Você está na página 1de 18

Environmetrics; 1993; 4(4): 381-398

Environmental Monitoring, Assessment


and Prediction of Change
A . H.EL -SHAA R A WP

ABSTRACT
Estimating the present status, detecting and estimating trends,
identifying problem areas, and testing for compliance with standards are
some common goals of environmental monitoring programmes. Issues of
concern when setting these programmes are what to measure, how and when
to make these measurements, and how to interpret the data. The role of
statistics in addressing these issues is discussed and illustrated using three
examples. The first is the upstream/downstream Niagara River monitoring
program which is used to: (1) estimate the loads of contaminants to the
river and from the river to Lake Ontario; (2) compare the concentrations
of various contaminants with water quality standards. The monitoring
programme for the Fraser River provides the second example. The Fraser
River has, in contrast to the Niagara River, a complicated hydrological
cycle which needs to be considered when interpreting water quality changes.
The third is the before and after time series experiments for environmental
impact assessment. In these examples, parametric and non-parametric
methods are used to model seasonality and trends. Techniques for dealing
with censored data are also discussed.

KEY WORDS: Environmental changes; ARIMA; Kendalls 7: censored data;


Niagara River.
1. INTRODUCTION

In recent years, more scientific and public efforts have been directed
to understanding the changes occurring in environmental systems. For example, the Great Lakes and various rivers in Canada such as the Niagara
and the Fraser Rivers are monitored routinely for chemical and biological
National Water Research Institute, Burlington, Ontario, Canada L7R 4A6.
118O-4OO9/93/040381-18$14.00
& Sons, Ltd

@ 1993 by John Wiley

Received 21 June 1993

382

A. H. EL-SHAARAWI

pollutants. The objectives are to find out: (1) what causes the changes; (2)
that are the effects of the changes, and (3) how to control the directions,
magnitudes and effects of the changes. In 1969, the International Joint
Commission (IJC) prepared a report on the water quality of the Great Lakes
which illustrates the ahove points. The report (Slater and Bangay 1980) lists
the following problems which require remedial action:
1. accelerated eutrophication of Lake Ontario and a condition of advanced
eutrophication in the western basin of Lake Erie, largely as a result of
increased nutrient inputs, especially phosphorus;
2. a disruption of beneficial uses of water as a result of changing trophic
conditions;
3. dramatic changes in the species composition of commercial fish catches;
4. pollution problems related to dredge spoil disposal;
5. bacterial pollution of nearshore waters;
6. pollution from organic contaminants, spills of oil and other hazardous
substances, radioactive materials, viral contamination and thermal
pollution.

The report gave the following recommendations:


1. immediate reductions in the phosphorus content in detergents;
2. implementation of programmes for the reduction of phosphorus from
municipal and industrial waste effluents, including a timetable for
reductions;
3. the development of programmes for the control of phosphorus from
agricultural operations;
4. regulation of any new uses of phosphorus which could result in appreciable
addition to the lakes.
Natural systems are continuously changing on their own and in response
to anthropogenic stress. Some of the changes are systematic with stable or
unstable patterns, while the others are haphazard and have random patterns.
Consistency is a necessary feature for the systematic changes. Examples
are the yearly temperature cycle and the summer thermal stratification of
large lakes. In the analysis of change, four states are to be distinguished:
(1) the initial state; (2) the transition state; (3) the present state; and (4)
the future state. The initial state provides a reference point against which
future changes are measured. It indicates that the analysis of change is
always conditional on the information available at the initial state. This
presupposes that the basic behaviour of the system is always the same under
the same circumstances. Otherwise the task of analysing the change becomes
impossible. It is also clear that the analysis of change is iterative with new
data giving additional insight into the nature of change.
This paper describes a number of monitoring systems used in Canada to
measure and evaluate the changes in water quality of rivers. Specifically the
systems used for monitoring the Niagara and the Fraser Rivers are described

ENVIROMENTAL
MONITORING,ASSESSMENTAND PREDICTION

383

along with their objectives. In addition, the analysis of the before and after
time series experimental design for assessing the environmental impact of
a given point source is discussed. Statistical methods commonly used for
detecting and estimating environmental changes are described and their
limitations are indicated. These methods are illustrated by examples.

2.

