Premium
Recommended approaches to the scientific evaluation of ecotoxicological hazards and risks of endocrine‐active substances
Author(s) -
Matthiessen Peter,
Ankley Gerald T,
Biever Ronald C,
Bjerregaard Poul,
Borgert Christopher,
Brugger Kristin,
Blankinship Amy,
Chambers Janice,
Coady Katherine K,
Constantine Lisa,
Dang Zhichao,
Denslow Nancy D,
Dreier David A,
Dungey Steve,
Gray L Earl,
Gross Melanie,
Guiney Patrick D,
Hecker Markus,
Holbech Henrik,
Iguchi Taisen,
Kadlec Sarah,
KarounaRenier Natalie K,
Katsiadaki Ioanna,
Kawashima Yukio,
Kloas Werner,
Krueger Henry,
Kumar Anu,
Lagadic Laurent,
Leopold Annegaaike,
Levine Steven L,
Maack Gerd,
Marty Sue,
Meador James,
Mihaich Ellen,
Odum Jenny,
Ortego Lisa,
Parrott Joanne,
Pickford Daniel,
Roberts Mike,
Schaefers Christoph,
Schwarz Tamar,
Solomon Keith,
Verslycke Tim,
Weltje Lennart,
Wheeler James R,
Williams Mike,
Wolf Jeffrey C,
Yamazaki Kunihiko
Publication year - 2017
Publication title -
integrated environmental assessment and management
Language(s) - English
Resource type - Journals
SCImago Journal Rank - 0.665
H-Index - 57
eISSN - 1551-3793
pISSN - 1551-3777
DOI - 10.1002/ieam.1885
Subject(s) - library science , agency (philosophy) , sociology , social science , computer science
A SETAC Pellston Workshop ® “Environmental Hazard and Risk Assessment Approaches for Endocrine‐Active Substances (EHRA)” was held in February 2016 in Pensacola, Florida, USA. The primary objective of the workshop was to provide advice, based on current scientific understanding, to regulators and policy makers; the aim being to make considered, informed decisions on whether to select an ecotoxicological hazard‐ or a risk‐based approach for regulating a given endocrine‐disrupting substance (EDS) under review. The workshop additionally considered recent developments in the identification of EDS. Case studies were undertaken on 6 endocrine‐active substances (EAS—not necessarily proven EDS, but substances known to interact directly with the endocrine system) that are representative of a range of perturbations of the endocrine system and considered to be data rich in relevant information at multiple biological levels of organization for 1 or more ecologically relevant taxa. The substances selected were 17α‐ethinylestradiol, perchlorate, propiconazole, 17β‐trenbolone, tributyltin, and vinclozolin. The 6 case studies were not comprehensive safety evaluations but provided foundations for clarifying key issues and procedures that should be considered when assessing the ecotoxicological hazards and risks of EAS and EDS. The workshop also highlighted areas of scientific uncertainty, and made specific recommendations for research and methods‐development to resolve some of the identified issues. The present paper provides broad guidance for scientists in regulatory authorities, industry, and academia on issues likely to arise during the ecotoxicological hazard and risk assessment of EAS and EDS. The primary conclusion of this paper, and of the SETAC Pellston Workshop on which it is based, is that if data on environmental exposure, effects on sensitive species and life‐stages, delayed effects, and effects at low concentrations are robust, initiating environmental risk assessment of EDS is scientifically sound and sufficiently reliable and protective of the environment. In the absence of such data, assessment on the basis of hazard is scientifically justified until such time as relevant new information is available. Integr Environ Assess Manag 2017;13:267–279. © 2017 The Authors. Integrated Environmental Assessment and Management published by Wiley Periodicals, Inc. on behalf of Society of Environmental Toxicology & Chemistry (SETAC)