Aquatic risk assessment of pesticides in Latin America
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Latin America is anticipated to be a major growth market for agriculture and production is increasing with use of technologies such as pesticides. Reports of contamination of aquatic ecosystems by pesticides in Latin America have raised concerns about potential for adverse ecological effects. In the registration process of pesticides, all countries require significant data packages on aquatic toxicology and environmental fate. However, there are usually no specific requirements to conduct an aquatic risk assessment. To address this issue, the Society of Environmental Toxicology and Chemistry organized a workshop that brought together scientists from academia, government, and industry to review and elaborate on aquatic risk assessment frameworks that can be implemented into regulation of pesticides in Latin America. The workshop concluded that the international framework for risk assessments (protection goals, effects, and exposure assessments, risk characterization, and risk mitigation) is broadly applicable in Latin America but needs further refinement for the use in the region. Some of the challenges associated with these refinements are discussed in the article. It was recognized that there is potential for data sharing both within and outside of the region where conditions are similar. However, there is a need for research to compare local species and environmental conditions to those in other jurisdictions to be able to evaluate the applicability of data used in other countries. Development should also focus on human resources as there is a need to build local capacity and capability, and scientific collaboration and exchange between stakeholders in industry, government, and academia is also important. The meeting also emphasized that, although establishing a regionally relevant risk assessment framework is important, this also needs to be accompanied by enforcement of developed regulations and good management practices to help protect aquatic habitats. Education, training, and communication efforts are needed to achieve this. Integr Environ Assess Manag 2014;10:539–542. © 2014 SETAC Key Points Participants at a SETAC workshop concluded that the international framework for risk assessment of pesticides in aquatic systems is applicable but needs further refinement to be made specific for Latin American uses of pesticides. Of the countries in the survey, Brazil and Peru were the only countries with a framework for environmental risk assessment included in their legislation, and only Peru's legislation included specific protection goals Research is needed to compare local species and environmental conditions, to evaluate applicability of data generated in other jurisdictions and to characterize pesticide use in each country. Risk assessment of pesticides is important but there also needs to be a focus on good management practices to protect aquatic habitats.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.004 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".