THENIAGARA AND FRASER


RIVERSMONITORINGPROGRAMMES

The Niagara River is part of the Great Lakes and the St. Lawrence
River system. It is the main drainage system for Lakes Superior, Huron,
Michigan and Erie into Lake Ontario (Figure 1). A water quality monitoring programme involving the collection of ambient water and suspended
solids at the head (Fort Erie) and mouth (Niagara-on-the-Lake) of the Niagara River has been in place since 1984. The presence of toxic organic
pollutants in the Niagara River has been a source of concern to environmental agencies from both the United States and Canada for more than a
decade. In 1987 Canada and the United States signed the Declaration of
Intent which calls for a target reduction level of 50 per cent of loadings
of persistent toxic chemicals of concern. The monitoring programme is used
to estimate the loadings from Lake Erie to the Niagara River and from the
river to Lake Ontario. The difference between the upstream and downstream
loadings is used as an indirect estimate of the loadings from the point and
non-point sources along the course of the river. One of the major difficulties in computing the loading is that some concentration values are recorded

USA

Fig 1. The Niagara River and the locations of the sampling stations.

384

A. H. EL-SHAARAWI

Fig 2. The Fraser River and the locations of the sampling stations.

as below the analytical detection limit. The problem of estimating the


yearly mean loading or concentration is considered using a data set on three
contaminants from this monitoring programme later in the paper.
Figure 2 shows that the Fraser River is located in the south-east corner
of the province of British Columbia (BC). It is one of Canadas major rivers,
with diverse and abundant natural resources. The river faces an increasing
threat from the enormous scale of industrial and urban development in the
basin. As a result, Environment Canada and BC Environment have adopted
a network of nine water quality monitoring stations for the river since 1985.
The locations of these stations are shown in Figure 2. The main purposes
of the monitoring programme are to assess the current conditions and any
trends in the water quality at these stations. A data set generated from this
program is used for illustrating the trend assessment techniques presented
in this paper.

3. TESTING
FOR TREND
3.1 THEUNIVARIATE CASE

Water quality time series data are usually short with missing
and censored values. This makes the detailed modelling of the data
computationally difficult and unreliable. As a result, simple computational

ENVIROMENTAL
MONITORING,
ASSESSMENTAND

PREDICTION

385

methods such as Kendalls T (Esterby et al., (1992)) and Spearmans


correlation (El-Shaarawi et al., (1983)) are very frequently used for testing
for monotonic trends. To reduce the effects of serial correlations and/or
the heterogeneity of the trends in seasonal data, these statistics are usually
computed for each season, and if the assumption of homogeneity is accepted
(using Van Belles homogeneity test for example), then the computed values
of the seasonal statistics are combined into a single overall test statistic
which is called seasonal Kendalls 7 .
Assuming no censored or missing values, let q i - ] ) b + j ( S ) be the observed
value of the characteristic s (s = 1, 2, ... , p ) in year i (i = 1,2, ... ,k), and
season j 0 = 1,2, , . . ,6). Then the associated Kendalls T for season j is
defined by
.rj(s)=

C Uj;eg(s>

e<
and
u j ; l g ( s >=

1,

z(6-l)b+j(s)

-11

ql-i)b+j.(s)

0,

otherwise.

> qg-I)b+j(S),
< qg-I)b+j(S),

Under the independence assumption, the variance of T ~ ( sis) u2 = k(k- 1)(2k+


) approximately
5)/18. For moderate and large k the distribution of T ~ ( s is
N(0,a2). It follows then that the distribution of
.

b
j-1

where

under the null hypothesis is approximately &. H is known as Van Belles


homogeneity test (El-Shaarawi et al. 1991) which is used to test for the
homogeneity of the trend.
It is natural to extend the use of H to determine the existence of
)
as linear or quadratic
systematic patterns in the seasonal values of T ~ ( ssuch
patterns. Let

be the linear and quadratic orthogonal polynomials associated with j


1,2, .. . ,6, where 1 = ( b + 1)/2 .If we model the expected value of T ~ ( s as
)

A. H. EL-SHAARAWI

386

then the least-squares estimates of p , P I , and

P2

P=?(S),

81 =

C ~j ( ~ ) Ej I
j-1
7

C tfj

C tzj

3''

j-1

respectively. Variances of these estimates are given as usual by


U2

var(jl) = -,
b

U2

02

var(pl) = - var&

C tfj'

CJ232'

Finally, the adequacy of linear and quadratic trends are tested by computing
the statistics

The distributions of HL and HQ are approximately xipzand xip3respectively.


