Intelligibility of speech in repaired cleft cases as related to timing of palatal repair.

B. Nandlal,A. Tiwari,A. Utreja,P. S. Chari,M. Ragunathan

1989-03-01

Journal of Indian Society of Pedodontics and Preventive Dentistry

Abstract:

What problem does this paper attempt to address?

A systems-based analysis to rethink the European environmental risk assessment of regulated chemicals using pesticides as a pilot case

Johan Axelman,Annette Aldrich,Sabine Duquesne,Thomas Backhaus,Stephan Brendel,Andreas Focks,Sheila Holz,Saskia Knillmann,Silvia Pieper,Emilia Silva,Maria Schmied-Tobies,Christopher John Topping,Louise Wipfler,James Williams,José Paulo Sousa

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.scitotenv.2024.174526

2024-10-20

Abstract:A growing body of scientific literature stresses the need to advance current environmental risk assessment (ERA) methodologies and associated regulatory frameworks to better address the landscape-scale and long-term impact of pesticide use on biodiversity and the ecosystem. Moreover, more collaborative and integrative approaches are needed to meet sustainability goals. The One Health approach is increasingly applied by the European Food Safety Authority (EFSA) to support the transition towards safer, healthier and more sustainable food. To this end, EFSA commissioned the development of a roadmap for action to establish a European Partnership for next-generation, systems-based Environmental Risk Assessment (PERA). Here, we summarise the main conclusions and recommendations reported in the 2022 PERA Roadmap. This roadmap highlights that fragmentation of data, knowledge and expertise across regulatory sectors results in suboptimal processes and hinders the implementation of integrative ERA approaches needed to better protect the environment. To advance ERA, we revisited the underlying assumptions of the current ERA paradigm; that chemical risks are generally assessed and managed in isolation with a substance-by-substance, realistic worst-case and tiered approach. We suggest optimising the use of the vast amount of information and expertise available with pesticides as a pilot area. It is recommended to as soon as possible adopt a systems-based approach, i.e. within the current regulatory framework, to spark a step-wise transition towards an ERA framed at a system level of ecological and societal relevance. Tangible systems-based and integrative steps are available. For instance, the rich sources of existing data for prospective and retrospective ERA of pesticides could be used to reality-benchmark existing and new ERA methods. To achieve these goals, collaboration among stakeholders across scientific disciplines and regulatory sectors must be strengthened.
Landscapes of risk: A comparative analysis of landscape metrics for the ecotoxicological assessment of pesticide risk to bees

Charlie C. Nicholson,Eric V. Lonsdorf,Georg K. S. Andersson,Jessica L. Knapp,Glenn P. Svensson,Mikaela Gönczi,Ove Jonsson,Joachim R. de Miranda,Neal M. Williams,Rundlöf,Maj Rundlöf

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1111/1365-2664.14622

IF: 6.865

2024-03-15

Journal of Applied Ecology

Abstract:Predicting pesticide risk based on landscape patterns could enable landscape‐scale ERA. However, simple metrics of landscape pattern, such as proportion of agricultural land, are not sufficient. We found that risk observed in bee‐collected pollen was best predicted when integrating spatialized pesticide use in the pesticide exposure model, underscoring the importance of such data for research, monitoring and mitigation. Further, we propose a guidance framework for future landscape ecotoxicological risk analyses that clarifies data needs relative to risk prediction goals. Pesticide use in agricultural landscapes creates environmental contamination that is heterogenous in space and time. Mobile organisms, such as bees, are exposed to multiple contamination sources when visiting patches that vary in the amount, timing and toxicity of pesticides used. Yet, environmental risk assessments (ERA) typically fail to consider this heterogeneity, in part because of the complexities of estimating exposure to different pesticides, and subsequent risk at organism‐relevant scales. We use pesticide assays of 269 bee‐collected pollen samples to understand the spatiotemporal variability of risk across a network of 41 field sites in southern Sweden. Observed bee pesticide risk is calculated based on compound‐specific residue quantifications in pollen and standardized toxicity data. We then compare the ability of three classes of landscape‐scale variables to predict this risk: (1) landscape composition and configuration metrics, (2) landscape load based on national pesticide use data and (3) predictions from a newly developed bee pesticide exposure model. Based on use data, 10 crops account for 81% of the total risk. We detected 49 pesticide compounds in bee‐collected pollen. Although herbicides and fungicides constitute the bulk of detected pesticides, both in frequency and amount quantified, unsurprisingly, insecticides contribute the most to risk. Landscape composition and configuration metrics did not predict observed pesticide risk, and interactions with bee species indicate taxa‐dependency in predictions. Landscape load predicted observed risk consistently between taxa. Risk estimates from our exposure model were strongly predictive but only when considering realized risk (i.e., risk estimates based on prior pesticide use information). Synthesis and applications. Predicting pesticide risk based on landscape patterns could enable landscape‐scale ERA. However, simple metrics of landscape pattern, such as proportion of agricultural land, are not sufficient. We found that risk observed in bee‐collected pollen was best predicted when integrating spatialized pesticide use in the pesticide exposure model, underscoring the importance of such data for research, monitoring and mitigation. Further, we propose a guidance framework for future landscape ecotoxicological risk analyses that clarifies data needs relative to risk prediction goals.

