A contribution to the identification of representative vulnerable fish species for pesticide risk assessment in Europe—A comparison of population resilience using matrix models

Ibrahim, Lara; Preuß, Thomas G.; Schäffer, Andreas; Hommen, Udo

doi:10.1016/j.ecolmodel.2013.08.001

Cited by 33 publications

(24 citation statements)

References 69 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Data are predominantly based on lotic studies, including 44 endpoints, whereas recovery in lentic systems is less well represented (n = 1). In temperate climates, many fi sh species exhibit one reproduction event per year (for an overview see e.g., Ibrahim et al 2014 ). As a consequence, short-term recovery of population size is only possible by external means, e.g.…”

Section: Fishmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…In addition, in the population and community level experiments (e.g., mesocosm tests), the exposure regime tested should be realistic to worst-case (informed by the predicted exposure for edge-of-fi eld surface waters), whereas sensitive taxa at risk (informed by lower-tier ecotoxicity tests) with a low recovery potential (on the basis of the target image of the aquatic ecosystem at risk) should be suffi ciently represented in these test systems (EFSA 2013 ). These taxa are often referred to as focal species and potential candidates are described e.g., by Brock ( 2013 ), Gergs et al ( 2011 ) and Ibrahim et al ( 2014 ).…”

Section: Risk Assessment Ecological Recovery and Legislationmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Ecological Recovery Potential of Freshwater Organisms: Consequences for Environmental Risk Assessment of Chemicals

Gergs

Classen²,

Strauß³

et al. 2016

Reviews of Environmental Contamination and Toxicology

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Chemical contaminants released into the in the environment may have adverse effects on (non-target) species, populations and communities. The return of a stressed system to its pre-disturbance or other reference state, i.e. the ecological recovery, may depend on various factors related to the affected taxon, the ecosystem of concern and the type of stressor with consequences for the assessment and management of risks associated with chemical contaminants. Whereas the effects caused by short-term exposure might be acceptable to some extent, the conditions under which ecological recovery can serve as a decision criterion in the environmental risk assessment of chemical stressors remains to be evaluated. For a generic consideration of recovery in the risk assessment of chemicals, we reviewed case studies of natural and artificial aquatic systems and evaluate five aspects that might cause variability in population recovery time: (1) taxonomic differences and life-history variability, (2) factors related to ecosystem type and community processes, (3) type of disturbance, (4) comparison of field and semi-field studies, and (5) effect magnitude, i.e., the decline in population size following disturbance. We discuss our findings with regard to both retrospective assessments and prospective risk assessment.

show abstract

Section: Fishmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Risk Assessment Ecological Recovery and Legislationmentioning

confidence: 99%

Ecological Recovery Potential of Freshwater Organisms: Consequences for Environmental Risk Assessment of Chemicals

Gergs

Classen²,

Strauß³

et al. 2016

Reviews of Environmental Contamination and Toxicology

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Moreover, the species used in toxicity testing are frequently chosen because they are amenable to maintenance and use under controlled laboratory conditions and not because they have met some criteria with regard to their representativeness of species in the wild (Luttik et al 2011). Unfortunately, there is considerable uncertainty regarding the amount of variability across species with regard to responses to chemical stressors (Ibrahim et al 2013, Ibrahim et al 2014). Nonetheless, an important consideration is how well certain approaches in ERA address variability among species (Luttik et al 2011).…”

Section: Current Challenges In Eramentioning

confidence: 99%

The pros and cons of ecological risk assessment based on data from different levels of biological organization

Rohr

Salice

Nisbet

2016

Critical Reviews in Toxicology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Ecological risk assessment (ERA) is the process used to evaluate the safety of manufactured chemicals to the environment. Here we review the pros and cons of ERA across levels of biological organization, including suborganismal (e.g. biomarkers), individual, population, community, ecosystem, and landscapes levels. Our review revealed that level of biological organization is often related negatively with ease at assessing cause-effect relationships, ease of high-throughput screening of large numbers of chemicals (it is especially easier for suborganismal endpoints), and uncertainty of the ERA because low levels of biological organization tend to have a large distance between their measurement (what is quantified) and assessment endpoints (what is to be protected). In contrast, level of biological organization is often related positively with sensitivity to important negative and positive feedbacks and context dependencies within biological systems, and ease at capturing recovery from adverse contaminant effects. Some endpoints did not show obvious trends across levels of biological organization, such as the use of vertebrate animals in chemical testing and ease at screening large numbers of species, and other factors lacked sufficient data across levels of biological organization, such as repeatability, variability, cost per study, and cost per species of effects assessment, the latter of which might be a more defensible way to compare costs of ERAs than cost per study. To compensate for weaknesses of ERA at any particular level of biological organization, we also review mathematical modeling approaches commonly used to extrapolate effects across levels of organization. Finally, we provide recommendations for next generation ERA, submitting that if there is an ideal level of biological organization to conduct ERA, it will only emerge if ERA is approached simultaneously from the bottom of biological organization up as well as from the top down, all while employing mathematical modeling approaches where possible to enhance ERA. Because top-down ERA is unconventional, we also offer some suggestions for how it might be implemented efficaciously. We hope this review helps researchers in the field of ERA fill key information gaps and helps risk assessors identify the best levels of biological organization to conduct ERAs with differing goals.

show abstract

“…Higher-tier approaches only (population and community level experiments as well as models) allow the derivation of an Ecological Recovery Potential of Freshwater Organisms… ERO-RAC. These taxa are often referred to as focal species and potential candidates are described e.g., by Brock ( 2013 ), Gergs et al ( 2011 ) and Ibrahim et al ( 2014 ). These taxa are often referred to as focal species and potential candidates are described e.g., by Brock ( 2013 ), Gergs et al ( 2011 ) and Ibrahim et al ( 2014 ).…”

Section: Risk Assessment Ecological Recovery and Legislationmentioning

confidence: 99%

Reviews of Environmental Contamination and Toxicology Volume 236

Voogt¹

2016

Reviews of Environmental Contamination and Toxicology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

A contribution to the identification of representative vulnerable fish species for pesticide risk assessment in Europe—A comparison of population resilience using matrix models

Cited by 33 publications

References 69 publications

Ecological Recovery Potential of Freshwater Organisms: Consequences for Environmental Risk Assessment of Chemicals

Ecological Recovery Potential of Freshwater Organisms: Consequences for Environmental Risk Assessment of Chemicals

The pros and cons of ecological risk assessment based on data from different levels of biological organization

Reviews of Environmental Contamination and Toxicology Volume 236

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About