Strength of methods assessment for aquatic primary producer toxicity data: A critical review of atrazine studies from the peer-reviewed literature

Atrazine and its degradation products in drinking water source and supply: Risk assessment for environmental and human health in Campinas, Brazil

Atrazine is a broad-spectrum herbicide widely used worldwide to control grassy and broadleaf weeds. Atrazine's popularity is attributable to its cost-effectiveness and reliable performance. Relatedly, it is also an important micropollutant with a potential negative impact on biodiversity and human health. Atrazine has long been regularly detected in several environmental compartments, and its widespread use has resulted in ubiquitous and unpreventable contamination. Among pesticides sold in Brazil, atrazine has remained among the top-ranked active ingredients for the last several years. Thus, this study aimed to evaluate the occurrence of atrazine and three degradation products (hydroxyatrazine, desisopropylatrazine, and desethylatrazine) in surface water (Capivari and Atibaia rivers) and treated water, monthly sampling from two drinking water treatment plants in Campinas (São Paulo, Brazil). An analytical method using solid-phase extraction (SPE) and liquid chromatography tandem mass spectrometry (LC-MS/MS) was developed to determine target compounds simultaneously. The method presented instrument quantification limits from 0.5 to 4.0 ng mL^-1 and recovery values from 80 to 112%, with a maximum relative standard deviation of 6%. All analytes had a detection frequency of 100% from 2 to 2744 ng L^-1. Statistical analysis showed no analyte removal after conventional water treatment. Also, the Capivari River showed greater analyte concentration than the Atibaia River. Performed risk assessments according to current Brazilian standards showed no human and environmental health risks. However, other risk assessment approaches may indicate potential risks, advocating for further research and ongoing surveillance.

Quantitative review summarizing the effects of oil pollution on subarctic and arctic marine invertebrates

While meta-analyses are common in the health and some biological sciences, there is a lack of such analyses for petroleum-related marine research. Oil is a highly complex substance consisting of thousands of different compounds. Measurement limitations, different protocols and a lack of standards in recording and reporting various elements of laboratory experiments impede attempts to homogenize and compare data and identify trends. Nevertheless, oil toxicology research would benefit from meta-analyses, through which we could develop meaningful research questions and design robust experiments. Here we report findings from an effort to quantitatively summarize results from oil toxicology studies on arctic and subarctic marine invertebrates. We discovered that the vast majority of studies was conducted on crustaceans, followed by molluscs. Analyzing the sensitivity of response measures across taxa we found that the most sensitive responses tend to rank low in ecological relevance, while less sensitive response measures tend to be more ecologically relevant. We further uncovered that crustaceans appear to be more sensitive to mechanically dispersed than chemically dispersed oil while the opposite seems true for molluscs, albeit not statistically significant. Both crustaceans and molluscs show a higher sensitivity to fresh than to weathered oil. No differences in the sensitivities of crustacean life stages were found. However, due to a lack of data, many questions remain unanswered. Our study revealed that while trends in responses can be elucidated, heterogeneous experimental protocols and reporting regimes prevent a proper meta-analysis.

A Critical Review of the Availability, Reliability, and Ecological Relevance of Arctic Species Toxicity Tests for Use in Environmental Risk Assessment

There is a pressing need to understand the impact of contaminants on Arctic ecosystems; however, most toxicity tests are based on temperate species, and there are issues with reliability and relevance of bioassays in general. Together this may result in an underestimation of harm to Arctic organisms and contribute to significant uncertainty in risk assessments. To help address these concerns, a critical review to assess reported effects for these species, quantify methodological and endpoint relevance gaps, and identify future research needs for testing was performed. We developed uniform criteria to score each study, allowing an objective comparison across experiments to quantify their reliability and relevance. We scored a total of 48 individual studies, capturing 39 tested compounds, 73 unique Arctic test species, and 95 distinct endpoints published from 1975 to 2021. Our analysis shows that of 253 test substance and species combinations scored (i.e., a unique toxicity test), 207 (82%) failed to meet at least one critical study criterion that contributes to data reliability for use in risk assessment. Arctic-focused toxicity testing needs to ensure that exposures can be analytically confirmed, include environmentally realistic exposure scenarios, and report test methods more thoroughly. Significant data gaps were identified as related to standardized toxicity testing with Arctic species, diversity of compounds tested with these organisms, and the inclusion of ecologically relevant sublethal and chronic endpoints assessed in Arctic toxicity testing. Overall, there needs to be ongoing improvement in test conduction and reporting in the scientific literature to support effective risk assessments in an Arctic context. Environ Toxicol Chem 2022;41:46-72. © 2021 The Authors. Environmental Toxicology and Chemistry published by Wiley Periodicals LLC on behalf of SETAC.