biodiversity conservation,ecology
Progresses of Ecological Risk Assessment

CHEN Hui,LIU Jin-Song,CAO Yu,LI Shuang-Cheng,OUYANG Hua

DOI: https://doi.org/10.3321/j.issn:1000-0933.2006.05.034

2006-01-01

Acta Ecologica Sinica

Abstract:Risk assessment beginning at 1980s has developed greatly in content, scale and methods of assessment from one chemical and one receptor to its current application at large spatial and temporal scales in the 20 years. In the 1980s, the main assessment content was from toxicity of one chemical to human health risk. In the 1990s, risk assessment as a management tool had to be applied to populations, communities, and eventually to the ecological landscape at large scales. The risk analysis of multiple stressors, not just multiple chemicals but multiple types of agents, was also taken into account. During the late part of 1990s and early 2000s, the ecological risk assessment was broadening to include not only chemicals and ecological affairs but also a wide variety stressors, such as the impacts of human activities(urbanization, land use and land cover change, fishery and climate change, etc.) and the assessment scale was expanding to region and landscape scales. Frameworks and statistical models are the key of regional ecological risk assessment. The risk assessment framework presented in the National Research Council(NRC) Red Book played a key role in the development of ecological risk assessment. After years of modification, the assessment framework had been improved to be perfect till 1998. The Environmental Protection Agency(EPA) framework proposed an integrated framework that covered both human health and ecological risk assessment including a detailed description of the process and showing how the process could be applied to a broad range of situations. Since then, various ERA framework have been developed for use in some countries(e.g. Netherlands, Australia, United Kingdom) and for specific situations. The statistical methods are the quantitative methods of ecological risk assessment. For one chemical stressor, the ratio value model and exposure-response model are adopted, but for the multiple stressors, multiple receptors, large scale of complex regional landscape, the methods aren't suitable because many uncertainties will appear during the extending from one stressor small scale to multiple stressors large scale. In the regional ecological risk assessment, Relative Risk Assessment(RRA) based on weight-of-evidence(WOE) are used widely. WOE approaches reported in the literature vary broadly from subjective and qualitative to quantitative and the categories of which include qualitative combination, expert ranking, consensus ranking, semi-quantitative ranking and sediment quality triad. WOE approaches could be used in retrospect assessment, causation assessment and the whole process of ecological risk assessment. In the future, as a universal framework for ecological management, ecological risk assessment should develop deeply in resolving the problems of scale extending, uncertainty and assessment standard. At the background of global ecological crisis, regional ecological risk assessment will emphasized the fields and aspects in close relationship with global changes, such as human activities, geological disasters and climate affairs and ecological risk resulting from policy error and ecology safety, etc. Regional ecological risk assessment has the potential of becoming quantitative tools of management decision if it integrated with economy, society and culture.
Applying a tiered environmental risk assessment framework to estimate the risk of pesticides to soil organisms in Latin America

Flavio Tincani,Ana Paola Cione,Fábio Casallanovo,Melanie Bottoms,Tania Alvarez,Stefania Loutseti,Richard Mackenzie,Helen Thompson

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1002/ieam.4669

Abstract:This work investigates the application of a tiered risk assessment scheme for soil organisms based on the risk quotient (RQ) and the toxicity exposure ratio (TER). Forty-five pesticides registered in Latin America were chosen and the ecotoxicological endpoints for earthworms, Collembola, and microorganisms were collated. Tier I assessment was made on conservative assumptions in which no refinements were applied. There, 14 pesticides (31%) exceed the RQ regulatory trigger indicating unacceptable risk, whereas 27 (60%) indicate unacceptable risk on the TER approach. In a Tier II evaluation when refinement options such as foliar interception, field half-life, and the dissipation following the peak estimated environmental concentration are considered, eight (18%) pesticides indicate unacceptable risk based on the RQ, and 15 (33%) indicate unacceptable risk based on the TER. A nonmetric multidimensional scaling evaluation was performed to understand the relevant characteristics involved in how each pesticide poses a risk to soil organisms. Based on the outcome of this analysis, we observed that, for a given pesticide, the combination of high persistence, low or no crop interception, and high toxicity are likely to require higher tier risk assessment. Refinement options can consider either or both the exposure and/or the effect side of the framework. Exposure refinements are potentially simpler and can be conducted with data already available to risk assessors, whereas effect refinements involving further testing with the organisms potentially at risk are still under discussion for intermediate and higher tiers. A sensitive, simple, and logical environmental risk assessment framework can be used to adequately identify risks based on the relevant protection goals that, in turn, will help to protect the desired soil multifunctionality of the ecosystem. We encourage academia and industry to further investigate these topics to provide the most scientifically robust and evidence-based information to decision makers. Integr Environ Assess Manag 2023;19:446-460. © 2022 SETAC.
Intermediate-tier options in the environmental risk assessment of plant protection products for soil invertebrates-Synthesis of a workshop

