1 / 26

WEBFRAM 5: A risk assessment module for soil invertebrates

WEBFRAM 5: A risk assessment module for soil invertebrates. Geoff Frampton University of Southampton (UK) Joerg Roembke ECT Oekotoxikologie (DE) Paul van den Brink Alterra (NL) Janeck Scott-Fordsmand NERI (DK). Funded by. Soil invertebrates pesticide risk assessment.

kieran-travis
Download Presentation

WEBFRAM 5: A risk assessment module for soil invertebrates

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. WEBFRAM 5: A risk assessment module for soil invertebrates Geoff Frampton University of Southampton (UK) Joerg Roembke ECT Oekotoxikologie (DE) Paul van den Brink Alterra (NL) Janeck Scott-Fordsmand NERI (DK) Funded by

  2. Soil invertebrates pesticide risk assessment ( 91 / 414 / EEC ) Standard higher-tier test ? Testing Earthworms routine yes optional Collembola no Enchytraeidae optional no

  3. WEBFRAM-5 : Principal aim Investigate whether the pesticide risk assessment for soil invertebrates could be improved by explicitly incorporating uncertainty into estimates of risk

  4. LIMITATIONS: ADVANTAGES: Risk estimation simple Arbitrary application factors Easily harmonised approach Margin of protection uncertain Requires a small amount of information Lacks transparency in risk calculation Soil invertebrates pesticide risk assessment DETERMINISTIC: Point estimates of toxicity, exposure and risk Application factors represent uncertainty

  5. 5% HC5 Species sensitivity distributions 100% NOECs from various species and experiments Potentially affected fraction of species 0 Log (LC50)

  6. WEBFRAM: seven inter-related projects: 1 COORDINATION AND WEB - ENABLING 6 Acceptability perception www.webfram.com 2 3 & 7 4 5 Aquatic invertebrates Terrestrial vertebrates Non - target arthropods Soil invertebrates

  7. WEBFRAM: seven inter-related projects: 1 COORDINATION AND WEB - ENABLING 6 Acceptability perception www.webfram.com 2 3 & 7 4 5 Aquatic invertebrates Terrestrial vertebrates Non - target arthropods Soil invertebrates

  8. WEBFRAM: seven inter-related projects: 1 COORDINATION AND WEB - ENABLING 6 Internet risk assessment tools Acceptability perception www.webfram.com 2 3 & 7 4 5 Aquatic invertebrates Terrestrial vertebrates Non - target arthropods Soil invertebrates

  9. Deterministic risk assessment with supporting data and worked examples Risk assessment version(s) that include uncertainty where appropriate Central Science Laboratory (CSL) (York) & Internet risk assessment tools Cadmus Group (Seattle) www.webfram.com

  10. WEBFRAM 5 : Objectives 1. Acquire data (key step!) 2. Identify variables with adequately-supported distributions 3. Use data distributions to describe uncertainty 4. Incorporate descriptions of uncertainty in alternative version(s) of the risk assessment

  11. Soil invertebrates: public domain data Lower tier (laboratory) Higher tier (TME & field) Active substances (a. s.) Species / groups Effects data sets 250 67 1341 80 62 934 a. s. with data for both tiers 45 (16%) a. s. with only one data set 108 (38%) WEBFRAM 5 : Key findings

  12. Soil invertebrate effects data : pesticides with > 20 data sets Carbendazim Copper Benomyl Dimethoate Pentachlorophenol Parathion Carbofuran Diazinon Lindane Atrazine Chloroacetamide Lambda-cyhalothrin Imidacloprid Chlorpyrifos Carbaryl Halofenozide DNOC Bendiocarb Malathion Thiophanate-methyl Phorate Lower tier Higher tier Number of data sets 0 50 100 150 200 250 300 350

  13. Distribution of pesticide effects data among soil invertebrate groups Lumbricidae Collembola Enchytraeidae Acari Coleoptera Nematoda Isopoda Formicidae Diptera Araneae Lower tier Higher tier Number of data sets 0 200 400 600 800 1000 1200 1400

  14. Lumbricidae species data : lower tier Eisenia fetida Earthworms grouped Eisenia andrei Lumbricus terrestris Aporrectodea caliginosa Lumbricus rubellus Aporrectodea tuberculata Allobophora chlorotica Dendrobaena rubida Apporectodea longa Aporrectodea rosea Octolasium lacteum Eisenia veneta Number of data sets 0 100 200 300 400 500

  15. Collembola species data : lower tier Folsomia candida Folsomia fimetaria Onychiurus folsomi Isotoma viridis Onychiurus armatus Proisotoma minuta Orchesella cincta Sinella communis Collembolans grouped Isotomidae Lepidocyrtus sp. Onychiurus apuanicus Sinella caeca Number of data sets

  16. Enchytraeidae species data : lower tier Enchytraeus albidus Cognettia sphagnetorum Enchytraeus crypticus Enchytraeus sp. indet. Enchytraeus coronatus Friderica ratzeli Enchytraeus buchholzi Number of data sets

  17. Relative sensitivities of standard test species Insecticides Herbicides Fungicides 2.5 2.0 Eisenia 1.5 Standardised log (LC50) 1.0 0.5 Folsomia 0 - 0.5 PCP Lindane Parathion Atrazine Propoxur Benomyl Diazinon Chlorpyrifos Dimethoate Carbendazim Chloracetamide Lambda-cyhalothrin

  18. Assuming minimum six species data, SSD could be calculated for only seven pesticides All SSD based on acute LC50 Species sensitivity distributions (SSD)

  19. Worms & nematodes Collembola www.webfram.com Pentachlorophenol species sensitivity distribution (LC50 data)

  20. Worms Hard - bodied arthropods Soft - bodied arthropods www.webfram.com Dimethoate species sensitivity distribution (LC50 data)

  21. Laboratory HC5 (mg / kg) LAB FIELD

  22. Laboratory HC5 compared with field effects concs (mg / kg) LAB FIELD

  23. Laboratory HC5 compared with field effects concs (mg / kg) Red HC5 exceed field NOEC or LOEC LAB FIELD

  24. Ratio of Eisenia fetida LC50 to soil invertebrate HC5 LC50 HC5 Ratio 95% CL (Application factor for Eisenia acute mortality test = 10)

  25. (concentrations in mg / kg) Probabilistic Five species Median HC5 based on NOECs from more species One species median HC5 = 0.53 95% CL 0.06 – 1.30 NOEC = 0.6 PEC chronic PEC = 0.4 PEC = 0.4 1.5 1.3 (0.15 – 3.25) HC5 / PEC Tiered risk assessment approach : carbendazim OECD earthworm reproduction test Deterministic NOEC from one species Toxicity Exposure PEC chronic Application factor: 5 TER < 5 indicates risk TER NOEC / PEC

  26. Conclusions Availability of empirical data for soil invertebrates is limited Earthworms the least sensitive soil invertebrates to most pesticides Pesticide concentrations tested in field studies not low enough to derive field NOECs for validation If SSD are used in soil risk assessment, need to ensure appropriate taxonomic composition of data sets WEBFRAM internet tools will provide an opportunity to explore these issues further

More Related