% CIs) from climate change by different regions, colors represent a gradient from least to most extinction risks (green to red) based upon the number of relevant studies (n). Figure is from Urban (2015)<ref name=":2" />. Reprinted with permission from AAAS. Any use of this figure requires the prior written permission of AAAS]]<br />
[[File:PowersFig2.png|thumb|900px|right| Figure 2. Conceptual diagram showing how increased water temperatures and pCO₂ (partial pressure of carbon dioxide) affect the early life stages of fish. Where arrow direction indicated increasing rate ( ↑ ), decreasing rate ( ↓ ), or both directions depending on other environmental variables ( ↕️ ). Figure is from Pankhurst and Munday (2011)<ref name=":4" />.]]<br />
Global&nbsp;climate&nbsp;change&nbsp;will affect ecosystem functions and cycles such as nutrient, hydraulic, and carbon cycles, changing aspects of environmental conditions such as temperature, soil moisture, and precipitation<ref>Davidson, E. A. and Janssens, I. A., 2006. Temperature sensitivity of soil carbon decomposition and feedbacks to climate change. Nature, 440, pp. 165-173.[https://doi.org/10.1038/nature04514 doi: 10.1038/nature04514]</ref><ref>Melillo, J. M., McGuire, A. D., Kicklighter, D. W., Moore, B., Vorosmarty, C. J., and Schloss, A. L., 1993. Global climate change and terrestrial net primary production. Nature, 363, pp. 234-240. [https://doi.org/10.1038/363234a0 doi: 10.1038/363234a0]</ref>. Wildlife species are adapted to their environments and changes to the environment and habitat conditions will mediate effects, either directly or indirectly, on species survival, fecundity and ultimately population persistence<ref>Alig, R. J., Technical Coordinator, 2011. Effects of Climate Change on Natural Resources and Communities: A Compendium of Briefing Papers. U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Pacific Northwest Research Station, General Technical Report, [https://www.fs.usda.gov/treesearch/pubs/37513 PNW-GTR-837], Portland, OR, 169p. [https://doi.org/10.2737/PNW-GTR-837 doi:10.2737/PNW-GTR-837] [//www.enviro.wiki/images/f/f2/Pnwgtr837.pdf Report pdf]</ref><ref>Acevedo-Whitehouse, K., and Duffus, A. L. J., 2009. Effects of environmental change on wildlife health. Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society B: Biological Sciences, 364(1534), pp. 3429-3438. [https://doi.org/10.1098/rstb.2009.0128 doi: 10.1098/rstb.2009.0128]</ref><ref>Milligan, S. R., Holt, W. V., and Lloyd, R., 2009. Impacts of climate change and environmental factors on reproduction and development in wildlife. Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society B: Biological Sciences, 364(1534), pp. 3313-3319. [https://doi.org/10.1098/rstb.2009.0175 doi: 10.1098/rstb.2009.0175] [//www.enviro.wiki/images/a/ad/Milligan2009.pdf Article pdf]</ref>. The ability to adapt to changing habitat conditions as a result of climate change will differ across individual species and between populations. Some wildlife species may be more vulnerable to climate change than other species (Figure 1). Vulnerability is often linked to particular life-history traits (e.g., specialized habitat needs or limited dispersal abilities, see Pacifici et al. 2015P<ref>Pacifici, M., Foden, W., and Visconti, P., 2015. Assessing species vulnerability to climate change. Nature Climate Change 5, pp. 215-225. [https://doi.org/10.1038/nclimate2448 doi: 10.1038/nclimate2448]</ref> for a review on species vulnerability to climate change) or genetic composition. For example, grassland birds may be more vulnerable to changing climate than forest birds as forests can buffer change more so than grasslands<ref>Jarzyna, M. A., Zuckerberg, B., Finley, A. O., and Porter, W. F., 2016. Synergistic effects of climate change and land cover: grassland birds are more vulnerable to climate change. Landscape Ecology, 31(10), pp. 2275-2290. [https://doi.org/10.1007/s10980-016-0399-1 doi: 10.1007/s10980-016-0399-1]</ref>. Projected changes in the climate will generally have adverse effects of wildlife populations<ref>IPCC, 2001. Climate Change 2001: Synthesis Report. A Contribution of Working Groups I, II, and III to the Third Assessment Report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change. R.T. Watson and the Core Writing Team (eds.). Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, United Kingdom, and New York, NY, USA, 398p. [//www.enviro.wiki/images/5/56/IPCC2001.pdf Report pdf]</ref>, though there are some species coping with climate change or benefitting from environmental change. For example, American kestrels (Falco sparverius) have shifted their breeding phenology to earlier in the year and may now raise two broods of young within a breeding season<ref>Smith, S. H., Steenhof, K., McClure, C. J. W., and Heath, J. A. 2017. Earlier nesting by generalist predatory bird is associated with human responses to climate change. Journal of Animal Ecology, 86(1), pp. 98-107. [https://doi.org/10.1111/1365-2656.12604 doi: 10.1111/1365-2656.12604] [//www.enviro.wiki/images/5/5d/Smith2017.pdf Article pdf]</ref>.<br />
<br />
==The Influence of Climate Change on Wildlife and Habitats==<br />
Climate change effects on wildlife include increases in disease and changes to pathogen distributions, patterns, and outbreaks in wildlife<ref>Bradley, B. A., Wilcove, D. S., and Oppenheimer, M., 2010. Climate change increases risk of plant invasion in the Eastern United States. Biological Invasions, 12, pp.1855-1872. [https://doi.org/10.1007/s10530-009-9597-y doi: 10.1007/s10530-009-9597-y]</ref><ref>Cudmore, T. J., Björklund, N., Carroll, A. L., and Lindgren, B. S., 2010. Climate change and the range expansion of an aggressive bark beetle: evidence of higher beetle reproduction in naïve host tree populations. Journal of Applied Ecology, 47(5), pp. 1036-1043. [https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-2664.2010.01848.x doi: 10.1111/j.1365-2664.2010.01848.x] [//www.enviro.wiki/images/b/b3/Cudmore2010.pdf Article pdf]</ref><ref>Price, S. J., Leung, W. T., Owen, C. J., Puschendorf, R., Sergeant, C., Cunningham, A. A., Balloux, F., Garner, T. W., and Nichols, R. A., 2019. Effects of historic and projected climate change on the range and impacts of an emerging wildlife disease. Global Change Biology, 25(8), pp. 2648-2660. [https://doi.org/10.1111/gcb.14651 doi: 10.1111/gcb.14651]</ref> changes in range distributions and shifts in latitudinal and elevational gradients; changes in phenology or the timing of life cycle events that may create phenological mismatches<ref>Renner, S. S., and Zohner, C. M., 2018. Climate Change and Phenological Mismatch in Trophic Interactions Among Plants, Insects, and Vertebrates. Annual Review of Ecology, Evolution, and Systematics, 49, pp. 165-182. [https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev-ecolsys-110617-062535 doi: 10.1146/annurev-ecolsys-110617-062535]</ref> and extinction or population reduction<ref name=":2">Urban, M. C., 2015. Accelerating extinction risk from climate change. Science, 348(6234), pp. 571-573. [https://doi.org/ 10.1126/science.aaa4984 doi: 10.1126/science.aaa4984] [//www.enviro.wiki/images/1/15/Urban2015.pdf Article pdf]</ref>. The effects of climate change across a species’ range will most likely not be homogenous, meaning it can vary substantially, especially if a species’ range spans across different continents as exhibited by many migratory birds. <br />
Other changes in habitat include shifting vegetation (i.e., tree-lines are shifting to higher elevations), changes in nutrients in plants, earlier snowmelt and run-off, increase in invasive species, warming of streams and rivers, reduction or degradation of habitat (i.e., glacial melt), and an increase in large wildfires<ref>Barbero, R., Abatzoglou, J. T., Larkin, N. K., Kolden, C. A., and Stocks, B., 2015. Climate change presents increased potential for very large fires in the contiguous United States. International Journal of Wildland Fire, 24(7), pp. 892-899. [https://doi.org/10.1071/WF150830128 doi: 10.1071/WF150830128] [//www.enviro.wiki/images/0/08/Barbero2015.pdf Article pdf]</ref> and droughts<ref>Schlaepfer, D. R., Bradford, J. B., Lauenroth, W. K., Munson, S. M., Tietjen, B., Hall, S. A., Wilson, S. D., Duniway, M. C., Jia, G., Pyke, D. A., Lkhagva, A., and Jamiyansharav, K., 2017. Climate change reduces extent of temperate drylands and intensifies drought in deep soils. Nature Communications, 8, pp. 14196. [https://doi.org/10.1038/ncomms14196 doi: 10.1038/ncomms14196]</ref>.<br />
<br />
Although climate change effects on wildlife often are linked to species-specific traits, there are general impacts associated with taxonomic groups<ref name=":1" />. For fish it can affect reproduction<ref name=":4">Pankhurst, N. W., and Munday, P. L., 2011. Effects of climate change on fish reproduction and early life history stages. Marine and Freshwater Research, 62(9), pp. 1015-1026. [https://doi.org/10.1071/MF10269 doi: 10.1071/MF10269] [[Special:FilePath/Pankhurst2011.pdf| Article pdf]]</ref>, growth, and recruitment<ref name=":3">Lynch, A. J., Myers, B. J. E., Chu, C., Eby, L. A., Falke, J. A., Kovach, R. P., Krabbenhoft, T. J., Kwak, T. J., Lyons, J., Paukert, C. P., and Whitney, J. E., 2016. Climate Change Effects on North American Inland Fish Populations and Assemblages. Fisheries, 41(7), pp. 346-361. [https://doi.org/10.1080/03632415.2016.1186016 doi: 10.1080/03632415.2016.1186016]</ref>(Figure 2). Cold-water fish such as inland North American species are highly affected with the warming of streams and rivers<ref name=":3" />. Amphibians are highly sensitive to their environment and changes in temperature and moisture can affect development, range, abundance, and phenology<ref>Blaustein, A.R., Walls, S.C., Bancroft, B.A., Lawler, J.J., Searle, C.L., and Gervasi, S.S., 2010. Direct and Indirect Effects of Climate Change on Amphibian Populations. Diversity, 2(2), pp. 281-313.[https://doi.org/10.3390/d2020281 doi: 10.3390/d2020281] [[Special:FilePath/Blaustein 2010.pdf| Article pdf]]</ref><ref name=":1" /><ref>Ficetola, G. F., and Maiorano, L., 2016. Contrasting effects of temperature and precipitation change on amphibian phenology, abundance and performance. Oecologia, 181(3), pp. 683-693. [https://doi.org/10.1007/s00442-016-3610-9 doi: 10.1007/s00442-016-3610-9]</ref>. In reptiles, climate change effects can alter thermoregulation patterns, affect female reproduction and in some species, change sex ratios with increasing temperature<ref name=":1" />. Furthermore, for many bird species the timing of migration and other phenological events are affected by climate change<ref>Crick, H. Q. P., 2004. The impact of climate change on birds. Ibis, 146(s1), pp. 48-56. [https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1474-919X.2004.00327.x doi: 10.1111/j.1474-919X.2004.00327.x] [//www.enviro.wiki/images/c/c9/Crick2004.pdf Article pdf]</ref>. Range shifts, growth size, and survival are linked to climate change for mammals<ref name=":1" />. Arctic marine mammals are closely linked to sea ice dynamics and a changing climate will affect these dynamics<ref>Kovacs, K. M., Lydersen, C., Overland, J. E., and Moore, S. E., 2011. Impacts of changing sea-ice conditions on Arctic marine mammals. Marine Biodiversity, 41, pp. 81-194. [https://doi.org/10.1007/s12526-010-0061-0 doi: 10.1007/s12526-010-0061-0]</ref>. Therefore, it is increasingly important for conservation and management plans to consider the effects of climate change on wildlife and habitat for the geographic location<ref>Mawdsley, J. R., O’Malley, R., and Ojima, D. S. 2009. A Review of Climate-Change Adaptations Strategies For Wildlife Management and Biodiversity Conservation. Conservation Biology, 23(5), pp. 1080-1089. [https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1523-1739.2009.01264.x doi: 10.1111/j.1523-1739.2009.01264.x]</ref>.<br />
<br />
==References==<br />
<references /><br />
<br />
==See Also==</div>Jhurleyhttps://www.enviro.wiki/index.php?title=Climate_Change_Effects_on_Wildlife&diff=18069Climate Change Effects on Wildlife2026-04-03T21:20:53Z<p>Jhurley: </p>
<hr />
<div>/** Climate change affects both terrestrial<ref>Diffenbaugh, N. S. and Field, C. B., 2013. Changes in Ecologically Critical Terrestrial Climate Conditions. Science, 341(6145), pp. 486-492. [https://doi.org/10.1126/science.1237123 doi: 10.1126/science.1237123]</ref> and aquatic biomes<ref>Hoegh-Guldberg, O., and Bruno, J. F., 2010. The Impact of Climate Change on the World’s Marine Ecosystem. Science, 328(5985), pp. 1523-1528. [https://doi.org/10.1126/science.1189930 doi: 10.1126/science.1189930]</ref> causing significant effects on ecosystem functions and biodiversity<ref name=":0">Bellard, C., Berteslsmeier, C., Leadley, P., Thuiller, W., and Courchamp, F., 2012. Impacts of climate change on the future of biodiversity. Ecological Letters, 15(4), pp. 365-377. [https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1461-0248.2011.01736.x doi: 10.1111/j.1461-0248.2011.01736.x] [//www.enviro.wiki/images/a/a4/Bellard2012.pdf Article pdf]</ref>. Climate change is affecting several key ecological processes and patterns that will have cascading impacts on wildlife and habitat<ref name=":1">Inkley, D. B., Anderson, M. G., Blaustein, A. R., Burkett, V. R., Felzer, B., Griffith, B., Price, J., and Root, T. L., 2004. Global Climate Change and Wildlife in North America. Wildlife Society Technical Review 04-2. The Wildlife Society, Bethesda, MD, 26 pp. [//www.enviro.wiki/images/f/f1/Inkley2004.pdf Report pdf]</ref>. For example, sea-level rise, changes in the timing and duration of growing seasons, and changes in primary production are mainly driven by changes to global environmental variables (e.g., temperature and atmospheric CO<sub>2</sub>). Climate-induced changes in the environment ultimately impact wildlife population abundance and distributions. */<br />
<div style="float:right;margin:0 0 2em 2em;">__TOC__</div><br />
'''Related Article(s):'''<br />
<br />
*[[Climate Change Primer|Climate Change]]<br />
*[[Downscaled High Resolution Datasets for Climate Change Projections]]<br />
*[[Predicting Species Responses to Climate Change with Population Models]]<br />
*[[Restoration of Ecological Function in Terrestrial Systems Impacted by Invasive Species]]<br />
<br />
<br />
'''Contributor(s):''' [[Dr. Breanna F. Powers]] and [[Dr. Julie A. Heath]]<br />
<br />
<br />
'''Key Resource(s):'''<br />
<br />
*[https://www.enviro.wiki/images/f/f1/Inkley2004.pdf Global climate change and wildlife in North America. Wildlife Society Technical Review 04-2]<ref name=":1" /><br />
*[https://www.enviro.wiki/images/a/a4/Bellard2012.pdf Impacts of climate change on the future of biodiversity]<ref name=":0" /><br />
<br />
==Introduction==<br />
[[File:PowersFig1.png|thumb|900px|left | Figure 1. The predicted extinction risk (by percentage with 95% CIs) from climate change by different regions, colors represent a gradient from least to most extinction risks (green to red) based upon the number of relevant studies (n). Figure is from Urban (2015)<ref name=":2" />. Reprinted with permission from AAAS. Any use of this figure requires the prior written permission of AAAS]]<br />
[[File:PowersFig2.png|thumb|900px|right| Figure 2. Conceptual diagram showing how increased water temperatures and pCO₂ (partial pressure of carbon dioxide) affect the early life stages of fish. Where arrow direction indicated increasing rate ( ↑ ), decreasing rate ( ↓ ), or both directions depending on other environmental variables ( ↕️ ). Figure is from Pankhurst and Munday (2011)<ref name=":4" />.]]<br />
