Exposure of captive feral pigeons to fonofos‐treated seed in a semifield experiment

Pascual, Juan Antonio; Hart, Andrew

doi:10.1002/etc.5620161216

Cited by 11 publications

(3 citation statements)

References 19 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…In the case of birds, this behaviour has been described in corvids and pigeons (e.g. Pascual and Hart, 1997;Kennedy and Connery, 2008;Curtis et al, 2019), thus the consideration of a digging species is necessary when exposure assessment is driven by medium granivorous birds consuming seeds (i.e. in the case that it is demonstrated that there are few seeds remaining on the soil surface).…”

Section: Abbreviationsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Moreover, additional digging after seeds of some species (e.g. Pascual and Hart, 1997; Kennedy and Connery, 2008; Curtis et al., 2019) must be also considered for acute and reproductive risk. Therefore, to consider the maximum searching area to reach the RAD as a refinement, it is first necessary to establish appropriate focal species (Section 6.5.2) considering both those that feed only from the soil surface and those which are known to dig for seeds/granules.…”

Section: Exposure Assessment Tiersmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Risk assessment for Birds and Mammals

Aagaard¹,

Berny²,

Chaton³

et al. 2023

EFS2

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The European Commission asked EFSA to revise the Guidance on the risk assessment for birds and mammals. That guidance described how to perform risk assessment for birds and mammals from plant protection products, containing pesticide active substances, in accordance with Regulation (EU) 1107/2009. The current guidance document is an update of EFSA's existing guidance document titled ‘Risk assessment for Birds and Mammals’ which was published in 2009. It outlines a tiered risk assessment scheme covering dietary exposure, exposure via secondary poisoning and exposure via intake of contaminated water.

show abstract

Section: Abbreviationsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Exposure Assessment Tiersmentioning

confidence: 99%

Risk assessment for Birds and Mammals

Aagaard¹,

Berny²,

Chaton³

et al. 2023

EFS2

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…This probably explains the failure of some existing pen studies (e.g. Pascual and Hart, 1997) to show mortality despite mortalities being documented for the same species in the wild. 91 If the purpose of a pen study is to investigate avoidance, the PPR Panel's recommendations in section 6.2 apply.…”

Section: Pen Studiesmentioning

confidence: 99%

Risk Assessment for Birds and Mammals ‐ Revision of Guidance Document under Council Directive 91/414/EEC (SANCO/4145/2000 – final of 25 September 2002) ‐ Scientific Opinion of the Panel on Plant protection products and their Residues (PPR) on the Science behind the Guidance Document on Risk Assessment for birds and mammals

2008

EFS2

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

In the course of the revision it became apparent that the task embraced several risk management issues that are not within EFSA's and the PPR Panel's remit. Therefore, the PPR Panel has adopted a two-stage approach and first has prepared the present 'Scientific Opinion on the Science behind the Guidance Document (GD) on risk assessment for birds and mammals' using a modular approach. In the second stage, a joint working group of representatives from EFSA, the European Commission and Member States will consider the risk management issues and finalise the revised/new Guidance Document. However, this opinion will remain unchanged and hence be a reference document giving the full scientific background to the risk assessment for birds and mammals.1 For citation purposes: Scientific Opinion of the Panel on Plant protection products and their residues on a request from the EFSA PRAPeR Unit on risk assessment for birds and mammals. The EFSA Journal (2008) 734, 1-181 Risk assessment for birds & mammalsThe EFSA Journal (2008) 734, 2-181The opinion addresses approaches to risk assessment for birds and mammals. In both cases, a tiered approach is used to assess the risk of mortality and reproductive effects.The PPR Panel has developed a first-tier assessment procedure for a large range of scenarios including different crops and different types of pesticide uses (e.g. granules, seed treatment, and sprays). Each scenario is a combination of the ecological characteristics of exposed species and other factors relevant to exposure, e.g. the type and structure of crop, and the type of formulation of the pesticide product. The Panel has used the best available data to define each scenario.In most cases the assessment results in a toxicity-exposure-ratio (TER) as a measure of risk. However, in the case of acute risks to birds from sprayed pesticides, the PPR Panel has also offered an alternative approach based on the number of lethal doses applied per square meter (LD 50 /m²).The PPR Panel evaluated the level of protection provided by each first-tier procedure, taking account of the conservatism of the assumptions used, uncertainties arising from factors omitted from the assessment (e.g. dermal exposure) and, where available, evidence on actual effects in field studies or from incident monitoring.The PPR Panel provides guidance on the range of options available for higher-tier risk assessment, e.g. refined dietary exposure assessments using realistic data on the ecology of relevant species; or field studies in order to get better residue data, better ecological data, or to measure effects.The PPR Panel also presents guidance on how to combine different types of evidence from higher-tier risk assessment to form an overall judgement on the level of risk, giving appropriate weight to the strengths and uncertainties of each type of evidence.More detailed guidance on specific aspects of higher risk assessment is given in a series of Appendices to the opinion. Further Appendices provide detailed scientific background and underlying d...

show abstract

Proposed Indoor Test Procedure to Quantify Pesticide Treatment Effects on Seed Consumption by Birds

Esther

Blanckenhagen²,

Heiden

et al. 2019

Environmental Toxicology and Chemistry

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Pesticides used in seed coatings can influence seed consumption by birds and, therefore, actual exposure risk for them. A quantification of such effects on consumption is currently not regarded as a refinement factor in environmental risk assessments, although it is a possible option and should be considered, for example, for comparing exposure risk of different pesticides. It can highlight avoidance behavior, preventing birds from taking up lethal or sublethal pesticide doses. To formulate a standard, we developed an indoor test procedure based on established pen test methods, including 2-and no-choice phases with hunger periods. During testing, the highest standards of animal welfare were applied. Statistical approaches were used to determine the most appropriate number of replicates and for analysis. The effect on consumption of seeds is expressed as the ratio of consumed treated to untreated seeds. This consumption factor can be applied in avian risk assessments for seed treatments equivalent to an avoidance factor. We present, as an example, an application of the procedure to obtain a seed-and species-specific consumption factor for oilseed rape seeds (Brassica napus) provided untreated and treated with fungicides to greenfinches (Carduelis chloris) and Japanese quail (Coturnix japonica). Overall, bird constitution was not negatively affected by the test procedure in either species. The test procedure was suitable for showing differences in expected consumption patterns, such as greater avoidance of treated seeds in 2-choice than in no-choice tests. However, the consumption differed between species and fungicide treatments, allowing us to rank avoidance effects of different fungicides. Using the presented standard procedure to generate comparable pesticide-and species-specific consumption factors for more species and seed treatments may result in refinement of default values and reduce animal trials in different designs in the future. Environ Toxicol Chem 2020;39:359-370.

show abstract

Exposure of captive feral pigeons to fonofos‐treated seed in a semifield experiment

Cited by 11 publications

References 19 publications

Risk assessment for Birds and Mammals

Risk assessment for Birds and Mammals

Proposed Indoor Test Procedure to Quantify Pesticide Treatment Effects on Seed Consumption by Birds

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About