Single and Combined Effects of Cypermethrin and UVR Pre-Exposure in the Microalgae Phaeodactylum Tricornutum

Coastal marine microalgae are exposed to anthropogenic pollutants, including pesticides from aquaculture/agriculture/household uses. Some microalgae species, such as Phaeodactylum tricornutum, can induce and accumulate UV-absorbing compounds (UACs) upon ultraviolet radiation (UVR) exposure to prevent deleterious effects. Tolerance mechanisms activated by natural stressors might also protect organisms from anthropogenic stressors. This work assesses the effects of the insecticide cypermethrin (Cyp) and UVR in the marine microalgae P tricornutum. Considering the pro-oxidant properties of both stressors and UACs' induction in P tricornutum, lethal and sublethal effects of Cyp were tested in cultures with and without UVR acclimation. After a 24-h exposure to 10 μg L^-1 of technical Cyp or culture medium, UACs, growth, glutathione-S-transferase activity (GST), sulfhydryl groups (SH-g), and lipid peroxidation (LPO) were analyzed. Results showed differences in terms of growth between Cyp and Cyp + UVR pre-exposure. UACs' content was induced after UVR acclimation and diminished after 24 h of growth in control and UVR pre-treated cultures, while levels remained constant under Cyp exposure. A single Cyp exposure exerted GST induction, SH-g depletion, and LPO increments. In UVR-acclimatized treatments, oxidative stress responses showed similar or more pronounced effects than the single chemical exposure, suggesting a potential additive effect of the UVR acclimation. The contrasting effects of Cyp + UVR observed between growth and biochemical responses suggest different compensatory mechanisms that need to be further investigated. Also, it highlights the need to include both lethal and sublethal endpoints to understand microalgae's tolerance and its significance in the multiple stressors' context.

Assessment of risks to listed species from the use of atrazine in the USA: a perspective

Atrazine is a triazine herbicide used predominantly on corn, sorghum, and sugarcane in the US. Its use potentially overlaps with the ranges of listed (threatened and endangered) species. In response to registration review in the context of the Endangered Species Act, we evaluated potential direct and indirect impacts of atrazine on listed species and designated critical habitats. Atrazine has been widely studied, extensive environmental monitoring and toxicity data sets are available, and the spatial and temporal uses on major crops are well characterized. Ranges of listed species are less well-defined, resulting in overly conservative designations of "May Effect". Preferences for habitat and food sources serve to limit exposure among many listed animal species and animals are relatively insensitive. Atrazine does not bioaccumulate, further diminishing exposures among consumers and predators. Because of incomplete exposure pathways, many species can be eliminated from consideration for direct effects. It is toxic to plants, but even sensitive plants tolerate episodic exposures, such as those occurring in flowing waters. Empirical data from long-term monitoring programs and realistic field data on off-target deposition of drift indicate that many other listed species can be removed from consideration because exposures are below conservative toxicity thresholds for direct and indirect effects. Combined with recent mitigation actions by the registrant, this review serves to refine and focus forthcoming listed species assessment efforts for atrazine.Abbreviations: a.i. = Active ingredient (of a pesticide product). AEMP = Atrazine Ecological Monitoring Program. AIMS = Avian Incident Monitoring SystemArach. = Arachnid (spiders and mites). AUC = Area Under the Curve. BE = Biological Evaluation (of potential effects on listed species). BO = Biological Opinion (conclusion of the consultation between USEPA and the Services with respect to potential effects in listed species). CASM = Comprehensive Aquatic System Model. CDL = Crop Data LayerCN = field Curve Number. CRP = Conservation Reserve Program (lands). CTA = Conditioned Taste Avoidance. DAC = Diaminochlorotriazine (a metabolite of atrazine, also known by the acronym DACT). DER = Data Evaluation Record. EC25 = Concentration causing a specified effect in 25% of the tested organisms. EC50 = Concentration causing a specified effect in 50% of the tested organisms. EC50_RGR = Concentration causing a 50% reduction in relative growth rate. ECOS = Environmental Conservation Online System. EDD = Estimated Daily Dose. EEC = Expected Environmental Concentration. EFED = Environmental Fate and Effects Division (of the USEPA). EFSA = European Food Safety Agency. EIIS = Ecological Incident Information System. ERA = Environmental Risk Assessment. ESA = Endangered Species Act. ESU = Evolutionarily Significant UnitsFAR = Field Application RateFIFRA = Federal Insecticide, Fungicide, and Rodenticide Act. FOIA = Freedom of Information Act (request). GSD = Genus Sensitivity Distribution. HC5 = Hazardous Concentration for ≤ 5% of species. HUC = Hydrologic Unit Code. IBM = Individual-Based Model. IDS = Incident Data System. K_OC = Partition coefficient between water and organic matter in soil or sediment. K_OW = Octanol-Water partition coefficient. LC50 = Concentration lethal to 50% of the tested organisms. LC-MS-MS = Liquid Chromatograph with Tandem Mass Spectrometry. LD50 = Dose lethal to 50% of the tested organisms. LAA = Likely to Adversely Affect. LOAEC = Lowest-Observed-Adverse-Effect Concentration. LOC = Level of Concern. MA = May Affect. MATC = Maximum Acceptable Toxicant Concentration. NAS = National Academy of Sciences. NCWQR = National Center of Water Quality Research. NE = No Effect. NLAA = Not Likely to Adversely Affect. NMFS = National Marine Fisheries Service. NOAA = National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration. NOAEC = No-Observed-Adverse-Effect Concentration. NOAEL = No-Observed-Adverse-Effect Dose-Level. OECD = Organization of Economic Cooperation and Development. PNSP = Pesticide National Synthesis Project. PQ = Plastoquinone. PRZM = Pesticide Root Zone Model. PWC = Pesticide in Water Calculator. QWoE = Quantitative Weight of Evidence. RGR = Relative growth rate (of plants). RQ = Risk Quotient. RUD = Residue Unit Doses. SAP = Science Advisory Panel (of the USEPA). SGR = Specific Growth Rate. SI = Supplemental Information. SSD = Species Sensitivity Distribution. SURLAG = Surface Runoff Lag Coefficient. SWAT = Soil & Water Assessment Tool. SWCC = Surface Water Concentration Calculator. UDL = Use Data Layer (for pesticides). USDA = United States Department of Agriculture. USEPA = United States Environmental Protection Agency. USFWS = United States Fish and Wildlife Service. USGS = United States Geological Survey. WARP = Watershed Regressions for Pesticides.

