Voltar
Artigo Acesso aberto Revisado por pares
BIBTEX RIS

Guidance on tiered risk assessment for plant protection products for aquatic organisms in edge‐of‐field surface waters

2013; Wiley; Volume: 11; Issue: 7 Linguagem: Inglês

10.2903/j.efsa.2013.3290

ISSN

1831-4732

Tópico(s)

Agricultural safety and regulations

Resumo

EFSA JournalVolume 11, Issue 7 3290 GuidanceOpen Access Guidance on tiered risk assessment for plant protection products for aquatic organisms in edge-of-field surface waters EFSA Panel on Plant Protection Products and their Residues (PPR), EFSA Panel on Plant Protection Products and their Residues (PPR)Search for more papers by this author EFSA Panel on Plant Protection Products and their Residues (PPR), EFSA Panel on Plant Protection Products and their Residues (PPR)Search for more papers by this author First published: 18 July 2013 https://doi.org/10.2903/j.efsa.2013.3290Citations: 249 Panel members: Alf Aagaard, Theo Brock, Ettore Capri, Sabine Duquesne, Metka Filipic, Antonio F. Hernandez-Jerez, Karen I. Hirsch-Ernst, Susanne Hougaard Bennekou, Michael Klein, Thomas Kuhl, Ryszard Laskowski, Matthias Liess, Alberto Mantovani, Colin Ockleford, Bernadette Ossendorp, Daniel Pickford, Robert Smith, Paulo Sousa, Ingvar Sundh, Aaldrik Tiktak, Ton Van Der Linden Correspondence: [email protected] Acknowledgement: EFSA wishes to thank the members of the Working Group Aquatic Ecotoxicology: Alf Aagaard, Paulien Adriaanse, Jos Boesten, Theo Brock, Sabine Duquesne, Michael Klein, Matthias Liess, Robert Luttik, Paul Miller, Daniel Pickford, Aaldrik Tiktak, Jan Vanderborght, Lina Wendt-Rasch and EFSA staff: Stephanie Bopp, Maria Arena and Alessandra Caffi for the support provided to this scientific opinion. Adoption date: 20 June 2013 Published date: 18 July 2013 Question number: EFSA-Q-2009-00001 On request from: EFSA AboutPDF ToolsExport citationAdd to favoritesTrack citation ShareShare Give accessShare full text accessShare full-text accessPlease review our Terms and Conditions of Use and check box below to share full-text version of article.I have read and accept the Wiley Online Library Terms and Conditions of UseShareable LinkUse the link below to share a full-text version of this article with your friends and colleagues. Learn more.Copy URL Abstract EFSA's Panel on Plant Protection Products and their Residues (PPR) was tasked to revise the Guidance Document (GD) on Aquatic Ecotoxicology under Council Directive 91/414/EEC (SANCO/3268/2001 rev.4 (final), 17 October 2002). This Guidance of the PPR Panel is the first of three requested deliverables within this mandate. It has its focus on tiered acute and chronic effect assessment schemes with detailed guidance on tier 1 and higher tier effect assessments for aquatic organisms in edge-of-field surface waters and on proposals regarding how to link effects to exposure estimates. The exposure assessment methodology was not reviewed and it is assumed that the current FOCUS surface water exposure assessment methodology will continue to be used for exposure assessment at EU level. The current GD is intended to be used for authorisation of active substances at EU level as well as for plant protection products at Member State level. The effect assessment schemes in this GD allow for the derivation of regulatory acceptable concentrations (RACs) on the basis of two options: (1) the ecological threshold option (ETO), accepting negligible population effects only, and (2) the ecological recovery option (ERO), accepting some population-level effects if ecological recovery takes place within an acceptable time period. In the tiered effect assessment schemes, in principle, all tiers (1, 2 and 3) are able to address the ETO, while the model ecosystem approach (tier 3), under certain conditions, is able to also address the ERO. The GD provides the scientific background for the risk assessment to aquatic organisms in edge-of-field surface waters and is structured to give detailed guidance on all assessment steps. An executive summary joining all parts of the guidance