DOCSLIB.ORG

Scientific Committee on Toxicity, Ecotoxicity and the Environment

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Scientific Committee on Toxicity, Ecotoxicity and the Environment EUROPEAN COMMISSION DIRECTORATE-GENERAL HEALTH AND CONSUMER PROTECTION Directorate C – Scientific Opinions on Health Matters Unit C2 – Management of Scientific Committees I Scientific Committee on Toxicity, Ecotoxicity and the Environment Brussels, C2/JCD/csteeop/Ter91100/D(0) SCIENTIFIC COMMITTEE ON TOXICITY, ECOTOXICITY AND THE ENVIRONMENT (CSTEE) Opinion on THE AVAILABLE SCIENTIFIC APPROACHES TO ASSESS THE POTENTIAL EFFECTS AND RISK OF CHEMICALS ON TERRESTRIAL ECOSYSTEMS Opinion expressed at the 19th CSTEE plenary meeting Brussels, 9 November 2000 CSTEE OPINION ON THE AVAILABLE SCIENTIFIC APPROACHES TO ASSESS THE POTENTIAL EFFECTS AND RISK OF CHEMICALS ON TERRESTRIAL ECOSYSTEMS FOREWORD AND SCOPE OF THIS DOCUMENT The concept "terrestrial environment" cannot be easily defined. It is characterised as the part of the biosphere that is not covered by water, less than one third of the total surface. From a geological viewpoint it just represents a thin line (a few meters wide) of the interface between both the solid (soil) and the gaseous (atmosphere) phases of the Earth, several orders of magnitude wider than this line. However, from the biological point of view, this thin line concentrates all non-aquatic living organisms, including human beings. Humans use the terrestrial environment for living and developing most of their activities, which include the commercial production of other species by agriculture and farming. Human activities deeply modify the terrestrial environment. Particularly in developed areas such as Europe, the landscape has been intensively modified by agricultural, mining, industrial and urban activities and only in a small proportion (mostly in extreme conditions such as high mountains, Northern latitudes, wetlands or semi-desert areas) of the European surface the landscape still resembles naive conditions. Wildlife has been forced to adapt to the new conditions or to disappear. Nature shows examples of adaptation and species extinction. Nevertheless, from the Polar Regions of Scandinavia to the arid zones of the Mediterranean countries terrestrial ecosystems more or less adapted to human activities, in particular agriculture, can be found. Chemical pollution represents an additional threat for living organisms. In the particular case of the terrestrial environment it can potentially affect human populations, human economy by acting on crop and livestock production and quality, and wildlife. Ecotoxicologists normally consider as the ultimate end-point the assessment of effects on the structure and function of the ecosystem. This also implies that this level of protection will also guarantee the anthropogenic uses of the environment. The protection of soil functions also protects the capability of the soil to be used for agricultural purposes; protection of populations include domestic as well as wild species. The protection goal in both cases is at the population or community level Hence, it is not necessary to protect each single rabbit or each single plant of wheat, but the rabbit population and the wheat yield. Domestic species represent an infinitesimal percentage of the total number of species, and it is expected that in most cases, the levels of chemicals in the environment required to protect ecosystems should be lower than those required for the protection of these human activities. In other words, a proper ecological risk assessment is sufficient for the evaluation of adverse effects on real ecosystems and associated agro-systems. Other concerns, indirectly related to the loss of living organisms (soil erosion associated to the loss of vegetation cover, climate change associated to deforestation) are also covered by the