Global&nbsp;climate&nbsp;change&nbsp;will affect ecosystem functions and cycles such as nutrient, hydraulic, and carbon cycles, changing aspects of environmental conditions such as temperature, soil moisture, and precipitation<ref>Davidson, E. A. and Janssens, I. A., 2006. Temperature sensitivity of soil carbon decomposition and feedbacks to climate change. Nature, 440, pp. 165-173.[https://doi.org/10.1038/nature04514 doi: 10.1038/nature04514]</ref><ref>Melillo, J. M., McGuire, A. D., Kicklighter, D. W., Moore, B., Vorosmarty, C. J., and Schloss, A. L., 1993. Global climate change and terrestrial net primary production. Nature, 363, pp. 234-240. [https://doi.org/10.1038/363234a0 doi: 10.1038/363234a0]</ref>. Wildlife species are adapted to their environments and changes to the environment and habitat conditions will mediate effects, either directly or indirectly, on species survival, fecundity and ultimately population persistence<ref>Alig, R. J., Technical Coordinator, 2011. Effects of Climate Change on Natural Resources and Communities: A Compendium of Briefing Papers. U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Pacific Northwest Research Station, General Technical Report, [https://www.fs.usda.gov/treesearch/pubs/37513 PNW-GTR-837], Portland, OR, 169p. [https://doi.org/10.2737/PNW-GTR-837 doi:10.2737/PNW-GTR-837] [//www.enviro.wiki/images/f/f2/Pnwgtr837.pdf Report pdf]</ref><ref>Acevedo-Whitehouse, K., and Duffus, A. L. J., 2009. Effects of environmental change on wildlife health. Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society B: Biological Sciences, 364(1534), pp. 3429-3438. [https://doi.org/10.1098/rstb.2009.0128 doi: 10.1098/rstb.2009.0128]</ref><ref>Milligan, S. R., Holt, W. V., and Lloyd, R., 2009. Impacts of climate change and environmental factors on reproduction and development in wildlife. Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society B: Biological Sciences, 364(1534), pp. 3313-3319. [https://doi.org/10.1098/rstb.2009.0175 doi: 10.1098/rstb.2009.0175] [//www.enviro.wiki/images/a/ad/Milligan2009.pdf Article pdf]</ref>. The ability to adapt to changing habitat conditions as a result of climate change will differ across individual species and between populations. Some wildlife species may be more vulnerable to climate change than other species (Figure 1). Vulnerability is often linked to particular life-history traits (e.g., specialized habitat needs or limited dispersal abilities, see Pacifici et al. 2015P<ref>Pacifici, M., Foden, W., and Visconti, P., 2015. Assessing species vulnerability to climate change. Nature Climate Change 5, pp. 215-225. [https://doi.org/10.1038/nclimate2448 doi: 10.1038/nclimate2448]</ref> for a review on species vulnerability to climate change) or genetic composition. For example, grassland birds may be more vulnerable to changing climate than forest birds as forests can buffer change more so than grasslands<ref>Jarzyna, M. A., Zuckerberg, B., Finley, A. O., and Porter, W. F., 2016. Synergistic effects of climate change and land cover: grassland birds are more vulnerable to climate change. Landscape Ecology, 31(10), pp. 2275-2290. [https://doi.org/10.1007/s10980-016-0399-1 doi: 10.1007/s10980-016-0399-1]</ref>. Projected changes in the climate will generally have adverse effects of wildlife populations<ref>IPCC, 2001. Climate Change 2001: Synthesis Report. A Contribution of Working Groups I, II, and III to the Third Assessment Report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change. R.T. Watson and the Core Writing Team (eds.). Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, United Kingdom, and New York, NY, USA, 398p. [//www.enviro.wiki/images/5/56/IPCC2001.pdf Report pdf]</ref>, though there are some species coping with climate change or benefitting from environmental change. For example, American kestrels (Falco sparverius) have shifted their breeding phenology to earlier in the year and may now raise two broods of young within a breeding season<ref>Smith, S. H., Steenhof, K., McClure, C. J. W., and Heath, J. A. 2017. Earlier nesting by generalist predatory bird is associated with human responses to climate change. Journal of Animal Ecology, 86(1), pp. 98-107. [https://doi.org/10.1111/1365-2656.12604 doi: 10.1111/1365-2656.12604] [//www.enviro.wiki/images/5/5d/Smith2017.pdf Article pdf]</ref>.<br />
<br />
==The Influence of Climate Change on Wildlife and Habitats==<br />
Climate change effects on wildlife include increases in disease and changes to pathogen distributions, patterns, and outbreaks in wildlife<ref>Bradley, B. A., Wilcove, D. S., and Oppenheimer, M., 2010. Climate change increases risk of plant invasion in the Eastern United States. Biological Invasions, 12, pp.1855-1872. [https://doi.org/10.1007/s10530-009-9597-y doi: 10.1007/s10530-009-9597-y]</ref><ref>Cudmore, T. J., Björklund, N., Carroll, A. L., and Lindgren, B. S., 2010. Climate change and the range expansion of an aggressive bark beetle: evidence of higher beetle reproduction in naïve host tree populations. Journal of Applied Ecology, 47(5), pp. 1036-1043. [https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-2664.2010.01848.x doi: 10.1111/j.1365-2664.2010.01848.x] [//www.enviro.wiki/images/b/b3/Cudmore2010.pdf Article pdf]</ref><ref>Price, S. J., Leung, W. T., Owen, C. J., Puschendorf, R., Sergeant, C., Cunningham, A. A., Balloux, F., Garner, T. W., and Nichols, R. A., 2019. Effects of historic and projected climate change on the range and impacts of an emerging wildlife disease. Global Change Biology, 25(8), pp. 2648-2660. [https://doi.org/10.1111/gcb.14651 doi: 10.1111/gcb.14651]</ref> changes in range distributions and shifts in latitudinal and elevational gradients; changes in phenology or the timing of life cycle events that may create phenological mismatches<ref>Renner, S. S., and Zohner, C. M., 2018. Climate Change and Phenological Mismatch in Trophic Interactions Among Plants, Insects, and Vertebrates. Annual Review of Ecology, Evolution, and Systematics, 49, pp. 165-182. [https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev-ecolsys-110617-062535 doi: 10.1146/annurev-ecolsys-110617-062535]</ref> and extinction or population reduction<ref name=":2">Urban, M. C., 2015. Accelerating extinction risk from climate change. Science, 348(6234), pp. 571-573. [https://doi.org/ 10.1126/science.aaa4984 doi: 10.1126/science.aaa4984] [//www.enviro.wiki/images/1/15/Urban2015.pdf Article pdf]</ref>. The effects of climate change across a species’ range will most likely not be homogenous, meaning it can vary substantially, especially if a species’ range spans across different continents as exhibited by many migratory birds. <br />
Other changes in habitat include shifting vegetation (i.e., tree-lines are shifting to higher elevations), changes in nutrients in plants, earlier snowmelt and run-off, increase in invasive species, warming of streams and rivers, reduction or degradation of habitat (i.e., glacial melt), and an increase in large wildfires<ref>Barbero, R., Abatzoglou, J. T., Larkin, N. K., Kolden, C. A., and Stocks, B., 2015. Climate change presents increased potential for very large fires in the contiguous United States. International Journal of Wildland Fire, 24(7), pp. 892-899. [https://doi.org/10.1071/WF150830128 doi: 10.1071/WF150830128] [//www.enviro.wiki/images/0/08/Barbero2015.pdf Article pdf]</ref> and droughts<ref>Schlaepfer, D. R., Bradford, J. B., Lauenroth, W. K., Munson, S. M., Tietjen, B., Hall, S. A., Wilson, S. D., Duniway, M. C., Jia, G., Pyke, D. A., Lkhagva, A., and Jamiyansharav, K., 2017. Climate change reduces extent of temperate drylands and intensifies drought in deep soils. Nature Communications, 8, pp. 14196. [https://doi.org/10.1038/ncomms14196 doi: 10.1038/ncomms14196]</ref>.<br />
<br />
Although climate change effects on wildlife often are linked to species-specific traits, there are general impacts associated with taxonomic groups<ref name=":1" />. For fish it can affect reproduction<ref name=":4">Pankhurst, N. W., and Munday, P. L., 2011. Effects of climate change on fish reproduction and early life history stages. Marine and Freshwater Research, 62(9), pp. 1015-1026. [https://doi.org/10.1071/MF10269 doi: 10.1071/MF10269] [[Special:FilePath/Pankhurst2011.pdf| Article pdf]]</ref>, growth, and recruitment<ref name=":3">Lynch, A. J., Myers, B. J. E., Chu, C., Eby, L. A., Falke, J. A., Kovach, R. P., Krabbenhoft, T. J., Kwak, T. J., Lyons, J., Paukert, C. P., and Whitney, J. E., 2016. Climate Change Effects on North American Inland Fish Populations and Assemblages. Fisheries, 41(7), pp. 346-361. [https://doi.org/10.1080/03632415.2016.1186016 doi: 10.1080/03632415.2016.1186016]</ref>(Figure 2). Cold-water fish such as inland North American species are highly affected with the warming of streams and rivers<ref name=":3" />. Amphibians are highly sensitive to their environment and changes in temperature and moisture can affect development, range, abundance, and phenology<ref>Blaustein, A.R., Walls, S.C., Bancroft, B.A., Lawler, J.J., Searle, C.L., and Gervasi, S.S., 2010. Direct and Indirect Effects of Climate Change on Amphibian Populations. Diversity, 2(2), pp. 281-313.[https://doi.org/10.3390/d2020281 doi: 10.3390/d2020281] [[Special:FilePath/Blaustein 2010.pdf| Article pdf]]</ref><ref name=":1" /><ref>Ficetola, G. F., and Maiorano, L., 2016. Contrasting effects of temperature and precipitation change on amphibian phenology, abundance and performance. Oecologia, 181(3), pp. 683-693. [https://doi.org/10.1007/s00442-016-3610-9 doi: 10.1007/s00442-016-3610-9]</ref>. In reptiles, climate change effects can alter thermoregulation patterns, affect female reproduction and in some species, change sex ratios with increasing temperature<ref name=":1" />. Furthermore, for many bird species the timing of migration and other phenological events are affected by climate change<ref>Crick, H. Q. P., 2004. The impact of climate change on birds. Ibis, 146(s1), pp. 48-56. [https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1474-919X.2004.00327.x doi: 10.1111/j.1474-919X.2004.00327.x] [//www.enviro.wiki/images/c/c9/Crick2004.pdf Article pdf]</ref>. Range shifts, growth size, and survival are linked to climate change for mammals<ref name=":1" />. Arctic marine mammals are closely linked to sea ice dynamics and a changing climate will affect these dynamics<ref>Kovacs, K. M., Lydersen, C., Overland, J. E., and Moore, S. E., 2011. Impacts of changing sea-ice conditions on Arctic marine mammals. Marine Biodiversity, 41, pp. 81-194. [https://doi.org/10.1007/s12526-010-0061-0 doi: 10.1007/s12526-010-0061-0]</ref>. Therefore, it is increasingly important for conservation and management plans to consider the effects of climate change on wildlife and habitat for the geographic location<ref>Mawdsley, J. R., O’Malley, R., and Ojima, D. S. 2009. A Review of Climate-Change Adaptations Strategies For Wildlife Management and Biodiversity Conservation. Conservation Biology, 23(5), pp. 1080-1089. [https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1523-1739.2009.01264.x doi: 10.1111/j.1523-1739.2009.01264.x]</ref>.<br />
<br />
==References==<br />
<references /><br />
<br />
==See Also==</div>Jhurleyhttps://www.enviro.wiki/index.php?title=Climate_Change_Effects_on_Wildlife&diff=18068Climate Change Effects on Wildlife2026-04-03T20:50:37Z<p>Jhurley: </p>
<hr />
<div>Climate change affects both terrestrial<ref>Diffenbaugh, N. S. and Field, C. B., 2013. Changes in Ecologically Critical Terrestrial Climate Conditions. Science, 341(6145), pp. 486-492. [https://doi.org/10.1126/science.1237123 doi: 10.1126/science.1237123]</ref> and aquatic biomes<ref>Hoegh-Guldberg, O., and Bruno, J. F., 2010. The Impact of Climate Change on the World’s Marine Ecosystem. Science, 328(5985), pp. 1523-1528. [https://doi.org/10.1126/science.1189930 doi: 10.1126/science.1189930]</ref> causing significant effects on ecosystem functions and biodiversity<ref name=":0">Bellard, C., Berteslsmeier, C., Leadley, P., Thuiller, W., and Courchamp, F., 2012. Impacts of climate change on the future of biodiversity. Ecological Letters, 15(4), pp. 365-377. [https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1461-0248.2011.01736.x doi: 10.1111/j.1461-0248.2011.01736.x] [//www.enviro.wiki/images/a/a4/Bellard2012.pdf Article pdf]</ref>. Climate change is affecting several key ecological processes and patterns that will have cascading impacts on wildlife and habitat<ref name=":1">Inkley, D. B., Anderson, M. G., Blaustein, A. R., Burkett, V. R., Felzer, B., Griffith, B., Price, J., and Root, T. L., 2004. Global Climate Change and Wildlife in North America. Wildlife Society Technical Review 04-2. The Wildlife Society, Bethesda, MD, 26 pp. [//www.enviro.wiki/images/f/f1/Inkley2004.pdf Report pdf]</ref>. For example, sea-level rise, changes in the timing and duration of growing seasons, and changes in primary production are mainly driven by changes to global environmental variables (e.g., temperature and atmospheric CO<sub>2</sub>). Climate-induced changes in the environment ultimately impact wildlife population abundance and distributions.<br />
<div style="float:right;margin:0 0 2em 2em;">__TOC__</div><br />
'''Related Article(s):'''<br />
<br />
*[[Climate Change Primer|Climate Change]]<br />
*[[Downscaled High Resolution Datasets for Climate Change Projections]]<br />
*[[Predicting Species Responses to Climate Change with Population Models]]<br />
*[[Restoration of Ecological Function in Terrestrial Systems Impacted by Invasive Species]]<br />
<br />
<br />
'''Contributor(s):''' [[Dr. Breanna F. Powers]] and [[Dr. Julie A. Heath]]<br />
<br />
<br />
'''Key Resource(s):'''<br />
<br />
*[https://www.enviro.wiki/images/f/f1/Inkley2004.pdf Global climate change and wildlife in North America. Wildlife Society Technical Review 04-2]<ref name=":1" /><br />
*[https://www.enviro.wiki/images/a/a4/Bellard2012.pdf Impacts of climate change on the future of biodiversity]<ref name=":0" /><br />
<br />
==Introduction==<br />
[[File:PowersFig1.png|thumb|900px|left | Figure 1. The predicted extinction risk (by percentage with 95% CIs) from climate change by different regions, colors represent a gradient from least to most extinction risks (green to red) based upon the number of relevant studies (n). Figure is from Urban (2015)<ref name=":2" />. Reprinted with permission from AAAS. Any use of this figure requires the prior written permission of AAAS]]<br />
[[File:PowersFig2.png|thumb|900px|right| Figure 2. Conceptual diagram showing how increased water temperatures and pCO₂ (partial pressure of carbon dioxide) affect the early life stages of fish. Where arrow direction indicated increasing rate ( ↑ ), decreasing rate ( ↓ ), or both directions depending on other environmental variables ( ↕️ ). Figure is from Pankhurst and Munday (2011)<ref name=":4" />.]]<br />
Global&nbsp;climate&nbsp;change&nbsp;will affect ecosystem functions and cycles such as nutrient, hydraulic, and carbon cycles, changing aspects of environmental conditions such as temperature, soil moisture, and precipitation<ref>Davidson, E. A. and Janssens, I. A., 2006. Temperature sensitivity of soil carbon decomposition and feedbacks to climate change. Nature, 440, pp. 165-173.[https://doi.org/10.1038/nature04514 doi: 10.1038/nature04514]</ref><ref>Melillo, J. M., McGuire, A. D., Kicklighter, D. W., Moore, B., Vorosmarty, C. J., and Schloss, A. L., 1993. Global climate change and terrestrial net primary production. Nature, 363, pp. 234-240. [https://doi.org/10.1038/363234a0 doi: 10.1038/363234a0]</ref>. Wildlife species are adapted to their environments and changes to the environment and habitat conditions will mediate effects, either directly or indirectly, on species survival, fecundity and ultimately population persistence<ref>Alig, R. J., Technical Coordinator, 2011. Effects of Climate Change on Natural Resources and Communities: A Compendium of Briefing Papers. U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Pacific Northwest Research Station, General Technical Report, [https://www.fs.usda.gov/treesearch/pubs/37513 PNW-GTR-837], Portland, OR, 169p. [https://doi.org/10.2737/PNW-GTR-837 doi:10.2737/PNW-GTR-837] [//www.enviro.wiki/images/f/f2/Pnwgtr837.pdf Report pdf]</ref><ref>Acevedo-Whitehouse, K., and Duffus, A. L. J., 2009. Effects of environmental change on wildlife health. Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society B: Biological Sciences, 364(1534), pp. 3429-3438. [https://doi.org/10.1098/rstb.2009.0128 doi: 10.1098/rstb.2009.0128]</ref><ref>Milligan, S. R., Holt, W. V., and Lloyd, R., 2009. Impacts of climate change and environmental factors on reproduction and development in wildlife. Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society B: Biological Sciences, 364(1534), pp. 3313-3319. [https://doi.org/10.1098/rstb.2009.0175 doi: 10.1098/rstb.2009.0175] [//www.enviro.wiki/images/a/ad/Milligan2009.pdf Article pdf]</ref>. The ability to adapt to changing habitat conditions as a result of climate change will differ across individual species and between populations. Some wildlife species may be more vulnerable to climate change than other species (Figure 1). Vulnerability is often linked to particular life-history traits (e.g., specialized habitat needs or limited dispersal abilities, see Pacifici et al. 2015P<ref>Pacifici, M., Foden, W., and Visconti, P., 2015. Assessing species vulnerability to climate change. Nature Climate Change 5, pp. 215-225. [https://doi.org/10.1038/nclimate2448 doi: 10.1038/nclimate2448]</ref> for a review on species vulnerability to climate change) or genetic composition. For example, grassland birds may be more vulnerable to changing climate than forest birds as forests can buffer change more so than grasslands<ref>Jarzyna, M. A., Zuckerberg, B., Finley, A. O., and Porter, W. F., 2016. Synergistic effects of climate change and land cover: grassland birds are more vulnerable to climate change. Landscape Ecology, 31(10), pp. 2275-2290. [https://doi.org/10.1007/s10980-016-0399-1 doi: 10.1007/s10980-016-0399-1]</ref>. Projected changes in the climate will generally have adverse effects of wildlife populations<ref>IPCC, 2001. Climate Change 2001: Synthesis Report. A Contribution of Working Groups I, II, and III to the Third Assessment Report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change. R.T. Watson and the Core Writing Team (eds.). Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, United Kingdom, and New York, NY, USA, 398p. [//www.enviro.wiki/images/5/56/IPCC2001.pdf Report pdf]</ref>, though there are some species coping with climate change or benefitting from environmental change. For example, American kestrels (Falco sparverius) have shifted their breeding phenology to earlier in the year and may now raise two broods of young within a breeding season<ref>Smith, S. H., Steenhof, K., McClure, C. J. W., and Heath, J. A. 2017. Earlier nesting by generalist predatory bird is associated with human responses to climate change. Journal of Animal Ecology, 86(1), pp. 98-107. [https://doi.org/10.1111/1365-2656.12604 doi: 10.1111/1365-2656.12604] [//www.enviro.wiki/images/5/5d/Smith2017.pdf Article pdf]</ref>.<br />
