Scientific Opinion on good modelling practice in the context of mechanistic effect models for risk assessment of plant protection products

The Panel has interpreted the Terms of Reference as a stepwise analysis of issues relevant to both the development and the evaluation of models to assess ecological effects of pesticides. The regulatory model should be selected or developed to address the relevant specific protection goal. The basis of good modelling practice must be the knowledge of relevant processes and the availability of data of sufficient quality. The opinion identifies several critical steps in order to set models within risk assessment, namely: problem formulation, considering the specific protection goals for the taxa or functional groups of concern; model domain of applicability, which drives the species and scenarios to model; species (and life stage) selection, considering relevant life history traits and toxicological/toxicokinetics characteristics of the pesticide; selection of the environmental scenario, which is defined by a combination of abiotic, biotic and agronomic parameters to provide a realistic worst-case situation. Model development should follow the modelling cycle, in which every step has to be fully documented: (i) problem definition; (ii) model formulation, i.e. design of a conceptual model; (iii) model formalisation, in which variables and parameters are linked together into mathematical equations or algorithms; (iv) model implementation, in which a computer code is produced and verified; (v) model setup, including sensitivity analysis, uncertainty analysis and comparison with observed data, that delivers the regulatory model; (vi) prior to actual use in risk assessment, the regulatory model should be evaluated for relevance to the specific protection goals; (vii) feedback from risk assessor with possible recommendations for model improvement. Model evaluation by regulatory authorities should consider each step of the modelling cycle: the opinion identifies points of particular attention for the use of mechanistic effect models in pesticide risk assessment. It is recommended that models be documented in a complete and transparent way, that a feedback platform be established involving risk assessors and model developers, and that a set of agreed models be made available.

[1]  Mark Westoby,et al.  Land-plant ecology on the basis of functional traits. , 2006, Trends in ecology & evolution.

[2]  L. Comas,et al.  Patterns in root trait variation among 25 co-existing North American forest species. , 2009, The New phytologist.

[3]  P. Kudsk,et al.  Modeling effects of herbicide drift on the competitive interactions between weeds , 2008 .

[4]  J. Boesten,et al.  Scientific Opinion on the science behind the guidance for scenario selection and scenario parameterisation for predicting environmental concentrations of plant protection products in soil , 2012 .

[5]  Graham C. Smith,et al.  Landscape as a Model: The Importance of Geometry , 2007, PLoS Comput. Biol..

[6]  J. Vanderborght,et al.  European scenarios for exposure of soil organisms to pesticides , 2013, Journal of environmental science and health. Part. B, Pesticides, food contaminants, and agricultural wastes.

[7]  A. J. Frost,et al.  Assessment of the effects of herbicide spray drift on a range of plant species of conservation interest. , 1989, Environmental pollution.

[8]  Paola Annoni,et al.  Sixth International Conference on Sensitivity Analysis of Model Output How to avoid a perfunctory sensitivity analysis , 2010 .

[9]  A Tiktak,et al.  Mapping ground water vulnerability to pesticide leaching with a process-based metamodel of EuroPEARL. , 2006, Journal of environmental quality.

[10]  Jan Vanderborght,et al.  Effect of pesticide fate parameters and their uncertainty on the selection of 'worst-case' scenarios of pesticide leaching to groundwater. , 2011, Pest management science.

[11]  P. Mineau,et al.  A Review of Interspecies Toxicity Extrapolation in Birds and Mammals and a Proposal for Long-term Toxicity Data , 2005, Ecotoxicology.

[12]  P. Heuberger,et al.  Calibration of process-oriented models , 1995 .

[13]  Peter Odderskær,et al.  ALMaSS, an agent-based model for animals in temperate European landscapes , 2003 .

[14]  J.J.T.I. Boesten,et al.  Modeller subjectivity in estimating pesticide parameters for leaching models using the same laboratory data set , 2000 .

[15]  Matthijs Hisschemöller,et al.  Coping with intractable controversies: The case for problem structuring in policy design and analysis , 1995 .

[16]  Matthias Liess,et al.  Landscape parameters driving aquatic pesticide exposure and effects. , 2014, Environmental pollution.

[17]  Jc Jacob Perrenet,et al.  The many faces of the mathematical modeling cycle , 2012 .

[18]  M. Liess,et al.  The influence of predation on the chronic response of Artemia sp. populations to a toxicant , 2006, The Journal of applied ecology.

[19]  Volker Grimm,et al.  Merging validation and evaluation of ecological models to ‘evaludation’: A review of terminology and a practical approach , 2014 .

[20]  Uta Berger,et al.  Pattern-Oriented Modeling of Agent-Based Complex Systems: Lessons from Ecology , 2005, Science.