ecosystem evaluation; obviously, any significant change to the vegetation cover, including trees will provoke dramatic changes on the structure and function of the ecosystem. If human beings are explicitly included in the evaluation, there are both similarities and differences. Humans are part of the terrestrial environment and as such will be exposed to chemical pollutants in similar ways to other vertebrates. Environmental exposures to contaminated soil, air and food can be evaluated at least in parallel ways for humans and for wild vertebrates. However, the required level of protection is different. As for environmental concerns, the population as a whole must be protected (e.g., in terms of growth rate). However for human populations, a higher level of protection is also needed where it is necessary to protect each individual human being. Therefore risk assessments are often divided into Human Health risk assessment (which include the exposure of humans through the environment as well as direct exposure during the life cycle of the chemical) and Ecological risk assessment (which by protecting ecosystems is also expected to protect the "use" of the environmental resources by humans) The CSTEE is in favour of the on-going approaches regarding the integration of both Human Health and Ecosystem risk assessment. However, it is necessary to have an adequate understanding of each part before any integration. Therefore, this CSTEE opinion focuses exclusively on the hazard and risk assessment of the effects of chemicals on terrestrial ecosystems, recognising that a holistic assessment of the terrestrial environment requires additional considerations and in particular, the integration of human beings and their activities as part of the terrestrial compartment. Table of contents TABLE OF CONTENTS 1. INTRODUCTION. 1.1. REGULATORY USE OF HAZARD IDENTIFICATION AND RISK ASSESSMENT 1.2. MANDATE 1.3. HAZARD AND RISK ASSESSMENT FOR THE TERRESTRIAL COMPARTMENT IN THE EU REGULATION 2. PRINCIPLES FOR ECOLOGICAL RISK ASSESSMENT AND THEIR APPLICABILITY TO TERRESTRIAL ECOSYSTEMS. 2.1. PROBLEM DEFINITION AND SELECTION OF SCENARIOS 2.2. IDENTIFICATION AND QUANTIFICATION OF RELEVANT EXPOSURE ROUTES 2.3. EFFECT ASSESSMENT: HAZARD IDENTIFICATION AND DOSE- RESPONSE ASSESSMENT 2.4. RISK CHARACTERISATION AND RISK REFINEMENT 2.5. DEFINITIONS AND ABREVIATIONS 3. HAZARD IDENTIFICATION. 3.1. INTRODUCTION 3.2. ESTABLISHING ENVIRONMENTAL CONCERNS 3.3. SELECTION OF ASSESSMENT ENDPOINTS: 3.4. SELECTION OF MEASURABLE ECOLOGICALLY RELEVANT PROPERTIES 3.5. ALTERNATIVES TO INCORPORATE SCIENTIFICALLY SOUND CRITERIA WHEN SETTING HAZARD CATEGORIES 4. TOOLS FOR EFFECT ASSESSMENT. 4.1. INTRODUCTION 4.2. LABORATORY "SINGLE-SPECIES" ECOTOXICOLOGICAL EFFECT TESTS 4.3. EXPERIMENTAL APPROACHES: MULTISPECIES TESTS 4.4. MEASUREMENT OF SOIL PROCESSES 4.5. CONCLUSIONS AND OUTLOOK Table of contents 5. DOSE /RESPONSE RELATIONSHIPS AND METHODS FOR SETTING ECOTOXICOLOGICAL THRESHOLDS AND QUALITY OBJECTIVES. 5.1. INTRODUCTION 5.2. DATA QUALITY AND (UN)CERTAINTY OF INPUT 5.3. EXTRAPOLATION METHODS 5.4. VALIDATION OF MATHEMATICALLY DERIVED QUALITY DATA USING MULTISPECIES AND FIELD DATA 5.5. QUALITY OBJECTIVES FOR MIXTURES 6. EXPOSURE ASSESSMENT. 6.1. EXPOSURE THROUGH SOIL 6.2. EXPOSURE THROUGH AIR 6.3. EXPOSURE THROUGH FOOD INCLUDING DRINKING WATER 6.4. METHODS FOR ASSESSING PEC IN THE TERRESTRIAL ENVIRONMENT 6.5. COMPARISON/USE OF EXPOSURE PREDICTION AND DATA OBTAINED IN MONITORING PROGRAMMES 7. RISK CHARACTERISATION. 7.1. VALUE AND LIMITATIONS OF TERS AS A TOOL FOR RISK CHARACTERISATION 7.2. RISK CHARACTERISATION AT HIGHER HIERARCHICAL LEVELS 7.3. BIOMAGNIFICATION RISK FOR PERSISTENT AND BIOACCUMULABLE CHEMICALS 7.4. RISK ASSESSMENT FOR AREAS OF HIGH ECOLOGICAL VALUE 8. RECENT PROPOSALS ON HAZARD AND RISK ASSESSMENT FOR THE TERRESTRIAL ENVIRONMENT. 