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.

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.