Selection of Scenarios for Exposure of Soil Organisms to Plant Protection Products

Statistically based soil-climate exposure scenarios for aquatic pesticide fate modeling and exposure assessment in the Pampa Region of Argentina

Although pesticides are used intensively in Argentina's Pampa region, the possibility of performing an environmental risk assessment (ERA) remains limited due to the absence of readily available databases to run pesticide fate models and the lack of standardized realistic worst-case scenarios. The aim of the present study was to further advance capacities for performing probabilistic ERAs in the Pampa region by dividing and parameterizing the region into functional soil-climate mapping units (SCU) and defining statistically based, worst-case soil-climate exposure scenarios. Results obtained demonstrate that the SCU selected for a specific modeling exercise should depend on the dissociation constant (K_d ) of the pesticide evaluated and whether short- or long-term pesticide fate modeling and risk assessment are needed. Four regionally representative SCUs were specifically identified for modeling the fate of pesticides with low, high, and intermediate values of K_d . Fate modeling of pesticides with an intermediate K_d requires the use of a different SCU for short- versus long-term pesticide modeling, whereas this distinction is not necessary for pesticides with both low and high K_d . The current definition of realistic, worst-case, soil-climate scenarios represents a crucial step toward better pesticide fate modeling and exposure assessment in Argentina's Pampa region. Integr Environ Assess Manag 2023;19:626-637. © 2022 SETAC.

Statement of the PPR Panel on a framework for conducting the environmental exposure and risk assessment for transition metals when used as active substances in plant protection products (PPP)

The European Commission asked the European Food Safety Authority (EFSA) to prepare a statement on a framework for the environmental risk assessment (ERA) of transition metals (e.g. iron and copper) used as active substances in plant protection products (PPPs). Non-degradability, essentiality and specific conditions affecting fate and behaviour as well as their toxicity are distinctive characteristics possibly not covered in current guidance for PPPs. The proposed risk assessment framework starts with a preliminary phase, in which monitoring data on transition metals in relevant environmental compartments are provided. They deliver the metal natural background and anthropogenic residue levels to be considered in the exposure calculations. A first assessment step is then performed assuming fully bioavailable residues. Should the first step fail, refined ERA can, in principle, consider bioavailability issues; however, non-equilibrium conditions need to be taken into account. Simple models that are fit for purpose should be employed in order to avoid unnecessary complexity. Exposure models and scenarios would need to be adapted to address environmental processes and parameters relevant to the fate and behaviour of transition metals in water, sediment and soils (e.g. speciation). All developments should follow current EFSA guidance documents. If refined approaches have been used in the risk assessment of PPPs containing metals, post-registration monitoring and controlled long-term studies should be conducted and assessed. Utilisation of the same transition metal in other PPPs or for other uses will lead to accumulation in environmental compartments acting as sinks. In general, it has to be considered that the prospective risk assessment of metal-containing PPPs can only cover a defined period as there are limitations in the long-term hazard assessment due to issues of non-degradability. It is therefore recommended to consider these aspects in any risk management decisions and to align the ERA with the goals of other overarching legislative frameworks.

Scientific report of EFSA on the 'repair action' of the FOCUS surface water scenarios

The European Commission asked EFSA to undertake a 'repair action' of the FOCUS surface water report after the EFSA Pesticide Steering Network had been consulted. The main request was to introduce into all FOCUS surface water scenarios (both run-off and drainage) a 20-year assessment period instead of the current 12- or 16-month assessment period. Because of the 20-year assessment period, the way application dates are defined needed to be reviewed, reconsidering the functionality of the pesticide application timing currently used. Guidance on how substance parameters should be handled when correlated with soil properties has been provided. Foliar wash-off calculated in MACRO and Pesticide Root Zone Model was aligned and the appropriateness of including rotational crop aspects was discussed. Processing time and how to use the results of the exposure assessment were considered.

Modeling chemical accumulation in sediment of small waterbodies accounting for sediment transport and water-sediment exchange processes over long periods

In a recent scientific opinion of the European Food Safety Authority it is argued that the accumulation of plant protection products in sediments over long time periods may be an environmentally significant process. Therefore, the European Food Safety Authority proposed a calculation to account for plant protection product accumulation. This calculation, however, considers plant protection product degradation within sediment as the only dissipation route, and does not account for sediment dynamics or back-diffusion into the water column. The hydraulic model Hydrologic Engineering Center-River Analysis System (HEC-RAS; US Army Corps of Engineers) was parameterized to assess sediment transport and deposition dynamics within the FOrum for Co-ordination of pesticide fate models and their USe (FOCUS) scenarios in simulations spanning 20 yr. The results show that only 10 to 50% of incoming sediment would be deposited. The remaining portion of sediment particles is transported across the downstream boundary. For a generic plant protection product substance this resulted in deposition of only 20 to 50% of incoming plant protection product substance. In a separate analysis, the FOCUS TOXSWA model was utilized to examine the relative importance of degradation versus back-diffusion as loss processes from the sediment compartment for a diverse range of generic plant protection products. In simulations spanning 20 yr, it was shown that back-diffusion was generally the dominant dissipation process. The results of the present study show that sediment dynamics and back-diffusion should be considered when calculating long-term plant protection product accumulation in sediment. Neglecting these may lead to a systematic overestimation of accumulation. Environ Toxicol Chem 2017;36:3223-3231. © 2017 SETAC.

