Ecotoxicological soil risk assessment under the new soil exposure framework - an impact assessment.

For the European risk assessment (RA) for soil organisms exposed to plant protection products (PPPs) endpoints from ecotoxicological laboratory studies are compared with predicted environmental concentrations in soil (PECSOIL) at first tier. A safety margin must be met; otherwise, a higher tier RA is triggered (usually soil organism field studies). A new tiered exposure modeling guidance was published by EFSA to determine PECSOIL. This work investigates its potential impact on future soil RA. PECSOIL values for >50 active substances and metabolites were calculated and compared with the respective endpoints for soil organisms to calculate the RA failure rate. Compared to the current (FOCUS) exposure modeling, PECSOIL values for all EU regulatory zones considerably increased, e.g., resulting in active substance RA failure rates of 67%, 58% and 36% for modeling Tier-1, Tier-2 and Tier-3A, respectively. The main driving factors for elevated PECSOIL were soil bulk density, crop interception and wash-off, next to obligatory modeling and scenario adjustment factors. Spatial PECSOIL scenario selection procedures result in agronomically atypical soil characteristics (e.g., soil bulk density values in Tier-3A scenarios far below typical European agricultural areas). Consequently, exposure modeling and ecotoxicological study characteristics are inconsistent, which hinders scientifically reasonable comparison of both in the RA.

Intermediate-tier options in the environmental risk assessment of plant protection products for soil invertebrates-Synthesis of a workshop.

The European environmental risk assessment (ERA) of plant protection products follows a tiered approach. The approach for soil invertebrates currently consists of two steps, starting with a Tier 1 assessment based on reproduction toxicity tests with earthworms, springtails, and predatory mites. In case an unacceptable risk is identified at Tier 1, field studies can be conducted as a higher-tier option. For soil invertebrates, intermediate tiers are not implemented. Hence, there is limited possibility to include additional information for the ERA to address specific concerns when the Tier 1 fails, as an alternative to, for example, a field study. Calibrated intermediate-tier approaches could help to address risks for soil invertebrates with less time and resources but also with sufficient certainty. A multistakeholder workshop was held on 2-4 March 2022 to discuss potential intermediate-tier options, focusing on four possible areas: (1) natural soil testing, (2) single-species tests (other than standard species), (3) assessing recovery in laboratory tests, and (4) the use of assembled soil multispecies test systems. The participants acknowledged a large potential in the intermediate-tier options but concluded that some issues need to be clarified before routine application of these approaches in the ERA is possible, that is, sensitivity, reproducibility, reliability, and standardization of potential new test systems. The definition of suitable assessment factors needed to calibrate the approaches to the protection goals was acknowledged. The aims of the workshop were to foster scientific exchange and a data-driven dialog, to discuss how the different approaches could be used in the risk assessment, and to identify research priorities for future work to address uncertainties and strengthen the tiered approach in the ERA for soil invertebrates. This article outlines the background, proposed methods, technical challenges, difficulties and opportunities in the ERA, and conclusions of the workshop. Integr Environ Assess Manag 2024;20:780-793. © 2023 The Authors. Integrated Environmental Assessment and Management published by Wiley Periodicals LLC on behalf of Society of Environmental Toxicology & Chemistry (SETAC).

A spatiotemporally explicit modeling approach for more realistic exposure and risk assessment of off-field soil organisms.

Natural and seminatural habitats of soil living organisms in cultivated landscapes can be subject to unintended exposure by active substances of plant protection products (PPPs) used in adjacent fields. Spray-drift deposition and runoff are considered major exposure routes into such off-field areas. In this work, we develop a model (xOffFieldSoil) and associated scenarios to estimate exposure of off-field soil habitats. The modular model approach consists of components, each addressing a specific aspect of exposure processes, for example, PPP use, drift deposition, runoff generation and filtering, estimation of soil concentrations. The approach is spatiotemporally explicit and operates at scales ranging from local edge-of-field to large landscapes. The outcome can be aggregated and presented to the risk assessor in a way that addresses the dimensions and scales defined in specific protection goals (SPGs). The approach can be used to assess the effect of mitigation options, for example, field margins, in-field buffers, or drift-reducing technology. The presented provisional scenarios start with a schematic edge-of-field situation and extend to real-world landscapes of up to 5 km × 5 km. A case study was conducted for two active substances of different environmental fate characteristics. Results are presented as a collection of percentiles over time and space, as contour plots, and as maps. The results show that exposure patterns of off-field soil organisms are of a complex nature due to spatial and temporal variabilities combined with landscape structure and event-based processes. Our concepts and analysis demonstrate that more realistic exposure data can be meaningfully consolidated to serve in standard-tier risk assessments. The real-world landscape-scale scenarios indicate risk hot-spots that support the identification of efficient risk mitigation. As a next step, the spatiotemporally explicit exposure data can be directly coupled to ecological effect models (e.g., for earthworms or collembola) to conduct risk assessments at biological entity levels as required by SPGs. Integr Environ Assess Manag 2024;20:263-278. © 2023 Applied Analysis Solutions LLC and WSC Scientific GmbH and Bayer AG and The Authors. Integrated Environmental Assessment and Management published by Wiley Periodicals LLC on behalf of Society of Environmental Toxicology & Chemistry (SETAC).

Integrating earthworm movement and life history through dynamic energy budgets.

