ESASeedPARAM: A seed treatment model for threatened and endangered bird species in the United States.

The USEPA, National Marine Fisheries Service, and Fish and Wildlife Service are required to assess the risks of pesticides undergoing registration or reregistration to threatened and endangered (i.e., listed) species. Currently, the USEPA lacks a refined model to assess the risks of seed treatments to listed bird species. We developed the Endangered Species Assessment Seed Treatment Probabilistic Avian Risk Assessment Model (ESASeedPARAM) to incorporate species-specific diets, body weights, and food ingestion rates for potentially exposed listed bird species. The model also incorporates information on dissipation of seed residues after planting, and metabolism and elimination by birds during exposure. The ESASeedPARAM estimates hourly intake from ingestion of treated seeds for up to 50 days after planting. For each simulated bird, maximum retained dose (= body burden) and maximum rolling average total daily intake are estimated for acute and chronic exposure, respectively. The model is probabilistic and estimates exposure and risk for 20 birds on each of 1000 fields. The model accounts for interfield variation in the amount of waste grain on the soil surface in tilled, reduced till, and untilled fields. To estimate the fate of each bird from acute exposure, a random value is selected from the appropriate dose-response relationship and compared with the maximum retained dose. If acute exposure exceeds the randomly chosen effects value, mortality is assumed. For chronic risk, the most sensitive No Observed Adverse Effects Level (NOAEL) and Lowest Observed Adverse Effects Level (LOAEL) for an apical endpoint (survival, growth, reproduction) are compared with maximum rolling average total daily intake. In this article, we describe a case study conducted with the ESASeedPARAM for imidacloprid used as a seed treatment on wheat and soybean. Integr Environ Assess Manag 2023;19:527-546. © 2022 SETAC.

A field spray drift study to determine the downwind effects of isoxaflutole herbicide to nontarget plants.

Spray drift buffers are often required on herbicide labels to prevent potential drift effects to nontarget plants. Buffers are typically derived by determining the distance at which predicted exposure from spray drift equals the ecotoxicology threshold for sensitive plant species determined in greenhouse tests. Field studies performed under realistic conditions have demonstrated, however, that this approach is far more conservative than necessary. In 2016, the US Environmental Protection Agency estimated that isoxaflutole (IFT), a herbicide used to control grass and broadleaf weeds, could adversely affect downwind nontarget dicot plants at distances of ≥304 m from the edge of the treated field due to spray drift. This prediction implies that a buffer of at least 304 m is required to protect nontarget plants. To refine the predicted buffer distance for IFT, we conducted a field study in which sensitive nontarget plants (lettuce and navy bean, two to four leaf stage) were placed at various distances downwind from previously harvested soybean fields sprayed with Balance® Flexx Herbicide. The test plants were then transported to a greenhouse for grow out following the standard vegetative vigor test protocol. There were three trials. One had vegetation in the downwind deposition area (i.e., test plants placed in mowed grass; typical exposure scenario) and two had bare ground deposition areas (worst-case exposure scenario). For both plant species in bare ground deposition areas, effects on shoot height and weight were observed at 1.52 m but not at downwind distances of ≥9.14 m from the edge of the treated area. No effects were observed at any distance for plants placed in the vegetated deposition area. The field study demonstrated that a buffer of 9.14 m protects nontarget terrestrial plants exposed to IFT via spray drift even under worst-case conditions. Integr Environ Assess Manag 2022;18:757-769. © 2021 Bayer. Integrated Environmental Assessment and Management published by Wiley Periodicals LLC on behalf of Society of Environmental Toxicology & Chemistry (SETAC).

Correcting for Phylogenetic Autocorrelation in Species Sensitivity Distributions.

A species sensitivity distribution (SSD) is a cumulative distribution function of toxicity endpoints for a receptor group. A key assumption when deriving an SSD is that the toxicity data points are independent and identically distributed (iid). This assumption is tenuous, however, because closely related species are more likely to have similar sensitivities than are distantly related species. When the response of 1 species can be partially predicted by the response of another species, there is a dependency or autocorrelation in the data set. To date, phylogenetic relationships and the resulting dependencies in input data sets have been ignored in deriving SSDs. In this paper, we explore the importance of the phylogenetic signal in deriving SSDs using a case studies approach. The case studies involved toxicity data sets for aquatic autotrophs exposed to atrazine and aquatic and avian species exposed to chlorpyrifos. Full and partial data sets were included to explore the influences of differing phylogenetic signal strength and sample size. The phylogenetic signal was significant for some toxicity data sets (i.e., most chlorpyrifos data sets) but not for others (i.e., the atrazine data sets, the chlorpyrifos data sets for all insects, crustaceans, and birds). When a significant phylogenetic signal did occur, effective sample size was reduced. The reduction was large when the signal was strong. In spite of the reduced effective sample sizes, significant phylogenetic signals had little impact on fitted SSDs, even in the tails (e.g., hazardous concentration for 5th percentile species [HC5]). The lack of a phylogenetic signal impact occurred even when we artificially reduced original sample size and increased strength of the phylogenetic signal. We conclude that it is good statistical practice to account for the phylogenetic signal when deriving SSDs because most toxicity data sets do not meet the independence assumption. That said, SSDs and HC5s are robust to deviations from the independence assumption. Integr Environ Assess Manag 2019;00:1-13. © 2019 The Authors. Integrated Environmental Assessment and Management published by Wiley Periodicals, Inc. on behalf of Society of Environmental Toxicology & Chemistry (SETAC).