8.1. OECD PROPOSALS 8.2. USEPA GUIDELINES FOR ECOLOGICAL RISK ASSESSMENT 8.3. PROPOSALS FROM THE SETAC WORKSHOPS 8.4. PREVIOUS OPINIONS OF THE CSTEE REGARDING THE HAZARD AND RISK ASSESSMENT FOR THE TERRESTRIAL ENVIRONMENT. 9. THE CURRENT STATE OF THE ART AND ITS POSSIBILITIES FOR DECISION MAKING. 9.1. HAZARD COMPARISON AND CLASSIFICATION. SCIENTIFIC BASIS FOR THE IDENTIFICATION OF DANGEROUS SUBSTANCES 9.2. INFORMATION SUPPORTING THE DERIVATION OF QUALITY STANDARS 9.3. INFORMATION SUPPORTING RISK ASSESSMENT 10. CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS. Chapter 1. Introduction CHAPTER 1 INTRODUCTION 1.1 REGULATORY USE OF HAZARD IDENTIFICATION AND RISK ASSESSMENT Hazard and risk assessment are key elements in the regulation of chemical substances. Their role within the European Union system has been recently reviewed by Hard et al., (1998). In principle, four main regulatory uses can be identified: • Identification and comparison of dangerous chemicals • Setting quality standards • Development of environmental indicators • Decision-making at the local (contaminated sites) and generic (activities, life- cycle assessment of substances, regulation of chemicals including registration/authorisation, etc.) levels. The current status of each aspect will be discussed below. Hazard assessment constitutes the essential tool for the evaluation of the potential effects of chemicals on organisms and ecosystems. It includes a first step, hazard identification, which must detect the potential dangers of the substance (i.e. the kind of effects that the substance may produce), and a second step to quantify each danger and to set the expected dose/response relationships. At the regulatory level, hazard identification/quantification can be used as independent tools or, alternatively, as part of the risk assessment. Risk Assessment aims to estimate the probability for adverse effects to occur, in doing this assessment the risk manager applies specific protocols to compare the potential hazard with the expected level
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Recipe 2016 V1.1 a Harmonized Life Cycle Impact Assessment Method at Midpoint and Endpoint Level Report I: Characterization
    ReCiPe 2016 v1.1 A harmonized life cycle impact assessment method at midpoint and endpoint level Report I: Characterization RIVM Report 2016-0104a RIVM Report 2016-0104 Colophon © RIVM 2017 Parts of this publication may be reproduced, provided acknowledgement is given to: National Institute for Public Health and the Environment, along with the title and year of publication. M.A.J. Huijbregts (author), Radboud University Nijmegen Z.J.N. Steinmann (author), Radboud University Nijmegen P.M.F. Elshout (author), Radboud University Nijmegen G. Stam (author), Radboud University Nijmegen F. Verones (author), NTNU Trondheim M.D.M. Vieira (author), Radboud University Nijmegen, Pré Consultants A. Hollander (author), RIVM M. Zijp (author), RIVM R. van Zelm (author), Radboud University Nijmegen Contact: Anne Hollander RIVM/DMG [email protected] This investigation has been performed by order and for the account of Ministerie IenM, within the framework of Van Afval naar Grondstof This is a publication of: National Institute for Public Health and the Environment P.O. Box 1 | 3720 BA Bilthoven The Netherlands www.rivm.nl/en Page 2 of 201 RIVM Report 2016-0104 Synopsis ReCiPe 2016 v1.1 A harmonized life cycle impact assessment method at midpoint and endpoint level Report I: Characterization Life cycle assessment (LCA) enables the assessment of the pressure a certain (production) process places on the environment. The assessment comprises all phases needed to produce and use a product, from the initial development to the treatment of waste (the total life cycle). The goal of LCA is, for example, to compare alternatives or to identify phases in the production process that place a relatively high level of pressure on the environment.