Prioritization of Pesticides for Assessment of Risk to Aquatic Ecosystems in Canada and Identification of Knowledge Gaps

Pesticides can enter aquatic environments via direct application, via overspray or drift during application, or by runoff or leaching from fields during rain events, where they can have unintended effects on non-target aquatic biota. As such, Fisheries and Oceans Canada identified a need to prioritize current-use pesticides based on potential risks towards fish, their prey species, and habitats in Canada. A literature review was conducted to: (1) Identify current-use pesticides of concern for Canadian marine and freshwater environments based on use and environmental presence in Canada, (2) Outline current knowledge on the biological effects of the pesticides of concern, and (3) Identify general data gaps specific to biological effects of pesticides on aquatic species. Prioritization was based upon recent sales data, measured concentrations in Canadian aquatic environments between 2000 and 2020, and inherent toxicity as represented by aquatic guideline values. Prioritization identified 55 pesticides for further research nationally. Based on rank, a sub-group of seven were chosen as the top-priority pesticides, including three herbicides (atrazine, diquat, and S-metolachlor), three insecticides (chlorpyrifos, clothianidin, and permethrin), and one fungicide (chlorothalonil). A number of knowledge gaps became apparent through this process, including gaps in our understanding of sub-lethal toxicity, environmental fate, species sensitivity distributions, and/or surface water concentrations for each of the active ingredients reviewed. More generally, we identified a need for more baseline fish and fish habitat data, ongoing environmental monitoring, development of marine and sediment-toxicity benchmarks, improved study design including sufficiently low method detection limits, and collaboration around accessible data reporting and management.

Learning from the past and considering the future of chemicals in the environment

Knowledge of the hazards and associated risks from chemicals discharged to the environment has grown considerably over the past 40 years. This improving awareness stems from advances in our ability to measure chemicals at low environmental concentrations, recognition of a range of effects on organisms, and a worldwide growth in expertise. Environmental scientists and companies have learned from the experiences of the past; in theory, the next generation of chemicals will cause less acute toxicity and be less environmentally persistent and bioaccumulative. However, researchers still struggle to establish whether the nonlethal effects associated with some modern chemicals and substances will have serious consequences for wildlife. Obtaining the resources to address issues associated with chemicals in the environment remains a challenge.