A list of fish species that are potentially exposed to pesticides in edge-of-field water bodies in the European Union—a first step towards identifying vulnerable representatives for risk assessment

Abstract

Surrogate species are used in standard toxicity tests for the environmental risk assessment of chemicals. Test results are then extrapolated to the situation in the field, which is often associated with a large degree of uncertainty. Since a vulnerable species in the field is not only characterised by its intrinsic sensitivity to a stressor but also by its potential for exposure and its population resilience, the identification of focal species based on these three components of vulnerability is needed for a more ecologically relevant risk assessment. This study listed European fish species that are susceptible to pesticide exposure in the field and thus achieved the first step towards identifying focal species for the risk assessment of pesticides for fish in Europe. A step-wise filtering approach was applied to list freshwater fish species that are native to Europe and widespread in the European Union, which inhabit streams, ditches or ponds in agricultural landscapes and therefore, are at an elevated risk of being exposed to pesticides. Out of the 579 fish species occurring in European freshwater, 27 species met the filtering criteria. The resulting list was verified based on monitoring studies that were conducted in agricultural landscapes over the past 20 years. Focal fish species that can be used for a more ecologically relevant environmental risk assessment of pesticides in Europe can be identified from the produced list of species by further assessing their ecological (life history and dispersal characteristics) and intrinsic sensitivities.Electronic supplementary material.The online version of this article (doi:10.1007/s11356-013-1471-x) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.

Characterisation of transcriptional responses to dioxins and dioxin-like contaminants in roach ( Rutilus rutilus ) using whole transcriptome analysis

“…One species of fish that is widely distributed and can constitute a large proportion of the fish biomass in water bodies throughout Europe is the common roach (Rutilus rutilus) (Baade and Fredrich, 1998;Ibrahim et al, 2013;Larmuseau et al, 2009). In comparison with more frequently investigated model species of fish, the effects of DLCs on roach have received little attention and only their basic biochemical effects (e.g.…”

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

“…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).…”

Toward the definition of specific protection goals for the environmental risk assessment of chemicals: A perspective on environmental regulation in Europe

“…Environmental complexity and variability present major challenges for assessing the environmental risks of chemicals in prospective ERA, prior to the registration and authorization of new substances (Chapman 2002;EC 2012aEC , 2014Meissle et al 2012;Ibrahim et al 2013 Specific protection goals (SPGs) are scarce in legislation and guidance concerning the prospective ERA of chemicals (Table 2). SPGs specify "entities that need to be protected, the attributes and/or functions of those entities, as well as the magnitude, temporal and spatial scales of effects on those attributes and/or functions that can be tolerated, without impacting the general protection goal, and the required degree of certainty with which the protection goal defined should be achieved" (EFSA 2010).…”

“…These regions contain a range of land use or land cover types (Meissle et al 2012;EC 2014), water body types (Water Framework Directive [WFD 2000]) and "ecologically relevant" species, which are potentially exposed to numerous different environmental pressures (Chapman 2002;Meissle et al 2012;Ibrahim et al 2013 Adapted from Beder (2006) and Brock et al (2006).…”