Comment ▼ Ecotoxicology he rest is chemistry,” said C. D. Anderson, the discoverer of the positron, in 1932. Chemistry was rapidly evolving then; however, many aspects of chemical reactions were still obscure. “The biology messes up our nicely designed experiments” was often heard from environmental chemists during the 1970s and 1980s, when researchers stumbled over observations difficult to interpret. At that time, for many of us, biology represented a black box with some white spots, as did chemistry in the time of Anderson. A process-based approach to ecotoxicology was thus the only possibility. Because of the lack of alternatives, emissions and ambient concentrations were used as surrogates of exposure in ecotoxicology. Such an approach is inherently inaccurate because it does not consider factors like bioavailability, biomagnification, chemical reactions in the environment, chemical transport to the different microenvironments and parts of organisms, and multimedia exposures. The rapid increase in our knowledge and understanding of biological processes at the molecular level has made the role of the biota in the environment more quantifiable and predictable. Thanks to more sophisticated molecular biological tools, deeper insights into the effects of chemicals on organisms and the reactions of organisms to changes in the environment can now be obtained. This extended scientific basis has provided more accurate and sounder exposure assessments during the past decade. Articles in ES&T report on the advancement of our understanding of processes in the environment, particularly those processes in which natural and synthetic chemical compounds are involved. To include exposure assessment and effects on organisms is a logical expansion toward ecotoxicology. As a consequence, the journal editors are particularly interested in ecotoxicology papers that provide insight into the mechanisms and processes behind the effects of chemicals and other stressors on organisms in the environment. The research articles may focus on in vitro and in vivo effects; the individual, population, or ecosystem level; and the links between effects at the molecular and higher levels of biological organization. In addition, papers describing the development and application of new technologies for measuring the exposure or effects of chemical pollutants in the environment are invited. Studies that only describe the outcomes of standard laboratory or field tests are not appropriate for publication in ES&T. Over the past few years, ES&T has published papers dealing with ecotoxicological topics. Many of these publi-
“T
© 2003 American Chemical Society
cations had, and still have, a high impact in the field. Their strength was in combining environmental physics and chemistry with insights into the expression and regulatory processes of biological systems. These papers are cornerstones of our appreciation of environmental complexity and the functioning of ecosystems. ES&T is committed to attracting such integrative and environmentally relevant papers in ecotoxicology, just as it has in other areas of environmental science. To highlight a number of promising research tracks in ecotoxicology, a special issue is planned for 2004. In addition, we will publish several feature articles dealing with specific aspects of ecotoxicology. These articles should serve two goals—first to inform our readership about the advances in the field of ecotoxicology and second to indicate which areas would be appropriate for ES&T. The first of this line of articles appeared in the April issue (Environ. Sci. Technol. 2003, 37, 147A–151A). Here, Peter Calow and Valery E. Forbes pose the question, “What is ecotoxicology for?” The authors conclude that we fall short when it comes to extrapolating from a few individuals to groupings of many individuals and species. The final goal of understanding the relationship between community composition and ecosystem processes and services and their ecological and societal consequences is still far from being achieved. The conclusion of Calow and Forbes’s paper brings to mind P. W. Anderson’s “More is Different” article (Science 1972, 177, 393–396). Anderson states, “The ability to reduce everything to simple fundamental laws does not imply the ability to start from those laws and reconstruct the universe”—in other words, there is no linear relationship between the levels of atomic structure and molecular processes with ecological and societal consequences. Each of these levels, and those in between, requires a whole new conceptual structure. Ecotoxicology comprises a range of levels. In-depth knowledge of each level is needed. However, to fully understand a given system and its response to disturbances, the different levels combined with their intraspecies interactions need to be studied.
Alexander J. B. Zehnder, Senior Associate Editor EAWAG
JUNE 1, 2003 / ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCE & TECHNOLOGY ■ 199 A
