Potential intensity (PI) is a key indicator for tropical cyclone (TC) activity, yet it exhibits considerable variability across global climate model (GCM) simulations, even with identical sea surface temperatures (SSTs). We show that the spread in PI across GCMs is primarily driven by differences in outflow temperature, a consequence of different upper atmospheric temperatures. To explore the impacts of these biases on TC activity, we conduct several idealized experiments with altered temperature profiles. In these experiments, global TC frequency and accumulated cyclone energy change by similar to 35% and hurricane frequency by similar to 80%. There are smaller but still significant impacts on lifetime maximum intensity. These findings highlight an underappreciated role of upper atmospheric model biases in modulating TC activity in GCMs, how future changes in TC activity may be influenced by responses of upper atmospheric temperature to anthropogenic emissions, and that TCs are more directly influenced by PI than SST alone.
Searching and learning from aggregated public metabolomics data spanning thousands of studies remained largely inaccessible. Here we present StructureMASST, a web-based application enabling scalable, structure-centric searches across public metabolomics repositories using molecule names or chemical representations. It queries a precomputed knowledgebase of 2.19 billion spectral matches and 420 million metadata links, supports modification-tolerant and mass-shift searches, and maps chemical structures across taxonomy, biological context and environmental conditions to accelerate discovery.
The risk assessment of chemicals relies on multiple tools to quantify the ecological responses of ecosystems to existing chemical pollution. These tools are broadly categorized into three major groups: toxic pressure assessments, bioassays, and ecological monitoring. Here, we examine the strengths and limitations of these approaches, their current level of implementation for freshwater ecosystems across Europe, and their ability to evaluate the impacts of chemicals under field conditions. Additionally, we analyze the correspondence between results obtained from these tools when applied to a monitoring dataset from German streams. Our evaluation showed that no single tool can perfectly characterize the environmental impacts of chemical mixtures. However, each provides distinct lines of evidence, enabling the identification of chemicals driving ecological risks and the biological endpoints most likely to be affected, with ecological monitoring tools having the potential to show long-term ecosystem impairment. Finally, we propose recommendations to better understand the discrepancies between the outcomes of different methods and explore their potential integration into a unified water quality evaluation framework.
Abstract Background Prioritisation of chemical pollutants is a major challenge for environmental managers and decision-makers alike, which is essential to help focus the limited resources available for monitoring and mitigation actions on the most relevant chemicals. This study extends the original NORMAN prioritisation scheme beyond target chemicals, presenting the integration of semi-quantitative data from retrospective suspect screening and expansion of existing exposure and risk indicators. The scheme utilises data retrieved automatically from the NORMAN Database System (NDS), including candidate substances for prioritisation, target and suspect screening data, ecotoxicological effect data, physico-chemical data and other properties. Two complementary workflows using target and suspect screening monitoring data are applied to first group the substances into six action categories and then rank the substances using exposure, hazard and risk indicators. The results from the ‘target’ and ‘suspect screening’ workflows can then be combined as multiple lines of evidence to support decision-making on regulatory and research actions. Results As a proof-of-concept, the new scheme was applied to a combined dataset of target and suspect screening data. To this end, > 65,000 substances on the NDS, of which 2579 substances supported by target wastewater monitoring data, were retrospectively screened in 84 effluent wastewater samples, totalling > 11 million data points. The final prioritisation results identified 677 substances as high priority for further actions, 7455 as medium priority and 326 with potentially lower priority for actions. Among the remaining substances, ca. 37,000 substances should be considered of medium priority with uncertainty, while it was not possible to conclude for 19,000 substances due to insufficient information from target monitoring and uncertainty in the identification from suspect screening. A high degree of agreement was observed between the categories assigned via target analysis and suspect screening-based prioritisation. Suspect screening was a valuable complementary approach to target analysis, helping to prioritise thousands of substances that are insufficiently investigated in current monitoring programmes. Conclusions This updated prioritisation workflow responds to the increasing use of suspect screening techniques. It can be adapted to different environmental compartments and can support regulatory obligations, including the identification of specific pollutants in river basins and the marine environments, as well as the confirmation of environmental occurrence levels predicted by modelling tools. Graphical Abstract
Increasing production and use of chemicals and awareness of their impact on ecosystems and humans has led to large interest for broadening the knowledge on the chemical status of the environment and human health by suspect and non-target screening (NTS). To facilitate effective implementation of NTS in scientific, commercial and governmental laboratories, as well as acceptance by managers, regulators and risk assessors, more harmonisation in NTS is required. To address this, NORMAN Association members involved in NTS activities have prepared this guidance document, based on the current state of knowledge. The document is intended to provide guidance on performing high quality NTS studies and data interpretation while increasing awareness of the promise but also pitfalls and challenges associated with these techniques. Guidance is provided for all steps; from sampling and sample preparation to analysis by chromatography (liquid and gas—LC and GC) coupled via various ionisation techniques to high-resolution tandem mass spectrometry (HRMS/MS), through to data evaluation and reporting in the context of NTS. Although most experience within the NORMAN network still involves water analysis of polar compounds using LC–HRMS/MS, other matrices (sediment, soil, biota, dust, air) and instrumentation (GC, ion mobility) are covered, reflecting the rapid development and extension of the field. Due to the ongoing developments, the different questions addressed with NTS and manifold techniques in use, NORMAN members feel that no standard operation process can be provided at this stage. However, appropriate analytical methods, data processing techniques and databases commonly compiled in NTS workflows are introduced, their limitations are discussed and recommendations for different cases are provided. Proper quality assurance, quantification without reference standards and reporting results with clear confidence of identification assignment complete the guidance together with a glossary of definitions. The NORMAN community greatly supports the sharing of experiences and data via open science and hopes that this guideline supports this effort.
