1

WEBFRAM 5: A risk assessment module for soil invertebrates

Geoff Frampton

University of Southampton (UK)

Joerg Roembke

ECT Oekotoxikologie (DE)

Paul van den Brink

Alterra (NL)

Janeck Scott-Fordsmand

NERI (DK) Funded by

2

Testing

Standard higher-tier

test ?

Earthworms

Collembola

Enchytraeidae

routine

optional

optional

yes

no

no

Soil invertebrates pesticide risk assessment

( 91 / 414 / EEC )

3

WEBFRAM-5 : Principal aim

Investigate whether the pesticide risk assessment

for soil invertebrates could be improved

by explicitly incorporating uncertainty

into estimates of risk

4

Soil invertebrates pesticide risk assessment

Point estimates of toxicity, exposure and risk

ADVANTAGES:

Risk estimation simple

Easily harmonised approach

Requires a small amount of information

Application factors represent uncertainty

DETERMINISTIC:

LIMITATIONS:

Arbitrary application factors

Margin of protection uncertain

Lacks transparency in risk calculation

5

Species sensitivity distributions

100%

0

Potentiallyaffectedfraction

of species

NOECs from various speciesand experiments

Log (LC50)HC5

5%

6

WEBFRAM: seven inter-related projects:

Non - targetarthropods

Aquaticinvertebrates

COORDINATION ANDWEB - ENABLING

www.webfram.com

Acceptabilityperception

Terrestrialvertebrates

Soilinvertebrates

6

2 3 & 7 54

1

7

WEBFRAM: seven inter-related projects:

Non - targetarthropods

Aquaticinvertebrates

COORDINATION ANDWEB - ENABLING

www.webfram.com

Acceptabilityperception

Terrestrialvertebrates

Soilinvertebrates

6

2 3 & 7 54

1

8

WEBFRAM: seven inter-related projects:

Non - targetarthropods

Aquaticinvertebrates

COORDINATION ANDWEB - ENABLING

www.webfram.com

Acceptabilityperception

Terrestrialvertebrates

Soilinvertebrates

6

2 3 & 7 54

1

Internet risk assessment

tools

9

Risk assessment version(s)that include uncertainty

where appropriate

Deterministic riskassessment with

supporting data andworked examples

Internet risk assessment

tools

www.webfram.com

Central ScienceLaboratory (CSL)

(York)

&

Cadmus Group (Seattle)

10

1. Acquire data (key step!)

2. Identify variables with adequately-supported distributions

3. Use data distributions to describe uncertainty

4. Incorporate descriptions of uncertainty in alternative version(s) of the risk assessment

WEBFRAM 5 : Objectives

11

WEBFRAM 5 : Key findingsSoil invertebrates: public domain data

Active substances (a. s.)

Species / groups

Effects data sets

Lower tier(laboratory)

Higher tier(TME & field)

250

67

1341

80

62

934

a. s. with data for both tiers

a. s. with only one data set

45 (16%)

108 (38%)

12

CarbendazimCopper

BenomylDimethoate

PentachlorophenolParathion

CarbofuranDiazinonLindaneAtrazine

ChloroacetamideLambda-cyhalothrin

ImidaclopridChlorpyrifos

CarbarylHalofenozide

DNOCBendiocarb

MalathionThiophanate-methyl

PhorateNumber of data sets

0 50 100 150 200 250 300 350

Lower tier

Higher tier

Soil invertebrate effects data : pesticides with > 20 data sets

13

Lumbricidae

Collembola

Enchytraeidae

Acari

Coleoptera

Nematoda

Isopoda

Formicidae

Diptera

Araneae

0 200 400 600 800 1000 1200 1400

Distribution of pesticide effects data among

soil invertebrate groups

Number of data sets

Lower tier

Higher tier

14

Lumbricidae species data : lower tier

Number of data sets

Eisenia fetida

Earthworms grouped

Eisenia andrei

Lumbricus terrestris

Aporrectodea caliginosa

Lumbricus rubellus

Aporrectodea tuberculata

Allobophora chlorotica

Dendrobaena rubida

Apporectodea longa

Aporrectodea rosea

Octolasium lacteum

Eisenia veneta

0 100 200 300 400 500

15

Collembola species data : lower tier

Number of data sets

0 10 20 30 40 50

Folsomia candidaFolsomia fimetariaOnychiurus folsomiIsotoma viridisOnychiurus armatusProisotoma minutaOrchesella cinctaSinella communisCollembolans groupedIsotomidaeLepidocyrtus sp.Onychiurus apuanicusSinella caeca

16

0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35

Enchytraeidae species data : lower tier

Number of data sets

Enchytraeus sp. indet.

