Incorporating Suborganismal Processes into Dynamic Energy Budget Models for Ecological Risk Assessment

Cheryl A. Murphy, Roger M. Nisbet, Philipp Antczak, Natàlia Garcia-Reyero, Andre Gergs, Konstadia Lika, Teresa Mathews, Erik B. Muller, Diane Nacci, Angela Peace, Christopher H. Remien, Irvin R. Schultz, Louise M. Stevenson, Karen Watanabe-Sailor

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

7 Citations (Scopus)

Abstract

A working group at the National Institute for Mathematical and Biological Synthesis (NIMBioS) explored the feasibility of integrating 2 complementary approaches relevant to ecological risk assessment. Adverse outcome pathway (AOP) models provide “bottom-up” mechanisms to predict specific toxicological effects that could affect an individual's ability to grow, reproduce, and/or survive from a molecular initiating event. Dynamic energy budget (DEB) models offer a “top-down” approach that reverse engineers stressor effects on growth, reproduction, and/or survival into modular characterizations related to the acquisition and processing of energy resources. Thus, AOP models quantify linkages between measurable molecular, cellular, or organ-level events, but they do not offer an explicit route to integratively characterize stressor effects at higher levels of organization. While DEB models provide the inherent basis to link effects on individuals to those at the population and ecosystem levels, their use of abstract variables obscures mechanistic connections to suborganismal biology. To take advantage of both approaches, we developed a conceptual model to link DEB and AOP models by interpreting AOP key events as measures of damage-inducing processes affecting DEB variables and rates. We report on the type and structure of data that are generated for AOP models that may also be useful for DEB models. We also report on case studies under development that merge information collected for AOPs with DEB models and highlight some of the challenges. Finally, we discuss how the linkage of these 2 approaches can improve ecological risk assessment, with possibilities for progress in predicting population responses to toxicant exposures within realistic environments. Integr Environ Assess Manag 2018;14:615–624.

Original languageEnglish (US)
Pages (from-to)615-624
Number of pages10
JournalIntegrated Environmental Assessment and Management
Volume14
Issue number5
DOIs
StatePublished - Sep 1 2018
Externally publishedYes

Fingerprint

energy budget
risk assessment
budget
energy
key event
top-down approach
event
working group
energy resource
biology
engineer
damages
organization
damage
effect
ecosystem
ability
resources

Keywords

  • Adverse outcome pathways
  • Dynamic energy budgets
  • Ecological risk assessment
  • Mechanistic
  • Suborganismal processes

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Geography, Planning and Development
  • Environmental Science(all)

Cite this

Murphy, C. A., Nisbet, R. M., Antczak, P., Garcia-Reyero, N., Gergs, A., Lika, K., ... Watanabe-Sailor, K. (2018). Incorporating Suborganismal Processes into Dynamic Energy Budget Models for Ecological Risk Assessment. Integrated Environmental Assessment and Management, 14(5), 615-624. https://doi.org/10.1002/ieam.4063

Incorporating Suborganismal Processes into Dynamic Energy Budget Models for Ecological Risk Assessment. / Murphy, Cheryl A.; Nisbet, Roger M.; Antczak, Philipp; Garcia-Reyero, Natàlia; Gergs, Andre; Lika, Konstadia; Mathews, Teresa; Muller, Erik B.; Nacci, Diane; Peace, Angela; Remien, Christopher H.; Schultz, Irvin R.; Stevenson, Louise M.; Watanabe-Sailor, Karen.

In: Integrated Environmental Assessment and Management, Vol. 14, No. 5, 01.09.2018, p. 615-624.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

Murphy, CA, Nisbet, RM, Antczak, P, Garcia-Reyero, N, Gergs, A, Lika, K, Mathews, T, Muller, EB, Nacci, D, Peace, A, Remien, CH, Schultz, IR, Stevenson, LM & Watanabe-Sailor, K 2018, 'Incorporating Suborganismal Processes into Dynamic Energy Budget Models for Ecological Risk Assessment', Integrated Environmental Assessment and Management, vol. 14, no. 5, pp. 615-624. https://doi.org/10.1002/ieam.4063
Murphy, Cheryl A. ; Nisbet, Roger M. ; Antczak, Philipp ; Garcia-Reyero, Natàlia ; Gergs, Andre ; Lika, Konstadia ; Mathews, Teresa ; Muller, Erik B. ; Nacci, Diane ; Peace, Angela ; Remien, Christopher H. ; Schultz, Irvin R. ; Stevenson, Louise M. ; Watanabe-Sailor, Karen. / Incorporating Suborganismal Processes into Dynamic Energy Budget Models for Ecological Risk Assessment. In: Integrated Environmental Assessment and Management. 2018 ; Vol. 14, No. 5. pp. 615-624.
@article{c8dfa503a592426f88ab7c664db3a291,
title = "Incorporating Suborganismal Processes into Dynamic Energy Budget Models for Ecological Risk Assessment",
abstract = "A working group at the National Institute for Mathematical and Biological Synthesis (NIMBioS) explored the feasibility of integrating 2 complementary approaches relevant to ecological risk assessment. Adverse outcome pathway (AOP) models provide “bottom-up” mechanisms to predict specific toxicological effects that could affect an individual's ability to grow, reproduce, and/or survive from a molecular initiating event. Dynamic energy budget (DEB) models offer a “top-down” approach that reverse engineers stressor effects on growth, reproduction, and/or survival into modular characterizations related to the acquisition and processing of energy resources. Thus, AOP models quantify linkages between measurable molecular, cellular, or organ-level events, but they do not offer an explicit route to integratively characterize stressor effects at higher levels of organization. While DEB models provide the inherent basis to link effects on individuals to those at the population and ecosystem levels, their use of abstract variables obscures mechanistic connections to suborganismal biology. To take advantage of both approaches, we developed a conceptual model to link DEB and AOP models by interpreting AOP key events as measures of damage-inducing processes affecting DEB variables and rates. We report on the type and structure of data that are generated for AOP models that may also be useful for DEB models. We also report on case studies under development that merge information collected for AOPs with DEB models and highlight some of the challenges. Finally, we discuss how the linkage of these 2 approaches can improve ecological risk assessment, with possibilities for progress in predicting population responses to toxicant exposures within realistic environments. Integr Environ Assess Manag 2018;14:615–624.",
keywords = "Adverse outcome pathways, Dynamic energy budgets, Ecological risk assessment, Mechanistic, Suborganismal processes",
author = "Murphy, {Cheryl A.} and Nisbet, {Roger M.} and Philipp Antczak and Nat{\`a}lia Garcia-Reyero and Andre Gergs and Konstadia Lika and Teresa Mathews and Muller, {Erik B.} and Diane Nacci and Angela Peace and Remien, {Christopher H.} and Schultz, {Irvin R.} and Stevenson, {Louise M.} and Karen Watanabe-Sailor",
year = "2018",
month = "9",
day = "1",
doi = "10.1002/ieam.4063",
language = "English (US)",
volume = "14",
pages = "615--624",
journal = "Integrated Environmental Assessment and Management",
issn = "1551-3777",
publisher = "SETAC Press",
number = "5",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - Incorporating Suborganismal Processes into Dynamic Energy Budget Models for Ecological Risk Assessment

