Pesticide risk assessment for seed treatments: review of the updated EFSA bird and mammal guidance.

IF 3 4区 环境科学与生态学 Q2 ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCES
Dennis Sprenger, Manousos Foudoulakis, Jörg Hahne, Steven Kragten, Kai Ristau, Alan Lawrence
{"title":"Pesticide risk assessment for seed treatments: review of the updated EFSA bird and mammal guidance.","authors":"Dennis Sprenger, Manousos Foudoulakis, Jörg Hahne, Steven Kragten, Kai Ristau, Alan Lawrence","doi":"10.1093/inteam/vjaf065","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Seed treatment technology allows a targeted application of plant protection products (PPPs) to protect crop seeds and emerging seedlings from soil-borne pests and diseases. This highly focused application of seed treatments highlights their potential as a precision application tool resulting in reduced pesticide use and exposure to non-target organisms compared to overspray, while supporting efficient crop production. The European Food Safety Authority (EFSA) recently published an updated risk assessment guidance for birds and mammals (EFSA, 2023), including a scheme for seed treatment uses. Here, we present illustrative risk assessment results according to EFSA (2023) based on active substance toxicity data and seed treatment specific commercial use patterns according to Good Agricultural Practice (GAP). Our results demonstrate a high failure rate at Tier 1 and higher tiers, resulting in the need for weight of evidence for the majority of products to further refine the assumed risk to birds and mammals. We discuss these high failure rates in the context of an apparent mismatch between implicit assumptions of the EFSA (2023) risk assessment scheme and anticipated real-world field conditions, with agronomic practices linked to modern sowing technology and the ecology of species not being realistically reflected. Aiming towards a harmonized evaluation of seed treatment uses by different Member States, we propose how the risk assessment scheme could be adapted by including more realism at Tier 1 and higher tiers. The development of precision agriculture and associated review of risk assessment procedures offers regulators and risk managers a timely opportunity to consider these proposals to the risk assessment scheme for crop seed treatments.</p>","PeriodicalId":13557,"journal":{"name":"Integrated Environmental Assessment and Management","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":3.0000,"publicationDate":"2025-05-28","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Integrated Environmental Assessment and Management","FirstCategoryId":"93","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1093/inteam/vjaf065","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"环境科学与生态学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCES","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Seed treatment technology allows a targeted application of plant protection products (PPPs) to protect crop seeds and emerging seedlings from soil-borne pests and diseases. This highly focused application of seed treatments highlights their potential as a precision application tool resulting in reduced pesticide use and exposure to non-target organisms compared to overspray, while supporting efficient crop production. The European Food Safety Authority (EFSA) recently published an updated risk assessment guidance for birds and mammals (EFSA, 2023), including a scheme for seed treatment uses. Here, we present illustrative risk assessment results according to EFSA (2023) based on active substance toxicity data and seed treatment specific commercial use patterns according to Good Agricultural Practice (GAP). Our results demonstrate a high failure rate at Tier 1 and higher tiers, resulting in the need for weight of evidence for the majority of products to further refine the assumed risk to birds and mammals. We discuss these high failure rates in the context of an apparent mismatch between implicit assumptions of the EFSA (2023) risk assessment scheme and anticipated real-world field conditions, with agronomic practices linked to modern sowing technology and the ecology of species not being realistically reflected. Aiming towards a harmonized evaluation of seed treatment uses by different Member States, we propose how the risk assessment scheme could be adapted by including more realism at Tier 1 and higher tiers. The development of precision agriculture and associated review of risk assessment procedures offers regulators and risk managers a timely opportunity to consider these proposals to the risk assessment scheme for crop seed treatments.

种子处理的农药风险评估:更新的欧洲食品安全局鸟类和哺乳动物指南的审查。
种子处理技术允许有针对性地应用植物保护产品(PPPs),以保护作物种子和新生幼苗免受土传病虫害的侵害。这种高度集中的种子处理应用突出了其作为精确应用工具的潜力,与过度喷洒相比,可减少农药使用和非目标生物暴露,同时支持高效作物生产。欧洲食品安全局(EFSA)最近发布了一份更新的鸟类和哺乳动物风险评估指南(EFSA, 2023),其中包括一项种子处理用途计划。在这里,我们根据EFSA(2023)基于活性物质毒性数据和根据良好农业规范(GAP)的种子处理特定商业使用模式提供说明性风险评估结果。我们的研究结果表明,一级和更高一级的产品失败率很高,因此需要对大多数产品进行证据加权,以进一步完善对鸟类和哺乳动物的假设风险。我们在EFSA(2023)风险评估方案的隐含假设与预期的实际田间条件明显不匹配的背景下讨论这些高故障率,与现代播种技术和物种生态相关的农艺实践没有得到现实反映。为了对不同成员国的种子处理用途进行统一评估,我们建议如何调整风险评估计划,在第一级和更高一级纳入更多的现实主义。精准农业的发展和风险评估程序的相关审查为监管机构和风险管理者提供了一个及时的机会,可以将这些建议纳入作物种子处理风险评估方案。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
Integrated Environmental Assessment and Management
Integrated Environmental Assessment and Management ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCESTOXICOLOGY&nbs-TOXICOLOGY
CiteScore
5.90
自引率
6.50%
发文量
156
期刊介绍: Integrated Environmental Assessment and Management (IEAM) publishes the science underpinning environmental decision making and problem solving. Papers submitted to IEAM must link science and technical innovations to vexing regional or global environmental issues in one or more of the following core areas: Science-informed regulation, policy, and decision making Health and ecological risk and impact assessment Restoration and management of damaged ecosystems Sustaining ecosystems Managing large-scale environmental change Papers published in these broad fields of study are connected by an array of interdisciplinary engineering, management, and scientific themes, which collectively reflect the interconnectedness of the scientific, social, and environmental challenges facing our modern global society: Methods for environmental quality assessment; forecasting across a number of ecosystem uses and challenges (systems-based, cost-benefit, ecosystem services, etc.); measuring or predicting ecosystem change and adaptation Approaches that connect policy and management tools; harmonize national and international environmental regulation; merge human well-being with ecological management; develop and sustain the function of ecosystems; conceptualize, model and apply concepts of spatial and regional sustainability Assessment and management frameworks that incorporate conservation, life cycle, restoration, and sustainability; considerations for climate-induced adaptation, change and consequences, and vulnerability Environmental management applications using risk-based approaches; considerations for protecting and fostering biodiversity, as well as enhancement or protection of ecosystem services and resiliency.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信