Discussion of the Status of Knowledge concerning Sampling Variation, Physiologic Tolerances, and Possible Change Criteria for Bay Organisms

Abstract

Indicators, according to Oglesby (1), can be used to detect pollution or to estimate the overall effects of pollution on a community. No two scientists, however, would agree on a simple definition, and the effort to develop working indicator theories or systems has somewhat of a mystical quality. Since its early basis is the saprobic system (2, 3), the search for practical measures to quantify change has approximated a scientific quest for the Holy Grail. Because portions of the available literature have been reviewed, beginning on p. S17, no attempt will be made in this discussion to rigorously cover all published material. Some recent published reviews seem to place the problem in perspective (4, 5) and also to emphasize the particular problems of the estuarine environment of which the Bay is a prime example. Perusal of these articles reveals a common theme: many possible techniques and approaches of merit exist. By implication or by direct statement, these articles also highlight the most vexing problem of indicator usage: its general low level of transfer quality. Methodology developed for European rivers or California bays cannot be transferred in toto to the Chesapeake Bay. ' Contribution No. 505, Natural Resources Institute, University of Maryland; Reference No. 72-1c, Oceanography Limnology Program, Smithsonian Institution; Contribution No. 481, Virginia Institute of Marine Science. 2Present address: Office of Technical Analysis, Room 3211 F-Waterside Mall, Environmental Protection Agency, 410 M Street, Washington, D.C. 20460. 3 Present address: Environmental Protection Agency, National Coastal Pollution Research Program, Marine Science Center, Newport, Oregon 97365.