RRADIATION ECOLOGYRadiation Ecology or Radioecology is a term that came into common usage in 1956 ppt

1041
R
RADIATION ECOLOGY
Radiation Ecology or Radioecology is a term that came into
common usage in 1956 to denote that area of the broad field
of ecology concerned with the assessment of radioactivity
in the environment. More specifically, radiation ecology has
come to be recognized as that area of ecology concerned
with radioactive substances, radiation and the environment.
The development and subsequent expansion of nuclear
energy for military and peaceful purposes has been accom-
panied by environmental problems, some of which are typi-
cal of other facets of industrialization and some unique to
atomic energy. The unique problems primarily concern the
fate and ecological effects of radionuclides released into
the environment.
The major environmental problems introduced by the
Atomic Age may be grouped into several areas of scien-
tific and public concern. Underlying each of these is the
worry about the effects of ionizing radiation—on man, his
domesticated plants and animals, and on the environment
and its living components, Fallout from weapons testing,
reactor radioactive waste effluents, radioactive waste dis-
posal, nuclear war, and use of nuclear explosives for major
engineering and related technological projects of large scale
comprise the activities which have concerned society and
which, because of potential impact on the environment and
man, have stimulated the development of radiation ecology.
Understanding the manner in which our ecological systems
(ecosystems) distribute, assimilate, and affect the environ-
mental behavior of radioactive substances, and the effects of

radiations emitted from those substances, are the concern of
the radioecologist.
RADIONUCLIDES OF ECOLOGICAL IMPORTANCE
Radionuclides which are of interest to the ecologist are
listed in Table 1. These radioactive elements represent the
major naturally-occurring and man-made sources of radia-
tion in the environment. Principal sources of exposure from
background (natural) radiation are represented by the ura-
nium, thorium and actinium decay series. Internal exposure
to man results primarily from
40
K,
14
C,
226
Ra, and
228
Ra and
their daughter products that are deposited in the body.
Radionuclides such as
222
Rn and
220
Rn and their daughter
products represents sources of internal radiation exposure to
man from inhalation.
Radionuclides produced by the fissioning of uranium
(fission products) are of the greatest current concern. These
man-made isotopes are not essential to organisms, but they
constitute the major sources of radiation in the environment

whether it be from fallout or waste disposal from reactor
operations. All of these radionuclides may enter ecosystems
where they become part of the flux of systems that are being
circulated within and between systems.
Some of the fission products which are chemically simi-
lar to biologically essential elements are of special inter-
est. They vary greatly in their physical half-life and in the
extent to which they participate in metabolic processes of
living organisms. The most important radionuclides affecting
plants and animals on land are strontium-90, cesium-137, and
iodine-131.
Strontium-90 remains in the environment for a long
time. Its half-life is 28 years. Strontium is chemically similar
to calcium, and it can enter living organisms as a replace-
ment for calcium. In weapons fallout strontium-90 is usually
deposited in the root systems of plants. the amount of
90
Sr
that a plant absorbs from soils depends on several factors,
particularly on the quantity of calcium in the soil, the relative
quantities of calcium and strontium at the depth where the
roots are located, and the ability of the plant to discriminate
between the two elements. The plant is the base for
90
Sr to
enter the human food chain. This chain is a short and simple
one consisting of plants, cows, and man, with cow’s milk
being the chief source of entry into man. There is consider-
able discrimination against the transfer of strontium at each
step in this food chain, but the small amount that is trans-