AU - Murphy, Cheryl A.

AU - Nisbet, Roger M.

AU - Antczak, Philipp

AU - Garcia-Reyero, Natàlia

AU - Gergs, Andre

AU - Lika, Konstadia

AU - Mathews, Teresa

AU - Muller, Erik B.

AU - Nacci, Diane

AU - Peace, Angela

AU - Remien, Christopher H.

AU - Schultz, Irvin R.

AU - Stevenson, Louise M.

AU - Watanabe-Sailor, Karen

PY - 2018/9/1

Y1 - 2018/9/1

N2 - A working group at the National Institute for Mathematical and Biological Synthesis (NIMBioS) explored the feasibility of integrating 2 complementary approaches relevant to ecological risk assessment. Adverse outcome pathway (AOP) models provide “bottom-up” mechanisms to predict specific toxicological effects that could affect an individual's ability to grow, reproduce, and/or survive from a molecular initiating event. Dynamic energy budget (DEB) models offer a “top-down” approach that reverse engineers stressor effects on growth, reproduction, and/or survival into modular characterizations related to the acquisition and processing of energy resources. Thus, AOP models quantify linkages between measurable molecular, cellular, or organ-level events, but they do not offer an explicit route to integratively characterize stressor effects at higher levels of organization. While DEB models provide the inherent basis to link effects on individuals to those at the population and ecosystem levels, their use of abstract variables obscures mechanistic connections to suborganismal biology. To take advantage of both approaches, we developed a conceptual model to link DEB and AOP models by interpreting AOP key events as measures of damage-inducing processes affecting DEB variables and rates. We report on the type and structure of data that are generated for AOP models that may also be useful for DEB models. We also report on case studies under development that merge information collected for AOPs with DEB models and highlight some of the challenges. Finally, we discuss how the linkage of these 2 approaches can improve ecological risk assessment, with possibilities for progress in predicting population responses to toxicant exposures within realistic environments. Integr Environ Assess Manag 2018;14:615–624.

AB - A working group at the National Institute for Mathematical and Biological Synthesis (NIMBioS) explored the feasibility of integrating 2 complementary approaches relevant to ecological risk assessment. Adverse outcome pathway (AOP) models provide “bottom-up” mechanisms to predict specific toxicological effects that could affect an individual's ability to grow, reproduce, and/or survive from a molecular initiating event. Dynamic energy budget (DEB) models offer a “top-down” approach that reverse engineers stressor effects on growth, reproduction, and/or survival into modular characterizations related to the acquisition and processing of energy resources. Thus, AOP models quantify linkages between measurable molecular, cellular, or organ-level events, but they do not offer an explicit route to integratively characterize stressor effects at higher levels of organization. While DEB models provide the inherent basis to link effects on individuals to those at the population and ecosystem levels, their use of abstract variables obscures mechanistic connections to suborganismal biology. To take advantage of both approaches, we developed a conceptual model to link DEB and AOP models by interpreting AOP key events as measures of damage-inducing processes affecting DEB variables and rates. We report on the type and structure of data that are generated for AOP models that may also be useful for DEB models. We also report on case studies under development that merge information collected for AOPs with DEB models and highlight some of the challenges. Finally, we discuss how the linkage of these 2 approaches can improve ecological risk assessment, with possibilities for progress in predicting population responses to toxicant exposures within realistic environments. Integr Environ Assess Manag 2018;14:615–624.

KW - Adverse outcome pathways

KW - Dynamic energy budgets

KW - Ecological risk assessment

KW - Mechanistic

KW - Suborganismal processes

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=85051760695&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=85051760695&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1002/ieam.4063

DO - 10.1002/ieam.4063

M3 - Article

VL - 14

SP - 615

EP - 624

JO - Integrated Environmental Assessment and Management

JF - Integrated Environmental Assessment and Management

SN - 1551-3777

IS - 5

ER -