To investigate whether vegetative endpoints are protective of reproductive endpoints in terrestrial plant risk assessments (RAs) for authorization of plant protection products (PPPs), we assessed differences in sensitivity to herbicides between these parameters. Published literature and unpublished proprietary data generated for the registration of PPPs were used to compile a database. If reproductive endpoints were systematically more sensitive than the vegetative endpoints on which regulatory decisions are presently based, a concern could be raised about the protectiveness of the current RA process. Vegetative and reproductive endpoints were assessed considering further potentially relevant parameters. Reproductive endpoints were compared with vegetative endpoints of juvenile plants or with those of mature plants. Direct comparison by substance–species combination proved to be most adequate and was used to calculate quotients by effect level. In addition, we assessed the spread between different effect levels, estimating by which factor the conservatism would increase if effect rate (ER)50 endpoints were replaced by ER25 or ER10 endpoints with otherwise unchanged test parameters. Reproductive endpoints were found to be similarly sensitive as vegetative endpoints derived in nontarget terrestrial plant (NTTP) studies conducted following Organisation for Economic Co‐operation and Development (OECD) or US Office of Chemical Safety and Pollution Prevention (OCSPP) guidelines. A switch from vegetative to reproductive endpoints would therefore not significantly change the conservatism (less than a factor of 1.5), whereas the change from ER50 to ER10 would (by a factor of ~5 to 6). However, because ecotoxicological tests on terrestrial plants bear intrinsic high variability that prevents the reliable detection of effects at the 10% effect level, ER10 endpoints are not a reliable basis for RA. No particular family, genus, or species with clusters of distinctly insensitive vegetative and sensitive reproductive endpoints could be identified that would call for regular testing of reproductive endpoints. Also, from the data set available, no specific herbicidal modes of action could be singled out for acting particularly on reproductive endpoints. Integr Environ Assess Manag 2020;16:166–183. © 2019 SETAC

中文翻译：

---

从接触除草剂对植物性和生殖性陆地植物物种端点的比较评估和潜在的环境影响：综述。

在授权植物保护产品（PPPs）的陆地植物风险评估（RA）中，要调查营养终点是否对生殖终点具有保护作用，我们评估了这些参数之间对除草剂敏感性的差异。为注册PPP而生成的已出版文献和未出版专有数据被用于编译数据库。如果生殖终点比目前基于决策的营养终点在系统上更加敏感，则可能会引起对当前RA过程的保护性的担忧。对营养和生殖终点的评估考虑了其他潜在的相关参数。将生殖终点与未成熟植物或成熟植物的营养终点进行了比较。事实证明，通过物质-物种组合进行直接比较是最合适的，并用于按效应水平计算商。此外，我们评估了不同效应水平之间的差异，估计如果用其他参数不变的ER25或ER10端点代替效应率（ER）50端点，则保守性会增加哪个因素。在按照经济合作与发展组织（OECD）或美国化学安全与污染预防办公室（OCSPP）指南进行的非目标陆地植物（NTTP）研究中，发现生殖终点与营养终点具有相似的敏感性。因此，从营养终点转向生殖终点不会明显改变保守性（小于1.5的因数），而从ER50到ER10的变化（大约为5到6）。但是，由于对陆生植物的生态毒理学测试具有内在的高变异性，无法在10％的效应水平上可靠地检测效应，因此ER10终点不是RA的可靠依据。不能鉴定出具有明显不敏感的营养和敏感生殖终点的簇的特定家族，属或种，这需要定期检测生殖终点。同样，从现有的数据集来看，没有任何特定的除草作用模式可以特别地作用于生殖终点。ER10端点不是RA的可靠依据。不能鉴定出具有明显不敏感的营养和敏感生殖终点的簇的特定家族，属或种，这需要定期检测生殖终点。同样，从现有的数据集来看，没有任何特定的除草作用模式可以特别地作用于生殖终点。ER10端点不是RA的可靠依据。不能鉴定出具有明显不敏感的营养和敏感生殖终点的簇的特定家族，属或种，这需要定期检测生殖终点。同样，从现有的数据集来看，没有任何特定的除草作用模式可以特别地作用于生殖终点。Integr环境评估管理2020； 16：166-183。©2019 SETAC