Literature DB >> 19431301

Ecological models in support of regulatory risk assessments of pesticides: developing a strategy for the future.

Valery E Forbes1, Udo Hommen, Pernille Thorbek, Fred Heimbach, Paul J Van den Brink, Jörn Wogram, Hans-Hermann Thulke, Volker Grimm.   

Abstract

This brief communication reports on the main findings of the LEMTOX workshop, held from 9 to 12 September 2007, at the Helmholtz Centre for Environmental Research (UFZ) in Leipzig, Germany. The workshop brought together a diverse group of stakeholders from academia, regulatory authorities, contract research organizations, and industry, representing Europe, the United States, and Asia, to discuss the role of ecological modeling in risk assessments of pesticides, particularly under the European regulatory framework. The following questions were addressed: What are the potential benefits of using ecological models in pesticide registration and risk assessment? What obstacles prevent ecological modeling from being used routinely in regulatory submissions? What actions are needed to overcome the identified obstacles? What recommendations should be made to ensure good modeling practice in this context? The workshop focused exclusively on population models, and discussion was focused on those categories of population models that link effects on individuals (e.g., survival, growth, reproduction, behavior) to effects on population dynamics. The workshop participants concluded that the overall benefits of ecological modeling are that it could bring more ecology into ecological risk assessment, and it could provide an excellent tool for exploring the importance of, and interactions among, ecological complexities. However, there are a number of challenges that need to be overcome before such models will receive wide acceptance for pesticide risk assessment, despite having been used extensively in other contexts (e.g., conservation biology). The need for guidance on Good Modeling Practice (on model development, analysis, interpretation, evaluation, documentation, and communication), as well as the need for case studies that can be used to explore the added value of ecological models for risk assessment, were identified as top priorities. Assessing recovery potential of exposed nontarget species and clarifying the ecological relevance of standard laboratory test results are two areas for which ecological modeling may be able to provide considerable benefits.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2009        PMID: 19431301     DOI: 10.1897/ieam_2008-029.1

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Integr Environ Assess Manag        ISSN: 1551-3777            Impact factor:   2.992


  22 in total

1.  Modelling effects of diquat under realistic exposure patterns in genetically differentiated populations of the gastropod Lymnaea stagnalis.

Authors:  Virginie Ducrot; Alexandre R R Péry; Laurent Lagadic
Journal:  Philos Trans R Soc Lond B Biol Sci       Date:  2010-11-12       Impact factor: 6.237

2.  The toxicokinetics cell demography model to explain metal kinetics in terrestrial invertebrates.

Authors:  Krzysztof Argasinski; Agnieszka Bednarska; Ryszard Laskowski
Journal:  Ecotoxicology       Date:  2012-07-10       Impact factor: 2.823

3.  Mechanistic effect models for ecological risk assessment of chemicals (MEMoRisk)-a new SETAC-Europe Advisory Group.

Authors:  Thomas G Preuss; Udo Hommen; Anne Alix; Roman Ashauer; Paul van den Brink; Peter Chapman; Virginie Ducrot; Valery Forbes; Volker Grimm; Dieter Schäfer; Franz Streissl; Pernille Thorbek
Journal:  Environ Sci Pollut Res Int       Date:  2009-03-26       Impact factor: 4.223

4.  CREAM: a European project on mechanistic effect models for ecological risk assessment of chemicals.

Authors:  Volker Grimm; Roman Ashauer; Valery Forbes; Udo Hommen; Thomas G Preuss; Annette Schmidt; Paul J van den Brink; Jörn Wogram; Pernille Thorbek
Journal:  Environ Sci Pollut Res Int       Date:  2009-08-07       Impact factor: 4.223

5.  Improving mesocosm data analysis through individual-based modelling of control population dynamics: a case study with mosquitofish (Gambusia holbrooki).

Authors:  Rémy Beaudouin; Vincent Ginot; Gilles Monod
Journal:  Ecotoxicology       Date:  2011-08-30       Impact factor: 2.823

6.  Direct and indirect effects of toxins on competition dynamics of species in an aquatic environment.

Authors:  Chunhua Shan; Qihua Huang
Journal:  J Math Biol       Date:  2018-08-29       Impact factor: 2.259

7.  Extrapolating ecotoxicological effects from individuals to populations: a generic approach based on Dynamic Energy Budget theory and individual-based modeling.

Authors:  Benjamin T Martin; Tjalling Jager; Roger M Nisbet; Thomas G Preuss; Monika Hammers-Wirtz; Volker Grimm
Journal:  Ecotoxicology       Date:  2013-02-22       Impact factor: 2.823

8.  The ChimERA project: coupling mechanistic exposure and effect models into an integrated platform for ecological risk assessment.

Authors:  F De Laender; Paul J van den Brink; Colin R Janssen; Antonio Di Guardo
Journal:  Environ Sci Pollut Res Int       Date:  2014-02-16       Impact factor: 4.223

9.  A framework for linking population model development with ecological risk assessment objectives.

Authors:  Sandy Raimondo; Matthew Etterson; Nathan Pollesch; Kristina Garber; Andrew Kanarek; Wade Lehmann; Jill Awkerman
Journal:  Integr Environ Assess Manag       Date:  2018-02-19       Impact factor: 2.992

10.  Coupling toxicokinetic-toxicodynamic and population models for assessing aquatic ecological risks to time-varying pesticide exposures.

Authors:  Glen Thursby; Keith Sappington; Matthew Etterson
Journal:  Environ Toxicol Chem       Date:  2018-08-06       Impact factor: 3.742

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.