    [Show full text]
  • AN INTRODUCTION to AQUATIC TOXICOLOGY This Page Intentionally Left Blank €ƒÂ€ an INTRODUCTION to AQUATIC TOXICOLOGY
    AN INTRODUCTION TO AQUATIC TOXICOLOGY This page intentionally left blank AN INTRODUCTION TO AQUATIC TOXICOLOGY MIKKO NIKINMAA Professor of Zoology, Department of Biology, Laboratory of Animal Physiology, University of Turku, Turku, Finland AMSTERDAM • BOSTON • HEIDELBERG • LONDON NEW YORK • OXFORD • PARIS • SAN DIEGO SAN FRANCISCO • SINGAPORE • SYDNEY • TOKYO Academic press is an imprint of Elsevier Academic Press is an imprint of Elsevier The Boulevard, Langford Lane, Kidlington, Oxford, OX5 1GB, UK 225 Wyman Street, Waltham, MA 02451, USA Copyright © 2014 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved. No part of this publication may be reproduced or transmitted in any form or by any means, electronic or mechanical, including photocopying, recording, or any information storage and retrieval system, without permission in writing from the publisher. Details on how to seek permission, further information about the Publisher’s permissions policies and our arrangement with organizations such as the Copyright Clearance Center and the Copyright Licensing Agency, can be found at our website: www.elsevier.com/permissions This book and the individual contributions contained in it are protected under copyright by the Publisher (other than as may be noted herein). Notices Knowledge and best practice in this field are constantly changing. As new research and experience broaden our understanding, changes in research methods, professional practices, or medical treatment may become necessary. Practitioners and researchers must always rely on their own experience and knowledge in evaluating and using any information, methods, compounds, or experiments described herein. In using such information or methods they should be mindful of their own safety and the safety of others, including parties for whom they have a professional responsibility.
    [Show full text]
  • Genetic and Molecular Ecotoxicology: a Research Framework
    Genetic and Molecular Ecotoxicology: A Research Framework Susan Anderson,1 Walter Sadinski,1 Lee Shugart,2 Peter Brussard,3 Michael Depledge,4 Tim Ford,5 JoEllen Hose,6 John Stegeman,7 William Suk,8 Isaac Wirgin,9 and Gerald Wogan0 1Lawrence Berkeley Laboratory, Berkeley, California; 2Oak Ridge National Laboratory, Oak Ridge, Tennessee; 3University of Nevada Reno, Reno, Nevada; 4University of Plymouth, Plymouth, UK; 5Harvard University, Cambridge, Massachusetts; 6 CCidental College, Los Angeles, California; 7Woods Hole Oceanographic Institute, Woods Hole, Massachusetts; 8National Institute of Environmental Health Sciences, Research Triangle Park, North Carolina; 9New York University Medical Center, Tuxedo, New York; 10Massachusetts Institute of Technology, Cambridge, Massachusetts Participants at the Napa Conference on Genetic and Molecular Ecotoxicology assessed the status of this field in light of heightened concerns about the genetic effects of exposure to hazardous substances and recent advancements in our capabilities to measure those effects. We present here a synthesis of the ideas discussed throughout the conference, including definitions of important concepts in the field and critical research needs and opportunities. While there were many opinions expressed on these topics, there was general agreement that there are substantive new opportuni- ties to improve the impact of genetic and molecular ecotoxicology on prediction of sublethal effects of exposure to hazardous substances. Future studies should emphasize integration of genetic ecotoxicology, ecological genetics, and molecular biology and should be directed toward improving our understanding of the ecological implications of genotoxic responses. Ecological implications may be assessed at either the population or ecosys- tem level; however, a population-level focus may be most pragmatic.
