COMET(Contract Number:604974)

DELIVERABLE (D-N°1.5)
COMET PROJECT FINAL REPORT - Advancement inscience, integration and sustainability of European
Radioecology
Author(s): Hildegarde Vandenhove, Maarit Muikku, Jordi Vives i Batlle, Åste Søvik, Catherine
Lecomte-Pradines, Nele Horemans, Nick Beresford, Cath Barnett, Brit Salbu, Céline Duffa, Dave
Spurgeon, Håvard Thørring, Rafael García-Tenorio, Pere Masque, Boguslaw Michalik, Lindis
Skipperud, Martin Steiner, Clare Bradshaw, Liisa Sirkka, Almudena Real and Jacqueline GarnierLaplace
Editors: Hildegarde Vandenhove and Kristine Leysen
Reporting period: 01/06/2013 – 31/05/2017
Date of issue of this report: 12/07/2017
Start date of project:

01/06/2013

Duration: 48 Months

Project co-funded by the European Commission under the Seventh Euratom Framework Programme for
Nuclear Research &Training Activities
Dissemination Level
PU
PublicPU
RE
Restricted to a group specified by the partners of the [COMET] project
CO
Confidential, only for partners of the [COMET] project[COMET](D-N°:1.5) – COMET project final report
Dissemination level: PU
Date of issue of this report: 12/07/2017

2/63

Name
André Jouve, COMET, EC Project Officer

DISTRIBUTION LIST
Number of copies
1

Hildegarde Vandenhove, COMET Co-ordinator(WP-1), SCK•CEN
Contributors (not listed in other groups)
Jordi Vives i Batlle, SCK•CEN
Nele Horemans, SCK•CEN
Cath Barnett, CEH
Céline Duffa, IRSN
Dave Spurgeon, CEHHåvard Thørring, NMBU
Lindis Skipperud, NMBU
Liisa Sirkka, STUKJacqueline Garnier-Laplace, IRSN

1Electronically (pdf file)

1 per contributor

Electronically (pdf file)

1 per member
Electronically (pdf file)

COMET Executive Committee members:
WP-1: H. Vandenhove, SCK•CEN
WP-2: M. Muikku, STUK
WP-3: Å. Søvik, NRPA
WP-4: C. Lecomte, IRSN
WP-5: N. Beresford, NERCCOMET Management Committee:
H. Vandenhove, SCK•CEN
M. Muikku, STUK
Å. Søvik, NRPA
C. Lecomte-Pradines, IRSN
N. Beresford, NERC
A. Real, CIEMAT
M. Steiner, BfS
C. Bradshaw, SU
B. Salbu, NMBU
B. Michalik, GIG
V. Kashparov, UIAR
S. Gashack, Chernobyl Centre
K. Nanba, Fukushima University
P. Masqué, Universitat Autònoma deBarcelona

1 per member[COMET](D-N°:1.5) – COMET project final report
Dissemination level: PU
Date of issue of this report: 12/07/2017

Comments
ElectronicallyElectronically (pdf file)

3/63

K.O. Buesseler, Woods Hole Oceanographic
Institute
J. Nishikawa, Tokai University
M. Christl, ETH, Zurich
R. García-Tenorio, University of Seville
P. Roos, DTU
D. Child, ANSTOCOMET Steering Committee
COMET Wiki site
ALLIANCE

1 per member
1
1 per member[COMET](D-N°:1.5) – COMET project final report
Dissemination level: PU
Date of issue of this report: 12/07/2017

Electronically (pdf file)
Electronically (pdf file)
Electronically (pdf file)

4/63

4.1.

Final publishable summary report

4.1.1. Executive summary
The EC FP7 COMET (Coordination and iMplementation of a pan-European instrument for radioecology) was
funded to strengthen the pan-European research initiative on the impact of radiation on man and theenvironment by facilitating the integration of radioecology research and development.
WP2 - Integrating and sustaining radioecology COMET has made progress in promoting the European
Radioecology Alliance (ALLIANCE) 1, which is now established on a solid basis of 27 partners. Scientificcollaboration has been strengthened globally, e.g. with participation of scientists from Ukraine, Japan, USA
and Australia, as well as with interactions with international radiation protection organisations (e.g. IRPA, ICRP,
IAEA, IUR, OECD-NEA and UNSCEAR). COMET and the ALLIANCE have especially encouraged collaboration with
the European platforms on nuclear and radiological emergency response and recovery (NERIS 2), low doseradiation risk (MELODI 3) and dosimetry (EURADOS 4). This interaction was enforced further via the projects
OPERRA 5 and EJP-CONCERT 6.
The Strategic Research Agenda (SRA) initiated by the STAR 7 Network of Excellence and integrated in the
research strategy implemented by the COMET consortium, defines a long-term vision (20 years) of the needs
for, and implementation of, research in radioecology. The SRA is being complemented by topical roadmaps
that have been initiated by COMET with the help and endorsement of the ALLIANCE following theestablishment of criteria and processes for research prioritisation. The strategy underlying roadmap
development is driven by the need for improvement of mechanistic understanding across radioecology, suchthat we can provide fit-for-purpose human and environmental impact/risk assessments in support ofprotection of man and the environment in interaction with society. Five-year roadmaps are being developedin the domain of Marine Radioecology, NORM, Human Food Chain, Transfer processes of atmosphericradionuclides and Transgenerational Effects and Interspecies Sensitivity. This short-term roadmap will be thebasis of an implementation plan for the priority research activities that have been identified in the SRA.
State of the art research infrastructure and its optimised use are key for sustainable radioecology in Europe.
A prominent ongoing task is the creation of Radioecological Observatories. These sites are being establishedin the Chernobyl and Fukushima affected areas as well as in NORM legacy sites in Poland and Belgium.
Research programmes are being established at these sites. The Education and Training platform developed
under COMET will contribute to ensuring a sustainable workforce in radioecology/radiation protection.
COMETs contributions to and legacy for radioecology are further described below.
WP3 - Improved models for risk assessment and for emergency and post-accident situations Part of the
COMET research activities was centred on improving parametrisation of key processes controlling the transfer
1 ALLIANCE: European Radioecology Alliance, http://www.er-alliance.eu/