and decision schemes in a concise way is provided and is intended to help applicants and regulatory authorities in day-to-day use. References Abel PD, 1980. Toxicity of hexachlorcyclohexane (Lindane) to Gammarus pulex; mortality in relation to concentration and duration of exposure. Freshwater Biology, 10, 251– 259. Adriaanse PI and Beltman WHJ, 2009. Transient water flow in the TOXSWA model (FOCUS versions): concepts and mathematical description. Statutory Research Tasks Unit for Nature and the Environment, WOT report 101, Wageningen, The Netherlands. Aldenberg T and Jaworska JS, 2000. Uncertainty of hazardous concentrations and fraction affeceted for normal species sensitivity distributions. Ecotoxicology and Environmental Safety, 46, 1– 18. Aldenberg T, Jaworska JS and Traas TP, 2002. Normal species sensitivity distributions in probabilistic ecological risk assessment. In: Species sensitivity distributions in risk assessment. Eds L Posthuma, TP Traas and GW Suter. CRC Press, Boca Raton, FL USA, 49– 102. Alonso Prados E and Novillo-Villajos A, 2010. Ecological characterization of permanent and ephemeral streams of a typical Mediterranean agricultural landscape (east and southeast of Iberian peninsula). In: Linking aquatic exposure and effects: risk assessment of pesticides. Eds TCM Brock, A Alix, CD Brown, E Capri, BFF Gottesbüren, F Heimbach, CM Lythgo, R Schulz and M Streloke. SETAC Press & CRC Press, Taylor & Francis Group, Boca Raton, FL, USA, 288– 303. Aldrich AP, 2009. Empfindlichkeit von Amphibien gegenüber Pflanzenschutzmitteln. AGRARForschung, 16, 466– 471. Altenburger R, Arrhenius A, Backhaus T, Coors A, Faust M and Zitzkat D, 2012. Ecotoxicological combined effects from chemical mixtures-Part 1: Relevance and adequate consideration in environmental risk assessment of plant protection products and biocides (Project No. (FKZ) 3709 65 404). Umweltbundesamt, Dessau-Rosslau, Germany). Artigas J, Arts G, Babut M, Caracciolo AB, Charles S, Chaumot A, Combourieu B, Dahllöf I, Despréaux D, Ferrari B, Friberg N, Garric J, Geffard O, Gourlay-Francé C, Hein M, Hjorth M, Krauss M, De Lange HJ, Lahr J, Lehtonen KK, Lettieri T, Liess M, Lofts S, Mayer P, Morin S, Paschke A, Svendsen C, Usseglio-Polatera P, van den Brink N, Vindimian E and Williams R, 2012. Towards a renewed research agenda in ecotoxicology. Environmental Pollution, 160, 201– 206. Arts GHP, Buijse-Bogdan LL, Belgers JDM, Van Rhenen-Kersten CH, Van Wijngaarden RPA, Roessink I, Maund SJ, Van den Brink PJ and Brock TCM, 2006. Ecological impact in ditch mesocosms of simulated spray drift from a crop protection programme for potatoes. Integrated Environmental Assessment and Management, 2, 105– 125. Ashauer R, Boxall ABA and Brown CD, 2007. New ecotoxicological model to simulate survival of aquatic invertebrates after exposure to fluctuating and sequential pulses of pesticides. Environmental Science and Technology, 41, 1480– 1486. Auber A, Roucate M, Togola A and Caquet T, 2011. Structural and functional effects of conventional and low pesticide input crop-protection programs on benthic macroinvertebrates communities in outdoor pond mesocosms. Ecotoxicology, 20, 20142– 2055. Baird DJ and Van den Brink PJ, 2007. Using biological traits to predict species sensitivity to toxic substances. Ecotoxicology and Environmental Safety, 67, 296– 301. Bärlocher F, 1985. The role of fungi in the nutrition of stream invertebrates. Botanical Journal of the Linnean Society, 91, 83– 94. Barnthouse LW, 2004. Quantifying population recovery rates for ecological risk assessment. Environmental Toxicology and Chemistry, 23, 500– 508. BBA, 2000. Bekanntmachung über die Abdrifteckwerte, die bei der Prüfung und Zulassung von Pflanzenschutzmitteln herangezogen werden. (8. Mai 2000) in: Bundesanzeiger No.100, amtlicher Teil, vom 25. Mai 2000, S. 9879. Becker RA, Janus ER, White RD, Kruszewski FH and Brackett RE, 2009. Good Laboratory Practices and Safety Assessments. Environmental Health Perspectives, 117, 482– 483. Beketov MA and Liess M, 2005. Acute contamination with Esfenvalerate