Gregor Ernst,Mónica J B Amorim,Melanie Bottoms,Amy C Brooks,Mark E Hodson,Stefan Kimmel,Pia Kotschik,Michael T Marx,Tiago Natal-da-Luz,Céline Pelosi,Silvia Pieper,Agnes Schimera,Janeck Scott-Fordsmand,Amanda Sharples,José P Sousa,Cornelis A M van Gestel,Bart van Hall,Matthias Bergtold

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1002/ieam.4825

Abstract:The European environmental risk assessment (ERA) of plant protection products follows a tiered approach. The approach for soil invertebrates currently consists of two steps, starting with a Tier 1 assessment based on reproduction toxicity tests with earthworms, springtails, and predatory mites. In case an unacceptable risk is identified at Tier 1, field studies can be conducted as a higher-tier option. For soil invertebrates, intermediate tiers are not implemented. Hence, there is limited possibility to include additional information for the ERA to address specific concerns when the Tier 1 fails, as an alternative to, for example, a field study. Calibrated intermediate-tier approaches could help to address risks for soil invertebrates with less time and resources but also with sufficient certainty. A multistakeholder workshop was held on 2-4 March 2022 to discuss potential intermediate-tier options, focusing on four possible areas: (1) natural soil testing, (2) single-species tests (other than standard species), (3) assessing recovery in laboratory tests, and (4) the use of assembled soil multispecies test systems. The participants acknowledged a large potential in the intermediate-tier options but concluded that some issues need to be clarified before routine application of these approaches in the ERA is possible, that is, sensitivity, reproducibility, reliability, and standardization of potential new test systems. The definition of suitable assessment factors needed to calibrate the approaches to the protection goals was acknowledged. The aims of the workshop were to foster scientific exchange and a data-driven dialog, to discuss how the different approaches could be used in the risk assessment, and to identify research priorities for future work to address uncertainties and strengthen the tiered approach in the ERA for soil invertebrates. This article outlines the background, proposed methods, technical challenges, difficulties and opportunities in the ERA, and conclusions of the workshop. Integr Environ Assess Manag 2024;20:780-793. © 2023 The Authors. Integrated Environmental Assessment and Management published by Wiley Periodicals LLC on behalf of Society of Environmental Toxicology & Chemistry (SETAC).
[Radioimmunoassay of digitalis].

J. Preibisz

Kardiologia Polska

Abstract:
Overhaul environmental risk assessment for pesticides

C J Topping,A Aldrich,P Berny,C. J. Topping,A. Aldrich,P. Berny

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1126/science.aay1144

IF: 56.9

2020-01-24

Science

Abstract:Align regulation with environmental reality and policy

multidisciplinary sciences
From parcels to people: development of a spatially explicit risk indicator to monitor residential pesticide exposure in agricultural areas

Francesco Galimberti,Stephanie Bopp,Alessandro Carletti,Rui Catarino,Martin Claverie,Pietro Florio,Alessio Ippolito,Arwyn Jones,Flavio Marchetto,Michael Olvedy,Alberto Pistocchi,Astrid Verhegghen,Marijn Van Der Velde,Diana Vieira,Raphael d'Andrimont

2024-02-16

Abstract:The increase in global pesticide use has mirrored the rising demand for food over the last decades, resulting in a boost in crop yields. However, concerns about the impact of pesticides on biodiversity, ecosystems, and human health, especially for populations residing close to cultivated areas, are growing. This study investigates how exposure and possible risks to residents can be estimated at high spatial granularity based on plant protection product data. The complexities of such analysis were explored in France, where relevant data with good granularity are publicly available. Integrating sets of spatial datasets and exposure assessment methodologies, we have developed an indicator to monitor the levels of pesticide risk faced by residents. By spatialising pesticide sales data according to their authorization on specific crops, we developed a detailed map depicting potential pesticide loads at parcel level across France. This spatial distribution served as the basis for an exposure and risk assessment, modelled following the European Food Safety Authority's guidelines. Combining the risk map with population distribution data, we have developed an indicator that allows to monitor patterns in non-dietary exposure to pesticides. Our results show that in France, on average, 13% of people might be exposed to pesticides due to living in the proximity to treated crops. This exposure is in the lower range for 34%, moderate range for 40% and higher range for 25% of the exposed population. The risk evaluation is based on worst case assumptions and values should not be taken as a regulatory risk assessment but as indicator to use, for example, for monitoring time trends. The purpose of this indicator is to demonstrate that more granular pesticide data can improve risk reduction strategies. Harmonized and high-resolution data can help in identifying regions where to focus on sustainable farming.

