Risk assessment considerations with regard to the potential impacts of pesticides on endangered species

ABSTRACT Simple, deterministic screening‐level assessments that are highly conservative by design facilitate a rapid initial screening to determine whether a pesticide active ingredient has the potential to adversely affect threatened or endangered species. If a worst‐case estimate of pesticide expo...

Ausführliche Beschreibung

Gespeichert in:
Bibliographische Detailangaben
Veröffentlicht in:Integrated environmental assessment and management 2015-01, Vol.11 (1), p.102-117
Hauptverfasser: Brain, Richard A, Teed, R Scott, Bang, JiSu, Thorbek, Pernille, Perine, Jeff, Peranginangin, Natalia, Kim, Myoungwoo, Valenti, Ted, Chen, Wenlin, Breton, Roger L, Rodney, Sara I, Moore, Dwayne RJ
Format: Artikel
Sprache:eng
Schlagworte:
Online-Zugang:Volltext
Tags: Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
container_end_page 117
container_issue 1
container_start_page 102
container_title Integrated environmental assessment and management
container_volume 11
creator Brain, Richard A
Teed, R Scott
Bang, JiSu
Thorbek, Pernille
Perine, Jeff
Peranginangin, Natalia
Kim, Myoungwoo
Valenti, Ted
Chen, Wenlin
Breton, Roger L
Rodney, Sara I
Moore, Dwayne RJ
description ABSTRACT Simple, deterministic screening‐level assessments that are highly conservative by design facilitate a rapid initial screening to determine whether a pesticide active ingredient has the potential to adversely affect threatened or endangered species. If a worst‐case estimate of pesticide exposure is below a very conservative effects metric (e.g., the no observed effects concentration of the most sensitive tested surrogate species) then the potential risks are considered de minimis and unlikely to jeopardize the existence of a threatened or endangered species. Thus by design, such compounded layers of conservatism are intended to minimize potential Type II errors (failure to reject a false null hypothesis of de minimus risk), but correspondingly increase Type I errors (falsely reject a null hypothesis of de minimus risk). Because of the conservatism inherent in screening‐level risk assessments, higher‐tier scientific information and analyses that provide additional environmental realism can be applied in cases where a potential risk has been identified. This information includes community‐level effects data, environmental fate and exposure data, monitoring data, geospatial location and proximity data, species biology data, and probabilistic exposure and population models. Given that the definition of “risk” includes likelihood and magnitude of effect, higher‐tier risk assessments should use probabilistic techniques that more accurately and realistically characterize risk. Moreover, where possible and appropriate, risk assessments should focus on effects at the population and community levels of organization rather than the more traditional focus on the organism level. This document provides a review of some types of higher‐tier data and assessment refinements available to more accurately and realistically evaluate potential risks of pesticide use to threatened and endangered species. Integr Environ Assess Manag 2015;11:102–117. © 2014 SETAC Key Points Endangered species pesticide risk assessments typically employ screening‐level evaluations to derive preliminary risk conclusions. Many methodological refinements s are available to more accurately and realistically quantify risks should progression to higher‐tiers of risk assessment be necessary. Available higher‐tier refinements take advantage of exposure, biological and toxicological data, use of spatially‐explicit tools, development of more realistic exposure, risk and population models, and incorpo
doi_str_mv 10.1002/ieam.1572
format Article