Note that under the above analysis, it is assumed that c2= var(Ti(s)) which
is not true, since it is a function of the parameters p , PI and Pz which we have
ignored. It is expected however that the variations in the variance would not
be too large.
3.2 THE MULTIVARIATECASE

The above can be generalized to the multivariate case in the following


manner. Let

be the column vector of Kendall T S associated with the p characteristics in


the jthmonth. For all s and j , we have under the assumption of no trends
var ( T j ( S ) ) = nz. It is easy to show that

Under the assumption that x(c(i-l)b+j(s) and


bivariate normal distribution with mean

and covariance matrix

3+l)b+j(s')

have the joint

ENVIROMENTAL
MONITORING,ASSESSMENT
AND PREDICTION

387

we have
COV ( T j ( S ) , T j ( S ) ) =

2
n

[(t) sin-

PS,SI

+2

(;)

sin-

=u

~ , , ~ 1 / 2

rs,st

In this expression, ps+, is unknown but could be estimated using the


usual correlation coefficient between z+l)b+j(s) and z+l)b+j(s). Assuming
approximate normality, the statistic

is distributed approximately as xi,where

As a conditional test for trend in the sttcharacteristic after removing the


effect of the characteristic s, we define the conditional Kendall T by

Finally, the Van Belles homogeneity test in the bivariate case is


b

H2 =

C D2,j - b?;C-?2,
j-1

which has approximately Xi(b-1) distribution, where 52 = (?(S),T(S)). The


extension to the general p-variate time series follows directly.

4. EAMPLES
The monthly stream flow (cubic metres/second) data over the period
1979-90 at four monitoring stations (Red Pass, Nansard, Marguerite and
Hope) in the Fraser River are displayed in Figure 3. In this example,
k=b=12 and p=4 with the values s=1,2,3 and 4 corresponding to the stations Red Pass, Hansard, Marguerite and Hope respectively (Figure 1).The
flow has a regular seasonal cycle with high values occurring in the summer and low values in the winter (Figure 3). The cycle has a consistent
shape for the different years and stations. Two time series, the flow at Marare used to illustrate the previguerite q&,)b+j(3)and at Hope ~+~)b+j(4)
ous methods. Table 1 shows that the month of April indicates a significant

A. H. EL-SHAARAWI

388

1979

1: Hope

2 Marguerite 3 H a n d 4:

Red Pass

Fig 3. The flow data at the four monitoring stations on the F'raser River.

increase in the flow over the years, but the seasonal test did not suggest the
existence of trend in the data. The homogeneity test was not significant.
The bivariate and conditional test statistics are also given in the table, and
show a significant trend for the month of April. It is interesting to note that
the conditional test showed a decreasing trend at Hope after removing the
effect of the Marguerite station.

5. TIMESERIESAPPROACH
Figure 3 suggests modelling the log flow (all the logarithms used here
are in base e) data as

where g(i-I)b+j(S) is the log flow for the jthmonth in the P1*year at I&
cation s, p j ( s ) is the seasonal mean, PS is the slope of the trend line,

ENVIROMENTAL
MONITORING,ASSESSMENTAND PREDICTION

389

Marginal Test Marginal Test Conditional Test Bivariate Test


Month

Marguerite
7j. (3)

January
February
March
April
May
June
July
August
September
October
November
December

Hope
Tj (4)

4
-8
4
36t
-8
10
-2
0
-30
-14
10
8

2
-8
-6
46t
4
8
-6
6
-28
-14
12
-6

D2,j

Hope
rj (413)

0.645
-0.126
1.774
-2.38*
-1.359
0.472
0.366
-1.642
-0.773
-0.167
0.037
2.01*

0.189
0.327
1.935
11.495+
1.330
0.481
0.247
1.231
4.236
0.978
0.691
2.495

Overall Test

25.634

* Significant at the 5 per cent level


+ Significant at the 1 per cent level
Table 1. Monthly Kendall's 7 statistics for the Fraser River

and 7&l)b+j(S) is a stationary error process. w e model q ( & l ) b + j ( s ) by an


autoregressive and moving average model. We base the analysis on the
difference y i b + j ( S ) - y&1)b+j(s), since it is free of the seasonality p j f s ) under
the model. The data from the four stations were fitted adequately by the
model
Zib+j(S) = yzb+j(S> - y ( i - l ) b + j ( s ) = PS -t a i b + j ( s > - @s'%b+j-I(s),