[21]  N. Stenseth,et al.  From patterns to processes and back: analysing density-dependent responses to an abiotic stressor by statistical and mechanistic modelling , 2005, Proceedings of the Royal Society B: Biological Sciences.

[22]  J. C. McFarlane,et al.  Phytotox database evaluation of surrogate plant species recommended by the U.S. environmental protection agency and the organization for economic cooperation and development , 1985 .

[23]  Andreas Huth,et al.  Statistical inference for stochastic simulation models--theory and application. , 2011, Ecology letters.

[24]  A. Tiktak.  Application of pesticide leaching models to the Vredepeel dataset: II Pesticide fate , 2000 .

[25]  Andrew Stirling,et al.  Keep it complex , 2010, Nature.

[26]  Anton Leijnse,et al.  Uncertainty in a regional-scale assessment of cadmium accumulation in the Netherlands , 1999 .

[27]  V E Forbes,et al.  Conceptual model for improving the link between exposure and effects in the aquatic risk assessment of pesticides. , 2007, Ecotoxicology and environmental safety.

[28]  A. Hunka,et al.  Stakeholders’ Perspective on Ecological Modeling in Environmental Risk Assessment of Pesticides: Challenges and Opportunities , 2013, Risk analysis : an official publication of the Society for Risk Analysis.

[29]  Matthias Liess,et al.  Interspecific competition delays recovery of Daphnia spp. populations from pesticide stress , 2012, Ecotoxicology.

[30]  Steven F. Railsback,et al.  Agent-Based and Individual-Based Modeling: A Practical Introduction , 2011 .

[31]  M. Liess,et al.  Culmination of Low-Dose Pesticide Effects , 2013, Environmental science & technology.

[32]  Steven F. Railsback,et al.  Individual-based modeling and ecology , 2005 .

[33]  G. Matteucci,et al.  Functional traits and local environment predict vegetation responses to disturbance: a pan‐European multi‐site experiment , 2011 .

[34]  Josh Dorrough,et al.  Plant responses to agricultural intensification , 2008 .

[35]  M. Liess.  Population response to toxicants is altered by intraspecific interaction , 2002, Environmental toxicology and chemistry.

[36]  Roger Vargas,et al.  How risky is risk assessment: the role that life history strategies play in susceptibility of species to stress. , 2004, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America.

[37]  Tjalling Jager,et al.  Simultaneous modeling of multiple end points in life-cycle toxicity tests. , 2004, Environmental science & technology.

[38]  Matthias Liess,et al.  Traits and stress: keys to identify community effects of low levels of toxicants in test systems , 2011, Ecotoxicology.

[39]  Udo Hommen,et al.  Recovery based on plot experiments is a poor predictor of landscape‐level population impacts of agricultural pesticides , 2014, Environmental toxicology and chemistry.

[40]  Colin D. Brown,et al.  Promoting effects on reproduction increase population vulnerability of Daphnia magna , 2012, Environmental toxicology and chemistry.

[41]  J. Hermens,et al.  Modes of action in ecotoxicology: their role in body burdens, species sensitivity, QSARs, and mixture effects. , 2002, Environmental science & technology.

[42]  Matthias Liess,et al.  Intraspecific competition increases toxicant effects in outdoor pond microcosms , 2012, Ecotoxicology.

[43]  John L. Harper,et al.  Ecology: from individuals to ecosystems. 4th edition , 2006 .

[44]  Wayne R. Munns,et al.  Modeling Approaches to Population-Level Ecological Risk Assessment , 2007 .

[45]  R. Sibly,et al.  Representing the acquisition and use of energy by individuals in agent‐based models of animal populations , 2013 .

[46]  G. Heuvelink,et al.  Propagation of uncertainties in soil and pesticide properties to pesticide leaching. , 2012, Journal of environmental quality.

[47]  C. Boutin,et al.  Herbicidal effects on nontarget vegetation: Investigating the limitations of current pesticide registration guidelines , 2007, Environmental toxicology and chemistry.

[48]  U. Hommen,et al.  The relative sensitivity of macrophyte and algal species to herbicides and fungicides: An analysis using species sensitivity distributions , 2013, Integrated environmental assessment and management.

[49]  J. Gareth Polhill,et al.  The ODD protocol: A review and first update , 2010, Ecological Modelling.

[50]  R. Peters.  The Ecological Implications of Body Size , 1983 .

[51]  Jens Christian Refsgaard,et al.  Modelling guidelinesterminology and guiding principles , 2004 .

