FN Archimer Export Format PT J TI The integrated biomarker response revisited: optimization to avoid misuse BT AF DEVIN, S. BURGEOT, Thierry GIAMBERINI, L. MINGUEZ, L. PAIN-DEVIN, S. AS 1:1,3;2:2;3:1;4:1;5:1,3; FF 1:;2:PDG-RBE-BE;3:;4:;5:; C1 Univ Lorraine, Lab Interdisciplinaire Environm Continentaux, CNRS UMR 7360, F-57070 Metz, France. IFREMER, IFREMER Ctr Nantes, Lab Ecotoxicol, Dept Biogeochim & Ecotoxicol, Nantes, France. LIEC, F-57070 Metz, France. C2 UNIV LORRAINE, FRANCE IFREMER, FRANCE LIEC, FRANCE SI NANTES SE PDG-RBE-BE IN WOS Ifremer jusqu'en 2018 copubli-france copubli-univ-france IF 2.828 TC 93 UR https://archimer.ifremer.fr/doc/00176/28712/27276.pdf LA English DT Article DE ;Biomarkers;Integrated Index;Environmental risk assessment;Pollution;Water Framework Directive AB The growing need to evaluate the quality of aquatic ecosystems led to the development of numerous monitoring tools. Among them, the development of biomarker-based procedures, that combine precocity and relevance, is recommended. However, multi-biomarker approaches are often hard to interpret, and produce results that are not easy to integrate in the environmental policies framework. Integrative index have been developed, and one of the most used is the integrated biomarker response (IBR). However, an analysis of available literature demonstrated that the IBR suffers from a frequent misuse and a bias in its calculation. Then, we propose here a new calculation method based on both a more simple formula and a permutation procedure. Together, these improvements should rightly avoid the misuse and bias that were recorded. Additionally, a case study illustrates how the new procedure enabled to perform a reliable classification of site along a pollution gradient based on biomarker responses used in the IBR calculations. PY 2014 PD FEB SO Environmental Science And Pollution Research SN 0944-1344 PU Springer Heidelberg VL 21 IS 4 UT 000331815100004 BP 2448 EP 2454 DI 10.1007/s11356-013-2169-9 ID 28712 ER EF