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

Following Regulation, Imidacloprid Persists and Flupyradifurone Increases in Nontarget Wildlife

After regulation of pesticides, determination of their persistence in the environment is an important indicator of effectiveness of these measures. We quantified concentrations of two types of systemic insecticides, neonicotinoids (imidacloprid, acetamiprid, clothianidin, thiacloprid, and thiamethoxam) and butenolides (flupyradifurone), in off-crop nontarget media of hummingbird cloacal fluid, honey bee (Apis mellifera) nectar and honey, and wildflowers before and after regulation of imidacloprid on highbush blueberries in Canada in April 2021. We found that mean total pesticide load increased in hummingbird cloacal fluid, nectar, and flower samples following imidacloprid regulation. On average, we did not find evidence of a decrease in imidacloprid concentrations after regulation. However, there were some decreases, some increases, and other cases with no changes in imidacloprid levels depending on the specific media, time point of sampling, and site type. At the same time, we found an overall increase in flupyradifurone, acetamiprid, thiamethoxam, and thiacloprid but no change in clothianidin concentrations. In particular, flupyradifurone concentrations observed in biota sampled near agricultural areas increased twofold in honey bee nectar, sevenfold in hummingbird cloacal fluid, and eightfold in flowers after the 2021 imidacloprid regulation. The highest residue detected was flupyradifurone at 665 ng/mL (parts per billion [ppb]) in honey bee nectar. Mean total pesticide loads were highest in honey samples (84 ± 10 ppb), followed by nectar (56 ± 7 ppb), then hummingbird cloacal fluid (1.8 ± 0.5 ppb), and least, flowers (0.51 ± 0.06 ppb). Our results highlight that limited regulation of imidacloprid does not immediately reduce residue concentrations, while other systemic insecticides, possibly replacement compounds, concurrently increase in wildlife. Environ Toxicol Chem 2024;00:1-12. © 2024 The Authors. Environmental Toxicology and Chemistry published by Wiley Periodicals LLC on behalf of SETAC.

Transgenerational effects of triazole fungicides on gene expression and egg compounds in non-exposed offspring: A case study using Red-Legged Partridges (Alectoris rufa)

Triazole fungicides are widely used to treat cereal seeds before sowing. Granivorous birds like the Red-legged Partridge (Alectoris rufa) have high exposure risk because they ingest treated seeds that remain on the field surface. As triazole fungicides can act as endocrine disruptors, affecting sterol synthesis and reproduction in birds several months after exposure, we hypothesized that these effects could also impact subsequent generations of exposed birds. To test this hypothesis, we exposed adult partridges (F0) to seeds treated at commercial doses with four different formulations containing triazoles as active ingredients (flutriafol, prothioconazole, tebuconazole, and a mixture of the latter two), simulating field exposure during late autumn sowing. During the subsequent reproductive season, two to four months after exposure, we examined compound allocation of steroid hormones, cholesterol, vitamins, and carotenoids in eggs laid by exposed birds (F1), as well as the expression of genes encoding enzymes involved in sterol biosynthesis in one-day-old chicks of this F1. One year later, F1 animals were paired again to investigate the expression of the same genes in the F2 chicks. We found changes in the expression of some genes for all treatments and both generations. Additionally, we observed an increase in estrone levels in eggs from partridges treated with flutriafol compared to controls, a decrease in tocopherol levels in partridges exposed to the mixture of tebuconazole and prothioconazole, and an increase in retinol levels in partridges exposed to prothioconazole. Despite sample size limitations, this study provides novel insights into the mechanisms of action of the previously observed effects of triazole fungicide-treated seeds on avian reproduction with evidence that the effects can persist beyond the exposure windows, affecting unexposed offspring of partridges fed with treated seeds. The results highlight the importance of considering long-term chronic effects when assessing pesticide risks to wild birds.