[52]  Roman Ashauer,et al.  Advantages of toxicokinetic and toxicodynamic modelling in aquatic ecotoxicology and risk assessment. , 2010, Journal of environmental monitoring : JEM.

[53]  R. Sibly,et al.  Landscape structure mediates the effects of a stressor on field vole populations , 2013, Landscape Ecology.

[54]  J. Stark,et al.  Reproductive potential: its influence on the susceptibility of a species to pesticides. , 1997, Ecotoxicology and environmental safety.

[55]  R M Sibly,et al.  Risk Assessment of UK Skylark Populations Using Life-History and Individual-Based Landscape Models , 2005, Ecotoxicology.

[56]  D. Zwart,et al.  Extrapolation Practice for Ecotoxicological Effect Characterization of Chemicals , 2008 .

[57]  Roman Ashauer,et al.  General unified threshold model of survival--a toxicokinetic-toxicodynamic framework for ecotoxicology. , 2011, Environmental science & technology.

[58]  Andreas Focks,et al.  Integrating chemical fate and population-level effect models for pesticides at landscape scale: New options for risk assessment , 2014 .

[59]  Volker Grimm,et al.  Ecological models supporting environmental decision making: a strategy for the future. , 2010, Trends in ecology & evolution.

[60]  Valery E. Forbes,et al.  TOXICANT IMPACTS ON DENSITY‐LIMITED POPULATIONS: A CRITICAL REVIEW OF THEORY, PRACTICE, AND RESULTS , 2001 .

[61]  Malgorzata Lagisz,et al.  Spatial Dynamic Factors Affecting Population-Level Risk Assessment for a Terrestrial Arthropod: An Agent-Based Modeling Approach , 2012 .

[62]  Carola A. Schriever,et al.  The footprint of pesticide stress in communities--species traits reveal community effects of toxicants. , 2008, The Science of the total environment.

[63]  P. J. Van den Brink,et al.  Potential application of population models in the European ecological risk assessment of chemicals II: Review of models and their potential to address environmental protection aims , 2010, Integrated environmental assessment and management.

[64]  V. Grimm,et al.  Post-Hoc Pattern-Oriented Testing and Tuning of an Existing Large Model: Lessons from the Field Vole , 2012, PloS one.

[65]  David J Carpenter,et al.  Sublethal effects of the herbicide glufosinate ammonium on crops and wild plants: short-term effects compared to vegetative recovery and plant reproduction , 2010, Ecotoxicology.

[66]  Walter Schmitt,et al.  Toxicokinetic‐toxicodynamic modeling of quantal and graded sublethal endpoints: A brief discussion of concepts , 2011, Environmental toxicology and chemistry.

[67]  Toke T. Høye,et al.  Opening the black box—Development, testing and documentation of a mechanistically rich agent-based model , 2010 .

[68]  C. Boutin,et al.  Toxicity Testing of Fifteen Non-Crop Plant Species with Six Herbicides in a Greenhouse Experiment: Implications for Risk Assessment , 2004, Ecotoxicology.

[69]  J. Boesten,et al.  EFSA Guidance Document on the risk assessment of plant protection products on bees (Apis mellifera, Bombus spp. and solitary bees) , 2013 .

[70]  Volker Grimm,et al.  Mechanistic effect modeling for ecological risk assessment: Where to go from here? , 2013, Integrated environmental assessment and management.

[71]  Anne Fairbrother,et al.  Sources of variability in plant toxicity testing. , 2004, Chemosphere.

[72]  James H. Brown,et al.  Metabolic ecology : a scaling approach , 2012 .

[73]  J. Hermens,et al.  Pattern analysis of the variation in the sensitivity of aquatic species to toxicants. , 1997, Chemosphere.

[74]  Birgit Müller,et al.  A standard protocol for describing individual-based and agent-based models , 2006 .

[75]  James H. Brown,et al.  Toward a metabolic theory of ecology , 2004 .

[76]  R. Parrish,et al.  A method for testing whether model predictions fall within a prescribed factor of true values, with an application to pesticide leaching , 1990 .

[77]  M. Liess,et al.  Analyzing effects of pesticides on invertebrate communities in streams , 2005, Environmental toxicology and chemistry.

[78]  Christopher J. Topping,et al.  Evaluation of wildlife management through organic farming , 2011 .

[79]  Thomas G. Preuss,et al.  A list of fish species that are potentially exposed to pesticides in edge-of-field water bodies in the European Union—a first step towards identifying vulnerable representatives for risk assessment , 2013, Environmental Science and Pollution Research.

[80]  Steven F Railsback,et al.  Pattern-oriented modelling: a ‘multi-scope’ for predictive systems ecology , 2012, Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society B: Biological Sciences.