and food limitation: Chronic effects on the mayfly Cloeon dipterum. Environmental Toxicology and Chemistry, 24, 1281– 1286. Beketov MA and Liess M, 2008. Acute and delayed effects of the neonicotinoid insecticide thiacloprid on seven freshwater arthropods. Environmental Toxicology and Chemistry, 27, 461– 470. Belden JB, Gilliom RJ and Lydy MJ, 2007a. How well can we predict the toxicity of pesticide mixtures to aquatic life? Integrated Environmental Assessment and Management, 3, 364– 372. Belden JB, Gilliom RS, Martin JD and Lydy MJ, 2007b. Relative toxicity and occurence patterns of pesticide mixtures in streams draining agricultural watersheds dominated by maize and soybean production. Integrated Environmental Assessment and Management, 3, 90– 100. Belgers JDM, Aalderink GH, Arts GHP and Brock TCM, 2011. Can time-weighted average exposure concentrations be used to assess the risks of metsulfuron-methyl to Myriophyllum spicatum? Chemosphere, 85, 1017– 1025. Bergtold M and Dohmen GP, 2011. Biomass or growth rate endpoint for algae and aquatic plants: relevance for the aquatic risk assessment of herbicides. Integrated Environmental Assessment and Management, 7, 237– 247. Biggs J and Brown CD, 2010. Ecological characterization of water bodies in clay landscapes in the United Kingdom. In: Linking aquatic exposure and effects: risk assessment of pesticides. Eds TCM Brock, A Alix, CD Brown, E Capri, BFF Gottesbüren, F Heimbach, CM Lythgo, R Schulz and Streloke MSETAC Press & CRC Press, Taylor & Francis Group, Boca Raton, FL, USA, 304– 320. Boesten JJTI, Köpp H, Adriaanse PI, Brock TCM and Forbes VE 2007. Conceptual model for improving the link between exposure and effects in the aquatic risk assessment of pesticides. Ecotoxicology and Environmental Safety, 66, 291– 308. Brock TCM and Budde BJ, 1994. On the choice of structural parameters to indicate responses of freshwater ecosystems to pesticide stress. In: Freshwater Field Tests for Hazard Assessment of Chemicals. Eds IA Hill, F Heimbach, P Leeuwangh and P Matthiesen. Lewis Publishers, Michigan, USA, 19– 56. Brock TCM and Van Wijngaarden RPA, 2012. Acute toxicity tests with Daphnia magna, Americamysis bahia, Chironomus riparius and Gammarus pulex and implications of new requirements for the aquatic effect assessment of insecticides. Environmental Science and Pollution Research, 19, 3610– 3618. Brock TCM, Arts GHP, Maltby L and Van den Brink PJ, 2006. Aquatic Risks of Pesticides, Ecological Protection Goals and Common Aims in European Union Legislation. Integrated Environmental Assessment and Management, 2, E20– E46. Brock TCM, Maltby L, Hickey CW, Chapman J and Solomon K, 2008. Spatial extrapolation in ecological effect assessment of chemicals. In: Extrapolation Practice for ecotoxicological effect characterization of chemicals. Eds KR Solomon, TCM Brock, D De Zwart, SD Dyer, L Posthuma, SM Richards, H Sanderson, PK Sibley and PJ Van den Brink. SETAC Press & CRC Press, Boca Raton, FL, USA, 223– 256. Brock TCM, Roessink I, Belgers JDM, Bransen F and Maund SJ, 2009. Impact of a benzoyl urea insecticide on aquatic macro-invertebrates in ditch mesocosms with and without non-sprayed sections. Environmental Toxicology and Chemistry, 28, 2191– 2205. TCM Brock, A Alix, CD Brown, E Capri, BFF Gottesbüren, F Heimbach, CM Lythgo, R Schulz and M Streloke (Eds), 2010a. Linking aquatic exposure and effects: risk assessment of pesticides. SETAC Press & CRC Press, Taylor & Francis Group, Boca Raton, FL, USA, 398 pp. Brock TCM, Belgers JDM, Roessink I, Cuppen JGM and Maund SJ, 2010b. Macroinvertebrate responses to insecticide application between sprayed and adjacent non-sprayed ditch sections of different sizes. Environmental Toxicology and Chemistry, 29, 1994– 2008. Brock T, Arts G, Belgers D and Van Rhenen-Kersten C, 2010c. Ecological characterization of drainage ditches in the Netherlands to evaluate pesticide stress. In: Linking aquatic exposure and effects: risk assessment of pesticides. Eds TCM Brock, A Alix, CD Brown, E Capri, BFF Gottesbüren, F Heimbach, CM Lythgo, R Schulz