ported to man tends to concentrate in bone tissue. It remains
there, undergoing radioactive decay and emitting its radia-
tion. Its danger is related to the fact that bone contains blood
forming (erythropoetic) tissue. In sufficient quantities the
radiation can cause leukaemia and bone cancer.
C018_001_r03.indd 1041C018_001_r03.indd 1041 11/18/2005 11:04:27 AM11/18/2005 11:04:27 AM
© 2006 by Taylor & Francis Group, LLC
1042 RADIATION ECOLOGY
Strontium-90 accumulation normally is greater in children
than in adults, because growing children are building bone at
a greater rate and use a larger amount of calcium. A study of
species in the deer family (cervidae) graphically demonstrated
the effects of
90
Sr fallout. The levels of
90
Sr in the antlers of
deer rose continually from 1947 through 1955, then remained
constant for 2 yrs, and rose again in 1958. The concentration
of
90
Sr was more than 8 ϫ as high in 1958 as it was in 1947.
With the cessation of major weapons tests in the 1960’s, the
levels began to drop off.
Cesium-137 is another major fission product that is
found in fallout and untreated radioactive waste effluents.
Cesium behaves chemically very much like potassium and
follows the same metabolic route in plants and animals as
potassium does. It enters plants directly through the leaves
after being deposited by rain, and so it appears in plant tis-

sues more quickly than does
90
Sr.
From there on the route of
137
Cs is much the same as
90
Sr;
it appears in the milk and muscles of cattle that eat contami-
nated plants, and it enters the human body in food. Once in
the human body, it becomes part of muscle tissue and so has
an almost uniform distribution throughout the body. It stays
there for only about 4 months. Since its half-life, like that of
90
Sr, is about 28 yrs, little of the
137
Cs undergoes radioactive
decay while in the body.
The transfer of
137
Cs and
90
Sr from plants to animals
also has been observed in species that are not important as
food sources for man. The coconut crab, a land animal that
lives on a diet of fruit and nuts on islands in the Pacific, was
found to have accumulated radioactive materials as a result
of the Pacific test explosions. Strontium-90 was found in the
skeleton, and
137

Cs was found in the soft body parts—direct
results of eating contaminated vegetation.
The third radionuclide or fission product of importance
in fallout is radio-iodine (
131
I). The chemistry of radioactive
131
I is exactly like that of natural
127
I, which is not radioac-
tive. Therefore, its concentration in the body depends only
on the concentration in the source material. Iodine becomes
concentrated in the thyroid glands of vertebrate animals,
where it can cause cancer of the thyroid and damage to other
tissues. Like
90
Sr and
137
Cs, it enters plants as a result of
radioactive fallout and then enters humans either by way of
the plants themselves, or by way of contaminated milk from
cows that eat the plants. The radioactivity of thyroid glands
removed from certain animals can serve as a sensitive indi-
cator of
131
I in the environment, because the concentration of
131
I in the thyroid can be as much as 10,000 ϫ higher than
the concentration in nature. The black-tailed jack-rabbit is a
useful animal for such measurements. It has a large thyroid

gland that is easy to remove and weigh. The level of radioac-
tivity in each gram of its thyroid tissues varies directly with
the fallout on vegetation.
Finally there are man-made radionuclides (activation
products) which are important because they are the isotopes
of elements which may be essential to plants and animals.
Some of these also may enter the environment as activation
products resulting from reactor operations or nuclear explo-
sives. Examples of activation radionuclides are cobalt-60
and zinc-65. In aquatic or marine environments these radio-
nuclides have been found to accumulate in food organisms
especially shellfish and mollusks. Generally
60
Co can be
anticipated to be accumulated by organisms or to be retained
in organically enriched materials such as forest floor humus
and organic sediment. Zinc-65 is of particular concern in
marine environments where it is likely to be accumulated in
clams and oysters. However, being an activation rather than
a fission product its presence depends more on appropriate
stable elements present which in turn are exposed to fast
neutrons than on fissionable material.
RADIOSENSITIVITY OF ECOLOGICAL SYSTEMS
Although there is much current concern about the possible
effect of low level, chronic radiation on ecological systems,
there is relatively little comprehensive scientific data on
TABLE 1
Radionuclides of ecological importance
Category Major radionuclides Ecological importance
Naturally occurring

