Mechanistic Effect Modeling of Earthworms in the Context of Pesticide Risk Assessment: Synthesis of the FORESEE Workshop

Abstract

Earthworms are important ecosystem engineers, and assessment of the risk of plant protection products toward them is part of the European environmental risk assessment (ERA). In the current ERA scheme, exposure and effects are represented simplistically and are not well integrated, resulting in uncertainty when the results are applied to ecosystems. Modeling offers a powerful tool to integrate the effects observed in lower tier laboratory studies with the environmental conditions under which exposure is expected in the field. This paper provides a summary of the (In)Field Organism Risk modEling by coupling Soil Exposure and Effect (FORESEE) Workshop held 28–30 January 2020 in Düsseldorf, Germany. This workshop focused on toxicokinetic–toxicodynamic (TKTD) and population modeling of earthworms in the context of ERA. The goal was to bring together scientists from different stakeholder groups to discuss the current state of soil invertebrate modeling and to explore how earthworm modeling could be applied to risk assessments, in particular how the different model outputs can be used in the tiered ERA approach. In support of these goals, the workshop aimed at addressing the requirements and concerns of the different stakeholder groups to support further model development. The modeling approach included 4 submodules to cover the most relevant processes for earthworm risk assessment: environment, behavior (feeding, vertical movement), TKTD, and population. Four workgroups examined different aspects of the model with relevance for risk assessment, earthworm ecology, uptake routes, and cross‐species extrapolation and model testing. Here, we present the perspectives of each workgroup and highlight how the collaborative effort of participants from multidisciplinary backgrounds helped to establish common ground. In addition, we provide a list of recommendations for how earthworm TKTD modeling could address some of the uncertainties in current risk assessments for plant protection products. Integr Environ Assess Manag 2021;17:352–363. © 2020 SETAC

Risk assessment for Birds and Mammals

“…Galic et al., 2010; Forbes et al., 2016; Larras et al., 2022) and workshops organised (e.g. Forbes et al., 2015; Hommen et al., 2016; Forbes et al., 2021) on their potential regulatory use. In addition, several case studies on mechanistic effect models have been published for wild species of birds (e.g.…”

Integrating earthworm movement and life history through dynamic energy budgets

“…The DEB model may be applied as a module in the chemical risk assessment (e.g. Forbes et al ., 2021 ; Roeben et al ., 2020 ) as well as in a conservation and environmental change context. In particular, our approach contributes to understanding important aspects of conservation physiology as highlighted by Cooke et al .…”

Three perspectives on the prediction of chemical effects in ecosystems

“…Fourth, identify those processes most critical in light of the biological level and spatiotemporal scale of prediction, as well as in light of the taxa, chemicals and potentially characteristics of the (eco)system under scrutiny (Figure 6[4]). Important processes and missing data might be identified and prioritised, respectively, in a collaborative effort, for example in workshops with participants from multidisciplinary backgrounds (Forbes et al, 2020). Also novel data science tools including artificial intelligence might strongly expand our prioritisation capacity in future (Pichler et al, 2020; Scowen et al, 2021).…”