and M Streloke. SETAC Press & CRC Press, Taylor & Francis Group, Boca Raton, FL, USA, 269– 287. Brock TCM, Arts GHP, Ten Hulscher TEM, De Jong FMW, Luttik R, Roex EWM, Smit CE and Van Vliet PJM, 2011. Aquatic effect assessment for plant protection products: a Dutch proposal that addresses the requirements of the Plant Protection Product Regulation and Water Framework Directive. Alterra Report No 2235. Brown K, Tomlinson J, Duncan J, Hinchcliffe A and Palmquist K, 2009. Critical comparison of available and potential higher tier testing approaches for the risk assessment of plant protection products, considering at least field and semi-field experimental designs, extrapolation from dose-response relationships, and increased dosages (aquatic and terrestrial). Final report: CFT/EFSA/PPR/2008/1: Lot 4. www.efsa.europa.eu/en/supporting/doc/16e.pdf Bundschuh M, Zubrod JP, Kosol S, Maltby L, Stang C, Duester L and Schulz R, 2011. Fungal composition on leaves explains pollutant-mediated indirect effects on amphipod feeding. Aquatic Toxicology, 104, 32– 37. Campbell PJ, Arnold DJS, Brock TCM, Grandy NJ, Heger W, Heimbach F, Maund SJ and Streloke M, 1999. Guidance document on higher-tier aquatic risk assessment for pesticides (HARAP). Brussels (BE): SETAC-Europe, 179 pp. Caquet T, Lagadic L and Sheffield SR, 2000. Mesocosms in ecotoxicology. 1. Outdoor aquatic systems. Reviews of Environmental Contamination and Toxicology, 165, 1– 38. Caquet C, Hanson M, Roucaute M, Graham D and Lagadic L, 2007. Influence of isolation on the recovery of pond mesocosms from the application of an insecticide. II Benthic macroinvertebrate responses. Environmental Toxicology and Chemistry, 26, 1280– 1290. Carsel RF, Imhoff JC, Hummel PR, Cheplick JM and Donigian Jr AS, 1995. PRZM-3. A model for predicting pesticide and nitrogen fate in the crop root and unsaturated soil zones. Users Manual for Release 3.0. National Exposure Research Laboratory, US Environmental Protection Agency, Athens, GA, USA. Chirico N and Gramatica P, 2011. Real external predictivity of QSAR models: How to evaluate it? Comparison of different validation criteria and proposal of using the Concordance Correlation Coefficient. Journal of Chemical Information and Modeling, 51, 2320– 2335. Chirico N and Gramatica P, 2012. Real External Predictivity of QSAR Models. Part 2. New intercomparable thresholds for different validation criteria and the need for scatter plot inspection. Journal of Chemical Information and Modeling, 52, 2044– 2058. Chow VT, 1959. Open-channel hydraulics. McGraw-Hill Book Company Inc., USA, 680 pp. Commission Regulation (EU) No 283/2013 of 1 March 2013 setting out the data requirements for active substances, in accordance with the Regulation (EC) No 1107/2009 of the European Parliament and of the Council concerning the placing of plant protection products on the market. OJ L 93, 3.4.2013, pp. 1– 84. Commission Regulation (EU) No 284/2013 of 1 March 2013 setting out the data requirements for plant protection products, in accordance with the Regulation (EC) No 1107/2009 of the European Parliament and of the Council concerning the placing of plant protection products on the market. OJ L 93, 3.4.2013, p. 85– 152. Consonni et aV, Ballabio D and Todeschini R, 2009. Comments on the definition of the Q2 parameter for QSAR validation. Journal of Chemical Information and Modeling, 49, 1668– 1678. Coors A and Frische T, 2011. Predicting the aquatic toxicity of commercial pesticide mixtures. Environmental Sciences Europe, 23. Coors A, Kuckelkorn J, Mammers-Wirtz and Strauss T, 2006. Application of in-situ bioassays with macrophytes in aquatic mesocosm studies. Ecotoxicology, 15, 583– 591. Council Directive 91/414/EEC concerning the placing of plant protection products on the market of 15 July 1991, OJ L 230, 19.8.1991, p. 1. Creton S, Clook M and Wheeler JR, in preparation. Application of the threshold approach for acute fish toxicity testing to plant protection products: a proposed framework. Creton S, Weltje L, Hobson H and Wheeler JR, 2013. Reducing the number of fish