International audience | Preserving biodiversity against the adverse effects of plant protection products (PPPs) is a major environmental and societal issue. However, despite intensive investigation into the ecotoxicological effects of PPPs, the knowledge produced remains fragmented given the sheer diversity of PPPs. This is due, at least in part, to a strong streetlight effect in the field of ecotoxicology. Indeed, while some PPPs have been investigated in numerous ecotoxicological studies, there are many for which the scientific literature still has little or no information on their ecotoxicological risks and effects. The PPPs under the streetlight include a large variety of legacy substances and a more limited number of more recent or currently-in-use substances, such as the herbicide glyphosate and the neonicotinoid insecticides. Furthermore, many of the most recent PPPs (including those used in biocontrol) and PPP transformation products (TPs) resulting from abiotic and/or biotic degradation are rarely addressed in the international literature in the field of ecotoxicology. Here, based on a recent collective scientific assessment of the effects of PPPs on biodiversity and ecosystem services in the French and European contexts, this article sets out to illustrate the limitations and biases caused by the streetlight effect and numbers of gray areas, and issue recommendations on how to overcome them.

International audience | There is growing scientific and societal consciousness that the environmental risks and impacts of plant protection products (PPPs) cannot be properly assessed without considering ecosystem services. However, the science on this issue remains incomplete and fragmented, as recently illustrated in a collective scientific assessment that pointed out the limited knowledge on the risks and impacts of PPPs on soil ecosystem services, which are clearly overlooked. Beside soil ecosystem services, certain key players involved in these services are largely overlooked in the scientific literature on the risks and impacts of PPPs, namely soil microbial photosynthetic communities. Here, we followed the principles of evidence-based logic chain approaches to show the importance of considering these microorganisms when studying the impacts of PPPs on certain services provided by soil ecosystems, with a focus on regulating and maintenance services that play a role in the regulation of baseline flows and extreme events. Terrestrial microalgae and cyanobacteria are ubiquitous photosynthetic microorganisms that, together with other soil micro- and macro-organisms, play key roles in the ecosystem functions that underpin these ecosystem services. There is an extensive literature on the ecotoxicological effects of PPPs on different organisms including soil microorganisms, but studies concerning soil microbial photosynthetic communities are very scarce. However, there is scientific evidence that herbicides can have both direct and indirect impacts on these microbial photosynthetic communities. Given that they play key functional roles, we argue that soil microbial photosynthetic communities warrant greater attention in efforts to assess the environmental risks and impacts of PPPs and, ultimately, help preserve or restore the regulating and maintenance services provided by soil ecosystems.

International audience | Biocontrol solutions (macroorganisms, microorganisms, natural substances, semiochemicals) are presented as potential alternatives to conventional plant protection products (PPPs) because they are supposed to have lower impacts on ecosystems and human health. However, to ensure the sustainability of biocontrol solutions, it is necessary to document the unintended effects of their use. Thus, the objectives of this work were to review (1) the available biocontrol solutions and their regulation, (2) the contamination of the environment (soil, water, air) by biocontrol solutions, (3) the fate of biocontrol solutions in the environment, (4) their ecotoxicological impacts on biodiversity, and (5) the impacts of biocontrol solutions compared to those of conventional PPPs. Very few studies concern the presence of biocontrol solutions in the environment, their fate, and their impacts on biodiversity. The most important number of results were found for the organisms that have been used the longest, and most often from the angle of their interactions with other biocontrol agents. However, the use of living organisms (micro and macroorganisms) in biocontrol brings a specific dimension compared to conventional PPPs because they can survive, multiply, move and colonize other environments. The questioning of regulation stems from this specific dimension of the use of living organisms. Concerning natural substances, the few existing results indicate that while most of them have low ecotoxicity, others have a toxicity equivalent to or greater than that of the conventional PPPs. There are almost no result regarding semiochemicals. Knowledge of the unintended effects of biocontrol solutions has proved to be very incomplete. Research remains necessary to ensure their sustainability.

Increased pharmaceutical usage has led to their widespread presence in aquatic environments, resulting in concerns regarding their potential environmental impacts. Antidepressants, particularly selective serotonin reuptake inhibitors (SSRIs) like citalopram, are frequently detected in European surface waters. Acute laboratory studies have demonstrated that citalopram can inhibit algal growth, immobilise Daphnia magna, and may result in foot detachment (i.e. the inability to adhere to a substrate) in snails. However, research on long-term citalopram exposure is scarce, and our understanding of its effects on aquatic community- and ecosystem-level is limited. Therefore, we investigated the impact of 13-week exposure to 0.01, 0.1, 1, 10 and 100 μg/L citalopram in outdoor freshwater mesocosms, focusing on water quality variables (i.e. pH, dissolved oxygen, electrical conductivity, temperature, algal chlorophyll-a, turbidity) and the structure of aquatic communities, with a special focus on mollusc foot detachment (Lymnaea stagnalis, Planorbis sp. and the total snail population). We found that environmentally relevant citalopram concentrations did not affect water quality variables, bacterial composition, zooplankton and macroinvertebrate communities. In contrast to expectations based on literature, snail foot detachment was not observed while the tested concentrations overlapped with the reported effect concentrations. This is in line with the absence of indirect adverse effects of foot detachment, such as population changes that could be the result of an increased vulnerability to predation or the inability to feed or reproduce. Reported sublethal effects in the literature, as found in laboratory studies, do not appear to lead to population- or community-level impacts in a semi-field experiment within the concentration range tested in this study. The experimental outcomes suggest that environmentally relevant concentrations of citalopram might not pose a threat to water quality variables, bacterial composition, zooplankton and macroinvertebrate communities, and snail foot detachment.

