Integrating chemical fate and population-level effect models for pesticides at landscape scale: New options for risk assessment

Focks, Andreas; Horst, Mechteld ter; Berg, Erik van den; Baveco, Hans; Brink, Paul J. Van den

doi:10.1016/j.ecolmodel.2013.09.023

Cited by 49 publications

(42 citation statements)

References 40 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…For example, in ERA focus is often placed on recovery of in-field populations, utilizing the spatial dynamics of mobile agricultural land species. However, this recovery is normally based on small plot experiments that do not take into account the landscape-scale impacts of source-sink dynamics (Topping and Lagisz 2012, Topping, Kjaer et al 2013, Focks, ter Horst et al 2014). …”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Towards a landscape scale management of pesticides: ERA using changes in modelled occupancy and abundance to assess long-term population impacts of pesticides

Topping

Craig

Jong

et al. 2015

Science of The Total Environment

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Citation for published item:oppingD ghris tF nd grigD eter F nd de tongD prnk nd uleinD wihel nd vskowskiD yszrd nd wnhiniD frr nd ieperD ilvi nd mithD o nd ousD tos¡ e ulo nd treisslD prnz nd wrowskyD ulus nd iktkD eldrik nd vn der vindenD on @PHISA 9owrds lndspe sle mngement of pestiides X ie using hnges in modelled oupny nd undne to ssess longEterm popultion impts of pestiidesF9D iene of the totl environmentFD SQU F ppF ISWEITWF Further information on publisher's website: Use policyThe full-text may be used and/or reproduced, and given to third parties in any format or medium, without prior permission or charge, for personal research or study, educational, or not-for-prot purposes provided that:• a full bibliographic reference is made to the original source • a link is made to the metadata record in DRO • the full-text is not changed in any way The full-text must not be sold in any format or medium without the formal permission of the copyright holders.Please consult the full DRO policy for further details. AbstractPesticides are regulated in Europe and this process includes an environmental risk assessment (ERA) for non-target arthropods (NTA). Traditionally a non-spatial or field trial assessment is used. In this study we exemplify the introduction of a spatial context to the ERA as well as suggest a way in which the results of complex models, necessary for proper inclusion of spatial aspects in the ERA, can be presented and evaluated easily using abundance and occupancy ratios (AOR). We used an agent-based simulation system and an existing model for a widespread carabid beetle (Bembidion lampros), to evaluate the impact of a fictitious highly-toxic pesticide on population density and the distribution of beetles in time and space. Landscape structure and field margin management were evaluated by comparing scenario-based ERAs for the beetle. Source-sink dynamics led to an off-crop impact even when no pesticide was present off-crop. In addition, the impacts increased with multi-year application of the pesticide whereas current ERA considers only maximally one year. These results further indicated a complex interaction between landscape structure and pesticide effect in time, both in-crop and off-crop, indicating the need for NTA ERA to be conducted at landscape-and multi-season temporal-scales. Use of AOR indices to compare ERA outputs facilitated easy comparison of scenarios, allowing simultaneous evaluation of impacts and planning of mitigation measures. The landscape and population ERA approach also demonstrates that there is a potential to change from regulation of a pesticide in isolation, towards the consideration of pesticide management at landscape scales and provision of biodiversity benefits via inclusion and testing of mitigation measures in authorisation procedures.

show abstract

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Towards a landscape scale management of pesticides: ERA using changes in modelled occupancy and abundance to assess long-term population impacts of pesticides

Topping

Craig

Jong

et al. 2015

Science of The Total Environment

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Increased computational power and agreement on probabilistic risk paradigms allowed regional scale assessments to emerge (Solomon et al 1996Purucker et al 2007). Recent models may incorporate more refined predictions of exposures and effects across landscapes (Schmolke et al 2010;Dixon 2012;Bartell et al 2013;Kohler and Triebskorn 2013;Van den Brink 2013;Wang 2013;Focks et al 2014;Topping et al 2015;Dohmen et al 2016;Hilbers et al 2018). These approaches allow prediction of population exposures to pesticides and resultant responses without having to conduct painstaking multiyear field assessments of population dynamics.…”

Section: Examples Of Higher Tier Effects and Exposure Refinements Formentioning

confidence: 99%

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

Levine

Giddings²,

Valenti

et al. 2019

Integr Envir Assess & Manag

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

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).

show abstract

“…Although there has been a reasonably steady output of papers on the topic since then (Hayes and Landis 2004, Landis 2002, Landis 2003a, Landis 2003b, Landis and Wiegers 1997, Wiegers et al 1998), recently there seems to have been a resurgence of interest (Beketov and Liess 2012, Focks et al 2014, Schafer 2014, Wendt-Rasch et al 2014). Landscape toxicological studies generally quantify differences in biotic or abiotic variables at sites within a landscape that differ in their levels of contamination.…”

Section: Landscape Levelmentioning

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

Integrating chemical fate and population-level effect models for pesticides at landscape scale: New options for risk assessment

Cited by 49 publications

References 40 publications

Towards a landscape scale management of pesticides: ERA using changes in modelled occupancy and abundance to assess long-term population impacts of pesticides

Towards a landscape scale management of pesticides: ERA using changes in modelled occupancy and abundance to assess long-term population impacts of pesticides

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

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

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About