<br />
==The Influence of Climate Change on Wildlife and Habitats==<br />
Climate change effects on wildlife include increases in disease and changes to pathogen distributions, patterns, and outbreaks in wildlife<ref>Bradley, B. A., Wilcove, D. S., and Oppenheimer, M., 2010. Climate change increases risk of plant invasion in the Eastern United States. Biological Invasions, 12, pp.1855-1872. [https://doi.org/10.1007/s10530-009-9597-y doi: 10.1007/s10530-009-9597-y]</ref><ref>Cudmore, T. J., Björklund, N., Carroll, A. L., and Lindgren, B. S., 2010. Climate change and the range expansion of an aggressive bark beetle: evidence of higher beetle reproduction in naïve host tree populations. Journal of Applied Ecology, 47(5), pp. 1036-1043. [https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-2664.2010.01848.x doi: 10.1111/j.1365-2664.2010.01848.x] [//www.enviro.wiki/images/b/b3/Cudmore2010.pdf Article pdf]</ref><ref>Price, S. J., Leung, W. T., Owen, C. J., Puschendorf, R., Sergeant, C., Cunningham, A. A., Balloux, F., Garner, T. W., and Nichols, R. A., 2019. Effects of historic and projected climate change on the range and impacts of an emerging wildlife disease. Global Change Biology, 25(8), pp. 2648-2660. [https://doi.org/10.1111/gcb.14651 doi: 10.1111/gcb.14651]</ref> changes in range distributions and shifts in latitudinal and elevational gradients; changes in phenology or the timing of life cycle events that may create phenological mismatches<ref>Renner, S. S., and Zohner, C. M., 2018. Climate Change and Phenological Mismatch in Trophic Interactions Among Plants, Insects, and Vertebrates. Annual Review of Ecology, Evolution, and Systematics, 49, pp. 165-182. [https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev-ecolsys-110617-062535 doi: 10.1146/annurev-ecolsys-110617-062535]</ref> and extinction or population reduction<ref name=":2">Urban, M. C., 2015. Accelerating extinction risk from climate change. Science, 348(6234), pp. 571-573. [https://doi.org/ 10.1126/science.aaa4984 doi: 10.1126/science.aaa4984] [//www.enviro.wiki/images/1/15/Urban2015.pdf Article pdf]</ref>. The effects of climate change across a species’ range will most likely not be homogenous, meaning it can vary substantially, especially if a species’ range spans across different continents as exhibited by many migratory birds. <br />
Other changes in habitat include shifting vegetation (i.e., tree-lines are shifting to higher elevations), changes in nutrients in plants, earlier snowmelt and run-off, increase in invasive species, warming of streams and rivers, reduction or degradation of habitat (i.e., glacial melt), and an increase in large wildfires<ref>Barbero, R., Abatzoglou, J. T., Larkin, N. K., Kolden, C. A., and Stocks, B., 2015. Climate change presents increased potential for very large fires in the contiguous United States. International Journal of Wildland Fire, 24(7), pp. 892-899. [https://doi.org/10.1071/WF150830128 doi: 10.1071/WF150830128] [//www.enviro.wiki/images/0/08/Barbero2015.pdf Article pdf]</ref> and droughts<ref>Schlaepfer, D. R., Bradford, J. B., Lauenroth, W. K., Munson, S. M., Tietjen, B., Hall, S. A., Wilson, S. D., Duniway, M. C., Jia, G., Pyke, D. A., Lkhagva, A., and Jamiyansharav, K., 2017. Climate change reduces extent of temperate drylands and intensifies drought in deep soils. Nature Communications, 8, pp. 14196. [https://doi.org/10.1038/ncomms14196 doi: 10.1038/ncomms14196]</ref>.<br />
<br />
Although climate change effects on wildlife often are linked to species-specific traits, there are general impacts associated with taxonomic groups<ref name=":1" />. For fish it can affect reproduction<ref name=":4">Pankhurst, N. W., and Munday, P. L., 2011. Effects of climate change on fish reproduction and early life history stages. Marine and Freshwater Research, 62(9), pp. 1015-1026. [https://doi.org/10.1071/MF10269 doi: 10.1071/MF10269] [[Special:FilePath/Pankhurst2011.pdf| Article pdf]]</ref>, growth, and recruitment<ref name=":3">Lynch, A. J., Myers, B. J. E., Chu, C., Eby, L. A., Falke, J. A., Kovach, R. P., Krabbenhoft, T. J., Kwak, T. J., Lyons, J., Paukert, C. P., and Whitney, J. E., 2016. Climate Change Effects on North American Inland Fish Populations and Assemblages. Fisheries, 41(7), pp. 346-361. [https://doi.org/10.1080/03632415.2016.1186016 doi: 10.1080/03632415.2016.1186016]</ref>(Figure 2). Cold-water fish such as inland North American species are highly affected with the warming of streams and rivers<ref name=":3" />. Amphibians are highly sensitive to their environment and changes in temperature and moisture can affect development, range, abundance, and phenology<ref>Blaustein, A.R., Walls, S.C., Bancroft, B.A., Lawler, J.J., Searle, C.L., and Gervasi, S.S., 2010. Direct and Indirect Effects of Climate Change on Amphibian Populations. Diversity, 2(2), pp. 281-313.[https://doi.org/10.3390/d2020281 doi: 10.3390/d2020281] [[Special:FilePath/Blaustein 2010.pdf| Article pdf]]</ref><ref name=":1" /><ref>Ficetola, G. F., and Maiorano, L., 2016. Contrasting effects of temperature and precipitation change on amphibian phenology, abundance and performance. Oecologia, 181(3), pp. 683-693. [https://doi.org/10.1007/s00442-016-3610-9 doi: 10.1007/s00442-016-3610-9]</ref>. In reptiles, climate change effects can alter thermoregulation patterns, affect female reproduction and in some species, change sex ratios with increasing temperature<ref name=":1" />. Furthermore, for many bird species the timing of migration and other phenological events are affected by climate change<ref>Crick, H. Q. P., 2004. The impact of climate change on birds. Ibis, 146(s1), pp. 48-56. [https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1474-919X.2004.00327.x doi: 10.1111/j.1474-919X.2004.00327.x] [//www.enviro.wiki/images/c/c9/Crick2004.pdf Article pdf]</ref>. Range shifts, growth size, and survival are linked to climate change for mammals<ref name=":1" />. Arctic marine mammals are closely linked to sea ice dynamics and a changing climate will affect these dynamics<ref>Kovacs, K. M., Lydersen, C., Overland, J. E., and Moore, S. E., 2011. Impacts of changing sea-ice conditions on Arctic marine mammals. Marine Biodiversity, 41, pp. 81-194. [https://doi.org/10.1007/s12526-010-0061-0 doi: 10.1007/s12526-010-0061-0]</ref>. Therefore, it is increasingly important for conservation and management plans to consider the effects of climate change on wildlife and habitat for the geographic location<ref>Mawdsley, J. R., O’Malley, R., and Ojima, D. S. 2009. A Review of Climate-Change Adaptations Strategies For Wildlife Management and Biodiversity Conservation. Conservation Biology, 23(5), pp. 1080-1089. [https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1523-1739.2009.01264.x doi: 10.1111/j.1523-1739.2009.01264.x]</ref>.<br />
<br />
==References==<br />
<references /><br />
<br />
==See Also==</div>Jhurleyhttps://www.enviro.wiki/index.php?title=Climate_Change_Effects_on_Wildlife&diff=18067Climate Change Effects on Wildlife2026-04-03T20:34:20Z<p>Jhurley: </p>
<hr />
<div><onlyinclude>Climate change affects both terrestrial</onlyinclude><ref>Diffenbaugh, N. S. and Field, C. B., 2013. Changes in Ecologically Critical Terrestrial Climate Conditions. Science, 341(6145), pp. 486-492. [https://doi.org/10.1126/science.1237123 doi: 10.1126/science.1237123]</ref><onlyinclude> and aquatic biomes</onlyinclude><ref>Hoegh-Guldberg, O., and Bruno, J. F., 2010. The Impact of Climate Change on the World’s Marine Ecosystem. Science, 328(5985), pp. 1523-1528. [https://doi.org/10.1126/science.1189930 doi: 10.1126/science.1189930]</ref><onlyinclude> causing significant effects on ecosystem functions and biodiversity</onlyinclude><ref name=":0">Bellard, C., Berteslsmeier, C., Leadley, P., Thuiller, W., and Courchamp, F., 2012. Impacts of climate change on the future of biodiversity. Ecological Letters, 15(4), pp. 365-377. [https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1461-0248.2011.01736.x doi: 10.1111/j.1461-0248.2011.01736.x] [//www.enviro.wiki/images/a/a4/Bellard2012.pdf Article pdf]</ref><onlyinclude>. Climate change is affecting several key ecological processes and patterns that will have cascading impacts on wildlife and habitat</onlyinclude><ref name=":1">Inkley, D. B., Anderson, M. G., Blaustein, A. R., Burkett, V. R., Felzer, B., Griffith, B., Price, J., and Root, T. L., 2004. Global Climate Change and Wildlife in North America. Wildlife Society Technical Review 04-2. The Wildlife Society, Bethesda, MD, 26 pp. [//www.enviro.wiki/images/f/f1/Inkley2004.pdf Report pdf]</ref><onlyinclude>. For example, sea-level rise, changes in the timing and duration of growing seasons, and changes in primary production are mainly driven by changes to global environmental variables (e.g., temperature and atmospheric CO<sub>2</sub>). </onlyinclude>Climate-induced changes in the environment ultimately impact wildlife population abundance and distributions.<br />
<div style="float:right;margin:0 0 2em 2em;">__TOC__</div><br />
'''Related Article(s):'''<br />
<br />
*[[Climate Change Primer|Climate Change]]<br />
*[[Downscaled High Resolution Datasets for Climate Change Projections]]<br />
*[[Predicting Species Responses to Climate Change with Population Models]]<br />
*[[Restoration of Ecological Function in Terrestrial Systems Impacted by Invasive Species]]<br />
<br />
<br />
'''Contributor(s):''' [[Dr. Breanna F. Powers]] and [[Dr. Julie A. Heath]]<br />
<br />
<br />
'''Key Resource(s):'''<br />
<br />
*[https://www.enviro.wiki/images/f/f1/Inkley2004.pdf Global climate change and wildlife in North America. Wildlife Society Technical Review 04-2]<ref name=":1" /><br />
*[https://www.enviro.wiki/images/a/a4/Bellard2012.pdf Impacts of climate change on the future of biodiversity]<ref name=":0" /><br />
<br />
==Introduction==<br />
[[File:PowersFig1.png|thumb|900px|left | Figure 1. The predicted extinction risk (by percentage with 95% CIs) from climate change by different regions, colors represent a gradient from least to most extinction risks (green to red) based upon the number of relevant studies (n). Figure is from Urban (2015)<ref name=":2" />. Reprinted with permission from AAAS. Any use of this figure requires the prior written permission of AAAS]]<br />
[[File:PowersFig2.png|thumb|900px|right| Figure 2. Conceptual diagram showing how increased water temperatures and pCO₂ (partial pressure of carbon dioxide) affect the early life stages of fish. Where arrow direction indicated increasing rate ( ↑ ), decreasing rate ( ↓ ), or both directions depending on other environmental variables ( ↕️ ). Figure is from Pankhurst and Munday (2011)<ref name=":4" />.]]<br />
Global&nbsp;climate&nbsp;change&nbsp;will affect ecosystem functions and cycles such as nutrient, hydraulic, and carbon cycles, changing aspects of environmental conditions such as temperature, soil moisture, and precipitation<ref>Davidson, E. A. and Janssens, I. A., 2006. Temperature sensitivity of soil carbon decomposition and feedbacks to climate change. Nature, 440, pp. 165-173.[https://doi.org/10.1038/nature04514 doi: 10.1038/nature04514]</ref><ref>Melillo, J. M., McGuire, A. D., Kicklighter, D. W., Moore, B., Vorosmarty, C. J., and Schloss, A. L., 1993. Global climate change and terrestrial net primary production. Nature, 363, pp. 234-240. [https://doi.org/10.1038/363234a0 doi: 10.1038/363234a0]</ref>. <onlyinclude>Wildlife species are adapted to their environments and changes to the environment and habitat conditions will mediate effects, either directly or indirectly, on species survival, fecundity and ultimately population persistence</onlyinclude><ref>Alig, R. J., Technical Coordinator, 2011. Effects of Climate Change on Natural Resources and Communities: A Compendium of Briefing Papers. U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Pacific Northwest Research Station, General Technical Report, [https://www.fs.usda.gov/treesearch/pubs/37513 PNW-GTR-837], Portland, OR, 169p. [https://doi.org/10.2737/PNW-GTR-837 doi:10.2737/PNW-GTR-837] [//www.enviro.wiki/images/f/f2/Pnwgtr837.pdf Report pdf]</ref><ref>Acevedo-Whitehouse, K., and Duffus, A. L. J., 2009. Effects of environmental change on wildlife health. Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society B: Biological Sciences, 364(1534), pp. 3429-3438. [https://doi.org/10.1098/rstb.2009.0128 doi: 10.1098/rstb.2009.0128]</ref><ref>Milligan, S. R., Holt, W. V., and Lloyd, R., 2009. Impacts of climate change and environmental factors on reproduction and development in wildlife. Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society B: Biological Sciences, 364(1534), pp. 3313-3319. [https://doi.org/10.1098/rstb.2009.0175 doi: 10.1098/rstb.2009.0175] [//www.enviro.wiki/images/a/ad/Milligan2009.pdf Article pdf]</ref><onlyinclude>. The ability to adapt to changing habitat conditions as a result of climate change will differ across individual species and between populations. </onlyinclude>Some wildlife species may be more vulnerable to climate change than other species (Figure 1). Vulnerability is often linked to particular life-history traits (e.g., specialized habitat needs or limited dispersal abilities, see Pacifici et al. 2015P<ref>Pacifici, M., Foden, W., and Visconti, P., 2015. Assessing species vulnerability to climate change. Nature Climate Change 5, pp. 215-225. [https://doi.org/10.1038/nclimate2448 doi: 10.1038/nclimate2448]</ref> for a review on species vulnerability to climate change) or genetic composition. For example, grassland birds may be more vulnerable to changing climate than forest birds as forests can buffer change more so than grasslands<ref>Jarzyna, M. A., Zuckerberg, B., Finley, A. O., and Porter, W. F., 2016. Synergistic effects of climate change and land cover: grassland birds are more vulnerable to climate change. Landscape Ecology, 31(10), pp. 2275-2290. [https://doi.org/10.1007/s10980-016-0399-1 doi: 10.1007/s10980-016-0399-1]</ref>. Projected changes in the climate will generally have adverse effects of wildlife populations<ref>IPCC, 2001. Climate Change 2001: Synthesis Report. A Contribution of Working Groups I, II, and III to the Third Assessment Report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change. R.T. Watson and the Core Writing Team (eds.). Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, United Kingdom, and New York, NY, USA, 398p. [//www.enviro.wiki/images/5/56/IPCC2001.pdf Report pdf]</ref>, though there are some species coping with climate change or benefitting from environmental change. For example, American kestrels (Falco sparverius) have shifted their breeding phenology to earlier in the year and may now raise two broods of young within a breeding season<ref>Smith, S. H., Steenhof, K., McClure, C. J. W., and Heath, J. A. 2017. Earlier nesting by generalist predatory bird is associated with human responses to climate change. Journal of Animal Ecology, 86(1), pp. 98-107. [https://doi.org/10.1111/1365-2656.12604 doi: 10.1111/1365-2656.12604] [//www.enviro.wiki/images/5/5d/Smith2017.pdf Article pdf]</ref>.<br />