The co-occurrence of pesticides, pharmaceuticals, and MPs has resulted in combined toxicity and high risks to ecosystems and human health. However, understanding on the interactions among co-occurring pollutants in soils remains limited. This study focused on adsorption behaviour of a pesticide mixture (chlorpyrifos (CPF), pendimethalin (PDM) and pyraclostrobin (PCS)) in three soils (sandy soil (S1), loamy soil (S2), and silt soil (S3)) to examine the absorption behaviour of pesticides in the presence of the pharmaceutical compound albendazole (ALB) and starch-based microplastics (MPs). The results showed that ALB significantly decreased (p < 0.05) the adsorption of CPF, PDM, and PCS by 29 %–41 % in S1. The adsorption of CPF (+20 %) and PCS (+101 %) in S2 were significantly enhanced but PDM (−22 %) adsorption was inhibited by ALB. ALB also significantly (p < 0.05) promoted CPF and PCS adsorption in S3 by 39 % and 120 %, respectively, but did not change PDM adsorption. In soil-MP matrices, ALB significantly reduced the adsorption of CPF (−25 %), PDM (−26 %), and PCS (−21 %) in the S1-MP matrix, but no significant change in the S2 and S3-MP matrices was observed. Moreover, MPs significantly (p < 0.05) increased the adsorption of the pesticide mixture by 120–730 %, but reduced ALB adsorption by 11–24 % in soils. Further, regardless of ALB presence, correlation analysis suggested that Kd of pesticides showed positive correlations (p < 0.01) to soil organic matter, specific surface area, and clay content in soil matrices without MP-contamination, while no significant positive correlation between Kd of pesticides and soil properties was observed in soil-MPs matrices. This study indicates that co-occurring pollutants could alter the adsorption behaviour of pesticides in soil and thereby affect their bioavailability and mobility in the soil ecosystem. Further study is urgently needed to assess the ecotoxicity of co-occurring multi-contaminants, as well as their potential transport to other environmental compartments.

International audience | Agricultural practices are a major cause of the current loss of biodiversity. Among postwar agricultural intensification practices, the use of plant protection products (PPPs) might be one of the prominent drivers of the loss of wildlife diversity in agroecosystems. A collective scientific assessment was performed upon the request of the French Ministries responsible for the Environment, for Agriculture and for Research to review the impacts of PPPs on biodiversity and ecosystem services based on the scientific literature. While the effects of legacy banned PPPs on ecosystems and the underlying mechanisms are well documented, the impacts of current use pesticides (CUPs) on biodiversity have rarely been reviewed. Here, we provide an overview of the available knowledge related to the impacts of PPPs, including biopesticides, on terrestrial vertebrates (i.e. herptiles, birds including raptors, bats and small and large mammals). We focused essentially on CUPs and on endpoints at the subindividual, individual, population and community levels, which ultimately linked with effects on biodiversity. We address both direct toxic effects and indirect effects related to ecological processes and review the existing knowledge about wildlife exposure to PPPs. The effects of PPPs on ecological functions and ecosystem services are discussed, as are the aggravating or mitigating factors. Finally, a synthesis of knowns and unknowns is provided, and we identify priorities to fill gaps in knowledge and perspectives for research and wildlife conservation.

International audience | Plant protection products (PPPs) have historically been one of the classes of chemical compounds at the frontline of raising scientific and public awareness of the global nature of environmental pollution and the role of trophic interactions in shaping the impacts of chemicals on ecosystems. Despite increasingly strong regulatory measures since the 1970s designed to avoid unintentional effects of PPPs, their use is now recognised as a driver of biodiversity erosion. The French Ministries for the Environment, Agriculture and Research commissioned a collective scientific assessment to synthesise the current science and knowledge on the impacts of PPPs on biodiversity and ecosystem services. Here we report a literature review of the state of knowledge on the propagation of PPP residues and the effects of PPPs in food webs, including biopesticides, with a focus on current-use PPPs. Currently used PPPs may be stronger drivers of the current biodiversity loss than the banned compounds no longer in use, and there have been far fewer reviews on current-use PPPs than legacy PPPs. We first provide a detailed overview of the transfer and propagation of effects of PPPs through trophic interactions in both terrestrial and aquatic ecosystems. We then review cross-ecosystem trophic paths of PPP propagation, and provide insight on the role of trophic interactions in the impacts of PPPs on ecological functions. We conclude with a summary of the available knowledge and the perspectives for tackling the main gaps, and address areas that warrant further research and pathways to advancing environmental risk assessment.

International audience