View in EDS HTML Full Text PDF Full Text

Key challenges and developments in wildlife ecological risk assessment: Problem formulation.

Saved in:
Bibliographic Details
Title: Key challenges and developments in wildlife ecological risk assessment: Problem formulation.
Authors: Sample, Bradley E.1 (AUTHOR), Johnson, Mark S.2 (AUTHOR) mark.s.johnson.civ@health.mil, Hull, Ruth N.3 (AUTHOR), Kapustka, Lawrence4 (AUTHOR), Landis, Wayne G.5 (AUTHOR), Murphy, Cheryl A.6 (AUTHOR), Sorensen, Mary7 (AUTHOR), Mann, Gary8 (AUTHOR), Gust, Kurt A.9 (AUTHOR), Mayfield, David B.10 (AUTHOR), Ludwigs, Jan‐Dieter11 (AUTHOR), Munns, Wayne R.12 (AUTHOR)
Source: Integrated Environmental Assessment & Management. May2024, Vol. 20 Issue 3, p658-673. 16p.
Subject Terms: *Ecological risk assessment, *Pesticides, *Environmental toxicology, *Environmental chemistry, Risk assessment, Public domain (Copyright law), Civil service
Geographic Terms: North America
Abstract: Problem formulation (PF) is a critical initial step in planning risk assessments for chemical exposures to wildlife, used either explicitly or implicitly in various jurisdictions to include registration of new pesticides, evaluation of new and existing chemicals released to the environment, and characterization of impact when chemical releases have occurred. Despite improvements in our understanding of the environment, ecology, and biological sciences, few risk assessments have used this information to enhance their value and predictive capabilities. In addition to advances in organism‐level mechanisms and methods, there have been substantive developments that focus on population‐ and systems‐level processes. Although most of the advances have been recognized as being state‐of‐the‐science for two decades or more, there is scant evidence that they have been incorporated into wildlife risk assessment or risk assessment in general. In this article, we identify opportunities to consider elevating the relevance of wildlife risk assessments by focusing on elements of the PF stage of risk assessment, especially in the construction of conceptual models and selection of assessment endpoints that target population‐ and system‐level endpoints. Doing so will remain consistent with four established steps of existing guidance: (1) establish clear protection goals early in the process; (2) consider how data collection using new methods will affect decisions, given all possibilities, and develop a decision plan a priori; (3) engage all relevant stakeholders in creating a robust, holistic conceptual model that incorporates plausible stressors that could affect the targets defined in the protection goals; and (4) embrace the need for iteration throughout the PF steps (recognizing that multiple passes may be required before agreeing on a feasible plan for the rest of the risk assessment). Integr Environ Assess Manag 2024;20:658–673. © 2022 The Authors. Integrated Environmental Assessment and Management published by Wiley Periodicals LLC on behalf of Society of Environmental Toxicology & Chemistry (SETAC). This article has been contributed to by U.S. Government employees and their work is in the public domain in the USA. Key Points: Emerging science in various disciplines can greatly improve risk assessments for wildlife.Data collected from the use of new methods (e.g., adverse outcome pathways, "omics" technologies, models, etc.) must be considered in a range of outcomes, and it should be determined how such data can be used within current problem formulation (PF) frameworks.Examples and considerations of how scientific advances are incorporated into PF in risk assessments for wildlife are provided considering a range of jurisdictional requirements and current policies in North America and Europe. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]
Copyright of Integrated Environmental Assessment & Management is the property of Oxford University Press / USA and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites without the copyright holder's express written permission. Additionally, content may not be used with any artificial intelligence tools or machine learning technologies. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract. (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.)
Database: GreenFILE
Full text is not displayed to guests.
FullText Links:
  – Type: pdflink
Text:
  Availability: 1
Header DbId: 8gh
DbLabel: GreenFILE
An: 176717515
AccessLevel: 6
PubType: Academic Journal
PubTypeId: academicJournal
PreciseRelevancyScore: 0
IllustrationInfo
Items – Name: Title
  Label: Title
  Group: Ti
  Data: Key challenges and developments in wildlife ecological risk assessment: Problem formulation.
