Short‐term to long‐term extrapolation of lethal effects of an herbicide on the marine mysid shrimp<i>Americamysis Bahia</i>by use of the General Unified Threshold Model of Survival (GUTS)

Gabsi, Faten; Solga, Andreas; Bruns, Eric J.; Leake, C. R.; Preuß, Thomas G.

doi:10.1002/ieam.4092

Cited by 6 publications

(4 citation statements)

References 20 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…It can also be that the observed survival‐concentration time data are best predicted using a combination of the GUTS‐RED‐SD and GUTS‐RED‐IT model, that is, the “proper” GUTS‐RED model (Jager and Ashauer 2018). However, this model is rarely used in published GUTS modeling studies (Focks et al 2018; Gabsi et al 2019; Dalhoff et al 2020), because researchers are typically able to explain the observed survival‐concentration time pattern with one of the 2 simpler models (IT or SD). The “proper” GUTS‐RED model is also more difficult to calibrate, because it consists of 5 instead of 4 parameters and the software used (openGUTS) does not yet support calibration of the proper GUTS‐RED model (Jager 2019b).…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Integrating Bioavailability of Metals in Fish Population Models

Janssen

Viaene²,

Sprang³

et al. 2021

Enviro Toxic and Chemistry

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Population models are increasingly being used to extrapolate individual-level effects of chemicals, including metals, to population-level effects. For metals, it is also important to take into account their bioavailability to correctly predict metal toxicity in natural waters. However, to our knowledge, no models exist that integrate metal bioavailability into population modeling. Therefore, our main aims were to 1) incorporate the bioavailability of copper (Cu) and zinc (Zn) into an individual-based model (IBM) of rainbow trout (Oncorhynchus mykiss), and 2) predict how survival-time concentration data translate to population-level effects. For each test water, reduced versions of the general unified threshold model of survival (GUTS-RED) were calibrated using the complete survival-time concentration data. The GUTS-RED individual tolerance (IT) showed the best fit in the different test waters. Little variation between the different test waters was found for 2 GUTS-RED-IT parameters. The GUTS-RED-IT parameter "median of distribution of thresholds" (m w ) showed a strong positive relation with the Ca 2+ , Mg 2+ , Na + , and H + ion activities. Therefore, m w formed the base of the calibrated GUTS bioavailability model (GUTS-BLM), which predicted 30-d x% lethal concentration (LCx) values within a 2-fold error. The GUTS-BLM was combined with an IBM, inSTREAM-Gen, into a GUTS-BLM-IBM. Assuming that juvenile survival was the only effect of Cu and Zn exposure, population-level effect concentrations were predicted to be 1.3 to 6.2 times higher than 30-d laboratory LCx values, with the larger differences being associated with higher interindividual variation of metal sensitivity. The proposed GUTS-BLM-IBM model can provide insight into metal bioavailability and effects at the population level and could be further improved by incorporating sublethal effects of Cu and Zn.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Integrating Bioavailability of Metals in Fish Population Models

Janssen

Viaene²,

Sprang³

et al. 2021

Enviro Toxic and Chemistry

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…On the basis of data for neonicotinoid insecticides and several aquatic arthropod species (comprising crustaceans and insects), Focks et al (2018) also concluded that the application of GUTS modeling for refinements in ERA appeared possible for most of the presented species–compound combinations, when the results of both the GUTS‐RED‐SD and GUTS‐RED‐IT models were used. Gabsi et al (2018) advocated that the selection of the model type (SD or IT) to be used in the risk assessment should be based on those toxicodynamic parameters that best reflect the toxic mode of action of the compound under evaluation. For example, they showed that the GUTS‐RED‐IT model parameters more successfully captured the slow‐acting mechanism of the herbicide tembotrione when predicting the response of time‐variable exposures on the mysid shrimp Americamysis bahia than the GUTS‐RED‐SD.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Application of General Unified Threshold Models of Survival Models for Regulatory Aquatic Pesticide Risk Assessment Illustrated with an Example for the Insecticide Chlorpyrifos

