{"title":"对Environ的Zaida Lentini的“第五部分:估计可能性和暴露”的评论。生物安全第5(2006)193-195。","authors":"Franco Digiovanni, Peter G Kevan","doi":"10.1051/ebr:2008007","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>We comment on Zaida Lentini's summary of Session V (titled \"Estimating Likelihood and Exposure\") of the 9th International Symposium on the Biosafety of Genetically Modified Organisms. We provide an explanation of the drawbacks of using empirical pollen dispersion models, based largely on the general representativeness of the data used to generate the empirical models. We exemplify the drawbacks by highlighting the limited data used to develop the empirical model of Gustafson (presented in the same Symposium session). We provide a discussion of the meaning of \"worst-case\" assessments for pollen dispersion, how \"worst-case\" assumptions are commonly used in environmental impact assessments and how regulators will view worst-case impact assessments differently from the regulated (biotech) community. Finally, we clarify the advantages and disadvantages of mechanistic models and explain why they are often used in preference to empirical models in environmental impact assessments.</p>","PeriodicalId":87177,"journal":{"name":"Environmental biosafety research","volume":"7 2","pages":"105-8; discussion 109-13"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2008-04-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"2","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Comment on \\\"Session V: estimating likelihood and exposure\\\", by Zaida Lentini, Environ. Biosafety Res. 5 (2006) 193-195.\",\"authors\":\"Franco Digiovanni, Peter G Kevan\",\"doi\":\"10.1051/ebr:2008007\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><p>We comment on Zaida Lentini's summary of Session V (titled \\\"Estimating Likelihood and Exposure\\\") of the 9th International Symposium on the Biosafety of Genetically Modified Organisms. We provide an explanation of the drawbacks of using empirical pollen dispersion models, based largely on the general representativeness of the data used to generate the empirical models. We exemplify the drawbacks by highlighting the limited data used to develop the empirical model of Gustafson (presented in the same Symposium session). We provide a discussion of the meaning of \\\"worst-case\\\" assessments for pollen dispersion, how \\\"worst-case\\\" assumptions are commonly used in environmental impact assessments and how regulators will view worst-case impact assessments differently from the regulated (biotech) community. Finally, we clarify the advantages and disadvantages of mechanistic models and explain why they are often used in preference to empirical models in environmental impact assessments.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":87177,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Environmental biosafety research\",\"volume\":\"7 2\",\"pages\":\"105-8; discussion 109-13\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2008-04-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"2\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Environmental biosafety research\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1051/ebr:2008007\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"2008/6/13 0:00:00\",\"PubModel\":\"Epub\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Environmental biosafety research","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1051/ebr:2008007","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2008/6/13 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
Comment on "Session V: estimating likelihood and exposure", by Zaida Lentini, Environ. Biosafety Res. 5 (2006) 193-195.
We comment on Zaida Lentini's summary of Session V (titled "Estimating Likelihood and Exposure") of the 9th International Symposium on the Biosafety of Genetically Modified Organisms. We provide an explanation of the drawbacks of using empirical pollen dispersion models, based largely on the general representativeness of the data used to generate the empirical models. We exemplify the drawbacks by highlighting the limited data used to develop the empirical model of Gustafson (presented in the same Symposium session). We provide a discussion of the meaning of "worst-case" assessments for pollen dispersion, how "worst-case" assumptions are commonly used in environmental impact assessments and how regulators will view worst-case impact assessments differently from the regulated (biotech) community. Finally, we clarify the advantages and disadvantages of mechanistic models and explain why they are often used in preference to empirical models in environmental impact assessments.