Key challenges and developments in wildlife ecological risk assessment: Problem formulation.

Problem formulation (PF) is a critical initial step in planning risk assessments for chemical exposures to wildlife, used either explicitly or implicitly in various jurisdictions to include registration of new pesticides, evaluation of new and existing chemicals released to the environment, and characterization of impact when chemical releases have occurred. Despite improvements in our understanding of the environment, ecology, and biological sciences, few risk assessments have used this information to enhance their value and predictive capabilities. In addition to advances in organism-level mechanisms and methods, there have been substantive developments that focus on population- and systems-level processes. Although most of the advances have been recognized as being state-of-the-science for two decades or more, there is scant evidence that they have been incorporated into wildlife risk assessment or risk assessment in general. In this article, we identify opportunities to consider elevating the relevance of wildlife risk assessments by focusing on elements of the PF stage of risk assessment, especially in the construction of conceptual models and selection of assessment endpoints that target population- and system-level endpoints. Doing so will remain consistent with four established steps of existing guidance: (1) establish clear protection goals early in the process; (2) consider how data collection using new methods will affect decisions, given all possibilities, and develop a decision plan a priori; (3) engage all relevant stakeholders in creating a robust, holistic conceptual model that incorporates plausible stressors that could affect the targets defined in the protection goals; and (4) embrace the need for iteration throughout the PF steps (recognizing that multiple passes may be required before agreeing on a feasible plan for the rest of the risk assessment). Integr Environ Assess Manag 2022;00:1-16. © 2022 The Authors. Integrated Environmental Assessment and Management published by Wiley Periodicals LLC on behalf of Society of Environmental Toxicology & Chemistry (SETAC). This article has been contributed to by U.S. Government employees and their work is in the public domain in the USA.

What makes radiation protection so challenging?

This commentary explores the challenges in radiation safety that derives from the inherent complexity of social-ecological systems. The framework needed to address the challenges acknowledges the characteristics of wicked problems in this era of postnormal science. My objective for this piece is to summarize relevant characteristics of social-ecological systems that underscore the importance, even the necessity, of adopting a holistic approach to radiation safety. This work builds on several publications that have come out of the ecosystems approach working group of the International Union of Radioecology. The nature of wicked problems is that they require meaningful engagement among diverse groups of affected stakeholders so that negotiated consensus regarding assessment and management for radiation safety can be achieved. I conclude by stating that this approach is complementary to the reference animal and plant approach, that it is consistent with the views for postnormal science, and it conforms with the United Nations Sustainable Development Goals (SDGS) that were adopted in 2015.

From tangled banks to toxic bunnies; a reflection on the issues involved in developing an ecosystem approach for environmental radiation protection.

The objective of this paper is to present the results of discussions at a workshop held as part of the International Congress of Radiation Research (Environmental Health stream) in Manchester UK, 2019. The main objective of the workshop was to provide a platform for radioecologists to engage with radiobiologists to address major questions around developing an Ecosystem approach in radioecology and radiation protection of the environment. The aim was to establish a critical framework to guide research that would permit integration of a pan-ecosystem approach into radiation protection guidelines and regulation for the environment. The conclusions were that the interaction between radioecologists and radiobiologists is useful in particular in addressing field versus laboratory issues where there are issues and challenges in designing good field experiments and a need to cross validate field data against laboratory data and vice versa. Other main conclusions were that there is a need to appreciate wider issues in ecology to design good approaches for an ecosystems approach in radioecology and that with the capture of 'Big Data', novel tools such as machine learning can now be applied to help with the complex issues involved in developing an ecosystem approach.

Dose assessment in environmental radiological protection: State of the art and perspectives.