radionuclides
Uranium Thorium Actinium series
elements Potassium-40 Carbon-14
Major contributors to background radiation (long
half-lives)
Fission products Strontium-89, 90, 91 Yttrium-90, 91
Zirconium-95 Niobium-95
Ruthenium-103, 106 Rhodium-106
Iodine-131 Cesium-137 Barium-137,
140 Lanthanum-140 Cerium-141,
144 Praeseodymium-143, 144
Neodymium-147 Promethium-147
Enter ecological systems through fallout or waste disposal
(half-lives ranging from a few hours to 30 yrs)
Radioisotopes of
elements essential
to organisms
Hydrogen-3 Cobalt-60 Carbon-14
Sodium-22, 24 Phosphorus-32
Sulfur-35 Potassium-42
Calcium-45 Manganese-54 Iron-59
Copper-64 Zinc-65
Used as tracers in both radionuclide cycling and radiation
effects studies on organisms and ecological systems
C018_001_r03.indd 1042C018_001_r03.indd 1042 11/18/2005 11:04:28 AM11/18/2005 11:04:28 AM
© 2006 by Taylor & Francis Group, LLC
RADIATION ECOLOGY 1043
this problem. Much more is known about the radiosensi-
tivity of organisms exposed to radiation doses which are
much higher than we expect to contend with in the normal

environment. In general, higher animals are far more sensi-
tive to radiation than are lower animals, and the very young
and the aged are more sensitive than mature, healthy ani-
mals. For example Table 2 gives estimated acute doses of
gamma of X-radiation necessary to kill 50% or more of
the adult members of several groups of organisms. These
data should be considered only as an indication of rela-
tive radiosensitivity as they represent generalized ranges.
Half the humans exposed to a single dose of 500 R will
die. For other mammals the lethal dose ranges from less
than 300–1200 R. Frogs and newts can survive higher
radiation levels, depending on their body temperatures at
the time of exposure. Insects can survive doses of up to
100,000 R in a few instances; most have lethal doses in the
10,000–20,000 R range. These kinds of data do not reflect
the more complex responses of organisms subjected to ion-
izing radiation under natural conditions. For example, most
organisms go through several stages of development from
egg to adult. These stages may take place in different parts
of the ecosystem. Likewise, the radiosensitivity of these
organisms may differ in different stages of the life cycle.
In radioresistance groups such as insects, 10% or less of
the lethal dose to adults may be effective at juvenile or egg
stages. For example, in the bagworm a dose of 450 R is
sufficient to kill 50% of 1-day old eggs, whereas a dose of
approximately 10,000 R was required to produce the same
effect in the larvae.
Effects other than lethality also may be produced by radi-
ation, especially in ecosystems where all organisms are linked
through various interactive processes. Aside from genetic or

reproductive effects, changes in number, growth, disease resis-
tance, life span or response to physical environmental factors
are of interest to the ecologist. Radiation-induced changes
can affect the role of organisms or populations within the
ecosystem. Predator–prey relationships, food chain transfers,
and other ecological processes which depend on the continu-
ing interaction between different organisms may be altered
by the impact of ionizing radiation.
The effect of ionizing radiation on plants has been
studied both outdoors and in greenhouses. One indoor test
field consists of 10 acres of land with a
60
Co source located
at the center. It is installed in a vertical tube, which can be
raised to different heights for irradiation and then lowered
by remote control into a lead case when not in use. Various
species of plants grow in the soil in concentric circles around
the source. Each species is arranged in a wedge-shaped area
so that the plants are located at various distances from the
source and receive various intensities of radiation. Plants are
exposed to radiation for 20 hr a day.
Radiation effects on plants are complex and depend on a
number of factors, including the plant species, the maturity of
a plant, its physical condition, the parts of the plant exposed
to radiation, the kind and amount of radiation, and the rate
at which the radiation dose is applied. Woody plants gener-
ally are more sensitive to radiation than are herbaceous plants
(Table 2). Gymnosperms are more sensitive to radiation than
angiosperms. A pine tree shows severe growth inhibition at a
level of about 10 R/day, while the same degree of inhibition in

