This Article Full Text (PDF) References Alert me when this article is cited Alert me if a correction is posted Services Email this article to a friend Similar articles in this journal Similar articles in PubMed Alert me to new issues of the journal Add to Saved Citations Download to citation manager Request Permissions Request Reprints Add to My Marked Citations Citing Articles Citing Articles via HighWire Citing Articles via Google Scholar Citing Articles via Scopus Google Scholar Articles by Chapman, P M Search for Related Content PubMed PubMed Citation Articles by Chapman, P M Social Bookmarking                         What's this?

The implications of hormesis to ecotoxicology and ecological risk assessment

Changes required for the explicit recognition of hormesis are outlined for both ecotoxicology and ecological risk assessment (ERA). A major research need is the extension of hormesis beyond chemical stressors to abiotic (e.g., habitat) and biotic stressors (e.g., species introductions, organism interactions). An overreaching research need is to determine for all stressors with model organisms, populations, and communities whether hormesis has positive, neutral, or adverse effects. The latter are the least likely; however, neutral effects cannot be ruled out. Based on our present state of knowledge, hormesis is likely to have more of an impact on ecotoxicology than on ERA. In the case of the latter, it is most likely to make a difference only in a detailed-level ecological risk assessment (DLERA), the most complex form of ERA. Further, for hormesis to be accepted fully into ecotoxicology or ERA will require a paradigm shift. Three ongoing paradigm shifts to which hormesis could be linked are: recognition of the low utility of no-observed-effects concentrations (NOECs); recognition of the need for special treatment of essential element dose–concentration responses, which are similar to hormesis; and the replacement of environmental toxicology with ecological toxicology (ecotoxicology).

Human & Experimental Toxicology, Vol. 20, No. 10, 499-505 (2001)
DOI: 10.1191/096032701718120337


CiteULike    Complore    Connotea    Del.icio.us    Digg    Reddit    Technorati    Twitter    What's this?

This article has been cited by other articles:

				C A Menzie Hormesis in ecological risk assessment: a useful concept, a confusing term, and/or a distraction? Human and Experimental Toxicology, October 1, 2001; 20(10): 521 - 523. [PDF]

				G M Rand Commentary: hormesis and ecological risk assessment Human and Experimental Toxicology, October 1, 2001; 20(10): 525 - 526. [PDF]