Interspecies scaling of toxicity reference values in human health versus ecological risk assessments: A critical review

Risk assessments that focus on anthropogenic chemicals in environmental media-whether considering human health or ecological effects-often rely on toxicity data from experimentally studied species to estimate safe exposures for species that lack similar data. Current default extrapolation approaches used in both human health risk assessments and ecological risk assessments (ERAs) account for differences in body weight between the test organisms and the species of interest, but the two default approaches differ in important ways. Human health risk assessments currently employ a default based on body weight raised to the three-quarters power. Ecological risk assessments for wildlife (i.e., mammals and birds) are typically based directly on body weight, as measured in the test organism and receptor species. This review describes differences in the experimental data underlying these default practices and discusses the many factors that affect interspecies variability in chemical exposures. The interplay of these different factors can lead to substantial departures from default expectations. Alternative methodologies for conducting more accurate interspecies extrapolations in ERAs for wildlife are discussed, including tissue-based toxicity reference values, physiologically based toxicokinetic and/or toxicodynamic modeling, chemical read-across, and a system of categorical defaults based on route of exposure and toxic mode of action. Integr Environ Assess Manag 2024;20:749-764. © 2023 SETAC.

Integrating emerging science to improve estimates of risk to wildlife from chemical exposure: What are the challenges?

Many jurisdictions require ecological risk assessments for terrestrial wildlife (i.e., terrestrial vertebrates) to assess potential adverse effects from exposure to anthropogenic chemicals. This occurs, for example, at contaminated sites and when new pesticides are proposed, and it occurs for chemicals that are in production and/or proposed for wide-scale use. However, guidance to evaluate such risks has not changed markedly in decades, despite the availability of new scientific tools to do so. In 2019, the Wildlife Toxicology World Interest Group of the Society of Environmental Toxicology and Chemistry (SETAC) initiated a virtual workshop that included a special session coincident with the annual SETAC North America meeting and which focused on the prospect of improving risk assessments for wildlife and improving their use in implementing chemical regulations. Work groups continued the work and investigated the utility of integrating emerging science and novel methods for improving problem formulation (WG1), exposure (WG2), toxicology (WG3), and risk characterization (WG4). Here we provide a summary of that workshop and the follow-up work, the regulations that drive risk assessment, and the key focus areas identified to advance the ability to predict risks of chemicals to wildlife. Integr Environ Assess Manag 2024;20:645-657. © 2024 The Authors. Integrated Environmental Assessment and Management published by Wiley Periodicals LLC on behalf of Society of Environmental Toxicology & Chemistry (SETAC).

Toxicological effects assessment for wildlife in the 21st century: Review of current methods and recommendations for a path forward

Model species (e.g., granivorous gamebirds, waterfowl, passerines, domesticated rodents) have been used for decades in guideline laboratory tests to generate survival, growth, and reproductive data for prospective ecological risk assessments (ERAs) for birds and mammals, while officially adopted risk assessment schemes for amphibians and reptiles do not exist. There are recognized shortcomings of current in vivo methods as well as uncertainty around the extent to which species with different life histories (e.g., terrestrial amphibians, reptiles, bats) than these commonly used models are protected by existing ERA frameworks. Approaches other than validating additional animal models for testing are being developed, but the incorporation of such new approach methodologies (NAMs) into risk assessment frameworks will require robust validations against in vivo responses. This takes time, and the ability to extrapolate findings from nonanimal studies to organism- and population-level effects in terrestrial wildlife remains weak. Failure to adequately anticipate and predict hazards could have economic and potentially even legal consequences for regulators and product registrants. In order to be able to use fewer animals or replace them altogether in the long term, vertebrate use and whole organism data will be needed to provide data for NAM validation in the short term. Therefore, it is worth investing resources for potential updates to existing standard test guidelines used in the laboratory as well as addressing the need for clear guidance on the conduct of field studies. Herein, we review the potential for improving standard in vivo test methods and for advancing the use of field studies in wildlife risk assessment, as these tools will be needed in the foreseeable future. Integr Environ Assess Manag 2024;20:699-724. © 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 U.S. Government employees and their work is in the public domain in the USA.

Using emerging science to inform risk characterizations for wildlife within current regulatory frameworks

Many jurisdictions have regulatory frameworks that seek to reduce the effects of environmental exposures of anthropogenic chemicals on terrestrial wildlife (i.e., mammals, birds, reptiles, and amphibians). The frameworks apply for new and existing chemicals, including pesticides (prospective assessments), and to environmental contamination from releases (retrospective risk assessments). Relatively recently, there have been many scientific advances that could improve risk estimates for wildlife. Here, we briefly describe current regulations from North America (United States and Canada) and from Europe that include risk assessments for wildlife to ascertain whether they are conducive to the use of emerging science and new methods. We also provide examples where new and emerging science may be used to improve wildlife risk characterization and identify areas in need of future research. Integr Environ Assess Manag 2024;20:765-779. © 2024 His Majesty the King in Right of Canada and The Authors. Integrated Environmental Assessment and Management © 2024 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 U.S. Government employees and their work is in the public domain in the USA.

