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

Topping, Chris; Craig, Peter; Jong, Frank de; Klein, Michael; Laskowski, Ryszard; Manachini, Barbara; Pieper, Silvia; Smith, Robert H.; Sousa, José Paulo; Streissl, Franz; Swarowsky, Klaus; Tiktak, A.; Linden, Tim Van der

doi:10.1016/j.scitotenv.2015.07.152

Cited by 64 publications

(68 citation statements)

References 36 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…Carabid beetles also react sensitively to toxic substances (herbicides, insecticides), changes in soil pH and changes in soil humidity (Hůrka, 1996;Porhajašová et al, 2011;Burgio et al, 2015). Topping et al (2015) evaluated in his research the impact of toxic pesticide on the landscape with the help of the eurytopic species Bembidion lampros.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

The bioindication importance of the Carabidae communities of Veporské vrchy and Juhoslovanská kotlina

Langraf

Petrovičová

David

et al. 2016

Ekológia (Bratislava)

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Langraf V., Petrovičová K., David S., Schlarmannová J.: The bioindication importance of the Carabidae communities of Veporské vrchy and Juhoslovanská kotlina. Ekológia (Bratislava), Vol. 35, No. 2, p. 126-135, 2016.The Carabidae family (Coleoptera) is used frequently for its bioindication potential to detect the environmental burden. In 2013 and 2014, we studied the correlation of Carabidae on the biotopes of six areas in the Veporské vrchy Mts and the Juhoslovenská kotlina basin by using pitfall traps, Möricke plates and Bambara beetle traps. Out of 432 recorded specimens of beetles (53 species, 15 families), the Carabidae family were the highest number of species and specimens represented, with which we confirmed higher anthropogenic interference and disturbance of ecosystems in the Juhoslovenská kotlina basin. This statistic confirms the presence of the following species typically found on arable land: Anchomenus dorsalis, Calathus fuscipes fuscipes, Harpalus affinis and Pseudoophonus rufipes. The ecosystems in the Veporské vrchy Mts region show less disturbance, and the anthropological impact is smaller, indicated by the presence of the Carabus problematicus species, an important indicator of the conservation of natural forest ecosystems.

show abstract

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

The bioindication importance of the Carabidae communities of Veporské vrchy and Juhoslovanská kotlina

Langraf

Petrovičová

David

et al. 2016

Ekológia (Bratislava)

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…In contrast, we see a more dramatic effect of acute mortality, which removes all foraging rabbits immediately. However, it is interesting to note that density in non-exposed areas remains high, suggesting in this case there is no significant depletion effect, or 'action at a distance' [49] seen in other systems [50,51].…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 92%

Rabbit Population Landscape-Scale Simulation to Investigate the Relevance of Using Rabbits in Regulatory Environmental Risk Assessment

Topping

Weyman²

2017

Environ Model Assess

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This paper describes the development and testing of the ALMaSS rabbit model and its baseline, and subsequently its application to the question of lagomorph population vulnerability in environmental risk assessment (ERA). Development and testing following a pattern-oriented modelling protocol resulted in a model able to replicate local and landscape-level rabbit population patterns. We then tested how robust rabbit populations are to an (imaginary) extreme toxic stressor at a landscape level in a variety of landscapes, and to what extremes key uncertain model parameters must be pushed to cause extinctions. This was contrasted with the same (imaginary) toxic stressor applied to the already existing ALMaSS hare model. For EU risk assessment of plant protection products, these results clearly indicate that if the protection goal is population-level impacts, either in abundance and/ or distribution, then the hare is a much more vulnerable species than the rabbit under all the conditions tested. Rabbits would only be more vulnerable than hares if the entire population were to be exposed simultaneously, when lower body mass would then be a critical factor. This did not occur even though the toxicant and exposure scenarios tested here were extreme and, in fragmented landscapes at scales used here, will not occur in reality from the use of plant protection products on crop fields. As well as specifically answering the question on rabbit versus hare vulnerability, this study generally illustrates the potential application of models for setting focal species for risk assessments.

show abstract

“…Consequently, most landscape studies are correlational, at best taking advantage of natural experiments. The exception would be mathematical modeling studies that attempt to assess the effects of a contaminant within a metapopulation (connected populations) or metacommunity (connected communities) context (Leibold et al 2004, Topping et al 2015, Topping et al 2016, Topping et al 2014). Nevertheless, landscape-level ERA is becoming more feasible as countries have begun national water quality monitoring programs (e.g.…”

Section: Landscape Levelmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…However, once landscape models have been developed and validated, the cost could decrease (e.g. Topping et al 2015, Topping et al 2016, Topping et al 2014). …”

Section: Landscape Levelmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…But given the ephemeral nature of some chemicals and the associated logistical challenges of covering large spatial scales, we do not propose that landscape field studies are an effective or efficient approach for screening large numbers of chemicals. In contrast, it might be possible to develop and validate landscape models across multiple chemicals and then use these validated models to predict effects on untested chemicals (see Topping et al 2015, Topping et al 2016, Topping et al 2014), but this remains to be seen. Because of these logistical challenges, landscape studies often only focus on one to a few species and thus often have measurement endpoints that far from the most defensible assessment endpoints.…”

Section: Landscape Levelmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

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

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

Cited by 64 publications

References 36 publications

The bioindication importance of the Carabidae communities of Veporské vrchy and Juhoslovanská kotlina

The bioindication importance of the Carabidae communities of Veporské vrchy and Juhoslovanská kotlina

Rabbit Population Landscape-Scale Simulation to Investigate the Relevance of Using Rabbits in Regulatory Environmental Risk Assessment

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

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About