<br />
==The Influence of Climate Change on Wildlife and Habitats==<br />
<onlyinclude>Climate change effects on wildlife include increases in disease and changes to pathogen distributions, patterns, and outbreaks in wildlife<ref>Bradley, B. A., Wilcove, D. S., and Oppenheimer, M., 2010. Climate change increases risk of plant invasion in the Eastern United States. Biological Invasions, 12, pp.1855-1872. [https://doi.org/10.1007/s10530-009-9597-y doi: 10.1007/s10530-009-9597-y]</ref><ref>Cudmore, T. J., Björklund, N., Carroll, A. L., and Lindgren, B. S., 2010. Climate change and the range expansion of an aggressive bark beetle: evidence of higher beetle reproduction in naïve host tree populations. Journal of Applied Ecology, 47(5), pp. 1036-1043. [https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-2664.2010.01848.x doi: 10.1111/j.1365-2664.2010.01848.x] [//www.enviro.wiki/images/b/b3/Cudmore2010.pdf Article pdf]</ref><ref>Price, S. J., Leung, W. T., Owen, C. J., Puschendorf, R., Sergeant, C., Cunningham, A. A., Balloux, F., Garner, T. W., and Nichols, R. A., 2019. Effects of historic and projected climate change on the range and impacts of an emerging wildlife disease. Global Change Biology, 25(8), pp. 2648-2660. [https://doi.org/10.1111/gcb.14651 doi: 10.1111/gcb.14651]</ref> changes in range distributions and shifts in latitudinal and elevational gradients; changes in phenology or the timing of life cycle events that may create phenological mismatches<ref>Renner, S. S., and Zohner, C. M., 2018. Climate Change and Phenological Mismatch in Trophic Interactions Among Plants, Insects, and Vertebrates. Annual Review of Ecology, Evolution, and Systematics, 49, pp. 165-182. [https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev-ecolsys-110617-062535 doi: 10.1146/annurev-ecolsys-110617-062535]</ref> and extinction or population reduction<ref name=":2">Urban, M. C., 2015. Accelerating extinction risk from climate change. Science, 348(6234), pp. 571-573. [https://doi.org/ 10.1126/science.aaa4984 doi: 10.1126/science.aaa4984] [//www.enviro.wiki/images/1/15/Urban2015.pdf Article pdf]</ref>. The effects of climate change across a species’ range will most likely not be homogenous, meaning it can vary substantially, especially if a species’ range spans across different continents as exhibited by many migratory birds. </onlyinclude><br />
Other changes in habitat include shifting vegetation (i.e., tree-lines are shifting to higher elevations), changes in nutrients in plants, earlier snowmelt and run-off, increase in invasive species, warming of streams and rivers, reduction or degradation of habitat (i.e., glacial melt), and an increase in large wildfires<ref>Barbero, R., Abatzoglou, J. T., Larkin, N. K., Kolden, C. A., and Stocks, B., 2015. Climate change presents increased potential for very large fires in the contiguous United States. International Journal of Wildland Fire, 24(7), pp. 892-899. [https://doi.org/10.1071/WF150830128 doi: 10.1071/WF150830128] [//www.enviro.wiki/images/0/08/Barbero2015.pdf Article pdf]</ref> and droughts<ref>Schlaepfer, D. R., Bradford, J. B., Lauenroth, W. K., Munson, S. M., Tietjen, B., Hall, S. A., Wilson, S. D., Duniway, M. C., Jia, G., Pyke, D. A., Lkhagva, A., and Jamiyansharav, K., 2017. Climate change reduces extent of temperate drylands and intensifies drought in deep soils. Nature Communications, 8, pp. 14196. [https://doi.org/10.1038/ncomms14196 doi: 10.1038/ncomms14196]</ref>.</onlyinclude><br />
<br />
Although climate change effects on wildlife often are linked to species-specific traits, there are general impacts associated with taxonomic groups<ref name=":1" />. For fish it can affect reproduction<ref name=":4">Pankhurst, N. W., and Munday, P. L., 2011. Effects of climate change on fish reproduction and early life history stages. Marine and Freshwater Research, 62(9), pp. 1015-1026. [https://doi.org/10.1071/MF10269 doi: 10.1071/MF10269] [[Special:FilePath/Pankhurst2011.pdf| Article pdf]]</ref>, growth, and recruitment<ref name=":3">Lynch, A. J., Myers, B. J. E., Chu, C., Eby, L. A., Falke, J. A., Kovach, R. P., Krabbenhoft, T. J., Kwak, T. J., Lyons, J., Paukert, C. P., and Whitney, J. E., 2016. Climate Change Effects on North American Inland Fish Populations and Assemblages. Fisheries, 41(7), pp. 346-361. [https://doi.org/10.1080/03632415.2016.1186016 doi: 10.1080/03632415.2016.1186016]</ref>(Figure 2). Cold-water fish such as inland North American species are highly affected with the warming of streams and rivers<ref name=":3" />. Amphibians are highly sensitive to their environment and changes in temperature and moisture can affect development, range, abundance, and phenology<ref>Blaustein, A.R., Walls, S.C., Bancroft, B.A., Lawler, J.J., Searle, C.L., and Gervasi, S.S., 2010. Direct and Indirect Effects of Climate Change on Amphibian Populations. Diversity, 2(2), pp. 281-313.[https://doi.org/10.3390/d2020281 doi: 10.3390/d2020281] [[Special:FilePath/Blaustein 2010.pdf| Article pdf]]</ref><ref name=":1" /><ref>Ficetola, G. F., and Maiorano, L., 2016. Contrasting effects of temperature and precipitation change on amphibian phenology, abundance and performance. Oecologia, 181(3), pp. 683-693. [https://doi.org/10.1007/s00442-016-3610-9 doi: 10.1007/s00442-016-3610-9]</ref>. In reptiles, climate change effects can alter thermoregulation patterns, affect female reproduction and in some species, change sex ratios with increasing temperature<ref name=":1" />. Furthermore, for many bird species the timing of migration and other phenological events are affected by climate change<ref>Crick, H. Q. P., 2004. The impact of climate change on birds. Ibis, 146(s1), pp. 48-56. [https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1474-919X.2004.00327.x doi: 10.1111/j.1474-919X.2004.00327.x] [//www.enviro.wiki/images/c/c9/Crick2004.pdf Article pdf]</ref>. Range shifts, growth size, and survival are linked to climate change for mammals<ref name=":1" />. Arctic marine mammals are closely linked to sea ice dynamics and a changing climate will affect these dynamics<ref>Kovacs, K. M., Lydersen, C., Overland, J. E., and Moore, S. E., 2011. Impacts of changing sea-ice conditions on Arctic marine mammals. Marine Biodiversity, 41, pp. 81-194. [https://doi.org/10.1007/s12526-010-0061-0 doi: 10.1007/s12526-010-0061-0]</ref>. Therefore, it is increasingly important for conservation and management plans to consider the effects of climate change on wildlife and habitat for the geographic location<ref>Mawdsley, J. R., O’Malley, R., and Ojima, D. S. 2009. A Review of Climate-Change Adaptations Strategies For Wildlife Management and Biodiversity Conservation. Conservation Biology, 23(5), pp. 1080-1089. [https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1523-1739.2009.01264.x doi: 10.1111/j.1523-1739.2009.01264.x]</ref>.<br />
<br />
==References==<br />
<references /><br />
<br />
==See Also==</div>Jhurleyhttps://www.enviro.wiki/index.php?title=Main_Page&diff=18066Main Page2026-04-03T20:27:46Z<p>Jhurley: </p>
<hr />
<div><center><br />
{| class="MainPageBG" style="margin: auto; width: 95%; border-spacing:0px;"<br />
|-<br />
| style="width:55%;" |<center><span style="font-size:175%; line-height: 0.2em; vertical-align:top;"><big><span style="color:#008566">Welcome to '''ENVIRO'''</span> <span style="color:#762a87">'''Wiki'''</span></big></span><br /><br /><br /><span style="font-size:150%; color:#008566; line-height: 0.2em; vertical-align:top;"> Peer Reviewed. Accessible. Written By Experts</span></center><br />
<br />
|-<br />
|<span style="width:55%; line-height: 0.3em;"> The goal of ENVIRO Wiki is to make scientific and engineering research results more accessible to environmental professionals, facilitating the permitting, design and implementation of environmental projects. Articles are written and edited by invited experts (see [[Contributors]]) to summarize current knowledge for the target audience on an array of topics, with cross-linked references to reports and technical literature. </span><br />
|<center><span style="font-size:130%"><br />[[#Table of Contents|See Table of Contents]]</span><br />
</center> <br />
<inputbox> type=fulltext <br />
placeholder=Search Enviro Wiki<br />
break=no </inputbox><br />
|}<br />
</center><br />
<br />
{| role="presentation" id="mp-upper" style="margin: auto; width: 95%; margin-top:3px; border-spacing: 0px; "<br />
<!-- TODAY'S FEATURED ARTICLE --><br />
| id="mp-left" class="MainPageBG" style="width:55%; padding:0; vertical-align:top; color:#000;" |<br />
<h2 id="mp-tfa-h2" style="margin:0.5em; background:#cef2e0; font-family:inherit; font-size:120%; font-weight:bold; border:1px solid #a3bfb1; color:#000; padding:0.2em 0.4em;"> Featured article: PFAS Destruction by Ultraviolet/Sulfite Treatment</h2><br />
<div id="mp-tfa" style="padding:0.0em 1.0em;">[[File:XiongFig1.png|400px|left|link=PFAS Destruction by Ultraviolet/Sulfite Treatment]]<dailyfeaturedpage></dailyfeaturedpage>&nbsp;&nbsp;<br />
<br />
[[PFAS Destruction by Ultraviolet/Sulfite Treatment|(Full article...)]] </div><br />
<br />
| style="border:1px solid transparent;" |<br />
<br />
<!-- Enviro WIKI Highlight --><br />
| id="mp-right" class="MainPageBG" style="width:40%; padding:0; horizontal-align:center; vertical-align:top;" |<br />
<h2 id="mp-itn-h2" style="margin:0.5em; background:#cedff2; font-family:inherit; font-size:120%; font-weight:bold; border:1px solid #a3b0bf; color:#000; padding:0.2em 0.4em;">Enviro Wiki Highlights</h2><br />
<div id="mp-itn" style="padding:0.0em 0.5em;"><br />
<br />
<slideshow sequence="random" transition="fade" refresh="7500"><br />
<br />
[[File:WH Picture1.JPG|thumb|center|x350px|link=Matrix Diffusion|Molecular diffusion slowly transports solutes into clay-rich, lower permeability zones]]<br />
[[File:WH Picture2.JPG|thumb|center|x350px|link=Subgrade Biogeochemical Reactor (SBGR)|Typical subgrade biogeochemical reactor (SBGR) layout. The SBGR is an in situ remediation technology for treatment of contaminated source areas and groundwater plume hot spots<br/>]]<br />
[[File:WH Picture3.JPG|thumb|center|x350px|link=Direct Push Logging|An Hydraulic Profiling Tool (HPT) log with electrical conductivity (EC) on left, injection pressure in middle, and flow rate on the right]]<br />
[[File:WH Picture4.JPG|thumb|center|x350px|link=PH Buffering in Aquifers|Diagram of mineral surface exchanging hydrogen ions with varying pH. The surface of most aquifer minerals carries an electrical charge that varies with pH]]<br />
[[File:WH Picture5.JPG|thumb|center|x350px|link=Biodegradation - Hydrocarbons|Comparison of the longitudinal redox zonation concept (A) and the plume fringe concept (B). Both concepts describe the spatial distribution of electron acceptors and respiration processes in a hydrocarbon contaminant plume]]<br />
[[File:WH Picture6.JPG|thumb|center|x350px|link=Direct Push Logging|Schematic of an Hydraulic Profiling Tool (HPT) probe. HPT were developed to better understand formation permeability and the distribution of permeable and low permeability zones in unconsolidated formations]]<br />
[[File:WH Picture7.JPG|thumb|center|x350px|link=Chemical Oxidation Design Considerations(In Situ - ISCO)|In situ chemical oxidation using (a) direct-push injection probes or (b) well-to-well flushing to delivery oxidants (shown in blue) into a target treatment zone of groundwater contaminated by dense nonaqueous phase liquid compounds (shown in red)]]<br />
[[File:WH Picture8.JPG|thumb|center|x350px|link=Geophysical Methods - Case_Studies|High-resolution 3D cross-borehole electrical imaging of contaminated fractured rock at the former Naval Air Warfare Center in New Jersey. Cross-borehole resistivity tomography imaging is a geophysical technique that can be used for site characterization and monitoring by observing variations in the electrical properties of subsurface materials]]<br />
[[File:WH Picture9.JPG|thumb|center|x350px|link=Stable_Isotope_Probing_(SIP)|Stable isotope probing (SIP) in use: Loading, deployment and recovery of Bio-Trap® passive sampler with 13C-labeled benzene. Stable isotope probing (SIP) is used to conclusively determine whether in situ biodegradation of a contaminant is occurring]]<br />
[[File:WH Picture10.JPG|thumb|center|x350px|link=1,2,3-Trichloropropane|Summary of anticipated, primary reaction pathways for degradation of 1,2,3-Trichloropropane (TCP). TCP is a man-made chemical that was used in the past primarily as a solvent and extractive agent, a paint and varnish remover, and as a cleaning and degreasing agent]]<br />
[[File:WH Picture11.JPG|thumb|center|x350px|link=Monitored Natural Attenuation (MNA) of Fuels|Distribution of BTEX plume lengths from 604 hydrocarbon sites. Monitored Natural Attenuation (MNA) is one of the most commonly used remediation approaches for groundwater contaminated with petroleum hydrocarbons (PHCs) and certain fuel additives such as fuel oxygenates or lead scavengers]]<br />
[[File:WH Picture12.JPG|thumb|center|x350px|link=Groundwater Sampling - No-Purge/Passive|No-purge and passive sampling methods eliminate the pre-purging step for groundwater sample collection and represent alternatives to conventional sampling methods that rely on low-flow purging of a well prior to collection. The Snap SamplerTM is an example of a passive grab sampler]]<br />
[[File:WH Picture13.JPG|thumb|center|x350px|link=Natural Source Zone Depletion (NSZD)|Conceptualization of Vapor Transport-related Natural Source Zone Depletion (NSZD) processes at a Petroleum Release Site]]<br />
[[File:WH Picture14.JPG|thumb|center|x350px|link=Soil Vapor Extraction (SVE)|Conceptual diagram of basic Soil Vapor Extraction (SVE) system for vadose zone remediation. (SVE) is a common and typically effective physical treatment process for remediation of volatile contaminants in vadose zone (unsaturated) soils]]<br />
[[File:WH Picture15.JPG|thumb|center|x350px|link=Emulsified Vegetable Oil (EVO) for Anaerobic Bioremediation|Emulsified Vegetable Oil (EVO) mixed in field during early pilot test. EVO is commonly added as a slowly fermentable substrate to stimulate the in situ anaerobic bioremediation of chlorinated solvents, explosives, perchlorate, chromate, and other contaminants]]<br />
[[File:WH Picture16.JPG|thumb|center|x350px|link=Vapor_Intrusion_(VI)|Key elements of vapor intrusion pathways]]<br />
[[File:WH Picture17.JPG|thumb|center|x350px|link=Sorption_of_Organic_Contaminants|Batch reactor experiments to generate points on a sorption isotherm]]<br />
[[File:WH Picture18.JPG|thumb|center|x350px|link=Metagenomics|Results for metagenomic analysis of a groundwater sample obtained from a site impacted with petroleum hydrocarbons]]<br />
[[File:WH Picture19.JPG|thumb|center|x350px|link=Perchlorate|Perchlorate releases and drinking water detections]]<br />
[[File:WH Picture20.JPG|thumb|center|x350px|link=Mass_Flux_and_Mass_Discharge|Data input screen for ESTCP Mass Flux Toolkit]]<br />
[[File:WH Picture21.JPG|thumb|center|x350px|link=Bioremediation_-_Anaerobic_Design_Considerations|Amendment addition for biobarrier]]<br />
[[File:WH Picture22.JPG|thumb|center|x350px|link=Thermal Conduction Heating (TCH)|Thermal Remediation - Desorption schematic]]<br />
[[File:WH_Picture23.jpg|thumb|center|x350px|link=Contaminated_Sediments_-_Introduction |Key exposure pathways for human health risk from contaminated sediments]]<br />
[[File:WH_Picture24.jpg|thumb|center|x350px|link=Perfluoroalkyl_and_Polyfluoroalkyl_Substances_(PFAS)| The PFAS family of compounds]]<br />
