4.5 Article

A Framework for Predicting Impacts on Ecosystem Services From (Sub)Organismal Responses to Chemicals

Journal

ENVIRONMENTAL TOXICOLOGY AND CHEMISTRY
Volume 36, Issue 4, Pages 845-859

Publisher

WILEY
DOI: 10.1002/etc.3720

Keywords

Ecological production function; Ecological risk assessment; Ecosystem service; Environmental management; Mechanistic effects model

Funding

  1. National Science Foundation [DBI-1300426]
  2. University of Tennessee, Knoxville
  3. Div Of Biological Infrastructure
  4. Direct For Biological Sciences [1300426] Funding Source: National Science Foundation

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Protection of ecosystem services is increasingly emphasized as a risk-assessment goal, but there are wide gaps between current ecological risk-assessment endpoints and potential effects on services provided by ecosystems. The authors present a framework that links common ecotoxicological endpoints to chemical impacts on populations and communities and the ecosystem services that they provide. This framework builds on considerable advances in mechanistic effects models designed to span multiple levels of biological organization and account for various types of biological interactions and feedbacks. For illustration, the authors introduce 2 case studies that employ well-developed and validated mechanistic effects models: the inSTREAM individual-based model for fish populations and the AQUATOX ecosystem model. They also show how dynamic energy budget theory can provide a common currency for interpreting organism-level toxicity. They suggest that a framework based on mechanistic models that predict impacts on ecosystem services resulting from chemical exposure, combined with economic valuation, can provide a useful approach for informing environmental management. The authors highlight the potential benefits of using this framework as well as the challenges that will need to be addressed in future work. (C) 2017 SETAC.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.5
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available