Reply to the EFSA (2016) on the relevance of recent publications (Hofmann et al. 2014, 2016) on environmental risk assessment and management of Bt-maize events (MON810, Bt11 and 1507)

In this commentary, we respond to a report of the EFSA GMO Panel (EFSA EFSA Supp Publ, 1) that criticises the outcomes of two studies published in this journal (Hofmann et al. Environ Sci Eur 26: 24, 2; Environ Sci Eur 28: 14, 3). Both publications relate to the environmental risk assessment and management of Bt-maize, including maize events MON810, Bt11 and maize 1507. The results of Hofmann et al. (Environ Sci Eur 26: 24, 2), using standardised pollen mass filter deposition measurements, indicated that the EFSA Panel model had underestimated pollen deposition and, hence, exposure of non-target organisms to Bt-maize pollen. The results implied a need for safety buffer distances in the kilometre range for protected nature reserve areas instead of the 20–30 m range recommended by the EFSA Panel. As a result, the EFSA Panel revised their model (EFSA EFSA J 13: 4127, 4), adopting the slope of the empirical data from Hofmann et al. The intercept, however, was substantially reduced to less than 1% at one point by introducing further assumptions based on the estimates of mainly panel members, citing possible ‘uncertainty’. Hofmann et al. (Environ Sci Eur 28: 14, 3) published extensive empirical data regarding pollen deposition on leaves. These results were part of a larger 3-year study involving detailed measurements of pollen release, dispersal and deposition over the maize flowering period. The data collected in situ confirmed the previous predictions of Hofmann et al. (Environ Sci Eur 26: 24, 2). Mean levels and observed variability of pollen deposition on maize and four lepidopteran host plants exceeded the assumptions and disagreed with the conclusions of the EFSA Panel. The EFSA Panel reacted in a report (EFSA EFSA Supp Publ, 1) criticising the methods and outcomes of the two published studies of Hofmann et al. while reaffirming their original recommendations. We respond here point-by-point, showing that the critique is not justified. Based on our results on Urtica leaf pollen density, we confirm the need for specific environmental impact assessments for Bt-maize cultivation with respect to protected habitats within isolation buffer distances in the kilometre range.     

A comparison of model performance between AERMOD and AUSTAL2000

In this study the performance of the American Meteorological Society and U.S. Environmental Protection Agency Regulatory Model (AERMOD), a Gaussian plume model, is compared in five test cases with the German Dispersion Model according to the Technical Instructions on Air Quality Control (Ausbreitungsmodell gem?beta der Technischen Anleitung zur Reinhaltung der Luft) (AUSTAL2000), a Lagrangian model. The test cases include different source types, rural and urban conditions, flat and complex terrain. The predicted concentrations are analyzed and compared with field data. For evaluation, quantile-quantile plots were used. Further, a performance measure is applied that refers to the upper end of concentration levels because this is the concentration range of utmost importance and interest for regulatory purposes. AERMOD generally predicted concentrations closer to the field observations. AERMOD and AUSTAL2000 performed considerably better when they included the emitting power plant building, indicating that the downwash effect near a source is an important factor. Although AERMOD handled mountainous terrain well, AUSTAL2000 significantly underestimated the concentrations under these conditions. In the urban test case AUSTAL2000 did not perform satisfactorily. This may be because AUSTAL2000, in contrast to AERMOD, does not use any algorithm for nightly turbulence as caused by the urban heat island effect. Both models performed acceptable for a nonbuoyant volume source. AUSTAL2000 had difficulties in stable conditions, resulting in severe underpredictions. This analysis indicates that AERMOD is the stronger model compared with AUSTAL2000 in cases with complex and urban terrain. The reasons for that seem to be AUSTAL2000's simplification of the meteorological input parameters and imprecision because of rounding errors.     

Survival of selected pathogens in diluted sludge of a thermophilic waste treatment plant and in NaCl-solution under aerobic and anaerobic conditions

Decimal reduction times (DRT or D-value) of Campylobacter jejuni, Salmonella enterica (formerly Salmonella choleraesuis) serovar Senftenberg, Escherichia coli, and Listeria monocytogenes were determined in two different matrices, diluted fermenter sludge (DFS) and 0.95% NaCl-solution (NaCl) at 50 degrees C, both under aerobic and anaerobic conditions. Depending on aeration, matrix composition, and the respective organism, the D-values varied between 10min and more than 15h. Generally the viability of bacteria decreased faster in DFS compared to NaCl-solution and under aerobic compared to anaerobic conditions. After 24h no viable cells could be detected in DFS, both under aerobic as well as under anaerobic conditions, whereas viable cells were still found in NaCl solutions. In both matrices the detection limits determined by means of PCR-based and classical microbiological methods were compared and pointed to lower detection limits of the latter methods. Results of the present investigation show that test organisms were far from surviving several days in DFS whereas hydraulic retention times normally used for thermophilic anaerobic digestion are in the range of 2 weeks. However, an underestimation of survival rates of the test organisms seems probable when applying aerobic standard methods.     

Globaler Vertrag zur Regelung von POPs: Die Stockholm Konvention

The success of the negotiations on the POPs Convention after the failure of the negotiations over the climate protocol in The Hague in late November is an important result for international action to protect the earth from damage by chemicals. It shows the countries’ real commitment to find compromises for protection of the environment and human health and for the restoration of damaged ecosystems on our planet. It deserves to be highlighted that all participants — not only the industrialized countries but also developing countries as well as environmental organizations and the (chemical) industry — regard the conclusion of this convention as a success and that a broad basis for joint action has thus been created. The convention is a signal also because of its useful contents, which includes instruments for the total elimination of 12 POPs in the beginning and of further persistent organic pollutants at a later stage. The basis for a gradual reduction of the increasing pollution of the environment on a global scale is given by mechanisms for subjecting further POPs to the requirements of this Convention in the future.     

Effective monitoring of agriculture: a response

The development of effective agricultural monitoring networks is essential to track, anticipate and manage changes in the social, economic and environmental aspects of agriculture. We welcome the perspective of Lindenmayer and Likens (J. Environ. Monit., 2011, 13, 1559) as published in the Journal of Environmental Monitoring on our earlier paper, "Monitoring the World's Agriculture" (Sachs et al., Nature, 2010, 466, 558-560). In this response, we address their three main critiques labeled as 'the passive approach', 'the problem with uniform metrics' and 'the problem with composite metrics'. We expand on specific research questions at the core of the network design, on the distinction between key universal and site-specific metrics to detect change over time and across scales, and on the need for composite metrics in decision-making. We believe that simultaneously measuring indicators of the three pillars of sustainability (environmentally sound, social responsible and economically viable) in an effectively integrated monitoring system will ultimately allow scientists and land managers alike to find solutions to the most pressing problems facing global food security.