<br />
</slideshow><br />
</div><br />
|}<br />
<br />
{| id="mp-upper" style="width: 95%; margin:3px 0 0 0; "<br />
| class="MainPageBG" style="width:50%; background:#f5faff; vertical-align:top; color:#000;" |<br />
{| id="mp-left" style="width:100%; vertical-align:top; background:#f9f9f9;"<br />
| style="padding:2px;" |<h2 id="mp-tfa-h2_2" style="margin:3px; background:#cef2e0; font-family:inherit; font-size:120%; font-weight:bold; border:1px solid #a3bfb1; text-align:center; color:#000; padding:0.2em 0.4em;"><span id="#Table of Contents"></span>Table of Contents <span style="font-size:85%; font-weight:bold;"></span></h2><br />
{| style="width:100%; vertical-align:top;" <br />
| style="vertical-align:top;" |<br />
<u>'''[[Transport & Attenuation Processes | Attenuation & Transport Processes]]'''</u><br />
<br />
*[[Biodegradation - 1,4-Dioxane]]<br />
*[[Biodegradation - Cometabolic]]<br />
*[[Biodegradation - Hydrocarbons]]<br />
*[[Biodegradation - Reductive Processes]]<br />
*[[Groundwater Flow and Solute Transport]]<br />
*[[Matrix Diffusion]]<br />
*[[Metals and Metalloids - Mobility in Groundwater | Mobility of Metals and Metalloids]]<br />
*[[pH Buffering in Aquifers]]<br />
*[[Sorption of Organic Contaminants]]<br />
*[[Vapor Intrusion (VI)]]<br />
**[[Vapor Intrusion - Separation Distances from Petroleum Sources]]<br />
**[[Vapor Intrusion – Sewers and Utility Tunnels as Preferential Pathways|Vapor Intrusion - Sewers and Utility Tunnels as Preferential Pathways]]<br />
**[[Assessing Vapor Intrusion (VI) Impacts in Neighborhoods with Groundwater Contaminated by Chlorinated Volatile Organic Chemicals (CVOCs)|Vapor Intrusion - Assessing VI Impacts in Neighborhoods with Groundwater Contaminated CVOCs]]<br />
<br />
<u>'''[[Characterization, Assessment & Monitoring]]'''</u><br />
<br />
*[[Characterization Methods – Hydraulic Conductivity]]<br />
*[[Compound Specific Isotope Analysis (CSIA)|Compound Specific Isotope Analysis (CSIA)]]<br />
*[[Direct Push (DP) Technology]]<br />
**[[Direct Push Logging |Direct Push Logging]]<br />
**[[Direct Push Sampling |Direct Push Sampling]]<br />
*[[Geophysical Methods | Geophysical Methods]]<br />
**[[Geophysical Methods - Case Studies |Case Studies]]<br />
**[[Hydrogeophysical Methods for Characterization and Monitoring of Groundwater-Surface Water Exchanges]]<br />
*[[Groundwater Sampling - No-Purge/Passive]]<br />
*[[Long-Term Monitoring (LTM)|Long-Term Monitoring (LTM)]] <br />
**[[Long-Term Monitoring (LTM) - Data Analysis |LTM Data Analysis]]<br />
**[[Long-Term Monitoring (LTM) - Data Variability |LTM Data Variability]]<br />
*[[Molecular Biological Tools - MBTs |Molecular Biological Tools (MBTs)]]<br />
**[[Metagenomics]]<br />
**[[Proteomics and Proteogenomics]]<br />
**[[Quantitative Polymerase Chain Reaction (qPCR)]]<br />
**[[Stable Isotope Probing (SIP)]]<br />
*[[Natural Attenuation in Source Zone and Groundwater Plume - Bemidji Crude Oil Spill |Natural Attenuation in Source Zone and Groundwater Plume&nbsp;-<br />Bemidji Crude Oil Spill]]<br />
*[[OPTically-based In-situ Characterization System (OPTICS)]]<br />
<br />
<u>'''[[Coastal and Estuarine Ecology]]'''</u><br />
<br />
*[[Phytoplankton (Algae) Blooms]]<br />
<br />
<u>'''[[Contaminated Sediments - Introduction | Contaminated Sediments]]'''</u><br />
<br />
*[[Contaminated Sediment Risk Assessment]]<br />
*[[In Situ Toxicity Identification Evaluation (iTIE) | In Situ Toxicity Identification Evaluation]]<br />
*[[In Situ Treatment of Contaminated Sediments with Activated Carbon]]<br />
*[[Mercury in Sediments]]<br />
*[[Passive Sampling of Sediments]]<br />
**[[Sediment Porewater Dialysis Passive Samplers for Inorganics (Peepers)]]<br />
*[[Sediment Capping]]<br />
<br />
| style="width:33%; vertical-align:top; " |<br />
<br />
<u>'''[[Light Non-Aqueous Phase Liquids (LNAPLs)]]'''</u><br />
<br />
*[[LNAPL Conceptual Site Models]]<br />
*[[LNAPL Remediation Technologies]]<br />
*[[NAPL Mobility]]<br />
<br />
<u>'''[[Munitions Constituents]]'''</u><br />
<br />
*[[Munitions Constituents - Abiotic Reduction|Abiotic Reduction]]<br />
*[[Munitions Constituents - Alkaline Degradation|Alkaline Degradation]]<br />
**[[Pyrogenic Carbonaceous Matter Enhanced Alkaline Hydrolysis]]<br />
*[[Munitions Constituents - Composting|Composting]]<br />
*[[Munitions Constituents - Deposition |Deposition]]<br />
*[[Munitions Constituents - Dissolution |Dissolution]]<br />
*[[Munitions Constituents - Electrochemical Treatment|Electrochemical Treatment]]<br />
*[[Metal(loid)s - Small Arms Ranges]]<br />
*[[Passive Sampling of Munitions Constituents|Passive Sampling]]<br />
*[[Munitions Constituents – Photolysis |Photolysis]]<br />
*[[Remediation of Stormwater Runoff Contaminated by Munition Constituents |Remediation of Stormwater Runoff ]]<br />
*[[Munitions Constituents – Sample Extraction and Analytical Techniques|Sample Extraction and Analytical Techniques]]<br />
*[[Munitions Constituents - Soil Sampling |Soil Sampling]]<br />
*[[Munitions Constituents - Sorption |Sorption]]<br />
*[[Munitions Constituents - IM Toxicology |Toxicology]]<br />
*[[Munitions Constituents- TREECS™ Fate and Risk Modeling|TREECS™]]<br />
<br />
<u>'''[[Monitored Natural Attenuation (MNA)]]'''</u><br />
<br />
*[[Monitored Natural Attenuation (MNA) of Chlorinated Solvents| MNA of Chlorinated Solvents]]<br />
*[[Monitored Natural Attenuation (MNA) of Fuels| MNA of Fuels]]<br />
*[[Monitored Natural Attenuation (MNA) of Metal and Metalloids| MNA of Metals and Metalloids]]<br />
*[[Natural Source Zone Depletion (NSZD)]]<br />
*[[Monitored Natural Attenuation - Transitioning from Active Remedies| Transitioning from Active Remedies]]<br />
<br />
<u>'''[[Perfluoroalkyl and Polyfluoroalkyl Substances (PFAS)]]'''</u><br />
<br />
*[[Hydrothermal Alkaline Treatment (HALT)]]<br />
*[[Lysimeters for Measuring PFAS Concentrations in the Vadose Zone]]<br />
*[[PFAS Destruction by Ultraviolet/Sulfite Treatment]]<br />
*[[PFAS Ex Situ Water Treatment]]<br />
**[[PFAS Treatment by Anion Exchange]]<br />
*[[PFAS Monitored Retention (PMR) and PFAS Enhanced Retention (PER)]]<br />
*[[PFAS Soil Remediation Technologies]]<br />
*[[PFAS Sources]]<br />
*[[PFAS Toxicology and Risk Assessment]]<br />
*[[PFAS Transport and Fate]]<br />
*[[PFAS Treatment by Electrical Discharge Plasma]]<br />
*[[Photoactivated Reductive Defluorination - PFAS Destruction | Photoactivated Reductive Defluorination]]<br />
*[[Reverse Osmosis and Nanofiltration Membrane Filtration Systems for PFAS Removal]]<br />
*[[Thermal Conduction Heating for Treatment of PFAS-Impacted Soil]]<br />
*[[Transition of Aqueous Film Forming Foam (AFFF) Fire Suppression Infrastructure Impacted by Per and Polyfluoroalkyl Substances (PFAS)| Transition of Aqueous Film Forming Foam Fire Suppression Infrastructure Impacted by Per and Polyfluoroalkyl Substances]]<br />
<br />
| style="width:33%; vertical-align:top; " |<br />
<u>'''[[Regulatory Issues and Site Management]]'''</u><br />
<br />
*[[Alternative Endpoints]]<br />
*[[Mass Flux and Mass Discharge]]<br />
*[[Plume Response Modeling]]<br />
*[[REMChlor - MD | REMChlor-MD]]<br />
*[[Source Zone Modeling]]<br />
*[[Sustainable Remediation]]<br />
<br />
<u>'''[[Remediation Technologies]]'''</u><br />
*[[Amendment Distribution in Low Conductivity Materials]]<br />
*[[Bioremediation - Anaerobic|Anaerobic Bioremediation]]<br />
**[[Bioremediation - Anaerobic Design Considerations | Design Considerations]]<br />
**[[Design Tool - Base Addition for ERD]]<br />
**[[Emulsified Vegetable Oil (EVO) for Anaerobic Bioremediation]]<br />
**[[Low pH Inhibition of Reductive Dechlorination]]<br />
**[[Bioremediation - Anaerobic Secondary Water Quality Impacts | Secondary Water Quality Impacts]]<br />
*[[Chemical Oxidation (In Situ - ISCO) | In Situ Chemical Oxidation (ISCO)]]<br />
**[[Chemical Oxidation Design Considerations(In Situ - ISCO) | Design Considerations]]<br />
**[[Chemical Oxidation Oxidant Selection (In Situ - ISCO) | Oxidant Selection]]<br />
*[[Chemical Reduction (In Situ - ISCR) | In Situ Chemical Reduction (ISCR)]]<br />
**[[Zerovalent Iron (ZVI) (Chemical Reduction - ISCR) | Zero-Valent Iron (ZVI)]]<br />
**[[Zerovalent Iron Permeable Reactive Barriers]]<br />
*[[In Situ Groundwater Treatment with Activated Carbon]]<br />
*[[Injection Techniques for Liquid Amendments]]<br />
*[[Injection Techniques - Viscosity Modification]]<br />
*[[Landfarming]]<br />
*[[Metal and Metalloids - Remediation | Remediation of Metals and Metalloids]]<br />
*[[Remediation Performance Assessment at Chlorinated Solvent Sites]]<br />
*[[Soil Vapor Extraction (SVE)]]<br />
*[[Stream Restoration]]<br />
*[[Subgrade Biogeochemical Reactor (SBGR)]]<br />
*[[Supercritical Water Oxidation (SCWO)]]<br />
*[[Thermal Remediation]]<br />
**[[Thermal Remediation - Combined Remedies | Combined Remedies]]<br />
**[[Thermal Remediation - Electrical Resistance Heating | Electrical Resistance Heating (ERH)]]<br />
**[[Thermal Remediation - Smoldering | Smoldering]]<br />
**[[Thermal Remediation - Steam | Steam Enhanced Extraction (SEE)]]<br />
**[[Thermal Conduction Heating (TCH)]]<br />
<br />
<u>'''[[Soil & Groundwater Contaminants]]'''</u><br />
<br />
*[[1,2,3-Trichloropropane]]<br />
*[[1,4-Dioxane]]<br />
*[[Chlorinated Solvents]]<br />
*[[Metal and Metalloid Contaminants|Metals and Metalloids]]<br />
*[[N-nitrosodimethylamine (NDMA)]]<br />
*[[Perchlorate|Perchlorate]]<br />
*[[Petroleum Hydrocarbons (PHCs)]]<br />
*[[Polycyclic Aromatic Hydrocarbons (PAHs)]]<br />
|}<br />
|}<br />
|}</div>Jhurleyhttps://www.enviro.wiki/index.php?title=Main_Page&diff=18065Main Page2026-04-03T20:25:41Z<p>Jhurley: </p>
<hr />
<div><center><br />
{| class="MainPageBG" style="margin: auto; width: 95%; border-spacing:0px;"<br />
|-<br />
| style="width:55%;" |<center><span style="font-size:175%; line-height: 0.2em; vertical-align:top;"><big><span style="color:#008566">Welcome to '''ENVIRO'''</span> <span style="color:#762a87">'''Wiki'''</span></big></span><br /><br /><br /><span style="font-size:150%; color:#008566; line-height: 0.2em; vertical-align:top;"> Peer Reviewed. Accessible. Written By Experts</span></center><br />
| style="width:40%;" |<center><span style="font-size:110%; vertical-align:top;"> ''Developed and brought to you by '' <br>[[File:MainLogo-serdp-estcp.png|link=https://www.serdp-estcp.org |frameless|center|350px]]</span>''<span style="font-size:140%; vertical-align:top;">Your Environmental Information Gateway</span>''<br />
</center><br />
|-<br />
|<span style="width:55%; line-height: 0.3em;"> The goal of ENVIRO Wiki is to make scientific and engineering research results more accessible to environmental professionals, facilitating the permitting, design and implementation of environmental projects. Articles are written and edited by invited experts (see [[Contributors]]) to summarize current knowledge for the target audience on an array of topics, with cross-linked references to reports and technical literature. </span><br />
|<center><span style="font-size:130%"><br />[[#Table of Contents|See Table of Contents]]</span><br />
</center> <br />
<inputbox> type=fulltext <br />
placeholder=Search Enviro Wiki<br />
break=no </inputbox><br />
|}<br />
</center><br />
<br />
{| role="presentation" id="mp-upper" style="margin: auto; width: 95%; margin-top:3px; border-spacing: 0px; "<br />
<!-- TODAY'S FEATURED ARTICLE --><br />
| id="mp-left" class="MainPageBG" style="width:55%; padding:0; vertical-align:top; color:#000;" |<br />
<h2 id="mp-tfa-h2" style="margin:0.5em; background:#cef2e0; font-family:inherit; font-size:120%; font-weight:bold; border:1px solid #a3bfb1; color:#000; padding:0.2em 0.4em;"> Featured article: PFAS Destruction by Ultraviolet/Sulfite Treatment</h2><br />
<div id="mp-tfa" style="padding:0.0em 1.0em;">[[File:XiongFig1.png|400px|left|link=PFAS Destruction by Ultraviolet/Sulfite Treatment]]<dailyfeaturedpage></dailyfeaturedpage>&nbsp;&nbsp;<br />
<br />
[[PFAS Destruction by Ultraviolet/Sulfite Treatment|(Full article...)]] </div><br />
<br />
| style="border:1px solid transparent;" |<br />
<br />
<!-- Enviro WIKI Highlight --><br />
| id="mp-right" class="MainPageBG" style="width:40%; padding:0; horizontal-align:center; vertical-align:top;" |<br />
<h2 id="mp-itn-h2" style="margin:0.5em; background:#cedff2; font-family:inherit; font-size:120%; font-weight:bold; border:1px solid #a3b0bf; color:#000; padding:0.2em 0.4em;">Enviro Wiki Highlights</h2><br />
<div id="mp-itn" style="padding:0.0em 0.5em;"><br />
<br />
<slideshow sequence="random" transition="fade" refresh="7500"><br />
<br />
[[File:WH Picture1.JPG|thumb|center|x350px|link=Matrix Diffusion|Molecular diffusion slowly transports solutes into clay-rich, lower permeability zones]]<br />
[[File:WH Picture2.JPG|thumb|center|x350px|link=Subgrade Biogeochemical Reactor (SBGR)|Typical subgrade biogeochemical reactor (SBGR) layout. The SBGR is an in situ remediation technology for treatment of contaminated source areas and groundwater plume hot spots<br/>]]<br />
[[File:WH Picture3.JPG|thumb|center|x350px|link=Direct Push Logging|An Hydraulic Profiling Tool (HPT) log with electrical conductivity (EC) on left, injection pressure in middle, and flow rate on the right]]<br />
[[File:WH Picture4.JPG|thumb|center|x350px|link=PH Buffering in Aquifers|Diagram of mineral surface exchanging hydrogen ions with varying pH. The surface of most aquifer minerals carries an electrical charge that varies with pH]]<br />
[[File:WH Picture5.JPG|thumb|center|x350px|link=Biodegradation - Hydrocarbons|Comparison of the longitudinal redox zonation concept (A) and the plume fringe concept (B). Both concepts describe the spatial distribution of electron acceptors and respiration processes in a hydrocarbon contaminant plume]]<br />
[[File:WH Picture6.JPG|thumb|center|x350px|link=Direct Push Logging|Schematic of an Hydraulic Profiling Tool (HPT) probe. HPT were developed to better understand formation permeability and the distribution of permeable and low permeability zones in unconsolidated formations]]<br />
[[File:WH Picture7.JPG|thumb|center|x350px|link=Chemical Oxidation Design Considerations(In Situ - ISCO)|In situ chemical oxidation using (a) direct-push injection probes or (b) well-to-well flushing to delivery oxidants (shown in blue) into a target treatment zone of groundwater contaminated by dense nonaqueous phase liquid compounds (shown in red)]]<br />
[[File:WH Picture8.JPG|thumb|center|x350px|link=Geophysical Methods - Case_Studies|High-resolution 3D cross-borehole electrical imaging of contaminated fractured rock at the former Naval Air Warfare Center in New Jersey. Cross-borehole resistivity tomography imaging is a geophysical technique that can be used for site characterization and monitoring by observing variations in the electrical properties of subsurface materials]]<br />
[[File:WH Picture9.JPG|thumb|center|x350px|link=Stable_Isotope_Probing_(SIP)|Stable isotope probing (SIP) in use: Loading, deployment and recovery of Bio-Trap® passive sampler with 13C-labeled benzene. Stable isotope probing (SIP) is used to conclusively determine whether in situ biodegradation of a contaminant is occurring]]<br />
[[File:WH Picture10.JPG|thumb|center|x350px|link=1,2,3-Trichloropropane|Summary of anticipated, primary reaction pathways for degradation of 1,2,3-Trichloropropane (TCP). TCP is a man-made chemical that was used in the past primarily as a solvent and extractive agent, a paint and varnish remover, and as a cleaning and degreasing agent]]<br />
[[File:WH Picture11.JPG|thumb|center|x350px|link=Monitored Natural Attenuation (MNA) of Fuels|Distribution of BTEX plume lengths from 604 hydrocarbon sites. Monitored Natural Attenuation (MNA) is one of the most commonly used remediation approaches for groundwater contaminated with petroleum hydrocarbons (PHCs) and certain fuel additives such as fuel oxygenates or lead scavengers]]<br />
[[File:WH Picture12.JPG|thumb|center|x350px|link=Groundwater Sampling - No-Purge/Passive|No-purge and passive sampling methods eliminate the pre-purging step for groundwater sample collection and represent alternatives to conventional sampling methods that rely on low-flow purging of a well prior to collection. The Snap SamplerTM is an example of a passive grab sampler]]<br />
