Waterborne Search Waterborne Navigation

Publications: Presentations

PresentationsHome and Personal Care Products2022

Evaluation of Environmental Stressors to Coral in the Florida Keys

View MoreView Less

Coral decline has been observed worldwide including to reefs in Florida. Several global and local stressors have been implicated as contributors to the decline of coral populations The most pervasive and deleterious stressor is the global event of rising atmospheric CO2 levels which results in sea temperature changes and acidification. These global warming changes cause coral bleaching and ultimately coral death. Stony Coral Tissue Loss Diseases (SCTLD) is causing widespread devastation in the Florida Reef Tract. Expert coral biologists have identified the most important stressors to reefs in Florida – invasive species, unsustainable fishing practices, coastal development, untreated or poorly treated wastewater, urban and agricultural run-off, and tourism-related damage. Recently, questions have been raised about the potential for certain sunscreen active ingredients (UV filters) to contribute to the decline in coral ecological status. An investigation was conducted to evaluate environmental stressors to coral in the Florida Reef Tract with a focus on the Florida Keys through the lens of possible global and local factors. Stressors with potential to impact coral ecosystems in the Florida Keys were identified and prioritized. A weight-of-evidence did not verify sunscreens as a contributor to coral decline. Improving the ecological status of coral in the Florida Keys requires prioritizing efforts on the most significant stressors. Mitigation efforts to restore damaged coral have been successful to some extent but are labor and time intensive. Conservation efforts should focus on recreational practices such as educational efforts on boaters, divers, and other activities in and around the coral reef to reduce the spread of SCTLD and minimize structural damage to the reefs.

SETAC Europe 2022. On-Demand Only Session 4.07: Environmental Risk Assessment of Organic and Inorganic UV Filters. Oral Presentation.

R. Vamshi, N. Maples-Reynolds, M. Williams (Waterborne), S. Dyer (Waterborne and LeTourneau University), K. Reynertson (Johnson & Johnson), J. Sirois (Consumer Healthcare Products Association)

PresentationsCrop Protection2022

Comparative Ecosystem Modeling Study for Assessing Pesticide Risks in Aquatic Mesocosms

View MoreView Less

Outdoor aquatic mesocosms are artificial ecosystems used for higher-tier pesticide risk assessments to assess the effects of pesticides across a wide range of organisms and to capture indirect effects mediated by the food web. Mesocosms provide more realistic estimates of risks compared to single-species laboratory-based standard toxicity studies. Aquatic system models (ASMs) have been developed to simulate mesocosm systems and can extend pesticide risk assessment through applying scenarios corresponding to conditions untested in the empirical systems, including time-variable exposures. We are presenting a comparative modeling (“ring”) study with four previously published ASMs (Streambugs, AQUATOX, CASM, and StoLaM+StreamCom). With the ring study, we aim to assess whether the artificial mesocosm systems can be simulated with ASMs. In addition, the study is an opportunity to gain insight into and inform data collection from the mesocosms themselves and allow for comparison between available ASMs. The goal of the study is to calibrate and validate the models with the same set of available mesocosm data. Mesocosm data are available from untreated control mesocosms from seven studies conducted in four different years at the FNU Research Centre Neu-Ulrichstein, Germany. We reviewed these data for patterns and consistencies across studies, and derived calibration and validation criteria to compare with the model outputs. Four of the available control data sets were used for calibration by all models. The remaining three data sets were used for validation in a separate step. The ring study provides a unique opportunity to compare previously published ASMs and assess whether they can be used to simulate the transient ecosystem responses in mesocosms. The ring study attempts to develop and establish ASMs as virtual mesocosms acceptable in the regulatory context of pesticide risk assessment.

SETAC Europe 2022. Session 4.05 – Effect Modelling in ERA. Oral Presentation, Wednesday 18 May 2022 AM Session (10:40AM).

