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

被引:12
作者
Bean, Thomas G. [1 ]
Beasley, Val R. [2 ]
Berny, Philippe [3 ]
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, Rafael [10 ]
Meyer, Carolyn B. [11 ]
Salice, Christopher J. [12 ]
Rattner, Barnett A. [13 ]
机构
[1] FMC Corp, Newark, DE 19711 USA
[2] Univ Illinois, Coll Vet Med, Champaign, IL USA
[3] Univ Lyon, UR ICE VETAGRO SUP, Lyon, France
[4] US Environm Protect Agcy, Washington, DC USA
[5] Environm & Climate Change Canada, Delta, BC, Canada
[6] Environm & Climate Change Canada, Dartmouth, NS, Canada
[7] Ramboll, Beachwood, OH USA
[8] US Def Hlth Ctr Aberdeen, Aberdeen, MD USA
[9] Simon Fraser Univ, Burnaby, BC, Canada
[10] UCLM, CSIC, Inst Invest Recursos Cineget IREC, JCCM, Ciudad Real, Spain
[11] Arcadis US Inc, Highlands Ranch, CO USA
[12] Towson Univ, Towson, MD USA
[13] US Geol Survey, Eastern Ecol Sci Ctr, Laurel, MD USA
关键词
3Rs; Field studies; Model species; New approach methodologies; Regulatory ecotoxicity testing; DIBENZO-P-DIOXINS; ECOLOGICAL RISK; ENVIRONMENTAL CONTAMINATION; REPRODUCTIVE IMPAIRMENT; AVIAN REPRODUCTION; PESTICIDE TOXICITY; MERCURY EXPOSURE; DERMAL TOXICITY; LIFE STAGES; AMPHIBIANS;
D O I
10.1002/ieam.4795
中图分类号
X [环境科学、安全科学];
学科分类号
08 ; 0830 ;
摘要
Model 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. & COPY; 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.
引用
收藏
页码:699 / 724
页数:26
相关论文
共 196 条
[1]   Risk assessment for Birds and Mammals [J].
Aagaard, Alf ;
Berny, Philippe ;
Chaton, Pierre-Francois ;
Antia, Ana Lopez ;
McVey, Emily ;
Arena, Maria ;
Fait, Gabriella ;
Ippolito, Alessio ;
Linguadoca, Alberto ;
Sharp, Rachel ;
Theobald, Anne ;
Brock, Theodorus ;
European Food Safety Authority EFSA .
EFSA JOURNAL, 2023, 21 (02) :1-300
[2]   Interspecific sensitivity of European amphibians towards two pesticides and comparison to standard test species [J].
Adams, Elena ;
Leeb, Christoph ;
Roodt, Alexis P. ;
Bruehl, Carsten A. .
ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCES EUROPE, 2021, 33 (01)
[3]  
Aldrich AP, 2009, AGRARFORSCHUNG, V16, P466
[4]  
Allard Patrick, 2010, Integrated Environmental Assessment and Management, V6, P28, DOI 10.1897/IEAM_2009-010.1
[5]  
American Standards for Testing and Materials, 2019, E116310 ASTM
[6]   ADVERSE OUTCOME PATHWAYS: A CONCEPTUAL FRAMEWORK TO SUPPORT ECOTOXICOLOGY RESEARCH AND RISK ASSESSMENT [J].
Ankley, Gerald T. ;
Bennett, Richard S. ;
Erickson, Russell J. ;
Hoff, Dale J. ;
Hornung, Michael W. ;
Johnson, Rodney D. ;
Mount, David R. ;
Nichols, John W. ;
Russom, Christine L. ;
Schmieder, Patricia K. ;
Serrrano, Jose A. ;
Tietge, Joseph E. ;
Villeneuve, Daniel L. .
ENVIRONMENTAL TOXICOLOGY AND CHEMISTRY, 2010, 29 (03) :730-741
[7]  
[Anonymous], 1996, ECOLOGICAL EFFECTS T
[8]  
[Anonymous], 2009, Discussion Papers no DP09/3
[9]  
[Anonymous], 2018, OECD Guidelines for the Testing of Chemicals, Section 4, DOI 10.1787/9789264185371-en
[10]  
[Anonymous], 2006, Guideline on the environmental risk assessment of medicinal products for human use