[[File:WH Picture13.JPG|thumb|center|x350px|link=Natural Source Zone Depletion (NSZD)|Conceptualization of Vapor Transport-related Natural Source Zone Depletion (NSZD) processes at a Petroleum Release Site]]<br />
[[File:WH Picture14.JPG|thumb|center|x350px|link=Soil Vapor Extraction (SVE)|Conceptual diagram of basic Soil Vapor Extraction (SVE) system for vadose zone remediation. (SVE) is a common and typically effective physical treatment process for remediation of volatile contaminants in vadose zone (unsaturated) soils]]<br />
[[File:WH Picture15.JPG|thumb|center|x350px|link=Emulsified Vegetable Oil (EVO) for Anaerobic Bioremediation|Emulsified Vegetable Oil (EVO) mixed in field during early pilot test. EVO is commonly added as a slowly fermentable substrate to stimulate the in situ anaerobic bioremediation of chlorinated solvents, explosives, perchlorate, chromate, and other contaminants]]<br />
[[File:WH Picture16.JPG|thumb|center|x350px|link=Vapor_Intrusion_(VI)|Key elements of vapor intrusion pathways]]<br />
[[File:WH Picture17.JPG|thumb|center|x350px|link=Sorption_of_Organic_Contaminants|Batch reactor experiments to generate points on a sorption isotherm]]<br />
[[File:WH Picture18.JPG|thumb|center|x350px|link=Metagenomics|Results for metagenomic analysis of a groundwater sample obtained from a site impacted with petroleum hydrocarbons]]<br />
[[File:WH Picture19.JPG|thumb|center|x350px|link=Perchlorate|Perchlorate releases and drinking water detections]]<br />
[[File:WH Picture20.JPG|thumb|center|x350px|link=Mass_Flux_and_Mass_Discharge|Data input screen for ESTCP Mass Flux Toolkit]]<br />
[[File:WH Picture21.JPG|thumb|center|x350px|link=Bioremediation_-_Anaerobic_Design_Considerations|Amendment addition for biobarrier]]<br />
[[File:WH Picture22.JPG|thumb|center|x350px|link=Thermal Conduction Heating (TCH)|Thermal Remediation - Desorption schematic]]<br />
[[File:WH_Picture23.jpg|thumb|center|x350px|link=Contaminated_Sediments_-_Introduction |Key exposure pathways for human health risk from contaminated sediments]]<br />
[[File:WH_Picture24.jpg|thumb|center|x350px|link=Perfluoroalkyl_and_Polyfluoroalkyl_Substances_(PFAS)| The PFAS family of compounds]]<br />
<br />
</slideshow><br />
</div><br />
|}<br />
<br />
{| id="mp-upper" style="width: 95%; margin:3px 0 0 0; "<br />
| class="MainPageBG" style="width:50%; background:#f5faff; vertical-align:top; color:#000;" |<br />
{| id="mp-left" style="width:100%; vertical-align:top; background:#f9f9f9;"<br />
| style="padding:2px;" |<h2 id="mp-tfa-h2_2" style="margin:3px; background:#cef2e0; font-family:inherit; font-size:120%; font-weight:bold; border:1px solid #a3bfb1; text-align:center; color:#000; padding:0.2em 0.4em;"><span id="#Table of Contents"></span>Table of Contents <span style="font-size:85%; font-weight:bold;"></span></h2><br />
{| style="width:100%; vertical-align:top;" <br />
| style="vertical-align:top;" |<br />
<u>'''[[Transport & Attenuation Processes | Attenuation & Transport Processes]]'''</u><br />
<br />
*[[Biodegradation - 1,4-Dioxane]]<br />
*[[Biodegradation - Cometabolic]]<br />
*[[Biodegradation - Hydrocarbons]]<br />
*[[Biodegradation - Reductive Processes]]<br />
*[[Groundwater Flow and Solute Transport]]<br />
*[[Matrix Diffusion]]<br />
*[[Metals and Metalloids - Mobility in Groundwater | Mobility of Metals and Metalloids]]<br />
*[[pH Buffering in Aquifers]]<br />
*[[Sorption of Organic Contaminants]]<br />
*[[Vapor Intrusion (VI)]]<br />
**[[Vapor Intrusion - Separation Distances from Petroleum Sources]]<br />
**[[Vapor Intrusion – Sewers and Utility Tunnels as Preferential Pathways|Vapor Intrusion - Sewers and Utility Tunnels as Preferential Pathways]]<br />
**[[Assessing Vapor Intrusion (VI) Impacts in Neighborhoods with Groundwater Contaminated by Chlorinated Volatile Organic Chemicals (CVOCs)|Vapor Intrusion - Assessing VI Impacts in Neighborhoods with Groundwater Contaminated CVOCs]]<br />
<br />
<u>'''[[Characterization, Assessment & Monitoring]]'''</u><br />
<br />
*[[Characterization Methods – Hydraulic Conductivity]]<br />
*[[Compound Specific Isotope Analysis (CSIA)|Compound Specific Isotope Analysis (CSIA)]]<br />
*[[Direct Push (DP) Technology]]<br />
**[[Direct Push Logging |Direct Push Logging]]<br />
**[[Direct Push Sampling |Direct Push Sampling]]<br />
*[[Geophysical Methods | Geophysical Methods]]<br />
**[[Geophysical Methods - Case Studies |Case Studies]]<br />
**[[Hydrogeophysical Methods for Characterization and Monitoring of Groundwater-Surface Water Exchanges]]<br />
*[[Groundwater Sampling - No-Purge/Passive]]<br />
*[[Long-Term Monitoring (LTM)|Long-Term Monitoring (LTM)]] <br />
**[[Long-Term Monitoring (LTM) - Data Analysis |LTM Data Analysis]]<br />
**[[Long-Term Monitoring (LTM) - Data Variability |LTM Data Variability]]<br />
*[[Molecular Biological Tools - MBTs |Molecular Biological Tools (MBTs)]]<br />
**[[Metagenomics]]<br />
**[[Proteomics and Proteogenomics]]<br />
**[[Quantitative Polymerase Chain Reaction (qPCR)]]<br />
**[[Stable Isotope Probing (SIP)]]<br />
*[[Natural Attenuation in Source Zone and Groundwater Plume - Bemidji Crude Oil Spill |Natural Attenuation in Source Zone and Groundwater Plume&nbsp;-<br />Bemidji Crude Oil Spill]]<br />
*[[OPTically-based In-situ Characterization System (OPTICS)]]<br />
<br />
<u>'''[[Coastal and Estuarine Ecology]]'''</u><br />
<br />
*[[Phytoplankton (Algae) Blooms]]<br />
<br />
<u>'''[[Contaminated Sediments - Introduction | Contaminated Sediments]]'''</u><br />
<br />
*[[Contaminated Sediment Risk Assessment]]<br />
*[[In Situ Toxicity Identification Evaluation (iTIE) | In Situ Toxicity Identification Evaluation]]<br />
*[[In Situ Treatment of Contaminated Sediments with Activated Carbon]]<br />
*[[Mercury in Sediments]]<br />
*[[Passive Sampling of Sediments]]<br />
**[[Sediment Porewater Dialysis Passive Samplers for Inorganics (Peepers)]]<br />
*[[Sediment Capping]]<br />
<br />
| style="width:33%; vertical-align:top; " |<br />
<br />
<u>'''[[Light Non-Aqueous Phase Liquids (LNAPLs)]]'''</u><br />
<br />
*[[LNAPL Conceptual Site Models]]<br />
*[[LNAPL Remediation Technologies]]<br />
*[[NAPL Mobility]]<br />
<br />
<u>'''[[Munitions Constituents]]'''</u><br />
<br />
*[[Munitions Constituents - Abiotic Reduction|Abiotic Reduction]]<br />
*[[Munitions Constituents - Alkaline Degradation|Alkaline Degradation]]<br />
**[[Pyrogenic Carbonaceous Matter Enhanced Alkaline Hydrolysis]]<br />
*[[Munitions Constituents - Composting|Composting]]<br />
*[[Munitions Constituents - Deposition |Deposition]]<br />
*[[Munitions Constituents - Dissolution |Dissolution]]<br />
*[[Munitions Constituents - Electrochemical Treatment|Electrochemical Treatment]]<br />
*[[Metal(loid)s - Small Arms Ranges]]<br />
*[[Passive Sampling of Munitions Constituents|Passive Sampling]]<br />
*[[Munitions Constituents – Photolysis |Photolysis]]<br />
*[[Remediation of Stormwater Runoff Contaminated by Munition Constituents |Remediation of Stormwater Runoff ]]<br />
*[[Munitions Constituents – Sample Extraction and Analytical Techniques|Sample Extraction and Analytical Techniques]]<br />
*[[Munitions Constituents - Soil Sampling |Soil Sampling]]<br />
*[[Munitions Constituents - Sorption |Sorption]]<br />
*[[Munitions Constituents - IM Toxicology |Toxicology]]<br />
*[[Munitions Constituents- TREECS™ Fate and Risk Modeling|TREECS™]]<br />
<br />
<u>'''[[Monitored Natural Attenuation (MNA)]]'''</u><br />
<br />
*[[Monitored Natural Attenuation (MNA) of Chlorinated Solvents| MNA of Chlorinated Solvents]]<br />
*[[Monitored Natural Attenuation (MNA) of Fuels| MNA of Fuels]]<br />
*[[Monitored Natural Attenuation (MNA) of Metal and Metalloids| MNA of Metals and Metalloids]]<br />
*[[Natural Source Zone Depletion (NSZD)]]<br />
*[[Monitored Natural Attenuation - Transitioning from Active Remedies| Transitioning from Active Remedies]]<br />
<br />
<u>'''[[Perfluoroalkyl and Polyfluoroalkyl Substances (PFAS)]]'''</u><br />
<br />
*[[Hydrothermal Alkaline Treatment (HALT)]]<br />
*[[Lysimeters for Measuring PFAS Concentrations in the Vadose Zone]]<br />
*[[PFAS Destruction by Ultraviolet/Sulfite Treatment]]<br />
*[[PFAS Ex Situ Water Treatment]]<br />
**[[PFAS Treatment by Anion Exchange]]<br />
*[[PFAS Monitored Retention (PMR) and PFAS Enhanced Retention (PER)]]<br />
*[[PFAS Soil Remediation Technologies]]<br />
*[[PFAS Sources]]<br />
*[[PFAS Toxicology and Risk Assessment]]<br />
*[[PFAS Transport and Fate]]<br />
*[[PFAS Treatment by Electrical Discharge Plasma]]<br />
*[[Photoactivated Reductive Defluorination - PFAS Destruction | Photoactivated Reductive Defluorination]]<br />
*[[Reverse Osmosis and Nanofiltration Membrane Filtration Systems for PFAS Removal]]<br />
*[[Thermal Conduction Heating for Treatment of PFAS-Impacted Soil]]<br />
*[[Transition of Aqueous Film Forming Foam (AFFF) Fire Suppression Infrastructure Impacted by Per and Polyfluoroalkyl Substances (PFAS)| Transition of Aqueous Film Forming Foam Fire Suppression Infrastructure Impacted by Per and Polyfluoroalkyl Substances]]<br />
<br />
| style="width:33%; vertical-align:top; " |<br />
<u>'''[[Regulatory Issues and Site Management]]'''</u><br />
<br />
*[[Alternative Endpoints]]<br />
*[[Mass Flux and Mass Discharge]]<br />
*[[Plume Response Modeling]]<br />
*[[REMChlor - MD | REMChlor-MD]]<br />
*[[Source Zone Modeling]]<br />
*[[Sustainable Remediation]]<br />
<br />
<u>'''[[Remediation Technologies]]'''</u><br />
*[[Amendment Distribution in Low Conductivity Materials]]<br />
*[[Bioremediation - Anaerobic|Anaerobic Bioremediation]]<br />
**[[Bioremediation - Anaerobic Design Considerations | Design Considerations]]<br />
**[[Design Tool - Base Addition for ERD]]<br />
**[[Emulsified Vegetable Oil (EVO) for Anaerobic Bioremediation]]<br />
**[[Low pH Inhibition of Reductive Dechlorination]]<br />
**[[Bioremediation - Anaerobic Secondary Water Quality Impacts | Secondary Water Quality Impacts]]<br />
*[[Chemical Oxidation (In Situ - ISCO) | In Situ Chemical Oxidation (ISCO)]]<br />
**[[Chemical Oxidation Design Considerations(In Situ - ISCO) | Design Considerations]]<br />
**[[Chemical Oxidation Oxidant Selection (In Situ - ISCO) | Oxidant Selection]]<br />
*[[Chemical Reduction (In Situ - ISCR) | In Situ Chemical Reduction (ISCR)]]<br />
**[[Zerovalent Iron (ZVI) (Chemical Reduction - ISCR) | Zero-Valent Iron (ZVI)]]<br />
**[[Zerovalent Iron Permeable Reactive Barriers]]<br />
*[[In Situ Groundwater Treatment with Activated Carbon]]<br />
*[[Injection Techniques for Liquid Amendments]]<br />
*[[Injection Techniques - Viscosity Modification]]<br />
*[[Landfarming]]<br />
*[[Metal and Metalloids - Remediation | Remediation of Metals and Metalloids]]<br />
*[[Remediation Performance Assessment at Chlorinated Solvent Sites]]<br />
*[[Soil Vapor Extraction (SVE)]]<br />
*[[Stream Restoration]]<br />
*[[Subgrade Biogeochemical Reactor (SBGR)]]<br />
*[[Supercritical Water Oxidation (SCWO)]]<br />
*[[Thermal Remediation]]<br />
**[[Thermal Remediation - Combined Remedies | Combined Remedies]]<br />
**[[Thermal Remediation - Electrical Resistance Heating | Electrical Resistance Heating (ERH)]]<br />
**[[Thermal Remediation - Smoldering | Smoldering]]<br />
**[[Thermal Remediation - Steam | Steam Enhanced Extraction (SEE)]]<br />
**[[Thermal Conduction Heating (TCH)]]<br />
<br />
<u>'''[[Soil & Groundwater Contaminants]]'''</u><br />
<br />
*[[1,2,3-Trichloropropane]]<br />
*[[1,4-Dioxane]]<br />
*[[Chlorinated Solvents]]<br />
*[[Metal and Metalloid Contaminants|Metals and Metalloids]]<br />
*[[N-nitrosodimethylamine (NDMA)]]<br />
*[[Perchlorate|Perchlorate]]<br />
*[[Petroleum Hydrocarbons (PHCs)]]<br />
*[[Polycyclic Aromatic Hydrocarbons (PAHs)]]<br />
|}<br />
|}<br />
|}</div>Jhurleyhttps://www.enviro.wiki/index.php?title=Main_Page&diff=18064Main Page2026-04-03T20:24:36Z<p>Jhurley: </p>
<hr />
<div><center><br />
{| class="MainPageBG" style="margin: auto; width: 95%; border-spacing:0px;"<br />
|-<br />
| style="width:55%;" |<center><span style="font-size:175%; line-height: 0.2em; vertical-align:top;"><big><span style="color:#008566">Welcome to '''ENVIRO'''</span> <span style="color:#762a87">'''Wiki'''</span></big></span><br /><br /><br /><span style="font-size:150%; color:#008566; line-height: 0.2em; vertical-align:top;"> Peer Reviewed. Accessible. Written By Experts</span></center><br />
| style="width:40%;" |<center><span style="font-size:110%; vertical-align:top;"> ''Developed and brought to you by '' <br>[[File:MainLogo-serdp-estcp.png|link=https://www.serdp-estcp.org |frameless|center|350px]]</span>''<span style="font-size:140%; vertical-align:top;">Your Environmental Information Gateway</span>''<br />
</center><br />
|-<br />
|<span style="width:55%; line-height: 0.3em;"> The goal of ENVIRO Wiki is to make scientific and engineering research results more accessible to environmental professionals, facilitating the permitting, design and implementation of environmental projects. Articles are written and edited by invited experts (see [[Contributors]]) to summarize current knowledge for the target audience on an array of topics, with cross-linked references to reports and technical literature. </span><br />
|<center><span style="font-size:130%"><br />[[#Table of Contents|See Table of Contents]]</span><br />
</center> <br />
<inputbox> type=fulltext <br />
placeholder=Search Enviro Wiki<br />
break=no </inputbox><br />
|}<br />
</center><br />
<br />
{| role="presentation" id="mp-upper" style="margin: auto; width: 95%; margin-top:3px; border-spacing: 0px; "<br />
<!-- TODAY'S FEATURED ARTICLE --><br />
| id="mp-left" class="MainPageBG" style="width:55%; padding:0; vertical-align:top; color:#000;" |<br />
<h2 id="mp-tfa-h2" style="margin:0.5em; background:#cef2e0; font-family:inherit; font-size:120%; font-weight:bold; border:1px solid #a3bfb1; color:#000; padding:0.2em 0.4em;"> Featured article: PFAS Destruction by Ultraviolet/Sulfite Treatment</h2><br />
<div id="mp-tfa" style="padding:0.0em 1.0em;">[[File:XiongFig1.png|400px|left|link=PFAS Destruction by Ultraviolet/Sulfite Treatment]]<dailyfeaturedpage></dailyfeaturedpage>&nbsp;&nbsp;<br />
<br />
[[PFAS Destruction by Ultraviolet/Sulfite Treatment|(Full article...)]] </div><br />
<br />
| style="border:1px solid transparent;" |<br />
<br />
<!-- Enviro WIKI Highlight --><br />
| id="mp-right" class="MainPageBG" style="width:40%; padding:0; horizontal-align:center; vertical-align:top;" |<br />
<h2 id="mp-itn-h2" style="margin:0.5em; background:#cedff2; font-family:inherit; font-size:120%; font-weight:bold; border:1px solid #a3b0bf; color:#000; padding:0.2em 0.4em;">Enviro Wiki Highlights</h2><br />
<div id="mp-itn" style="padding:0.0em 0.5em;"><br />
<br />
<slideshow sequence="random" transition="fade" refresh="7500"><br />
<br />
[[File:WH Picture1.JPG|thumb|center|x350px|link=Matrix Diffusion|Molecular diffusion slowly transports solutes into clay-rich, lower permeability zones]]<br />
[[File:WH Picture2.JPG|thumb|center|x350px|link=Subgrade Biogeochemical Reactor (SBGR)|Typical subgrade biogeochemical reactor (SBGR) layout. The SBGR is an in situ remediation technology for treatment of contaminated source areas and groundwater plume hot spots<br/>]]<br />
[[File:WH Picture3.JPG|thumb|center|x350px|link=Direct Push Logging|An Hydraulic Profiling Tool (HPT) log with electrical conductivity (EC) on left, injection pressure in middle, and flow rate on the right]]<br />
[[File:WH Picture4.JPG|thumb|center|x350px|link=PH Buffering in Aquifers|Diagram of mineral surface exchanging hydrogen ions with varying pH. The surface of most aquifer minerals carries an electrical charge that varies with pH]]<br />
[[File:WH Picture5.JPG|thumb|center|x350px|link=Biodegradation - Hydrocarbons|Comparison of the longitudinal redox zonation concept (A) and the plume fringe concept (B). Both concepts describe the spatial distribution of electron acceptors and respiration processes in a hydrocarbon contaminant plume]]<br />
[[File:WH Picture6.JPG|thumb|center|x350px|link=Direct Push Logging|Schematic of an Hydraulic Profiling Tool (HPT) probe. HPT were developed to better understand formation permeability and the distribution of permeable and low permeability zones in unconsolidated formations]]<br />