A. Schmolke, F. Abi-Akar, J. Collins (Waterborne), N. Galic, R. Ashauer (Syngenta Crop Protection), S. Bartell, Y. Atalay (Cardno, Inc.), I. O’Connor, S. Spycher (EBP Schweiz AG), N. Schuwirth (Eawag: Swiss Federal Institute of Aquatic Science and Technology), T. Strauss (gaiac Research Institute), B. Sackmann (GSI Environmental Inc), D. Preziosi, R. Pastorok (Integral Consulting, Inc), P. Ebke, J. Schmidt, A. Loerracher (Mesocosm GmbH, Institut für Gewässerschutz).

Presentations2022

Using GIS Overlay Methods to Determine Vulnerable Agricultural Areas in Europe

View MoreView Less

GIS enables the use of meta-models, weighted-overlay, and index methods to assess the relative vulnerability of groundwater or surface water to contaminants. The application of these methods is driven in large part by data availability, and assessor expertise and familiarity. This may result in a bias in the models as certain criteria are over- or underemphasized; for example, pesticide behaviour is often ignored in commonly used index methods, where environmental factors such as pH and organic carbon have been shown to affect the local vulnerability of groundwater and surface water. Furthermore, vulnerability index methods may feature subjective weights and rankings, which increases the likelihood of bias.

The objective of the studies was to determine the relative vulnerability ranking groundwater and surface water in maize production areas in Europe, especially in the Ukraine using a GIS based approach.

SETAC Europe 2022. Session 3.08 – Measuring, monitoring and modelling of pesticide fate and mitigation in a regulatory context. Presentation 3.08.T-02. On-Demand Oral Presentation, Auditorium 10. Thursday 19 May 2022, 11:00AM.

C.G. Hoogeweg, R. Krueger, A. Ritter (Waterborne), N. Peranginangin (Syngenta Crop Protection), R. Krueger (Waterborne), A. Ritter (Waterborne). Using GIS Overlay Methods to Determine Vulnerable Agricultural Areas in Europe.

Presentations2021

Do Current Modeling Scenarios Address Changes in Climate Patterns?

View MoreView Less

Standard regulatory ecological risk assessments in the US and Europe rely on historical weather data to predict pesticide concentrations in groundwater and surface water. With climate change, it is predicted that temperatures will increase and rainfall patterns will shift. It is also expected that many areas will see a change in the amount of rainfall and a change in rainfall intensity. Current climate models essentially predict that arid regions will get drier and wet areas will get wetter. The effects of climate change on pesticide risk assessments are multiple. With higher temperatures, an increase in degradation of pesticides is expected and will reduce predicted concentrations in groundwater and surface water. However, increased rainfall amounts and/or intensity may result in increased leaching and runoff, leading to higher concentrations of pesticides in groundwater or surface water. In arid areas, due to a decrease in rainfall, additional irrigation may be required, the consequences of which are still poorly understood. Currently no modeling scenarios are available to predict these effects. We have developed an approach that enables us to update existing standard weather files from USEPA, PMRA, EFSA, etc., with climate change data to incorporate predicted changes in rainfall and temperature for any standard scenario (met file), agricultural field or watershed. The resulting data are daily weather files that account for increased temperature, changes in rainfall and rainfall intensity as predicted by the climate change models and the different climate change scenarios. In this presentation we will show the effects of climate change on a risk assessment in an arid region and a wet region for standard pesticide substances with different environmental fate properties. The results will demonstrate the potential effects of climate change on predicted environmental concentrations in groundwater and surface water.

SETAC North America 2021. Session: Incorporating Climate Change Predictions into Human Health and Ecological Risk Assessments (05.07.02)

A. Ritter, J.M. Jackson, A. Schmolke, G. Hoogeweg, K. Marincic (Waterborne), J. Eble (Eble Group). Do Current Modeling Scenarios Address Changes in Climate Patterns?

