Effet du lindane sur la croissance pondérale d'Asellus aquaticus L. (crustacé, isopode) en laboratoire et en mésocosme

La croissance pondérale estimée par le taux instantané de croissance (b) d'Asellus aquaticus L. a été évaluée dans des conditions de laboratoire et en milieu naturel dans des mésocosmes. L'influence d'une contamination par du lindane (insecticide organochloré) a été étudiée. Au laboratoire, la durée d'exposition au lindane a été de 20 jours, sa concentration de 4 µg.l-1 au départ était de l'ordre de 2 µg.l-1 à la fin de la période d'exposition : la température a été constante (15 °C) et la photopériode 12/12 heures. Dans les mésocosmes, l'expérimentation a duré du mois de juin au mois de février. Au départ, la concentration du lindane était de 4,5 µg.l-1, elle était voisine de zéro en février. On constate que le taux instantané de croissance (b) est plus élevé dans les mésocosmes qu'au laboratoire, en milieu contaminé qu'en milieu témoin. Dans les conditions de laboratoire il est environ 2,6 lois plus élevé pour des aselles contaminées (de poids compris entre 7 et 12 mg) que pour les aselles témoins. Cette augmentation est significative de l'action du lindane. Dans les mésocosmes, l'augmentation du taux instantané de croissance des aselles maintenues en milieu contaminé par rapport à celles provenant de milieu non contaminé n'est statistiquement significative qu'au septième mois après le début de la contamination par le lindane, elle ne l'est plus au huitième. Il semble que d'autres facteurs puissent expliquer cette augmentation, en particulier la qualité de l'alimentation est discutée. Aussi ne peut-on affirmer que le lindane dans les conditions naturelles est responsable d'une élévation du taux instantané de croissance de l'aselle.We estimated the ponderal growth (instantaneous growth rate) of a fresh-water invertebrate Asellus aquaticus L. (Crustacea, isopoda), bred under laboratory conditions and in experimental mesocosms. Contamination by the insecticide lindane (Pepro 99 % purity) was studied.To estimate the instantaneous growth rate we used the formula Wt = Wo exp Mt) in what Wo is the median weight class of Asellus at the beginning of experiment. Wt is the median weight after 20 days, dj is the days number multiplied by median temperature above 3 °C of considered period (3 °C is considered as minimal temperature below that no development is possible). Seven classe were constituted : class 1 (2 mg to 6.99 mg), 2 (7 to 11.99), 3 (12 to 16.99), 4 (17 to 21.99), 5 (22 to 26.99), 6 (27 to 31.99) and 7 (32 to 36.99). The instantaneous growth rate is calculated for this seven class weight and for each replicate, next median and standard error were calculated for each class. The number of replicate vary among class weight. It was : 22, 33, 29, 22, 16, 15 and 13 respectively for class 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6 and 7.Asellus were preleved in natural ponds, acclimated in laboratory conditions during a minimal period of 15 days before that they are used for experiment. (glass containers of 30 litres, filled with hall tap-water hall pond-water, feed with maple leaves).In laboratory conditions Asellus were kept in glass aquarium (15 x 20 x 18 cm) filled with 2 litres of water.Physico-chemical parameters of water were : pH = 8.2; total hardness =155 mg 1-1 measured as Ca C03; nitrites = 0.055 mg 1-1; nitrates = 3 mg 1-1; chloride = 73 mg l-1 as Na C1. Laboratory breeding conditions were a tempera-tare of 15 °C and a 12/12 hours photoperiod. Contamination tasted 20 days, lindane concentration was 4,5 µg. l-1 (near the median lethal concentration, 48 hours : 5.14 µg.1-1) at the beginning of the experiment and approximatively 2 µg.1-1 at the end. Twenty Asellus of the same weight class were deposed in each glass. The diet was constitued with maple leaves. For contamination study only Asellus of class 7 to 11.99 was study. Ten replicates were realised.The mesocosms were constituted by two rectangular basins 10 meters in length, 2.5 m in width and 50 to 60 cm in deep. To secure a good water-thightness, bottom and sides were covered with black polyane 150 µm in thick, sediment and sand were deposed on the bottom on 5 to 10 cm in thick. Next basins were gradually (July 1987 to January 1988) filled up with tapwater. Natural colonization by phytoplankton and insects were observed, whereas vegetable (Ranunculus aquatilis, Typha angustifolia, Scirpus palustris and Ceratophyllum submersum) and invertebrates (Asellus, Planaria and Leech) were introduced by us. One mesocosm was contaminated by surface spraying with lindane acetonic solution.Thirty of a same weight class were placed in 25 x 12 x 7 cm plastic box, with a total of 20 lateral openings on either side (1.2 cm in diameter) disposed in two rows and covered with fine mesh net (150 µm in opening). The center part of the lid was cut out and also covered with the same fine mesh net. A bed of maple leaves was placed on the bottom of the box. This containers were then distributed throughout bath the control and lindane contaminated basins. Between 15 to 20 days later, this containers were collected and brought back to the laboratory. All the specimens were weighted and once divided into size classes and returned to their experimental basins. The experiment started in June 1988 and lasted till February 1989. The lindane concentration was 4.5 µg.l-1 at the beginning and near zero at the end.For the control, in laboratory condition or in mesocosm, we observed that the instantaneous growth rate decrease when the median weight of the class increase. It vary to 0.1131 mg.mg- 1.dj-1 to 0.0183 mg.mg-1.dj-1 and to 0.2704 mg.mg-1.dj-1 to 0.0879 mg.mg-1.dj-1 respectively in laboratory condition and mesocosm. Significant correlation (level 0.001) was observed between the logarithm of instantaneous growth rate and logarithm of the weight. Slope of regression lines does not vary, only position differ. Growth rate was higher in the mesocosm than in laboratory. In laboratory conditions lindane contamination induce a variation of instantaneous growth rate. An significant increase of 2.6 was observed between contaminated and control for Asellus of weight class 7 to 11.99 mg. In the contaminated mesocosm, a correlation is noted between instantaneous growth rate and weight, it is significant only for 3 collections dates (December 1988, January 1989 and February 1989). No variation in the slope of linear regression is noted, position differ significatively (level 0.01) only in February. For this collection date instantaneous growth rate is higher in contaminated mesocosm than in control. It appear that other factors that lindane contamination may also explain this increase. Among these, food quality has been envisaged by different authors. In conclusion is noted that in laboratory condition lindane induce an increase of instantaneous growth rate, in mesocosm we can't affirm that lindane was the responsible for the increase of instantaneous growth rate. Other experiments are necessary to confirm this observation

