ures depict the presence/absence of toxicity, not the relative degree of toxicity, based upon statistical 

 differences from the controls. 



Based upon the data depicted in Table 37 and Figures 46 and 47, it appears that the spatial limits of 

 toxicity were not determined. Toxicity to at least one of the tests was evident throughout most of the 

 study area and extended to its outer limits. There were no clear limits or boundaries beyond which only 

 nontoxic sediments were consistently encountered. All of the samples from western Long Island Sound, 

 the upper East River, the lower East River, Newark Bay, Arthur Kill, and inner-most Sandy Hook Bay 

 were toxic in at least one of the tests. Also, many of the samples from the lower Raritan River and 

 western Raritan Bay were toxic in at least one test. In contrast, only two of the 15 samples in the lower 

 Hudson River/upper New York Harbor area were toxic in any of the tests. In addition, only two of the 

 stations in sites 31, 32, and 33 in southern Raritan Bay were toxic in all tests. All three samples from 

 site 39 in New York Bight were significantly different from controls in at least one test, but the site 

 mean was not significantly different from controls in any of the tests. 



The spatial pattern in toxicity illustrated by the site means (Figure 47) is similar to that identified by the 

 station means (Figure 46). Figure 47 illlustrates the sites in which the mean toxicity results for any of 

 the tests were significantly different from the respective controls. As observed with the station means, 

 these data indicate that the sites in western Long Island Sound, upper East River, lower East River, 

 Newark Bay, Arthur Kill, much of western Raritan Bay, and Sandy Hook Bay were different from 

 controls. However, these data also suggest that site 13 in the lower Hudson River; sites 31 and 33 in 

 southern Raritan Bay; and sites 36, 37, and 38 in the mouth of the estuary were significantly different 

 from controls in at least one test. As observed with the station means, the site means indicated that sites 

 1-3 in the lower Hudson River, site 14 in upper New York Harbor, and several sites in north-central 

 Raritan Bay were not toxic in any of the tests. 



Figure 48 depicts the relative toxicity of the sites, based upon the number of significant toxic responses 

 determined at each site, using the tests of statistical differences from controls. Sites are identified in 

 which there was no toxic response relative to controls among the four test end-points, and sites in 

 which there was one response, two, three, or four. It was assumed that sediments that caused four 

 significantly elevated toxic responses were more degraded than those that elicited, say, one or two 

 significant responses. 



The site means for all four tests were significantly different from the controls only at site 7 (Figure 48). 

 Note: based upon a critical value of <80% of controls, three sites were indicated as toxic in all tests in 

 the calculations of the spatial extent of toxicity (Table 13). However, based upon the statistical tests of 

 significance, only one site (site 7) was different from controls in all four tests. That is, in all four test 

 end-points, the measures of toxicity were sufficiently high and consistent to provide mean results that 

 were significantly different from the controls. In addition, the numerical results of the three inverte- 

 brate tests were 80% or less than the controls. Among the 17 samples tested with the polychaete 

 growth test, sediments from site 7 were the most toxic. This site was clearly the most toxic among all 

 39 sites sampled during Phase 1. 



Sites 11, 15, 17, 18, and 30 located in lower East River, upper New York Harbor, Newark Bay, Arthur 

 Kill, and Sandy Hook Bay, respectively, were highly toxic in three of the four test end-points (Figure 

 48). Sites 1-3, 14, 19, 21, 24-26, 32, 34, and 39 were not toxic to any of the tests. 



120 



