Scientific concepts and methods for moving persistence assessments into the 21st century.
Scientific concepts and methods for moving persistence assessments into the 21st century.
复制标题
DOI：
10.1002/ieam.4575
复制
发表时间：
2022-11
影响因子：
3.1
通讯作者：
Redman, Aaron
中科院分区：
文献类型：
--
作者：
Davenport, Russell;Curtis-Jackson, Pippa;Dalkmann, Philipp;Davies, Jordan;Fenner, Kathrin;Hand, Laurence;McDonough, Kathleen;Ott, Amelie;Ortega-Calvo, Jose Julio;Parsons, John R.;Schaffer, Andreas;Sweetlove, Cyril;Trapp, Stefan;Wang, Neil;Redman, Aaron
评估化学物质的持久性是了解其环境命运、暴露浓度以及最终环境风险的关键。传统的生物降解测试方法是多年前开发的，用于可溶性、非挥发性、单组分测试物质，不能代表广泛的制造化学物质。此外，经济合作与发展组织（OECD）的筛选和模拟测试方法并不能完全反映物质释放的环境条件，因此，对化学降解半衰期的估计可能非常不确定，并可能歪曲真实的环境过程。在本文中，我们讨论了当前测试方法面临的挑战和限制，以及有助于理解和提供解决方案的科学进展。这些进步包括：(1)提供更深入了解微生物组成、多样性和丰度的可靠方法，以确保测试之间的一致性和/或解释差异；(2)通过与具有良好量化降解特征的物质进行比较，帮助进行持久性评估的基准工具和参考物质；(3)允许在环境相关浓度下对母体和代谢物进行量化的分析方法，并告知测试物质的生物利用度、生化途径、初级与总体降解率以及代谢物形成和衰变率；(4)预测微生物生物转化可能性以及生化途径的建模工具；(5)建模方法，允许推导更普遍适用的生物转化速率常数，在评估测试数据时考虑物理和/或化学过程和测试系统设计。我们还认识到，虽然这些进步可以提高持久性评估的确定性和准确性，但将其转化为监管实践和制定新的经合组织测试指南的机制和过程需要改进和加快。在仍存在不确定性的情况下，可能需要采用证据的整体权重方法来准确评估化学品的持久性。环境管理学报（英文版）；2022;18:1454-1487。©2022作者。Wiley期刊有限责任公司代表环境毒理学与化学学会（SETAC）出版的《综合环境评估与管理》。这篇重要的综述论述了当前用于持久性评估的测试方法所面临的挑战和局限性，以及有助于理解和提供解决方案的科学进展。现在有可靠的方法可以更深入地了解微生物组成、多样性和丰度，确保测试之间的一致性和/或解释差异；并量化低浓度的母体和/或代谢物，告知生物利用度和生物转化速率/途径。基准工具和参考物质现在可以通过与具有良好量化降解概况的物质进行比较来帮助进行持久性评估。建模工具可用于预测微生物生物转化和生化途径的可能性，并允许推导更适用的生物转化速率常数，在评估测试数据时考虑物理和/或化学过程和测试系统设计。
The evaluation of a chemical substance's persistence is key to understanding its environmental fate, exposure concentration, and, ultimately, environmental risk. Traditional biodegradation test methods were developed many years ago for soluble, nonvolatile, single‐constituent test substances, which do not represent the wide range of manufactured chemical substances. In addition, the Organisation for Economic Co‐operation and Development (OECD) screening and simulation test methods do not fully reflect the environmental conditions into which substances are released and, therefore, estimates of chemical degradation half‐lives can be very uncertain and may misrepresent real environmental processes. In this paper, we address the challenges and limitations facing current test methods and the scientific advances that are helping to both understand and provide solutions to them. Some of these advancements include the following: (1) robust methods that provide a deeper understanding of microbial composition, diversity, and abundance to ensure consistency and/or interpret variability between tests; (2) benchmarking tools and reference substances that aid in persistence evaluations through comparison against substances with well‐quantified degradation profiles; (3) analytical methods that allow quantification for parent and metabolites at environmentally relevant concentrations, and inform on test substance bioavailability, biochemical pathways, rates of primary versus overall degradation, and rates of metabolite formation and decay; (4) modeling tools that predict the likelihood of microbial biotransformation, as well as biochemical pathways; and (5) modeling approaches that allow for derivation of more generally applicable biotransformation rate constants, by accounting for physical and/or chemical processes and test system design when evaluating test data. We also identify that, while such advancements could improve the certainty and accuracy of persistence assessments, the mechanisms and processes by which they are translated into regulatory practice and development of new OECD test guidelines need improving and accelerating. Where uncertainty remains, holistic weight of evidence approaches may be required to accurately assess the persistence of chemicals. Integr Environ Assess Manag 2022;18:1454–1487. © 2022 The Authors. Integrated Environmental Assessment and Management published by Wiley Periodicals LLC on behalf of Society of Environmental Toxicology & Chemistry (SETAC). This critical review addresses the challenges and limitations facing current test methods used in persistence assessment and the scientific advances that are helping to both understand and provide solutions to them. Robust methods are now available to provide a deeper understanding of microbial composition, diversity, and abundance, ensuring consistency and/or interpret variability between tests; and quantify parent and/or metabolites at low concentrations informing bioavailability and biotransformation rates/paths. Benchmarking tools and reference substances are now available that aid in persistence evaluations through comparison against substances with well‐quantified degradation profiles. Modeling tools are available that predict the likelihood of microbial biotransformation and biochemical pathways, and allow for derivation of more applicable biotransformation rate constants, by accounting for physical and/or chemical processes and test system design when evaluating test data.
登录
查看更多内容
影响因子：
11.4
作者：
BOETHLING, RS;HOWARD, PH;TIRADO, N
通讯作者：
TIRADO, N
影响因子：
11.4
作者：
Achermann, Stefan;Falas, Per;Fenner, Kathrin
通讯作者：
Fenner, Kathrin
影响因子：
8.8
作者：
Birch, Heidi;Hammershoj, Rikke;Mayer, Philipp
通讯作者：
Mayer, Philipp
影响因子：
6.4
作者：
Amann R;Rosselló-Móra R
通讯作者：
Rosselló-Móra R
影响因子：
9.8
作者：
Beckers, Liza-Marie;Brack, Werner;Schulze, Tobias
通讯作者：
Schulze, Tobias