Harmonisation of polychlorinated biphenyl (PCB) analyses for ecotoxicological interpretations of southeast Asian environmental media: what’s the problem?

Within the southeast Asian region, an issue has arisen about how polychlorinated biphenyls (PCBs) should be analysed in environmental samples for risk assessment purposes. Should PCBs be identified as Aroclors (or other commercial mixtures such as Kanechlors), as homologues, as PCB congeners, or as toxic equivalents? The debate appears to centre around separate disciplines that are involved in environmental measurement and analyses, specifically the reporting needs of the environmental chemists and toxicologists. The choice of PCB measurements is generally made on the basis of what question is being asked. This viewpoint presents a general description of the issue, identifies the differences amongst measurement techniques (significance of analytical results, the application and reliability of data, and general costs), characterises the current status of PCB analyses and reporting in the southeast Asian region (specifically, in Cambodia, China, Hong Kong, India, Indonesia, Korea, Japan, the Phillipines, Thailand and Vietnam), and proposes a recommended approach for harmonising analytical and toxicological results from laboratories and research groups who are interested in investigating the fate and effects of PCBs on marine/estuarine biota in the region