a gladiolus plant requires about 5000 R/day. Some ecologists
have speculated that radiation from a nuclear attack would
destroy all pine trees and other gymnosperms in irradiated
areas, leaving other plants relatively unharmed.
It is possible to predict some radiation effects in plants.
The meristematic or growth regions in plants are the most
radiosensitive tissues. It is the absorption of radiation energy
in these regions that alters plant growth and development.
Ecologists and botanists have shown that the response of
plants to ionizing radiation is directly proportional to the
interphase chromosome volumes in meristematic tissues.
That is, plant species with large chromosomes are more sen-
sitive; those with small chromosomes are more resistant to
radiation. In general, this is an extremely useful concept, and
it has been applied to predict and assess probable radiation
effects on vegetation (natural and agricultural) from military
uses of nuclear devices.
Seeds are far less sensitive to radiation than are growing
plants. A stand of pine trees exposed to a total of 12,000 R of
gamma radiation was 90% destroyed, yet 95% of the seeds
taken from cones on the same trees were viable. The high
resistance of seeds to radiation damage is probably associated
with their low water and oxygen content. The sensitivity of
dry seeds varied widely among species, however. Lily seeds
show practically no ability to sprout after receiving a dose of
2000 R. Yet the seeds of other plants seem to be stimulated to
sprout more vigorously than normal under the same amount
of radiation or more. Such differences favor the growth of
certain species over others in areas where radiation is a factor
in the environment.

EFFECTS OF RADIATION ON ECOSYSTEMS
The effects that large scale ionizing radiation such as from
a nuclear attack would have on plants and animals living
together in an ecosystem have concerned radioecologists
ever since the first use of atomic bombs. Several studies have
TABLE 2
Comparative radiosensitivity of groups of organisms
Group Lethal dose range
a
(rads)
Bacteria 100,000–1,000,000
Insects 5,000–100,000
Fish 1,000–300
Mammals 300–1,200
Herbaceous plants 5,000–70,000
Coniferous trees 800–3,000
Deciduous trees 4,000–10,000

a
Estimated acute whole body gamma radiation doses
required to kill 50% or more of the adult organisms.
C018_001_r03.indd 1043C018_001_r03.indd 1043 11/18/2005 11:04:28 AM11/18/2005 11:04:28 AM
© 2006 by Taylor & Francis Group, LLC
1044 RADIATION ECOLOGY
been conducted involving small ecosystems in an attempt to
determine what would happen on a large scale. In one study,
10,000 acres of land surrounding a nuclear reactor where
exposed to radiation ranging from lethal levels to levels no
higher than the natural background radiation. The ecosystem
on this land consisted mainly of an oak-hickory-pine climax

forest. The forest was exposed to a mixture of gamma radia-
tion and neutrons, with an intensity similar to that expected
from fallout after a nuclear attack. The radiation reached
about 37,00 trees, plus many more herbaceous species and
many more shrubs. Ecologists examined thousands of plants
in order to differentiate between the effects of ionizing radia-
tion and the effects of frost, disease, insect damage, drought,
and other natural factors. In still another study, a community
of spring and summer annuals was exposed to gamma radia-
tion for nearly 4 months during one growing season and then
was observed over the next 3 yrs. In still another study, gamma
radiation was applied daily throughout one winter and spring
to a forest and to an open field with a well-established cover
of annual plants.
On the basis of these and other studies, radioecologists
have formulated a scenario depicting how ionizing radiation
would affect the plants and animals of our forests and fields
if a nuclear attack occurred during the summer growing
season. People emerging from shelters several weeks after the
attack would find little change in their surroundings, except
in areas of extremely high radiation. All plants and animals,
both large and small, would have been killed in these high
radiation areas, and as the plants died they would subject
the surrounding areas to further danger from fire. However,
most fields and woodlands would appear unchanged by
radiation when viewed from a distance. Closer inspection
would reveal more clearly the extent of the damage. The
ground would be littered with the bodies of birds and ani-
mals killed by the radiation. Inspection of lakes, streams,
ponds and marshes would show that the lower animals had

