The avermectins, milbemycins and spinosyns are collectively referred to as macrocyclic lactones (MLs) which comprise several classes of chemicals derived from cultures of soil micro-organisms. These compounds are extensively and increasingly used in veterinary medicine and agriculture. Due to their potential effects on non-target organisms, large amounts of information on their impact in the environment has been compiled in recent years, mainly caused by legal requirements related to their marketing authorization or registration. The main objective of this paper is to critically review the present knowledge about the acute and chronic ecotoxicological effects of MLs on organisms, mainly invertebrates, in the terrestrial and aquatic environment. Detailed information is presented on the mode-of-action as well as the ecotoxicity of the most important compounds representing the three groups of MLs. This information, based on more than 360 references, is mainly provided in nine tables, presenting the effects of abamectin, ivermectin, eprinomectin, doramectin, emamectin, moxidectin, and spinosad on individual species of terrestrial and aquatic invertebrates as well as plants and algae. Since dung dwelling organisms are particularly important non-targets, as they are exposed via dung from treated animals over their whole life-cycle, the information on the effects of MLs on dung communities is compiled in an additional table. The results of this review clearly demonstrate that regarding environmental impacts many macrocyclic lactones are substances of high concern particularly with larval instars of invertebrates. Recent studies have also shown that susceptibility varies with life cycle stage and impacts can be mitigated by using MLs when these stages are not present. However information on the environmental impact of the MLs is scattered across a wide range of specialised scientific journals with research focusing mainly on ivermectin and to a lesser extent on abamectin doramectin and moxidectin. By comparison, information on compounds such as eprinomectin, emamectin and selamectin is still relatively scarce.

Biodiversity continues to decline in the face of increasing anthropogenic pressures such as habitat destruction, exploitation, pollution and introduction of alien species. Existing global databases of species’ threat status or population time series are dominated by charismatic species. The collation of datasets with broad taxonomic and biogeographic extents, and that support computation of a range of biodiversity indicators, is necessary to enable better understanding of historical declines and to project – and avert – future declines. We describe and assess a new database of more than 1.6 million samples from 78 countries representing over 28,000 species, collated from existing spatial comparisons of local‐scale biodiversity exposed to different intensities and types of anthropogenic pressures, from terrestrial sites around the world. The database contains measurements taken in 208 (of 814) ecoregions, 13 (of 14) biomes, 25 (of 35) biodiversity hotspots and 16 (of 17) megadiverse countries. The database contains more than 1% of the total number of all species described, and more than 1% of the described species within many taxonomic groups – including flowering plants, gymnosperms, birds, mammals, reptiles, amphibians, beetles, lepidopterans and hymenopterans. The dataset, which is still being added to, is therefore already considerably larger and more representative than those used by previous quantitative models of biodiversity trends and responses. The database is being assembled as part of thePREDICTSproject (Projecting Responses of Ecological Diversity In Changing Terrestrial Systems –https://www.nhm.ac.uk/our-science/our-work/biodiversity/predicts.html). We make site‐level summary data available alongside this article. The full database will be publicly available in 2015.

Species sensitivity distributions (SSD) and 5% hazardous concentrations (HC5) are distribution‐based approaches for assessing environmental risks of pollutants. These methods have potential for application in pesticide risk assessments, but their applicability for assessing pesticide risks to soil invertebrate communities has not been evaluated. Using data obtained in a systematic review, the present study investigates the relevance of SSD and HC5 for predicting pesticide risks to soil invertebrates. Altogether, 1,950 laboratory toxicity data were obtained, representing 250 pesticides and 67 invertebrate taxa. The majority (96%) of pesticides have toxicity data for fewer than five species. Based on a minimum of five species, the best available endpoint data (acute mortality median lethal concentration) enabled SSD and HC5 to be calculated for 11 pesticides (atrazine, carbendazim, chlorpyrifos, copper compounds, diazinon, dimethoate, γ‐hexachlorocyclohexane, lambda‐cyhalothrin, parathion, pentachlorophenol, and propoxur). Arthropods and oligochaetes exhibit pronounced differences in their sensitivity to most of these pesticides. The standard test earthworm species, Eisenia fetida sensu lato, is the species that is least sensitive to insecticides based on acute mortality, whereas the standard Collembola test species, Folsomia candida, is among the most sensitive species for a broad range of toxic modes of action (biocide, fungicide, herbicide, and insecticide). These findings suggest that soil arthropods should be tested routinely in regulatory risk assessments. In addition, the data indicate that the uncertainty factor for earthworm acute mortality tests (i.e., 10) does not fully cover the range of earthworm species sensitivities and that acute mortality tests would not provide the most sensitive risk estimate for earthworms in the majority (95%) of cases.