Assessing pesticide risks to threatened and endangered species using population models: Findings and recommendations from a CropLife America Science Forum

Wildlife ecological risk assessment in the 21st century: Promising technologies to assess toxicological effects

Despite advances in toxicity testing and the development of new approach methodologies (NAMs) for hazard assessment, the ecological risk assessment (ERA) framework for terrestrial wildlife (i.e., air-breathing amphibians, reptiles, birds, and mammals) has remained unchanged for decades. While survival, growth, and reproductive endpoints derived from whole-animal toxicity tests are central to hazard assessment, nonstandard measures of biological effects at multiple levels of biological organization (e.g., molecular, cellular, tissue, organ, organism, population, community, ecosystem) have the potential to enhance the relevance of prospective and retrospective wildlife ERAs. Other factors (e.g., indirect effects of contaminants on food supplies and infectious disease processes) are influenced by toxicants at individual, population, and community levels, and need to be factored into chemically based risk assessments to enhance the "eco" component of ERAs. Regulatory and logistical challenges often relegate such nonstandard endpoints and indirect effects to postregistration evaluations of pesticides and industrial chemicals and contaminated site evaluations. While NAMs are being developed, to date, their applications in ERAs focused on wildlife have been limited. No single magic tool or model will address all uncertainties in hazard assessment. Modernizing wildlife ERAs will likely entail combinations of laboratory- and field-derived data at multiple levels of biological organization, knowledge collection solutions (e.g., systematic review, adverse outcome pathway frameworks), and inferential methods that facilitate integrations and risk estimations focused on species, populations, interspecific extrapolations, and ecosystem services modeling, with less dependence on whole-animal data and simple hazard ratios. Integr Environ Assess Manag 2024;20:725-748. © 2023 His Majesty the King in Right of Canada and The Authors. Integrated Environmental Assessment and Management published by Wiley Periodicals LLC on behalf of Society of Environmental Toxicology & Chemistry (SETAC). Reproduced with the permission of the Minister of Environment and Climate Change Canada. This article has been contributed to by US Government employees and their work is in the public domain in the USA.

Using life-history trait variation to inform ecological risk assessments for threatened and endangered plant species

Developing population models for assessing risks to terrestrial plant species listed as threatened or endangered under the Endangered Species Act (ESA) is challenging given a paucity of data on their life histories. The purpose of this study was to develop a novel approach for identifying relatively data-rich nonlisted species that could serve as representatives for species listed under the ESA in the development of population models to inform risk assessments. We used the USDA PLANTS Database, which provides data on plants present in the US territories, to create a list of herbaceous plants. A total of 8742 species was obtained, of which 344 were listed under the ESA. Using the most up-to-date phylogeny for vascular plants in combination with a database of matrix population models for plants (COMPADRE) and cluster analyses, we investigated how listed species were distributed across the plant phylogeny, grouped listed and nonlisted species according to their life history, and identified the traits distinguishing the clusters. We performed elasticity analyses to determine the relative sensitivity of population growth rate to perturbations of species' survival, growth, and reproduction and compared these across clusters and between listed and nonlisted species. We found that listed species were distributed widely across the plant phylogeny as well as clusters, suggesting that listed species do not share a common evolution or life-history characteristics that would make them uniquely vulnerable. Lifespan and age at maturity were more important for distinguishing clusters than were reproductive traits. For clusters that were intermediate in their lifespan, listed and nonlisted species responded similarly to perturbations of their life histories. However, for clusters at either extreme of lifespan, the response to survival perturbations varied depending on conservation status. These results can be used to guide the choice of representative species for population model development in the context of ecological risk assessment. Integr Environ Assess Manag 2023;19:213-223. © 2022 The Authors. Integrated Environmental Assessment and Management published by Wiley Periodicals LLC on behalf of Society of Environmental Toxicology & Chemistry (SETAC).

A critical review of effect modeling for ecological risk assessment of plant protection products

A wide diversity of plant protection products (PPP) is used for crop protection leading to the contamination of soil, water, and air, which can have ecotoxicological impacts on living organisms. It is inconceivable to study the effects of each compound on each species from each compartment, experimental studies being time consuming and cost prohibitive, and animal testing having to be avoided. Therefore, numerous models are developed to assess PPP ecotoxicological effects. Our objective was to provide an overview of the modeling approaches enabling the assessment of PPP effects (including biopesticides) on the biota. Six categories of models were inventoried: (Q)SAR, DR and TKTD, population, multi-species, landscape, and mixture models. They were developed for various species (terrestrial and aquatic vertebrates and invertebrates, primary producers, micro-organisms) belonging to diverse environmental compartments, to address different goals (e.g., species sensitivity or PPP bioaccumulation assessment, ecosystem services protection). Among them, mechanistic models are increasingly recognized by EFSA for PPP regulatory risk assessment but, to date, remain not considered in notified guidance documents. The strengths and limits of the reviewed models are discussed together with improvement avenues (multigenerational effects, multiple biotic and abiotic stressors). This review also underlines a lack of model testing by means of field data and of sensitivity and uncertainty analyses. Accurate and robust modeling of PPP effects and other stressors on living organisms, from their application in the field to their functional consequences on the ecosystems at different scales of time and space, would help going toward a more sustainable management of the environment. Graphical Abstract Combination of the keyword lists composing the first bibliographic query. Columns were joined together with the logical operator AND. All keyword lists are available in Supplementary Information at https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.5775038 (Larras et al. 2021).