in bioconcentration studies for plant protection products by reducing the number of test concentrations. Chemosphere, 90, 1300– 1304. Crossland NO, Heimbach F, Hill IR, Boudou A, Leeuwangh P, Matthiessen P and Persoone G, 1993. European Workshop on Freshwater Field tests (EWOFFT), Summary and recommendations. Workshop held in Potsdam, Germany, June 25–26, 1992. Dabrowski JM, Peall SKC, Reinecke AJ, Liess M and Schulz R, 2001. Runoff-related pesticide input into the Lourens river, South Africa: Basic data for exposure assessment and risk mitigation at the catchment scale. Water, Air and Soil Pollution, 135, 265– 283. De Jong FMW, Brock TCM, Foekema EM and Leeuwangh P, 2008. Guidance for summarizing and evaluating aquatic micro- and mesocosm studies. RIVM Report 601506009, Bilthoven, the Netherlands, 59 pp. De Lange M, Sala S, Vighi M and Faber J, 2010. A framework for applying ecological vulnerability in risk assessment. 20th Annual Meeting SETAC Europe (Society of Environmental Toxicology and Chemistry). 23–27 May 2010, Seville, Spain. De Laender F, Van Sprang P and Janssen C, 2013. A re-evaluation of fifteen years of European Risk Assessment using effect models. Environmental Toxicology and Chemistry, 32, 594– 601. Diepens NJ, Arts GHP, Brock TCM, Smidt H, Van den Brink PJ, Van den Heuvel-Greve MJ and Koelmans AA, 2013. Sediment toxicity testing of organic chemicals in the context of prospective RA: A review. Critical Reviews in Environmental Science and Technology (accepted). Dijksterhuis J, Van Doorn T, Samson R and Postma J, 2011. Effects of seven fungicides on non-target aquatic fungi. Water, Air and Soil Pollution, 222, 421– 425. Dimitrov SD, Dimitrova GD, Pavlov TS, Dimitrova N, Patlewicz GY, Niemela J and Mekenyan OG, 2005. A stepwise approach for defining the applicability domain of SAR and QSAR models. Journal of Chemical Information and Modeling, 45, 839– 849. Duncan J, Hinchcliffe A and Palmquist K, 2009. Evidence of potential long term effects in (aquatic and terrestrial) invertebrates after short term pulsed exposure, Literature reviews on ecotoxicology of chemicals with special focus on plant protection products. Reference: FT/EFSA/PPR/2008/01. www.efsa.europa.eu/en/supporting/pub/17e.htm EC (European Commission), 2000. Directive 2000/60/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 23 October 2000 establishing a framework for Community action in the field of water policy. OJ L 327/1, 22.12.2000, pp. 1– 72. EC (European Commission), 2002a. Guidance Document on Aquatic Ecotoxicology in the context of the Directive 91/414/EEC (SANCO/3268/2001) rev.4 final, 17.11.2002, pp. 1– 62. EC (European Commission), 2002b. Guidance Document on Terrestrial Ecotoxicology in the context of the Directive 91/414/EEC (SANCO/10329/2002, rev.2 final, 17.10.2002, pp. 1– 39. EC (European Commission), 2002c. Guidance Document on Risk Assessment for Birds and Mammals under Council Directive 91/414/EEC. SANCO/4145/2000–final 25 September 2002, p. 74. 58. EC (European Commission), 2003. Technical Guidance Document on risk assessment in support of Commission Directive 93/67/EEC on risk assessment for new notified substances and Commission Regulation (EC) No 1488/94 on risk assessment for existing substances and Directive 98/8/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council concerning the placing of biocidal products on the market. EC (European Commission), 2006. Regulation (EC) No 1907/2006 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 18 December 2006concerning the Registration, Evaluation, Authorisation and Restriction of Chemicals (REACH), establishing a European Chemicals Agency, amending Directive 1999/45/EC and repealing Council Regulation (EEC) No 793/93 and Commission Regulation (EC) No 1488/94 as well as Council Directive76/769/EEC and Commission Directives 91/155/EEC, 93/67/EEC, 93/105/EC and 2000/21/EC. OJ L 136/3, 29.5.2007, pp. 1– 287. EC (European Commission), 2008. Regulation (EC) No 1272/2008 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 16 December 2008 on classification, labelling