Wildlife ecotoxicology of plant protection products: knowns and unknowns about the impacts of currently used pesticides on terrestrial vertebrate biodiversity

Agricultural practices are a major cause of the current loss of biodiversity. Among postwar agricultural intensification practices, the use of plant protection products (PPPs) might be one of the prominent drivers of the loss of wildlife diversity in agroecosystems. A collective scientific assessment was performed upon the request of the French Ministries responsible for the Environment, for Agriculture and for Research to review the impacts of PPPs on biodiversity and ecosystem services based on the scientific literature. While the effects of legacy banned PPPs on ecosystems and the underlying mechanisms are well documented, the impacts of current use pesticides (CUPs) on biodiversity have rarely been reviewed. Here, we provide an overview of the available knowledge related to the impacts of PPPs, including biopesticides, on terrestrial vertebrates (i.e. herptiles, birds including raptors, bats and small and large mammals). We focused essentially on CUPs and on endpoints at the subindividual, individual, population and community levels, which ultimately linked with effects on biodiversity. We address both direct toxic effects and indirect effects related to ecological processes and review the existing knowledge about wildlife exposure to PPPs. The effects of PPPs on ecological functions and ecosystem services are discussed, as are the aggravating or mitigating factors. Finally, a synthesis of knowns and unknowns is provided, and we identify priorities to fill gaps in knowledge and perspectives for research and wildlife conservation.

In silico environmental risk assessment improves efficiency for pesticide safety management

Pesticides are indispensable to maintain crop quality and food production worldwide, but their use also poses environmental risks. Pesticide risk assessment involves a series of complex, expensive and time-consuming toxicity tests. To improve the efficiency and accuracy for assessing the environmental impact of pesticides, numerous computational tools have been developed. However, there is a notable deficiency in critical analysis or a systematic summary of environmental risk assessment tools and their applicable contexts. Here, many of the current approaches and tools for assessing environmental risks posed by pesticides are reviewed, and the question of whether these tools are fit for use on complex multicomponent scenarios is discussed. We analyze the adaptations of these tools to aquatic and terrestrial ecosystems, followed by the provision of resources for predicting pesticide concentrations in environmental medias, including air, soil and water. The successful application of computational tools for risk assessment and interpretation of predicted results will also be discussed. This assessment serves as a valuable resource, enabling scientists to utilize suitable models to enhance the robustness of pesticides risk assessments.

Hepatic Transcriptomic Responses to Ethinylestradiol in Embryonic Japanese Quail and Double-Crested Cormorant

Understanding species differences in sensitivity to toxicants is a critical issue in ecotoxicology. We recently established that double-crested cormorant (DCCO) embryos are more sensitive than Japanese quail (JQ) to the developmental effects of ethinylestradiol (EE2). We explored how this difference in sensitivity between species is reflected at a transcriptomic level. The EE2 was dissolved in dimethyl sulfoxide and injected into the air cell of eggs prior to incubation at nominal concentrations of 0, 3.33, and 33.3 µg/g egg weight. At midincubation (JQ 9 days; DCCO 16 days), livers were collected from five embryos/treatment group for RNA sequencing. Data were processed and analyzed using EcoOmicsAnalyst and ExpressAnalyst. The EE2 exposure dysregulated 238 and 1,987 genes in JQ and DCCO, respectively, with 78 genes in common between the two species. These included classic biomarkers of estrogen exposure such as vitellogenin and apovitellenin. We also report DCCO-specific dysregulation of Phase I/II enzyme-coding genes and species-specific transcriptional ontogeny of vitellogenin-2. Twelve Kyoto Encyclopedia of Genes and Genomes pathways and two EcoToxModules were dysregulated in common in both species including the peroxisome proliferator-activated receptor (PPAR) signaling pathway and fatty acid metabolism. Similar to previously reported differences at the organismal level, DCCO were more responsive to EE2 exposure than JQ at the gene expression level. Our description of differences in transcriptional responses to EE2 in early life stage birds may contribute to a better understanding of the molecular basis for species differences. Environ Toxicol Chem 2024;00:1-12. © 2023 The Authors. Environmental Toxicology and Chemistry published by Wiley Periodicals LLC on behalf of SETAC.