Effects of pesticides on soil invertebrates in laboratory studies: A review and analysis using species sensitivity distributions

Environmental Toxicology and Chemistry

Volumn 25, Issue 9, 2006, Pages 2480-2489

  Frampton, Geoff K ^a   Jänsch, Stephan ^b   Scott Fordsmand, Janeck J ^c   Römbke, Jörg ^b   Van Den Brink, Paul J ^d  

^a UNIVERSITY OF SOUTHAMPTON   (United Kingdom)

^b ECT OEKOTOXIKOLOGIE GMBH   (Germany)

^c Department of Inland Fisheries   (Denmark)

^d WAGENINGEN UNIVERSITY   (Netherlands)

Author keywords

Acute to chronic ratio; Environmental risk assessment; Hazardous concentration; Probabilistic risk assessment; Soil fauna

Indexed keywords

BIODIVERSITY; ENVIRONMENTAL ENGINEERING; RISK ASSESSMENT; SOIL POLLUTION; TOXICITY;

ACUTE TO CHRONIC RATIO; ENVIRONMENTAL RISK ASSESSMENT; HAZARDOUS CONCENTRATION; PROBABILISTIC RISK ASSESSMENT; SOIL FAUNA;

PESTICIDES;

ATRAZINE; CARBENDAZIM; CHLORPYRIFOS; COPPER DERIVATIVE; DIMETHOATE; DIMPYLATE; LINDANE; PESTICIDE;

EARTHWORM; INSECT; MORTALITY; PESTICIDE; POLLUTION EFFECT; RISK ASSESSMENT; SOIL ECOSYSTEM; SOIL FAUNA; TOXICITY;

ARTHROPOD; CONFERENCE PAPER; EARTHWORM; ENVIRONMENTAL EXPOSURE; INVERTEBRATE; LABORATORY TEST; LC 50; MORTALITY; POLLUTANT; PRIORITY JOURNAL; RISK ASSESSMENT; SPECIES DISTRIBUTION; SPECIES IDENTIFICATION; TOXICITY TESTING; ANIMAL; DRUG EFFECT; REVIEW; SOIL; SPECIES DIFFERENCE;

ARTHROPODA; COLLEMBOLA; EARTHWORMS (SP.); EISENIA FETIDA; FOLSOMIA CANDIDA; INVERTEBRATA; OLIGOCHAETA (METAZOA);

ANIMALS; INVERTEBRATES; PESTICIDES; SOIL; SPECIES SPECIFICITY;

EID: 33750587610     PISSN: 07307268     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1897/05-438R.1     Document Type: Conference Paper

References (40)