Interspecific competition delays recovery of Daphnia spp. populations from pesticide stress

Xenobiotics alter the balance of competition between species and induce shifts in community composition. However, little is known about how these alterations affect the recovery of sensitive taxa. We exposed zooplankton communities to esfenvalerate (0.03, 0.3, and 3 μg/L) in outdoor microcosms and investigated the long-term effects on populations of Daphnia spp. To cover a broad and realistic range of environmental conditions, we established 96 microcosms with different treatments of shading and periodic harvesting. Populations of Daphnia spp. decreased in abundance for more than 8 weeks after contamination at 0.3 and 3 μg/L esfenvalerate. The period required for recovery at 0.3 and 3 μg/L was more than eight and three times longer, respectively, than the recovery period that was predicted on the basis of the life cycle of Daphnia spp. without considering the environmental context. We found that the recovery of sensitive Daphnia spp. populations depended on the initial pesticide survival and the related increase of less sensitive, competing taxa. We assert that this increase in the abundance of competing species, as well as sub-lethal effects of esfenvalerate, caused the unexpectedly prolonged effects of esfenvalerate on populations of Daphnia spp. We conclude that assessing biotic interactions is essential to understand and hence predict the effects and recovery from toxicant stress in communities

International Science Foresight Workshop: Global Challenges and Research Gaps. The Royaumont process.

How scientists might better contribute to SDGs in the land sector? At the invitation of INRAE, a group of high-level international experts delivers a comprehensive and systemic approach

Utilisation de mésocosmes comme outils d'aide à l'évaluation des risques écotoxicologiques

National audienceLa réglementation européenne concernant la mise sur le marché et/ou l'utilisation de substances chimiques nécessite la caractérisation de l'écotoxicité et du devenir de ces substances dans l'environnement (Directive 92/32/CEE) afin de réaliser, dans la mesure où la substance est classée dangereuse pour l'environnement, une évaluation des risques pour l'environnement liés à l'utilisation de ces produits (Directive 93/67/CEE). A l'heure actuelle, cette évaluation, tant du comportement que de l'écotoxicité est réalisée à partir des résultats d'essais normalisés de laboratoire (Directive 92/32/CEE). Les mésocosmes, en permettant de coupler les études de comportement et de caractérisation de l'ecotoxicité des substances chimiques représentent un niveau d'intégration supérieur à celui des essais de laboratoire et permettent donc une évaluation plus réaliste des risques résultant d'une éventuelle contamination des milieux aquatiques. Ces outils ont d'ailleurs fait l'objet de diverses études, en particulier aux Etats-Unis, notamment pour évaluer l'impact des pesticides sur les écosystèmes aquatiques (Touart, 1994; Urban 1994). L'objectif des études menées dans le cadre du Programme PNETOX est de recueillir les informations nécessaires permettant à terme de réaliser des simplifications des écosystèmes artificiels tant lotiques que lentiques de sorte que la variabilité soit réduite et que des mécanismes essentiels puissent être isolés, sans pour autant invalider les conclusions et les prédictions qui pourraient être tirées

