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).

Arbuscular Mycorrhizal Fungi and the Need for a Meaningful Regulatory Plant Protection Product Testing Strategy.

Arbuscular mycorrhizal fungi (AMF) perform key soil ecosystem services and, because of their symbiotic relationship with plant roots, may be exposed to the plant protection products (PPPs) applied to soils and crops. In 2017, the European Food Safety Authority (EFSA) released a scientific opinion addressing the state of the science on risk assessment of PPPs for in-soil organisms, recommending the inclusion of AMF ecotoxicological testing in the PPP regulatory process. However, it is not clear how this can be implemented in a tiered, robust, and ecologically relevant manner. Through a critical review of current literature, we examine the recommendations made within the EFSA report and the methodologies available to integrate AMF into the PPP risk assessment and provide perspective and commentary on their agronomic and ecological relevance. We conclude that considerable research questions remain to be addressed prior to the inclusion of AMF into the in-soil organism risk assessment, many of which stem from the unique challenges associated with including an obligate symbiont within the PPP risk assessment. Finally, we highlight critical knowledge gaps and the further research required to enable development of relevant, reliable, and robust scientific tests alongside pragmatic and scientifically sound guidance to ensure that any future risk-assessment paradigm is adequately protective of the ecosystem services it aims to preserve. Environ Toxicol Chem 2022;41:1808-1823. © 2022 The Authors. Environmental Toxicology and Chemistry published by Wiley Periodicals LLC on behalf of SETAC.

Investigating the role of soil mesofauna abundance and biodiversity for organic matter breakdown in arable fields.

Intact soil food webs are pivotal to maintaining essential soil functions, such as carbon recycling, sequestering, and biomass production. Although the functional role of micro- (e.g., bacteria and fungi) and macrofauna (e.g., earthworms) is comparatively well established, the importance of the mesofauna community (e.g., abundance and diversity of Acari and Collembola) in maintaining soil functionality is less clear. We investigated this question in a six-month field experiment in arable soil by actively manipulating mesofauna abundance and biodiversity through the application of two legacy insecticides (lindane and methamidophos) at sufficiently high doses to reduce mesofauna abundance (well above previously registered application rates; 2.5 and 7.5 kg a.s./ha for lindane, and 0.6 and 3 kg a.s./ha for methamidophos) and measure the impact on organic matter degradation. Our results demonstrate that both insecticides had reduced Collembola and Acari abundances by up to 80% over the study's six-month duration. In addition, we observed less pronounced and more complex changes in mesofauna biodiversity over time. These included insecticide-dependent temporal fluctuations (both reduction and increase) for different estimates (indices) of local (alpha)-diversity over time and no lasting impact for most estimates after six months. Even at these exceptionally high field rates, Collembola and Acari diversity was observed to generally recover by six months. In contrast, considering organic matter breakdown, we found no evidence of a treatment-related effect. These results suggest that organic matter breakdown in arable soils is likely driven by other trophic levels (e.g., microorganisms or earthworms) with only a limited influence of the mesofauna community. We discuss these findings with regard to their implications for our current understanding of soil food web function and future European soil risk assessments. Integr Environ Assess Manag 2022;18:1423-1433. © 2021 The Authors. Integrated Environmental Assessment and Management published by Wiley Periodicals LLC on behalf of Society of Environmental Toxicology & Chemistry (SETAC).

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.

Lethal and sublethal toxic effects of a test chemical (ivermectin) on the yellow dung fly (Scathophaga stercoraria) based on a standardized international ring test.

A standardized bioassay using the yellow dung fly, Scathophaga stercoraria L. (Diptera: Scathophagidae), was developed to test the lethal and sublethal toxicity of parasiticide residues in livestock dung. The repeatability of the bioassay was assessed for the parasiticide ivermectin in 13 tests performed by seven laboratories in Germany, the United Kingdom, Switzerland, and Canada. Test results had an acceptable range of heterogeneity. The calculated median effective concentration for 50% (EC50) egg-to-adult mortality was 20.9 +/- 19.1 microg ivermectin/kg dung fresh weight (FW) (mean +/- standard deviation; range, 6.33-67.5 microg/kg). Mortality was not observed below a calculated no-observable-effect concentration (NOEC) of 8.1 +/- 7.7 microg/kg FW. However, prolonged development time (and, in a subset of tests, reduced body size) was observed above a calculated NOEC of 0.8 +/- 0.8 microg/kg FW. An oviposition site choice test revealed that yellow dung fly females do not discriminate among dung of different ivermectin concentrations. Thus, the yellow dung fly is suitably sensitive, and the methods are sufficiently repeatable, to support use of this standardized bioassay by the international community in the registration of new veterinary pharmaceuticals.