Abased on the Overall Magnitude of NOEL/ER-L Exceedences for All Chemicals (Table 3-4)

Table 3-15.Ranking of stations with respect to sediment chemistry, toxicity, and benthic community data. The higher the ranking, the less degraded the station relative to the other stations.

Ranks
Station / Chemistrya / Amphipod % Survivalb / Sea Urchin % Fertilizationc / Sea Urchin % Normal Developmentd / Ave. Toxicity Rank / Infaunal Species Richnesse / Rank Sumf / Relative Ranking
1 / 9 / 1 / 1 / 1 / 1 / 2 / 12 / 1
2 / 12 / 6 / 2 / 7 / 5 / 5 / 22 / 9
3 / 10 / 8.5 / 3 / 4 / 5.2 / 3.5 / 18.7 / 6
4 / 11 / 3.5 / 4 / 8 / 5.2 / 8 / 24.2 / 10
5 / 3 / 5 / 7 / 6 / 6 / 12 / 21 / 8
6 / 5 / 3.5 / 10 / 11.5 / 8.3 / 3.5 / 16.8 / 5
7 / 7 / 7 / 8 / 11.5 / 8.3 / 1 / 16.3 / 4
8 / 6 / 10 / 5 / 10 / 8.3 / 10 / 24.3 / 11
9 / 4 / 2 / 12 / 9 / 7.7 / 9 / 20.7 / 7
10 / 1 / 11.5 / 9 / 3 / 7.8 / 6 / 14.8 / 3
11 / 2 / 8.5 / 6 / 2 / 5.5 / 7 / 14.5 / 2
12 / 8 / 11.5 / 11 / 5 / 9.2 / 11 / 28.2 / 12

aBased on the overall magnitude of NOEL/ER-L exceedences for all chemicals (Table 3-4).

bBased on % survival data (Figure 3.1).

cBased on mean % fertilization data at 100% WQAS (Table 3-5).

dBased on EC50 data from the embryological development test (Table 3-8).

eBased on average no. species/sample (Table 3-10).

fΣ chemistry rank and average toxicity rank and infaunal species richness rank.