首页> 外文期刊>BioRisk >Assessing the potential risks of transgenic plants for non-target invertebrates in Europe: a review of classification approaches of the receiving environment
【24h】

Assessing the potential risks of transgenic plants for non-target invertebrates in Europe: a review of classification approaches of the receiving environment

机译:评估转基因植物对非目标无脊椎动物的潜在风险:综述接收环境的分类方法

获取原文
           

摘要

According to the current legal background for the regulation of genetically modified plants (GMPs) in Europe, an environmental risk assessment (ERA) has to be performed considering i) the crop plant, ii) the novel trait relating to its intended effect and phenotypic characteristics of the GM crop plant and iii) the receiving environment related to the intended use of the GMP. However, the current GMP-ERA does not differentiate between different intended receiving environments. Therefore, the question is to be raised: How can the ’receiving environment’ be classified on the European scale, both in an ecologically relevant and feasible way? As a first step this proposal focuses on invertebrates in the terrestrial environmental compartment. In order to check if already existing regionalization concepts are suitable for the above raised question the following selection criteria were employed: Distribution of non-target organisms (NTOs): A suitable regionalization concept should appropriately reflect the specific characteristics of the animal and plant communities of the different receiving environments of a GMP. Therefore, such a classification should be done by an ecoregion approach, meaning that different ecoregions support different organism communities that may play a different role in supporting relevant ecosystem services. However, information on the distribution of invertebrates in Europe is not available in sufficient detail for this purpose. Hence, it is proposed to use the information about site conditions like climatic, vegetation and soil parameters, which determine the composition of invertebrate communities, for the selection of an appropriate classification concept. Size and number of geographical units: This is a trade-off between the total number of ‘receiving environments’ in Europe manageable in a regulatory context and the ecological uniformity of a single geographical unit. An intermediate size and number of geographical units should be the aim of the classification.With the ‘Indicative map of European biogeographical regions’ (IMEBR) there is an existing regionalization concept that meets many of the requirements identified above: the classification is based on parameters that also determine the distribution of invertebrate communities (i.e., the potential natural vegetation) and nine biogeographical regions represented within the 27 member states of the European (EU-27) are a manageable number for regulatory purposes. However, epigeic (living above ground) and endogeic (living below ground) faunal communities are determined by different biotic and abiotic parameters. For example, climate data is much more relevant for epigeic species than for endogeic organisms. The most important soil properties related to the distribution of endogeic organisms and plants are pH, texture, organic matter content and/or content of organic carbon, C/N ratio, and water-holding capacity. Hence, for endogeic non-target organisms there is currently no suitable regionalization concept available. For the time being, it is recommended to identify important species for testing purposes in each ecoregion with GMP cultivation by means of expert knowledge using the IMEBR for both epigeic and endogeic communities.The regionalization concept is intended to be used in the context of the ERA of GMPs for the assessment of risk for NTOs. Hence, it should be tailored for the area in the EU where GMPs are likely to be grown. The overlap between the biogeographical regions and the intended area of cultivation for a novel GMP form the different cases, each of which should undergo a specific ERA process.For example, there would be eight or nine separate potato cases for the EU-27 area, i.e. the Alpine, Atlantic, Boreal, Continental, Macaronesian, Mediterranean, Pannonian, Steppic and possibly the Black Sea biogeographical regions. For grain maize there would be five to nine separate cases, i.e. the Atlantic, Continental, Mediterranean, Pannonian, Steppic and possibly the Alpine, Black Sea, Boreal and Macaronesian biogeographical regions.
机译:根据欧洲目前对转基因植物(GMP)进行监管的法律背景,必须考虑以下因素进行环境风险评估(ERA):i)作物植物; ii)与预期效果和表型特征有关的新特性转基因作物的种类和iii)与GMP预期用途有关的接收环境。但是,当前的GMP-ERA无法区分不同的预期接收环境。因此,将提出一个问题:“接收环境”如何才能实现?在生态上和可行的方面都可以在欧洲范围内进行分类?第一步,该提案重点关注陆地环境隔室中的无脊椎动物。为了检查现有的区域化概念是否适合上述提出的问题,采用了以下选择标准:非目标生物(NTOs)的分布:适当的区域化概念应适当反映动物的动植物群落的特定特征。 GMP的不同接收环境。因此,这种分类应采用生态区方法进行,这意味着不同的生态区支持不同的生物群落,而这些生物群落在支持相关生态系统服务方面可能发挥不同的作用。但是,为此目的,没有足够详细的欧洲无脊椎动物分布信息。因此,建议使用有关气候,植被和土壤参数等场所条件的信息来确定无脊椎动物群落的组成,以选择合适的分类概念。地理单位的大小和数量:这是“接收环境”总数与“接收环境”总数之间的权衡。在欧洲,可以在监管范围内以及单个地理单位的生态统一性方面进行管理。分类的目的应该是地理单位的大小和中间数量。通过“欧洲生物地理区域指示性地图”, (IMEBR)现有的区域化概念可以满足上述许多要求:分类基于参数,这些参数还确定了27个成员国内无脊椎动物群落(即潜在的自然植被)和9个生物地理区域的分布出于法规目的,欧洲(EU-27)的数量是一个可管理的数字。但是,表皮动物(高于地面生活)和内生动物(低于地面生活)动物群落是由不同的生物和非生物参数确定的。例如,与内生生物相比,气候数据与附生物种更为相关。与内生生物和植物的分布有关的最重要的土壤性质是pH,质地,有机质含量和/或有机碳含量,C / N比和持水量。因此,对于内源性非靶标生物,目前尚无合适的区域化概念。目前,建议通过专家知识,使用IMEBR识别流行和内生群落的每个生态区域中进行GMP种植的重要物种,以便在ERA的背景下使用GMP用于评估NTO风险。因此,应针对可能会种植GMP的欧盟地区量身定制。生物地理区域与新型GMP的预期种植区域之间的重叠形成了不同的案例,每个案例都应经过特定的ERA流程。例如,EU-27地区将有八个或九个单独的马铃薯案例,例如,高山,大西洋,北方,大陆,马卡罗尼西亚,地中海,潘诺尼亚,Steppic以及可能的黑海生物地理区域。对于谷物玉米,将有五到九个单独的案例,即大西洋,大陆,地中海,潘诺尼,Steppic以及可能的高山,黑海,北方和马卡罗尼西亚生物地理区域。

著录项

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利
获取原文

客服邮箱:kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备:11010802029741号 ICP备案号:京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有
  • 客服微信

  • 服务号