Application of General Unified Threshold Models of Survival Models for Regulatory Aquatic Pesticide Risk Assessment Illustrated with an Example for the Insecticide Chlorpyrifos.

Mathematical models within the General Unified Threshold models of Survival (GUTS) framework translate time-variable chemical exposure information into expected survival of animals. The GUTS models are species and compound specific and explicitly describe the internal exposure dynamics in an organism (toxicokinetics) and the related damage and effect dynamics (toxicodynamics), thereby connecting the external exposure concentration dynamics with the simulated mortality or immobility over time. In a recent scientific opinion on toxicokinetic-toxicodynamic (TKTD) models published by the European Food Safety Authority (EFSA), the GUTS modeling framework was considered ready for use in the aquatic risk assessment for pesticides and aquatic fauna. The GUTS models are suggested for use in risk assessment, if they are sufficiently validated for a specific substance-species combination. This paper aims to illustrate how they can be used in the regulatory environmental risk assessment for pesticides for a specific type of refinement, that is, when risks are triggered by lower tiers in acute as well as in chronic risk assessment and mortality or immobility is the critical endpoint. This approach involves the evaluation of time-variable exposure regimes in a so-called "Tier-2C" assessment. The insecticide chlorpyrifos was selected as an example compound because a large data set was available. The GUTS models for 13 different freshwater arthropods and 8 different theoretical aquatic exposure profiles were used to calculate a series of GUTS-based risk estimates, including exposure profile-specific multiplication factors leading to 50% mortality or immobility at the end of the tested profile (LP50/EP50) as "margins of safety." To put the use of GUTS models within the tiered aquatic risk assessment into perspective, GUTS models for the 13 aquatic arthropods were also used to predict the environmental risks of a measured chlorpyrifos exposure profile from an experimental ditch study (Tier-3 approach), and the results are discussed in the context of calibration of the tiered approach. Integr Environ Assess Manag 2021;17:243-258. © 2020 The Authors. Integrated Environmental Assessment and Management published by Wiley Periodicals LLC on behalf of Society of Environmental Toxicology & Chemistry (SETAC).

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.

Scientific Opinion on the state of the art of Toxicokinetic/Toxicodynamic (TKTD) effect models for regulatory risk assessment of pesticides for aquatic organisms.

Following a request from EFSA, the Panel on Plant Protection Products and their Residues (PPR) developed an opinion on the state of the art of Toxicokinetic/Toxicodynamic (TKTD) models and their use in prospective environmental risk assessment (ERA) for pesticides and aquatic organisms. TKTD models are species- and compound-specific and can be used to predict (sub)lethal effects of pesticides under untested (time-variable) exposure conditions. Three different types of TKTD models are described, viz., (i) the 'General Unified Threshold models of Survival' (GUTS), (ii) those based on the Dynamic Energy Budget theory (DEBtox models), and (iii) models for primary producers. All these TKTD models follow the principle that the processes influencing internal exposure of an organism, (TK), are separated from the processes that lead to damage and effects/mortality (TD). GUTS models can be used to predict survival rate under untested exposure conditions. DEBtox models explore the effects on growth and reproduction of toxicants over time, even over the entire life cycle. TKTD model for primary producers and pesticides have been developed for algae, Lemna and Myriophyllum. For all TKTD model calibration, both toxicity data on standard test species and/or additional species can be used. For validation, substance and species-specific data sets from independent refined-exposure experiments are required. Based on the current state of the art (e.g. lack of documented and evaluated examples), the DEBtox modelling approach is currently limited to research applications. However, its great potential for future use in prospective ERA for pesticides is recognised. The GUTS model and the Lemna model are considered ready to be used in risk assessment.

A risk assessment example for soil invertebrates using spatially explicit agent-based models.

Current risk assessment methods for measuring the toxicity of plant protection products (PPPs) on soil invertebrates use standardized laboratory conditions to determine acute effects on mortality and sublethal effects on reproduction. If an unacceptable risk is identified at the lower tier, population-level effects are assessed using semifield and field trials at a higher tier because modeling methods for extrapolating available lower-tier information to population effects have not yet been implemented. Field trials are expensive, time consuming, and cannot be applied to variable landscape scenarios. Mechanistic modeling of the toxicological effects of PPPs on individuals and their responses combined with simulation of population-level response shows great potential in fulfilling such a need, aiding ecologically informed extrapolation. Here, we introduce and demonstrate the potential of 2 population models for ubiquitous soil invertebrates (collembolans and earthworms) as refinement options in current risk assessment. Both are spatially explicit agent-based models (ABMs), incorporating individual and landscape variability. The models were used to provide refined risk assessments for different application scenarios of a hypothetical pesticide applied to potato crops (full-field spray onto the soil surface [termed "overall"], in-furrow, and soil-incorporated pesticide applications). In the refined risk assessment, the population models suggest that soil invertebrate populations would likely recover within 1 year after pesticide application, regardless of application method. The population modeling for both soil organisms also illustrated that a lower predicted average environmental concentration in soil (PECsoil) could potentially lead to greater effects at the population level, depending on the spatial heterogeneity of the pesticide and the behavior of the soil organisms. Population-level effects of spatial-temporal variations in exposure were elucidated in the refined risk assessment, using ABMs and population-level endpoints while yielding outputs that directly address the protection goals. We recommend choosing model outputs that are closely related to specific protection goals, using available toxicity data and accepted fate models to the extent possible in parameterizing models to minimize additional data needs and testing, evaluating, and documenting models following recent guidance.