Quantitative Methods,Populations and Evolution
ARPEGES: A Bayesian Belief Network to Assess the Risk of Pesticide Contamination for the River Network of France

Jeremy Piffady,Nadia Carluer,Veronique Gouy,Guy Henaff,Thierry Tormos,Nolwenn Bougon,Emilie Adoir,Katell Mellac

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1002/ieam.4343

2020-11-03

Integrated Environmental Assessment and Management

Abstract:Pesticides are priority concerns in aquatic risk assessment due to their widespread use, on‐going development of new molecules, and potential effects from short‐ and long‐term exposures to aquatic life. Water quality assessments are also challenged by contrasting pesticide behaviors (e.g., mobility, half‐life time, solubility) in different environmental contexts. Furthermore, monitoring networks are not well adapted to the pesticide media transfer dynamics and therefore fail at providing a reliable assessment of pesticides. We present here a Bayesian belief network that was developed in a cooperative process between researchers specializing in Bayesian modelling, soil sciences, agronomy and diffuse pollutants to provide a tool for stakeholders to assess surface water contamination by pesticides. It integrates knowledge on dominant transfer pathways according to basin physical context and climate for different pesticides properties, such as half‐life duration and affinity to organic carbon, to develop an assessment of risks of contamination for every watershed in France. The resulting model, ARPEGES (Risk Analysis of Water Surface Contamination by Pesticides), was developed in R. A user‐friendly R interface was built to enable stakeholders to not only obtain ARPEGES' results, but also freely use it to test management scenarios. Though it is applicable to any chemical, its results are illustrated for S‐Metolachlor, a pesticide that was widely used on cereals crops worldwide. In addition to providing contamination potential, ARPEGES also provides a way to diagnose its main explaining factors, enabling stakeholders to focus efforts in the most potentially affected basins, but also on the most probable cause of contamination. In this context, the Bayesian belief network allowed us to use information at different scales (i.e., regional contexts for climate, pedology at the basin scale, pesticide use at the municipality scale) to provide an expert assessment of the processes driving pesticide contamination of streams and the associated uncertainties.This article is protected by copyright. All rights reserved.

environmental sciences,toxicology
Improving the Risk Assessment of Pesticides through the Integration of Human Biomonitoring and Food Monitoring Data: A Case Study for Chlorpyrifos

Jose V. Tarazona,Maria del Carmen González-Caballero,Mercedes de Alba-Gonzalez,Susana Pedraza-Diaz,Ana Cañas,Noelia Dominguez-Morueco,Marta Esteban-López,Irene Cattaneo,Andromachi Katsonouri,Konstantinos C. Makris,Thorhallur I. Halldorsson,Kristin Olafsdottir,Jan-Paul Zock,Jonatan Dias,Annelies De Decker,Bert Morrens,Tamar Berman,Zohar Barnett-Itzhaki,Christian Lindh,Liese Gilles,Eva Govarts,Greet Schoeters,Till Weber,Marike Kolossa-Gehring,Tiina Santonen,Argelia Castaño

DOI: https://doi.org/10.3390/toxics10060313

2022-06-09

Toxics

Abstract:The risk assessment of pesticide residues in food is a key priority in the area of food safety. Most jurisdictions have implemented pre-marketing authorization processes, which are supported by prospective risk assessments. These prospective assessments estimate the expected residue levels in food combining results from residue trials, resembling the pesticide use patterns, with food consumption patterns, according to internationally agreed procedures. In addition, jurisdictions such as the European Union (EU) have implemented large monitoring programs, measuring actual pesticide residue levels in food, and are supporting large-scale human biomonitoring programs for confirming the actual exposure levels and potential risk for consumers. The organophosphate insecticide chlorpyrifos offers an interesting case study, as in the last decade, its acceptable daily intake (ADI) has been reduced several times following risk assessments by the European Food Safety Authority (EFSA). This process has been linked to significant reductions in the use authorized in the EU, reducing consumers' exposure progressively, until the final ban in 2020, accompanied by setting all EU maximum residue levels (MRL) in food at the default value of 0.01 mg/kg. We present a comparison of estimates of the consumer's internal exposure to chlorpyrifos based on the urinary marker 3,5,6-trichloro-2-pyridinol (TCPy), using two sources of monitoring data: monitoring of the food chain from the EU program and biomonitoring of European citizens from the HB4EU project, supported by a literature search. Both methods confirmed a drastic reduction in exposure levels from 2016 onwards. The margin of exposure approach is then used for conducting retrospective risk assessments at different time points, considering the evolution of our understanding of chlorpyrifos toxicity, as well as of exposure levels in EU consumers following the regulatory decisions. Concerns are presented using a color code, and have been identified for almost all studies, particularly for the highest exposed group, but at different levels, reaching the maximum level, red code, for children in Cyprus and Israel. The assessment uncertainties are highlighted and integrated in the identification of levels of concern.

environmental sciences,toxicology
Evaluation of the ecological risk of pesticide residues from the European LUCAS Soil monitoring 2018 survey