Brock

Arena

Cedergreen

et al. 2020

Integr Envir Assess & Manag

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Mathematical models within the General Unified Threshold models of Survival (GUTS) framework translate time-variable chemical exposure information into expected survival of animals. The GUTS models are species and compound specific and explicitly describe the internal exposure dynamics in an organism (toxicokinetics) and the related damage and effect dynamics (toxicodynamics), thereby connecting the external exposure concentration dynamics with the simulated mortality or immobility over time. In a recent scientific opinion on toxicokinetic-toxicodynamic (TKTD) models published by the European Food Safety Authority (EFSA), the GUTS modeling framework was considered ready for use in the aquatic risk assessment for pesticides and aquatic fauna. The GUTS models are suggested for use in risk assessment, if they are sufficiently validated for a specific substance-species combination. This paper aims to illustrate how they can be used in the regulatory environmental risk assessment for pesticides for a specific type of refinement, that is, when risks are triggered by lower tiers in acute as well as in chronic risk assessment and mortality or immobility is the critical endpoint. This approach involves the evaluation of time-variable exposure regimes in a so-called "Tier-2C" assessment. The insecticide chlorpyrifos was selected as an example compound because a large data set was available. The GUTS models for 13 different freshwater arthropods and 8 different theoretical aquatic exposure profiles were used to calculate a series of GUTS-based risk estimates, including exposure profile-specific multiplication factors leading to 50% mortality or immobility at the end of the tested profile (LP50/EP50) as "margins of safety." To put the use of GUTS models within the tiered aquatic risk assessment into perspective, GUTS models for the 13 aquatic arthropods were also used to predict the environmental risks of a measured chlorpyrifos exposure profile from an experimental ditch study (Tier-3 approach), and the results are discussed in the context of calibration of the tiered approach. Integr Environ Assess Manag 2020;00:1-16.

show abstract

“…Mostly used for research purposes, initially at constant exposure concen trations (Jager and Kooijman, 2005;Hesketh et al, 2016;Kretschmann et al, 2012), GUTS is today more and more employed to account for time-variable exposure (Ducrot et al, 2010;Focks et al, 2018;Nyman et al, 2012;Gabsi et al, 2018). GUTS models are also used for ERA, for example at Tier-2C assessment in combination with Tier-2B assessment based on SSD approaches (see Brock et al 2021, and Figure 6 in EFSA PPR Panel 2018a).…”

Section: Extrapolation Of Effects Of a Tested Exposure Pattern To Oth...mentioning

confidence: 99%

A critical review of effect modeling for ecological risk assessment of plant protection products

Larras

Charles

Chaumot

et al. 2022

Environ Sci Pollut Res

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

A wide diversity of plant protection products (PPP) is used for crop protection leading to the contamination of soil, water, and air, which can hâve ecotoxicological impacts on living organisms. It is inconceivable to study the effects of each compound on each species from each compartment, experimental studies being time consuming and cost prohibitive, and animal testing having to be avoided. Therefore, numerous models are developed to assess PPP ecotoxicological effects. Our objective was to provide an overview of the modelling approaches enabling the assessment of PPP effects (inc.luding biopesticides) on the biota. Six categories of models were inventoried: QSAR, DR and TKTD, population, multi-species, landscape, and mixture models. They were developed for various species (terrestrial and aquatic vertebrates and invertebrates, primary producers, micro-organisms) belonging to diverse environmental compartments, and address different goals (e.g., species sensitivity or PPP bioaccumulation assessment, ecosystem ser vices protection). Among them, mechanistic models are increasingly recognized by EFSA for P P P regulatory risk assessment but, to date, remain not considered in notified guidance documents. The strengths and limits of the reviewed models are discussed together with improvement avenues (multi-generational effects, multiple biotic and abiotic stressors. ..). This review also underlines a lack of model testing by rneans of fleld data and of sensitivity and uncertainty analyses. Accurate and robust modelling of PPP effects and other stressors on living organisms, from their application in the ffeld to their functional consé quences on the ecosystems at different scales of time and space, would help going towards a more sustainable management of the environment. K e y w o r d s: Ecotoxicological m odels, ecological m odels, risk assessm ent, environm ent, ecotoxicity, m ulti-stressors, E u ro p ea n rég u latio n Review of models for ERA of plant protection products

show abstract

Short‐term to long‐term extrapolation of lethal effects of an herbicide on the marine mysid shrimpAmericamysis Bahiaby use of the General Unified Threshold Model of Survival (GUTS)

Cited by 6 publications

References 20 publications

Integrating Bioavailability of Metals in Fish Population Models

Integrating Bioavailability of Metals in Fish Population Models

Application of General Unified Threshold Models of Survival Models for Regulatory Aquatic Pesticide Risk Assessment Illustrated with an Example for the Insecticide Chlorpyrifos

A critical review of effect modeling for ecological risk assessment of plant protection products

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About