English (United Kingdom)

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/featured_content/oa?rat=en

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/highlighted_journal/

Global: Zendy Plus annual

Presents the access of premium content as premium feature

Premium Content

Presents the keyphrase highlighting as premium feature

Keyphrase Highlighting

Presents the summarisation as premium feature

Summarisation

Insights

Presents the pdf analysis as premium feature

PDF Analysis

Presents the zaia usage as premium feature

ZAIA

Global: Zendy Tools annual

Global: Zendy Free Plan

Global: Zendy Tools monthly

Global: Zendy Plus monthly

Ecological risk assessments (ERAs) for contaminated terrestrial sites regularly include mammals as receptors-of-concern whose home ranges dwarf the sites by tens of times. As a consequence, opportunities to sustain chemical exposures of concern are greatly limited. In having notably miniscule densities as well, wide-ranging mammals are poorly selected species to evaluate because true populations are effectively non-existent at sites. Collectively, the case can be made that wide-ranging mammals are spatially irrelevant at sites to a point where ERAs can be streamlined through their non-consideration. Paralleling work done with the White-tailed deer (Odocoileus virginianus), we used global positioning system (GPS) technology to determine whether or not the only other wide-ranging mammal routinely evaluated in terrestrial ERAs aside from deer, the fox (here, the gray fox, Urocyon cinereoargenteus), is spatially relevant for assessments. Wearing programmable GPS collars, precise fox locations were recorded over periods of either six months or one year as the animals roamed freely. The plotted locations were used in a surrogate manner to establish the percentage of a fox’s time spent in land parcels of the size of common hazardous waste sites (i.e., 1, 5, 10 and 20 acres). Fox were observed to be absent from their most utilized parcels more than 80% of the time, and numerous sitesize parcels were hardly used. Additionally, the probability of a most utilized 20-acre parcel happening to be a contaminated site was conservatively estimated to be less than 2%. These findings of spatial irrelevance facilitated a systematic review of the worthiness in selecting mammals of any type for evaluation in terrestrial ERAs. For a variety of reasons ranging from the absence of reporting of decimated populations at contaminated sites, to species having extremely low densities, the review found that mammal inclusion in ERAs can be dispensed with, a challenging notion for ERA practitioners to concede. Recognizing the non-need for mammal inclusion in ERAs however, can allow for the ERA process to focus on other species and site features more deserving of review.

Demonstrated Spatial Irrelevance of Gray Fox at Contaminated Sites: Are Ecological Risk Assessments for Mammals Necessary?