ArticlePest management science2017
Pesticide exposure assessment for surface waters in the EU. Part 2: Determination of statistically based run-off and drainage scenarios for Germany.
Article in Pest management science, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
3 citing papers in PubMed.
- An assessment of potential pesticide transmission, considering the combined impact of soil texture and pesticide properties: A meta-analysis.Soil use and management · 2022Article
- Scientific report of EFSA on the 'repair action' of the FOCUS surface water scenarios.EFSA journal. European Food Safety Authority · 2020Article
- Calibration and validation of toxicokinetic-toxicodynamic models for three neonicotinoids and some aquatic macroinvertebrates.Ecotoxicology (London, England) · 2018Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
13 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundIn order to assess surface water exposure to active substances of plant protection products (PPPs) in the European Union (EU), the FOCUS (FOrum for the Co-ordination of pesticide fate models and their USe) surface water workgroup introduced four run-off and six drainage scenarios for Step 3 of the tiered FOCUSsw approach. These scenarios may not necessarily represent realistic worst-case situations for the different Member States of the EU. Hence, the suitability of the scenarios for risk assessment in the national authorisation procedures is not known.
resultsUsing Germany as an example, the paper illustrates how national soil-climate scenarios can be developed to model entries of active substances into surface waters from run-off and erosion (using the model PRZM) and from drainage (using the model MACRO). In the authorisation procedure for PPPs on Member State level, such soil-climate scenarios can be used to determine exposure endpoints with a defined overall percentile.
conclusionThe approach allows the development of national specific soil-climate scenarios and to calculate percentile-based exposure endpoints. The scenarios have been integrated into a software tool analogous to FOCUS-SWASH which can be used in the future to assess surface water exposure in authorisation procedures of PPPs in Germany. © 2017 The Authors. Pest Management Science published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd on behalf of Society of Chemical Industry.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.