gave results that highly agreed with those generated by the model. Such endpoints
are particularly useful in an ERA because they reflect alterations at higher levels of
biological organisation (i.e. community level). The development of robust baselines
for this type of response would be very valuable for their integration into the WOE
approach, widening the type of biological responses included in the model.
The versatility of the WOE model allows its application in a wide variety of
contexts. For instance, it can be considered to monitor the environmental repercussions of installations, industries and river development or rehabilitation projects: the
model would be helpful to characterise the global ecological impact by comparing
the results before and after such modifications of the environment. This tool could
also be applicable in the context of temporal and comparative monitoring of study
sites, e.g. along the Seine River continuum.
5 Conclusions and Perspectives
The different examples given in this chapter illustrate the application of a wide array
of bioassays or biomarkers in the PIREN-Seine programme, which aimed to investigate the ecotoxicological quality of the Seine River and some of its tributaries
(e.g. Oise and Orge). With the development of new biotechnologies, bioassays and
biomarkers will certainly evolve in the future to (1) improve our knowledge of toxic
pathways of water contaminants and (2) increase their sensitivity in the detection of
adverse effects on biota linked to water contamination. For instance, the recent
development of ‘omics’ appears promising to identify new biological targets of
emerging contaminants. In the near future, there is no doubt that the establishment
of both reference and threshold values of biomarkers will authorise their integration
into ERA for monitoring the efficiency of water treatment plants or restoration
schemes for aquatic ecosystems, as may be requested by national or European
directives. However, biomonitoring water quality may not be restricted to a limited
geographic area and must cover the entire ecological continuum, from continental
waters to the estuary as for the Seine River, for example, or must be carried out
jointly between European members for cross-border rivers. For this type of
biomonitoring survey, we need to go beyond various technical and scientific barriers, implying the choice of several species belonging to the same taxa along the
salinity gradient (from continental to brackish/marine waters) representative of
aquatic ecosystems and various trophic levels; a single species could not live
along the entire continuum. Likewise, the development of reference and threshold
values for biomarkers will allow responses between species to be compared. Therefore, the cartography of the overall ecotoxicity representative of the different human
pressures on watersheds could be established regardless of the target species. This is
an exciting challenge that will guide our research strategies on the Seine River basin
for the coming years.
264
M. Bonnard et al.
are particularly useful in an ERA because they reflect alterations at higher levels of
biological organisation (i.e. community level). The development of robust baselines
for this type of response would be very valuable for their integration into the WOE
approach, widening the type of biological responses included in the model.
The versatility of the WOE model allows its application in a wide variety of
contexts. For instance, it can be considered to monitor the environmental repercussions of installations, industries and river development or rehabilitation projects: the
model would be helpful to characterise the global ecological impact by comparing
the results before and after such modifications of the environment. This tool could
also be applicable in the context of temporal and comparative monitoring of study
sites, e.g. along the Seine River continuum.
5 Conclusions and Perspectives
The different examples given in this chapter illustrate the application of a wide array
of bioassays or biomarkers in the PIREN-Seine programme, which aimed to investigate the ecotoxicological quality of the Seine River and some of its tributaries
(e.g. Oise and Orge). With the development of new biotechnologies, bioassays and
biomarkers will certainly evolve in the future to (1) improve our knowledge of toxic
pathways of water contaminants and (2) increase their sensitivity in the detection of
adverse effects on biota linked to water contamination. For instance, the recent
development of ‘omics’ appears promising to identify new biological targets of
emerging contaminants. In the near future, there is no doubt that the establishment
of both reference and threshold values of biomarkers will authorise their integration
into ERA for monitoring the efficiency of water treatment plants or restoration
schemes for aquatic ecosystems, as may be requested by national or European
directives. However, biomonitoring water quality may not be restricted to a limited
geographic area and must cover the entire ecological continuum, from continental
waters to the estuary as for the Seine River, for example, or must be carried out
jointly between European members for cross-border rivers. For this type of
biomonitoring survey, we need to go beyond various technical and scientific barriers, implying the choice of several species belonging to the same taxa along the
salinity gradient (from continental to brackish/marine waters) representative of
aquatic ecosystems and various trophic levels; a single species could not live
along the entire continuum. Likewise, the development of reference and threshold
values for biomarkers will allow responses between species to be compared. Therefore, the cartography of the overall ecotoxicity representative of the different human
pressures on watersheds could be established regardless of the target species. This is
an exciting challenge that will guide our research strategies on the Seine River basin
for the coming years.
264
M. Bonnard et al.