where the a's are independent N(O,aZ,(s)).Table 2 gives the estimates of the
parameters of the model, their standard errors (given in parentheses) and
the Box-Pierce statistic at lag 24. The Box-Pierce statistic is not significant
for each station, indicating the adequacy of the model. The standard errors
of the bs,the estimate of Ps, exceed their estimated values, indicating nonvalues are significantly different from zero.
significant trends, while the
The estimates of the white noise variances 8i(s) are nearly the same for the
four stations.
The cross-correlation between the residuals & + j ( S ) and i l i b + j ( ~ - 1) (e.g.
t,he downstream station and the upstream station) showed that only the
cross correlation at lag zero was significant. This led to the identification of
a model of the form

e,

A. H. EL-SHAARAWI

390

Station

bs

-0.3397
(0.0789)
-0.4280
(0.0759)
-0.5109
(0.0721)
-0.4721
(0.0741)

0.00011
(0.0251)
0.00041
(0.03209)
-0.00017
(0.02873)
-0.00015
(0.02485)

Red Pass
Hansard
Marguerite
Hope
Table 2.

6s

%(s)

Modified
Box-Pierce
statistic at
lag 24

0.0507

21 .?

0.0728

21.1

0.0522

27.2

0.0411

21.9

Estimates of the parameters of the model fitted to four sampling stations.

for modelling the log flow at the downstream station s as a function of


the log flow at the upstream station (s - l ) , where B is the lag operator
Bq = ztpl,ws,s-l is an unknown transfer function parameter, and the es,ib+j
are white noise with variance &. We have then three models, the first
for modelling the flow at Hansard as a function of the flow at Red Pass,
the second for modelling the flow at Marguerite as a function of that at
Hansard, and finally modelling the flow at Hope as a function of the flow at
Marguerite:

Model 1: Hansard as function of Red Pass


(1 - B)yi/,+j(2)

= (1

(1 + 0.428B)
(1 + 0.3397B) (1 - B)yib+j(l)
with c?& = 0.0331.

+0.4280B)q,jb+j+0.882

Model 2: Marguerite as a function of Hansard


(1 + 0.5109B)
(1 + 0.42808) (1 - B)?/ib+j@)
= 0.0128.

(1 - B)yib+j(3)= (1 +0.5109B)e3,ib+j+0.734

with

&.3,e

Model 3: Hope as a function of Marguerite


(1 +0.4721B)
(I - B ) P ~ ~ +
= (1
~ (+~0.4721
)
B)e,,ib+j + 0.794(1 + 0.51WB)
(1 - B)gib+j(3)
with
= 0.0081.

&z,e

&z,e

By comparing
and ?i(s) (given in Table 2) we note a major improvement in the model for the flow at the downstream station by taking the flow
at the upstream station as a covariate. Also it will be useful to eliminate the

ENVIROMENTAL
MONITORING, ASSESSMENT AND PREDICTION

5.5-

4.5-

5(
r

391

W
!4-

8 3.5-

a:p

32.5-

-1

(a)

wc

0 0

1.5

1-l

+ +
I

2
3
Ln Suspended Solids (Wg)
1

Fig 4a. Plot of the regression line and P,P-DDE data vs Suspended Solids on the log
scale. Uncensored observations are indicated by a star, In detection limits by an empty
square, and expected values obtained for censored observations by a plus.

nearly common factors (1 + 8,B) and (1 + ds-l B ) , for this leads to the simple
and easy to interpret model for the flow as

ANALYSISWITH CENSORED AUTOCORRELATEDDATA


6. REGRESSION
The concentrations of the contaminants P,P-DDE, P,P-DDT
and P,P-TDE in suspended solids seem to decrease with the solid
concentrations, as can be seen in Figure 4. The log contaminant
concentration is plotted against the log solid concentration. The
measurements (Data Interpretation Group (1989)) were made weekly at
Niagara-on-the-Lake over the period 2 April 1987 and 30 March 1988. Table
3 shows the number of values above and below the detection limit for each
chemical. Figure 4 suggests the regression model

A. H. EL-SHAARAWI

392

4.54-

)I(

+
1-

++ +

Fig 4b. Plot of the regression line and P,P-DDT data vs Suspended Solids on the log
scale. Uncensored observations are indicated by a star, In detection limits by an empty
square, and expected values obtained for censored observations by a plus.