Antonio Franco,Diana Vieira,Laure‐Alix Clerbaux,Alberto Orgiazzi,Maeva Labouyrie,Julia Köninger,Vera Silva,Ruud van Dam,Edoardo Carnesecchi,Jean Lou C. M. Dorne,Jeanne Vuaille,Joana Lobo Vicente,Arwyn Jones

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1002/ieam.4917

2024-04-12

Integrated Environmental Assessment and Management

Abstract:The 2018 LUCAS (Land Use and Coverage Area frame Survey) Soil Pesticides survey provides a European Union (EU)‐scale assessment of 118 pesticide residues in more than 3473 soil sites. This study responds to the policy need to develop risk‐based indicators for pesticides in the environment. Two mixture risk indicators are presented for soil based, respectively, on the lowest and the median of available No Observed Effect Concentration (NOECsoil,min and NOECsoil,50) from publicly available toxicity datasets. Two further indicators were developed based on the corresponding equilibrium concentration in the aqueous phase and aquatic toxicity data, which are available as species sensitivity distributions. Pesticides were quantified in 74.5% of the sites. The mixture risk indicator based on the NOECsoil,min exceeds 1 in 14% of the sites and 0.1 in 23%. The insecticides imidacloprid and chlorpyrifos and the fungicide epoxiconazole are the largest contributors to the overall risk. At each site, one or a few substances drive mixture risk. Modes of actions most likely associated with mixture effects include modulation of acetylcholine metabolism (neonicotinoids and organophosphate substances) and sterol biosynthesis inhibition (triazole fungicides). Several pesticides driving the risk have been phased out since 2018. Following LUCAS surveys will determine the effectiveness of substance‐specific risk management and the overall progress toward risk reduction targets established by EU and UN policies. Newly generated data and knowledge will stimulate needed future research on pesticides, soil health, and biodiversity protection. Integr Environ Assess Manag 2024;00:1–15. © 2024 The Authors. Integrated Environmental Assessment and Management published by Wiley Periodicals LLC on behalf of Society of Environmental Toxicology & Chemistry (SETAC).

environmental sciences,toxicology
Incorporating a weight‐of‐evidence approach into a tiered assessment for chemicals management, with emphasis on program development and applications in developing countries and emerging economies

Charles A. Menzie,Patrick D. Guiney,Scott E. Belanger,Kuan‐Chun Lee,Gertie Arts,Beatrice Olutoyin Opeolu,Helena C. Silva de Assis

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1002/ieam.4986

2024-08-18

Integrated Environmental Assessment and Management

Abstract:A flexible approach is described for incorporating a weight‐of‐evidence (WoE) methodology into a tiered ecological risk assessment (ERA)/management framework for chemicals. The approach is oriented toward informing decisions about chemicals. Communication is regarded as a critical component of the risk assessment process. The paper resulted from insights gained from seven ERA workshops held by SETAC (Society of Environmental Toxicology and Chemistry, www.setac.org) in the Asia‐Pacific, African, and Latin American regions. Formal ERA methods are not fully developed or applied in many of these countries and assessments often begin with tables of risk values and test methods from countries where ERA is already implemented. While appropriate and sometimes necessary, workshop participants had questions about the reliability and relevance of using this information for regionally specific ecosystems with different receptors, fate processes, and exposure characteristics. The idea that an assessment of reliability and relevance of available information and the need for additional information was necessary at an early stage of the assessment process was considered. The judgment of reliability and relevance is central to WoE approaches along with the identification of information needs and the integration of such information. The need to engage in WoE considerations early and throughout the assessment process indicates that a tiered approach is appropriate for unifying the evaluation process in a consistent way from early screening‐level steps to later more involved evaluations. The approach outlined in this article is complementary to WoE guidance developed by the Organization for Economic Co‐operation and Development and many national guidance documents. To link assessments of risk to management decisions, emphasis is given to communications at each tier between the risk assessor (technical side) and the decision‐makers (policy and regulatory side). Tools and information sources are suggested for each tier and suggestions are meant to be illustrative and not prescriptive. Integr Environ Assess Manag 2024;00:1–15. © 2024 SETAC

environmental sciences,toxicology
Incorporating climate projections in the environmental risk assessment of pesticides in aquatic ecosystems

Rik Oldenkamp,Rasmus E. Benestad,John D. Hader,Sophie Mentzel,Rory Nathan,Anders L. Madsen,S. Jannicke Moe