Exposure to radiation is a potential hazard to humans and the environment. The Fukushima accident reminded the world of the importance of a reliable risk management system that incorporates the dose received from radiation exposures. The dose to humans from exposure to radiation can be quantified using a well-defined system; its environmental equivalent, however, is still in a developmental state. Additionally, the results of several papers published over the last decade have been criticized because of poor dosimetry. Therefore, a workshop on environmental dosimetry was organized by the STAR (Strategy for Allied Radioecology) Network of Excellence to review the state of the art in environmental dosimetry and prioritize areas of methodological and guidance development. Herein, we report the key findings from that international workshop, summarise parameters that affect the dose animals and plants receive when exposed to radiation, and identify further research needs. Current dosimetry practices for determining environmental protection are based on simple screening dose assessments using knowledge of fundamental radiation physics, source-target geometry relationships, the influence of organism shape and size, and knowledge of how radionuclide distributions in the body and in the soil profile alter dose. In screening model calculations that estimate whole-body dose to biota the shapes of organisms are simply represented as ellipsoids, while recently developed complex voxel phantom models allow organ-specific dose estimates. We identified several research and guidance development priorities for dosimetry. For external exposures, the uncertainty in dose estimates due to spatially heterogeneous distributions of radionuclide contamination is currently being evaluated. Guidance is needed on the level of dosimetry that is required when screening benchmarks are exceeded and how to report exposure in dose-effect studies, including quantification of uncertainties. Further research is needed to establish whether and how dosimetry should account for differences in tissue physiology, organism life stages, seasonal variability (in ecology, physiology and radiation field), species life span, and the proportion of a population that is actually exposed. We contend that, although major advances have recently been made in environmental radiation protection, substantive improvements are required to reduce uncertainties and increase the reliability of environmental dosimetry.

Addressing ecological effects of radiation on populations and ecosystems to improve protection of the environment against radiation: Agreed statements from a Consensus Symposium.

This paper reports the output of a consensus symposium organized by the International Union of Radioecology in November 2015. The symposium gathered an academically diverse group of 30 scientists to consider the still debated ecological impact of radiation on populations and ecosystems. Stimulated by the Chernobyl and Fukushima disasters' accidental contamination of the environment, there is increasing interest in developing environmental radiation protection frameworks. Scientific research conducted in a variety of laboratory and field settings has improved our knowledge of the effects of ionizing radiation on the environment. However, the results from such studies sometimes appear contradictory and there is disagreement about the implications for risk assessment. The Symposium discussions therefore focused on issues that might lead to different interpretations of the results, such as laboratory versus field approaches, organism versus population and ecosystemic inference strategies, dose estimation approaches and their significance under chronic exposure conditions. The participating scientists, from across the spectrum of disciplines and research areas, extending also beyond the traditional radioecology community, successfully developed a constructive spirit directed at understanding discrepancies. From the discussions, the group has derived seven consensus statements related to environmental protection against radiation, which are supplemented with some recommendations. Each of these statements is contextualized and discussed in view of contributing to the orientation and integration of future research, the results of which should yield better consensus on the ecological impact of radiation and consolidate suitable approaches for efficient radiological protection of the environment.

Coordinating ecological restoration options analysis and risk assessment to improve environmental outcomes.

Ecological risk assessment as currently practiced has hindered consideration of ecosystem services endpoints and restoration goals in the environmental management process. Practitioners have created barriers between procedures to clean up contaminated areas and efforts to restore ecosystem functions. In this article, we examine linkages between contaminant risk assessment approaches and restoration efforts with the aim of identifying ways to improve environmental outcomes. We advocate that project managers and other stakeholders use an ecological planning framework, with restoration options included upfront in the risk assessment. We also considered the opportunities to incorporate ecosystem services as potential assessment endpoints in the Problem Formulation stages of a risk assessment. Indeed, diverse perspectives of stakeholders are central to understand the relevance of social, cultural, economic, and regional ecology as influences on future use options for the landscape being restored. The measurement endpoints used to characterize the existing ecological conditions for selected ecosystem services can also be used to evaluate restoration success. A regional, landscape, or seascape focus is needed throughout the risk assessment process, so that restoration efforts play a more prominent role in enhancing ecosystem services. In short, we suggest that practitioners begin with the question of "how can the ecological risk assessment inform the decision on how best to restore the ecosystem?"

Using an Ecosystem Approach to complement protection schemes based on organism-level endpoints.

