第六章 結論與建議
6.1 結論
綜合以上實驗及統計所得之結果，可得到以下之結論：
1. 密閉式月芽藻為六種生物試驗法中最具敏感性的方法，其在多變量統計分析 結果中皆顯示為獨立的一群，為重要的成分變數。此外，藻類為水生生物食 物鏈中重要的生產者角色，因此為“組生物”法中不可或缺的物種之一；然 而在我國現行發布之生物毒性試驗標準方法僅包含甲殼類生物及魚類試驗方 法，即使廢水經由這些標準方法進行毒性試驗評估後已達合格標準，但因藻 類較具敏感性，可能對藻類造成嚴重毒性影響，進而因營養階層底層之生產 者的破壞，間接地影響次級及高級消費者(甲殼類生物及魚類生物)。因此，
本研究結果顯示我國現行發布之生物毒性試驗標準方法並無考慮到生物營養 階層及生物敏感性的概念，而無法有效評估汙染物之危害性，尚須納入密閉 式月芽藻及海洋螢光菌生物試驗方法。
2. 本研究室所發展之密閉式月芽藻試驗方法較其他藻類標準試驗方法為敏感，
且可有效降低有機物的揮發而不至於低估了所造成的毒性。因此建議選擇此 方法。
3. 海洋螢光菌具實驗操作容易、試驗期間短、再現性佳與成本低等優點，且研 究發現，海洋螢光菌與鯉魚及 Fathead minnow 試驗法間分群結果相同，具 相關性，因此可取代鯉魚或 Fathead minnow 的毒性試驗；但需考慮到具特 殊作用機制的有機物可能造成分群狀況改變。
85
4. 多變量統計分析結果顯示，當以九十種有機物為觀察樣本時，其分析結果與 以本研究進行試驗所選擇之二十有機物為觀察樣本時相符合。
5. 研究指出沒有任何一種生物試驗方法對所有毒化物皆具高敏感性，因此無法 使用單一生物進行廢水毒性評估。
6. 本研究所選擇之組生物包含：生產者-密閉式月芽藻；初級消費者-Daphnia magna；分解者-海洋螢光菌，且主成分分析結果顯示，以此"組生物"進行毒 性評估時，並不會減少解釋的變異量(PC1、PC2 共同解釋 91.4%的原始變 異量)，因此密閉式月芽藻、Daphnia magna 及海洋螢光菌是"組生物"試驗法 中合適的試驗生物。
7. 使用多變量統計法能有效的選擇"組生物"來評估廢水之危害性，因此，不同 類型之廢水能利用此方法來選擇較合適的"組生物"。
86
參考文獻
[1] Hernando MD, Fernandez-Alba AR, Tauler R, Barcelona D. 2005. Toxicity assays applied to wastewater treatment. Talanta 65:358-366.
[2] Forget G, Gagnon P, Sanchez WA, Dutka BJ. 2000. Overview of methods and results of the eight country International Development Research Centre (IDRC) WaterTox project.
Environmental Toxicology 15:264-276.
[3] Russom CL, Bradbury SP, Broderius SJ, Hammermeister DE, Drummond RA. 1997.
Predicting modes of toxic action from chemical structure: Acute toxicity in the fathead minnow (Pimephales promelas). Environmental Toxicology and Chemistry 16:948-967.
[4] Manusadzianas L, Balkelyt L, Sadauskas K, Blinova I, Pollumaa L, Kahru A. 2003.
Ecotoxicological study of Lithuanian and Estonian wastewaters: selection of the biotests, and correspondence between toxicity and chemical-based indices. Aquatic Toxicology 63:27-41.
[5] Ren S, Frymier PD. 2002. Modeling the toxicity of polar and nonpolar narcotic compounds to luminescent bacterium Shk1. Environmental Toxicology and Chemistry 21:2649-2653.
[6] Fochtman P, Raszka A, Nierzedska E. 2000. The use of conventional bioassays, microbiotests, and some “rapid” methods in the selection of an optimal test battery for the assessment of pesticides toxicity. Environmental Toxicology 15:376-384.
[7] Blaise CB, N; Coillie, R. van. 1985. Integrated ecotoxicological approach to assessment of ecotoxicity. Water quality bulletin;10(1):3-10, 60-61.
[8] Ren S, Frymier PD. 2003. Use of multidimensional scaling in the selection of wastewater toxicity test battery components. Water Research 37:1655-1661.
[9] Vindimian É , Garric J, Flammarion P, Thybaud É , Babut M. 1999. An index of effluent aquatic toxicity designed by partial least squares regression, using acute and chronic tests and expert judgements. Environmental Toxicology and Chemistry 18:2386-2391.