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1002/ieam.4849

2023-10-07

Integrated Environmental Assessment and Management

Abstract:Global climate change will significantly impact the biodiversity of freshwater ecosystems, both directly and indirectly via the exacerbation of impacts from other stressors. Pesticides form a prime example of chemical stressors that are expected to synergise with climate change. Aquatic exposures to pesticides might change in magnitude due to increased runoff from agricultural fields, and in composition as application patterns will change due to changes in pest pressures and crop types. Any prospective chemical risk assessment that aims to capture the influence of climate change should properly and comprehensively account for the variabilities and uncertainties that are inherent to projections of future climate. This is only feasible if they probabilistically propagate extensive ensembles of climate model projections. However, current prospective risk assessments typically make use of process‐based models of chemical fate that do not typically allow for such high‐throughput application. Here we describe a Bayesian network model that does. It incorporates a two‐step univariate regression model based on a thirty‐day antecedent precipitation index, circumventing the need for computationally laborious mechanistic models. We show its feasibility and application potential in a case study with two pesticides in a Norwegian stream: the fungicide trifloxystrobin and herbicide clopyralid. Our analysis showed that variations in pesticide application rates as well as precipitation intensity lead to variations in in‐stream exposures. When relating to aquatic risks, the influence of these processes reduces and distributions of risk are dominated by effect‐related parameters. Predicted risks for clopyralid were negligible, but the probability of unacceptable future environmental risks due to exposure to trifloxystrobin (i.e., a risk quotient > 1) was 8‐12%. This percentage further increases to 30‐35% when a more conservative precautionary factor of 100 instead of 30 was used.

environmental sciences,toxicology
QSAR/QSPR models based on quantum chemistry for risk assessment of pesticides according to current European legislation

J.J. Villaverde,B. Sevilla-Morán,C. López-Goti,J.L. Alonso-Prados,P. Sandín-España

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/1062936X.2019.1692368

IF: 3.681

2019-11-27

SAR and QSAR in Environmental Research

Abstract:In Europe, agencies and official organizations involved in the pesticide control such as the EFSA, ECHA, JRC and ECETOC or even the OECD are pointing out that the software tools based on quantitative structure relationship models, i.e. QSAR and QSPR, have a huge potential to improve the pesticide risk assessment process. In this sense, these non-animal test methods can promote the competitiveness of agriculture in this region: the consumer safety is increased with them due to the possibility of perform an overall better risk assessment of the degradation products and metabolites from pesticides. However, the use of theses computational-based (in silico) tools must be much more systematised and harmonised, improving their validation and including case studies to test them. To open databases, incorporating critical data in an orderly manner for building the models, becomes also necessary. Moreover, quantum chemistry through the Density Functional Theory should be promoted as tool for calculation of quantum descriptors, especially for the study of similar compounds with the same carbon skeleton but differing substitution patterns, e.g. isomers.

environmental sciences,toxicology,computer science, interdisciplinary applications,chemistry, multidisciplinary,mathematical & computational biology
Ecotoxicological soil risk assessment under the new soil exposure framework – an impact assessment

Agnes Schimera,Sebastian Multsch,Olga I Guevara Montemayor,Philip Branford,Melanie Bottoms,Sian Ellis,Gregor Ernst,Stefania Loutseti,Michael T Marx,David Patterson,Amanda Sharples,Frank Staab,Bernhard Gottesbueren,Agnes SchimeraSebastian MultschOlga I Guevara MontemayorPhilip BranfordMelanie BottomsSian EllisGregor ErnstStefania LoutsetiMichael T MarxDavid PattersonAmanda SharplesFrank StaabBernhard Gottesbuerena Environmental Safety,ADAMA Deutschland GmbH,Cologne,Germanyb Agricultural Solutions,BASF SE,Limburgerhof,Germanyc Environmental Fate and Modelling,Knoell Germany GmbH,Mannheim,Germanyd Environmental Safety,ADAMA Agricultural Solutions,Reading,UKe Ecotoxicology,Syngenta,Jealott's Hill International Research Centre,Bracknell,UKf Regulatory Ecotoxicology,Corteva Agriscience,Abingdon,UKg Environmental Safety,Bayer AG Crop Science Division,Monheim,Germanyh Global Regulatory Sciences,FMC Corporation,Philadelphia,Pennsylvania,USA

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/03601234.2024.2319005

2024-03-02

Abstract:For the European risk assessment (RA) for soil organisms exposed to plant protection products (PPPs) endpoints from ecotoxicological laboratory studies are compared with predicted environmental concentrations in soil (PEC SOIL ) at first tier. A safety margin must be met; otherwise, a higher tier RA is triggered (usually soil organism field studies). A new tiered exposure modeling guidance was published by EFSA to determine PEC SOIL . This work investigates its potential impact on future soil RA. PEC SOIL values for >50 active substances and metabolites were calculated and compared with the respective endpoints for soil organisms to calculate the RA failure rate. Compared to the current (FOCUS) exposure modeling, PEC SOIL values for all EU regulatory zones considerably increased, e.g., resulting in active substance RA failure rates of 67%, 58% and 36% for modeling Tier-1, Tier-2 and Tier-3A, respectively. The main driving factors for elevated PEC SOIL were soil bulk density, crop interception and wash-off, next to obligatory modeling and scenario adjustment factors. Spatial PEC SOIL scenario selection procedures result in agronomically atypical soil characteristics (e.g., soil bulk density values in Tier-3A scenarios far below typical European agricultural areas). Consequently, exposure modeling and ecotoxicological study characteristics are inconsistent, which hinders scientifically reasonable comparison of both in the RA.
Using a Bayesian Network Model to Predict Risk of Pesticides on Aquatic Community Endpoints in a Rice Field-A Southern European Case Study

