Adverse outcome pathways (AOPs) for radiation-induced reproductive effects in environmental species: state of science and identification of a consensus AOP network

BACKGROUND

Reproductive effects of ionizing radiation in organisms have been observed under laboratory and field conditions. Such assessments often rely on associations between exposure and effects, and thus lacking a detailed mechanistic understanding of causality between effects occurring at different levels of biological organization. The Adverse Outcome Pathway (AOP), a conceptual knowledge framework to capture, organize, evaluate and visualize the scientific knowledge of relevant toxicological effects, has the potential to evaluate the causal relationships between molecular, cellular, individual, and population effects. This paper presents the first development of a set of consensus AOPs for reproductive effects of ionizing radiation in wildlife. This work was performed by a group of experts formed during a workshop organized jointly by the Multidisciplinary European Low Dose Initiative (MELODI) and the European Radioecology Alliance (ALLIANCE) associations to present the AOP approach and tools. The work presents a series of taxon-specific case studies that were used to identify relevant empirical evidence, identify common AOP components and propose a set of consensus AOPs that could be organized into an AOP network with broader taxonomic applicability.

CONCLUSION

Expert consultation led to the identification of key biological events and description of causal linkages between ionizing radiation, reproductive impairment and reduction in population fitness. The study characterized the knowledge domain of taxon-specific AOPs, identified knowledge gaps pertinent to reproductive-relevant AOP development and reflected on how AOPs could assist applications in radiation (radioecological) research, environmental health assessment, and radiological protection. Future advancement and consolidation of the AOPs is planned to include structured weight of evidence considerations, formalized review and critical assessment of the empirical evidence prior to formal submission and review by the OECD sponsored AOP development program.

Ensuring robust radiological risk assessment for wildlife: insights from the International Atomic Energy Agency EMRAS and MODARIA programmes

In response to changing international recommendations and national requirements, a number of assessment approaches, and associated tools and models, have been developed over the last circa 20 years to assess radiological risk to wildlife. In this paper, we summarise international intercomparison exercises and scenario applications of available radiological assessment models for wildlife to aid future model users and those such as regulators who interpret assessments. Through our studies, we have assessed the fitness for purpose of various models and tools, identified the major sources of uncertainty and made recommendations on how the models and tools can best be applied to suit the purposes of an assessment. We conclude that the commonly used tiered or graded assessment tools are generally fit for purpose for conducting screening-level assessments of radiological impacts to wildlife. Radiological protection of the environment (or wildlife) is still a relatively new development within the overall system of radiation protection and environmental assessment approaches are continuing to develop. Given that some new/developing approaches differ considerably from the more established models/tools and there is an increasing international interest in developing approaches that support the effective regulation of multiple stressors (including radiation), we recommend the continuation of coordinated international programmes for model development, intercomparison and scenario testing.

Towards an ecological modelling approach for assessing ionizing radiation impact on wildlife populations

The emphasis of the international system of radiological protection of the environment is to protect populations of flora and fauna. Throughout the MODARIA programmes, the United Nations' International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) has facilitated knowledge sharing, data gathering and model development on the effect of radiation on wildlife. We present a summary of the achievements of MODARIA I and II on wildlife dose effect modelling, extending to a new sensitivity analysis and model development to incorporate other stressors. We reviewed evidence on historical doses and transgenerational effects on wildlife from radioactively contaminated areas. We also evaluated chemical population modelling approaches, discussing similarities and differences between chemical and radiological impact assessment in wildlife. We developed population modelling methodologies by sourcing life history and radiosensitivity data and evaluating the available models, leading to the formulation of an ecosystem-based mathematical approach. This resulted in an ecologically relevant conceptual population model, which we used to produce advice on the evaluation of risk criteria used in the radiological protection of the environment and a proposed modelling extension for chemicals. This work seeks to inform stakeholder dialogue on factors influencing wildlife population responses to radiation, including discussions on the ecological relevance of current environmental protection criteria. The area of assessment of radiation effects in wildlife is still developing with underlying data and models continuing to be improved. IAEA's ongoing support to facilitate the sharing of new knowledge, models and approaches to Member States is highlighted, and we give suggestions for future developments in this regard.

Bounding uncertainties around the conceptual representation of species in radiological assessment in the context of routine atmospheric release

Wildlife protection has become of regulatory interest since the International Commission on Radiological Protection (ICRP) developed an approach to assess the level of radiological protection specifically for animals and plants. For the purpose of demonstrating compliance with regulation to protect the environment against routine authorised discharges from nuclear facilities, the wide variety of biota inhabiting an ecosystem needs to be condensed to a limited set of representative organisms, as proposed by the ICRP with a set of 'reference animals and plants' which can be considered representative of many other species. It is now recommended in the International Atomic Energy Agency Safety Standards, and internationally accepted, that the use of such a limited number of organisms to represent a pool of species is adequate for radiation protection purposes, particularly in planned exposure situations. Adding site-specific species to that set of surrogate species can respond to various interests, such as ensuring a site-specific context to the assessment that addresses stakeholder interests and can aid in stakeholder consultation and risk communication. Moreover, there is a need to question whether the use of the set of surrogate organisms is conservative enough to cover a wider range of biodiversity. Previous studies partially answered this question and this paper adds a range of test cases. A selection of hypothetical representations of possible site-specific species are assessed on the basis of possible variations in size (mass) and occupancy habits. Dose rates are evaluated to determine the greatest difference between hypothetical organisms and those for reference organisms (ROs), considering radionuclides (RNs) potentially discharged in atmospheric routine release from different nuclear facilities. Differences observed in the results between hypothetical organisms and ROs were less than one order of magnitude in all cases, the difference being dependent on the RNs considered. These findings do not preclude the inclusion of site-specific species in environmental radiological assessments if it is considered necessary, but they provide reassurance that using ROs for radiological impact assessments in the case of routine atmospheric discharges is sufficient.

Radiological Risk to Human and Non-Human Biota Due to Radioactivity in Coastal Sand and Marine Sediments, Gulf of Oman

Natural and ¹³⁷Cs radioactivity in coastal marine sediment samples was measured using gamma spectrometry. Samples were collected at 16 locations from four beaches along the coastal area of Muscat City, Gulf of Oman. Radioactivity in beach sand was used to estimate the radiological risk parameters to humans, whereas the radioactivity in marine sediments was used to assess the radiological risk parameters to non-human biota, using the ERICA Tool. The average radioactivity concentrations (Bqkg⁻¹) of ²²⁶Ra, ²³²Th, ⁴⁰K, ²¹⁰Pb and ¹³⁷Cs in sediments (sand) were as follows: 16.2 (16.3), 34.5(27.8), 54.7 (45.6), 46.8 (44.9) and 0.08 (0.10), respectively. In sand samples, the estimated average indoor (Din) and outdoor (Dout) air absorbed dose rates due to natural radioactivity were 49.26 and 27.4 and the total effective dose (AEDTotal; µSvy⁻¹) ranged from 150.2 to 498.9 (average: 275.2). The measured radioactivity resulted in an excess lifetime cancer risk (ELCR) in the range of 58–203 (average: 111) in and an average gonadal dose (AGD; µGy.y⁻¹) ranged from 97.3 to 329.5 (average: 181.1). Total dose rate per marine organism ranged from 0.035 µGy h⁻¹ (in zooplankton) to 0.564 µGy h⁻¹ (in phytoplankton). The results showed marine sediments as an important source of radiation exposure to biota in the aquatic environment. Regular monitoring of radioactivity levels is vital for radiation risk confinement. The results provide an important radiological risk profile parameter to which future radioactivity levels in marine environments can be compared.