Affiliation:
1. Bayer AG, Crop Science Division Monheim Germany
2. Eurofins Agroscience Services Ecotox GmbH Niefern‐Öschelbronn Germany
3. Smithers Wareham Massachusetts USA
4. Corteva Agriscience, Regulatory Innovation Centre Oxfordshire UK
5. Eurofins Agroscience Services Easton Maryland USA
6. Experimental Pathology Laboratories Inc. Sterling Virginia USA
7. ADAMA Deutschland GmbH Cologne Germany
8. Springer Ecotox Easton Maryland USA
Abstract
AbstractThe registration of herbicides in the European Union requires an assessment of risks to nontarget terrestrial plants (NTTPs). Regulatory plant studies are performed to determine risk‐assessment‐relevant endpoints (50% effect rate) for quantitative parameters, mostly biomass and survival. Recently, the European Food Safety Authority stated that endpoints for qualitatively assessed plant visual injuries (PVIs) such as necrosis, chlorosis, and so forth should be considered for the risk assessment as equal to endpoints derived from quantitatively determined parameters. However, the lack of guidance in the NTTP test guidelines on how to assess PVI and how to derive a statistically meaningful endpoint for PVI makes their use in risk assessments challenging. To evaluate and improve the reliability, reproducibility, and regulatory relevance of PVI assessments in NTTP studies, the PVI Working Group was formed in 2022 within the SETAC Plant Interest Group. In a first exercise, research needs, guidance gaps, and shortcomings in current methodologies were identified and are presented together with recommendations for a future, validated, and harmonized method for the assessment of PVI. Survey results revealed a high variability in how PVI are currently assessed, and that the reliability of these data is unclear. Under current conditions, the PVI data can rather be seen as supportive information instead of using the data for the statistically sound determination of a regulatory endpoint. Consequently, standardization and harmonization of procedures for the assessment of PVI are needed. An improved scoring methodology should be developed that allows for a precise, statistically sound endpoint determination. Regarding the regulatory relevance of PVI, further research is required to assess the biological meaning of PVI data and how this is connected to the regulatory requirements and protection goals. Last but not least, guidance is required on how to evaluate the historically available PVI data that are based on various assessment methodologies. Integr Environ Assess Manag 2023;00:1–9. © 2023 The Authors. Integrated Environmental Assessment and Management published by Wiley Periodicals LLC on behalf of Society of Environmental Toxicology & Chemistry (SETAC).
Subject
General Environmental Science,General Medicine,Geography, Planning and Development
Reference35 articles.
1. Agentur für Gesundheit und Ernährungssicherheit (AGES). (2021 April).National risk assessment for the authorization of plant protection products (PPP): Ecotoxicology non‐target terrestrial plants (NTTP). Information for notifier/applicants and other interested parties. Version 2.
2. An assessment of the accuracy and consistency of human perception of weed cover
3. Assessment of somaclonal variation for salinity tolerance in sweet potato regenerated plants;Anwar N.;African Journal of Biotechnology,2010
4. Canadian Weed Science Society. (2018 January 15).Description of 0–100 rating scale for herbicide efficacy and crop phytotoxicity.https://weedscience.ca/cwss_scm-rating-scale/