A refined ecological risk assessment for California red-legged frog, Delta smelt, and California tiger salamander exposed to malathion.

The California red-legged frog (CRLF), Delta smelt (DS), and California tiger salamander (CTS) are 3 species listed under the United States Federal Endangered Species Act (ESA), all of which inhabit aquatic ecosystems in California. The US Environmental Protection Agency (USEPA) has conducted deterministic screening-level risk assessments for these species potentially exposed to malathion, an organophosphorus insecticide and acaricide. Results from our screening-level analyses identified potential risk of direct effects to DS as well as indirect effects to all 3 species via reduction in prey. Accordingly, for those species and scenarios in which risk was identified at the screening level, we conducted a refined probabilistic risk assessment for CRLF, DS, and CTS. The refined ecological risk assessment (ERA) was conducted using best available data and approaches, as recommended by the 2013 National Research Council (NRC) report "Assessing Risks to Endangered and Threatened Species from Pesticides." Refined aquatic exposure models including the Pesticide Root Zone Model (PRZM), the Vegetative Filter Strip Modeling System (VFSMOD), the Variable Volume Water Model (VVWM), the Exposure Analysis Modeling System (EXAMS), and the Soil and Water Assessment Tool (SWAT) were used to generate estimated exposure concentrations (EECs) for malathion based on worst-case scenarios in California. Refined effects analyses involved developing concentration-response curves for fish and species sensitivity distributions (SSDs) for fish and aquatic invertebrates. Quantitative risk curves, field and mesocosm studies, surface-water monitoring data, and incident reports were considered in a weight-of-evidence approach. Currently, labeled uses of malathion are not expected to result in direct effects to CRLF, DS or CTS, or indirect effects due to effects on fish and invertebrate prey. Integr Environ Assess Manag 2018;14:224-239. © 2017 The Authors. Integrated Environmental Assessment and Management published by Wiley Periodicals, Inc. on behalf of Society of Environmental Toxicology & Chemistry (SETAC).

A probabilistic risk assessment for the Kirtland's warbler potentially exposed to chlorpyrifos and malathion during the breeding season and migration.

Two organophosphate pesticides, chlorpyrifos and malathion, are currently undergoing reregistration in the United States and were recently used by the US Environmental Protection Agency (USEPA) as case studies to develop a national procedure for evaluating risks to endangered species. One of the endangered bird species considered by the USEPA was the Kirtland's warbler (Setophaga kirtlandii). The Kirtland's warbler is an endangered migratory species that nests exclusively in young jack pine stands in Michigan and Wisconsin, and winters in the Bahamas. We developed probabilistic models to assess the risks of chlorpyrifos and malathion to Kirtland's warblers during the breeding season and the spring and fall migrations. The breeding area model simulates acute and chronic exposure and risk to each of 10 000 birds over a 60-d period following initial pesticide application. The model is highly species specific with regard to the foraging behavior of Kirtland's warblers during the breeding season. We simulated the maximum application rate and number of applications allowed on the labels for representative use patterns that could be found within 3 km of the breeding areas of Kirtland's warbler. The migration model simulates 10 000 birds during the course of their 12- to 23-d migration between their breeding area and the Bahamas. The model takes advantage of more than a century of observations of when, where, and for how long Kirtland's warblers forage in different habitats during the course of their migration. The data indicate that warblers only infrequently stop over in habitats that could be treated with chlorpyrifos and malathion. The breeding area and migration models resulted in predictions of very low acute and chronic risk for both pesticides to Kirtland's warblers. These results were expected, given that field observations indicate that the Kirtland's warbler has dramatically increased in abundance in recent decades. Integr Environ Assess Manag 2018;14:252-269. © 2017 SETAC.