2 NERIS: European Platform on Preparedness for Nuclear and Radiological Emergency Response and Recovery, http://www.eu-

neris.net
3 MELODI: Multidisciplinary European Low Dose Initiative, http://www.melodi-online.eu
4 EURADOS: European Dosimetry Group, http://www.eurados.org
5 OPERRA: Open Project for the European Radiation Research Area, http://www.melodi-online.eu/operra.html
6 CONCERT: European Joint Programme for the Integration of Radiation Protection Research, http://www.concert-h2020.eu/
7 Network of Excellence STAR (Strategy for Allied Radioecology), http://www.star-radioecology.org[COMET](D-N°:1.5) – COMET project final report
Dissemination level: PU
Date of issue of this report: 12/07/2017

5/63

of radionuclides in the environment, with a specific focus on dynamic and mechanistic modelling approaches.
The research was initially conducted within topical working groups on marine, forest, human food chain,
NORM, wildlife transfer and particle behaviour. After an open research call initiated by COMET, these groups
were complemented by two projects, FRAME (The impact of recent releases from the Fukushima nucleaR
Accident on the Marine Environment) and RATE (RAdioactive particle Transformation procEsses). These new
projects conducted additional investigations on the mechanisms for radionuclide transfer in the marine
environment and on the behaviour of particle-bound radionuclides, respectively. COMETs activities have madesignificant contributions to improve radioecological modelling capabilities, thereby reducing uncertainties. For
example, kinetic transfer models were improved to better capture the dynamic changes of activity
concentration in both marine biota and sediments during post-accident situations, and improved trophic
transfer models were developed. Both experiments and fieldwork contributed towards improved model
parameterisation. For example, the scientific cruises conducted under the FRAME project provided data forboth marine model improvement and validation, while experimental work on human food chain modellingand particle behaviour provided data on dynamic parameters for their respective models. COMET covered
topics highly relevant for emergency and post-accident communities, such as updating decision support
systems with regional parameters. Furthermore, interdisciplinary research was conducted, such as a very
fruitful collaboration with oceanographers, and marine radioecologists.
WP4 - Epigenetic changes and their possible role in adaptation and trans-generational effects Our objective
was to increase understanding of the effects of chronic low-dose radiation and the possible contribution of
epigenetic mechanisms (epigenetic changes are stable heritable traits (or "phenotypes") that cannot be
explained by changes in DNA sequence) to long-term and multi-generational effects. COMET performed
controlled laboratory exposure experiments to investigate the role of epigenetic changes in the alteration ofphysiological functions of laboratory model organisms (zebrafish, earthworm and plant). In parallel fieldstudies were performed on a range of indigenous species (earthworm, plant and frog) within contaminatedareas (the Chernobyl exclusion zone and the Fukushima 100-km area) to investigate epigenetic changes inwildlife. DNA methylation (one of the major epigenetic processes) in addition to other molecular physiologicalmarkers was measured in order to investigate radiation effects. The results from field and laboratory studies
showed limited impact of long-term exposure to radiation on DNA methylation but results suggest a role ofmethylation in the multigenerational response to radiation exposure under both field and laboratory
conditions. These preliminary results should encourage further studies to better understand the contributionof DNA methylation and other epigenetic mechanisms in radiation response and to test their usefulness asbiomarkers of radiation exposure/effects. In the present research, the comparison of field versus laboratory
results showed that species sampled in the field were more sensitive (or responsive?) to radiation than thosestudied under laboratory controlled conditions. From the project results, there is no clear evidence of anincreased sensitivity to radiation exposure over generations. Absence of clear effects may also point toadaptation.
WP5 - Knowledge exchange An important aspect of COMET was exchanging knowledge and expertise. Key
objectives were to: (i) disseminate COMET activities (via website, social media, newsletters etc.), (ii) facilitate
discussion of topical radioecological issues between researchers and users and (iii) develop training tomaintain and enhance professional competence. The Radioecology Exchange website was created in 2011
under FP7 STAR and COMET has built extensively upon this work. The site has become the ‘hub’ for both
[COMET]
6/63(D-N°:1.5) – COMET project final report
Dissemination level: PU
Date of issue of this report: 12/07/2017

projects and is the ‘gateway’ for information related to European (and wider) radioecological research.
Recognising the value of bringing together the different communities involved in radiation protection, COMET
ran four focussed workshops to debate topical issues ensuring better focusing and exploitation of scientificresearch. COMET developed an E&T web platform and arranged a number of courses for students andprofessionals, drawing on relevant expertise from the partner organisations. More than 30 PhD students anda large number of MSc students have been associated with COMET-related research and are part of theRadioecology PhD network. Within the Radioecology Exchange, COMET has developed the E&T platform,
which contains information on courses within radioecology ranging from MSc and PhD courses to workshops
and professional development. COMET partners have continued to develop and participate in the European
Masters Programme in Radioecology held at NMBU, Norway. Two new intensive field courses were developed
and held during COMET. A training course in ‘Radiological Protection of the Environment’ was held and COMET
also co-organised a ‘young scientists session’ at Radiation Protection Week 2016 and held refresher courses
at international conferences.

4.1.2. Project context and objectives
COMET was a response by the European Commission and the European radioecology community to the needto ensure the sustainability of radioecologial research in Europe. Through COMET, the ALLIANCE developed
stronger ties with the wider European radiation protection community and the international radiologicalsciences and ecotoxicology communities. The trans-national structure developed will be capable of ensuring
appropriate governance of radioecology research to meet the challenges identified within the radioecology
strategic research agenda. s
Through COMET, the ALLIANCE has positioned itself as a strong component of the Horizon 2020 Radiation
Protection Federating Association. Our scientific strategy was to structure radioecological research in the mosteffective way, through the further development of the Radioecology SRA and to develop mechanisms of joint
programming and implementation. The research activities advanced knowledge and expertise in transfer,
exposure and effect assessment through innovative multidisciplinary research. We have strengthened
collaboration between the radioecology and (post)-emergency and low-dose research communities. The
development of future common research lines and a Joint Programme of Activities and Implementation Planbetween NERIS, MELODI and the ALLIANCE will increase efficiency, leading to the optimised use of researchfunds and infrastructure, and a more holistic approach to research. COMET activities have been effectively
disseminated and E&T packages have been developed to maintain and enhance professional competence.