Radiation protection goals for ecological resources are focussed on ecological structures and functions at population-, community-, and ecosystem-levels. The current approach to radiation safety for non-human biota relies on organism-level endpoints, and as such is not aligned with the stated overarching protection goals of international agencies. Exposure to stressors can trigger non-linear changes in ecosystem structure and function that cannot be predicted from effects on individual organisms. From the ecological sciences, we know that important interactive dynamics related to such emergent properties determine the flows of goods and services in ecological systems that human societies rely upon. A previous Task Group of the IUR (International Union of Radioecology) has presented the rationale for adding an Ecosystem Approach to the suite of tools available to manage radiation safety. In this paper, we summarize the arguments for an Ecosystem Approach and identify next steps and challenges ahead pertaining to developing and implementing a practical Ecosystem Approach to complement organism-level endpoints currently used in radiation safety.

The challenges posed by radiation and radionuclide releases to the environment.

The recent accident at the Fukushima I nuclear power plant in Japan (also known as Fukushima Daiichi) captured the world's attention and re-invigorated concerns about the safety of nuclear power technology. The Editors of Integrated Environmental Assessment and Management invited experts in the field to describe the primary issues associated with the control and release of radioactive materials to the environment, particularly those that are of importance to the health of the human populations and the ecological systems that populate our planet. This collection of invited short commentaries aims to inform on the safety of nuclear power plants damaged by natural disasters and provide a primer on the potential environmental impacts. The intent of these invited commentaries is not to fuel the excitement and fears about the Fukushima Daiichi incident; rather, it is to collect views and comments from some of the world's experts on the broad science and policy challenges raised by this event, and to provide high-level views on the science issues that surround this situation in order to improve our collective ability to avoid or at least minimize the consequences of future events.

Recommendations for the development and application of wildlife toxicity reference values.

Toxicity reference values (TRVs) are essential in models used in the prediction of the potential for adverse impacts of environmental contaminants to avian and mammalian wildlife; however, issues in their derivation and application continue to result in inconsistent hazard and risk assessments that present a challenge to site managers and regulatory agencies. Currently, the available science does not support several common practices in TRV derivation and application. Key issues include inappropriate use of hazard quotients and the inability to define the probability of adverse outcomes. Other common problems include the continued use of no-observed- and lowest-observed-adverse-effect levels (NOAELs and LOAELs), the use of allometric scaling for interspecific extrapolation of chronic TRVs, inappropriate extrapolation across classes when data are limited, and extrapolation of chronic TRVs from acute data without scientific basis. Recommendations for future TRV derivation focus on using all available qualified toxicity data to include measures of variation associated with those data. This can be achieved by deriving effective dose (EDx)-based TRVs where x refers to an acceptable (as defined in a problem formulation) reduction in endpoint performance relative to the negative control instead of relying on NOAELs and LOAELs. Recommendations for moving past the use of hazard quotients and dealing with the uncertainty in the TRVs are also provided.

Plant toxicity testing to derive ecological soil screening levels for cobalt and nickel.

Phytotoxicity tests were performed to set ecological soil screening levels for cobalt (Co) and nickel (Ni) following the American Society for Testing and Materials international E1963-98 Standard Guide for Conducting Terrestrial Plant Toxicity Tests. Two soils (a modified artificial soil mixed with 5% organic matter, pH 5.01, and a native riverine sandy soil with 0.1% organic matter, pH 6.3) were treated with cobalt(II) chloride or nickel chloride and allowed to age for four weeks before initiating tests. Alfalfa, barley, radish, perennial rye, and brassica were used to determine the appropriate range of concentrations and to select the most sensitive plant species for definitive tests. The tests were designed to have one to three test concentrations below the 20% effects concentration (EC20), and five to six test concentrations above the EC20. Definitive tests for each chemical used two soil matrices, three plant species, and replicates at 10 nominal concentrations, including negative control. Soil chemical concentrations were determined before planting and on completion of the phytotoxicity tests. Threshold responses interpreted as the EC20 for each species endpoint were calculated from regression analyses. The geometric mean of the EC20 values (excluding emergence, mortality, and nodule numbers) for each species resulted in values of 30.6 mg/kg for Co and 27.9 mg/kg for Ni.

BIOLOGICAL NITROGEN INFLUX IN AN OHIO RELICT PRAIRIE.