Sophie Mentzel,Claudia Martínez-Megías,Merete Grung,Andreu Rico,Knut Erik Tollefsen,Paul J Van den Brink,S Jannicke Moe

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1002/etc.5755

Abstract:Bayesian network (BN) models are increasingly used as tools to support probabilistic environmental risk assessments (ERAs), because they can better account for uncertainty compared with the simpler approaches commonly used in traditional ERA. We used BNs as metamodels to link various sources of information in a probabilistic framework, to predict the risk of pesticides to aquatic communities under given scenarios. The research focused on rice fields surrounding the Albufera Natural Park (Valencia, Spain), and considered three selected pesticides: acetamiprid (an insecticide), 2-methyl-4-chlorophenoxyacetic acid (MCPA; a herbicide), and azoxystrobin (a fungicide). The developed BN linked the inputs and outputs of two pesticide models: a process-based exposure model (Rice Water Quality [RICEWQ]), and a probabilistic effects model (Predicts the Ecological Risk of Pesticides [PERPEST]) using case-based reasoning with data from microcosm and mesocosm experiments. The model characterized risk at three levels in a hierarchy: biological endpoints (e.g., molluscs, zooplankton, insects, etc.), endpoint groups (plants, invertebrates, vertebrates, and community processes), and community. The pesticide risk to a biological endpoint was characterized as the probability of an effect for a given pesticide concentration interval. The risk to an endpoint group was calculated as the joint probability of effect on any of the endpoints in the group. Likewise, community-level risk was calculated as the joint probability of any of the endpoint groups being affected. This approach enabled comparison of risk to endpoint groups across different pesticide types. For example, in a scenario for the year 2050, the predicted risk of the insecticide to the community (40% probability of effect) was dominated by the risk to invertebrates (36% risk). In contrast, herbicide-related risk to the community (63%) resulted from risk to both plants (35%) and invertebrates (38%); the latter might represent (in the present study) indirect effects of toxicity through the food chain. This novel approach combines the quantification of spatial variability of exposure with probabilistic risk prediction for different components of aquatic ecosystems. Environ Toxicol Chem 2024;43:182-196. © 2023 The Authors. Environmental Toxicology and Chemistry published by Wiley Periodicals LLC on behalf of SETAC.
Environmental risk assessment of combined effects in aquatic ecotoxicology: a discussion paper

Jonny Beyer,Karina Petersen,You Song,Anders Ruus,Merete Grung,Torgeir Bakke,Knut Erik Tollefsen

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.marenvres.2013.10.008

Abstract:Environmental regulatory edicts within the EU, such as the regulatory framework for chemicals REACH (Registration, Evaluation, Authorisation and Restriction of Chemicals), the Water Framework Directive (WFD), and the Marine Strategy Framework Directive (MSFD) focus mainly on toxicity assessment of individual chemicals although the effect of contaminant mixtures is a matter of increasing concern. This discussion paper provides an overview of the field of combined effects in aquatic ecotoxicology and addresses some of the major challenges related to assessment of combined effects in connection with environmental risk assessment (ERA) and regulation. Potentials and obstacles related to different experimental, modelling and predictive ERA approaches are described. On-going ERA guideline and manual developments in Europe aiming to incorporate combined effects of contaminants, the use of different experimental approaches for providing combined effect data, the involvement of biomarkers to characterize Mode of Action and toxicity pathways and efforts to identify relevant risk scenarios related to combined effects are discussed.
Proposal for a tiered regulatory framework for the aquatic risk assessment of pesticides in Brazil

Gustavo Souza Santos,Fábio Casallanovo,Rômulo Penna Scorza Júnior,Michiel A. Daam,Ana Paola Cione

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1002/ieam.4931

2024-04-19

Integrated Environmental Assessment and Management

Abstract:Aquatic risk assessment is essential to guarantee the sustainable use of pesticides and the conservation of water resources near agricultural fields. This article discusses a proposal for a tiered regulatory framework for the aquatic risk assessment of pesticides in Brazil. The first step is problem formulation, which includes establishing general and specific protection goals. In the exposure assessment, the Estimated Environmental Concentrations in water should be calculated based on realistic worst‐case assumptions regarding application rate and frequency, the entry into the edge‐of‐field water body, and fate in the water body, using scenario‐dependent models suggested by the Brazilian Environmental Agency. These calculations can be refined by including Efate studies with variable exposures to reflect realistic environmental conditions accurately and include mitigation measures that impact the modeling. In the hazard assessment, ecotoxicological data for toxicity to fish, aquatic invertebrates, algae, and aquatic plants should be required for all pesticides based on standardized protocols and species. Tier 2 has several refinement options, including incorporating toxicity data from additional test species and effect modeling. In Tier 3, population‐ and community‐level effects are evaluated using semi‐field studies. Considering the case study in Brazil, Tier 1 demonstrated that, from the 12 pesticides that were assessed, seven (58%) failed based on the value of the Risk Quotient. In Tier 2, when exposure refinement options and mitigation measures such as buffer zones are considered, all seven pesticides, for which Tier 1 indicated risk, still failed the assessment. The risk for four of these seven pesticides could be refined by considering toxicity information from additional species. Refinement options and mitigation measures that could be applied to the agricultural scenario in Brazil were discussed. In conclusion, the proposed tiered risk assessment is a feasible way to evaluate whether a pesticide will pose an unacceptable risk to aquatic organisms. Integr Environ Assess Manag 2024;00:1–15. © 2024 The Authors. Integrated Environmental Assessment and Management published by Wiley Periodicals LLC on behalf of Society of Environmental Toxicology & Chemistry (SETAC).