fullrecord <record><control><sourceid>proquest_cross</sourceid><recordid>TN_cdi_proquest_miscellaneous_1660044904</recordid><sourceformat>XML</sourceformat><sourcesystem>PC</sourcesystem><sourcerecordid>1660044904</sourcerecordid><originalsourceid>FETCH-LOGICAL-c4922-b690eb1902b6ea754d8c4a2870aa619bbeb1cb7aad9f2faa206ff3b00156ba1e3</originalsourceid><addsrcrecordid>eNqNkU1PFEEQhjtGIwge_AOmEy96GOiP6W7mSAggCaIQiMdO9UzN0jBfds0G-ff2Ztc9mBg9VVX6ed9U18vYOykOpBDqMCL0B9I49YLtSmNkoV2lX25753bYG6IHIUqttHrNdpQRldTS7rLFTaRHDkRI1OMw83ocKDaYYI65409xvucJF5AaPo98vkc-jXMGI3Q89hPUM_Gx5RPSHOsszNPAcWhgWGDChtOEdUTaZ69a6Ajfbuoeuzs7vT35XFx-Pb84Ob4s6rJSqgi2EhhkJVSwCM6UzVFdgjpyAsDKKoT8WAcH0FStagGUsG2rgxDS2AAS9R77uPad0vhjmZfyfaQauw4GHJfkpbX5DGWVT_Fv1JTWlc79D1pKJaSzNqMf_kAfxmUa8p9XlKlyJFJn6tOaqtNIlLD1U4o9pGcvhV9l6leZ-lWmmX2_cVyGHpst-TvEDByugafY4fPfnfzF6fGXjWWxVkSa8edWAenRW6ed8d-vzv1VeS3FtzPrb_UvWhi60w</addsrcrecordid><sourcetype>Aggregation Database</sourcetype><iscdi>true</iscdi><recordtype>article</recordtype><pqid>1645955113</pqid></control><display><type>article</type><title>Risk assessment considerations with regard to the potential impacts of pesticides on endangered species</title><source>MEDLINE</source><source>Wiley Online Library Journals Frontfile Complete</source><creator>Brain, Richard A ; Teed, R Scott ; Bang, JiSu ; Thorbek, Pernille ; Perine, Jeff ; Peranginangin, Natalia ; Kim, Myoungwoo ; Valenti, Ted ; Chen, Wenlin ; Breton, Roger L ; Rodney, Sara I ; Moore, Dwayne RJ</creator><creatorcontrib>Brain, Richard A ; Teed, R Scott ; Bang, JiSu ; Thorbek, Pernille ; Perine, Jeff ; Peranginangin, Natalia ; Kim, Myoungwoo ; Valenti, Ted ; Chen, Wenlin ; Breton, Roger L ; Rodney, Sara I ; Moore, Dwayne RJ</creatorcontrib><description>ABSTRACT Simple, deterministic screening‐level assessments that are highly conservative by design facilitate a rapid initial screening to determine whether a pesticide active ingredient has the potential to adversely affect threatened or endangered species. If a worst‐case estimate of pesticide exposure is below a very conservative effects metric (e.g., the no observed effects concentration of the most sensitive tested surrogate species) then the potential risks are considered de minimis and unlikely to jeopardize the existence of a threatened or endangered species. Thus by design, such compounded layers of conservatism are intended to minimize potential Type II errors (failure to reject a false null hypothesis of de minimus risk), but correspondingly increase Type I errors (falsely reject a null hypothesis of de minimus risk). Because of the conservatism inherent in screening‐level risk assessments, higher‐tier scientific information and analyses that provide additional environmental realism can be applied in cases where a potential risk has been identified. This information includes community‐level effects data, environmental fate and exposure data, monitoring data, geospatial location and proximity data, species biology data, and probabilistic exposure and population models. Given that the definition of “risk” includes likelihood and magnitude of effect, higher‐tier risk assessments should use probabilistic techniques that more accurately and realistically characterize risk. Moreover, where possible and appropriate, risk assessments should focus on effects at the population and community levels of organization rather than the more traditional focus on the organism level. This document provides a review of some types of higher‐tier data and assessment refinements available to more accurately and realistically evaluate potential risks of pesticide use to threatened and endangered species. Integr Environ Assess Manag 2015;11:102–117. © 2014 SETAC Key Points Endangered species pesticide risk assessments typically employ screening‐level evaluations to derive preliminary risk conclusions. Many methodological refinements s are available to more accurately and realistically quantify risks should progression to higher‐tiers of risk assessment be necessary. Available higher‐tier refinements take advantage of exposure, biological and toxicological data, use of spatially‐explicit tools, development of more realistic exposure, risk and population models, and incorporation of probabilistic methods. Collectively, higher‐tier refinements are designed to progress risk assessment from highly conservative and unrealistic towards more ecologically representative, realistic and relevant estimates.