WP2 – Joint programming and implementation – Expanding the ALLIANCE
The ALLIANCE and the STAR NoE have taken the first steps towards joint programming of research activities inradioecology and a number of ALLIANCE/STAR organisations have begun to harmonise their research throughcommon activities. They had also begun to explore infrastructure sharing and joint capacity development.
Moreover, in interaction with the ALLIANCE, STAR has developed an SRA which has been generally wellreceived and has been the subject of an open meeting in November 2012.

[COMET](D-N°:1.5) – COMET project final report
Dissemination level: PU
Date of issue of this report: 12/07/2017

7/63

The overall objective of this work package under COMET was to build upon the foundations laid by STAR and
the ALLIANCE to strengthen the pan-European research initiative on the impact of radiation on environment
and man. COMET took the following actions in order to achieve this objective:•••

Further developing the strategic research agenda (SRA) created under STAR/ALLIANCE in light ofadvances in knowledge, identification of new priority needs and to better align it with the SRAs ofother radiation protection platforms.
Developing a strategy for a roadmap and an associated implementation plan based on the SRA forRadioecology in association with the ALLIANCE
Developing innovative mechanisms for joint programming and implementation of radioecologicalresearch in close collaboration with the ALLIANCE and the platforms of allied fields such as emergency
management (NERIS) and low dose research (MELODI).

WP3 – Improving and validating radioecological models
Radioecology is a multidisciplinary science that studies the transfer of radionuclides in the biosphere,
atmosphere and geosphere-biosphere interaction zone to predict radiation exposure to man and theenvironment and its resulting potential impact on both human health and ecosystems. This expertise is needed
to understand and predict accidental and routine releases and existing exposure scenarios and to ensure thesafe operation or management of nuclear industry, the NORM industries, releases from hospitals and research
institutes, and legacy sites contaminated by past activities. The overall objectives of this work package wastherefore to undertake joint research activities to improve and validate radioecological models of interest toboth communities for better protection of humans and the environment in existing, planned and emergency
exposure situations.
The research in WP3 aimed to centre on improving parametrisation of key processes controlling the transferof radionuclides, with a specific focus on dynamic and mechanistic modelling approaches. It was guided by
Challenge one of the Strategic Research Agenda of radioecology: ”To Predict Human and Wildlife Exposure ina Robust Way by Quantifying Key Processes that Influence Radionuclide Transfers and Exposure”, with its four
associated research lines.

WP4 – Epigenetic changes and their possible role in adaptation and trans-generational effects
Epigenetic processes and transgenerational effects induced by ionising radiation have been put forward aspriority research areas in the SRAs of both the ALLIANCE and MELODI. Epigenetic changes are hereditary traits
which do not involve a change in the DNA sequence. Epigenetic states and certain environmental responses
in mammals and spermatophytes (seed plants) can persist in the next generation. Epigenetic processes are
induced by stressors (like radiation) and may lead to altered/less fit phenotypes or off-spring. Epigenetic
changes may, however, also lead to increased resistance to adverse conditions. With only few studies thatanalyse in detail the involvement of DNA methylation and other epigenetic mechanisms in the complex
process of radiation stress for man and wildlife, COMET intended to advance this innovative and scientificallychallenging area.
The objective was to increase our understanding of the effects of chronic low-dose radiation and the possible
contribution of epigenetic mechanisms to long-term and trans/multi-generational effects. Laboratory and field[COMET](D-N°:1.5) – COMET project final report
Dissemination level: PU
Date of issue of this report: 12/07/2017

8/63

experiments stiudying different test organisms were performed. The following key research hypotheses wereaddressed: H1: Exposure to gamma-irradiation results in a changed radiosensitivity (or resistance) within andover generations; H2: Epigenetic mechanisms underlie changes in radiosensitivity (or resistance) observed in
gamma-irradiated organisms; H3: Epigenetic changes observed in gamma irradiated organisms grown undercontrolled lab-conditions are similar to epigenetic changes observed in areas affected by a nuclear accident.

WP5 – Knowledge exchange and capacity building
Recognising the importance of knowledge exchange including the exploitation of results, spreading of
excellence and capacity building we wanted to develop strong mechanisms for knowledge exchange anddissemination to enhance and maintain European capacity and skills in radioecology.
The overarching objectives of this work package were to enhance and maintain European capacity and skills
in radioecology by establishing a dynamic interaction promoting effective collaboration between researchers,
tool developers, regulators and industry.

The specific objectives that were addressed by this work package were (i) to establish a website as a hub for
European radioecology; (ii) to facilitate discussion of topical radioecological issues between researchers andstakeholders; (3) to develop training packages to maintain and enhance professional competence.
This work should ensure a more effective ‘take-up’ of scientific advances by the user community and a stronger
focus of radioecological research to address the needs of users.

4.1.3. Main S&T results
WP2 - Joint programming and implementation – Expanding the ALLIANCE
The overall objective of our joint programming and implementation task within COMET was to build upon thefoundations laid by the FP7 STAR NoE (Strategy for Allied Radioecology) and the European Radioecological
Alliance (ALLIANCE) platform which were to strengthen the pan-European research initiative on the impact ofradiation on environment and man.

Evolving towards a pan-European network
The ALLIANCE platform now has a secure basis, having, in 2017, expanded from the initial eight founding
members to 27 members from 14 countries (Belgium, Croatia, Finland, France, Germany, Greece, Ireland,
Kazakhstan, Norway, Poland, Portugal, Spain, Sweden and United Kingdom). The ALLIANCE does not depend
upon external funding, but is an association with members committed to sustainable cooperation. However,the funding available under COMET has helped the ALLIANCE develop its structural basis. During COMET a
description of functioning and interaction mechanisms of the European Radioecology ALLIANCE has been
produced (COMET D2.7 Blueprint of the European Radioecology ALLIANCE functioning, Muikku et al., 2017).
The interaction mechanisms include both internal interaction between COMET and ALLIANCE partners, andinteraction with other research organisations, universities, national competent authorities, stakeholders,international interest organisations as well as other platforms, mainly in the field of radiation protection.
[COMET](D-N°:1.5) – COMET project final report
Dissemination level: PU
Date of issue of this report: 12/07/2017