87
[10] Rojickova-Padrtova R, Marsalek B, Holoubek I. 1998. Evaluation of alternative and standard toxicity assays for screening of environmental samples: Selection of an optimal test battery. Chemosphere 37:495-507.
[11] Bernard C, Colin JR, Anne LD-D. 1997. Estimation of the hazard of landfills through toxicity testing of leachates: 2. Comparison of physico-chemical characteristics of landfill leachates with their toxicity determined with a battery of tests. Chemosphere 35:2783-2796.
[12] Castillo GC, Vila IC, Neild E. 2000. Ecotoxicity assessment of metals and wastewater using multitrophic assays. Environmental Toxicology 15:370-375.
[13] Walsh GE, Merrill RG. 1984. Algal bioassays of industrial and energy process effluents. Algae as Ecological Indicators, Academic Press, New York:329-360.
[14] Nyholm N, Källqvist T. 1989. Methods for growth inhibition toxicity tests with freshwater algae. Environmental Toxicology and Chemistry 8:689-703.
[15] Wang Y-S, Tai K-T, Yen J-H. 2004. Separation, bioactivity, and dissipation of enantiomers of the organophosphorus insecticide fenamiphos. Ecotoxicology and Environmental Safety 57:346-353.
[16] Henegar A, Mombelli E, Pandard P, P 矇 ry ARR. What can be learnt from an ecotoxicity database in the framework of the REACh regulation? Science of The Total Environment 409:489-494.
[17] Lin J-H, Kao W-C, Tsai K-P, Chen C-Y. 2005. A novel algal toxicity testing technique for assessing the toxicity of both metallic and organic toxicants. Water Research 39:1869-1877.
[18] Tsai K-P, Chen C-Y. 2007. An algal toxicity database of organic toxicants derived by a closed-system technique. Environmental Toxicology and Chemistry 26:1931-1939.
[19] Hornstrom E. 1990 oxicity test with algae-a discussion on the batch method.
Ecotoxicol Environ Saf. 20(3):343-53.
[20] Huang HJ. 2000. Experimental design of the algal toxicity test based on photosynthetic respones. National Chiao Tung University.
[21] Chen C-Y, Lin K-C. 1997. Optimization and performance evaluation of the continuous algal toxicity test. Environmental Toxicology and Chemistry 16:1337-1344.
88
[22] United States Environmental Protection Agency（U.S. EPA). 1996. Ecological Effect Test Guidelines. OPPTS 850.5400. Algal Toxicity, Tiers I and II.
[23] Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development（OECD). 1984. Guideline for testing chemicals. No. 201.Alga growth inhibition test. Paris, France.
[24] International Organization for Standardization（ISO）. 1987. Water quality- Algal growth inhibition test. Draft International Standard ISO/DIS 8692. Geneva, Switzerland.
[25] Mayer P, Nyholm N, Verbruggen EMJ, Hermens JLM, Tolls J. 2000. Algal growth inhibition test in filled, closed bottles for volatile and sorptive materials. Environmental Toxicology and Chemistry 19:2551-2556.
[26] Lin JH. 2001. Experimental design of the algal toxicity test based on BOD bottle. A Thesis Submitted to Institute of Environmental Engineering of National Chiao Tung University.
[27] Hsu CH. 2002. Experimental design of the algal toxicity test based on photosynthesic response. A Thesis of Institute of Environmental Engineering of National Chiao Tung University.
[28] Kao WC. 2001. A comparison of the results of several freshwater aquatic toxicity testing on synthetic and real wastewaters. A Thesis of Institute of Environmental Engineering of National Chiao Tung University.
[29] Konemann H. 1981. Quantitative structure-activity relationships in fish toxicity studies Part 1: Relationship for 50 industrial pollutants. Toxicology 19:209-221.
[30] Schultz TW SG, Bearden AP. 1998. QSAR in aquatic toxicology: a mechanism of action approach comparing toxic potency to Pimephales promelas, Tetrahymena pyriformis, and Vibrio fischeri. Taylor & Francis, New York, NY, USA:pp 51-109.
[31] Kamlet MJ, Doherty RM, Veith GD, Taft RW, Abraham MH. 1986. Solubility properties in polymers and biological media. 7. An analysis of toxicant properties that influence
inhibition of bioluminescence in Photobacterium phosphoreum (the Microtox test).
Environmental Science & Technology 20:690-695.
[32] Verhaar HJM, van Leeuwen CJ, Hermens JLM. 1992. Classifying environmental pollutants. Chemosphere 25:471-491.
89
[33] Liao YY, Wang LS, He YB, Yang H. 1996. Toxicity QSAR of Substituted Benzenes to Yeast Saccharomyces cerevisiae. Bulletin of Environmental Contamination and Toxicology 56:460-466.