fared better. Fish, frogs, toads and salamanders would be
alive and healthy. The sound of insects would be heard as
before. Among the plants the damage would be least seri-
ous to those that appear early in a natural succession pattern.
Mosses and lichens would be undamaged, annuals would be
somewhat affected, shrubs more so, and trees most of all. The
damage to pine trees would be most apparent. Pines nearest
the radiation zone would have turned a brilliant red brown
within a few days after the attack. Other plants in the forest
and fields would undergo little change during the remainder
of the summer.
In the autumn the oaks, hickories and other hardwood
trees would lose their leaves earlier than usual—perhaps as
much as 7 weeks earlier in areas nearest the high-radiation
zone. The following spring these areas would remain in their
state of winter dormancy 7 or 8 weeks longer than usual.
Examination of the hardwoods (oaks, hickories, etc.) at this
time would reveal severe damage to the buds, resulting in the
development of fewer leaves and of abnormal leaves. Near
the high-radiation zones, the trees might be leafless. The
distribution of annuals in the open fields and on the forest
floor would also be changed from previous years. Certain
species would grow in greater numbers, partly as a result
of the stimulation of their seeds by radiation and partly as
a result of the radiation in seed germination among other
competing species. The delay in development of leaves on
the trees would give these annuals an extra long growing
season. In the abundance of sunshine, weeds would grow on
the forest to heights of 8 ft or more. The absence of a leafy
canopy would also cause changes in the forest soil. With

greater wind flow through the bare trees and higher tempera-
tures from direct sunlight, the soil would become drier and
harder during sunny weather. In rain storms the harder impact
of rain drops would wash away topsoil in areas not covered
by weeds or shrubs. Throughout the first summer follow-
ing the attack, birds and animals from outside the irradiated
areas would move in to replace those that were killed.
RADIOACTIVE TRACERS
With the threat of nuclear war receding, and nuclear reac-
tors being equipped with ever more elaborate safe-guards
to reduce radioactive releases to the environment, the thrust
of radioecology is changing. Activation products in con-
trolled quantities are now being used as radioactive tracers
to follow the pathways of chemical elements in the bodies
of organisms and in the complex interactions of ecosystems.
The radioactive materials have the advantage of being easily
detected and quantitatively measured in biological materi-
als without elaborate chemical separation of the elements
otherwise necessary.
For example, the radioisotope
137
Cs was added to the
upward flow of water in trunks of yellow poplar trees in
Tennessee about 18 years ago. In the ensuing years radio-
ecologists have followed the movement of this relatively
inert tracer into leaves of the trees, into leaf-eating insects,
into the insect eating birds, into the forest litter as the dead
leaves fell, into soil insects, and so forth. Periodic sam-
pling has confirmed the recycling of natural materials in
this forest ecosystem. The radioecologists, in concert with

systems analysts, are currently developing computer simula-
tion models to mimic the ecological cycles revealed by this
cesium tagging experiment. Comparable information on the
exchange of materials from one component of the ecosys-
tem to another could never have been obtained without the
knowledgeable use of radioactive materials by these trained
radioecologists.
Other activation products such as calcium-45 or
phosphorus-32 find use in studies of metabolic processes
in organisms, populations or communities. Such studies
lead to an understanding of regulatory processes and struc-
tural characteristics of living systems. Other examples of
experimental use of radioactive tracers may range ecologi-
cally, from studying the uptake of
45
Ca tagged fertilizer by
corn, to following the pathways of
32
P in a stream, includ-
ing its distribution in the non-living as well as the living
components.
Radiation ecology is now an area of ecological research
and teaching that encompasses far more of the impacts of
C018_001_r03.indd 1044C018_001_r03.indd 1044 11/18/2005 11:04:28 AM11/18/2005 11:04:28 AM
© 2006 by Taylor & Francis Group, LLC
RADIATION ECOLOGY 1045
man on his environment than the atom bomb and nuclear
reactors. Understanding of nearly all pollutant chemicals
in the environment is being enhanced by use of tech-
niques and principles of ecological cycling developed by