9/63

A workshop with NERIS-ALLIANCE/STAR-MELODI and EC-OPERRA (Open Project for European Radiation
Research Area) to prioritise topics for organizing a Competitive Call was arranged in 2013. The Competitive
Call was launched together with OPERRA in December 2013. The COMET 2013 call was an essential part of thejoint programming. A primary motivation of the Competitive Call was to engage the wider scientificcommunities to address scientific challenges that had been jointly identified as important by both theradioecology community and the low-dose or the (post) emergency communities. COMET organised the Call,partially to attract new expertise to the consortium and at the same time, guarantee the integration of new
beneficiaries to the existing consortium. Two projects were integrated within COMET: FRAME (The impact ofrecent releases from the Fukushima nuclear accident on the marine environment, http://www.radioecologyexchange.org/content/comet-frame) and RATE (RAdioactive particle Transformation processes,
http://www.radioecology-exchange.org/content/comet-rate).
Integration of the European radiation protection community has been enhanced by and during COMET. The
four platforms: the ALLIANCE (European Radioecology Alliance), NERIS (European Platform on preparedness
for nuclear and radiological emergency response and recovery), MELODI (Multidisciplinary European Low Dose
Initiative) and EURADOS (the European dosimetry group) have strengthened their connections. They all signed
a Memorandum of understanding in December 2013.
COMET partners, as representatives of the ALLIANCE, have participated in several meetings arranged by other
European platforms and projects during 2013-2017. COMET also contributed to arrangements for Radiation
Protection Week, organised in 2016 in Oxford, UK, which brought together complementary strands ofradiation protection research, with the established European platforms MELODI, EURADOS, NERIS and the
ALLIANCE as co-organisers, along with other relevant related areas. he COMET final event arranged in April
2017 brought together not only the other radiation protection platforms but also other organisations in thefield (e.g. IUR, IAEA, ICRP, OECD-NEA). The final event centred around the discussion of position papers whichhighlight the major contributions of COMET to key areas of radioecology dealt with under COMET, theendeavour being to assure sustainability of radioecology in Europe and to capture views on the way forward.
In addition, COMET partners, together with representatives of other platforms, have worked for the
preparation a successful proposal and establishment of the new project EJP-CONCERT – European Joint
Programme for the Integration of the Radiation Protection Research, under H2020. This project started in June2015 and launched two calls for research proposals in 2016 and 2017. The work to promote radioecology willcontinue under the Euratom EJP-CONCERT.
The integration within radioecology has been enhanced by getting a wide variety of organisations tocollaborate in radioecological studies. Integration with other programmes and platforms involving researchand development in health and safety issues relating to ionising radiation in Europe has also been promoted
by COMET. In addition, COMET has also been successful in enhancing collaboration globally; in particular,scientific collaboration has been strengthened, e.g. with participation of scientists from the USA, Australia andJapan as well as with interactions with international radiation protection organisations (e.g. IRPA, ICRP, IAEA,
IUR, OECD-NEA and UNSCEAR).

[COMET](D-N°:1.5) – COMET project final report
Dissemination level: PU
Date of issue of this report: 12/07/2017

10/63

The Strategic Research Agenda (SRA) and roadmap
The ALLIANCE Strategic Research Agenda (SRA) initiated by the STAR NoE and integrated in the researchstrategy implemented by the COMET consortium, defines a long-term vision (20 years) of the needs for, andimplementation of, research in radioecology. The latest review of the SRA has been carried out in 2017 under
COMET (COMET Deliverable 2.4 Update of the SRA, Garnier-Laplace et al., 2017). An ALLIANCE workshop wasarranged in April 2017 following the COMET final event with the objectives of refining and coordinating the
ALLIANCE roadmap, and of identifying the new drivers of the next version of the SRA due under EJP-CONCERTin November 2019.
The first short-term (5-y) scientific roadmap for Radioecology, released as a COMET deliverable in September
2013 (COMET D2.1, Towards a First Phase Radioecology Alliance RTD Roadmap and Implementation Plan,
Vandenhove et al., 2013), was a first transitional implementation plan to structure and enhance interactions
between the ALLIANCE and the European research platforms, NERIS and MELODI. These two documents, the
SRA and the first transitional roadmap, have constituted two of the essential elements for preparing the EJP(European Joint Programming) scientific programme for radioecology in harmonisation with MELODI, NERIS
and EURADOS. The strategy underlying the roadmap development is driven by the need for improvement of
mechanistic understanding across radioecology such that we can provide fit-for-purpose human andenvironmental impact/risk assessment in support of protection of man and the environment in interaction
with society (connecting science, communication, economy) and for the three exposure situations defined by
ICRP (i.e., planned, existing and emergency). Some of the research areas for radioecology are also relevant for
post-emergency management and low-dose effect research and provide a powerful catalyst to further develop
collaboration between the four platforms of radiation protection, the ALLIANCE, NERIS, MELODI and
EURADOS.
The SRA and transitional roadmap were complemented by 5-year topical roadmaps each dealing with specificscientific areas and/or complex environmental issues defined by the COMET project in collaboration with the
ALLIANCE. Four topical roadmap working groups have been established under COMET, with participation of
the ALLIANCE members, to make progress in addressing the challenges and priorities put forward in theRadioecology SRA in a structured way:1) Marine radioecology2) Radionuclides in the human food chain3) Naturally Occurring Radioactive Materials (NORM) (coordinated by ALLIANCE members)
4) Transgenerational effects and species radiosensitivity.
Under the ALLIANCE an additional topical roadmap was launched on Atmospheric releases of radionuclides
and their involvement in environmental transfer processes. Through the roadmap working groups
mechanisms of joint programming and implementation following the establishment of criteria and processes
for prioritisation of programming research have been developed and a sustainable implementation processes
jointly with the ALLIANCE and in close interaction with the broader radiation protection arena represented by
OPERRA and CONCERT has been set up. As a consequence of having the COMET-initiated topical roadmaps[COMET](D-N°:1.5) – COMET project final report
Dissemination level: PU
Date of issue of this report: 12/07/2017

11/63

and roadmap working groups, the ALLIANCE now has the constituents to build a global roadmap up to Horizon
2020 which is to be released under CONCERT in November 2017.

