一种高效、实用的农药监管性水生混合物风险评估方法

IF 5.9 3区 环境科学与生态学 Q1 Environmental Science Environmental Sciences Europe Pub Date : 2022-02-19 DOI:10.1186/s12302-022-00594-3
Christian Dietrich, Magnus Wang, Markus Ebeling, Anja Gladbach
{"title":"一种高效、实用的农药监管性水生混合物风险评估方法","authors":"Christian Dietrich,&nbsp;Magnus Wang,&nbsp;Markus Ebeling,&nbsp;Anja Gladbach","doi":"10.1186/s12302-022-00594-3","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><p>The current regulatory approach to address aquatic mixture toxicity for pesticides in the EU (EFSA J 11:3290, 2013) is rather complex: in typical cases it requires conducting the entire mixture risk assessment scheme for every exposure scenario separately (e.g. 6–8 ecotoxicological endpoints, for each of the nine exposure scenarios for the European Central Zone with 24 common mitigation measure combinations result in over 1700 sub-scenarios to be assessed). This article discusses the available concepts for a mixture toxicity assessment, the key questions raised and the implementation of these questions in existing risk assessment approaches. Based on this, an alternative, more efficient assessment scheme for aquatic mixture risk assessment (AMiRA) is proposed with the aim of facilitating the practical conduct and interpretation of the assessment while addressing the key questions and preserving the level of protection. The scheme assesses product risk (including a check for non-additive effects), the presence of a risk driver and gains efficiency by the straightforward use of risk quotients (RQ) to calculate mixture risk quotients (RQ<sub>mix</sub>) that are equivalent to the calculation of exposure toxicity ratios for a mixture (ETR<sub>mix,CA</sub> = Exposure-Toxicity-Ratio for mixtures based on concentration addition) proposed by EFSA (EFSA J 11:3290, 2013). A case study is provided underlining the equivalence of the proposed approach to the EFSA (EFSA J 11:3290, 2013) decision tree.</p></div>","PeriodicalId":54293,"journal":{"name":"Environmental Sciences Europe","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":5.9000,"publicationDate":"2022-02-19","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://enveurope.springeropen.com/counter/pdf/10.1186/s12302-022-00594-3","citationCount":"1","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"An efficient and pragmatic approach for regulatory aquatic mixture risk assessment of pesticides\",\"authors\":\"Christian Dietrich,&nbsp;Magnus Wang,&nbsp;Markus Ebeling,&nbsp;Anja Gladbach\",\"doi\":\"10.1186/s12302-022-00594-3\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<div><p>The current regulatory approach to address aquatic mixture toxicity for pesticides in the EU (EFSA J 11:3290, 2013) is rather complex: in typical cases it requires conducting the entire mixture risk assessment scheme for every exposure scenario separately (e.g. 6–8 ecotoxicological endpoints, for each of the nine exposure scenarios for the European Central Zone with 24 common mitigation measure combinations result in over 1700 sub-scenarios to be assessed). This article discusses the available concepts for a mixture toxicity assessment, the key questions raised and the implementation of these questions in existing risk assessment approaches. Based on this, an alternative, more efficient assessment scheme for aquatic mixture risk assessment (AMiRA) is proposed with the aim of facilitating the practical conduct and interpretation of the assessment while addressing the key questions and preserving the level of protection. The scheme assesses product risk (including a check for non-additive effects), the presence of a risk driver and gains efficiency by the straightforward use of risk quotients (RQ) to calculate mixture risk quotients (RQ<sub>mix</sub>) that are equivalent to the calculation of exposure toxicity ratios for a mixture (ETR<sub>mix,CA</sub> = Exposure-Toxicity-Ratio for mixtures based on concentration addition) proposed by EFSA (EFSA J 11:3290, 2013). A case study is provided underlining the equivalence of the proposed approach to the EFSA (EFSA J 11:3290, 2013) decision tree.</p></div>\",\"PeriodicalId\":54293,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Environmental Sciences Europe\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":5.9000,\"publicationDate\":\"2022-02-19\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://enveurope.springeropen.com/counter/pdf/10.1186/s12302-022-00594-3\",\"citationCount\":\"1\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Environmental Sciences Europe\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"93\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://link.springer.com/article/10.1186/s12302-022-00594-3\",\"RegionNum\":3,\"RegionCategory\":\"环境科学与生态学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"Environmental Science\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Environmental Sciences Europe","FirstCategoryId":"93","ListUrlMain":"https://link.springer.com/article/10.1186/s12302-022-00594-3","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"环境科学与生态学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"Environmental Science","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 1

