There is a relation between biodiversity and ecotoxicological research in the sense that biodiversity is directly related to nature conservation assessment, while ecotoxicology is directly related to ecological impact assessment. However, the approaches to these assessments seem to be opposite from each other.
When using the term ‘nature conservation assessment’ one can refer to the work by the IUCN, for example, with its lists of species and habitats to be protected. These are based on species numbers, temporal dynamics, and spatial distributions. Threats are assessed in a rather absolute sense: all threats should be minimized, ideally become zero. There is no standard assessment of the impacts of individual threats in a cause-effect approach. Described relations between environmental impacts and species decline are based on correlations comparing spatial distributions (e.g., toxic chemicals and species numbers) or temporal changes in species with levels of certain compounds in the air, water, and soil.
On the other hand, Ecological Risk Assessment is based on cause-effect relations between specific compounds and species, integrated to a higher biological organization level using the statistical-based Species Sensitivity Distributions (SDD), so no particular weight is given to the absolute numbers or decline of individual species. Further integration to higher trophic levels is aimed at specific food chain relations, with other types of interaction also being considered (e.g., host-parasite or microbial relations). It will be beneficial when Ecological Risk Assessment can account for rare and endemic species which may not be represented well by the typical statistical SSD approach.
With respect to biodiversity conservation and management, the EU has opted for a third and more functional approach by using ecosystem services as the core of new policy-making.
To have a better functional approach to biodiversity protection, it is necessary to specify the threats so that it is possible to define proper policy approaches. This means refining protection principles, assessment procedures, and management options. It also comprises workable mechanisms that can be applied in practice, while accepting that a less refined, more robust outcome may mean that a higher risk for an adverse impact of toxic compounds must be taken into account.
The scope of this Research Topic aims to bridge the gap between these different approaches to conserve and manage nature conservation, biodiversity protection, and Ecological Risk Assessment to provide a better basis for policy measures.
We welcome research on fundamental aspects such as:
1. the fundamental meaning of 'hazard' and 'risk' in biodiversity and nature conservation;
2. how to include rare and endemic species in Risk Assessment procedures; and
3. in what way indicator research and monitoring activities could be used, and how functional biodiversity can be included in risk assessments.
Moreover, more applied papers are welcome on:
1. examples of species sensitivity or species protection that could bridge the gap between nature protection and environmental protection;
2. various computing and modeling approaches to integrate individual species-oriented risk assessments to higher levels of biological information; and
3. different assessment procedures like ecosystem services combined with nature or environmental protection.
Topic Editor Prof Victor Wepener is a board member Glasaal Volendam BV. All other Topic Editors declare no competing interests with regards to the Research Topic subject.
There is a relation between biodiversity and ecotoxicological research in the sense that biodiversity is directly related to nature conservation assessment, while ecotoxicology is directly related to ecological impact assessment. However, the approaches to these assessments seem to be opposite from each other.
When using the term ‘nature conservation assessment’ one can refer to the work by the IUCN, for example, with its lists of species and habitats to be protected. These are based on species numbers, temporal dynamics, and spatial distributions. Threats are assessed in a rather absolute sense: all threats should be minimized, ideally become zero. There is no standard assessment of the impacts of individual threats in a cause-effect approach. Described relations between environmental impacts and species decline are based on correlations comparing spatial distributions (e.g., toxic chemicals and species numbers) or temporal changes in species with levels of certain compounds in the air, water, and soil.
On the other hand, Ecological Risk Assessment is based on cause-effect relations between specific compounds and species, integrated to a higher biological organization level using the statistical-based Species Sensitivity Distributions (SDD), so no particular weight is given to the absolute numbers or decline of individual species. Further integration to higher trophic levels is aimed at specific food chain relations, with other types of interaction also being considered (e.g., host-parasite or microbial relations). It will be beneficial when Ecological Risk Assessment can account for rare and endemic species which may not be represented well by the typical statistical SSD approach.
With respect to biodiversity conservation and management, the EU has opted for a third and more functional approach by using ecosystem services as the core of new policy-making.
To have a better functional approach to biodiversity protection, it is necessary to specify the threats so that it is possible to define proper policy approaches. This means refining protection principles, assessment procedures, and management options. It also comprises workable mechanisms that can be applied in practice, while accepting that a less refined, more robust outcome may mean that a higher risk for an adverse impact of toxic compounds must be taken into account.
The scope of this Research Topic aims to bridge the gap between these different approaches to conserve and manage nature conservation, biodiversity protection, and Ecological Risk Assessment to provide a better basis for policy measures.
We welcome research on fundamental aspects such as:
1. the fundamental meaning of 'hazard' and 'risk' in biodiversity and nature conservation;
2. how to include rare and endemic species in Risk Assessment procedures; and
3. in what way indicator research and monitoring activities could be used, and how functional biodiversity can be included in risk assessments.
Moreover, more applied papers are welcome on:
1. examples of species sensitivity or species protection that could bridge the gap between nature protection and environmental protection;
2. various computing and modeling approaches to integrate individual species-oriented risk assessments to higher levels of biological information; and
3. different assessment procedures like ecosystem services combined with nature or environmental protection.
Topic Editor Prof Victor Wepener is a board member Glasaal Volendam BV. All other Topic Editors declare no competing interests with regards to the Research Topic subject.