– Name: Author
  Label: Authors
  Group: Au
  Data: <searchLink fieldCode="AR" term="%22Sample%2C+Bradley+E%2E%22">Sample, Bradley E.</searchLink><relatesTo>1</relatesTo> (AUTHOR)<br /><searchLink fieldCode="AR" term="%22Johnson%2C+Mark+S%2E%22">Johnson, Mark S.</searchLink><relatesTo>2</relatesTo> (AUTHOR)<i> mark.s.johnson.civ@health.mil</i><br /><searchLink fieldCode="AR" term="%22Hull%2C+Ruth+N%2E%22">Hull, Ruth N.</searchLink><relatesTo>3</relatesTo> (AUTHOR)<br /><searchLink fieldCode="AR" term="%22Kapustka%2C+Lawrence%22">Kapustka, Lawrence</searchLink><relatesTo>4</relatesTo> (AUTHOR)<br /><searchLink fieldCode="AR" term="%22Landis%2C+Wayne+G%2E%22">Landis, Wayne G.</searchLink><relatesTo>5</relatesTo> (AUTHOR)<br /><searchLink fieldCode="AR" term="%22Murphy%2C+Cheryl+A%2E%22">Murphy, Cheryl A.</searchLink><relatesTo>6</relatesTo> (AUTHOR)<br /><searchLink fieldCode="AR" term="%22Sorensen%2C+Mary%22">Sorensen, Mary</searchLink><relatesTo>7</relatesTo> (AUTHOR)<br /><searchLink fieldCode="AR" term="%22Mann%2C+Gary%22">Mann, Gary</searchLink><relatesTo>8</relatesTo> (AUTHOR)<br /><searchLink fieldCode="AR" term="%22Gust%2C+Kurt+A%2E%22">Gust, Kurt A.</searchLink><relatesTo>9</relatesTo> (AUTHOR)<br /><searchLink fieldCode="AR" term="%22Mayfield%2C+David+B%2E%22">Mayfield, David B.</searchLink><relatesTo>10</relatesTo> (AUTHOR)<br /><searchLink fieldCode="AR" term="%22Ludwigs%2C+Jan‐Dieter%22">Ludwigs, Jan‐Dieter</searchLink><relatesTo>11</relatesTo> (AUTHOR)<br /><searchLink fieldCode="AR" term="%22Munns%2C+Wayne+R%2E%22">Munns, Wayne R.</searchLink><relatesTo>12</relatesTo> (AUTHOR)
– Name: TitleSource
  Label: Source
  Group: Src
  Data: <searchLink fieldCode="JN" term="%22Integrated+Environmental+Assessment+%26+Management%22">Integrated Environmental Assessment & Management</searchLink>. May2024, Vol. 20 Issue 3, p658-673. 16p.
– Name: Subject
  Label: Subject Terms
  Group: Su
  Data: *<searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Ecological+risk+assessment%22">Ecological risk assessment</searchLink><br />*<searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Pesticides%22">Pesticides</searchLink><br />*<searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Environmental+toxicology%22">Environmental toxicology</searchLink><br />*<searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Environmental+chemistry%22">Environmental chemistry</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Risk+assessment%22">Risk assessment</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Public+domain+%28Copyright+law%29%22">Public domain (Copyright law)</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Civil+service%22">Civil service</searchLink>
– Name: SubjectGeographic
  Label: Geographic Terms
  Group: Su
  Data: <searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22North+America%22">North America</searchLink>
– Name: Abstract
  Label: Abstract
  Group: Ab
  Data: Problem formulation (PF) is a critical initial step in planning risk assessments for chemical exposures to wildlife, used either explicitly or implicitly in various jurisdictions to include registration of new pesticides, evaluation of new and existing chemicals released to the environment, and characterization of impact when chemical releases have occurred. Despite improvements in our understanding of the environment, ecology, and biological sciences, few risk assessments have used this information to enhance their value and predictive capabilities. In addition to advances in organism‐level mechanisms and methods, there have been substantive developments that focus on population‐ and systems‐level processes. Although most of the advances have been recognized as being state‐of‐the‐science for two decades or more, there is scant evidence that they have been incorporated into wildlife risk assessment or risk assessment in general. In this article, we identify opportunities to consider elevating the relevance of wildlife risk assessments by focusing on elements of the PF stage of risk assessment, especially in the construction of conceptual models and selection of assessment endpoints that target population‐ and system‐level endpoints. Doing so will remain consistent with four established steps of existing guidance: (1) establish clear protection goals early in the process; (2) consider how data collection using new methods will affect decisions, given all