Estimating radiological exposure of wildlife in the field

Beaugelin­-Seiller, K.; Garnier‐Laplace, Jacqueline; Beresford, Nicholas A.

doi:10.1016/j.jenvrad.2018.10.006

Cited by 14 publications

(10 citation statements)

References 43 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…A criticism of many studies reporting effects on wildlife in the CEZ is that the estimation of exposure is poor (Beaugelin-Seiller et al, 2019;Beresford et al, 2019a). Many studies relate observations simply to dose rate readings from handheld dosimeters, with no consideration of internal exposure or the mobility of many organisms in extremely heterogeneously contaminated environments (e.g.…”

Section: Exposurementioning

confidence: 99%

“…there may be effects but are these the consequence of previous high exposures rather than current comparatively low dose rates); incorrect interpretation of statistical results (e.g. a statistically significant correlation does not necessarily imply causation, especially if it explains little of the observed variation) (Gaschak, 2016;Beaugelin-Seiller et al, 2019;Beresford et al, 2019a).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Towards solving a scientific controversy – The effects of ionising radiation on the environment

Beresford

Horemans

Copplestone

et al. 2020

Journal of Environmental Radioactivity

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Section: Exposurementioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Towards solving a scientific controversy – The effects of ionising radiation on the environment

Beresford

Horemans

Copplestone

et al. 2020

Journal of Environmental Radioactivity

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

“…However, most investigators agree that the poor estimate of actual levels of exposures in terms of doses to wildlife is one of the highly relevant explanations that could underlie differences in opinions concerning radiation effects on wildlife 4,5,13,14 . This led to recommendations with regard to the nature of data to acquire when conducting field studies 5,15 . Suggested good practices, such as more thoughtful sampling protocols, should apply to future studies.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Dose reconstruction supports the interpretation of decreased abundance of mammals in the Chernobyl Exclusion Zone

Beaugelin-Seiller

Garnier‐Laplace

Della-Vedova

et al. 2020

Sci Rep

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

We re-analyzed field data concerning potential effects of ionizing radiation on the abundance of mammals collected in the Chernobyl Exclusion Zone (CEZ) to interpret these findings from current knowledge of radiological dose-response relationships, here mammal response in terms of abundance. in line with recent work at fukushima, and exploiting a census conducted in february 2009 in the CEZ, we reconstructed the radiological dose for 12 species of mammals observed at 161 sites. We used this new information rather than the measured ambient dose rate (from 0.0146 to 225 µGy h −1) to statistically analyze the variation in abundance for all observed species as established from tracks in the snow in previous field studies. All available knowledge related to relevant confounding factors was considered in this re-analysis. this more realistic approach led us to establish a correlation between changes in mammal abundance with both the time elapsed since the last snowfall and the dose rate to which they were exposed. this relationship was also observed when distinguishing prey from predators. the dose rates resulting from our re-analysis are in agreement with exposure levels reported in the literature as likely to induce physiological disorders in mammals that could explain the decrease in their abundance in the ceZ. our results contribute to informing the Weight of Evidence approach to demonstrate effects on wildlife resulting from its field exposure to ionizing radiation. Thirty years after the accident at the Chernobyl nuclear power plant (Ch-NPP), the subject of its consequences for wildlife living in the Exclusion Zone (the so-called CEZ, that is an approximately 30 km diameter evacuated area surrounding the NPP) is still hotly debated between scientists arguing it had a negative ecological impact 1 and proponents of no-effects, or even some collateral consequences such as human evacuation being beneficial for the fauna 2,3. However, whatever their conclusions, these studies do not sufficiently often analyze the underlying data with respect to the most relevant indicator of total exposure when attempting to quantify the dose-response relationship that characterizes the effects of animal exposure to ionizing radiation. As explained by Beresford et al. 4 simplistic measurements of exposure, such as ambient dose rates or soil concentration activities, cannot encompass all the complexity of actual exposure of wildlife. Contributions of internal and external irradiation pathways to the total dose rates have both to be considered, and this balance depends on radionuclides (type and energy of emitted radiation) and on animal species (age, diet, habitat, use of the environment). Largely used for humans, the dose reconstruction process would also allow the accurate characterization of wildlife exposure required to interpret it in terms of effect. It should be acknowledged that this approach incorporates larger

show abstract

“…The challenge relates to different emitters (alpha, beta, gamma) and determination of internal versus external dose. Beaugelin-Seiller et al (2020) discusses approaches to improve the estimate of absorbed dose in field studies.…”

Section: What Is Stopping the Development Of An Ecosystem Approach?mentioning

confidence: 99%

From tangled banks to toxic bunnies; a reflection on the issues involved in developing an ecosystem approach for environmental radiation protection

Mothersill

Oughton

Schofield

et al. 2020

International Journal of Radiation Biology

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

Estimating radiological exposure of wildlife in the field

Cited by 14 publications

References 43 publications

Towards solving a scientific controversy – The effects of ionising radiation on the environment

Towards solving a scientific controversy – The effects of ionising radiation on the environment

Dose reconstruction supports the interpretation of decreased abundance of mammals in the Chernobyl Exclusion Zone

From tangled banks to toxic bunnies; a reflection on the issues involved in developing an ecosystem approach for environmental radiation protection

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About