Home About us Contact
|
Home About us Contact | ||
|
|
||
Avian Risk Assessment (avian + risk_assessment)
Selected AbstractsAvian Risk Assessment: Effects of Perching Height and DetectabilityETHOLOGY, Issue 4 2004Daniel T. Blumstein We studied two components of predator risk assessment in birds. While many species are limited to seeking safety under cover or under ground, some birds can fly away from their predators and escape to trees. If birds in fact ,feel' safer (e.g. perceive less risk) in trees, we would expect them to tolerate closer approach by a potential terrestrial predator. Another component of safety is at which point the animal detects an approaching threat, which we expected to increase with eye size, assuming eye size is a surrogate for visual acuity. We used the distance birds moved away from an approaching human [flight initiation distance (FID)] as a metric to determine whether birds associated a lower risk of predation by being in trees, and we used the distance at which birds first displayed alert behaviors from an approaching human (alert distance) to determine if birds with larger eyes had higher detection distances. Although some species were affected by tree height, we found no clear pattern that birds assessed themselves to be at a lower risk of predation when they were ,3 m above the ground compared with being <3 m above ground. In the 10 species for which height had any significant effect on FID, birds ,3 m off the ground had greater FIDs in six species, but the remaining three species had the opposite response. While we found a significant positive relationship between eye size and alert distance in 23 species, the relationship was not present in a phylogenetic analysis using independent contrasts, which suggests that the apparent relationship was influenced strongly by the association between the studied species. Together, these results suggest that birds do not obviously associate being in a tree with safety, and that variations in visual acuity, per se, cannot be used as a general indicator of differences in alert distances, as previously suggested in the literature. [source] Refined avian risk assessment for aldicarb in the United StatesINTEGRATED ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND MANAGEMENT, Issue 1 2010Dwayne RJ Moore Abstract Aldicarb was recently reviewed by the US Environmental Protection Agency (USEPA) for re-registration eligibility. In this paper, we describe a refined avian risk assessment for aldicarb that was conducted to build upon the screening-level methods used by USEPA. The goal of the refined ERA was to characterize and understand better the risks posed by aldicarb to birds in areas where the pesticide is applied. Aldicarb is a systemic insecticide sold in granular form under the trade name Temik®. It is applied directly to soil and is used to control mites, nematodes, and aphids on a variety of crops (e.g., cotton, potatoes, peanuts). Consumption of grit is necessary for proper digestion in many bird species, particularly for granivores and insectivores. Thus, aldicarb granules may be mistaken for grit by birds. The Granular Pesticide Avian Risk Assessment Model (GranPARAM) is described in a companion paper and was used to estimate the probability and magnitude of effects to flocks of birds that frequent aldicarb-treated fields. One hundred thirty-five exposure scenarios were modeled that together include a range of bird species, crops, application methods and rates, and regions in the United States. The results indicated that, even for the most sensitive bird species, the risks associated with the agricultural use of granular aldicarb are negligible to low. There are several reasons for the limited risk: 1) the Temik formulation includes a gypsum core and a graphite coating and is black in color, all of which have been shown to be unattractive to birds, and 2) the pesticide is applied subsurface and rapidly dissolves following contact with water. The fact that no bird kill incidents involving appropriate label uses of aldicarb have been conclusively documented in the United States over its 38 years of use supports the results of this refined risk assessment. Integr Environ Assess Manag 2010; 6:83,101. © 2009 SETAC [source] Estimating the probability of bird mortality from pesticide sprays on the basis of the field study recordENVIRONMENTAL TOXICOLOGY & CHEMISTRY, Issue 7 2002Pierre Mineau Abstract The outcome of avian field studies was examined to model the likelihood of mortality. The data were divided into clusters reflecting the type of pesticide application and bird guilds present on site. Logistic regression was used to model the probability of a bird kill. Four independent variables were tested for their explanatory power: a variable reflecting acute oral toxicity and application rate; a variable reflecting the relative oral to dermal toxicity of the pesticides; Henry's law constant; and a variable reflecting possible avoidance of contaminated food items, the hazard factor (HF). All variables except for HF significantly improved model prediction. The relative dermal to oral toxicity, especially, was shown to have a major influence on field outcome and clearly must be incorporated into future avian risk assessments. The probability of avian mortality could be calculated from a number of current pesticide applications and the conclusion was made that avian mortality occurs regularly and frequently in agricultural fields. [source] | ||||||||||