Sustainable land-use transitions : moving beyond the 30x30 target and the land sparing/land sharing debates : policy brief

Policy Brief présenté pour discussion dans les COP Climat et Biodiversité, et Stockholm +50BACKGROUND The climate, biodiversity, water and health crises raise the crucial question of how we protect land while also producing food, fibre and biomass. Although this topic was addressed at the UN Food Systems Summit and at COP26 in 2021, the debate revolves around only two options presented as polar opposites: land sparing-high input, intensive farming that allows large portions of land to be "spared" for nature; and land sharing-biodiversity friendly low-input farming that shares land more equitably between nature and humans. In parallel, the Post-2020 Global Biodiversity Framework, to be discussed at the 15 th Conference of the Parties to the Convention on Biological Diversity (CBD), targets the protection of 30% of land and marine areas by 2030 (30 x 30 target). This target is fiercely debated because of: 1) its declarative nature, i.e., with no commitments on means and indicators; 2) its decoupling from the use of agricultural and forest areas, i.e., what is to be done with the remaining 70%? and 3) questions of State sovereignty, people' s land rights and environmental justice, i.e., in what geographic areas of the world and according to which forms of governance will the extension of protected areas be carried out? This policy brief reformulates the terms of the debate on land use within the framework of the Sustainable Development Goals. It shows that conservation policies are inseparable from the future of agriculture and food systems. It delivers four key messages

Sustainable land-use transitions : moving beyond the 30x30 target and the land sparing/land sharing debates : policy brief

Policy Brief présenté pour discussion dans les COP Climat et Biodiversité, et Stockholm +50BACKGROUND The climate, biodiversity, water and health crises raise the crucial question of how we protect land while also producing food, fibre and biomass. Although this topic was addressed at the UN Food Systems Summit and at COP26 in 2021, the debate revolves around only two options presented as polar opposites: land sparing-high input, intensive farming that allows large portions of land to be "spared" for nature; and land sharing-biodiversity friendly low-input farming that shares land more equitably between nature and humans. In parallel, the Post-2020 Global Biodiversity Framework, to be discussed at the 15 th Conference of the Parties to the Convention on Biological Diversity (CBD), targets the protection of 30% of land and marine areas by 2030 (30 x 30 target). This target is fiercely debated because of: 1) its declarative nature, i.e., with no commitments on means and indicators; 2) its decoupling from the use of agricultural and forest areas, i.e., what is to be done with the remaining 70%? and 3) questions of State sovereignty, people' s land rights and environmental justice, i.e., in what geographic areas of the world and according to which forms of governance will the extension of protected areas be carried out? This policy brief reformulates the terms of the debate on land use within the framework of the Sustainable Development Goals. It shows that conservation policies are inseparable from the future of agriculture and food systems. It delivers four key messages

Sustainable land-use transitions : moving beyond the 30x30 target and the land sparing/land sharing debates : policy brief

Policy Brief présenté pour discussion dans les COP Climat et Biodiversité, et Stockholm +50BACKGROUND The climate, biodiversity, water and health crises raise the crucial question of how we protect land while also producing food, fibre and biomass. Although this topic was addressed at the UN Food Systems Summit and at COP26 in 2021, the debate revolves around only two options presented as polar opposites: land sparing-high input, intensive farming that allows large portions of land to be "spared" for nature; and land sharing-biodiversity friendly low-input farming that shares land more equitably between nature and humans. In parallel, the Post-2020 Global Biodiversity Framework, to be discussed at the 15 th Conference of the Parties to the Convention on Biological Diversity (CBD), targets the protection of 30% of land and marine areas by 2030 (30 x 30 target). This target is fiercely debated because of: 1) its declarative nature, i.e., with no commitments on means and indicators; 2) its decoupling from the use of agricultural and forest areas, i.e., what is to be done with the remaining 70%? and 3) questions of State sovereignty, people' s land rights and environmental justice, i.e., in what geographic areas of the world and according to which forms of governance will the extension of protected areas be carried out? This policy brief reformulates the terms of the debate on land use within the framework of the Sustainable Development Goals. It shows that conservation policies are inseparable from the future of agriculture and food systems. It delivers four key messages