Mechanisms of sustainable cooperation
Advancing infrastructure
A report containing information to researchers or institutions useful for facilitating research projects which
are intended to be carried out at the European Radioecology Observatories or at the large infrastructures
owned by the partners of COMET was produced (COMET D2.2 Description of the protocols for access andmechanisms for supporting the research in the Radioecological Observatories and other large infrastructures,Mora et. al. 2015). In the document, a brief description of the European Observatories for Radioecology is
included as well as a list with the contact persons able to give support to perform research activities at theObservatories. Moreover a list of unique and to some extent large infrastructures, owned by the COMET
partners and which could be of interest for use by COMET members and also by other researchers not in
COMET, is presented as well as a list of contact persons. Finally, some examples for the preparation of a
Memorandum of Understanding (MoU) between those institutions interested in the use of the observatories
or other large infrastructures are annexed within the document.
The original idea of the Radioecological Observatories was that they are contaminated field sites that provide
a focus for long term joint field investigations. The intention is to perform multidisciplinary joint research
addressing the research priorities identified by the Strategic Research Agenda. The pooled, consolidated effort
will maximise research progression, the sharing of data and resources as well as provide excellent training andeducation sites. The data collected from the Observatory sites will form a valuable international resource. Inview of this long-term perspective, the Radioecological Observatories are closely linked to the Strategic
Research Agenda, the long-term vision of radioecological research needed within the European Community.
Four contaminated sites have been selected under the STAR NoE and COMET project as the most promising
options for Radioecological Observatories:••••

the Chernobyl Exclusion Zone;
the aquatic environment of a previous coal mining and processing site in Poland (The Upper Silesian
Coal Basin);a forest in the Fukushima prefecture in Japan (Yamayika);a waste landfill "Kepkensberg" from the Belgian phosphate industry.

More information on the Observatory Sites can be found on the Radioecology Exchange website(http://www.radioecology-exchange.org/content/radioecological-observatories). Observatory Working
groups were formed under COMET to coordinate the RTD activities performed in the four Observatories
selected.
SCK•CEN proposed, in collaboration with the University of Seville, to further characterise and monitor theforested Kepkensberg site. A monitoring station will be installed within the CONCERT project TERRITORIES.
The station will be open to the other researchers of TERRITORIES and the ALLIANCE. A long-term sampling
program will be established to further characterise the site and to further study the behaviour of natural[COMET](D-N°:1.5) – COMET project final report
Dissemination level: PU
Date of issue of this report: 12/07/2017

12/63

occurring radionuclides in the environment. The results obtained (now and in the future) will be disseminatedin conferences and peer review papers.
Thematic working groups
The ALLIANCE has formed four working groups on (1) Strategic Research Agenda & Roadmap, (2)Infrastructures and Sustainability, (3) Education & Training and (4) Stakeholder Involvement that will develop
and promote the issues related to their topics in the future as seen necessary. COMET members have been
actively working in the groups. The ALLIANCE working groups are now giving input to the relevant work
packages of the EJP-CONCERT project.
National programmes
To get an overview of national programmes, funding schemes and requirements for radioecological researchin Europe and begin the integration of national radioecology programmes to create a common framework for
future research activities, a survey on nationally funded projects related to areas of research of OPERRA andCOMET, covering the time frame between 2007 – 2013, was conducted under COMET WP2, in cooperation
with OPERRA WP2. The survey was performed in two parts (COMET D2.3 Inventory on national research
projects related to radioecology, Sirkka et. al. 2017). First, during 2014-2015, the information from EU member
states was collected. Secondly, during 2016, the survey was extended to European countries other than EU
members, and expanded internationally. The response rate to the survey was very low, and the results of thesurvey do not reflect the status of the national funding in the contacted countries. Therefore, it must be
strongly emphasised that the report gives us some scattered information and examples from various
countries, inside and outside EU, but it is not a description of national programmes and funding schemes since
the scarce information we were able to collect clearly does not represent the reality. One conclusion that canbe drawn from the survey is that the cooperation with national funders is very challenging and there seems to
be lack of interest from their side to cooperate on international level, at least when measured by the responses
to the survey.
Education and training
Within the Radioecology Exchange website, COMET has further developed the Education and Training
platform that was initially set up by the STAR NoE (http://www.radioecology-exchange.org/content/trainingeducation). It is a focal point for students and professionals interested in radioecology, linking education indifferent nuclear disciplines together (COMET D2.6 Description of training and education coordinatedplatform, Skipperud et al., 2017). The platform gives an overview of education and training course modules
within radioecology/environmental radioactivity presently offered by the COMET consortium and will befollowed up by the ALLIANCE post-COMET. The ultimate aim of the Education and Training platform is toensure a sustainable workforce in radioecology.. This platform holds information on different courses withinradioecology ranging from MSc and PhD courses to workshops and professional development, it also provides
links to other Education and Training platforms, such as those within Radiochemistry, Radiobiology andRadiation Protection (DoReMi, CINCH II, etc.). This is an important outreach mechanism for the Radioecology
E&T platform, as, for example, many of the basic course modules within radioecology are also relevant forother nuclear science students, and vice versa. A possibility to submit a radioecology MSc application to
Erasmus Mundus was also explored under COMET. Nine of the COMET partners were interested in being part
[COMET](D-N°:1.5) – COMET project final report
Dissemination level: PU
Date of issue of this report: 12/07/2017

13/63

of an Erasmus Mundus joint MSc programme application. There were sufficient number of Higher Education
Institutions (5 universities from 4 countries) to fulfil the criteria for such an application though no application
has been submitted so far. In addition, COMET has been engaged in discussions with the ALLIANCE for more
long-term solutions to maintain the sustainability of radioecology Education and Training after the end of
COMET.
In conclusion, several mechanisms for sustainable collaboration have been established by COMET. The
activities of the ALLIANCE are organised within working groups, in which any interested member canparticipate. These working groups provide input to promote the ALLIANCE functioning, strengthen integrationand sustainability of the developments achieved during the STAR and COMET projects. The Education andTraining platform will ensure a sustainable workforce in radioecology.

WP3 - Improving / validating radioecological models and field studies
Introduction
The overall aim of work package 3 of COMET was to strengthen the pan-European links between theradioecology and the emergency and post-accident communities and to undertake joint research activities toimprove and validate radioecological models of interest to both communities. The research in WP3 wascentred on improving parametrisation of key processes controlling the transfer of radionuclides, with a specificfocus on dynamic and mechanistic modelling approaches. The research was initially conducted within topicalworking groups on marine, forest, human food chain, NORM, wildlife transfer modelling and particle
behaviour. After an open call, these groups were complemented by two projects, FRAME and RATE, in which
additional investigations on the mechanisms radionuclide transfer in the marine environment and on particle
behaviour, respectively, would further reduce the uncertainties associated with key transfer processes.