The principal contributors of biologically fixed N in natural grassland ecosystems appear to be asymbiotic bacteria and heterocystous cyanobacteria. The environmental factors of light, moisture, and temperature play important roles in the magnitude of the N2 -fixation activity. Biological N2 -fixation was measured in the Elizabeth's Prairie section of the Lynx Prairie Preserve, Adams County, Ohio, during 15 site visits beginning 29 March through 8 November 1980. In situ N2 -fixation activity was measured using the acetylene-reduction technique. The percentage cover of cyanobacterial colonies (Nostoc sp.) was determined using Point-Frame Analysis. Soil and air temperatures and soil water potentials also were measured. Intact soil cores with a surface cover of Nostoc were collected and returned to the laboratory to quantify the effect of decreasing water potential on the N2 (C2 H2 )ase activity of Nostoc. The N2 (C2 H2 )ase activity of Nostoc on the intact soil cores displayed a linear response of approximately 10% decrease in N2 (C2 H2 )ase activity per one bar decrease in soil water potential. The cyanobacteria contributed almost all of the biologically fixed N at the site until late June. From late June through to mid September, heterotrophic diazotrophs played the major role in the N2 -fixation activity. These changes are attributed to fluctuations in Nostoc sp. colony cover, temperature, and soil water potentials. Extrapolation of the measured rates, and assuming an average of 10 hr per day of activity, Nostoc sp. is shown to have contributed 4.60 ± 1.17 kg N ha-1 yr-1 . Heterotrophic diazotrophs contributed an estimated 3.19 ± 1.18 kg N ha-1 yr-1 . The total biological N2 -fixation for the site was calculated at 8.2 ± 2.55 kg N ha-1 yr-1 , from additional measurements which estimated total diazotrophic activity of the site. These rates of N2 -fixation are among the highest reported for temperate grassland habitats.

N2 (C2 H2 )ASE ACTIVITY BY ALNUS INCANA SSP. RUGOSA (BETULACEAE) IN THE NORTHERN HARDWOOD FOREST.

Field assays of N2 (C2 H2 )ase activity were performed with intact nodules from a pure alder site (alder) and a mixed alder-aspen site (aspen). Assays were performed between 12 June and 12 August 1980 and in May 1981. N2 (C2 H2 )ase rates are expressed as g N g nodule oven-dry wt-1 hr-1 (g N g-1 hr-1 ). Diurnal N2 (C2 H2 )ase activity showed an increase in both sites between 0600 and midday, then decreased to a low by 1800. Nighttime activity in the May 1981 assay was approximately 25% of the daytime peak. Mean (±SE) 1200 hr N2 (C2 H2 )ase activity (µg N g-1 hr-1 ) for all sizes in the alder stand rose from 24.56 ± 6.56 on 12 June to 73.96 ± 28.37 on 26 June and declined to 9.20 ± 2.56 by 12 August. In the aspen stand activity decreased from the 12 June rate of 21.81 ± 4.59 to 3.64 ± 1.87 on 24 July but then increased to 30.00 ± 7.39 by 12 August. Based on diurnal assays, the seasonal mean N influx (µg N g-1 hr-1 ) is statistically higher (P 0.05) in the alder stand with a value of 26.70 compared to 14.63 in the aspen stand. Small size class shrubs had significantly higher (P < 0.05) N2 (C2 H2 )ase activity (µg N g-1 hr-1 ) in diurnal assays than medium or large class shrubs. The estimated mean (±SE) N2 (C2 H2 )ase activity (mg N g-1 season-1 ) for all sizes was 44.4 ± 18.6 in the alder stand compared to 16.2 ± 5.2 in the aspen stand. Nodule excavations showed the g shrub-1 in the alder stand to be 16.48 ± 10.29, 38.57 ± 12.34 and 29.11 ± 7.15 for small, medium and large size shrubs and 12.73 ± 3.23, 28.21 ± 4.36 and 56.45 ± 16.23 for respective sizes in the aspen stand. Seasonal N influx was 4.69 kg ha-1 in the alder stand and 0.84 kg ha-1 in the aspen stand, representing 17.9% of the alder stand. Nitrogen feedback inhibition from uric acid-N influx and allelochemic interference from aspen are discussed as explanations for the differences in N influx in the two stands.