E Dufourcq-Sekatcheff, L Quevarec, M-L Delignette-Muller, C Car, J-M Bonzom, R Gilbin, K-E Tollefsen, O Armant, S Frelon
{"title":"开发不良后果路径以支持放射生态风险评估:挑战与启示。","authors":"E Dufourcq-Sekatcheff, L Quevarec, M-L Delignette-Muller, C Car, J-M Bonzom, R Gilbin, K-E Tollefsen, O Armant, S Frelon","doi":"10.1093/etojnl/vgaf031","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Environmental pollution associated with long term effects, especially in the case of ionizing radiation, poses significant risks to wildlife, necessitating a more nuanced approach to Ecological Risk Assessment (ERA). In radioecology, current methods, as outlined by the International Commission on Radiological Protection (ICRP), focus primarily on exposure and individual/population-level effects, often both suffering a lack of ecological realism due to the nature of data used, and, sidelining a big amount of critical non-individual effects such as sub-individual one like genotoxicity. This review aims to address these gaps by suggesting the integration of New Approach Methods (NAMs) and the Adverse Outcome Pathway (AOP) framework in the field of radioecology. NAMs encompass innovative techniques, such as in silico and in vitro methodologies, that can provide predictive insights without relying solely on traditional animal testing. The AOP framework, developed by the Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD), structures effects data into a sequence of causally linked events, enabling a clearer understanding of how molecular changes lead to adverse ecological outcomes. In the first section of the review, we explore the challenges of applying AOPs within radioecology, including the complexities of modelling realistic exposure scenarios, the temporal dynamics of effects, and the impacts of multiple stressors. The second section highlights the potential and the application of some NAMs within an AOP framework to contribute improving risk assessment methodologies (in species realism issue and the use of sub-individual data). This part also offers other potential solutions to increase the number of data to be used in ERA as well as their ecological realism, through the use of AOP framework with relevant biological scales and ecological endpoints still uninvestigated in such way. In conclusion, leveraging NAMs and AOPs is much valuable for bridging molecular data and ecological implications, thereby advancing regulatory practices in radioecology and ensuring more comprehensive protection of ecosystems from radiological hazards.</p>","PeriodicalId":11793,"journal":{"name":"Environmental Toxicology and Chemistry","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":3.6000,"publicationDate":"2025-01-28","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Developing Adverse Outcome Pathways to support radioecological risk assessment: Challenges and insights.\",\"authors\":\"E Dufourcq-Sekatcheff, L Quevarec, M-L Delignette-Muller, C Car, J-M Bonzom, R Gilbin, K-E Tollefsen, O Armant, S Frelon\",\"doi\":\"10.1093/etojnl/vgaf031\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><p>Environmental pollution associated with long term effects, especially in the case of ionizing radiation, poses significant risks to wildlife, necessitating a more nuanced approach to Ecological Risk Assessment (ERA). In radioecology, current methods, as outlined by the International Commission on Radiological Protection (ICRP), focus primarily on exposure and individual/population-level effects, often both suffering a lack of ecological realism due to the nature of data used, and, sidelining a big amount of critical non-individual effects such as sub-individual one like genotoxicity. This review aims to address these gaps by suggesting the integration of New Approach Methods (NAMs) and the Adverse Outcome Pathway (AOP) framework in the field of radioecology. NAMs encompass innovative techniques, such as in silico and in vitro methodologies, that can provide predictive insights without relying solely on traditional animal testing. The AOP framework, developed by the Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD), structures effects data into a sequence of causally linked events, enabling a clearer understanding of how molecular changes lead to adverse ecological outcomes. In the first section of the review, we explore the challenges of applying AOPs within radioecology, including the complexities of modelling realistic exposure scenarios, the temporal dynamics of effects, and the impacts of multiple stressors. The second section highlights the potential and the application of some NAMs within an AOP framework to contribute improving risk assessment methodologies (in species realism issue and the use of sub-individual data). This part also offers other potential solutions to increase the number of data to be used in ERA as well as their ecological realism, through the use of AOP framework with relevant biological scales and ecological endpoints still uninvestigated in such way. In conclusion, leveraging NAMs and AOPs is much valuable for bridging molecular data and ecological implications, thereby advancing regulatory practices in radioecology and ensuring more comprehensive protection of ecosystems from radiological hazards.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":11793,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Environmental Toxicology and Chemistry\",\"volume\":\" \",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":3.6000,\"publicationDate\":\"2025-01-28\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Environmental Toxicology and Chemistry\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"93\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1093/etojnl/vgaf031\",\"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}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Environmental Toxicology and Chemistry","FirstCategoryId":"93","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1093/etojnl/vgaf031","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}
Developing Adverse Outcome Pathways to support radioecological risk assessment: Challenges and insights.
Environmental pollution associated with long term effects, especially in the case of ionizing radiation, poses significant risks to wildlife, necessitating a more nuanced approach to Ecological Risk Assessment (ERA). In radioecology, current methods, as outlined by the International Commission on Radiological Protection (ICRP), focus primarily on exposure and individual/population-level effects, often both suffering a lack of ecological realism due to the nature of data used, and, sidelining a big amount of critical non-individual effects such as sub-individual one like genotoxicity. This review aims to address these gaps by suggesting the integration of New Approach Methods (NAMs) and the Adverse Outcome Pathway (AOP) framework in the field of radioecology. NAMs encompass innovative techniques, such as in silico and in vitro methodologies, that can provide predictive insights without relying solely on traditional animal testing. The AOP framework, developed by the Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD), structures effects data into a sequence of causally linked events, enabling a clearer understanding of how molecular changes lead to adverse ecological outcomes. In the first section of the review, we explore the challenges of applying AOPs within radioecology, including the complexities of modelling realistic exposure scenarios, the temporal dynamics of effects, and the impacts of multiple stressors. The second section highlights the potential and the application of some NAMs within an AOP framework to contribute improving risk assessment methodologies (in species realism issue and the use of sub-individual data). This part also offers other potential solutions to increase the number of data to be used in ERA as well as their ecological realism, through the use of AOP framework with relevant biological scales and ecological endpoints still uninvestigated in such way. In conclusion, leveraging NAMs and AOPs is much valuable for bridging molecular data and ecological implications, thereby advancing regulatory practices in radioecology and ensuring more comprehensive protection of ecosystems from radiological hazards.
期刊介绍:
The Society of Environmental Toxicology and Chemistry (SETAC) publishes two journals: Environmental Toxicology and Chemistry (ET&C) and Integrated Environmental Assessment and Management (IEAM). Environmental Toxicology and Chemistry is dedicated to furthering scientific knowledge and disseminating information on environmental toxicology and chemistry, including the application of these sciences to risk assessment.[...]
Environmental Toxicology and Chemistry is interdisciplinary in scope and integrates the fields of environmental toxicology; environmental, analytical, and molecular chemistry; ecology; physiology; biochemistry; microbiology; genetics; genomics; environmental engineering; chemical, environmental, and biological modeling; epidemiology; and earth sciences. ET&C seeks to publish papers describing original experimental or theoretical work that significantly advances understanding in the area of environmental toxicology, environmental chemistry and hazard/risk assessment. Emphasis is given to papers that enhance capabilities for the prediction, measurement, and assessment of the fate and effects of chemicals in the environment, rather than simply providing additional data. The scientific impact of papers is judged in terms of the breadth and depth of the findings and the expected influence on existing or future scientific practice. Methodological papers must make clear not only how the work differs from existing practice, but the significance of these differences to the field. Site-based research or monitoring must have regional or global implications beyond the particular site, such as evaluating processes, mechanisms, or theory under a natural environmental setting.