Soil science is one of the least diverse subdisciplines within the agricultural, earth, and natural sciences. Representation within soil science does not currently reflect demographic trends in the United States. We synthesize available data on the representation of historically marginalized groups in soil science in the United States and identify historical mechanisms contributing to these trends. We review education and employment information within academia and the federal government, land-grant university participation, and available Soil Science Society of America (SSSA) membership data to gain insight into the current state of representation within soil sciences and implications for the future of this discipline. Across all domains of diversity, historically marginalized groups are under-represented in soil science. We provide recommendations toward recognizing diversity within the field and improving and encouraging diversity within the SSSA, and suggested responses for both individuals and institutions toward improving diversity, equity, and inclusion.
Currently, several desalination facilities have been proposed to operate or are actually operating in California. These facilities' use of reverse osmosis (RO) may discharge hypersaline reject brine into the marine environment. The risks, if any, this brine would pose to coastal receiving waters are unknown. To test the toxicity of hypersaline brine in the absence of any additional toxic constituents, we prepared brine and tested it with the seven toxicity test organisms listed in the 2009 California Ocean Plan. The most sensitive protocols were the marine larval development tests, whereas the most tolerant to increased salinities were the euryhaline topsmelt, mysid shrimp, and giant kelp tests. Reject brines from the Monterey Bay Aquarium's RO desalination facility were also tested with three species. The effects of the aquarium's brine effluent on topsmelt, mussels, and giant kelp were consistent with those observed in the salinity tolerance experiments. This information will be used by regulators to establish receiving water limitations for hypersaline discharges.
Indigenous Peoples have historically been targets of extractive research that has led to little to no benefit. In genomics, such research not only exposes communities to harms and risks of misuse, but also deprives such communities of potential benefits. Tribes in the US have been exercising their sovereignty to limit this extractive practice by adopting laws and policies to govern research on their territories and with their citizens. Federally and state recognized tribes are in the strongest position to assert research oversight. Other tribes lack the same authority, given that federal and state governments do not recognize their rights to regulate research, resulting in varying levels of oversight by tribes. These governance measures establish collective protections absent from the US federal government’s research oversight infrastructure, while setting expectations regarding benefits to tribes as political collectives. Using a legal epidemiology approach, the paper discusses findings from a review of Tribal research legislation, policy, and administrative materials from 26 tribes in the US. The discussion specifies issues viewed by tribes as facilitators and barriers to securing benefits from research for their nations and members/citizens, and describes preemptive and mitigating strategies pursued by tribes in response. These strategies are set within the framing of the CARE Principles for Indigenous Data Governance (Collective Benefit, Authority to Control, Responsibility, Ethics), a set of standards developed to ensure that decisions made about data pertaining to Indigenous communities at the individual and tribal levels are responsive to their values and collective interests. Our findings illustrate gaps to address for benefit sharing and a need to strengthen Responsibility and Ethics in tribal research governance.
Many watersheds in the Central Valley region of California are listed as impaired due to pyrethroid-associated sediment toxicity. The Central Valley Regional Water Quality Control Board is developing numeric sediment quality criteria for pyrethroids, beginning with bifenthrin. Criteria are being developed using existing data, along with data from 10 d and 28 d toxicity tests with Hyalella azteca conducted as part of the current study. A single range-finder and 2 definitive tests were conducted for each test duration. Median lethal concentrations (LC50s), as well as LC20s and inhibition concentrations (IC20s) were calculated based on measured whole sediment bifenthrin concentrations and interstitial water concentrations. Sediment LC50s were also corrected for organic C content. Average LC50s were not significantly different in 10 d versus 28 d tests with H. azteca: 9.1 and 9.6 ng/g bifenthrin for 10 d and 28 d tests, respectively. Average LC20 values were also similar with concentrations at 7.1 and 7.0 for 10 d and 28 d tests, respectively. Bifenthrin inhibition concentrations (IC20s) based on amphipod growth were variable, particularly in the 28 d tests, where a clear dose-response relationship was observed in only 1 of the definitive experiments. Average amphipod growth IC20s were 3.9 and 9.0 ng/g for 10 d and 28 d tests, respectively. Amphipod growth calculated as biomass resulted in IC20s of 4.1 and 6.3 ng/g for the 10 d and 28 d tests, respectively. Lack of a clear growth effect in the longer term test may be related to the lack of food adjustment to account for amphipod mortality in whole sediment exposures. The average C-corrected LC50s were 1.03 and 1.09 μg/g OC for the 10 d and 28 d tests, respectively. Interstitial water LC50s were determined as the measured dissolved concentration of bifenthrin relative to interstitial water dissolved organic carbon. The average LC50s for dissolved interstitial water bifenthrin were 4.23 and 4.28 ng/L for the 10 d and 28 d tests, respectively. In addition, a set of 10 d and 28 d tests were conducted at 15 °C to assess the relative toxicity of bifenthrin at a lower temperature than the standard 23 °C test temperature. These results showed that bifenthrin was more toxic at the lower temperature, with LC50s of 5.1 and 3.4 ng/g bifenthrin in 10 d and 28 d tests, respectively. Amphipod growth at 15 °C after a 28 d exposure resulted in the lowest effect concentration of all experiments conducted (IC20 = 0.61 ng/g). This article discusses how bifenthrin dose-response data from 10 d and 28 d exposures inform development of sediment quality criteria for this pesticide for California Central Valley watersheds.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.
hi@scite.ai
10624 S. Eastern Ave., Ste. A-614
Henderson, NV 89052, USA
Copyright © 2024 scite LLC. All rights reserved.
Made with 💙 for researchers
Part of the Research Solutions Family.