[34] Lin JH. 2001. Experimental design of the algal toxicity test based on BOD bottle.
National Chiao Tung University.
[35] Van Leeuwen CJ, Van Der Zandt PTJ, Aldenberg T, Verhaar HJM, Hermens JLM. 1992.
Application of QSARs, extrapolation and equilibrium partitioning in aquatic effects assessment. I. Narcotic industrial pollutants. Environmental Toxicology and Chemistry 11:267-282.
[36] Vighi M, Migliorati S, Monti GS. 2009. Toxicity on the luminescent bacterium Vibrio fischeri (Beijerinck). I: QSAR equation for narcotics and polar narcotics. Ecotoxicology and Environmental Safety 72:154-161.
[37] Mayer FL, Ellersieck MR. 1986. Manual of acute toxicity: Interpretation and data base for 410 chemicals and 66 species of freshwater animals. Volume 160 iii, 439 p.
[38] Toussaint MW, Shedd TR, van der Schalie WH, Leather GR. 1995. A comparison of standard acute toxicity tests with rapid-screening toxicity tests. Environmental Toxicology and Chemistry 14:907-915.
[39] Aruoja V, Sihtmae M, Dubourguier H-C, Kahru A. 2011. Toxicity of 58 substituted anilines and phenols to algae Pseudokirchneriella subcapitata and bacteria Vibrio fischeri:
Comparison with published data and QSARs. Chemosphere 84:1310-1320.
[40] Vaal M, van der Wal JT, Hermens J, Hoekstra J. 1997. Pattern analysis of the variation in the sensitivity of aquatic species to toxicants. Chemosphere 35:1291-1309.
[41] Dearden JC, Cronin MTD, Dobbs AJ. 1995. Quantitative structure-activity relationships as a tool to assess the comparative toxicity of organic chemicals. Chemosphere 31:2521-2528.
[42] Pandard P, Devillers J, Charissou A-M, Poulsen V, Jourdain M-J, Ferard J-F, Grand C, Bispo A. 2006. Selecting a battery of bioassays for ecotoxicological characterization of wastes.
Science of The Total Environment 363:114-125.
[43] Sano LL, Krueger AM, Landrum PF. 2005. Chronic toxicity of glutaraldehyde:
differential sensitivity of three freshwater organisms. Aquatic Toxicology 71:283-296.
90
[44] Munkegaard M, Abbaspoor M, Cedergreen N. 2008. Organophosphorous insecticides as herbicide synergists on the green algae <i>Pseudokirchneriella subcapitata</i>
and the aquatic plant <i>Lemna minor</i>. Ecotoxicology 17:29-35.
[45] Tatsuo Abe, Saito H, Niikura Y, Shigeoka T, Nakano Y. 2001. Embryonic development assay with Daphnia magna: application to toxicity of aniline derivatives. Chemosphere 45:487-495.
[46] Jin L, Dai J, Guo P, Wang L, Wei Z, Zhang Z. 1998. Quantitative structure-toxicity relationships for benzaldehydes to Daphnia magna. Chemosphere 37:79-85.
[47] Zhao YH, Cronin MTD, Dearden JC. 1998. Quantitative Structure-Activity
Relationships of Chemicals Acting by Non-polar Narcosis—Theoretical Considerations.
Quantitative Structure-Activity Relationships 17:131-138.
[48] Cronina MTD. GSB, G. D. Sinksb & T. W. Schultzb 2000. Structure-Toxicity Relationships for Aliphatic Compounds Encompassing a Variety of Mechanisms of Toxic Action to Vibrio fischeri SAR and QSAR in Environmental Research 11:301-312.
91
附錄一
二十種有機物毒性試驗 鯉魚急毒性試驗
原始數據
92
93
94
95
Parathion
Malathion
Conc. Initial Final (mg/L) Number Number
Control 20 19
6.61 20 0
3.31 20 0
1.653 20 7
0.827 20 14
0.33 20 15
0.17 20 17
Conc. Initial Final (mg/L) Number Number
Control 20 20
38.57 20 0
19.29 20 0
9.64 20 9
3.86 20 12
1.21 20 15
0.48 20 19
96
97
98
99
100
101
102
103
104
105
106
附錄二
二十種有機物毒性試驗 Microtox 急毒性試驗
原始數據
107
108
109
110
Parathion
Malathion
Conc. Initial Final (mg/L) light light
Control 96 107
334.757 91 0
167.3785 87 9
83.68925 95 26
41.844625 93 43
20.9223125 97 75
Conc. Initial Final (mg/L) light light
Control 93 102
542.43 90 0
271.215 87 3
135.6075 86 26
67.80375 87 51
33.901875 97 74
111
112
113
114
115
116
117
118
119
120
121