Endogenous Lifecycle Models for Chemical Risk Assessment

Despite over 50 years of research on the use of population models in chemical risk assessment, their practical utility has remained elusive. A novel application and interpretation of ecotoxicological models, Endogenous Lifecycle Models (ELM), is proposed that offers some of the benefits sought from population models, at much lower cost of design, parametrization, and verification. ELMs capture the endogenous lifecycle processes of growth, development, survival, and reproduction and integrate these to estimate and predict expected fitness. Two measures of fitness are proposed as natural model predictions in the context of chemical risk assessment, lifetime reproductive success, and the expected annual propagation of genetic descendants, including self (intrinsic fitness). Six characteristics of the ELM approach are reviewed and illustrated with two ELM examples, the first for a general passerine lifecycle and the second for bald eagle (Haliaeetus leucocephalus). Throughout, the focus is on development of robust qualitative model predictions that depend as little as possible on specific parameter values. Thus, ELMs sacrifice precision to optimize generality in understanding the effects of chemicals across the diversity of avian lifecycles. Notably, the ELM approach integrates naturally with the adverse outcome pathway framework; this integration can be employed as a midtier risk assessment tool when lower tier analyses suggest potential risk.

Abiotic Factors Influence Surface Water Herbicide Concentrations Following Silvicultural Aerial Application in Oregon's North Coast Range

Nontarget impacts of routine aerial silvicultural practices on surface water quality are not well documented. Thus, uncertainty remains regarding herbicide treatment effects on ecological and human health. To investigate factors that influence silvicultural herbicide concentrations in surface water and identify any potential risks, we conducted a 2-year study that monitored multiple streams for herbicide residues following aerial application of glyphosate, clopyralid, sulfometuron methyl (SMM), and metsulfuron methyl (MSM). The monitored streams drain recently harvested forest lands that also serve as municipal water sources for nearby communities in western Oregon's north coast range. A paired watershed design targeted predicted episodic pulses with water samples collected before, during, and after herbicide application, and during the first posttreatment storm events. We report no relic herbicide detections in control or test streams. Aerial application of glyphosate, clopyralid, SMM, and MSM resulted in no detections in control streams and only trace, episodic concentrations in test streams. Across all test streams from both study years, maximum SMM and MSM detections (≤0.030 μg/L) consistently occurred during the first storm event at sampling locations closest to the treated harvest unit. Results indicate that proximity to the treatment site, time from application, and rainfall influence herbicide presence and concentrations in surface water. Furthermore, detections of trace SMM and MSM concentrations were more than 25 000-fold and 60 000-fold below federal human health safety benchmarks for chronic exposure, respectively. We provide empirical context for understanding surface water herbicide presence following aerial silviculture application under modern forestry best management practices and identify potential risk to ecological and human health. Integr Environ Assess Manag 2019;00:1-14. © 2019 The Authors. Integrated Environmental Assessment and Management published by Wiley Periodicals, Inc. on behalf of Society of Environmental Toxicology & Chemistry (SETAC).

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

The value of models that link organism-level impacts to the responses of a population in ecological risk assessments (ERAs) has been demonstrated extensively over the past few decades. There is little debate about the utility of these models to translate multiple organism-level endpoints into a holistic interpretation of effect to the population; however, there continues to be a struggle for actual application of these models as a common practice in ERA. Although general frameworks for developing models for ERA have been proposed, there is limited guidance on when models should be used, in what form, and how to interpret model output to inform the risk manager's decision. We propose a framework for developing and applying population models in regulatory decision making that focuses on trade-offs of generality, realism, and precision for both ERAs and models. We approach the framework development from the perspective of regulators aimed at defining the needs of specific models commensurate with the assessment objective. We explore why models are not widely used by comparing their requirements and limitations with the needs of regulators. Using a series of case studies under specific regulatory frameworks, we classify ERA objectives by trade-offs of generality, realism, and precision and demonstrate how the output of population models developed with these same trade-offs informs the ERA objective. We examine attributes for both assessments and models that aid in the discussion of these trade-offs. The proposed framework will assist risk assessors and managers to identify models of appropriate complexity and to understand the utility and limitations of a model's output and associated uncertainty in the context of their assessment goals. Integr Environ Assess Manag 2018;14:369-380. Published 2017. This article is a US Government work and is in the public domain in the USA.