Marine modelling and field studies
The Fukushima nuclear accident in 2011 constitutes the most important accidental release of artificial
radionuclides to the marine environment. The major sources of contamination as exemplified in Figure 1 are:(a) direct atmospheric emissions deposited onto the ocean; (b) river discharge and surface water runoff and(c) submarine groundwater discharges. Significant concentrations of 137Cs have been measured in bottom
sediments of Fukushima, which serve as both a long-term repository and a potential source of contamination.

[COMET](D-N°:1.5) – COMET project final report
Dissemination level: PU
Date of issue of this report: 12/07/2017

14/63

Figure 1: Schematic of Fukushima Daiichi–derived sources of 137Cs to the environment. Atmospheric fallout (1) and directdischarge (2) are shown as total petabecquerels (PBq) released in the first month after the accident. Groundwater fluxes(3) and river runoff (4) are approximate ranges for the first year after the accident. Notice that (3) and (4) are expressedin terabecquerels (TBq). From Buesseler et al. (2017).

This unprecedented accident is one of the main reasons why a marine group emerged within the COMET. The
main lines of research from Challenge One of the ALLIANCE SRA directly relevant to this marine group were(a) to identify and mathematically represent key processes (b) acquire the data necessary for parameterisationof these processes and (c) develop transfer and exposure models. This provided the reference point for themarine radioecology activities within COMET. Such activities focussed on how models designed to predict thetransfer of radionuclides released by Fukushima into water to sedimentary deposits and non-human biota
could be adapted to highly dynamic post-accident situations, improving the existing models by making themmore dynamic and process-based, and trying to make more realistic estimates of transfer to biota with thesemodels in order to assess radiological consequences, using improved data for parameterisation, calibrationand validation of the models.
Improvements in marine radioecological models
Two main radioecological modelling topics were taken into account: Transfers and exchanges between waterand sediments, and modelling of transfer to biota. Some simple models could be included in decision support
systems for emergency situations. Others, more sophisticated, are available for use in a second step toevaluate and predict more accurately the post accidental situation. The main focus of the marine modelling
activities was on the modelling tools adapted to emergency and post-accidental issues. Existing timedependent models were used as a basis for the work with a view to improving some of them to achieve moresophisticated models.
One of the models improved in the course of COMET work was the IRSN model STERNE, which is designed to
be operated for a first estimation in case of emergency situation. STERNE calculates both radionuclides[COMET](D-N°:1.5) – COMET project final report
Dissemination level: PU
Date of issue of this report: 12/07/2017

15/63

transport using advection and diffusion equations offline from hydrodynamic calculation given from validated
models, and radioecological transfers to biota with a simple model based on dynamic transfer equation.
Needed radioecological parameters (concentration factors and single or multicomponent biological half-lives)
have been compiled for some important radionuclides and for generic marine species (macroalgae, fish,
molluscs, crustaceans). Dispersion and transfer calculations are carried out simultaneously on a 3D grid.
The second marine model further improved during the COMET work is the SCK•CEN D-DAT model, which
simulates the dynamics of radionuclide uptake and turnover in marine biota. The model calculates activity
concentration of 131I, 134Cs, 137Cs and 90Sr in seabed sediment, fish, crustaceans, molluscs and macroalgae fromsurrounding activity concentrations in seawater, with which to derive internal and external dose rates. The
main specific improvement carried out during COMET was the inclusion of sediment processes. The model is
now adapted to include particle scavenging, molecular diffusion, pore water mixing and bioturbation
represented by a simple set of differential equations that is coupled with the biological uptake/turnoverprocesses.
The third model that was improved during COMET was the NRPA box model, which uses an approach with
time-dependent transfer of radionuclides within the food chain that can be described by first-order differential
equations considering not only kinetic exchange between organisms and water but also transfer ofradionuclides between prey and predators. For this, the NRPA model uses ingestion rates and absorption
efficiencies governing the passage of radionuclide from one organism into another. The model is simplified byassuming that excretion/elimination rates are independent of the uptake route, assimilation efficiency is
independent of food type, and predators do not to assimilate the activity concentration in gut content of theirprey and zooplankton are a homogeneous group.
Lastly, in the course of COMET, IRSN, together with the University of Toulouse (France), has developed adynamic model of radiocaesium transfer to marine biota taking into account large scale organism
displacements in Fukushima area (Belharet et al., 2016). This model considers uptake of radionuclides fromwater and biological elimination by egestion and excretion, as well as exchanges between different organisms
by grazing or predation. Radiocaesium activity in water was deduced from dispersion modelling using a coastal
circulation model SYMPHONIE (Estournel et al., 2012), while biomasses of the different marine populations,grazing, excretion and egestion fluxes were obtained through application of a 3-dimensional ecosystem modelcomposed of a bio-geochemical model NEMURO (Kishi et al., 2007) coupled with the bioenergetic model
NEMURO.FISH (Ito et al., 2004; Megrey et al., 2007).
Application of models
The project FRAME led to further practical application of the D-DAT model. It was observed that, in recent
years, a generally exponential decrease of activity concentrations with time occurs for all the main categories
of marine biota as would be expected as contamination clears the local environment by dispersion anddilution. The fact that activity concentrations for marine biota decrease much more slowly over time than
expected given their biological half-lives (TB1/2’s) hints at hold-up processes by bottom sediments, which havebecome increasingly a source for radionuclides in the local environment, due to their ability to retain
radiocaesium.
[COMET](D-N°:1.5) – COMET project final report
Dissemination level: PU
Date of issue of this report: 12/07/2017