PresentationsCrop Protection2021

Integrating Landscape-Level Agronomic Information into Aquatic Exposure Estimates: Efficiency and Reproducibility

View MoreView Less

The challenge of evaluating exposure potential from multiple labeled uses for over 1600 Endangered Species nationally can be intimidating. It is important to be as spatially detailed as possible in order to identify potential product use areas and regional factors that are most relevant to each species being evaluated. In addition, with over 1600 species being evaluated for a multitude of labeled uses modeled on 13 agricultural Use Data Layers (UDLs), efficiency and reproducibility are critical. We developed a highly efficient and structured approach that incorporates best available information in order to increase the reliability and relevance of exposure estimates to listed species. The refinement framework incorporates additional dimensions of aquatic exposure modeling such as cropping density and proximity, pesticide treated acre distribution, and consideration of temporal exposure. A structured and programmatic framework was implemented to build upon the baseline scenario concentrations, and apply spatial, temporal and agronomic aspects to produce well-defined and reproducible species-specific aquatic concentrations. In this presentation we will describe how daily data from thousands of individual PWC output files (labeled use / HUC / aquatic bin / proximity / application method) were scanned using Python scripts to develop summary concentration profiles for differing time periods and distribution points. Utilizing those data for each species, the set of NHD+ catchments, landscape-based crop proximity and density, pesticide usage (e.g., Percent Crop Treated), and user options (e.g., PCT multiplier, alternate application rates) were processed to produce refined exposure concentrations suitable for aggregation at multiple spatial scales appropriate for the species being examined. Transparency of input data, modeling run options and availability of raw and formatted results was paramount in this process and resulted in the ability to rapidly process and document alternative cropped areas, application rates, intervals and other variables.

SETAC North America 2021. Session:  Advancing Endangered Species Risk Assessment and Mitigation from National Scale to Species-Centric Assessments Using “Best Available” Data (05.01.07).

L. Insinga, C.M. Holmes (Applied Analysis Solutions), D. Desmarteau (Waterborne), S. Kay (Pyxis Regulatory Consulting), M .Kern (Balance EcoSolutions), J.L. Cowles (Tessenderlo Kerley/NovaSource), K. Henry (Tessenderlo Kerley/NovaSource). Integrating Landscape-Level Agronoic Information into Aquatic Exposure Estimates: Efficiency and Reproducibility.

PostersPresentationsHome and Personal Care Products2021

Use of an Eco-Epidemiology Approach to Assess Potential Risks of Natural and Anthropogenic Factors, Including UV Filters, to Coral Community Status in Hawaii

View MoreView Less

In the past few years, questions have been raised regarding the environmental safety of some UV filters used in personal, skin care and beach products to corals. In some cases (e.g., Hawaii, Key West, Palau) regulatory actions have been precautionary, leading to bans. Unfortunately, no regulatory authority has explicitly attempted to quantify the impacts of UV filters on corals relative to other forms of pollution or environmental factors. Eco-epidemiology is a methodology that considers species and communities as affected by complex combinations of multiple physical, chemical, and environmental conditions over time. This study assembled a large set of natural and human influenced factors (including potential risks of UV filters) along with coral cover data for the Hawaiian Island of Oahu to assess the potential adverse effects of UV filters on corals within the context of other factors. All data were spatially analyzed using a geographic information system. Principal component analyses were used to determine the relationships of coral ecological data to natural and anthropogenic factors. Results indicated that coral cover could be explained via species diversity and abundance. These aspects and all other factors were then correlated to each other to determine if some factors could act as proxies for each other (e.g., beach visitors as a proxy for UV filters) and if any factors appeared to be highly related to coral diversity and abundance. Wave power, sea surface temperatures and sedimentation were shown to be highly correlated to coral ecological status. Statistically significant regressions for coral diversity included temperature anomalies and wave power, both of which addressed the vast majority of the variance. UV filters did not significantly contribute to decreases in coral diversity. Regressions for coral abundance indicated that sewage effluent and sedimentation were more significant than UV filter hazards. Hence, it appears that UV filter hazards do not significantly address reduced coral diversity and abundance whereas wave power, temperature and sedimentation appear as the dominant factors affecting coral ecological status.

