Ecological risk assessment (ERA) of polymetallic contamination in soils has caused extensive solicitude. However, objective and feasible methods suitable for soil ERA are limited. Therefore, in this study, a multidisciplinary and quantitative weight of evidence approach (WOE) specific to soil ecosystems was developed based on the previous WOE for aquatic ecosystems. The framework consisted of four lines of evidence (LOEs): DTPA-extractable heavy metal in soils, bioaccumulation in earthworms, integration of biomarker responses and expected community effect (multi-substance Potentially Affected Fraction, msPAF). These four LOEs were initially evaluated by each hazard quotient (HQ) of them based on the ratio to the reference (RTR) of each parameter. Then, Environmental risk index (EnvRI) integrated by HQs with different weights was calculated. At last, three sites, one for reference (N1) and two for contaminated soils (N2 and N3) were chosen to apply the modified WOE approach. Results showed that heavily contaminated site, N3 had higher HQ classification for each LOE and its EnvRI was classified as Major levels, while the EnvRI of N2 was assigned into Moderate. What's more, HQ of biomarker response (HQ_biomarker) integrated by RTRs of biomarkers increased gradiently with the increase of heavy metal levels in soils though irregular changes were observed for most of those biomarkers. Overall, our results indicated that the quantitative WOE framework specific to soil ERA had the advantage of obtaining a comprehensive and objective risk assessment.

土壤中多金属污染的生态风险评估（ERA）引起了广泛的关注。然而，适用于土壤ERA的客观可行方法受到限制。因此，在这项研究中，基于以前的水生生态系统WOE，开发了针对土壤生态系统的多学科和定量的证据权重方法（WOE）。该框架由四大证据线（LOE）组成：土壤中DTPA可萃取的重金属，worm中的生物蓄积，生物标志物响应的整合和预期的社区效应（多物质潜在影响组分，msPAF）。最初，由这四个LOE根据每个参数与参考值（RTR）的比值来评估它们。然后，计算由不同权重的总部综合的环境风险指数（EnvRI）。最后，选择了三个地点，一个用于参考（N1），两个用于受污染的土壤（N2和N3），以应用改进的WOE方法。结果表明，受严重污染的地点，每个LOE的N3总部分类都较高，其EnvRI被归为“主要”级别，而N2的EnvRI被归为“中等”级别。此外，生物标志物反应的总部（HQ_{生物标志物}的RTR整合而来的生物标志物随着土壤中重金属含量的增加而逐渐增加，尽管大多数生物标志物均观察到不规则的变化。总体而言，我们的结果表明，针对土壤ERA的定量WOE框架具有获得全面客观的风险评估的优势。