</description><identifier>ISSN: 1551-3777</identifier><identifier>EISSN: 1551-3793</identifier><identifier>DOI: 10.1002/ieam.1572</identifier><identifier>PMID: 25091316</identifier><language>eng</language><publisher>United States: Blackwell Publishing Ltd</publisher><subject>Animals ; Assessments ; Conservatism ; Endangered &amp; extinct species ; Endangered Species ; Environmental Monitoring ; Environmental Pollutants - toxicity ; Exposure ; Impact analysis ; Models, Theoretical ; Null hypothesis ; Pesticide ; Pesticides ; Pesticides - toxicity ; Population modeling ; Probabilistic risk assessment ; Probability theory ; Risk ; Risk Assessment ; Threatened and endangered species ; Threatened species ; Wildlife conservation</subject><ispartof>Integrated environmental assessment and management, 2015-01, Vol.11 (1), p.102-117</ispartof><rights>2014 SETAC</rights><rights>2014 SETAC.</rights><rights>Copyright Blackwell Publishing Ltd. Jan 2015</rights><lds50>peer_reviewed</lds50><oa>free_for_read</oa><woscitedreferencessubscribed>false</woscitedreferencessubscribed><citedby>FETCH-LOGICAL-c4922-b690eb1902b6ea754d8c4a2870aa619bbeb1cb7aad9f2faa206ff3b00156ba1e3</citedby><cites>FETCH-LOGICAL-c4922-b690eb1902b6ea754d8c4a2870aa619bbeb1cb7aad9f2faa206ff3b00156ba1e3</cites></display><links><openurl>$$Topenurl_article</openurl><openurlfulltext>$$Topenurlfull_article</openurlfulltext><thumbnail>$$Tsyndetics_thumb_exl</thumbnail><linktopdf>$$Uhttps://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/pdf/10.1002%2Fieam.1572$$EPDF$$P50$$Gwiley$$H</linktopdf><linktohtml>$$Uhttps://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/full/10.1002%2Fieam.1572$$EHTML$$P50$$Gwiley$$H</linktohtml><link.rule.ids>314,776,780,1411,27901,27902,45550,45551</link.rule.ids><backlink>$$Uhttps://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/25091316$$D View this record in MEDLINE/PubMed$$Hfree_for_read</backlink></links><search><creatorcontrib>Brain, Richard A</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Teed, R Scott</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Bang, JiSu</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Thorbek, Pernille</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Perine, Jeff</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Peranginangin, Natalia</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Kim, Myoungwoo</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Valenti, Ted</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Chen, Wenlin</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Breton, Roger L</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Rodney, Sara I</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Moore, Dwayne RJ</creatorcontrib><title>Risk assessment considerations with regard to the potential impacts of pesticides on endangered species</title><title>Integrated environmental assessment and management</title><addtitle>Integr Environ Assess Manag</addtitle><description>ABSTRACT Simple, deterministic screening‐level assessments that are highly conservative by design facilitate a rapid initial screening to determine whether a pesticide active ingredient has the potential to adversely affect threatened or endangered species. If a worst‐case estimate of pesticide exposure is below a very conservative effects metric (e.g., the no observed effects concentration of the most sensitive tested surrogate species) then the potential risks are considered de minimis and unlikely to jeopardize the existence of a threatened or endangered species. Thus by design, such compounded layers of conservatism are intended to minimize potential Type II errors (failure to reject a false null hypothesis of de minimus risk), but correspondingly increase Type I errors (falsely reject a null hypothesis of de minimus risk). Because of the conservatism inherent in screening‐level risk assessments, higher‐tier scientific information and analyses that provide additional environmental realism can be applied in cases where a potential risk has been identified. This information includes community‐level effects data, environmental fate and exposure data, monitoring data, geospatial location and proximity data, species biology data, and probabilistic exposure and population models. Given that the definition of “risk” includes likelihood and magnitude of effect, higher‐tier risk assessments should use probabilistic techniques that more accurately and realistically characterize risk. Moreover, where possible and appropriate, risk assessments should