SETAC North America 2021. Session: UV Filters in Aquatic Ecosystems (2.12.04)

R. Vamshi, S.D. Dyer, B.H. Kent, F. Abi-Akar (Waterborne), C.M. Holmes (Applied Analysis Solutions), N.S. Green (Kennesaw State University, I. Davies (Personal Care Products Council). Use of an Eco-Epidemiology Approach to Assess Potential Risks of Natura and Anthropogenic Factors, Including UV Filters, to Coral Community Status in Hawaii.

PresentationsCrop Protection2021

Screening-level pollinator risk assessment for trisiloxane polyether surfactants (Part II): Effects and risk characterization

View MoreView Less

ACS 2021, AGRO Division, Zoom Room 03
Session Title: Screening-level pollinator risk assessment for trisiloxane polyether surfactants (Part II): Effects and risk characterization
Thursday, August 26, 2021, 05:25 pm – 05:50 pm USA/Canada – Eastern

The screening-level pollinator risk assessment for three trisiloxane polyether surfactants will expand on the exposure characterization presented in Part I. In this phase, the ecotoxicological effects of three trisiloxane polyether surfactants were evaluated and incorporated with the exposure characterization to evaluate risk. The US EPA model, BeeREX, was used to conduct a Tier I screening-level model assessment to generate risk quotients for comparison against levels of concern. The effects characterization included a review of endpoints from acute and chronic laboratory studies for both larval and adult stage honeybees (Apis mellifera) following published OECD test guidelines. Estimated residue concentrations calculated in Part I were compared to the relevant acute and chronic endpoints (acute 50% lethal dose, LD50 and chronic no-observed-effect dose, NOED) from several GLP toxicology studies to determine the risk quotients (RQs) for this assessment. This presentation will include a comparison of calculated RQs and to defined regulatory levels of concern for pollinator risk assessment, as well as a discussion of the uncertainty analysis.

 

J. Collins (Waterborne). Screening-level pollinator risk assessment for trisiloxane polyether surfactants (Part II): Effects and risk characterization. AGRO, ACS 2021. Virtual Meeting.

PresentationsCrop Protection2021

Screening-level pollinator risk assessment for trisiloxane polyether surfactants (Part I): Challenges and methodologies for estimating exposure of honeybees (Apis mellifera)

View MoreView Less

ACS 2021, AGRO Division, Zoom Room 03
Session Title: Screening-level pollinator risk assessment for trisiloxane polyether surfactants (Part I): Challenges and methodologies for estimating exposure of honeybees (Apis mellifera)
Thursday, August 26, 2021, 05:00 pm – 05:25 pm USA/Canada – Eastern

The pollinator risk assessment framework laid out by US EPA, PRMA, and CDPR (2014) is primarily focused on pesticide active ingredients. In recent years, there has been increased interest in the potential impact, if any, to human health and the environment of inert ingredients (i.e., non-pesticidally active components of pesticide products) and chemical substances used as tank mix adjuvants and surfactants. Trisiloxane polyethers represent a class of superspreader surfactants with the unique ability of significantly reducing the surface tension of water to promote a rapid spreading of aqueous solutions on the surfaces of leaves. Since limited data is available regarding routes of exposure to honeybees from trisiloxanes, there are some challenges in the evaluation of exposure characterization. The objective of this presentation is to layout the challenges in the exposure characterization of three trisiloxane polyether surfactants and discuss various methodologies employed to conservatively quantify exposure for use in a screening-level pollinator risk assessment framework for these surfactants. The BeeREX Tier I screening-level risk assessment model uses maximum application rates to estimate worst-case exposure concentrations in various honeybee matrices via model default residue assumptions, for instances where available residue data are not available. The model also provides a refinement option using available residue data. The CDPR Pesticide Use Registry (PUR) database was used to determine reasonable maximum surfactant application rates, which were modeled to determine worst-case exposure rates using default residue assumptions. In addition, refined exposure estimates were determined by incorporating surfactant residues generated in a field residue study.

