Skip to main content

Table 3 TMFs of WFD PS selected for TL 4 normalization of fish monitoring data from rivers Moselle and Havel

From: Selection and application of trophic magnification factors for priority substances to normalize freshwater fish monitoring data under the European Water Framework Directive: a case study

Substance TMF Rationale for selection TMF data selected from Table 2
(R2 and p, if given in the source)
Analyzed food web Source
∑6 PBDE 2.25
Lipid-based
Geometric mean TMF for BDE 47 (“worst case” TMF) 4.2
(R2 = 0.65 p = 0.02)
Lentic, pelagic: fish only1
TL range: ≈ 3.5–4.9
[43]
6.34 ± 1.19
Lentic, pelagic: plankton, invertebrates, fish2
TL range: 1.7–4.6
[20]
2.11
(R2 = 0.2321;
p = 0.0127)
Lentic, pelagic: fish only3
TL range: ≈ 2.8–4.9
[42]
0.46
(R2 = 0.2234;
p = 0.0024)
Lentic, pelagic: fish only4
TL range ≈ 3.0–4.6
[42]
HCB 2.24
Lipid-based
Geometric mean TMF (based on fish fillet) 2.4
(R2 = 0.31;
p < 0.01)
Lentic, pelagic: plankton, fish5
TL: 1.0–3.9
[49]
2.1 ± 1.8
Lentic, pelagic: plankton, fish6
TL range: ≈ 1.0–6.2, depending on lake
[50]
PCDD/F + dl-PCB 2.96
Lipid-based
TMF for PCB 126 as highest contributing dl-PCB 2.96
Lentic, benthopelagic: plankton, invertebrates, fish7
δ15N-range: 8.1–17.6
[51]
HBCDD 2.23
Lipid-based
TMF for sum HBCDD 2.23
(R2 = 0.3202;
p = 0.0026)
Lentic, pelagic: fish only3
TL range: ≈ 2.8–4.9
[42]
PFOS 2.60
ww-based
Geometric mean TMF for stream ecosystems 1.5
Lotic, benthopelagic: biofilm–macrophytes–invertebrates–fish8
TL range: 1.0–3.5
[33]
2.4–4.1
(geometric mean 2.90)
Lotic, benthopelagic: invertebrates–fish9
TL range: 1.4–5.4 depending on site
[58]
Hg 4.73
ww-based
Geometric mean TMF for stream ecosystems (based on fish fillet) 3.9–5.4 Lotic, benthopelagic: biofilm –invertebrates–fish (one species)10
TL range: ≈ 1–5
[41] recalculated to wet weight by [14]
  1. 1−10 Detailed information on food web compositions as derived from the original sources is provided in the Additional file 1: section "Additional information to Table 3"