When experts disagree: the need to rethink indicator selection for assessing sustainability of agriculture

Sustainability indicators are well recognized for their potential to assess and monitor sustainable development of agricultural systems. A large number of indicators are proposed in various sustainability assessment frameworks, which raises concerns regarding the validity of approaches, usefulness and trust in such frameworks. Selecting indicators requires transparent and well-defined procedures to ensure the relevance and validity of sustainability assessments. The objective of this study, therefore, was to determine whether experts agree on which criteria are most important in the selection of indicators and indicator sets for robust sustainability assessments. Two groups of experts (Temperate Agriculture Research Network and New Zealand Sustainability Dashboard) were asked to rank the relative importance of eleven criteria for selecting individual indicators and of nine criteria for balancing a collective set of indicators. Both ranking surveys reveal a startling lack of consensus amongst experts about how best to measure agricultural sustainability and call for a radical rethink about how complementary approaches to sustainability assessments are used alongside each other to ensure a plurality of views and maximum collaboration and trust amongst stakeholders. To improve the transparency, relevance and robustness of sustainable assessments, the context of the sustainability assessment, including prioritizations of selection criteria for indicator selection, must be accounted for. A collaborative design process will enhance the acceptance of diverse values and prioritizations embedded in sustainability assessments. The process by which indicators and sustainability frameworks are established may be a much more important determinant of their success than the final shape of the assessment tools. Such an emphasis on process would make assessments more transparent, transformative and enduring.     

Urinary 8-oxo-7, 8-dihydro-2′-deoxyguanosine concentrations after frying of bacon,a pilot study

Cooking fumes contain compounds that may give rise to oxidative stress and mutations when inhaled. The aim of this study was to evaluate if cooking fumes from frying of bacon induce oxidative stress by measurement of urinary 8-oxo-7,8-dihydro-2 deoxyguanosine, a marker of oxidatively damaged DNA. Three non-smoking women fried bacon for 3 h. Urine samples were taken as early morning void at the same time on four days; the morning before frying, the morning after first frying, the morning after three days of frying and one week after first urine sample. 8-Oxo-7,8-dihydro-2 deoxyguanosine, 1-hydroxypyrene and 2-hydroxyphenanthrene, metabolites of polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons, were measured by liquid chromatography-mass spectrometry/mass spectrometry (LC-MS/MS). 8-Oxo-7,8-dihydro-2 deoxyguanosine correlated weakly with concentrations of 1-hydroxypyrene (r = 0.31, p = 0.042), but it did not correlate with 2-hydroxyphenanthrene (r = ?0.074; p = 0.64). Average urinary 8-oxo-7,8-dihydro-2 deoxyguanosine concentrations increased from the day before frying (16.3 ± 4.2 nmol/L) to the third day of frying (26.2 ± 10.2 nmol/L), although not statistically significantly. Our pilot study shows that frying of bacon may result in increased oxidative stress which further emphasises the possible carcinogenic potential of cooking fumes.     

Der Einsatz von Pflanzentests bei der Sedimentbewertung

Up to now, sediment studies have mainly used standardized aquatic bioassays with organisms of the three trophic levels. Among these, algae are the only representatives of the entire plant kingdom. Bioassays with higher plants have hardly been used for the assessment of sediments. The aim of the present study is to demonstrate that the use of higher plants in biotests for analyses of anthropogenically contaminated sediments yields valuable results, which may be included in a concept for the integrated assessment of waters. The contamination by environmental chemicals was determined in the River Elbe by means of samples taken at the Fahlberg-List industrial site at Magdeburg in combination with studies in a reference area on the Müritz-Elde Waterway (Eldenburger Kanal). Sediment extracts and pore waters were tested with the aquatic lemna test. For comparison, first sediment contact tests withLemna minor were tried out. The whole extract of the sediment from Fahlberg-List Magdeburg and one fraction F5 caused distinct damages of the plants. Obviously, the phytotoxic substances of the whole extract are preferentially concentrated in the highly polar fraction F5. A comparison with chemical analytical data proved that the whole fraction F0 and the fraction F5 were heavily contaminated with chemicals. Assays with pore water from this sediment and with the whole sediment also caused a strong inhibition of growth. These results confirm the high contamination of the sediment from Magdeburg. The tests with the reference sediment suggested only a moderate toxic contamination. The results of this study prove that the selected aquatic plant,Lemna minor, is basically able to indicate contamination. In the aquatic test of the sediment extracts, it showed weak, but very selective, responses to certain classes of contaminants. Fractionating of the sample and subsequent chemical analysis combined with toxicity tests allow to narrow down the groups of substances causing toxic effects. This toxicity was confirmed by analyses of the pore waters and whole sediment samples. Together with other toxicity tests (e.g. standardized bioassays) and combined with biological benthos examinations, an overall judgment can be given for the integrated assessment of waters.