    [Show full text]
  • Shortcomings of the Laboratory-Derived Median Lethal Concentration for Predicting Mortality in Field Populations: Exposure Duration and Latent Mortality
    Environmental Toxicology and Chemistry, Vol. 23, No. 9, pp. 2147±2153, 2004 q 2004 SETAC Printed in the USA 0730-7268/04 $12.00 1 .00 SHORTCOMINGS OF THE LABORATORY-DERIVED MEDIAN LETHAL CONCENTRATION FOR PREDICTING MORTALITY IN FIELD POPULATIONS: EXPOSURE DURATION AND LATENT MORTALITY YUAN ZHAO* and MICHAEL C. NEWMAN Department of Environmental and Aquatic Animal Health, Virginia Institute of Marine Science, College of William and Mary, P.O. Box 1346, Gloucester Point, Virginia 23062-1346, USA (Received 15 October 2003; Accepted 9 February 2004) AbstractÐExposure duration and intensity (concentration or dose) determine lethal effects of toxicants. However, environmental regulators have focused on exposure intensity and have considered duration only peripherally. Conventional testing for toxicology tends to ®x exposure time and to use the median lethal concentration (LC50) at that time to quantify mortality. Fixing the exposure duration and selecting the 50% mortality level for reasons of statistical and logistical convenience result in the loss of ecologically relevant information generated at all other times and ignore latent mortality that manifests after the exposure ends. In the present study, we used survival analysis, which is widely employed in other ®elds, to include both time and concentration as covariates and to quantify latent mortality. This was done with two contrasting toxicants, copper sulfate (CuSO4) and sodium pentachlorophenol (NaPCP). Amphipods (Hyalella azteca) were exposed to different toxicant concentrations, and the percentage mortalities were noted both during and after the exposure ended. For CuSO4 at the conventional 48-h LC50 concentrations, the predicted proportions dead after including latent mortality were 65 to 85%, not 50%.
    [Show full text]
  • European Centre for Ecotoxicology and Toxicology of Chemicals
    EUROPEAN CENTRE FOR ECOTOXICOLOGY AND TOXICOLOGY OF CHEMICALS EUROPEAN CENTRE FOR ECOTOXICOLOGY AND TOXICOLOGY OF CHEMICALS ECETOC at a glance 2 Purpose 3 Values 3 Vision 3 Mission 3 Approach 3 Membership 4 ECETOC Member Companies 4 Membership benefits 5 Message from the Chairman 6 ECETOC Board of Administration 7 Report from the Secretary General 8 Science Programme 10 Foreword from the Scientific Committee Chairman 10 ECETOC revises its science strategy 11 Summary of the 2011 Science Programme 12 Highlights of 2011 15 Task forces established 16 Task forces completed 18 Workshops 21 Symposia and other meetings 24 Science Awards 28 Long-range Research Initiative 29 Communication 31 Publications 31 Online communication 32 External Representation 32 Members of the Scientific Committee 34 Members of the Secretariat 34 Finance 35 Abbreviations 36 ECETOC I European Centre for Ecotoxicology and Toxicology of Chemicals I Annual Report 2011 I page 2 Introduction Membership Message Board of Report from Science Science Long-range Communication Members of Finance Abbreviations from the Administration the Secretary Programme Awards Research the Scientific Chairman General Initiative Committee Established in 1978, ECETOC is Europe’s leading industry association for developing and promoting top quality science in human and environmental risk assessment of chemicals. Members include the main companies with interests in the manufacture and use of chemicals, biomaterials and pharmaceuticals, and organisations active in these fields. ECETOC is the scientific forum where member company experts meet and co-operate with government and academic scientists, to evaluate and assess the available data, identify gaps in knowledge and recommend research, and publish critical reviews on the ecotoxicology and toxicology of chemicals, biomaterials and pharmaceuticals.