and packaging of substances and mixtures, amending and repealing Directives 67/548/EEC and 1999/45/EC, and amending Regulation (EC) No 1907/2006. EN OJ L 353/1, 31.12.2008, pp. 1– 1355. EC (European Commission), 2009. Regulation (EC) No 1107/2009 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 21 October 2009 concerning the placing of plant protection products on the market and repealing Council Directives 79/117/EEC and 91/414/EEC. OJ L 309/1, 24.11.2009, pp. 1– 50. EC (European Commission), 2011a. Regulation (EC) No 546/2011 of 10 June 2011 implementing Regulation (EC) No 1107/2009 of the European Parliament and of the Council as regards uniform principles for evaluation and authorisation of plant protection products. EC (European Commission), 2011b. Technical Guidance for Deriving Environmental Quality Standards, Guidance Document No: 27 under the Common Implementation Strategy for the Water Framework Directive (2000/60/EC). Technical Report 2011-055. EC (European Commission), 2011c. Guidance Document, Guidelines on comparability, extrapolation, group tolerances and data requirements for setting MRLs. SANCO Document 7525/VI/95-rev.9, March 2011. EC (European Commission), 2012. Guidance Document on the assessment of the equivalence of technical materials of substances regulated under Regulation (EC) No 1107/2009. SANCO/10597/2003 rev. 10.1, 13 July 2012. ECB (European Chemicals Bureau), 2005. Scoping study on the development of a technical guidance document on information requirements on intrinsic properties of substances. Report prepared by CEFIC, DK-EPA, Environmental Agency of Wales and England, ECETOC, INERIS, KemI and TNO. European Chemicals Bureau, Joint Research Centre, European Commission, Ispra, Italy. ECHA (European Chemicals Agency), 2008. Guidance on information requirements and chemical safety assessment. Chapter R.7b: Endpoint specific guidance. Version 1.1. Helsinki, Finland: European Chemicals Agency. 234 p. EEA (European Environment Agency), 2009. Small water bodies-Assessment of the status and threats of standing small water bodies. EEA/ADS/06/001–Water, Version 1.1. EFSA (European Food Safety Authority), 2005a. Opinion of the Scientific Panel on Plant health, Plant Protection Products and their Residues on a request from the EFSA related to the evaluation of dimoxystrobin. The EFSA Journal 2005, 178, 45 pp. doi:10.2903/j.efsa.2005.178. EFSA (European Food Safety Authority), 2005b. Opinion of the Scientific Panel on Plant health, Plant protection products and their Residues on a request from EFSA on the appropriateness of using the current FOCUS surface water scenarios for estimating exposure for risk assessment in aquatic ecotoxicology in the context of Council Directive 91/414/EEC. The EFSA Journal 2005, 145, 31 pp. doi:10.2903/j.efsa.2005.145. EFSA (European Food Safety Authority), 2006a. Opinion of the Scientific Panel on Plant health, Plant Protection Products and their Residues on a request from the EFSA related to the assessment of the acute and chronic risk to aquatic organisms with regard to the possibility of lowering the assessment factor if additional species were tested. The EFSA Journal 2005, 301, 45 pp. doi:10.2903/j.efsa.2006.301. EFSA (European Food Safety Authority), 2006b. Opinion of the Scientific Panel on Plant Health, Plant Protection Products and their Residues (PPR) on a request from EFSA related to the evaluation of pirimicarb. The EFSA Journal 2005, 240, 21 pp. doi:10.2903/j.efsa.2005.240. EFSA (European Food Safety Authority), 2006c. Opinion of the Scientific Panel on Plant health, Plant Protection Products and their Residues on a request from the EFSA related to the aquatic risk assessment for cyprodinil and the use of a mesocosm study in particular. The EFSA Journal 2006, 329, 77 pp. doi:10.2903/j.efsa.2006.329. EFSA (European Food Safety Authority), 2007a, Opinion of the Scientific Panel on Plant protection products and their Residues on a request from the Commission related to the revision of Annexes II and III to Council Directive 91/414/EEC concerning