Principles for regulatory testing and interpretation of semi-field and field studies with non-target arthropods

Candolfi, M. P.; Bigler, F.; Campbell, Peter J.; Heimbach, Udo; Schmuck, Richard A.; Angeli, G.; Bakker, Frank; Brown, Kate; Carli, Geraldo Attílio De; Dinter, Axel; Forti, Davide; Forster, Rolf; Gathmann, Achim; Hassan, S. A.; Mead-Briggs, M. A.; Melandri, Manuela; Neumann, Paul; Pasqualini, Eddi; Powell, W.; Reboulet, J.-N.; Romijn, Kees; Sechser, B.; Thieme, Th.; Ufer, A.; Vergnet, Ch.; Vogt, Heidrun

doi:10.1007/bf02956449

Cited by 45 publications

(12 citation statements)

References 1 publication

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Unlike the approach of worst case exposure on inert glass plates in lower tier studies with non-target beneficial organisms (Candolfi et al 2000), the results of the present study and other studies (e.g. Domene et al 2012;Amorim et al 2005) have shown that the use of a standardised artificial soil in lower tier laboratory tests with soil organisms does not reflect a worst case scenario as it ranges among the soils with lowest toxicity.…”

Section: Implication On Eracontrasting

confidence: 88%

Natural soils in OECD 222 testing — influence of soil water and soil properties on earthworm reproduction toxicity of carbendazim

et al. 2023

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Soil sorption properties can influence the bioavailability of substances and consequently the toxicity for soil organisms. Current standardised laboratory testing for the exposure assessment of pesticides to soil organisms uses OECD artificial soil that does not reflect the high variation in chemical-physical soil properties found in natural agroecosystems. According to guideline OECD 222, earthworm reproduction tests with Eisenia fetida and the pesticide carbendazim were performed in four natural soils and OECD artificial soil. By using pF 1.6, which ensures a uniformity in actual soil water availability, the control reproduction performance of E. fetida in all natural soils was at the same level as OECD artificial soil. In a principle component analysis, the variation in toxicity between the tested soils was attributable to a combination of two soil properties, namely total organic carbon content (TOC) and pH. The largest difference of 4.9-fold was found between the typical agricultural Luvisol with 1.03% TOC and pH 6.2 (EC10: 0.17 (0.12–0.21) mg a.i. kg−1 sdw, EC50: 0.36 (0.31–0.40) mg a.i. kg−1 sdw) and OECD artificial soil with 4.11% TOC and pH 5.6 (EC10: 0.84 (0.72–0.92) mg a.i. kg−1 sdw, EC50: 1.07 (0.99–1.15) mg a.i. kg−1 sdw). The use of typical agricultural soils in standardised laboratory earthworm testing was successfully established with using the measure pF for soil moisture adjustment. It provides a more application-oriented approach and could serve as a new tool to refine the environmental risk assessment at lower tier testing or in an intermediate tier based approach.

show abstract

Section: Implication On Eracontrasting

confidence: 88%

Natural soils in OECD 222 testing — influence of soil water and soil properties on earthworm reproduction toxicity of carbendazim

et al. 2023

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…The following guidance documents were followed in the production of this conclusion: European Commission (2000a,b).…”

Section: Identity Physical/chemical/technical Properties and Methods ...mentioning

confidence: 99%

“…The risk assessment was based on the following documents: European Commission (2002a,b), SETAC (2001), EFSA (2013) and EFSA PPR Panel (2013).…”

Section: Ecotoxicologymentioning

confidence: 99%

Peer review of the pesticide risk assessment of the active substance sheep fat

Álvarez¹,

Arena²,

Auteri³

et al. 2022

EFS2

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The conclusions of EFSA following the peer review of the initial risk assessments carried out by the competent authorities of the rapporteur Member State the Czech Republic (CZ) and co‐rapporteur Member State France (FR) for the pesticide active substance sheep fat and the considerations as regards the inclusion of the substance in Annex IV of Regulation (EC) No 396/2005 are reported. The context of the peer review was that required by Commission Implementing Regulation (EU) No 844/2012, as amended by Commission Implementing Regulation (EU) No 2018/1659. The conclusions were reached on the basis of the evaluation of the representative uses of sheep fat as a repellent on deciduous and coniferous trees in forestry. The reliable end points, appropriate for use in regulatory risk assessment are presented. Missing information identified as being required by the regulatory framework is listed.

show abstract

“…The risk assessment was based on the following documents: European Commission ( 2002a , b ), SETAC ( 2001 ), EFSA ( 2009 , 2013 ) and EFSA PPR Panel ( 2013 ).…”

Section: Ecotoxicologymentioning

confidence: 99%

Peer review of the pesticide risk assessment of the active substance metiram

Álvarez¹,

Arena²,

Auteri³

et al. 2023

EFS2

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The conclusions of EFSA following the peer review of the initial risk assessments carried out by the competent authorities of the rapporteur Member State Italy and co-rapporteur Member State the United Kingdom for the pesticide active substance metiram are reported. The context of the peer review was that required by Commission Implementing Regulation (EU) No 844/2012, as amended by Commission Implementing Regulation (EU) No 2018/1659. The conclusions were reached on the basis of the evaluation of the representative uses of metiram as a fungicide on grapes (wine table) and potatoes (all being field uses). It was concluded that following the guidance on this topic, metiram has endocrine disrupting potential, which is a cut-off criterion for non-approval of an active substance. Considerations are also provided on whether exposure to humans and the environment from the representative use of metiram on potatoes can be considered negligible, taking into account information from the applicant and the European Commission's draft technical guidance on this topic. The information available indicated this exposure was not negligible. The reliable end points, appropriate for use in regulatory risk assessment are presented. Missing information identified as being required by the regulatory framework is listed. Concerns are reported where identified. An evaluation of data concerning the necessity of metiram as a fungicide to control a serious danger to plant health which cannot be contained by other available means, including non-chemical methods is also presented.

show abstract

Principles for regulatory testing and interpretation of semi-field and field studies with non-target arthropods

Cited by 45 publications

References 1 publication

Natural soils in OECD 222 testing — influence of soil water and soil properties on earthworm reproduction toxicity of carbendazim

Natural soils in OECD 222 testing — influence of soil water and soil properties on earthworm reproduction toxicity of carbendazim

Peer review of the pesticide risk assessment of the active substance sheep fat

Peer review of the pesticide risk assessment of the active substance metiram

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About