    [Show full text]
  • Toxicity and Assessment of Chemical Mixtures
    Toxicity and Assessment of Chemical Mixtures Scientific Committee on Health and Environmental Risks SCHER Scientific Committee on Emerging and Newly Identified Health Risks SCENIHR Scientific Committee on Consumer Safety SCCS Toxicity and Assessment of Chemical Mixtures The SCHER approved this opinion at its 15th plenary of 22 November 2011 The SCENIHR approved this opinion at its 16th plenary of 30 November 2011 The SCCS approved this opinion at its 14th plenary of 14 December 2011 1 Toxicity and Assessment of Chemical Mixtures About the Scientific Committees Three independent non-food Scientific Committees provide the Commission with the scientific advice it needs when preparing policy and proposals relating to consumer safety, public health and the environment. The Committees also draw the Commission's attention to the new or emerging problems which may pose an actual or potential threat. They are: the Scientific Committee on Consumer Safety (SCCS), the Scientific Committee on Health and Environmental Risks (SCHER) and the Scientific Committee on Emerging and Newly Identified Health Risks (SCENIHR) and are made up of external experts. In addition, the Commission relies upon the work of the European Food Safety Authority (EFSA), the European Medicines Agency (EMA), the European Centre for Disease prevention and Control (ECDC) and the European Chemicals Agency (ECHA). SCCS The Committee shall provide opinions on questions concerning all types of health and safety risks (notably chemical, biological, mechanical and other physical risks) of non- food consumer products (for example: cosmetic products and their ingredients, toys, textiles, clothing, personal care and household products such as detergents, etc.) and services (for example: tattooing, artificial sun tanning, etc.).
    [Show full text]
  • ECETOC Guidance on Dose Selection
    ECETOC Guidance on Dose Selection Technical Report No. 138 EUROPEAN CENTRE OFOR EC TOXICOLOGY AND TOXICOLOGY OF CHEMICALS ECETOC Guidance on Dose Selection ECETOC Guidance on Dose Selection Technical Report No. 138 Brussels, March 2021 ISSN-2079-1526-138 (online) ECETOC TR No. 138 1 ECETOC Guidance on Dose Selection 224504 ECETOC Technical Report No. 138 © Copyright – ECETOC AISBL European Centre for Ecotoxicology and Toxicology of Chemicals Rue Belliard 40, B-1040 Brussels, Belgium. All rights reserved. No part of this publication may be reproduced, copied, stored in a retrieval system or transmitted in any form or by any means, electronic, mechanical, photocopying, recording or otherwise without the prior written permission of the copyright holder. Applications to reproduce, store, copy or translate should be made to the Secretary General. ECETOC welcomes such applications. Reference to the document, its title and summary may be copied or abstracted in data retrieval systems without subsequent reference. The content of this document has been prepared and reviewed by experts on behalf of ECETOC with all possible care and from the available scientific information. It is provided for information only. ECETOC cannot accept any responsibility or liability and does not provide a warranty for any use or interpretation of the material contained in the publication. ECETOC TR No. 138 2 ECETOC Guidance on Dose Selection ECETOC Guidance on Dose Selection Table of Contents 1. SUMMARY 6 2. INTRODUCTION, BACKGROUND AND PRINCIPLES 9 2.1. Background and Principles 9 2.2. Current Regulatory Framework and Guidance 10 2.2.1. Historical perspectives and the evolution of test guidelines 10 2.2.2.
    [Show full text]
  • Wildlife Toxicology: Environmental Contaminants and Their National and International Regulation" (2012)
    University of Nebraska - Lincoln DigitalCommons@University of Nebraska - Lincoln USGS Staff -- ubP lished Research US Geological Survey 2012 Wildlife Toxicology: Environmental Contaminants and Their aN tional and International Regulation K. Christiana Grim Center for Species Survival, Smithsonian Conservation Biology Institute Anne Fairbrother EcoSciences Barnett A. Rattner U.S. Geological Survey, [email protected] Follow this and additional works at: http://digitalcommons.unl.edu/usgsstaffpub Part of the Geology Commons, Oceanography and Atmospheric Sciences and Meteorology Commons, Other Earth Sciences Commons, and the Other Environmental Sciences Commons Grim, K. Christiana; Fairbrother, Anne; and Rattner, Barnett A., "Wildlife Toxicology: Environmental Contaminants and Their National and International Regulation" (2012). USGS Staff -- Published Research. 969. http://digitalcommons.unl.edu/usgsstaffpub/969 This Article is brought to you for free and open access by the US Geological Survey at DigitalCommons@University of Nebraska - Lincoln. It has been accepted for inclusion in USGS Staff -- ubP lished Research by an authorized administrator of DigitalCommons@University of Nebraska - Lincoln. Published in New Directions in Conservation Medicine: Applied Cases in Ecological Health, edited by A. Alonso Aguirre, Richard S. Ostfield, and Peter Daszak (New York: Oxford University Press, 2012). Authors K. Christiana Grim, D.V.M. Research Associate Center for Species Survival Smithsonian Conservation Biology Institute Front Royal, Vrrginia Anne Fairbrother, D.V.M., M.S., Ph.D. Senior Managing Scientist EcoSciences Exponent Seattle, Washington Barnett A. Rattner, Ph.D. Ecotoxicologist U.S. Geological Survey Patuxent Wildlife Research Center Beltsville Laboratory Beltsville, Maryland WILDLIFE TOXICOLOGY Environmental Contaminants and Their National and International Regulation K. Christiana Grim, Anne Fairbrother, and Barnett A.