Assessing and Managing Natural Resource Damages: Continuing Challenges and Opportunities

In a 2002 paper, we discussed the technical challenges associated with quantifying natural resource injuries, service losses and damages, and suggested some actions that might help to overcome them. An important suggestion was to consider using some of the approaches in ecological risk assessment to help evaluate potential natural resource injuries, and ultimately in some cases to help translate those injuries into natural resource service loss. This was based on the observation that ecological risk assessment and natural resource damage assessments use much of the same types of data, but at that time the experience base with ecological risk assessment was greater than for natural resource damage assessments. We also discussed some of the issues in applying the then current Department of Interior natural resource damage assessments regulations. Since our 2002 publication the scientific literature, relevant regulations, the global context and more have changed. In the current paper we focus on the technical and regulatory changes in natural resource damage assessments practice since 2002, and use recent reports and publications to illustrate those changes and identify new directions in natural resource damage assessments.

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

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.

Assessing the risks of pesticides to threatened and endangered species using population modeling: A critical review and recommendations for future work

United States legislation requires the US Environmental Protection Agency to ensure that pesticide use does not cause unreasonable adverse effects on the environment, including species listed under the Endangered Species Act (ESA; hereafter referred to as listed species). Despite a long history of population models used in conservation biology and resource management and a 2013 report from the US National Research Council recommending their use, application of population models for pesticide risk assessments under the ESA has been minimal. The pertinent literature published from 2004 to 2014 was reviewed to explore the availability of population models and their frequency of use in listed species risk assessments. The models were categorized in terms of structure, taxonomic coverage, purpose, inputs and outputs, and whether the models included density dependence, stochasticity, or risk estimates, or were spatially explicit. Despite the widespread availability of models and an extensive literature documenting their use in other management contexts, only 2 of the approximately 400 studies reviewed used population models to assess the risks of pesticides to listed species. This result suggests that there is an untapped potential to adapt existing models for pesticide risk assessments under the ESA, but also that there are some challenges to do so for listed species. Key conclusions from the analysis are summarized, and priorities are recommended for future work to increase the usefulness of population models as tools for pesticide risk assessments. Environ Toxicol Chem 2016;35:1904-1913. © 2016 SETAC.

Next-generation ecological risk assessment: Predicting risk from molecular initiation to ecosystem service delivery

Ecological risk assessment is the process of evaluating how likely it is that the environment may be impacted as the result of exposure to one or more chemicals and/or other stressors. It is not playing as large a role in environmental management decisions as it should be. A core challenge is that risk assessments often do not relate directly or transparently to protection goals. There have been exciting developments in in vitro testing and high-throughput systems that measure responses to chemicals at molecular and biochemical levels of organization, but the linkage between such responses and impacts of regulatory significance - whole organisms, populations, communities, and ecosystems - are not easily predictable. This article describes some recent developments that are directed at bridging this gap and providing more predictive models that can make robust links between what we typically measure in risk assessments and what we aim to protect.

How to use mechanistic effect models in environmental risk assessment of pesticides: Case studies and recommendations from the SETAC workshop MODELINK

Mechanistic effect models (MEMs) are useful tools for ecological risk assessment of chemicals to complement experimentation. However, currently no recommendations exist for how to use them in risk assessments. Therefore, the Society of Environmental Toxicology and Chemistry (SETAC) MODELINK workshop aimed at providing guidance for when and how to apply MEMs in regulatory risk assessments. The workshop focused on risk assessment of plant protection products under Regulation (EC) No 1107/2009 using MEMs at the organism and population levels. Realistic applications of MEMs were demonstrated in 6 case studies covering assessments for plants, invertebrates, and vertebrates in aquatic and terrestrial habitats. From the case studies and their evaluation, 12 recommendations on the future use of MEMs were formulated, addressing the issues of how to translate specific protection goals into workable questions, how to select species and scenarios to be modeled, and where and how to fit MEMs into current and future risk assessment schemes. The most important recommendations are that protection goals should be made more quantitative; the species to be modeled must be vulnerable not only regarding toxic effects but also regarding their life history and dispersal traits; the models should be as realistic as possible for a specific risk assessment question, and the level of conservatism required for a specific risk assessment should be reached by designing appropriately conservative environmental and exposure scenarios; scenarios should include different regions of the European Union (EU) and different crops; in the long run, generic MEMs covering relevant species based on representative scenarios should be developed, which will require EU-level joint initiatives of all stakeholders involved. The main conclusion from the MODELINK workshop is that the considerable effort required for making MEMs an integral part of environmental risk assessment of pesticides is worthwhile, because it will make risk assessments not only more ecologically relevant and less uncertain but also more comprehensive, coherent, and cost effective.