Chemical
(ng/g)

P,P-DDE
P,P-DDT
P,P-TDE

No. of
observations

No. of censored
values

Detect ion
limit

48
41

2
12

5.6

45

7.5
6.0

Table 3. The number of observations and censored values as well as detection


limits for the Data.

for the log contaminant concentration yt and log solid concentration zt in


the tthweek respectively ( t = 1, . . . ,n).The random component et is assumed
to be an AR(1) process, that is

and the ats are independent with the common normal variate with mean 0
and variance c2.

ENVIROMENTAL
MONITORING, ASSESSMENTAND PREDICTION

393

5-

M
M

la

b- f
v
f!4
&

m #

a52-

M I

10.

m 0

[IBI(o

* +

+ +

Fig. 4c. Plot of the regression line and P,P-TDE data vs Suspended Solids on the log
scale. Uncensored observations are indicated by a star, In detection limits by an empty
square, expected values obtained for censored observations by a plus.

Data

&

P,P-DDE
P,P-DDT
P,P-TDE

3.840
2.784
3.451

-0.347
-0.269
-0.381

0.834
0.900
0.999

0.129
-0.352
0.273

Fable4. Estimates of the parameters of the regression model with correlated


errors

The parameters a, p, 8 and o2 are fitted by maximizing the pseudolikelihood function as suggested by Zeger and Brookmeyer (1986) and
modified by Dagenais (1989, 1991) in order to achieve the consistency
of the estimates. The estimates of the parameters are given in Table 4.
The estimates of the autoregressive parameter d indicate moderate autodependence between the ets. The model was also fitted assuming that
6=0, to see if the estimates (Table 5) of the regression parameters under the assumption of independence differed from those given in Table 4.
As can be seen, the differences between the two sets of estimates are not

A. H. EL-SHAARAWI

394

Data

P,P-DDE
P,P-DDT
P,P-TDE

3.862
2.709
3.528

-0.370
-0.231
-0.458

0.831
0.868
1.007

Table 5 . Estimates of the parameters of the regression model


when 8=0.

Contaminant
P,P-DDE
P,P-DDT
P,P-TDE

0.129
0
-0.352
0
0.273
0

var (&)
0.0342
0.0355
0.04847
0.04784
0.13810
0.06124

var (b)
0.0213
0.01381
0.03861
0.02163
0.05917
0.02358

cov (@)
0.0055
-0.0170
-0.03058
-0.02404
-0.07400
-0.02986

Table 6. The_variances and covariances of the regression parameter when


8 = 0 and 8 = 0

large. When 0 is different from zero the method of Dagenais (1989) is


used to compute the covariance matrix. Furthermore, the elements of the
asymptotic covariance matrices are given for each chemical in Table 6 under
both dependence and autodependence. It seems that the variance of is
consistently underestimated if the independence assumption is violated.

7. THEBEFOREAND AFTER TIMESERIES EXPERIMENTS


Time series experimental design for assessing the impact of a single
source of pollution or a treatment involves the selection of two sites where
the measurements of some property are made at a number of time points
both before and after the treatment. The treatment is assumed to affect only
one site (treatment site), so the other site will serve as a control. Let xt and
vt be the measurements made at time t ( t = 1,2, . . . ,n) on the control and
the treatment sites respectively. Suppose that at some time in the interval
n1 < t < nl + 1, the treatment is introduced. The usual approach for testing
the effect of the treatment is to use the statistic

where

ENVIROMENTAL MONITORING,
ASSESSMENTAND PREDICTION

395

The Student t with (n-2) degrees of freedom is used to assess the significance
of T .
The above analysis is valid for testing Hf:A = 0, where A is the
treatment effect in the following model:
1,2, .. . ,n,
i = 1,2, . . . ,n1,,
Pi + E ; ,
~ + p i + e ; , i - n l + l , . . . ,n,

Xi=pi+Ei,
Yi=

2 =

where ( e i , e ; ) have a bivariate normal distribution with mean (0,O) and


covariance matrix

Suppose, instead of the above model, the following model is more


appropriate for the data:

then

where

Under this model, testing A=O, using the T statistic is appropriate only if
,8=1. The distribution of T is a function of p l , . .. ,Pn and under the null
hypothesis. Conditional on the x i s , the model
yi = a + p x z + + ; ,

=A+a+pa;+e;,

provides the appropriate test for A=O.

2 = 1 , 2 , ...,n]
i = n l i l , ... ,n

A. H. EL-SHAARAWI

396

.WIIQ.

.
.OS?OO~

..

.
.
I
-

.OS210
.(

:
.04720
I
c

-:

.04230

. .