environmental sciences,toxicology
Overcoming Challenges of Incorporating Higher Tier Data in Ecological Risk Assessments and Risk Management of Pesticides in the United States: Findings and Recommendations from the 2017 Workshop on Regulation and Innovation in Agriculture

Steven L Levine,Jeffrey Giddings,Theodore Valenti,George P Cobb,Danesha Seth Carley,Laura L McConnell

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1002/ieam.4173

Abstract:Pesticide regulation requires regulatory authorities to assess the potential ecological risk of pesticides submitted for registration, and most risk assessment schemes use a tiered testing and assessment approach. Standardized ecotoxicity tests, environmental fate studies, and exposure models are used at lower tiers and follow well-defined methods for assessing risk. If a lower tier assessment indicates that the pesticide may pose an ecological risk, higher tier studies using more environmentally realistic conditions or assumptions can be performed to refine the risk assessment and inform risk management options. However, there is limited guidance in the United States on options to refine an assessment and how the data will be incorporated into the risk assessment and risk management processes. To overcome challenges to incorporation of higher tier data into ecological risk assessments and risk management of pesticides, a workshop was held in Raleigh, North Carolina. Attendees included representatives from the United States Environmental Protection Agency, United States Department of Agriculture, National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, universities, commodity groups, consultants, nonprofit organizations, and the crop protection industry. Key recommendations emphasized the need for 1) more effective, timely, open communication among registrants, risk assessors, and risk managers earlier in the registration process to identify specific protection goals, address areas of potential concern where higher tier studies or assessments may be required, and if a higher tier study is necessary that there is agreement on study design; 2) minimizing the complexity of study designs while retaining high value to the risk assessment and risk management process; 3) greater transparency regarding critical factors utilized in risk management decisions with clearly defined protection goals that are operational; and 4) retrospective analyses of success-failure learnings on the acceptability of higher tier studies to help inform registrants on how to improve the application of such studies to risk assessments and the risk management process. Integr Environ Assess Manag 2019;15:714-725. © 2019 The Authors. Integrated Environmental Assessment and Management published by Wiley Periodicals, Inc. on behalf of Society of Environmental Toxicology & Chemistry (SETAC).

Intelligibility of speech in repaired cleft cases as related to timing of palatal repair.

A systems-based analysis to rethink the European environmental risk assessment of regulated chemicals using pesticides as a pilot case

Landscapes of risk: A comparative analysis of landscape metrics for the ecotoxicological assessment of pesticide risk to bees

Progresses of Ecological Risk Assessment

Applying a tiered environmental risk assessment framework to estimate the risk of pesticides to soil organisms in Latin America

Intermediate-tier options in the environmental risk assessment of plant protection products for soil invertebrates-Synthesis of a workshop

[Radioimmunoassay of digitalis].

Overhaul environmental risk assessment for pesticides

From parcels to people: development of a spatially explicit risk indicator to monitor residential pesticide exposure in agricultural areas

ARPEGES: A Bayesian Belief Network to Assess the Risk of Pesticide Contamination for the River Network of France

Improving the Risk Assessment of Pesticides through the Integration of Human Biomonitoring and Food Monitoring Data: A Case Study for Chlorpyrifos

Evaluation of the ecological risk of pesticide residues from the European LUCAS Soil monitoring 2018 survey

Incorporating a weight‐of‐evidence approach into a tiered assessment for chemicals management, with emphasis on program development and applications in developing countries and emerging economies

Incorporating climate projections in the environmental risk assessment of pesticides in aquatic ecosystems

QSAR/QSPR models based on quantum chemistry for risk assessment of pesticides according to current European legislation

Ecotoxicological soil risk assessment under the new soil exposure framework – an impact assessment

Using a Bayesian Network Model to Predict Risk of Pesticides on Aquatic Community Endpoints in a Rice Field-A Southern European Case Study

Environmental risk assessment of combined effects in aquatic ecotoxicology: a discussion paper

Proposal for a tiered regulatory framework for the aquatic risk assessment of pesticides in Brazil

Overcoming Challenges of Incorporating Higher Tier Data in Ecological Risk Assessments and Risk Management of Pesticides in the United States: Findings and Recommendations from the 2017 Workshop on Regulation and Innovation in Agriculture