Earthworms are considered ecosystem engineers and, as such, they are an integral part of the soil ecosystem. The movement of earthworms is significantly influenced by environmental factors such as temperature and soil properties. As movement may directly be linked to food ingestion, especially of endogeic species like Aporrectodea caliginosa, changes in those environmental factors also affect life history traits such as growth and reproduction. In our laboratory studies, earthworms showed a decrease in burrowing activity with decreasing moisture levels and, to some extent, the organic matter content. The burrowing activity of earthworms was also affected by temperature, for which the casts produced per earthworm was used as a proxy in laboratory experiments. We integrated changes in earthworm movement and life histories in response to temperature, soil organic matter content and the moisture level, as observed in our experiment and reported in the literature, through dynamic energy budget (DEB) modelling. The joint parametrization of a DEB model for A. caliginosa based on movement and life history data revealed that food ingestion via movement is an integral part of the earthworms' energy budgets. Our findings highlight the importance of soil properties to be considered in the model development for earthworms. Furthermore, by understanding and incorporating the effect of environmental factors on the physiology, this mechanistic approach can help assess the impact of environmental changes such as temperature rise or drought.

Mechanistic Effect Modeling of Earthworms in the Context of Pesticide Risk Assessment: Synthesis of the FORESEE Workshop.

Earthworms are important ecosystem engineers, and assessment of the risk of plant protection products toward them is part of the European environmental risk assessment (ERA). In the current ERA scheme, exposure and effects are represented simplistically and are not well integrated, resulting in uncertainty when the results are applied to ecosystems. Modeling offers a powerful tool to integrate the effects observed in lower tier laboratory studies with the environmental conditions under which exposure is expected in the field. This paper provides a summary of the (In)Field Organism Risk modEling by coupling Soil Exposure and Effect (FORESEE) Workshop held 28-30 January 2020 in Düsseldorf, Germany. This workshop focused on toxicokinetic-toxicodynamic (TKTD) and population modeling of earthworms in the context of ERA. The goal was to bring together scientists from different stakeholder groups to discuss the current state of soil invertebrate modeling and to explore how earthworm modeling could be applied to risk assessments, in particular how the different model outputs can be used in the tiered ERA approach. In support of these goals, the workshop aimed at addressing the requirements and concerns of the different stakeholder groups to support further model development. The modeling approach included 4 submodules to cover the most relevant processes for earthworm risk assessment: environment, behavior (feeding, vertical movement), TKTD, and population. Four workgroups examined different aspects of the model with relevance for risk assessment, earthworm ecology, uptake routes, and cross-species extrapolation and model testing. Here, we present the perspectives of each workgroup and highlight how the collaborative effort of participants from multidisciplinary backgrounds helped to establish common ground. In addition, we provide a list of recommendations for how earthworm TKTD modeling could address some of the uncertainties in current risk assessments for plant protection products. Integr Environ Assess Manag 2021;17:352-363. © 2020 SETAC.

Assessing the potential for intrinsic recovery in a Collembola two-generation study: possible implementation in a tiered soil risk assessment approach for plant protection products.

Collembola are soil dwelling organisms that provide important ecosystem services within soils. To increase realism in evaluating potential effects of plant protection products a Collembola two-generation study was developed. This test assesses the potential for recovery of Collembola when exposed to plant protection products. Juvenile individuals of Folsomia candida (Willem, Ann Soc Entomol Belg 46:275-283, 1902) which hatched under conditions of exposure to a test substance in a modified OECD 232 bioassay were introduced into a second consecutive bioassay containing the same test substance aged in soil. This test system determines whether a population which was initially impacted by a substance in a 1st bioassay shows normal reproduction or survival in a 2nd bioassay after aging of the test substance in soil. An intermediate period for juvenile growth is included between the 1st and 2nd bioassay in order to reduce the control treatment variability in reproduction and mortality to fulfill the validity criteria according to the OECD 232 guideline. The Collembola two-generation study is able to differentiate between substances showing either a potential long-term risk or comprising a low risk. Comparing the results of this two generation study with data from semi-field or field studies indicates a high degree of conservatism when this test is considered within a tiered risk assessment scheme. This approach represents a valuable tool which makes the risk assessment more efficient by providing an alternative refinement option for highly conservative tier 1 Collembola risk assessment.

Recalibration of the earthworm tier 1 risk assessment of plant protection products.

In the first step of earthworm risk assessment for plant protection products (PPPs), the risk is assessed by comparing the no-observed effect levels (NOELs) from laboratory reproduction tests with the predicted exposure of the PPP in soil, while applying a trigger value (assessment factor [AF]) to cover uncertainties. If this step indicates a potential risk, field studies are conducted. However, the predicted environmental concentration in soil, which can be calculated, for example, for different soil layers (ranging from 0-1 cm to 0-20 cm), and the AF determine the conservatism that is applied in this first step. In this review paper, the tier 1 earthworm risk assessment for PPPs is calibrated by comparing the NOEL in earthworm reproduction tests with effect levels on earthworm populations under realistic field conditions. A data set of 54 pairs of studies conducted in the laboratory and in the field with the same PPP was compiled, allowing a direct comparison of relevant endpoints. The results indicate that a tier 1 AF of 5 combined with a regulatory relevant soil layer of 0 to 5 cm provides a conservative tier 1 risk assessment. A risk was identified by the tier 1 risk assessment in the majority of the cases at application rates that were of low risk for natural earthworm populations under field conditions. Increasing the conservatism in the tier 1 risk assessment by reducing the depth of the regulatory relevant soil layer or by increasing the tier 1 AF would increase the number of false positives and trigger a large number of additional field studies. This increased conservatism, however, would not increase the margin of safety for earthworm populations. The analysis revealed that the risk assessment is conservative if an AF of 5 and a regulatory relevant soil layer of 0 to 5 cm is used. Integr Environ Assess Manag 2016;12:643-650. © 2015 SETAC.