.OS?40

032so

.02?6I
,039

Fig 5. The plot of the log chlorophyll a for the treatment site against that of the control.

As an example, consider a data set of 62 observations on chlorophyll


a which was collected at impact and control locations with the treatment
introduced after nl=28. Figures 5 and 6 show the plot of log chlorophyll a
concentration in the treatment site against that at the control, and the plot
of the difference between treatment and control against control, respectively.
The two plots support the use of the second model for analysing the data.
The results obtained from the usual regression analysis indicate that the
treatment has an effect on both the intercept and the slope of the line. This
means a model of the form
yi=~appq+~)i, z = l , 2 ,

... , n ~

= c Y ' + ~ ) x ~ + + z; =
, n 1 + 1 , ... ,n

is more appropriate for the data set considered in this example.

8.

SUMMARY

Three monitoring systems are described. The first two represent the
Canadian monitoring programmes for the Fraser and the Niagara Rivers,
while the third deals with monitoring the impact of an intervention by

ENVIROMENTAL
MONITORING,
ASSESSMENTAND PREDICTION

397

Fig 6. The plot of the difference (log treatment-log control) against the log control.

collecting data at a control site and a treatment site before and after the
intervention. Kendall's T is usually used to detect the existence of monotonic
trends. El-Shaarawi and Niculescu (1992) have shown that ignoring serial
correlation when it exists can severely impair the interpretation of the
observed value of T . Here we have described how to extend the test for
detecting seasonal heterogeneity by giving a simple extension to Van Belle's
test. This extension is designed to detect simple seasonal patterns in
the values of TS such as linear, quadratic etc. Furthermore, the bivariate
extension of 7 is also given along with a closed form expression for the
variance-covariance matrix under the normality assumption. The results can
be easily extended to the multivariate case. The same data set was treated
using a standard time series modelling approach. Univariate and transfer
function models were fitted to the data. The resulting models are simple
and can be used for forecasting the flow both in time and at a downstream
location using the immediate upstream time series. On the basis of this
work,it seems more useful to use parametric modelling than non-parametric
methods for summarizing the data.
The second example was concerned with regression analysis in the
presence of type I censoring. If serial correlation is ignored, the estimates of
the regression coefficientsseem to change little but the estimates of standard
errors appear to be seriously impaired. The conclusion from this is that if

A. H. EL-SHAARAWI

inferences are required about the parameters of the model, serial correlations
have to be included in the analysis.
The third example was chosen to illustrate that in the before and after
monitoring programme, performing the t-test on the mean differences, m is
usually done in ecological work, can lead to incorrect conclusions about the
effect of intervention.

REFERENCES
Dagenais, M.G. (1991). Comment on Zeger and Brookmeyer. Journal of the American
Statistical Association 86, 413.
Dagenais, M.G. (1989). Small sample performance of parameter estimator, for tobit
models with serial correlation. Journal of Statistical Computation Simulation 33,
11-26.
Data Interpretation Group (1989). Joint Evaluation of Upstream/Downstream Niagara
River Monitoring Data. New York State Department of Environmental Conservation,
Environment Canada, US Environmental Protection Agency and Ontario Ministry of
the Environment.
El-Shaarawi, A.H., S.R. Esterby and K.W. Kuntz (1983). A Statistical Evaluation of
trends in the Water Quality of the Niagara River. Journal of Great Lakes Research
2, 234-240.
El-Shaarawi, A.H., S.R. Esterby and J. Yip (1991). %nd Assessment Techniques:
Application to Prairie Provinces Water Board Quality Data Set. Prairie Provinces
Water Board report no. 113, Regina, Saskatchewan, Canada.
El-Shaarawi, A.H. and S.P. Niculescu (1992). On Kendalls tau as a test of trend in time
series data. Environmetrics 3,385-411.
Esterby, S.R., A.H. El-Shaarawi and H.O. Block (1992). Detection of water quality
changes along a river system. Environmental Monitoring and Assessment 23, 219242.
Slater, R.W. and G.E. Bangay (1980). Action Taken to Control Phosphorus in the Great
Lakes. In Phosphorus Management Strategies for Lakes, eds R.C. Loehr, C.S. Martin,
C.S. and W. Rast. Ann Arbor Science Publishers, Ann Arbor, 13-25.
Zeger, S.L. and R. Brookmeyer (1986). Regression analysis with censored autocorrelated
data. Journal of the American Statistical Association 81 395, 722-729.

Você também pode gostar