Enchytraeus coronatus

Enchytraeus albidus

Cognettia sphagnetorum

Friderica ratzeli

Enchytraeus crypticus

Enchytraeus buchholzi

17

Standardisedlog (LC50)

Chlorpyrifos

-0.5

0

0.5

1.0

1.5

2.0

2.5

Folsomia

HerbicidesInsecticides

Eisenia

Dimethoate

Lindane

Parathion

Propoxur

Diazinon

Lambda-cyhalothrin

Chloracetamide

Atrazin

e

Carbendazim

BenomylPCP

Fungicides

Relative sensitivities of standard test species

18

Species sensitivity distributions (SSD)

Assuming minimumsix species data, SSD could be calculated foronly seven pesticides

All SSD based onacute LC50

19

Pentachlorophenolspeciessensitivitydistribution(LC50 data)

Worms &nematodes

Collembola

www.webfram.com

20

Dimethoatespeciessensitivitydistribution(LC50 data) Hard - bodied

arthropods

Worms

Soft - bodiedarthropods

www.webfram.com

21

N

Median

HC5

Upper

HC5 N NOEC LOEC

Atrazine 8 4.40 12.00 37 0.13 0.53

Carbendazim 7 0.91 5.02 241 0.20 0.24

Chlorpyrifos 7 0.88 10.88 21 - 0.64

Dimethoate 12 0.19 0.74 1 - (0.53)

Lindane 6 0.37 2.99 7 - 1.30

PCP 9 3.80 12.30 44 - 6.60

Laboratory HC5 (mg / kg)

LAB FIELD

22

N

Median

HC5

Upper

HC5 N NOEC LOEC

Atrazine 8 4.40 12.00 37 0.13 0.53

Carbendazim 7 0.91 5.02 241 0.20 0.24

Chlorpyrifos 7 0.88 10.88 21 - 0.64

Dimethoate 12 0.19 0.74 1 - (0.53)

Lindane 6 0.37 2.99 7 - 1.30

PCP 9 3.80 12.30 44 - 6.60

Laboratory HC5 compared with field effects concs (mg / kg)

LAB FIELD

23

N

Median

HC5

Upper

HC5 N NOEC LOEC

Atrazine 8 4.40 12.00 37 0.13 0.53

Carbendazim 7 0.91 5.02 241 0.20 0.24

Chlorpyrifos 7 0.88 10.88 21 - 0.64

Dimethoate 12 0.19 0.74 1 - (0.53)

Lindane 6 0.37 2.99 7 - 1.30

PCP 9 3.80 12.30 44 - 6.60

Laboratory HC5 compared with field effects concs (mg / kg)

LAB FIELDRed HC5exceed field NOECor LOEC

24

Atrazine 14 5 – 100

Carbendazim 113 21 – 3433

Chlorpyrifos 6 3 – 24

Dimethoate 774 199 – 7350

Lindane 437 55 – 54333

PCP 8 2 – 68

Ratio of Eisenia fetida LC50 to soil invertebrate HC5

Ratio 95% CL

(Applicationfactor for Eiseniaacute mortalitytest = 10)

LC50HC5

25

Application factor: 5

TER < 5 indicates risk

Deterministic

Toxicity

Tiered risk assessment approach : carbendazim

NOEC from

one species

Exposure

TER

PEC chronic

NOEC / PEC

OECD earthworm reproduction test

Probabilistic

Median HC5 based

on NOECs from

more species

PEC chronic

HC5 / PEC

One speciesFive species

NOEC = 0.6median HC5 = 0.53

95% CL 0.06 – 1.30

PEC = 0.4 PEC = 0.4

1.5 1.3 (0.15 – 3.25)

(concentrations in mg / kg)

26

Conclusions

Availability of empirical data for soil invertebrates is limited

Pesticide concentrations tested in field studies not low enoughto derive field NOECs for validation

Earthworms the least sensitive soil invertebrates to most pesticides

If SSD are used in soil risk assessment, need to ensureappropriate taxonomic composition of data sets

WEBFRAM internet tools will provide an opportunity to explorethese issues further