Literature DB >> 20821697

Potential application of ecological models in the European environmental risk assessment of chemicals. I. Review of protection goals in EU directives and regulations.

Udo Hommen1, J M Hans Baveco, Nika Galic, Paul J van den Brink.   

Abstract

Several European directives and regulations address the environmental risk assessment of chemicals. We used the protection of freshwater ecosystems against plant protection products, biocidal products, human and veterinary pharmaceuticals, and other chemicals and priority substances under the Water Framework Directive as examples to explore the potential of ecological effect models for a refined risk assessment. Our analysis of the directives, regulations, and related guidance documents lead us to distinguish the following 5 areas for the application of ecological models in chemical risk assessment: 1) Extrapolation of organism-level effects to the population level: The protection goals are formulated in general terms, e.g., avoiding "unacceptable effects" or "adverse impact" on the environment or the "viability of exposed species." In contrast, most of the standard ecotoxicological tests provide data only on organism-level endpoints and are thus not directly linked to the protection goals which focus on populations and communities. 2) Extrapolation of effects between different exposure profiles: Especially for plant protection products, exposure profiles can be very variable and impossible to cover in toxicological tests. 3) Extrapolation of recovery processes: As a consequence of the often short-term exposures to plant protection products, the risk assessment is based on the community recovery principle. On the other hand, assessments under the other directives assume a more or less constant exposure and are based on the ecosystem threshold principle. 4) Analysis and prediction of indirect effects: Because effects on 1 or a few taxa might have consequences on other taxa that are not directly affected by the chemical, such indirect effects on communities have to be considered. 5) Prediction of bioaccumulation within food chains: All directives take the possibility of bioaccumulation, and thus secondary poisoning within the food chain, into account. (c) 2010 SETAC.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2010        PMID: 20821697     DOI: 10.1002/ieam.69

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


  21 in total

1.  SSD-based rating system for the classification of pesticide risk on biodiversity.

Authors:  Serenella Sala; Sonia Migliorati; Gianna S Monti; Marco Vighi
Journal:  Ecotoxicology       Date:  2012-01-22       Impact factor: 2.823

Review 2.  A plea for the use of copepods in freshwater ecotoxicology.

Authors:  Devdutt Kulkarni; André Gergs; Udo Hommen; Hans Toni Ratte; Thomas G Preuss
Journal:  Environ Sci Pollut Res Int       Date:  2012-08-17       Impact factor: 4.223

3.  A comparison of simple and complex population models to reduce uncertainty in ecological risk assessments of chemicals: example with three species of Daphnia.

Authors:  Niklas Hanson; John D Stark
Journal:  Ecotoxicology       Date:  2011-04-19       Impact factor: 2.823

4.  Identification of realistic worst case aquatic macroinvertebrate species for prospective risk assessment using the trait concept.

Authors:  André Gergs; Silke Classen; Udo Hommen; Thomas G Preuss
Journal:  Environ Sci Pollut Res Int       Date:  2011-03-29       Impact factor: 4.223

5.  Assessing and Managing Natural Resource Damages: Continuing Challenges and Opportunities.

Authors:  Lawrence W Barnthouse; Ralph G Stahl
Journal:  Environ Manage       Date:  2017-03-04       Impact factor: 3.266

6.  Natural variability of enzymatic biomarkers in freshwater invertebrates.

Authors:  Alessio Ippolito; Roberto Giacchini; Paolo Parenti; Marco Vighi
Journal:  Environ Sci Pollut Res Int       Date:  2016-10-18       Impact factor: 4.223

7.  Toward sustainable environmental quality: Priority research questions for Europe.

Authors:  Paul J Van den Brink; Alistair B A Boxall; Lorraine Maltby; Bryan W Brooks; Murray A Rudd; Thomas Backhaus; David Spurgeon; Violaine Verougstraete; Charmaine Ajao; Gerald T Ankley; Sabine E Apitz; Kathryn Arnold; Tomas Brodin; Miguel Cañedo-Argüelles; Jennifer Chapman; Jone Corrales; Marie-Agnès Coutellec; Teresa F Fernandes; Jerker Fick; Alex T Ford; Gemma Giménez Papiol; Ksenia J Groh; Thomas H Hutchinson; Hank Kruger; Jussi V K Kukkonen; Stefania Loutseti; Stuart Marshall; Derek Muir; Manuel E Ortiz-Santaliestra; Kai B Paul; Andreu Rico; Ismael Rodea-Palomares; Jörg Römbke; Tomas Rydberg; Helmut Segner; Mathijs Smit; Cornelis A M van Gestel; Marco Vighi; Inge Werner; Elke I Zimmer; Joke van Wensem
Journal:  Environ Toxicol Chem       Date:  2018-07-19       Impact factor: 3.742

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.  Decomposition analysis of LTREs may facilitate the design of short-term ecotoxicological tests.

Authors:  Natnael T Hamda; Dragan M Jevtić; Ryszard Laskowski
Journal:  Ecotoxicology       Date:  2012-04-21       Impact factor: 2.823

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.