Assessing in-field pesticide effects under European regulation and its implications for biodiversity: a workshop report

IF 6 3区 环境科学与生态学 Q1 ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCES Environmental Sciences Europe Pub Date : 2024-08-30 DOI:10.1186/s12302-024-00977-8
Magali Solé, Stephan Brendel, Annette Aldrich, Jens Dauber, Julie Ewald, Sabine Duquesne, Eckhard Gottschalk, Jörg Hoffmann, Mathias Kuemmerlen, Alastair Leake, Steffen Matezki, Stefan Meyer, Moritz Nabel, Tiago Natal-da-Luz, Silvia Pieper, Dario Piselli, Stanislas Rigal, Martina Roß-Nickoll, Andreas Schäffer, Josef Settele, Gabriel Sigmund, Nick Sotherton, Jörn Wogram, Dirk Messner
{"title":"Assessing in-field pesticide effects under European regulation and its implications for biodiversity: a workshop report","authors":"Magali Solé,&nbsp;Stephan Brendel,&nbsp;Annette Aldrich,&nbsp;Jens Dauber,&nbsp;Julie Ewald,&nbsp;Sabine Duquesne,&nbsp;Eckhard Gottschalk,&nbsp;Jörg Hoffmann,&nbsp;Mathias Kuemmerlen,&nbsp;Alastair Leake,&nbsp;Steffen Matezki,&nbsp;Stefan Meyer,&nbsp;Moritz Nabel,&nbsp;Tiago Natal-da-Luz,&nbsp;Silvia Pieper,&nbsp;Dario Piselli,&nbsp;Stanislas Rigal,&nbsp;Martina Roß-Nickoll,&nbsp;Andreas Schäffer,&nbsp;Josef Settele,&nbsp;Gabriel Sigmund,&nbsp;Nick Sotherton,&nbsp;Jörn Wogram,&nbsp;Dirk Messner","doi":"10.1186/s12302-024-00977-8","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><h3>Background</h3><p>Biodiversity loss is particularly pronounced in agroecosystems. Agricultural fields cover about one-third of the European Union and are crucial habitats for many species. At the same time, agricultural fields receive the highest pesticide input in European landscapes. Non-target species, including plants and arthropods, closely related to targeted pests, are directly affected by pesticides. Direct effects on these lower trophic levels cascade through the food web, resulting in indirect effects via the loss of food and habitat for subsequent trophic levels. The overarching goals of the European pesticide legislation require governments to sufficiently consider direct and indirect effects on plants and arthropods when authorising pesticides. This publication provides an overview of a workshop's findings in 2023 on whether the current pesticide risk assessment adequately addresses these requirements.</p><h3>Results</h3><p>Effects due to in-field exposure to pesticides are currently not assessed for plants and inadequately assessed for arthropods, resulting in an impairment of the food web support and biodiversity. Deficiencies lie within the risk assessment, as defined in the terrestrial guidance document from 2002. To overcome this problem, we introduce a two-step assessment method feasible for risk assessors, that is to determine (i) whether a pesticide product might have severe impacts on plants or arthropods and (ii) whether these effects extend to a broad taxonomic spectrum. When each step is fulfilled, it can be concluded that the in-field exposure of the pesticide use under assessment could lead to unacceptable direct effects on non-target species in-field and thus subsequent indirect effects on the food web. While our primary focus is to improve risk assessment methodologies, it is crucial to note that risk mitigation measures, such as conservation headlands, exist in cases where risks from in-field exposure have been identified.</p><h3>Conclusions</h3><p>We advocate that direct and indirect effects caused by in-field exposure to pesticides need to be adequately included in the risk assessment and risk management as soon as possible. To achieve this, we provide recommendations for the authorities including an evaluation method. Implementing this method would address a major deficiency in the current in-field pesticide risk assessment and ensure better protection of biodiversity.</p></div>","PeriodicalId":546,"journal":{"name":"Environmental Sciences Europe","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":6.0000,"publicationDate":"2024-08-30","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://link.springer.com/content/pdf/10.1186/s12302-024-00977-8.pdf","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Environmental Sciences Europe","FirstCategoryId":"93","ListUrlMain":"https://link.springer.com/article/10.1186/s12302-024-00977-8","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"环境科学与生态学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCES","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background

Biodiversity loss is particularly pronounced in agroecosystems. Agricultural fields cover about one-third of the European Union and are crucial habitats for many species. At the same time, agricultural fields receive the highest pesticide input in European landscapes. Non-target species, including plants and arthropods, closely related to targeted pests, are directly affected by pesticides. Direct effects on these lower trophic levels cascade through the food web, resulting in indirect effects via the loss of food and habitat for subsequent trophic levels. The overarching goals of the European pesticide legislation require governments to sufficiently consider direct and indirect effects on plants and arthropods when authorising pesticides. This publication provides an overview of a workshop's findings in 2023 on whether the current pesticide risk assessment adequately addresses these requirements.