摘要

目前处理欧盟水生混合农药毒性问题的监管方法(EFSA J 11:32 - 90, 2013)相当复杂:在典型情况下,它需要对每个暴露情景分别进行整个混合物风险评估方案(例如,欧洲中心区9个暴露情景中的每一个都有6-8个生态毒理学终点,24种常见缓解措施组合导致1700多个子情景需要评估)。本文讨论了混合物毒性评估的现有概念,提出的关键问题以及这些问题在现有风险评估方法中的实施。在此基础上,提出了一种替代的、更有效的水生混合物风险评估(AMiRA)评估方案,旨在促进评估的实际实施和解释,同时解决关键问题并保持保护水平。该方案评估产品风险(包括检查非加性效应),风险驱动因素的存在,并通过直接使用风险商(RQ)来计算混合物风险商(RQmix),从而获得效率,该风险商相当于计算混合物的暴露毒性比(ETRmix,CA =基于浓度添加的混合物的暴露毒性比),由EFSA提出(EFSA J 11:32, 90, 2013)。提供了一个案例研究,强调了所提出的方法与EFSA (EFSA J 11:32, 90, 2013)决策树的等价性。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
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
An efficient and pragmatic approach for regulatory aquatic mixture risk assessment of pesticides

The current regulatory approach to address aquatic mixture toxicity for pesticides in the EU (EFSA J 11:3290, 2013) is rather complex: in typical cases it requires conducting the entire mixture risk assessment scheme for every exposure scenario separately (e.g. 6–8 ecotoxicological endpoints, for each of the nine exposure scenarios for the European Central Zone with 24 common mitigation measure combinations result in over 1700 sub-scenarios to be assessed). This article discusses the available concepts for a mixture toxicity assessment, the key questions raised and the implementation of these questions in existing risk assessment approaches. Based on this, an alternative, more efficient assessment scheme for aquatic mixture risk assessment (AMiRA) is proposed with the aim of facilitating the practical conduct and interpretation of the assessment while addressing the key questions and preserving the level of protection. The scheme assesses product risk (including a check for non-additive effects), the presence of a risk driver and gains efficiency by the straightforward use of risk quotients (RQ) to calculate mixture risk quotients (RQmix) that are equivalent to the calculation of exposure toxicity ratios for a mixture (ETRmix,CA = Exposure-Toxicity-Ratio for mixtures based on concentration addition) proposed by EFSA (EFSA J 11:3290, 2013). A case study is provided underlining the equivalence of the proposed approach to the EFSA (EFSA J 11:3290, 2013) decision tree.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Environmental Sciences Europe
Environmental Sciences Europe Environmental Science-Pollution
CiteScore
9.20
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
Correction: Impact of soil moisture regimes on greenhouse gas emissions, soil microbial biomass, and enzymatic activity in long-term fertilized paddy soil Identifying the skills requirements related to industrial symbiosis and energy efficiency for the European process industry Sex difference in the association between pyrethroids exposure and sleep problems among adolescents: NHANES 2007–2014 Operational blue water footprint and water deficit assessment of coal-fired power plants: case study in Malaysia Terrestrial ecotoxicity of glyphosate, its formulations, and co-formulants: evidence from 2010–2023
×
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