Considerations of temperature in the context of the persistence classification in the EU

Simulation degradation studies for industrial chemicals, biocidal products and plant protection products are required in the EU to estimate half-lives in soil, water and sediment for the comparison to persistence criteria for hazard (P/vP) assessment, and for use in exposure assessments. There is a discrepancy between European regulatory approaches regarding the temperature at which degradation half-lives should be (1) measured in simulation degradation testing of environmental compartments, and (2) compared to the P/vP criteria. In this paper, an opinion is provided on the options for the experimental temperature and extrapolation to other conditions. A review of the historical development of persistence criteria did not give conclusive evidence of the temperature at which the half-lives that underpin the P-criteria were measured, but room temperature is likely. Half-lives measured at 20 °C are in line with the intentions of some international agreements, but in the EU there is a continued political debate regarding the relevant temperature for comparison with persistence criteria. Measuring degradation at 20 °C has the advantage that metabolites/transformation products can be identified with greater accuracy, and that kinetic fits to determine half-lives for parent compounds and metabolites carry less uncertainty. Extrapolation of half-lives to lower temperatures is possible for assessing environmental exposure, but the uncertainty of the persistence classification is smaller when measured half-lives are used for direct comparison with P/vP criteria, without extrapolation. Model simulations demonstrate the pattern of concentrations that can be expected for realistic worst case climate scenarios in the EU based on the half-life of 120 days in soil at 20 °C and of 40 days in water at 20 °C, and their temporal and spatial variability.

Scientific Opinion addressing the state of the science on risk assessment of plant protection products for in-soil organisms

Following a request from EFSA, the Panel on Plant Protection Products and their Residues developed an opinion on the science behind the risk assessment of plant protection products for in-soil organisms. The current risk assessment scheme is reviewed, taking into account new regulatory frameworks and scientific developments. Proposals are made for specific protection goals for in-soil organisms being key drivers for relevant ecosystem services in agricultural landscapes such as nutrient cycling, soil structure, pest control and biodiversity. Considering the time-scales and biological processes related to the dispersal of the majority of in-soil organisms compared to terrestrial non-target arthropods living above soil, the Panel proposes that in-soil environmental risk assessments are made at in- and off-field scale considering field boundary levels. A new testing strategy which takes into account the relevant exposure routes for in-soil organisms and the potential direct and indirect effects is proposed. In order to address species recovery and long-term impacts of PPPs, the use of population models is also proposed.

European scenarios for exposure of soil organisms to pesticides

Standardised exposure scenarios play an important role in European pesticide authorisation procedures (a scenario is a combination of climate, weather and crop data to be used in exposure models). The European Food Safety Authority developed such scenarios for the assessment of exposure of soil organisms to pesticides. Scenarios were needed for both the concentration in total soil and for the concentration in the liquid phase. The goal of the exposure assessment is the 90th percentile of the exposure concentration in the area of agricultural use of a pesticide in each of three regulatory European zones (North, Centre and South). A statistical approach was adopted to find scenarios that are consistent with this exposure goal. Scenario development began with the simulation of the concentration distribution in the entire area of use by means of a simple analytical model. In the subsequent two steps, procedures were applied to account for parameter uncertainty and scenario uncertainty (i.e. the likelihood that a scenario that is derived for one pesticide is not conservative enough for another pesticide). In the final step, the six scenarios were selected by defining their average air temperature, soil organic-matter content and their soil textural class. Organic matter of the selected scenarios decreased in the order North-Centre-South. Because organic matter has a different effect on the concentration in total soil than it has on the concentration in the liquid phase, the concentration in total soil decreased in the order North-Centre-South whereas the concentration in the liquid phase decreased in the opposite order. The concentration differences between the three regulatory zones appeared to be no more than a factor of two. These differences were comparatively small in view of the considerable differences in climate and soil properties between the three zones.

Propagation of uncertainties in soil and pesticide properties to pesticide leaching

In the new Dutch decision tree for the evaluation of pesticide leaching to groundwater, spatially distributed soil data are used by the GeoPEARL model to calculate the 90th percentile of the spatial cumulative distribution function of the leaching concentration in the area of potential usage (SP90). Until now it was not known to what extent uncertainties in soil and pesticide properties propagate to spatially aggregated parameters like the SP90. A study was performed to quantify the uncertainties in soil and pesticide properties and to analyze their contribution to the uncertainty in SP90. First, uncertainties in the soil and pesticide properties were quantified. Next, a regular grid sample of points covering the whole of the agricultural area in the Netherlands was randomly selected. At the grid nodes, realizations from the probability distributions of the uncertain inputs were generated and used as input to a Monte Carlo uncertainty propagation analysis. The analysis showed that the uncertainty concerning the SP90 is 10 times smaller than the uncertainty about the leaching concentration at individual point locations. The parameters that contribute most to the uncertainty about the SP90 are, however, the same as the parameters that contribute most to uncertainty about the leaching concentration at individual point locations (e.g., the transformation half-life in soil and the coefficient of sorption on organic matter). Taking uncertainties in soil and pesticide properties into account further leads to a systematic increase of the predicted SP90. The important implication for pesticide regulation is that the leaching concentration is systematically underestimated when these uncertainties are ignored.