Main conclusions and perspectives from the collective scientific assessment of the effects of plant protection products on biodiversity and ecosystem services along the land-sea continuum in France and French overseas territories

Regulatory framework for the assessment of the impacts of plant protection products on biodiversity: review of strengths and limits

The placing of plant protection products (PPPs) on the market in the European Union is governed by numerous regulations. These regulations are among the most stringent in the world, however they have been the subject of criticisms especially because of the decline in biodiversity. The objectives of this work were to review (1) the functioning and actors involved in the PPP framework processes, (2) the construction of the environmental risk assessment focused on biodiversity, and (3) the suggested ways to respond to the identified limits. Both literature from social sciences and ecotoxicology were examined. Despite the protective nature of the European regulation on PPPs, the very imperfect consideration of biodiversity in the evaluation process was underlined. The main limits are the multiplicity of applicable rules, the routinization of the evaluation procedures, the lack of consideration of social data, and the lack of independence of the evaluation. Strengths of the regulation are the decision to integrate a systemic approach in the evaluation of PPPs, the development of modeling tools, and the phytopharmacovigilance systems. The avenues for improvement concern the realism of the risk assessment (species used, cocktail effects…), a greater transparency and independence in the conduct of evaluations, and the opening of the evaluation and decision-making processes to actors such as beekeepers or NGOs. Truly interdisciplinary reflections crossing the functioning of the living world, its alteration by PPPs, and how these elements question the users of PPPs would allow to specify social actions, public policies, and their regulation to better protect biodiversity.

The use of copper as plant protection product contributes to environmental contamination and resulting impacts on terrestrial and aquatic biodiversity and ecosystem functions

Copper-based plant protection products (PPPs) are widely used in both conventional and organic farming, and to a lesser extent for non-agricultural maintenance of gardens, greenspaces, and infrastructures. The use of copper PPPs adds to environmental contamination by this trace element. This paper aims to review the contribution of these PPPs to the contamination of soils and waters by copper in the context of France (which can be extrapolated to most of the European countries), and the resulting impacts on terrestrial and aquatic biodiversity, as well as on ecosystem functions. It was produced in the framework of a collective scientific assessment on the impacts of PPPs on biodiversity and ecosystem services in France. Current science shows that copper, which persists in soils, can partially transfer to adjacent aquatic environments (surface water and sediment) and ultimately to the marine environment. This widespread contamination impacts biodiversity and ecosystem functions, chiefly through its effects on phototrophic and heterotrophic microbial communities, and terrestrial and aquatic invertebrates. Its effects on other biological groups and biotic interactions remain relatively under-documented.

Experimental investigation of the effect of tebuconazole on three biomarkers of innate immunity in the house sparrow (Passer domesticus)

Triazoles are among the most widely used fungicides in the world due to their efficacy against fungal crop diseases and their broad spectrum of action. Intensive use of triazoles has resulted in residual contamination in different compartments of agroecosystems and exposes non-target species to potential sublethal effects. Triazoles are known to be immunomodulators in medicine and therapeutic treatments, but very little data is available on their potential effect on immune parameters of non-target vertebrate species living in agroecosystems. In this study, we experimentally examined the impact of tebuconazole on three immune biomarkers (haemagglutination titre (HA), haemolysis titre (HL), and haptoglobin concentration (Hp)), as well as on the body condition of house sparrows (Passer domesticus). Our results suggest that tebuconazole had very little, if any, effect on the studied immune parameters. However, further studies are needed to better assess the effect of tebuconazole on bird immunity because (1) experimental individuals were kept under optimal conditions and the impact of tebuconazole on immunity may occur under suboptimal conditions, (2) only one concentration of tebuconazole was tested and its effect could be dose-dependent and (3) other complementary immunological biomarkers should be studied, given the complexity of the vertebrate immune system. Current knowledge on the potential effects of triazoles on the immunity of wild farmland vertebrates is still largely insufficient. Further physiological and immune studies should be conducted to better understand the effect of triazole fungicides on farmland birds.

Recommendations to reduce the streetlight effect and gray areas limiting the knowledge of the effects of plant protection products on biodiversity

Preserving biodiversity against the adverse effects of plant protection products (PPPs) is a major environmental and societal issue. However, despite intensive investigation into the ecotoxicological effects of PPPs, the knowledge produced remains fragmented given the sheer diversity of PPPs. This is due, at least in part, to a strong streetlight effect in the field of ecotoxicology. Indeed, while some PPPs have been investigated in numerous ecotoxicological studies, there are many for which the scientific literature still has little or no information on their ecotoxicological risks and effects. The PPPs under the streetlight include a large variety of legacy substances and a more limited number of more recent or currently-in-use substances, such as the herbicide glyphosate and the neonicotinoid insecticides. Furthermore, many of the most recent PPPs (including those used in biocontrol) and PPP transformation products (TPs) resulting from abiotic and/or biotic degradation are rarely addressed in the international literature in the field of ecotoxicology. Here, based on a recent collective scientific assessment of the effects of PPPs on biodiversity and ecosystem services in the French and European contexts, this article sets out to illustrate the limitations and biases caused by the streetlight effect and numbers of gray areas, and issue recommendations on how to overcome them.