16/63

From our own analysis of the published data and the FRAME measurements, different rates of decrease areseen in different organism groups, being slowest (with consequently a higher residence half-time) for benthic
biota and fastest for pelagic biota. This is compatible with differences in TB1/2’s for these radionuclides. What
the model was not able to reproduce was the a high variability of the monitoring data, because this is due tosampling, measurement or geographical variability but may be partially explained also (particularly in the latteryears) by the presence of the previously mentioned secondary emissions (such as groundwater releases).
The complex time evolution of 137Cs in marine biota from 2011 to present is now modelled by D-DAT as amulticomponent exponential decrease influenced by a bi-phasic depuration mechanism and the radionuclide
hold-up processes by seabed sediments. This is better reproduced when using two TB½s of the order of 4 and54 days, helping to explain mathematically why biota activity levels remain somewhat elevated, as well as thelong ecological half-lives observed in the field. The model has also been optimised with a flushing time of 2.2± 0.3 day for the clearance of water from the Fukushima coastal compartment, and by implementing local
parameters derived from the marine cruises. For example, the sub-model for 137Cs is now updated with a lessconservative, more site-specific value of 0.061 m3 kg-1, derived from pelagic fish data from the FRAME 2014
cruise. This resulted in a substantial improvement in prediction when comparing the model-predicted activity
concentrations in benthic fish with the measurements carried out by the Japanese authorities (MAFF).
Using the ecosystem modelling implemented in the IRSN/Toulouse model, transfer to zooplankton wascalibrated with in situ data. This model showed that maximum values of the 137Cs concentrations in
phytoplankton and zooplankton populations were mainly reached 1 month after the accident and were about
2 to 4 orders of magnitude higher than those observed before the accident depending on the distance from
FNPP.
Field studies
The impact of the releases of radioactive isotopes from the Fukushima Dai-ichi NPP to the ocean due to theaccident that occurred in March 2011 was investigated in the field by a consortium of international
laboratories under the project FRAME. The main results of the project have been published elsewhere(Castrillejo et al., 2016, Buesseler et al., 2017, Vives Batlle, 2016a-b, Aoyama et al., 2016a-c) and othermanuscripts submitted or in preparation), as well as in various conference proceedings (Buesseler, 2015c,
Masqué, 2015, Buesseler, 2015b, Buesseler, 2015a), to quote a few examples, so only the key aspects will bementioned here.
Important marine processes, such as the interaction of waterborne radionuclides with suspended particles
and sediments, were investigated, invoking the large spatial scales incorporating ocean circulation and landsea interactions. The main focus of the research was on 137Cs, 134Cs and 90Sr, but attention was paid also to 129I,
236
U and Pu-isotopes. Seawater samples, sediment cores and biota samples were taken in 2014 and 2015 on
board the Japanese Research Vessel Shinsei Maru, covering the most heavily affected area off the coast of
Fukushima. In addition to the artificial radionuclides, natural radium isotopes were analysed to quantify thefluxes of chemical elements associated with the offshore transport. Groundwater sampling along the shoreline
was conducted to determine the rate of submarine groundwater discharge (SGD) along the Fukushima
prefecture coastline to constrain the radiocaesium flux to the ocean.

[COMET](D-N°:1.5) – COMET project final report
Dissemination level: PU
Date of issue of this report: 12/07/2017

17/63

Surface ocean concentrations of 137Cs, 90Sr and 129I measured during the FRAME project were found to behigher near the FDNPS and they were above the global fallout levels, suggesting that there are still ongoingreleases from the Nuclear Power Plant site. Particularly interesting was the evolution of atomic and/or activity
ratios of 137Cs/90Sr, 129I/137Cs, 129I/90Sr with time, which helped to corroborate the ongoing releases ofradionuclides to the coast off Japan. Evidence was found of groundwater-transported Fukushimaradionuclides to the ocean both at the FDNPP site and further along the coasts, with a relatively constant 137Cs
fluxes of up to 1011 Bq d-1 in 2013-2014, down to several GBq per day in 2016.
In addition to radiocaesium, coastal inputs of 90Sr are observed, though they are significantly lower, in theorder of 2-8 GBq d-1 in 2013. We did not detect any signal of the presence of radionuclides such as 236U and Pu
isotopes. There is a reasonable inference that the main source of these ongoing releases is high contaminatedwater within the site. The fate of such radiocaesium and 90Sr released in the ocean is largely driven by theoceanic circulation. The uptake of radionuclides by biota was also investigated using samples from the 2014
research cruise to the Fukushima area (the data from the 2015 cruise is not yet available). The results follow
the expected decrease in concentrations with time since the accident. The radiological impact to fish was moresignificant for benthic species exposed to contaminated sediments, but after several years since the accident
all radiation doses to marine biota are below the ERICA no-effects dose screening level (10 µGy h-1). Potential
impact assessment to humans due to ingestion of fish shows that this should not be of a concern at present
time, since estimates of annual does would be a fraction of a mSv.
Perspectives for future work
The marine research performed under COMET has demonstrated that biokinetic models can better represent
radionuclide transfer to biota in non-equilibrium situations, bringing more realism to predictions, and it has
also enabled a better understand important marine processes, such as the interaction of Fukushimaradionuclides with seawater, particulate matter and biota. The main achievement during COMET has been to
directly address temporal dynamics in the assessment process. There has also been an attempt to involve
more biological factors in the modelling process, by including (for example) TB½’s, bioturbation, fish migration,
trophic transfer and uptake/elimination. We are readier now than we were before Fukushima in terms of
having models that can be applied to dynamic situations. In this sense, the objectives of the marine working
group were met. The work provided six publications, and was the opportunity to present marine activities andresults in three different international congress (ICOBTE, ICRER, and ASLO).
Investigations should continue in the future to further understand the complex mechanisms involved in thetransfer of the radioactivity still accumulated on land and groundwater and bottom sediments to the watercolumn and to marine organisms. Moreover, simple biokinetic models that consider accumulation anddepuration terms seem to be efficient as operational tools that are necessary to evaluate the first trend after
any accidental release, but a second generation of trophic transfer models that could better represent
variability of transfers depending on considered organisms are to be developed, especially for mid to longterm post-accidental contamination.
Another area that requires further effort is gathering new measurements, but also all data provided by
Japanese Authorities and Universities, in order to provide further to improve and calibrate modelling tools,
especially for radionuclides other than radiocaesium, because radionuclides’ behaviour in marine environment[COMET](D-N°:1.5) – COMET project final report
Dissemination level: PU
Date of issue of this report: 12/07/2017

18/63

in non-equilibrium situations is still poorly documented, such as the radionuclides’ reactivity and partition
between particulate and dissolved phase, transfers through the different trophic chains. On this depends the
future development of properly validated dispersion models relevant for normal or accidental discharges from
nuclear plants or ship wreckage, usable in decision support system or for different studies are needed,
especially for coastal areas. The scope of marine radioecology is very large, the behaviour and fate ofradionuclides is complicated to investigate due to the difficulty and the cost of getting measurement data. At
the same time, Marine radioecology is of cross-border importance and needs to have more fundedcollaborative projects with the wider research community dealing with how other contaminants disperse andtransfer to different parts of the environment.