possibilities, and develop a decision plan a priori; (3) engage all relevant stakeholders in creating a robust, holistic conceptual model that incorporates plausible stressors that could affect the targets defined in the protection goals; and (4) embrace the need for iteration throughout the PF steps (recognizing that multiple passes may be required before agreeing on a feasible plan for the rest of the risk assessment). Integr Environ Assess Manag 2024;20:658–673. © 2022 The Authors. Integrated Environmental Assessment and Management published by Wiley Periodicals LLC on behalf of Society of Environmental Toxicology & Chemistry (SETAC). This article has been contributed to by U.S. Government employees and their work is in the public domain in the USA. Key Points: Emerging science in various disciplines can greatly improve risk assessments for wildlife.Data collected from the use of new methods (e.g., adverse outcome pathways, "omics" technologies, models, etc.) must be considered in a range of outcomes, and it should be determined how such data can be used within current problem formulation (PF) frameworks.Examples and considerations of how scientific advances are incorporated into PF in risk assessments for wildlife are provided considering a range of jurisdictional requirements and current policies in North America and Europe. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]
– Name: AbstractSuppliedCopyright
  Label:
  Group: Ab
  Data: <i>Copyright of Integrated Environmental Assessment & Management is the property of Oxford University Press / USA and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites without the copyright holder's express written permission. Additionally, content may not be used with any artificial intelligence tools or machine learning technologies. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract.</i> (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.)
PLink https://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&site=eds-live&db=8gh&AN=176717515
RecordInfo BibRecord:
  BibEntity:
    Identifiers:
      – Type: doi
        Value: 10.1002/ieam.4710
    Languages:
      – Code: eng
        Text: English
    PhysicalDescription:
      Pagination:
        PageCount: 16
        StartPage: 658
    Subjects:
      – SubjectFull: Ecological risk assessment
        Type: general
      – SubjectFull: Pesticides
        Type: general
      – SubjectFull: Environmental toxicology
        Type: general
      – SubjectFull: Environmental chemistry
        Type: general
      – SubjectFull: Risk assessment
        Type: general
      – SubjectFull: Public domain (Copyright law)
        Type: general
      – SubjectFull: Civil service
        Type: general
      – SubjectFull: North America
        Type: general
    Titles:
      – TitleFull: Key challenges and developments in wildlife ecological risk assessment: Problem formulation.
        Type: main
  BibRelationships:
    HasContributorRelationships:
      – PersonEntity:
          Name:
            NameFull: Sample, Bradley E.
      – PersonEntity:
          Name:
            NameFull: Johnson, Mark S.
      – PersonEntity:
          Name:
            NameFull: Hull, Ruth N.
      – PersonEntity:
          Name:
            NameFull: Kapustka, Lawrence
      – PersonEntity:
          Name:
            NameFull: Landis, Wayne G.
      – PersonEntity:
          Name:
            NameFull: Murphy, Cheryl A.
      – PersonEntity:
          Name:
            NameFull: Sorensen, Mary
      – PersonEntity:
          Name:
            NameFull: Mann, Gary
      – PersonEntity:
          Name:
            NameFull: Gust, Kurt A.
      – PersonEntity:
          Name:
            NameFull: Mayfield, David B.
      – PersonEntity:
          Name:
            NameFull: Ludwigs, Jan‐Dieter
      – PersonEntity:
          Name:
            NameFull: Munns, Wayne R.
    IsPartOfRelationships:
      – BibEntity:
          Dates:
            – D: 01
              M: 05
              Text: May2024
              Type: published
              Y: 2024
          Identifiers:
            – Type: issn-print
              Value: 15513777
          Numbering:
            – Type: volume
              Value: 20
            – Type: issue
              Value: 3
          Titles:
            – TitleFull: Integrated Environmental Assessment & Management
              Type: main
ResultId 1