the placing of plant protection products on the market-Ecotoxicological studies. The EFSA Journal 2007, 461, 44 pp. doi:10.2903/j.efsa.2007.461. EFSA (European Food Safety Authority), 2007b. Opinion of the Scientific Panel on Plant protection products and their Residues on a request from the Commission related to the revision of Annexes II and III to Council Directive 91/414/EEC concerning the placing of plant protection products on the market-Fate and Behaviour in the Environment. The EFSA Journal 2007, 448, 17 pp. doi:10.2903/j.efsa.2007.448. EFSA (European Food Safety Authority), 2007c. Opinion of the Scientific Panel on Plant protection products and their Residues on a request from the Commission on acute dietary intake assessment of pesticide residues in fruit and vegetables. The EFSA Journal 2007, 538, 88 pp. doi:10.2903/j.efsa.2007.538. EFSA (European Food Safety Authority), 2007d. Opinion of the Scientific Panel on Plant protection products and their Residues on a request from the Commission on the risks associated with an increase of the MRL for dieldrin on courgettes. The EFSA Journal 2007, 554, 48 pp. doi:10.2903/j.efsa.2007.554. EFSA (European Food Safety Authority), 2008. Scientific Opinion of the Panel on Plant protection products and their Residues (PPR) on the Science behind the Guidance Document on Risk Assessment for birds and mammals. The EFSA Journal 2008, 734, 181 pp. doi:10.2903/j.efsa.2008.734. EFSA (European Food Safety Authority), 2009a. Scientific Opinion of the Panel on Plant Protection Products and their Residues on a request from EFSA updating the opinion related to Annex II and III: Ecotoxicological studies. The EFSA Journal 2009, 1165, 25 pp. doi:10.2903/j.efsa.2009.1165. EFSA (European Food Safety Authority), 2009b. Outcome of the Public Consultation on the existing Guidance Documents on Aquatic and Terrestrial Ecotoxicology under Directive 91/414/EC. EFSA Journal 2009; 7(11):1375, 129 pp. doi:10.2903/j.efsa.2009.1375. EFSA (European Food Safety Authority), 2009c. Guidance Document on Risk Assessment for Birds and Mammals on request of EFSA. EFSA Journal 2009; 7(12):1438, 358 pp. doi:10.2903/j.efsa.2009.1438. EFSA (European Food Safety Authority), 2011. Submission of scientific peer-reviewed open literature for the approval of pesticide active substances under Regulation (EC) No 1107/2009. EFSA Journal 2011; 9(2): 2092, 49 pp. doi:10.2903/j.efsa.2011.2092. EFSA GMO Panel (EFSA Panel on Genetically Modified Organisms), 2010. Scientific Opinion on Statistical considerations for the safety evaluation of GMOs. EFSA Journal 2010; 8(1):1250, 59 pp. doi:10.2903/j.efsa.2010.1250. EFSA PPR Panel (EFSA Panel on Plant Protection Products and their Residues), 2010a. Scientific opinion on the development of specific protection goal options for environmental risk assessment of pesticides, in particular in relation to the revision of the Guidance Documents on Aquatic and Terrestrial Ecotoxicology (SANCO/3268/2001 and SANCO/10329/2002). EFSA Journal 2010; 8(10):1821, 55 pp. doi:10.2903/j.efsa.2010.1821. EFSA PPR Panel (EFSA Panel on Plant Protection Products and their Residues), 2010b. Scientific Opinion on outline proposals for assessment of exposure of organisms to substances in soil. EFSA Journal 2010; 8(1):1442, 38 pp. doi:10.2903/j.efsa.2010.1442. EFSA PPR Panel (EFSA Panel on Plant Protection Products and their Residues), 2012a. Scientific Opinion on Evaluation of the Toxicological Relevance of Pesticide Metabolites for Dietary Risk Assessment. EFSA Journal 2012; 10(07): 2799, 187 pp. doi:10.2903/j.efsa.2012.2799. EFSA PPR Panel (EFSA Panel on Plant Protection Products and their Residues), 2012b. Scientific Opinion on the science behind the development of a Risk Assessment of Plant Protection Products on bees (Apis mellifera, Bombus spp. and solitary bees). EFSA Journal 2012; 10(5):2668, 275 pp. doi:10.2903/j.efsa.2012.2668. EFSA PPR Panel (EFSA Panel on Plant Protection Products and their Residues), 2012c. Scientific Opinion on the science behind the guidance for scenario se

Referência(s)