SEARCH

SEARCH BY CITATION

Keywords:

  • Ecological risk assessment;
  • Population modeling;
  • Hazard ratio;
  • Daphnia;
  • 91/414/EEC

Abstract

Traditionally, ecological risk assessments (ERA) of pesticides have been based on risk ratios, where the predicted concentration of the chemical is compared to the concentration that causes biological effects. The concentration that causes biological effect is mostly determined from laboratory experiments using endpoints on the level of the individual (e.g., mortality and reproduction). However, the protection goals are mostly defined at the population level. To deal with the uncertainty in the necessary extrapolations, safety factors are used. Major disadvantages with this simplified approach is that it is difficult to relate a risk ratio to the environmental protection goals, and that the use of fixed safety factors can result in over- as well as underprotective assessments. To reduce uncertainty and increase value relevance in ERA, it has been argued that population models should be used more frequently. In the present study, we have used matrix population models for 3 daphnid species (Ceriodaphnia dubia, Daphnia magna, and D. pulex) to reduce uncertainty and increase value relevance in the ERA of a pesticide (spinosad). The survival rates in the models were reduced in accordance with data from traditional acute mortality tests. As no data on reproductive effects were available, the conservative assumption that no reproduction occurred during the exposure period was made. The models were used to calculate the minimum population size and the time to recovery. These endpoints can be related to the European Union (EU) protection goals for aquatic ecosystems in the vicinity of agricultural fields, which state that reversible population level effects are acceptable if there is recovery within an acceptable (undefined) time frame. The results of the population models were compared to the acceptable (according to EU documents) toxicity exposure ratio (TER) that was based on the same data. At the acceptable TER, which was based on the most sensitive species (C. dubia), the maximum reduction in population size was 13% and the maximum time to recovery was 4 d (both for D. magna). This information is clearly more informative for risk management than a risk ratio. For one of the species, D. pulex, a more complex model, which included sublethal effects on reproduction, was set up. The results of this model were in good agreement with a previous microcosm study and indicated that a traditional TER was overprotective. Integr Environ Assess Manag 2012; 8: 262–270. © 2011 SETAC