    [Show full text]
  • Ecotoxicology Knowledgebase
    ECOTOXicology Knowledgebase: Modernizing the Literature Review and Data Curation Processes, and Mapping Ecological Toxicity of Per- and Polyfluoroalkyl Substances (PFAS) Jennifer OlkerPhoto, image Postdoctoral area measures 2” H x 6.93” W and can be Researchermasked by a collage strip of one, two or three images. Colleen ElonenThe photo, imageECOTOX area is located 3.19” from coordinator left and 3.81” from top of page. Each image used in collage should be reduced or cropped to a maximum of 2” high, stroked with a 1.5 pt white frame and positioned edge-to-edge with accompanying images. US EPA ECOTOX Project Team: Colleen Elonen Jennifer Olker GDIT contract staff Dale Hoff SEE staff Rong-Lin Wang Office of Research and Development www.epa.gov/ecotox Overview • Background and History for ECOTOX Knowledgebase • Modernizing the ECOTOX Pipeline (C. Elonen, SOT 2020) • Mapping ecological toxicity of PFAS with ECOTOX Protocols (J. Olker, SOT 2020) 2 What is the ECOTOX Knowledgebase? Publicly available, curated database providing toxicity data from single-chemical exposure studies to aquatic life, terrestrial plants, and wildlife • From comprehensive search and review of open and grey literature – Data extracted from acceptable studies, with up to 250 fields – Updated quarterly • 30+ year history: www.epa.gov/ecotox/ Originated in the early 1980s, US Environmental Protection Agency Office of Research and Development 3 Who uses the ECOTOX Knowledgebase? Clients Contacting ECOTOX Support line 2005 - 2016 (n = 2813) US EPA Headquarters Local Govt. International Govt. 4% 1% 8% Govt. Contractors 25% US EPA Regional Office 4% Unknown 5% University/Academia Other Federal 6% Agencies 4% US EPA Laboratory 4% State Govt.
    [Show full text]
  • Lecture Notes on Toxicology
    LECTURE NOTES For Medical Laboratory Science Students Toxicology Dr. Biruh Alemu (MD), Ato Mistire Wolde (MSC, MSC) Hawassa University In collaboration with the Ethiopia Public Health Training Initiative, The Carter Center, the Ethiopia Ministry of Health, and the Ethiopia Ministry of Education May 2007 Funded under USAID Cooperative Agreement No. 663-A-00-00-0358-00. Produced in collaboration with the Ethiopia Public Health Training Initiative, The Carter Center, the Ethiopia Ministry of Health, and the Ethiopia Ministry of Education. Important Guidelines for Printing and Photocopying Limited permission is granted free of charge to print or photocopy all pages of this publication for educational, not-for-profit use by health care workers, students or faculty. All copies must retain all author credits and copyright notices included in the original document. Under no circumstances is it permissible to sell or distribute on a commercial basis, or to claim authorship of, copies of material reproduced from this publication. ©2007 by Dr. Biruh Alemu, Ato Misire Wolde All rights reserved. Except as expressly provided above, no part of this publication may be reproduced or transmitted in any form or by any means, electronic or mechanical, including photocopying, recording, or by any information storage and retrieval system, without written permission of the author or authors. This material is intended for educational use only by practicing health care workers or students and faculty in a health care field. PREFACE The scope of toxicology widened tremendously during the last few years. An important development in this discipline is mandatory because of the expansion of different industrial, medical, environmental, animal and plant noxious substances.
