Toxicological effects assessment for wildlife in the 21st century: Review of current methods and recommendations for a path forward

Author:

Bean Thomas G.1,Beasley Val R.2,Berny Philippe3,Eisenreich Karen M.4,Elliott John E.5,Eng Margaret L.6,Fuchsman Phyllis C.7,Johnson Mark S.8,King Mason D.9,Mateo Rafael10,Meyer Carolyn B.11,Salice Christopher J.12,Rattner Barnett A.13

Affiliation:

1. FMC Corporation Newark Delaware USA

2. College of Veterinary Medicine University of Illinois at Urbana Champaign Illinois USA

3. UR ICE‐VETAGRO‐SUP Université de Lyon Lyon France

4. US Environmental Protection Agency Washington District of Columbia USA

5. Environment and Climate Change Canada Delta British Columbia Canada

6. Environment and Climate Change Canada Dartmouth Nova Scotia Canada

7. Ramboll Beachwood Ohio USA

8. US Defense Health Centers ‐ Aberdeen Aberdeen Maryland USA

9. Simon Fraser University Burnaby British Columbia Canada

10. Instituto de Investigación en Recursos Cinegéticos (IREC) CSIC‐UCLM‐JCCM Ciudad Real Spain

11. Arcadis US Inc. Highlands Ranch Colorado USA

12. Towson University Towson Maryland USA

13. US Geological Survey Eastern Ecological Science Center Laurel Maryland USA

Abstract

AbstractModel species (e.g., granivorous gamebirds, waterfowl, passerines, domesticated rodents) have been used for decades in guideline laboratory tests to generate survival, growth, and reproductive data for prospective ecological risk assessments (ERAs) for birds and mammals, while officially adopted risk assessment schemes for amphibians and reptiles do not exist. There are recognized shortcomings of current in vivo methods as well as uncertainty around the extent to which species with different life histories (e.g., terrestrial amphibians, reptiles, bats) than these commonly used models are protected by existing ERA frameworks. Approaches other than validating additional animal models for testing are being developed, but the incorporation of such new approach methodologies (NAMs) into risk assessment frameworks will require robust validations against in vivo responses. This takes time, and the ability to extrapolate findings from nonanimal studies to organism‐ and population‐level effects in terrestrial wildlife remains weak. Failure to adequately anticipate and predict hazards could have economic and potentially even legal consequences for regulators and product registrants. In order to be able to use fewer animals or replace them altogether in the long term, vertebrate use and whole organism data will be needed to provide data for NAM validation in the short term. Therefore, it is worth investing resources for potential updates to existing standard test guidelines used in the laboratory as well as addressing the need for clear guidance on the conduct of field studies. Herein, we review the potential for improving standard in vivo test methods and for advancing the use of field studies in wildlife risk assessment, as these tools will be needed in the foreseeable future. Integr Environ Assess Manag 2023;00:1–26. © 2023 His Majesty the King in Right of Canada and The Authors. Integrated Environmental Assessment and Management published by Wiley Periodicals LLC on behalf of Society of Environmental Toxicology & Chemistry (SETAC). Reproduced with the permission of the Minister of Environment and Climate Change Canada. This article has been contributed to by U.S. Government employees and their work is in the public domain in the USA.

Publisher

Wiley

Subject

General Environmental Science,General Medicine,Geography, Planning and Development

Reference198 articles.

1. Interspecific sensitivity of European amphibians towards two pesticides and comparison to standard test species

2. Sensitivity of amphibians to pesticides;Aldrich A.;Agrarforschung,2009

3. RECOMMENDATIONS FOR THE DEVELOPMENT AND APPLICATION OF WILDLIFE TOXICITY REFERENCE VALUES

4. American Standards for Testing and Materials. (2019).Standard test method for estimating acute oral toxicity in rats(ASTM E‐1163‐10). West Conshohocken PA USA.https://www.astm.org/e1163-10r19.html

5. Adverse outcome pathways: A conceptual framework to support ecotoxicology research and risk assessment

Cited by 10 articles. 订阅此论文施引文献 订阅此论文施引文献,注册后可以免费订阅5篇论文的施引文献,订阅后可以查看论文全部施引文献

同舟云学术

1.学者识别学者识别

2.学术分析学术分析

3.人才评估人才评估

"同舟云学术"是以全球学者为主线,采集、加工和组织学术论文而形成的新型学术文献查询和分析系统,可以对全球学者进行文献检索和人才价值评估。用户可以通过关注某些学科领域的顶尖人物而持续追踪该领域的学科进展和研究前沿。经过近期的数据扩容,当前同舟云学术共收录了国内外主流学术期刊6万余种,收集的期刊论文及会议论文总量共计约1.5亿篇,并以每天添加12000余篇中外论文的速度递增。我们也可以为用户提供个性化、定制化的学者数据。欢迎来电咨询!咨询电话:010-8811{复制后删除}0370

www.globalauthorid.com

TOP

Copyright © 2019-2024 北京同舟云网络信息技术有限公司
京公网安备11010802033243号  京ICP备18003416号-3