focus on effects at the population and community levels of organization rather than the more traditional focus on the organism level. This document provides a review of some types of higher‐tier data and assessment refinements available to more accurately and realistically evaluate potential risks of pesticide use to threatened and endangered species. Integr Environ Assess Manag 2015;11:102–117. © 2014 SETAC Key Points Endangered species pesticide risk assessments typically employ screening‐level evaluations to derive preliminary risk conclusions. Many methodological refinements s are available to more accurately and realistically quantify risks should progression to higher‐tiers of risk assessment be necessary. Available higher‐tier refinements take advantage of exposure, biological and toxicological data, use of spatially‐explicit tools, development of more realistic exposure, risk and population models, and incorporation of probabilistic methods. Collectively, higher‐tier refinements are designed to progress risk assessment from highly conservative and unrealistic towards more ecologically representative, realistic and relevant estimates.</description><subject>Animals</subject><subject>Assessments</subject><subject>Conservatism</subject><subject>Endangered &amp; extinct species</subject><subject>Endangered Species</subject><subject>Environmental Monitoring</subject><subject>Environmental Pollutants - toxicity</subject><subject>Exposure</subject><subject>Impact analysis</subject><subject>Models, Theoretical</subject><subject>Null hypothesis</subject><subject>Pesticide</subject><subject>Pesticides</subject><subject>Pesticides - toxicity</subject><subject>Population modeling</subject><subject>Probabilistic risk assessment</subject><subject>Probability theory</subject><subject>Risk</subject><subject>Risk Assessment</subject><subject>Threatened and endangered species</subject><subject>Threatened species</subject><subject>Wildlife conservation</subject><issn>1551-3777</issn><issn>1551-3793</issn><fulltext>true</fulltext><rsrctype>article</rsrctype><creationdate>2015</creationdate><recordtype>article</recordtype><sourceid>EIF</sourceid><recordid>eNqNkU1PFEEQhjtGIwge_AOmEy96GOiP6W7mSAggCaIQiMdO9UzN0jBfds0G-ff2Ztc9mBg9VVX6ed9U18vYOykOpBDqMCL0B9I49YLtSmNkoV2lX25753bYG6IHIUqttHrNdpQRldTS7rLFTaRHDkRI1OMw83ocKDaYYI65409xvucJF5AaPo98vkc-jXMGI3Q89hPUM_Gx5RPSHOsszNPAcWhgWGDChtOEdUTaZ69a6Ajfbuoeuzs7vT35XFx-Pb84Ob4s6rJSqgi2EhhkJVSwCM6UzVFdgjpyAsDKKoT8WAcH0FStagGUsG2rgxDS2AAS9R77uPad0vhjmZfyfaQauw4GHJfkpbX5DGWVT_Fv1JTWlc79D1pKJaSzNqMf_kAfxmUa8p9XlKlyJFJn6tOaqtNIlLD1U4o9pGcvhV9l6leZ-lWmmX2_cVyGHpst-TvEDByugafY4fPfnfzF6fGXjWWxVkSa8edWAenRW6ed8d-vzv1VeS3FtzPrb_UvWhi60w</recordid><startdate>201501</startdate><enddate>201501</enddate><creator>Brain, Richard A</creator><creator>Teed, R Scott</creator><creator>Bang, JiSu</creator><creator>Thorbek, Pernille</creator><creator>Perine, Jeff</creator><creator>Peranginangin, Natalia</creator><creator>Kim, Myoungwoo</creator><creator>Valenti, Ted</creator><creator>Chen, Wenlin</creator><creator>Breton, Roger L</creator><creator>Rodney, Sara I</creator><creator>Moore, Dwayne RJ</creator><general>Blackwell Publishing Ltd</general><scope>BSCLL</scope><scope>CGR</scope><scope>CUY</scope><scope>CVF</scope><scope>ECM</scope><scope>EIF</scope><scope>NPM</scope><scope>AAYXX</scope><scope>CITATION</scope><scope>7QH</scope><scope>7SN</scope><scope>7ST</scope><scope>7U7</scope><scope>7UA</scope><scope>C1K</scope><scope>F1W</scope><scope>H97</scope><scope>K9.</scope><scope>L.G</scope><scope>SOI</scope><scope>7X8</scope><scope>7U1</scope><scope>7U2</scope><scope>7SU</scope><scope>8FD</scope><scope>FR3</scope><scope>KR7</scope></search><sort><creationdate>201501</creationdate><title>Risk assessment considerations with regard to the potential impacts of pesticides on endangered species</title><author>Brain, Richard A ; Teed, R Scott ; Bang, JiSu ; Thorbek, Pernille ; Perine, Jeff ; Peranginangin, Natalia ; Kim, Myoungwoo ; Valenti, Ted ; Chen, Wenlin ; Breton, Roger L ; Rodney, Sara I ; Moore, Dwayne RJ</author></sort><facets><frbrtype>5</frbrtype><frbrgroupid>cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c4922-b690eb1902b6ea754d8c4a2870aa619bbeb1cb7aad9f2faa206ff3b00156ba1e3</frbrgroupid><rsrctype>articles</rsrctype><prefilter>articles</prefilter><language>eng</language><creationdate>2015</creationdate><topic>Animals</topic><topic>Assessments</topic><topic>Conservatism</topic><topic>Endangered &amp; extinct species</topic><topic>Endangered Species</topic><topic>Environmental Monitoring</topic><topic>Environmental Pollutants - toxicity</topic><topic>Exposure</topic><topic>Impact analysis</topic><topic>Models, Theoretical</topic><topic>Null hypothesis</topic><topic>Pesticide</topic><topic>Pesticides</topic><topic>Pesticides - toxicity</topic><topic>Population modeling</topic><topic>Probabilistic risk assessment</topic><topic>Probability theory</topic><topic>Risk</topic><topic>Risk Assessment</topic><topic>Threatened and endangered species</topic><topic>Threatened species</topic><topic>Wildlife conservation</topic><toplevel>peer_reviewed</toplevel><toplevel>online_resources</toplevel><creatorcontrib>Brain, Richard A</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Teed, R Scott</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Bang, JiSu</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Thorbek, Pernille</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Perine, Jeff</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Peranginangin, Natalia</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Kim, Myoungwoo</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Valenti, Ted</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Chen, Wenlin</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Breton, Roger L</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Rodney, Sara I</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Moore, Dwayne RJ</creatorcontrib><collection>Istex</collection><collection>Medline</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>MEDLINE (Ovid)</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>PubMed</collection><collection>CrossRef</collection><collection>Aqualine</collection><collection>Ecology Abstracts</collection><collection>Environment Abstracts</collection><collection>Toxicology Abstracts</collection><collection>Water Resources Abstracts</collection><collection>Environmental Sciences and Pollution Management</collection><collection>ASFA: Aquatic Sciences and Fisheries Abstracts</collection><collection>Aquatic Science &amp; Fisheries Abstracts (ASFA) 3: Aquatic Pollution &amp; Environmental Quality</collection><collection>ProQuest Health &amp; Medical Complete (Alumni)</collection><collection>Aquatic Science &amp; Fisheries Abstracts (ASFA) Professional</collection><collection>Environment Abstracts</collection><collection>MEDLINE - Academic</collection><collection>Risk Abstracts</collection><collection>Safety Science and Risk</collection><collection>Environmental Engineering Abstracts</collection><collection>Technology Research Database</collection><collection>Engineering Research Database</collection><collection>Civil Engineering Abstracts</collection><jtitle>Integrated environmental assessment and management</jtitle></facets><delivery><delcategory>Remote Search Resource</delcategory><fulltext>fulltext</fulltext></delivery><addata><au>Brain, Richard A</au><au>Teed, R Scott</au><au>Bang, JiSu</au><au>Thorbek, Pernille</au><au>Perine, Jeff</au><au>Peranginangin, Natalia</au><au>Kim, Myoungwoo</au><au>Valenti, Ted</au><au>Chen, Wenlin</au><au>Breton, Roger L</au><au>Rodney, Sara I</au><au>Moore, Dwayne RJ</au><format>journal</format><genre>article</genre><ristype>JOUR</ristype><atitle>Risk assessment considerations with regard to the potential impacts of pesticides on endangered species</atitle><jtitle>Integrated environmental assessment and management</jtitle><addtitle>Integr Environ Assess Manag</addtitle><date>2015-01</date><risdate>2015</risdate><volume>11</volume><issue>1</issue><spage>102</spage><epage>117</epage><pages>102-117</pages><issn>1551-3777</issn><eissn>1551-3793</eissn><abstract>ABSTRACT Simple, deterministic screening‐level assessments that are highly conservative by design facilitate a rapid initial screening to determine whether a pesticide active ingredient has the potential to adversely affect threatened or endangered species. If a worst‐case estimate of pesticide exposure is below a very conservative effects metric (e.g., the no observed effects concentration of the most sensitive tested surrogate species) then the potential risks are considered de minimis and unlikely to jeopardize the existence of a threatened or endangered species. Thus by design, such compounded layers of conservatism are intended to minimize potential Type II errors (failure to reject a false null hypothesis of de minimus risk), but correspondingly increase Type I errors (falsely reject a null hypothesis of de minimus risk). Because of the conservatism inherent in screening‐level risk assessments, higher‐tier scientific information and analyses that provide additional environmental realism can be applied in cases where a potential risk has been identified. This information includes community‐level effects data, environmental fate and exposure data, monitoring data, geospatial location and proximity data, species biology data, and probabilistic exposure and population models. Given that the definition of “risk” includes likelihood and magnitude of effect, higher‐tier risk assessments should use probabilistic techniques that more accurately and realistically characterize risk. Moreover, where possible and appropriate, risk assessments should focus on effects at the population and community levels of organization rather than the more traditional focus on the organism level. This document provides a review of some types of higher‐tier data and assessment refinements available to more accurately and realistically evaluate potential risks of pesticide use to threatened and endangered species. Integr Environ Assess Manag 2015;11:102–117. © 2014 SETAC Key Points Endangered species pesticide risk assessments typically employ screening‐level evaluations to derive preliminary risk conclusions. Many methodological refinements s are available to more accurately and realistically quantify risks should progression to higher‐tiers of risk assessment be necessary. Available higher‐tier refinements take advantage of exposure, biological and toxicological data, use of spatially‐explicit tools, development of more realistic exposure, risk and population models, and incorporation of probabilistic methods. Collectively, higher‐tier refinements are designed to progress risk assessment from highly conservative and unrealistic towards more ecologically representative, realistic and relevant estimates.</abstract><cop>United States</cop><pub>Blackwell Publishing Ltd</pub><pmid>25091316</pmid><doi>10.1002/ieam.1572</doi><tpages>16</tpages><oa>free_for_read</oa></addata></record>
fulltext fulltext
identifier ISSN: 1551-3777
ispartof Integrated environmental assessment and management, 2015-01, Vol.11 (1), p.102-117
issn 1551-3777
1551-3793
language eng
recordid cdi_proquest_miscellaneous_1660044904
source MEDLINE; Wiley Online Library Journals Frontfile Complete
subjects Animals
Assessments
Conservatism
Endangered & extinct species
Endangered Species
Environmental Monitoring
Environmental Pollutants - toxicity
Exposure
Impact analysis
Models, Theoretical
Null hypothesis
Pesticide
Pesticides
Pesticides - toxicity
Population modeling
Probabilistic risk assessment
Probability theory
Risk
Risk Assessment
Threatened and endangered species
Threatened species
Wildlife conservation
title Risk assessment considerations with regard to the potential impacts of pesticides on endangered species
url https://sfx.bib-bvb.de/sfx_tum?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&ctx_tim=2025-02-14T23%3A06%3A20IST&url_ver=Z39.88-2004&url_ctx_fmt=infofi/fmt:kev:mtx:ctx&rfr_id=info:sid/primo.exlibrisgroup.com:primo3-Article-proquest_cross&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.atitle=Risk%20assessment%20considerations%20with%20regard%20to%20the%20potential%20impacts%20of%20pesticides%20on%20endangered%20species&rft.jtitle=Integrated%20environmental%20assessment%20and%20management&rft.au=Brain,%20Richard%20A&rft.date=2015-01&rft.volume=11&rft.issue=1&rft.spage=102&rft.epage=117&rft.pages=102-117&rft.issn=1551-3777&rft.eissn=1551-3793&rft_id=info:doi/10.1002/ieam.1572&rft_dat=%3Cproquest_cross%3E1660044904%3C/proquest_cross%3E%3Curl%3E%3C/url%3E&disable_directlink=true&sfx.directlink=off&sfx.report_link=0&rft_id=info:oai/&rft_pqid=1645955113&rft_id=info:pmid/25091316&rfr_iscdi=true