radioecologists.
CURRENT DEVELOPMENTS IN RADIATION
ECOLOGY
The last several years have witnessed a major decrease of
interest in, and hence support of, research in radiation ecol-
ogy. In the United States the research programs and projects
initiated primarily under the Atomic Energy Commission
(AEC) have been mostly dismantled. The rationale behind
these policy shifts is difficult to comprehend; however, it
seems to have been associated with a perception that most
of the scientific challenges associated with the ecological
aspects of radiation are either sufficiently understood or can
contribute little to those practical issues related to radia-
tion protection that are still of concern. Despite this ratio-
nale, there has been little change in the long-standing public
fear of ionizing radiation and its potential consequences. In
addition, the recent major accident at the Russian nuclear
power station at Chernobyl (1986), in which 50–100 Mci
was released into the environment, not only raised or exacer-
bated fears in those public sectors already concerned about
radiation problems associated with nuclear power but also
served to galvanize resistance in large groups (e.g., the Soviet
public and other East European populations) that hitherto
had either accepted nuclear power or manifested little if any
public resistance.
The Chernobyl accident underscored both the inef-
fectuality of political boundaries against environmental
contamination and the role of food chains, both natural
and agricultural, in exposing humans and other organisms
to potentially harmful levels of radionuclides. Likewise,

Chernobyl focused interest on the direct consequences of
radiation on ecosystems in the zones of high contamination
(within a radius of 18 km of the reactor site). The release of
large quantities of
134
Cs and
137
Cs resulted in the contamina-
tion of lakes, streams, and forests in the path of the plume.
The need to understand the rates of transfer and patterns of
bioaccumulation of these radionuclides in different ecologi-
cal pathways became manifest in many European countries
located thousands of kilometers away from the reactor. In
Sweden, for example, high concentrations of
137
Cs were
found in reindeer and moose (1,000 to 10,000 Bq/kg) and
in several species of freshwater fish. The relatively rapid
buildup of radionuclides in these organisms was the result
of processes which can affect both the rate and extent of bio-
accumulation in food chains. Thus the Chernobyl accident
has emphasized an increased need for additional research in
radiation ecology.
Food chains are the ecological pathways by which many
substances are moved in terrestrial and freshwater envi-
ronments. In the case of radionuclides, these pathways are
important in the assessment of radiation exposure to critical
population subgroups and human populations. Until recently
the uptake and transfer coefficients used in regulatory models
were mainly generic default values intended for use in lieu

of site-specific information. The Chernobyl accident demon-
strated the importance of and need for geographic-specific
data on individual radionuclide behavior in terrestrial and
fresh-water pathways.
Unlike the United States, most other countries are
involved in extensive radioecological research. This
research is aimed at obtaining data for predicting exposure
resulting from transport of radionuclides in agricultural
food chains. The processes of interest in terrestrial envi-
ronments are those involving atmospheric deposition onto
soils and vegetation; resuspension and leaching from these
surfaces; uptake from soils by the edible portions of vegeta-
tion; and transfer into meat, milk, and other animal products
utilized by humans. In the aquatic environment the key pro-
cesses involve the bioaccumulation of radionuclides from
sediments, water, and algae into the edible components of
aquatic biota.
The assessment of the environmental and health impacts
resulting from radiation exposure is dependent on the use
of mathematical models, which, like all other models, are
prone to uncertainty. The best method for evaluating uncer-
tainties in the predictions of dose-assessment models is to
test predictions against data obtained under real-world con-
ditions. The large extent of contamination following the
Chernobyl accident has provided exactly this type of oppor-
tunity. Currently an international cooperative effort known as
BIOMOVS (BIOspheric MOdel Validation Study) is under
way to test models designed for the calculation of environ-
mental transfer and bioaccumulation of radionuclides and
other trace substances. More than 20 assessment models are

