» Articles » PMID: 28738089

A Random Forest Approach to Predict the Spatial Distribution of Sediment Pollution in an Estuarine System

Overview
Journal PLoS One
Date 2017 Jul 25
PMID 28738089
Citations 4
Authors
Affiliations
Soon will be listed here.
Abstract

Modeling the magnitude and distribution of sediment-bound pollutants in estuaries is often limited by incomplete knowledge of the site and inadequate sample density. To address these modeling limitations, a decision-support tool framework was conceived that predicts sediment contamination from the sub-estuary to broader estuary extent. For this study, a Random Forest (RF) model was implemented to predict the distribution of a model contaminant, triclosan (5-chloro-2-(2,4-dichlorophenoxy)phenol) (TCS), in Narragansett Bay, Rhode Island, USA. TCS is an unregulated contaminant used in many personal care products. The RF explanatory variables were associated with TCS transport and fate (proxies) and direct and indirect environmental entry. The continuous RF TCS concentration predictions were discretized into three levels of contamination (low, medium, and high) for three different quantile thresholds. The RF model explained 63% of the variance with a minimum number of variables. Total organic carbon (TOC) (transport and fate proxy) was a strong predictor of TCS contamination causing a mean squared error increase of 59% when compared to permutations of randomized values of TOC. Additionally, combined sewer overflow discharge (environmental entry) and sand (transport and fate proxy) were strong predictors. The discretization models identified a TCS area of greatest concern in the northern reach of Narragansett Bay (Providence River sub-estuary), which was validated with independent test samples. This decision-support tool performed well at the sub-estuary extent and provided the means to identify areas of concern and prioritize bay-wide sampling.

Citing Articles

Random Forest models to estimate bankfull and low flow channel widths and depths across the conterminous United States.

Doyle J, Hill R, Leibowitz S, Ebersole J J Am Water Resour Assoc. 2023; 59(5):1099-1114.

PMID: 37941964 PMC: 10631553. DOI: 10.1111/1752-1688.13116.


A Machine Learning Approach to Predict Watershed Health Indices for Sediments and Nutrients at Ungauged Basins.

Mallya G, Hantush M, Govindaraju R Water (Basel). 2023; 15(3):1-23.

PMID: 37309416 PMC: 10259765. DOI: 10.3390/w15030586.


Preconditioning of clinical data for intraocular lens formula constant optimisation using Random Forest Quantile Regression Trees.

Langenbucher A, Szentmary N, Cayless A, Wendelstein J, Hoffmann P Z Med Phys. 2023; 34(4):632-640.

PMID: 36813595 PMC: 11624328. DOI: 10.1016/j.zemedi.2022.11.009.


Context is Everything: Interacting Inputs and Landscape Characteristics Control Stream Nitrogen.

Lin J, Compton J, Hill R, Herlihy A, Sabo R, Brooks J Environ Sci Technol. 2021; 55(12):7890-7899.

PMID: 34060819 PMC: 8673309. DOI: 10.1021/acs.est.0c07102.

References
1.
Benotti M, Brownawell B . Distributions of pharmaceuticals in an urban estuary during both dry- and wet-weather conditions. Environ Sci Technol. 2007; 41(16):5795-802. DOI: 10.1021/es0629965. View

2.
Calabretta C, Oviatt C . The response of benthic macrofauna to anthropogenic stress in Narragansett Bay, Rhode Island: a review of human stressors and assessment of community conditions. Mar Pollut Bull. 2008; 56(10):1680-95. DOI: 10.1016/j.marpolbul.2008.07.012. View

3.
Cutler D, Edwards Jr T, Beard K, Cutler A, Hess K, Gibson J . Random forests for classification in ecology. Ecology. 2007; 88(11):2783-92. DOI: 10.1890/07-0539.1. View

4.
Kolpin D, Furlong E, Meyer M, Thurman E, Zaugg S, Barber L . Pharmaceuticals, hormones, and other organic wastewater contaminants in U.S. streams, 1999-2000: a national reconnaissance. Environ Sci Technol. 2002; 36(6):1202-11. DOI: 10.1021/es011055j. View

5.
Hayes T, Usami S, Jacobucci R, McArdle J . Using Classification and Regression Trees (CART) and random forests to analyze attrition: Results from two simulations. Psychol Aging. 2015; 30(4):911-29. PMC: 4743660. DOI: 10.1037/pag0000046. View