1. André HM, Noti MI, Lebrun P. 1994. The soil fauna - The other last biotic frontier. Biodiversity and Conservation 3:45-56.
2. Kooijman SALM. 1987. A safety factor for LC50 values allowing for differences in sensitivity among species. Water Res 21:269-276.
3. Van Straalen NM, Denneman CAK. 1989. Ecotoxicological evaluation of soil quality criteria. Ecotoxicol Environ Saf 18:241-251.
4. Wagner C, Løkke H. 1991. Estimation of ecotoxicological protection levels from NOEC toxicity data. Water Res 25:1237-1242.
5. Aldenberg T, Slob W. 1993. Confidence limits for hazardous concentrations based on logistically distributed NOEC toxicity data. Ecotoxicol Environ Saf 25:48-63.
6. Posthuma L, Traas TP, Suter GW, eds. 2002. The Use of Species Sensitivity Distributions in Ecotoxicology. Lewis, Boca Raton, FL, USA.
7. Health Council of the Netherlands. 1989. Assessing the risk of toxic chemicals for ecosystems. Report 1988/28E. The Hague, The Netherlands.
8. Hopkin SP. 1993. Ecological implications of '95% protection levels' for metals in soils. Oikos 66:137-141.
9. Forbes VE, Calow P. 2002. Species sensitivity distributions revisited: A critical appraisal. Hum Ecol Risk Assess 8:473-492.
10. European Plant Protection Organization. 2003. EPPO Standards. Environmental risk assessment scheme for plant protection products. Chapter 8: Soil organisms and functions. EPPO Bulletin 33:195-209.
11. Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development. 1984. Guideline for testing of chemicals No. 207. Earthworm acute toxicity test. Paris, France.
12. International Organization for Standardization. 1998. Soil quality - Effects of pollutants on earthworms (Eisenia fetida). Part 2: Determination of effects on reproduction. ISO 11268-2:1998. Geneva, Switzerland.
13. Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development. 2004. Guideline for Testing of Chemicals No. 222. Earthworm reproduction test. Paris, France.
14. International Organization for Standardization. 1999. Soil quality - Inhibition of reproduction of Collembola (Folsomia Candida) by soil pollutants. ISO 11267:1999. Geneva, Switzerland.
15. International Organization for Standardization. 2004. Soil quality - Effects of pollutants on Enchytraeidae (Enchytraeus sp.) - Determination of effects on reproduction and survival. ISO 16387:2004. Geneva, Switzerland.
16. Bakker FM, Feije R, Grove AJ, Hoogendorn G, Jacobs G, Loose ED, Van Stratum P. 2003. A laboratory test protocol to evaluate effects of plant protection products on mortality and reproduction of the predatory mite Hypoaspis aculeifer Canestrini (Acari: Laelapidae) in standard soil. Journal of Soils and Sediments 3:73-77.
17. International Organization for Standardization. 1999. Soil quality - Effects of pollutants on earthworms. Part 3: Guidance on the determination of effects in field situations. ISO 11268-3:1999. Geneva, Switzerland.
18. Hart A, ed. 2001. Probabilistic risk assessment in Europe: Implementation and research needs. A report from the European Workshop on the probabilistic risk assessment for the environmental impacts of plant protection products (EUPRA), The Netherlands, June 2001. Central Science Laboratory, York, UK.
19. Ecological Committee on FIFRA Risk Assessment Methods. 1999. ECOFRAM terrestrial draft report, May 10, 1999. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Washington, DC.
20. European Commission. 2002. Working Document. Guidance Document on Aquatic Ecotoxicology in the context of the Directive 91/414/EEC. SANCO/3268/2001 rev 4 final. Brussels, Belgium.
21. Scott-Fordsmand JJ, Pedersen MB. 1995. Soil-quality criteria for selected inorganic compounds. Working Report 48. Danish Environmental Protection Agency, Copenhagen, Denmark.
22. Crommentuijn T, Sijm D, De Bruijn J, Van den Hoop M, Van Leeuwen K, Van de Plassche E. 2000. Maximum permissible and negligible concentrations for metals and metalloids in The Netherlands, taking into account background concentrations. J Environ Manag 60:121-143.
23. Wilke B-M, Hund-Rinke K, Pieper S, Römbke J, Marschner A. 2004. Entwicklung von Prüfwertempfehlungen für ausgewählte Schadstoffe zum Schutz des Bodens als Lebensraum für Bodenorganismen. Umweltwissenschaften und Schadstoff-Forschung (UWSF) 16:155-160.
24. Jensen J, Løkke H, Holmstrup M, Krogh PH, Elsgaard L. 2001. Effects and risk assessment of linear alkylbenzene sulfonates in agricultural soil. 5. Probabilistic risk assessment of linear alkylbenzene sulfonates in sludge-amended soils. Environ Toxicol Chem 20:1690-1697.
25. Badejo MA, Van Straalen NM. 1992. Effects of atrazine on growth and reproduction of Orchesella cincta (Collembola). Pedobiologia 26:221-230.
26. Jänsch S, Frampton GK, Römbke J, Van den Brink PJ, Scott-Fordsmand JJ. 2006. Effects of pesticides on soil invertebrates in model ecosystem and field studies: A review and comparison with laboratory toxicity data. Environ Toxicol Chem 25:2490-2501.
27. Wheeler JR, Grist EPM, Leung KMY, Morritt D, Crane M. 2002. Species sensitivity distributions: Data and model choice. Mar Pollut Bull 45:192-202.
28. Van der Hoeven N. 2001. Estimating the 5-percentile of the species sensitivity distributions without any assumptions about the distribution. Ecotoxicology 10:25-34.
29. Jagoe RH, Newman MC. 1997. Bootstrap estimation of community NOEC values. Ecotoxicology 6:293-306.
30. Maltby L, Blake N, Brock TCM, Van den Brink PJ. 2005. Insecticide species sensitivity distributions: The importance of test species selection and relevance to aquatic ecosystems. Environ Toxicol Chem 24:379-388.
31. Luttik R, Aldenberg T. 1997. Extrapolation factors for small samples of pesticide toxicity data: Special focus on LD50 values for birds and mammals. Environ Toxicol Chem 16:1785-1788.
32. Campbell PJ, Arnold DJS, Brock TCM, Grandy NJ, Heger W, Heimbach F, Maund SJ, Streloke M. 1999. Guidance Document on Higher-tier Aquatic Risk Assessment for Pesticides (HARAP). SETAC-Europe, Brussels, Belgium.
33. Aldenberg T, Jaworska JS. 2000. Uncertainty of the hazardous concentration and fraction affected for normal species sensitivity distributions. Ecotoxicol Environ Saf 46:1-18.
34. European Commission. 2002. Draft Working Document. Guidance Document on Terrestrial Ecotoxicology Under Council Directive 91/414/EEC. SANCO/10329/2002 rev 2 final. Brussels, Belgium.
35. Länge R, Hutchinson TH, Scholz N, Solbé J. 1998. Analysis of the ECETOC Aquatic Toxicity (EAT) database. II - Comparison of acute to chronic ratios for various aquatic organisms and chemical substances. Chemosphere 36:115-127.
36. Elmegaard N, Jagers op Akkerhuis GAJM. 2000. Differences in species sensitivity and acute-chronic relations. NERI Technical Report 325. National Environmental Research Institute, Silkeborg, Denmark.
37. Lock K, De Schamphelaere KAC, Janssen CR. 2002. The effect of lindane on terrestrial invertebrates. Arch Environ Contam Toxicol 42:217-221.
38. Jänsch S, Amorim MJ, Römbke J. 2005. Identification of the ecological requirements of important terrestrial ecotoxicological test species. Environ Rev 13:51-83.
39. European Union. 1991. Council directive concerning the placing of plant protection products on the market. 91/414/EEC. Brussels, Belgium.
40. Van den Brink PJ, Brock TCM, Posthuma L. 2002. The value of the species sensitivity distribution concept for predicting field effects: (Non-)confirmation of the concept using semifield experiments. In Posthuma L, Suter GWI, Traas TP, eds, Species Sensitivity Distributions in Ecotoxiology. Lewis, Boca Raton, FL, USA, pp 155-193.