Comparing Energetics and Physiological Trait Patterns of North American Birds to Support Ecological Risk Assessment
-
Published:2024-07-05
Issue:3
Volume:5
Page:354-367
-
ISSN:2673-4133
-
Container-title:Ecologies
-
language:en
-
Short-container-title:Ecologies
Author:
Muller Erik B.12ORCID, Romoli Carlo1ORCID, Goussen Benoit1ORCID, Maul Jonathan D.3, Brain Richard3, Galic Nika4
Affiliation:
1. ibacon GmbH, Arheilger Weg 17, 64380 Roßdorf, Germany 2. Marine Science Institute, University of California, Santa Barbara, CA 93106, USA 3. Syngenta Crop Protection LLC, Greensboro, NC 27409, USA 4. Syngenta Crop Protection AG, 4058 Basel, Switzerland
Abstract
The environmental risk assessment (ERA) of plant protection products (PPPs) is commonly conducted for a number of standard laboratory species, though its scope includes all species, especially those that are vulnerable or endangered. This begs the question of how the eco-physiological and life history traits of those data-rich species compare to those of less documented species. This paper investigates the utility of a database of such traits, the Add-my-Pet collection of Dynamic Energy Budget theory, for the ERA of North American birds. We identified 72 bird species in the collection that have a federal listing status or are otherwise of interest for the ERA of PPPs and compared their eco-physiological and life history traits in relation to body size, feeding guild, and taxonomic identity to those of 446 terrestrial Holarctic birds, as well as those of standard lab species, notably the northern bobwhite, mallard, and zebra finch. The properties of standard lab species generally align with those of a similar taxonomy and size, with the notable exception of the relatively high reproductive capacity of the northern bobwhite and mallard due to the unique properties of laboratory study data. In addition, taxonomy appears to be a better predictor of eco-physiological traits than feeding guild. We conclude that, to identify representative species for the ERA of PPPs, more traits need to be included, such as those directly linked to the likelihood of exposure and those related to reproductive behavior.
Funder
Syngenta Crop Protection LLC
Reference31 articles.
1. OECD (1984). Test No. 206: Avian Reproduction Test, Organisation for Economic Co-Operation and Development. Available online: https://www.oecd-ilibrary.org/environment/test-no-206-avian-reproduction-test_9789264070028-en. 2. US EPA (2012). Ecological Effects Test Guidelines OCSPP 850.2300: Avian Reproduction Test, US EPA. Guideline EPA-HQ-OPPT-2009-0154-0012. 3. EFSA, Aagaard, A., Berny, P., Chaton, P.-F., Antia, A.L., McVey, E., Arena, M., Fait, G., Ippolito, A., and Linguadoca, A. (2023). Risk assessment for Birds and Mammals. EFSA J., 21, e07790. 4. Galic, N., Forbes, V.E., Grimm, V., Schmolke, A., Vaugeois, M., and Brain, R.A. Ecological risk assessment when species-specific data are scarce: How trait-based approaches and modeling can help, BioScience, in press. 5. Validation of freshwater mussel life-history strategies: A database and multivariate analysis of freshwater mussel life-history traits;Moore;Aquat. Conserv.,2021
|
|