In: Ecotoxicology and environmental safety: EES ; official journal of the International Society of Ecotoxicology and Environmental safety, Band 89, S. 196-203
In: Ecotoxicology and environmental safety: EES ; official journal of the International Society of Ecotoxicology and Environmental safety, Band 78, S. 178-183
In: Umweltwissenschaften und Schadstoff-Forschung: UWSF ; Zeitschrift für Umweltchemie und Ökotoxikologie ; Organ des Verbandes für Geoökologie in Deutschland (VGöD) und der Eco-Informa, Band 9, Heft 5, S. 267-272
Surrogate species are used in standard toxicity tests for the environmental risk assessment of chemicals. Test results are then extrapolated to the situation in the field, which is often associated with a large degree of uncertainty. Since a vulnerable species in the field is not only characterised by its intrinsic sensitivity to a stressor but also by its potential for exposure and its population resilience, the identification of focal species based on these three components of vulnerability is needed for a more ecologically relevant risk assessment. This study listed European fish species that are susceptible to pesticide exposure in the field and thus achieved the first step towards identifying focal species for the risk assessment of pesticides for fish in Europe. A step-wise filtering approach was applied to list freshwater fish species that are native to Europe and widespread in the European Union, which inhabit streams, ditches or ponds in agricultural landscapes and therefore, are at an elevated risk of being exposed to pesticides. Out of the 579 fish species occurring in European freshwater, 27 species met the filtering criteria. The resulting list was verified based on monitoring studies that were conducted in agricultural landscapes over the past 20 years. Focal fish species that can be used for a more ecologically relevant environmental risk assessment of pesticides in Europe can be identified from the produced list of species by further assessing their ecological (life history and dispersal characteristics) and intrinsic sensitivities.
In: Umweltwissenschaften und Schadstoff-Forschung: UWSF ; Zeitschrift für Umweltchemie und Ökotoxikologie ; Organ des Verbandes für Geoökologie in Deutschland (VGöD) und der Eco-Informa, Band 19, Heft 4
In: Umweltwissenschaften und Schadstoff-Forschung: UWSF ; Zeitschrift für Umweltchemie und Ökotoxikologie ; Organ des Verbandes für Geoökologie in Deutschland (VGöD) und der Eco-Informa, Band 18, Heft 3, S. 211-212
In: Umweltwissenschaften und Schadstoff-Forschung: UWSF ; Zeitschrift für Umweltchemie und Ökotoxikologie ; Organ des Verbandes für Geoökologie in Deutschland (VGöD) und der Eco-Informa, Band 20, Heft 2, S. 154-154
Abstract Background A recently published article, by Reiber et al., on the representativity of macroinvertebrate communities in outdoor micro- or mesocosm studies, used as a higher tier tool in the environmental risk assessment of plant protection products (PPPs) in the EU, concluded that 'micro-/mesocosm studies do not represent natural macroinvertebrate communities'. Fundamentally, the article based its conclusion on the analysis of data from 26 streams used in a monitoring project in Germany (2018–2019), in comparison to taxa found in seven lentic micro- and mesocosm studies, conducted at four test sites (2013 – 2018), and submitted to the UBA, Germany.
Results There are multiple reasons why this conclusion is incorrect, e.g. the number of taxa, for which the Minimum Detectable Differences (MDDs) were low enough to allow a detection of direct effects in the seven lentic mesocosm studies, cannot be compared to the number of taxa just present in at least five of 26 streams. We have further investigated the data from five of the seven studies which were analysed in detail by Reiber et al. and determined that the MDDs of 12 to 18 invertebrate taxa per study fulfilled the current recommendation to allow a detection of medium effects (MDD up to 70%). However, which taxa can be considered potentially sensitive depends on the specific test item. While lentic test systems may not be suitable to test effects on typical stream taxa, taxa occurring in lentic systems such as ponds and ditches are not by definition less sensitive, or vulnerable, to pesticides than taxa living in streams, and their relative sensitivity can be checked in laboratory tests, or artificial streams, if needed.
Conclusions In our view, well conducted micro- and mesocosm studies do provide reliable and useful data for the environmental risk assessment of plant protection products covering long-term, as well as indirect, effects under semi-natural conditions.
In: Umweltwissenschaften und Schadstoff-Forschung: UWSF ; Zeitschrift für Umweltchemie und Ökotoxikologie ; Organ des Verbandes für Geoökologie in Deutschland (VGöD) und der Eco-Informa, Band 21, Heft 3, S. 319-322
In: Umweltwissenschaften und Schadstoff-Forschung: UWSF ; Zeitschrift für Umweltchemie und Ökotoxikologie ; Organ des Verbandes für Geoökologie in Deutschland (VGöD) und der Eco-Informa, Band 19, Heft S1, S. 6-6