Search

Wild birds and mammals that feed in agricultural habitats are potentially exposed to pesticides through various routes. The European Food Safety Authority (EFSA) recently published a statement which concluded that the current EFSA risk assessment scheme for birds and mammals does not adequately cover bats (Chiroptera). In the present study, we take a more detailed look at the EFSA statement and assumptions made regarding direct (dermal) and indirect (dietary) exposure of bats to pesticides in terms of their realism and the potential implications for risk assessment outcomes. Regarding dietary exposure, errors in the residue per unit dose (RUD) values for flying insects (bat food), proposed in the EFSA bat statement, were identified and corrected. Lower RUD values based on a much broader data base are proposed. Using these more realistic RUD values, together with current assumptions regarding toxicity and exposure, the acute and long-term risk to bats appears to be within the range of those calculated for birds and ground-dwelling mammals under the current risk assessment scheme. Depending on the assumptions made, some uncertainties may remain and should be investigated further. According to the EFSA bat statement, dermal exposure of bats is the most significant route of exposure, resulting in the highest predicted daily doses. We demonstrated that the dermal exposure models in the EFSA bat statement predict much higher residues for bats than those measured for other flying organisms that have larger surface area to volume ratios, and thus would be expected to have the reverse relationship. We also illustrated that the amounts of spray liquid required to achieve the predicted dermal exposures of bats are implausibly high, with bats carrying an amount of spray liquid that exceeds their body weight many fold. It is recommended that a bat risk assessment framework should be based on realistic, sound science, allowing resources to be focused on those scenarios that are not already covered by the existing bird and mammal framework. Therefore, a quantitative risk assessment scheme should not be implemented until the many scientific uncertainties within the EFSA bat statement are addressed. Environ Toxicol Chem 2022;41:2595-2602. © 2022 Cambridge Environmental Assessments. Environmental Toxicology and Chemistry published by Wiley Periodicals LLC on behalf of SETAC., (© 2022 Cambridge Environmental Assessments. Environmental Toxicology and Chemistry published by Wiley Periodicals LLC on behalf of SETAC.)

Intact soil food webs are pivotal to maintaining essential soil functions, such as carbon recycling, sequestering, and biomass production. Although the functional role of micro‐ (e.g., bacteria and fungi) and macrofauna (e.g., earthworms) is comparatively well established, the importance of the mesofauna community (e.g., abundance and diversity of Acari and Collembola) in maintaining soil functionality is less clear. We investigated this question in a six‐month field experiment in arable soil by actively manipulating mesofauna abundance and biodiversity through the application of two legacy insecticides (lindane and methamidophos) at sufficiently high doses to reduce mesofauna abundance (well above previously registered application rates; 2.5 and 7.5 kg a.s./ha for lindane, and 0.6 and 3 kg a.s./ha for methamidophos) and measure the impact on organic matter degradation. Our results demonstrate that both insecticides had reduced Collembola and Acari abundances by up to 80% over the study's six‐month duration. In addition, we observed less pronounced and more complex changes in mesofauna biodiversity over time. These included insecticide‐dependent temporal fluctuations (both reduction and increase) for different estimates (indices) of local (alpha)‐diversity over time and no lasting impact for most estimates after six months. Even at these exceptionally high field rates, Collembola and Acari diversity was observed to generally recover by six months. In contrast, considering organic matter breakdown, we found no evidence of a treatment‐related effect. These results suggest that organic matter breakdown in arable soils is likely driven by other trophic levels (e.g., microorganisms or earthworms) with only a limited influence of the mesofauna community. We discuss these findings with regard to their implications for our current understanding of soil food web function and future European soil risk assessments. Integr Environ Assess Manag 2022;18:1423–1433. © 2021 The Authors. Integrated Environmental Assessment and Management published by Wiley Periodicals LLC on behalf of Society of Environmental Toxicology & Chemistry (SETAC). Key Points: The insecticide treatments heavily reduced the Collembola and Acari abundances but showed a less pronounced effect on soil mesofauna diversity.The contribution of soil mesofauna to soil organic matter breakdown is limited in arable field soils and is mainly driven by soil microorganisms.The mini‐container test can represent a flexible supplemental tool in the risk assessment of pesticides, which could be used to directly address functional soil endpoints such as decomposition by soil microorganisms and/or mesofauna, and their interactions, if needed.There is no clear evidence that structural (single species) endpoints are reliable indicators of soil functions, which need to be protected to support ecosystem services like food production on arable fields. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]