Results

Effects due to in-field exposure to pesticides are currently not assessed for plants and inadequately assessed for arthropods, resulting in an impairment of the food web support and biodiversity. Deficiencies lie within the risk assessment, as defined in the terrestrial guidance document from 2002. To overcome this problem, we introduce a two-step assessment method feasible for risk assessors, that is to determine (i) whether a pesticide product might have severe impacts on plants or arthropods and (ii) whether these effects extend to a broad taxonomic spectrum. When each step is fulfilled, it can be concluded that the in-field exposure of the pesticide use under assessment could lead to unacceptable direct effects on non-target species in-field and thus subsequent indirect effects on the food web. While our primary focus is to improve risk assessment methodologies, it is crucial to note that risk mitigation measures, such as conservation headlands, exist in cases where risks from in-field exposure have been identified.

Conclusions

We advocate that direct and indirect effects caused by in-field exposure to pesticides need to be adequately included in the risk assessment and risk management as soon as possible. To achieve this, we provide recommendations for the authorities including an evaluation method. Implementing this method would address a major deficiency in the current in-field pesticide risk assessment and ensure better protection of biodiversity.

Abstract Image

查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
根据欧洲法规评估田间农药效应及其对生物多样性的影响:研讨会报告
背景生物多样性的丧失在农业生态系统中尤为明显。农田约占欧盟面积的三分之一,是许多物种的重要栖息地。同时,农田也是欧洲景观中农药投入量最高的地方。与目标害虫密切相关的非目标物种(包括植物和节肢动物)直接受到农药的影响。对这些较低营养级的直接影响会通过食物网产生连锁反应,导致后续营养级食物和栖息地的丧失,从而产生间接影响。欧洲农药立法的总体目标要求各国政府在授权使用农药时,充分考虑对植物和节肢动物的直接和间接影响。本出版物概述了 2023 年一次研讨会的结论,即目前的农药风险评估是否充分满足了这些要求。结果目前,田间接触农药对植物的影响没有得到评估,对节肢动物的影响评估不足,导致食物网支持和生物多样性受损。不足之处在于 2002 年陆地指导文件中规定的风险评估。为了解决这个问题,我们引入了一种对风险评估人员可行的两步评估方法,即确定(i)农药产品是否会对植物或节肢动物产生严重影响,以及(ii)这些影响是否会扩展到广泛的分类学范围。当每个步骤都完成后,就可以得出结论,评估中的农药田间暴露可能会对田间的非目标物种造成不可接受的直接影响,进而对食物网产生间接影响。虽然我们的主要重点是改进风险评估方法,但必须指出,在田间暴露风险已经确定的情况下,风险 缓解措施是存在的,比如保护岬角。为了实现这一目标,我们为有关部门提供了包括评估方法在内的建议。实施这一方法将解决目前田间农药风险评估中的一个主要缺陷,并确保更好地保护生物多样性。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
Environmental Sciences Europe
Environmental Sciences Europe Environmental Science-Pollution
CiteScore
11.20
自引率
1.70%
发文量
110
审稿时长
13 weeks
期刊介绍: ESEU is an international journal, focusing primarily on Europe, with a broad scope covering all aspects of environmental sciences, including the main topic regulation. ESEU will discuss the entanglement between environmental sciences and regulation because, in recent years, there have been misunderstandings and even disagreement between stakeholders in these two areas. ESEU will help to improve the comprehension of issues between environmental sciences and regulation. ESEU will be an outlet from the German-speaking (DACH) countries to Europe and an inlet from Europe to the DACH countries regarding environmental sciences and regulation. Moreover, ESEU will facilitate the exchange of ideas and interaction between Europe and the DACH countries regarding environmental regulatory issues. Although Europe is at the center of ESEU, the journal will not exclude the rest of the world, because regulatory issues pertaining to environmental sciences can be fully seen only from a global perspective.
期刊最新文献
Unlocking the potential of data harmonization and FAIRness in chemical risk assessment: lessons from practice and insights for policy development Heavy metal contamination and potential health risks in upland rice-producing soils of rotational shifting cultivation in northern Thailand Microbial biopesticides are inhibited by honey bee royal jelly and in vitro larval diet COVID-19 pandemic microplastics environmental impacts predicted by deep random forest (DRF) predictive model Is environmental risk assessment possible with the alternatives to acute fish toxicity test? Case study with pharmaceuticals
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1