    [Show full text]
  • APPENDIX O10 Ecotoxicology Studies
    APPENDIX O10 Ecotoxicology studies Olympic Dam Expansion Draft Environmental Impact Statement 2009 Appendix O 163 AAppendix_O_Vol_1.inddppendix_O_Vol_1.indd Sec1:163Sec1:163 117/2/097/2/09 11:08:33:08:33 AMAM AAppendix_O_Vol_1.inddppendix_O_Vol_1.indd Sec1:164Sec1:164 117/2/097/2/09 11:08:34:08:34 AMAM O10 ECOTOXICOLOGY STUDIES O10.1 INTRODUCTION The toxicity of simulated brine was tested using 15 species of marine flora and fauna. The tests were managed by Hydrobiology and Geotechnical Services and undertaken in laboratories in Sydney, Adelaide and Perth during 2006 and 2007. A suite of species from Upper Spencer Gulf, or surrogates for which recognised tests were available, were tested using both chronic and acute tests by Hydrobiology in 2006. These tests are presented in Appendix O10.2. Toxicity tests were developed for the Australian Giant Cuttlefish Sepia apama by Geotechnical Services in 2006. These tests are presented in Appendix O10.3. Following a review of the 2006 reports, additional tests were undertaken in 2007 to include more local species, chronic rather than acute tests, and a consistent diluent salinity (41 g/L), and to repeat the Giant Cuttlefish tests. The 2007 tests are presented in Appendix O10.4. Several interim species protection trigger values (SPTV) were calculated using the three suites of toxicity tests. The CSIRO subsequently reviewed all the tests and calculated an overall SPTV using the most appropriate species and tests. The CSIRO’s assessment is presented in Appendix O10.5. Dr Michael Warne of the CSIRO has also provided a peer review letter of testimony for the ecotoxicological studies undertaken for the Draft EIS (see overleaf).
    [Show full text]
  • Persistent Organic Pollutants (Pops): State of the Science
    Environmental Pollution 100 (1999) 209±221 www.elsevier.com/locate/envpol Persistent organic pollutants (POPs): state of the science K.C. Jones a,*, P. de Voogt b aEnvironmental Science Department, Institute of Environmental and Natural Sciences, Lancaster University, Lancaster, LA1 4YQ, UK bDepartment of Environmental and Toxicological Chemistry, Amsterdam Research Institute for Substances in Ecosystems (ARISE), University of Amsterdam, Nieuwe Achtergracht 166, 1018 WV Amsterdam, Netherlands Received 15 November 1998; accepted 22 March 1999 Abstract The environmental chemistry and ecotoxicology of persistent organic pollutants (POPs) are fascinating areas of scienti®c research. Our objective in this paper is to provide a brief, focussed overview of what constitutes a POP, highlight the harmful eects they may have on biota, make some comments on their environmental sources and analysis, their environmental trends and pro- cesses, their movement through foodchains and highlight some important regional-and global-scale environmental transport issues. Finally, we oer some personal thoughts on some current and future areas of scienti®c enquiry on POPs. # 1999 Elsevier Science Ltd. All rights reserved. Keywords: Persistent organic pollutant, POP; Sources; Air±surface exchange; Biota; Foodchains 1. What are Persistent Organic Pollutants (POPs) and They also partition into lipids in organisms rather than their properties? entering the aqueous milieu of cells and become stored in fatty tissue. This confers persistence on the chemical There are many thousands of POP chemicals, often in biota since metabolism is slow and POPs may there- coming from certain series or `families' of chemicals (e.g fore accumulate in foodchains. there are theoretically 209 dierent polychlorinated Importantly, POPs have the propensity to enter the biphenyls, diering from each other by level of chlor- gas phase under environmental temperatures.
    [Show full text]