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

    4 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

    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

    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{7d139bcf2c824b3a8b2f00d2a2baa3d8,
    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 = "1551-3793",
    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 - 1551-3793

    IS - 5

    ER -