[[File:WH Picture7.JPG|thumb|center|x350px|link=Chemical Oxidation Design Considerations(In Situ - ISCO)|In situ chemical oxidation using (a) direct-push injection probes or (b) well-to-well flushing to delivery oxidants (shown in blue) into a target treatment zone of groundwater contaminated by dense nonaqueous phase liquid compounds (shown in red)]]<br />
[[File:WH Picture8.JPG|thumb|center|x350px|link=Geophysical Methods - Case_Studies|High-resolution 3D cross-borehole electrical imaging of contaminated fractured rock at the former Naval Air Warfare Center in New Jersey. Cross-borehole resistivity tomography imaging is a geophysical technique that can be used for site characterization and monitoring by observing variations in the electrical properties of subsurface materials]]<br />
[[File:WH Picture9.JPG|thumb|center|x350px|link=Stable_Isotope_Probing_(SIP)|Stable isotope probing (SIP) in use: Loading, deployment and recovery of Bio-Trap® passive sampler with 13C-labeled benzene. Stable isotope probing (SIP) is used to conclusively determine whether in situ biodegradation of a contaminant is occurring]]<br />
[[File:WH Picture10.JPG|thumb|center|x350px|link=1,2,3-Trichloropropane|Summary of anticipated, primary reaction pathways for degradation of 1,2,3-Trichloropropane (TCP). TCP is a man-made chemical that was used in the past primarily as a solvent and extractive agent, a paint and varnish remover, and as a cleaning and degreasing agent]]<br />
[[File:WH Picture11.JPG|thumb|center|x350px|link=Monitored Natural Attenuation (MNA) of Fuels|Distribution of BTEX plume lengths from 604 hydrocarbon sites. Monitored Natural Attenuation (MNA) is one of the most commonly used remediation approaches for groundwater contaminated with petroleum hydrocarbons (PHCs) and certain fuel additives such as fuel oxygenates or lead scavengers]]<br />
[[File:WH Picture12.JPG|thumb|center|x350px|link=Groundwater Sampling - No-Purge/Passive|No-purge and passive sampling methods eliminate the pre-purging step for groundwater sample collection and represent alternatives to conventional sampling methods that rely on low-flow purging of a well prior to collection. The Snap SamplerTM is an example of a passive grab sampler]]<br />
[[File:WH Picture13.JPG|thumb|center|x350px|link=Natural Source Zone Depletion (NSZD)|Conceptualization of Vapor Transport-related Natural Source Zone Depletion (NSZD) processes at a Petroleum Release Site]]<br />
[[File:WH Picture14.JPG|thumb|center|x350px|link=Soil Vapor Extraction (SVE)|Conceptual diagram of basic Soil Vapor Extraction (SVE) system for vadose zone remediation. (SVE) is a common and typically effective physical treatment process for remediation of volatile contaminants in vadose zone (unsaturated) soils]]<br />
[[File:WH Picture15.JPG|thumb|center|x350px|link=Emulsified Vegetable Oil (EVO) for Anaerobic Bioremediation|Emulsified Vegetable Oil (EVO) mixed in field during early pilot test. EVO is commonly added as a slowly fermentable substrate to stimulate the in situ anaerobic bioremediation of chlorinated solvents, explosives, perchlorate, chromate, and other contaminants]]<br />
[[File:WH Picture16.JPG|thumb|center|x350px|link=Vapor_Intrusion_(VI)|Key elements of vapor intrusion pathways]]<br />
[[File:WH Picture17.JPG|thumb|center|x350px|link=Sorption_of_Organic_Contaminants|Batch reactor experiments to generate points on a sorption isotherm]]<br />
[[File:WH Picture18.JPG|thumb|center|x350px|link=Metagenomics|Results for metagenomic analysis of a groundwater sample obtained from a site impacted with petroleum hydrocarbons]]<br />
[[File:WH Picture19.JPG|thumb|center|x350px|link=Perchlorate|Perchlorate releases and drinking water detections]]<br />
[[File:WH Picture20.JPG|thumb|center|x350px|link=Mass_Flux_and_Mass_Discharge|Data input screen for ESTCP Mass Flux Toolkit]]<br />
[[File:WH Picture21.JPG|thumb|center|x350px|link=Bioremediation_-_Anaerobic_Design_Considerations|Amendment addition for biobarrier]]<br />
[[File:WH Picture22.JPG|thumb|center|x350px|link=Thermal Conduction Heating (TCH)|Thermal Remediation - Desorption schematic]]<br />
[[File:WH_Picture23.jpg|thumb|center|x350px|link=Contaminated_Sediments_-_Introduction |Key exposure pathways for human health risk from contaminated sediments]]<br />
[[File:WH_Picture24.jpg|thumb|center|x350px|link=Perfluoroalkyl_and_Polyfluoroalkyl_Substances_(PFAS)| The PFAS family of compounds]]<br />
<br />
</slideshow><br />
</div><br />
|}<br />
<br />
{| id="mp-upper" style="width: 95%; margin:3px 0 0 0; "<br />
| class="MainPageBG" style="width:50%; background:#f5faff; vertical-align:top; color:#000;" |<br />
{| id="mp-left" style="width:100%; vertical-align:top; background:#f9f9f9;"<br />
| style="padding:2px;" |<h2 id="mp-tfa-h2_2" style="margin:3px; background:#cef2e0; font-family:inherit; font-size:120%; font-weight:bold; border:1px solid #a3bfb1; text-align:center; color:#000; padding:0.2em 0.4em;"><span id="#Table of Contents"></span>Table of Contents <span style="font-size:85%; font-weight:bold;"></span></h2><br />
{| style="width:100%; vertical-align:top;" <br />
| style="vertical-align:top;" |<br />
<u>'''[[Transport & Attenuation Processes | Attenuation & Transport Processes]]'''</u><br />
<br />
*[[Biodegradation - 1,4-Dioxane]]<br />
*[[Biodegradation - Cometabolic]]<br />
*[[Biodegradation - Hydrocarbons]]<br />
*[[Biodegradation - Reductive Processes]]<br />
*[[Groundwater Flow and Solute Transport]]<br />
*[[Matrix Diffusion]]<br />
*[[Metals and Metalloids - Mobility in Groundwater | Mobility of Metals and Metalloids]]<br />
*[[pH Buffering in Aquifers]]<br />
*[[Sorption of Organic Contaminants]]<br />
*[[Vapor Intrusion (VI)]]<br />
**[[Vapor Intrusion - Separation Distances from Petroleum Sources]]<br />
**[[Vapor Intrusion – Sewers and Utility Tunnels as Preferential Pathways|Vapor Intrusion - Sewers and Utility Tunnels as Preferential Pathways]]<br />
**[[Assessing Vapor Intrusion (VI) Impacts in Neighborhoods with Groundwater Contaminated by Chlorinated Volatile Organic Chemicals (CVOCs)|Vapor Intrusion - Assessing VI Impacts in Neighborhoods with Groundwater Contaminated CVOCs]]<br />
<br />
<u>'''[[Characterization, Assessment & Monitoring]]'''</u><br />
<br />
*[[Characterization Methods – Hydraulic Conductivity]]<br />
*[[Compound Specific Isotope Analysis (CSIA)|Compound Specific Isotope Analysis (CSIA)]]<br />
*[[Direct Push (DP) Technology]]<br />
**[[Direct Push Logging |Direct Push Logging]]<br />
**[[Direct Push Sampling |Direct Push Sampling]]<br />
*[[Geophysical Methods | Geophysical Methods]]<br />
**[[Geophysical Methods - Case Studies |Case Studies]]<br />
**[[Hydrogeophysical Methods for Characterization and Monitoring of Groundwater-Surface Water Exchanges]]<br />
*[[Groundwater Sampling - No-Purge/Passive]]<br />
*[[Long-Term Monitoring (LTM)|Long-Term Monitoring (LTM)]] <br />
**[[Long-Term Monitoring (LTM) - Data Analysis |LTM Data Analysis]]<br />
**[[Long-Term Monitoring (LTM) - Data Variability |LTM Data Variability]]<br />
*[[Molecular Biological Tools - MBTs |Molecular Biological Tools (MBTs)]]<br />
**[[Metagenomics]]<br />
**[[Proteomics and Proteogenomics]]<br />
**[[Quantitative Polymerase Chain Reaction (qPCR)]]<br />
**[[Stable Isotope Probing (SIP)]]<br />
*[[Natural Attenuation in Source Zone and Groundwater Plume - Bemidji Crude Oil Spill |Natural Attenuation in Source Zone and Groundwater Plume&nbsp;-<br />Bemidji Crude Oil Spill]]<br />
*[[OPTically-based In-situ Characterization System (OPTICS)]]<br />
<br />
<u>'''[[Coastal and Estuarine Ecology]]'''</u><br />
<br />
*[[Phytoplankton (Algae) Blooms]]<br />
<br />
| style="width:33%; vertical-align:top; " |<br />
<u>'''[[Contaminated Sediments - Introduction | Contaminated Sediments]]'''</u><br />
<br />
*[[Contaminated Sediment Risk Assessment]]<br />
*[[In Situ Toxicity Identification Evaluation (iTIE) | In Situ Toxicity Identification Evaluation]]<br />
*[[In Situ Treatment of Contaminated Sediments with Activated Carbon]]<br />
*[[Mercury in Sediments]]<br />
*[[Passive Sampling of Sediments]]<br />
**[[Sediment Porewater Dialysis Passive Samplers for Inorganics (Peepers)]]<br />
*[[Sediment Capping]]<br />
<br />
<u>'''[[Light Non-Aqueous Phase Liquids (LNAPLs)]]'''</u><br />
<br />
*[[LNAPL Conceptual Site Models]]<br />
*[[LNAPL Remediation Technologies]]<br />
*[[NAPL Mobility]]<br />
<br />
<u>'''[[Munitions Constituents]]'''</u><br />
<br />
*[[Munitions Constituents - Abiotic Reduction|Abiotic Reduction]]<br />
*[[Munitions Constituents - Alkaline Degradation|Alkaline Degradation]]<br />
**[[Pyrogenic Carbonaceous Matter Enhanced Alkaline Hydrolysis]]<br />
*[[Munitions Constituents - Composting|Composting]]<br />
*[[Munitions Constituents - Deposition |Deposition]]<br />
*[[Munitions Constituents - Dissolution |Dissolution]]<br />
*[[Munitions Constituents - Electrochemical Treatment|Electrochemical Treatment]]<br />
*[[Metal(loid)s - Small Arms Ranges]]<br />
*[[Passive Sampling of Munitions Constituents|Passive Sampling]]<br />
*[[Munitions Constituents – Photolysis |Photolysis]]<br />
*[[Remediation of Stormwater Runoff Contaminated by Munition Constituents |Remediation of Stormwater Runoff ]]<br />
*[[Munitions Constituents – Sample Extraction and Analytical Techniques|Sample Extraction and Analytical Techniques]]<br />
*[[Munitions Constituents - Soil Sampling |Soil Sampling]]<br />
*[[Munitions Constituents - Sorption |Sorption]]<br />
*[[Munitions Constituents - IM Toxicology |Toxicology]]<br />
*[[Munitions Constituents- TREECS™ Fate and Risk Modeling|TREECS™]]<br />
<br />
<u>'''[[Monitored Natural Attenuation (MNA)]]'''</u><br />
<br />
*[[Monitored Natural Attenuation (MNA) of Chlorinated Solvents| MNA of Chlorinated Solvents]]<br />
*[[Monitored Natural Attenuation (MNA) of Fuels| MNA of Fuels]]<br />
*[[Monitored Natural Attenuation (MNA) of Metal and Metalloids| MNA of Metals and Metalloids]]<br />
*[[Natural Source Zone Depletion (NSZD)]]<br />
*[[Monitored Natural Attenuation - Transitioning from Active Remedies| Transitioning from Active Remedies]]<br />
<br />
<u>'''[[Perfluoroalkyl and Polyfluoroalkyl Substances (PFAS)]]'''</u><br />
<br />
*[[Hydrothermal Alkaline Treatment (HALT)]]<br />
*[[Lysimeters for Measuring PFAS Concentrations in the Vadose Zone]]<br />
*[[PFAS Destruction by Ultraviolet/Sulfite Treatment]]<br />
*[[PFAS Ex Situ Water Treatment]]<br />
**[[PFAS Treatment by Anion Exchange]]<br />
*[[PFAS Monitored Retention (PMR) and PFAS Enhanced Retention (PER)]]<br />
*[[PFAS Soil Remediation Technologies]]<br />
*[[PFAS Sources]]<br />
*[[PFAS Toxicology and Risk Assessment]]<br />
*[[PFAS Transport and Fate]]<br />
*[[PFAS Treatment by Electrical Discharge Plasma]]<br />
*[[Photoactivated Reductive Defluorination - PFAS Destruction | Photoactivated Reductive Defluorination]]<br />
*[[Reverse Osmosis and Nanofiltration Membrane Filtration Systems for PFAS Removal]]<br />
*[[Thermal Conduction Heating for Treatment of PFAS-Impacted Soil]]<br />
*[[Transition of Aqueous Film Forming Foam (AFFF) Fire Suppression Infrastructure Impacted by Per and Polyfluoroalkyl Substances (PFAS)| Transition of Aqueous Film Forming Foam Fire Suppression Infrastructure Impacted by Per and Polyfluoroalkyl Substances]]<br />
<br />
| style="width:33%; vertical-align:top; " |<br />
<u>'''[[Regulatory Issues and Site Management]]'''</u><br />
<br />
*[[Alternative Endpoints]]<br />
*[[Mass Flux and Mass Discharge]]<br />
*[[Plume Response Modeling]]<br />
*[[REMChlor - MD | REMChlor-MD]]<br />
*[[Source Zone Modeling]]<br />
*[[Sustainable Remediation]]<br />
<br />
<u>'''[[Remediation Technologies]]'''</u><br />
*[[Amendment Distribution in Low Conductivity Materials]]<br />
*[[Bioremediation - Anaerobic|Anaerobic Bioremediation]]<br />
**[[Bioremediation - Anaerobic Design Considerations | Design Considerations]]<br />
**[[Design Tool - Base Addition for ERD]]<br />
**[[Emulsified Vegetable Oil (EVO) for Anaerobic Bioremediation]]<br />
**[[Low pH Inhibition of Reductive Dechlorination]]<br />
**[[Bioremediation - Anaerobic Secondary Water Quality Impacts | Secondary Water Quality Impacts]]<br />
*[[Chemical Oxidation (In Situ - ISCO) | In Situ Chemical Oxidation (ISCO)]]<br />
**[[Chemical Oxidation Design Considerations(In Situ - ISCO) | Design Considerations]]<br />
**[[Chemical Oxidation Oxidant Selection (In Situ - ISCO) | Oxidant Selection]]<br />
*[[Chemical Reduction (In Situ - ISCR) | In Situ Chemical Reduction (ISCR)]]<br />
**[[Zerovalent Iron (ZVI) (Chemical Reduction - ISCR) | Zero-Valent Iron (ZVI)]]<br />
**[[Zerovalent Iron Permeable Reactive Barriers]]<br />
*[[In Situ Groundwater Treatment with Activated Carbon]]<br />
*[[Injection Techniques for Liquid Amendments]]<br />
*[[Injection Techniques - Viscosity Modification]]<br />
*[[Landfarming]]<br />
*[[Metal and Metalloids - Remediation | Remediation of Metals and Metalloids]]<br />
*[[Remediation Performance Assessment at Chlorinated Solvent Sites]]<br />
*[[Soil Vapor Extraction (SVE)]]<br />
*[[Stream Restoration]]<br />
*[[Subgrade Biogeochemical Reactor (SBGR)]]<br />
*[[Supercritical Water Oxidation (SCWO)]]<br />
*[[Thermal Remediation]]<br />
**[[Thermal Remediation - Combined Remedies | Combined Remedies]]<br />
**[[Thermal Remediation - Electrical Resistance Heating | Electrical Resistance Heating (ERH)]]<br />
**[[Thermal Remediation - Smoldering | Smoldering]]<br />
**[[Thermal Remediation - Steam | Steam Enhanced Extraction (SEE)]]<br />
**[[Thermal Conduction Heating (TCH)]]<br />
<br />
<u>'''[[Soil & Groundwater Contaminants]]'''</u><br />
<br />
*[[1,2,3-Trichloropropane]]<br />
*[[1,4-Dioxane]]<br />
*[[Chlorinated Solvents]]<br />
*[[Metal and Metalloid Contaminants|Metals and Metalloids]]<br />
*[[N-nitrosodimethylamine (NDMA)]]<br />
*[[Perchlorate|Perchlorate]]<br />
*[[Petroleum Hydrocarbons (PHCs)]]<br />
*[[Polycyclic Aromatic Hydrocarbons (PAHs)]]<br />
|}<br />
|}<br />
|}</div>Jhurleyhttps://www.enviro.wiki/index.php?title=Articles&diff=18063Articles2026-04-03T20:17:58Z<p>Jhurley: </p>
<hr />
<div>{| class="wikitable sortable"<br />
|-<br />
!Title!!First Author!!Linking Phrases<br />
|-<br />
|[[Groundwater Sampling - No-Purge/Passive]]||[[Dr. David Adamson, P.E. |Adamson, David, Ph.D., P.E.]]||passive sampling, no purge sampling, grab samplers, diffusion samplers, sorptive samplers<br />
|-<br />
|[[ Long-Term Monitoring (LTM)]]||[[Dr. David Adamson, P.E. |Adamson, David, Ph.D., P.E.]]||long-term monitoring, LTM, LTM objectives, LTM programs, LTM challenges<br />
|-<br />
|[[PFAS Monitored Retention (PMR) and PFAS Enhanced Retention (PER)]]<br />
|[[Dr. David Adamson, P.E. |Adamson, David, Ph.D., P.E.]]<br />
|PFAS, MNA, natural attenuation<br />
|-<br />
|[[Sorption of Organic Contaminants]]||[[Richelle Allen-King|Allen-King, Richelle]]||<br />
|-<br />
|[[PFAS Transport and Fate]]<br />
|[[Dr. Richard Anderson|Anderson, Richard, Ph.D.]]<br />
|PFAS, fate and transport<br />
|-<br />
|[[Mass Flux and Mass Discharge]]||[[Dr. Michael Annable, P.E. |Annable, Michael, Ph.D., P.E.]]||source reduction<br />
|-<br />
|[[PFAS Toxicology and Risk Assessment]]<br />
|[[Jennifer Arblaster|Arblaster, Jennifer]]<br />
|PFAS, toxicology, risk assessment<br />
|-<br />
|[[Metal(loid)s - Small Arms Ranges]]|| Dr. Amanda Barker |[[Dr. Amanda Barker|Barker, Amanda, Ph.D.]]<br />
|<br />
|-<br />
|[[Munitions Constituents – Photolysis|Munitions Constituents - Photolysis]]<br />
|[[Dr. Warren Kadoya|Kadoya, Warren, Ph.D.]]<br />
|<br />
|-<br />
|[[Munitions Constituents - Soil Sampling]]<br />
|[[Dr. Samuel Beal|Beal, Samuel, Ph.D.]]<br />
|<br />
|-<br />
|[[Vapor Intrusion – Sewers and Utility Tunnels as Preferential Pathways|Vapor Intrusion - Sewers and Utility Tunnels as Preferential Pathways]]<br />
|[[Lila Beckley|Beckley, Lila]]<br />
|vapor intrusion<br />
|-<br />
|[[Natural Attenuation in Source Zone and Groundwater Plume - Bemidji Crude Oil Spill]]<br />
|[[Dr. Barbara Bekins|Bekins, Barbara, Ph.D.]]||<br />
|-<br />
|[[Bioremediation - Anaerobic Secondary Water Quality Impacts]]||[[Dr. Robert Borden, P.E. |Borden, Robert, Ph.D., P.E.]]||secondary impacts, water quality (in regards to anaerobic conditions)<br />
|-<br />
|[[Design Tool - Base Addition for ERD]]||[[Dr. Robert Borden, P.E. |Borden, Robert, Ph.D., P.E.]]||aquifer acidity, base addition<br />
|-<br />
|[[Emulsified Vegetable Oil (EVO) for Anaerobic Bioremediation]]<br />
|[[Dr. Robert Borden, P.E. |Borden, Robert, Ph.D., P.E.]]||<br />
|-<br />