Impacts of neonicotinoids on biodiversity: a critical review

Neonicotinoids are the most widely used class of insecticides in the world, but they have raised numerous concerns regarding their effects on biodiversity. Thus, the objective of this work was to do a critical review of the contamination of the environment (soil, water, air, biota) by neonicotinoids (acetamiprid, clothianidin, imidacloprid, thiacloprid, thiamethoxam) and of their impacts on terrestrial and aquatic biodiversity. Neonicotinoids are very frequently detected in soils and in freshwater, and they are also found in the air. They have only been recently monitored in coastal and marine environments, but some studies already reported the presence of imidacloprid and thiamethoxam in transitional or semi-enclosed ecosystems (lagoons, bays, and estuaries). The contamination of the environment leads to the exposure and to the contamination of non-target organisms and to negative effects on biodiversity. Direct impacts of neonicotinoids are mainly reported on terrestrial invertebrates (e.g., pollinators, natural enemies, earthworms) and vertebrates (e.g., birds) and on aquatic invertebrates (e.g., arthropods). Impacts on aquatic vertebrate populations and communities, as well as on microorganisms, are less documented. In addition to their toxicity to directly exposed organisms, neonicotinoid induce indirect effects via trophic cascades as demonstrated in several species (terrestrial and aquatic invertebrates). However, more data are needed to reach firmer conclusions and to get a clearer picture of such indirect effects. Finally, we identified specific knowledge gaps that need to be filled to better understand the effects of neonicotinoids on terrestrial, freshwater, and marine organisms, as well as on ecosystem services associated with these biotas.

Improved assessment of the impacts of plant protection products on certain soil ecosystem services requires better consideration of terrestrial microalgae and cyanobacteria

There is growing scientific and societal consciousness that the environmental risks and impacts of plant protection products (PPPs) cannot be properly assessed without considering ecosystem services. However, the science on this issue remains incomplete and fragmented, as recently illustrated in a collective scientific assessment that pointed out the limited knowledge on the risks and impacts of PPPs on soil ecosystem services, which are clearly overlooked. Beside soil ecosystem services, certain key players involved in these services are largely overlooked in the scientific literature on the risks and impacts of PPPs, namely soil microbial photosynthetic communities. Here, we followed the principles of evidence-based logic chain approaches to show the importance of considering these microorganisms when studying the impacts of PPPs on certain services provided by soil ecosystems, with a focus on regulating and maintenance services that play a role in the regulation of baseline flows and extreme events. Terrestrial microalgae and cyanobacteria are ubiquitous photosynthetic microorganisms that, together with other soil micro- and macro-organisms, play key roles in the ecosystem functions that underpin these ecosystem services. There is an extensive literature on the ecotoxicological effects of PPPs on different organisms including soil microorganisms, but studies concerning soil microbial photosynthetic communities are very scarce. However, there is scientific evidence that herbicides can have both direct and indirect impacts on these microbial photosynthetic communities. Given that they play key functional roles, we argue that soil microbial photosynthetic communities warrant greater attention in efforts to assess the environmental risks and impacts of PPPs and, ultimately, help preserve or restore the regulating and maintenance services provided by soil ecosystems.

Linking ecotoxicological effects on biodiversity and ecosystem functions to impairment of ecosystem services is a challenge: an illustration with the case of plant protection products

There is growing interest in using the ecosystem services framework for environmental risk assessments of chemicals, including plant protection products (PPPs). Although this topic is increasingly discussed in the recent scientific literature, there is still a substantial gap between most ecotoxicological studies and a solid evaluation of potential ecotoxicological consequences on ecosystem services. This was recently highlighted by a collective scientific assessment (CSA) performed by 46 scientific experts who analyzed the international science on the impacts of PPPs on biodiversity, ecosystem functions, and ecosystem services. Here, we first point out the main obstacles to better linking knowledge on the ecotoxicological effects of PPPs on biodiversity and ecological processes with ecosystem functions and services. Then, we go on to propose and discuss possible pathways for related improvements. We describe the main processes governing the relationships between biodiversity, ecological processes, and ecosystem functions in response to effects of PPP, and we define categories of ecosystem functions that could be directly linked with the ecological processes used as functional endpoints in investigations on the ecotoxicology of PPPs. We then explore perceptions on the possible links between these categories of ecosystem functions and ecosystem services among a sub-panel of the scientific experts from various fields of environmental science. We find that these direct and indirect linkages still need clarification. This paper, which reflects the difficulties faced by the multidisciplinary group of researchers involved in the CSA, suggests that the current gap between most ecotoxicological studies and a solid potential evaluation of ecotoxicological consequences on ecosystem services could be partially addressed if concepts and definitions related to ecological processes, ecosystem functions, and ecosystem services were more widely accepted and shared within the ecotoxicology community. Narrowing this gap would help harmonize and extend the science that informs decision-making and policy-making, and ultimately help to better address the trade-off between social benefits and environmental losses caused by the use of PPPs.