J. Collins (Waterborne), A. Schmolke (Waterborne)

Screening-level pollinator risk assessment for trisiloxane polyether surfactants (Part I): Challenges and methodologies for estimating exposure of honeybees (Apis mellifera) AGRO, ACS 2021

PresentationsAgriculture and Food, Crop Protection2021

Overview of the chemical degradation kinetics pathway tool and practical considerations for its application for model inputs

View MoreView Less Download Now>

ACS 2021, AGRO Division, Zoom Room 04
Session Title: Overview of the chemical degradation kinetics pathway tool and practical considerations for its application for model inputs
Monday, August 23, 2021, 10:35 am – 11:00 am USA/Canada – Eastern

Reliable chemical degradation tools for modeling kinetic pathways are imperative to conducting accurate human health and environmental risk assessments. While the EU FOCUS organization has extensive guidance for conducting the analysis and software tools have been developed in many iterations (CAKE, KinGUII, Model Maker, etc), the USEPA has not formally released tools or guidance for pathway modeling. In 2020, the USEPA included a kinetics software tool, Deg Kinetics v 2.8.2, for kinetic evaluation of chemical degradation data for applications in drinking water assessments with several evaluations. This Excel based solver serves as a useful tool for modeling single first order chemical pathways and evaluation of degradation within the pathway as an input into the typical exposure models used by USEPA, PMRA, and state agencies. This presentation will utilize the Deg Kinetics v 2.8.2 tool in the context of real-world application of the tool as a comparison of its setup, inputs, and parameter selection to that of other FOCUS typical kinetics tools. Finally, this presentation will provide an overview of methods for combining data from multiple datasets as inputs into the model framework – specifically regarding considerations with rapidly degrading parent to daughter and granddaughter compounds and the impact on model predictions.

P. Paulausky (Waterborne), A. Ritter (Waterborne), N. Snyder (Waterborne). Overview of the chemical degradation kinetics pathway tool and practical considerations for its application for model inputs. AGRO, ACS 2021, Virtual Meeting

PresentationsAgriculture and Food, Crop Protection2021

Collection of water monitoring data: Working in the spirit of GLPs

View MoreView Less

ACS 2021, AGRO Division, Zoom Room 04
Session Title: Collection of water monitoring data: Working in the spirit of GLPs
Monday, August 23, 2021, 07:25 pm – 07:45 pm USA/Canada – Eastern

Over time the accessibility and processes used for the collection of water monitoring data has changed. The days of transcription from laboratory reports are becoming minimal and electronic data files from comprehensive databases are becoming more commonplace, which requires new approaches for data reproducibility and documentation. Over the past decade, water monitoring data have been collected under the “spirit of the GLPs” in its documentation, reproducibility, and archival. While all aspects of the GLP program are not required, critical steps throughout the data collection and processing follow the underlying principles of the GLPs. As more electronic data were collected from a variety of sources, the process of how to standardize these data increased in complexity. Challenges such as data transformation, traceability, and connections to historic data needed to be addressed to ensure data quality and to answer questions from regulators. In addition, we have continued to enhance our data processing protocols to ensure consistency in data handling, analysis, and documentation of uncertainty. For studies in which GLPs are not necessarily required by a sponsor, we explore an approach of operating under the “spirit of the GLPs” to ensure that monitoring data processes and summarization are repeatable, traceable and provide confidence around electronic data processing and archival similar to those electronic data collected under GLP programs.

J. Trask (Waterborne), L. Johnson (Waterborne), J. Crider (Waterborne)

Collection of water monitoring data: Working in the spirit of GLPs. AGRO, ACS 2021, Virtual Meeting