|[[Low pH Inhibition of Reductive Dechlorination]]||[[Dr. Robert Borden, P.E. |Borden, Robert, Ph.D., P.E.]]||low pH inhibition<br />
|-<br />
|[[In Situ Toxicity Identification Evaluation (iTIE)]]||[[Dr. G. Allen Burton |Burton, Allen, P.E.]]||toxicity evaluation<br />
|-<br />
|[[OPTically-based In-situ Characterization System (OPTICS)]]<br />
|[[Dr. Grace Chang|Chang, Grace, Ph.D.]]<br />
|<br />
|-<br />
|[[Munitions Constituents - Electrochemical Treatment]]<br />
|[[Dr. Brian P. Chaplin|Chaplin, Brian, Ph.D.]]<br />
|munitions constituents remediation<br />
|-<br />
|[[PFAS Sources]]<br />
|[[Dr. Dora Chiang|Chiang, Dora, Ph.D.]]<br />
|<br />
|-<br />
|[[Biodegradation - Cometabolic]]||[[Dr. Kung-Hui (Bella) Chu |Chu, Kung-Hui (Bella), Ph.D]]||cometabolic biodegradation<br />
|-<br />
|[[Munitions Constituents - Composting]]<br />
|[[Harry Craig|Craig, Harry]]<br />
|<br />
|-<br />
|[[Chemical Oxidation (In Situ - ISCO)]]||[[Dr. Michelle Crimi |Crimi, Michelle, Ph.D]]||ISCO, chemical oxidation<br />
|-<br />
|[[Chemical Oxidation Oxidant Selection (In Situ - ISCO)]]||[[Dr. Michelle Crimi |Crimi, Michelle, Ph.D]]||chemical oxidant, oxidant (in regards to ISCO)<br />
|-<br />
|[[Chemical Oxidation Design Considerations(In Situ - ISCO)]]||[[Dr. Michelle Crimi |Crimi, Michelle, Ph.D]]||screening, design, implementation, oxidant delivery (in regards to ISCO)<br />
|-<br />
|[[Perfluoroalkyl and Polyfluoroalkyl Substances (PFAS)]]||[[Dr. Rula Deeb |Deeb, Rula, Ph.D.]]||PFAS, perfluorooctanoic acid (PFOA), perfluorooctane sulfonate (PFOS)<br />
|-<br />
|[[Metal and Metalloid Contaminants]]||[[Dr. Miles Denham |Denham, Miles, Ph.D.]]||metal contaminant(s), metalloid contaminant(s), metal(s), metalloid(s),<br />
|-<br />
|[[Metals and Metalloids - Mobility in Groundwater]]||[[Dr. Miles Denham |Denham, Miles, Ph.D.]]||metal mobility, aqueous speciation, adsorption, precipitation, colloidal transport (in regards to metals)<br />
|-<br />
|[[Monitored Natural Attenuation (MNA) of Metal and Metalloids]]||[[Dr. Miles Denham |Denham, Miles, Ph.D.]]||MNA, attenuation of metal(s), natural attenuation processes, attenuation (in regards to metals)<br />
|-<br />
|[[Metal and Metalloids - Remediation]]||[[Dr. Miles Denham |Denham, Miles, Ph.D.]]||remediation, in situ technologies, contaminant removal (in regards to metals)<br />
|-<br />
|[[pH Buffering in Aquifers]]||[[Dr. Miles Denham |Denham, Miles, Ph.D.]]||ph buffer, natural pH buffer, engineered pH buffer<br />
|-<br />
|[[Munitions Constituents - Sorption]]||[[Dr. Katerina Dontsova |Dontsova, Katerina, Ph.D.]]||energetics, sorption<br />
|-<br />
|[[Biodegradation - Hydrocarbons]]||[[Dr. Elizabeth Edwards |Edwards, Elizabeth, Ph.D.]]||hydrocarbon, biodegradation<br />
|-<br />
|[[Source Zone Modeling]]||[[Dr. Ron Falta |Falta, Ron, Ph.D.]]||source zone modeling<br />
|-<br />
|[[Plume Response Modeling]]||[[Dr. Ron Falta |Falta, Ron, Ph.D.]]||plume response modeling<br />
|-<br />
|[[REMChlor - MD]]<br />
|[[Dr. Ron Falta|Falta, Ron, Ph.D.]]<br />
|<br />
|-<br />
|[[In Situ Groundwater Treatment with Activated Carbon]]<br />
|[[Dr. Dimin Fan|Fan, Dimin, Ph.D.]]<br />
|<br />
|-<br />
|[[LNAPL Remediation Technologies]]||[[Dr. Shahla Farhat |Farhat, Shahla, Ph.D.]]||<br />
|-<br />
|[[Sustainable Remediation]]||[[Paul Favara |Favara, Paul]]||sustainable remediation, social, economic and environmental impacts<br />
|-<br />
|[[Munitions Constituents]]||[[Dr. Kevin Finneran |Finneran, Kevin, Ph.D.]]||Explosives, energetics, insensitive munitions<br />
|-<br />
|[[Biodegradation - Reductive Processes]]||[[Dr. David Freedman |Freedman, David, Ph.D.]]||biotic reduction, biotic reductive processes, hydrogenolysis, dihaloelimination, coupling, organohalide respiration<br />
|-<br />
|[[Remediation of Stormwater Runoff Contaminated by Munition Constituents|Munitions Constituents - Remediation of Stormwater Runoff]]||Fuller, Mark, Ph.D.||energetics, insensitive munitions, stormwater runoff<br />
|-<br />
|[[Subgrade Biogeochemical Reactor (SBGR)]]||[[Jeff Gamlin |Gamlin, Jeff]]||SBGR, subgrade biogeochemical reactor, bioreactor<br />
|-<br />
|[[Thermal Remediation - Smoldering]]||[[Dr. Jason Gerhard |Gerhard, Jason, Ph.D.]]||smouldering remediation, self-sustaining treatment for active remediation, STAR<br />
|-<br />
|[[Contaminated Sediments - Introduction]]<br />
|[[Dr. Upal Ghosh|Ghosh, Upal, Ph.D.]]<br />
|<br />
|-<br />
|[[Contaminated Sediment Risk Assessment]]<br />
|[[Richard Wenning|Wenning, Richard]]<br />
|<br />
|-<br />
|[[In Situ Treatment of Contaminated Sediments with Activated Carbon]]<br />
|[[Dr. Upal Ghosh|Ghosh, Upal, Ph.D.]]<br />
|<br />
|-<br />
|[[PFAS Ex Situ Water Treatment]]<br />
|[[Dr. Scott Grieco |Grieco, Scott, Ph.D.]]<br />
|<br />
|-<br />
|[[Stream Restoration]]<br />
|[[Dr. Natalie Griffiths|Griffiths, Natalie, Ph.D.]]<br />
|<br />
|-<br />
|[[Passive Sampling of Sediments]]<br />
|[[Dr. Philip M. Gschwend|Gschwend, Philip]]<br />
|<br />
|-<br />
|[[Phytoplankton (Algae) Blooms]]<br />
|[[Dr. Nathan Hall|Hall, Nathan]]<br />
|<br />
|-<br />
|[[PFAS Soil Remediation Technologies]]||[[James_Hatton |Hatton, Jim]]||PFAS, Soil source zones<br />
|-<br />
|[[Proteomics and Proteogenomics]]<br />
|[[Dr. Kate Kucharzyk|Kucharzyk, Kate, Ph.D.]]<br />
|<br />
|-<br />
|[[N-nitrosodimethylamine (NDMA)]]<br />
|[[Paul Hatzinger|Hatzinger, Paul, Ph.D.]]<br />
|<br />
|-<br />
|[[Alternative Endpoints]]||[[Elisabeth Hawley |Hawley, Elisabeth]]||management of complex sites||<br />
|-<br />
|[[Thermal Remediation]]||[[Dr. Gorm Heron |Heron, Gorm, Ph.D.]]||thermal remediation, in situ thermal<br />
|-<br />
|[[Thermal Remediation - Steam]]||[[Dr. Gorm Heron |Heron, Gorm, Ph.D.]]||Steam Enhanced Extraction<br />
|-<br />
|[[Thermal Remediation - Electrical Resistance Heating]]||[[Dr. Gorm Heron |Heron, Gorm, Ph.D.]]||Electrical Resistance Heating<br />
|-<br />
|[[Thermal Conduction Heating (TCH)]]||[[Dr. Gorm Heron |Heron, Gorm, Ph.D.]]||thermal desorption<br />
|-<br />
|[[Thermal Remediation - Combined Remedies]]||[[Dr. Gorm Heron |Heron, Gorm, Ph.D.]]||thermal remediation<br />
|-<br />
|[[Thermal Conduction Heating for Treatment of PFAS-Impacted Soil]]||[[Dr. Gorm Heron |Heron, Gorm, Ph.D.]]||thermal remediation, PFAS<br />
// |-<br />
// |[[Predicting Species Responses to Climate Change with Population Models]]<br />
// |[[Dr. Brian Hudgens|Hudgens, Brian, Ph.D.]]<br />
// |climate change<br />
// |-<br />
// |[[Infrastructure Resilience]]<br />
// |[[Dr. John Hummel|Hummel, John, Ph.D.]]<br />
// |<br />
|-<br />
|[[Munitions Constituents- TREECS™ Fate and Risk Modeling|Munitions Constituents - TREECS™ Fate and Risk Modeling]]||[[Dr. Billy E. Johnson |Johnson, Billy, Ph.D.]]||munitions constituents fate and transport modeling, TREECS<br />
|-<br />
|[[Munitions Constituents - Alkaline Degradation]]<br />
|[[Jared Johnson|Johnson, Jared]]<br />
|<br />
|-<br />
|[[Assessing Vapor Intrusion (VI) Impacts in Neighborhoods with Groundwater Contaminated by Chlorinated Volatile Organic Chemicals (CVOCs)|Vapor Intrusion - Assessing VI Impacts in Neighborhoods with Groundwater Contaminated CVOCs]]<br />
|[[Dr. Paul C. Johnson|Johnson, Paul, Ph.D.]]<br />
|vapor intrusion<br />
|-<br />
|[[Munitions Constituents - IM Toxicology]]||-----||insensitive explosives, insensitive munitions, IMX-101, IMX<br />
|-<br />
|[[Landfarming]]<br />
|[[Dr. Roopa Kamath|Kamath, Roopa, Ph.D.]]<br />
|<br />
|-<br />
|[[NAPL Mobility]]<br />
|[[Andrew Kirkman|Kirkman, Andrew]]<br />
|<br />
// |-<br />
// |[[Climate Change Primer]]<br />
// |[[Dr. Rao Kotamarthi|Kotamarthi, Rao, Ph.D.]]<br />
// |<br />
|-<br />
|[[Perchlorate]]||[[Thomas Krug |Krug, Thomas]]||perchlorate<br />
|-<br />
|[[Injection Techniques for Liquid Amendments]]||[[Thomas Krug |Krug, Thomas]]||amendment injection<br />
|-<br />
|[[Transition of Aqueous Film Forming Foam (AFFF) Fire Suppression Infrastructure Impacted by Per and Polyfluoroalkyl Substances (PFAS)]]<br />
|[[Dr. Johnsie Ray Lang|Lang, Johnsie Ray, Ph.D.]]||PFAS<br />
|<br />
|-<br />
|[[Characterization Methods – Hydraulic Conductivity]]<br />
|[[Dr. Gaisheng Liu|Liu, Gaisheng, Ph.D.]]<br />
|<br />
|-<br />
|[[Compound Specific Isotope Analysis (CSIA)]]||[[Dr. Barbara Sherwood Lollar, F.R.S.C. |Lollar, Barbara S., FRSC]]||Compound Specific Isotope Analysis (CSIA)<br />
|-<br />
|[[Passive Sampling of Munitions Constituents|Munitions Constituents - Passive Sampling]]<br />
|[[Dr. Guilherme Lotufo|Lotufo, Guilerme, Ph.D.]]<br />
|<br />
|-<br />
|[[Vapor Intrusion (VI)]]||[[Chris Lutes |Lutes, Chris]]||vapor intrusion<br />
|-<br />
|[[Bioremediation - Anaerobic]]||[[Leah MacKinnon, M.A.Sc., P. Eng.|MacKinnon, Leah]]||anaerobic bioremediation<br />
|-<br />
|[[Bioremediation - Anaerobic Design Considerations]]||[[Leah MacKinnon, M.A.Sc., P. Eng.|MacKinnon, Leah]]||<br />
|-<br />
|[[Biodegradation - 1,4-Dioxane]]<br />
|[[Dr. Shaily Mahendra|Mahendra, Shaily, Ph.D.]]<br />
|<br />
|-<br />
|[[Direct Push (DP) Technology]]||[[Wesley McCall, M.S., P.G. |McCall, Wesley, M.S., P.G.]]||direct push, DP, DP machines, DP technology<br />
|-<br />
|[[Direct Push Sampling]]||[[Wesley McCall, M.S., P.G. |McCall, Wesley, M.S., P.G.]]||direct push sampling, soil sampling, groundwater sampling, well installation, soil vapor sampling (in regards to DP)<br />
|-<br />
|[[Direct Push Logging]]||[[Wesley McCall, M.S., P.G. |McCall, Wesley, M.S., P.G.]]||direct push logging, Cone Penetration Testing, CPT, Electrical Conductivity, EC, Hydraulic Profiling Tool, HPT,<br>Membrane Interface Probe, MIP, Optical Imaging Profiler, OIP<br />
// |-<br />
// |[[Downscaled High Resolution Datasets for Climate Change Projections]]<br />
// |[[Dr. Rao Kotamarthi|Kotamarthi, Rao, Ph.D.]]<br />
// |<br />
|-<br />
|[[Remediation Performance Assessment at Chlorinated Solvent Sites]]||[[Travis McGuire|McGuire, Travis]]||multi-site studies<br />
|-<br />
|[[LNAPL Conceptual Site Models]]<br />
|[[Dr. Charles Newell, P.E. |Newell, Charles, Ph.D., P.E.]]<br />
|<br />
|-<br />
|[[Long-Term Monitoring (LTM) - Data Analysis]]||[[Dr. Thomas McHugh |McHugh, Thomas, Ph.D.]]||data analysis, analysis methods (in regards to LTM)<br />
|-<br />
|[[Long-Term Monitoring (LTM) - Data Variability]]||[[Dr. Thomas McHugh |McHugh, Thomas, Ph.D.]]||data variability (in regards to LTM), LTM evaluation<br />
|-<br />
|-<br />
|[[Munitions Constituents - Abiotic Reduction]]||[[Dr. Jimmy Murillo-Gelvez |Murillo-Gelvez, Jimmy, Ph.D.]]<br />
|-<br />
|[[Supercritical Water Oxidation (SCWO)]]<br />
|Nagar, Kobe<br />
|<br />
|-<br />
|[[Matrix Diffusion]]<br />
|[[Dr. Charles Newell, P.E. |Newell, Charles, Ph.D., P.E.]]<br />
|<br />
|-<br />
|[[Groundwater Flow and Solute Transport]]||[[Dr. Charles Newell, P.E. |Newell, Charles, Ph.D., P.E.]]||groundwater flow, advection, dispersion, diffusion, molecular diffusion, mechanical dispersion<br />
|-<br />
|[[Molecular Biological Tools - MBTs]]||[[Dora Ogles-Taggart |Ogles-Taggart, Dora]]||MBT, Molecular Biological Tool(s)<br />
|-<br />
|[[Quantitative Polymerase Chain Reaction (qPCR)]]||[[Dora Ogles-Taggart |Ogles-Taggart, Dora]]||qPCR, Polymerase Chain Reaction<br />
|-<br />
|[[Sediment Capping]]<br />
|[[Dr. Danny Reible|Reible, Danny]]<br />
|<br />
|-<br />
|[[Stable Isotope Probing (SIP)]]||[[Dora Ogles-Taggart |Ogles-Taggart, Dora]]||SIP, Stable Isotope Probing<br />
|-<br />
|[[Metagenomics]]||[[Dora Ogles-Taggart |Ogles-Taggart, Dora]]||metagenomics<br />
|-<br />
|[[Natural Source Zone Depletion (NSZD)]]||[[Tom Palaia |Palaia, Tom]]||natural source zone depletion, NSZD<br />
// |-<br />
// |[[Climate Change Effects on Wildlife]]<br />
// |[[Dr. Breanna F. Powers|Powers, Breanna, PhD.]]<br />
// |<br />
|-<br />
|[[Amendment Distribution in Low Conductivity Materials]]||[[Dr. Stephen Richardson |Richardson, Stephen, Ph.D.]]||<br />
|-<br />
|[[Polycyclic Aromatic Hydrocarbons (PAHs)]]||[[Dr. Stephen Richardson |Richardson, Stephen, Ph.D.]]||polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons, PAH(s)<br />
|-<br />
|[[Sediment Porewater Dialysis Passive Samplers for Inorganics (Peepers)]]<br />
|[[Florent Risacher|Risacher, Florent, M.Sc.]]<br />
|<br />
|-<br />
|[[1,2,3-Trichloropropane]]||[[Dr. Alexandra Salter-Blanc |Salter-Blanc, Alexandra, Ph.D.]]||TCP, trichloropropane<br />
|-<br />
|[[Zerovalent Iron (ZVI) (Chemical Reduction - ISCR)]]||[[Dr. Alexandra Salter-Blanc |Salter-Blanc, Alexandra, Ph.D.]]||ZVI<br />
|-<br />
|[[Mercury in Sediments]]<br />
|[[Dr. Grace Schwartz|Schwartz, Grace, Ph.D.]]<br />
|<br />
|-<br />
|[[Munitions Constituents – Sample Extraction and Analytical Techniques|Munitions Constituents - Sample Extraction and Analytical Techniques]]<br />
|[[Dr. Austin Scircle|Scircle, Austin]]<br />
|<br />
|-<br />
|[[Geophysical Methods]]||[[Dr. Lee Slater |Slater, Lee, Ph.D.]]||geophysics<br />
|-<br />
|[[Geophysical Methods - Case Studies]]||[[Dr. Lee Slater |Slater, Lee, Ph.D.]]||geophysics<br />
|-<br />
|[[PFAS Treatment by Anion Exchange]]<br />
|[[Dr. Timothy J. Strathmann|Strathmann, Timothy, Ph.D.]]<br />
|PFAS<br />
|-<br />
|[[Munitions Constituents - Dissolution]]||[[Dr. Susan Taylor |Taylor, Susan, Ph.D.]]||explosive(s), dissolution,<br />
|-<br />
|[[PFAS Treatment by Electrical Discharge Plasma]]<br />
|[[Dr. Selma Mededovic Thagard|Thagard, Selma Mededovic, Ph.D.]]<br />
|PFAS<br />
// |-<br />
// |[[Restoration of Ecological Function in Terrestrial Systems Impacted by Invasive Species]]<br />
// |Thierry, Hugo, Ph.D.<br />
// |climate change, invasive species, restoration ecology<br />
|-<br />
|[[Chemical Reduction (In Situ - ISCR)]]||[[Dr. Paul Tratnyek |Tratnyek, Paul, Ph.D.]]||In Situ Chemical Reduction, ISCR<br />
|-<br />
|[[Injection Techniques - Viscosity Modification]]||[[Michael Truex |Truex, Michael]]||viscosity, viscosity modifiers, viscosity modification<br />
|-<br />
|[[Soil Vapor Extraction (SVE)]]||[[Michael Truex |Truex, Michael]]||soil vapor extraction, SVE<br />
|-<br />
|[[Munitions Constituents - Deposition]]||[[Michael R. Walsh, P.E., M.E.|Walsh, Michael, P.E.]]||explosive deposition, energetics deposition<br />
|-<br />
|[[Vapor Intrusion - Separation Distances from Petroleum Sources]]<br />
|[[Dr. James Weaver|Weaver, James, Ph.D.]]<br />
|vapor intrusion<br />
|-<br />
|[[Zerovalent Iron Permeable Reactive Barriers]]<br />
|[[Dr. Richard Wilkin|Wilkin, Rick, Ph.D.]]<br />
|<br />
|-<br />
|[[Monitored Natural Attenuation (MNA)]]||[[Dr. John Wilson |Wilson, John, Ph.D.]]||MNA, In Situ MNA, natural attenuation, natural attenuation processes<br />
|-<br />
|[[Monitored Natural Attenuation (MNA) of Fuels]]||[[Dr. John Wilson |Wilson, John, Ph.D.]]||MNA, natural attenuation, attenuate (when used in context related to petroleum hydrocarbons and fuel components)<br />
|-<br />
|[[Monitored Natural Attenuation (MNA) of Chlorinated Solvents]]||[[Dr. John Wilson |Wilson, John, Ph.D.]]||MNA, natural attenuation, attenuate (when used in context related to chlorinated solvents)<br />
|-<br />
|[[Monitored Natural Attenuation - Transitioning from Active Remedies]]<br />
|[[Dr. John Wilson|Wilson, John, Ph.D.]]<br />
|MNA, natural attenuation<br />
|-<br />
|[[Chlorinated Solvents]]||[[Dr. Bilgen Yuncu, P.E. |Yuncu, Bilgen, Ph.D., P.E.]]||chlorinated solvents<br />
|-<br />
|[[Petroleum Hydrocarbons (PHCs)]]<br />
|[[Dr. Bilgen Yuncu, P.E.|Yuncu, Bilgen, Ph.D., P.E.]]<br />
|Petroleum Hydrocarbons (PHCs)<br />
|-<br />
|[[Photoactivated Reductive Defluorination - PFAS Destruction]]<br />
|[[Dr. Suzanne Witt|Witt, Suzanne, Ph.D.]]<br />
|PFAS destruction<br />
|<br />
|-<br />
|[[Hydrogeophysical Methods for Characterization and Monitoring of Groundwater-Surface Water Exchanges]]<br />
|[[Dr. Lee Slater|Slater, Lee, Ph.D.]]<br />
|geophysics, hydrogeophysical methods, <br />
|<br />
|-<br />
|[[Hydrothermal Alkaline Treatment (HALT)]]<br />
|[[Dr. Brian Pinkard|Pinkard, Brian]]<br />
|<br />
|-<br />
|[[1,4-Dioxane]]<br />
|[[Matthew Zenker|Zenker, Matthew]]<br />
|<br />
|-<br />
|[[Lysimeters for Measuring PFAS Concentrations in the Vadose Zone]]<br />
|[[Dr. John F. Stults|Stults, Dr. John]]<br />
|PFAS, vadose zone, lysimeter, field investigation<br />
|<br />
|-<br />
|[[PFAS Destruction by Ultraviolet/Sulfite Treatment]]||[[Dr. Yida Fang |Fang, Yida, Ph.D.]]||PFAS destruction<br />
|<br />
|-<br />
|}</div>Jhurley