now being tested against data collected from numerous sites
throughout the Northern Hemisphere. Upon completion of
the initial model testing effort of the BIOMOVS project,
additional long-term testing is being planned and organized
by the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA).
Another issue of concern that has not received research
attention recently in the United States in the direct effect
of ionizing radiation on populations and communities of
organisms. This issue invariably arises whenever there is a
nuclear-related incident. In the case of the Chernobyl acci-
dent, radiation exposures in the immediate vicinity of the
reactor resulted in 28 human fatalities, with a larger number
or persons (209) suffering varying degrees of radiation sick-
ness. Pine forests within several kilometers of the reactor site
received sufficient contamination to result in an accumulated
dose of more than 1000 rads. According to Soviet reports,
pronounced morphological damage to pine foliage was vis-
ible within 5 months after the accident in the zones where
the doses ranged from 300 to 1000 rads. Lethal effects in the
1000 rad zone were also manifest by this time, and by winter
(7 months postaccident) 400 ha of forest was destroyed. An
ecological preserve has been established in one of the natu-
ral areas subjected to high levels of radionuclide contamina-
tion. The Soviet government has announced its intention to
carry out long-term radioecological observations and studies
C018_001_r03.indd 1045C018_001_r03.indd 1045 11/18/2005 11:04:28 AM11/18/2005 11:04:28 AM
© 2006 by Taylor & Francis Group, LLC
1046 RADIATION ECOLOGY
in this preserve to assess the long-term impacts, if any, on the
resident flora and fauna.

To the Soviets’ credit, they have recognized both the
need and the opportunity to obtain data on the long-term
effects of ionizing radiation on plant and animal populations
as manifested through genetic mechanisms. To this end,
they have established experimental facilities at the accident
site to carry out this research. Radioecologists have long
recognized the need for hard data on the long-term conse-
quences of exposure to chronic radiation to populations of
organisms. Little is known about the interaction of ionizing
radiation and environmental stress on populations that are
subject to competitive pressures, predation, and other fac-
tors that affect survival. We need to be concerned with the
effects that a buildup of radionuclides in the environment
would have on the eventual fate of the organisms inhabiting
such an environment.
Thus, despite the current lack of attention given to
research issues in radiation ecology in the United States,
much can be learned by collaborating with scientists in
Europe and Asia who are now engaged in investigating the
fates and effects of radioactive substances deposited from
the Chernobyl accident.
REFERENCES
1. Lansdell, Norman, The Atom and the Energy Revolution, Philosophical
Library, New York, 1958.
2. Curtis, Richard and Elizabeth Hogan, Perils of the Peaceful Atom, Dou-
bleday and Co., New York, 1970.
3. Bryerton, Gene, Nuclear Dilemma, Ballantine, New York, 1970.
4. Ravelle, Roger et al., The ocean. Scientific American, September 1969.
5. Russell, R. Scott et al., Radioactivity and Human Diet. Pergamon Press,
London, 1966.

6. Auerbach, Stanley I. A Perspective on Radioecological Research, J.
Soc. Radiol. Prot. 4(3): 100–105, 1984.
7. Izrael, Yu, A. et al., Ecological Consequences of Radioactive Contami-
nation of the Environment in the Chernobyl Emergency Zone. Moscow,
1987.
8. Peterson, R. C., Jr., et al., Assessment of the Impact of the Chernobyl
Reactor Accident on the Biota of Swedish Streams and Lakes, Ambio
15(6): 327–334, 1986.
9. BIOMOVS Progress Report No. 6 Swedish National Institute for Radi-
ation Protection, Stockholm, 1988.
10. International Atomic Energy Agency. Coordinated Research Project on
the Validation of Terrestrial, Aquatic, and Urban Radionuclide Transfer
Models and Acquisition of Data for that Purpose. IAEA, Vienna.
STANLEY I. AUERBACH
Oak Ridge National Laboratory
RADIOACTIVE WASTE MANAGEMENT: see MANAGEMENT OF
RADIOACTIVE WASTE
C018_001_r03.indd 1046C018_001_r03.indd 1046 11/18/2005 11:04:28 AM11/18/2005 11:04:28 AM
© 2006 by Taylor & Francis Group, LLC