Particle behaviour
A certain fraction of refractory radionuclides released to the environment from the nuclear weapon and fuelcycles are present as particles ranging from submicrons to fragments. Such particles can carry a substantial
amount of radioactivity (e.g., fission and activation products, transuranics) and associated metals, and can act
as point sources. Furthermore, U/Th particles (progenies, metals) are present at NORM sites.
Particle characteristics such as elemental/radionuclide composition as well as atom/isotope and element
ratios will depend on the emitting source, while particle size, crystalline structure and oxidation states areclosely linked to the release scenarios. Following deposition, ecosystem transfer of particle associatedradionuclides are therefore delayed compared to mobile radionuclide species (i.e., ecosystem transfer isdelayed until particle weathering and remobilisation of associated radionuclides occur). Thus, theenvironmental behavior and associated radioecological and radiological impact will be different from asituation when the radioactive contamination is present in ionic forms.
The RATE project has been devoted to improve the ability to quantify the processes of particle transformationin the environment and radionuclide leaching into various media, and to improve the assessment of ecosystemtransfer in environments affected by radioactive particle contamination. With this end, systematictransformation experiments exposing well characterized particle samples to environmentally relevant media
were performed, thus providing weathering rates to be linked to site-specific particle characteristics.
This quantification was performed by applying well defined abiotic and biotic leaching protocols to isolated
radioactive particles of different origin previously characterized by means of advanced techniques (e.g.,
autoradiography, ESEM-EDX, TOF-SIMS, synchrotron radiation based x-ray techniques), giving informationsuch as elemental composition and 3D distribution as well as crystallographic structure and oxidation stateslinked to particle weathering rates, extraction kinetics and potential bioavailability of remobilised particle
associated radionuclides. The leaching protocols were mostly applied to radioactive particles collected in a)areas affected by local fallout generated by weapon tests (Semipalatinsk in Kazakhstan, Maralinga inAustralia), b) areas contaminated by the accidental dispersion of the content of nuclear weapon (Palomaresin Spain, Thule in Greenland), and c) high background natural radioactivity areas (e.g., Norway). In all cases,
the relative (%) fractions of radionuclides leached from particles under different agent media (rainwater, HCl
0.16 M, rumen fluid) were quite low, indicating the refractory character of the particles and evidenced that in
the terrestrial areas affected by this contamination the Kd values are quite high and not comparable withdefault values generally considered in modelling exercises. The need to use on-site specific transfer factors
has been clearly demonstrated, and is essential if realistic conclusions from modelling exercises are to beobtained. In particular, the role of bacteria and enzymes forming part of rumen fluids in leaching processes[COMET]
19/63(D-N°:1.5) – COMET project final report
Dissemination level: PU
Date of issue of this report: 12/07/2017

has been demonstrated in the biotic experiments carried out with isolated radioactive particles andcontaminated soils from Palomares (Pu) and Fen (Th). The environmental behaviour of radioactive particles ,weathering rates and transformation processes have also been detailed investigated at sites within the
Chernobyl exclusion zone were the areas were mainly contaminated with spent fuel particles.
The results showed that in the exclusion zone the fraction (%) of 90Sr in extractable and mobile (i.e. , potentiallybiologically available) form has increased during the years and has presently reached its maximum value forthe post-accident period due to fuel particles dissolution in topsoil and in the radioactive waste trenches. It
has been demonstrated that the increasing uptake (dynamics) of 90Sr in vegetation is mainly determined by
the kinetics of fuel particle dissolution and by increased contribution of mobile 90Sr in the root-layer. A
monotonic increase of the concentration ratio (CR) of 90Sr for grain was observed in the Chernobyl
experimental area due to dissolution of the fuel particles and this coincides well with theoretical forecasts as
it can be observed in Figure 2.

Figure 2: Dynamic of 90Sr average Concentration Ratio (CR) for wheat (grain) cultivated in the exclusion zone (Otresko
et al., 2014).

Weathering and dissolution of fuel particles in the drained bottom sediments of the cooling pond of the ChNPP
were already investigated before the water level was decreased in 2015. Today, the water level has decreasedby 4 m and the drained very contaminated bottom sediments have become exposed to air as observed in the
Figure 3. Results show that the particle weathering rate was low when radionuclides were leaching fromsediments from the ChNPP cooling pond, as the process seems to be controlled by a prolonged slightly alkaline
pH in the sediment. The alkaline solution is caused by the presence of a large number of remnant shells ofzebra mussels in bottom sediments of the ChPNN cooling pond. Hence, a sharp increase of radionuclide
mobility should not be expected for the newly exposed sediments (Protsak and Odintsov, 2014).

[COMET](D-N°:1.5) – COMET project final report
Dissemination level: PU
Date of issue of this report: 12/07/2017

20/63

(A)

(B)

Figure 3: Water level of the ChNPP cooling pond in July (A) and in September (B) 2015.

It has been further demonstrated that radioactive particles in affecting ecosystems are of biological relevance.
Previous laboratory experiments have demonstrated that particles given with food to organisms (goat,nematodes, Blue mussel) can be retained. In the field particles can be inhaled or ingested, and can be retained
within organisms, acting as point sources. This fact has been evidenced in field studies performed withmammals in Taranaki (Australia), in muskoxen from Thule and in snails from Palomares (Spain). From thesestudies, it has been experimentally demonstrated that the transfer factors expressed as concentration ratios( CR) are affected, and default CR generally used in the radioecological models would be biased and would
contribute to significant uncertainties in impact assessments. This fact is very important because until now
bioavailability and uptake of particle-bound radionuclides compared with those existing as ions or simple
molecules have so far largely been ignored when impact and risk are assessed. As a result, there is a highdegree of scientific uncertainty about the long-term ecological consequences and risk to human health fromradioactive particles present in the environment. Advances to reduce the uncertainties associated withparticle contaminated sites have been reached, but it is essential to devote additional efforts to improvedosimetry models for proper evaluation of internal uneven distribution of dose and potential effects
associated to high-specific activity particles, as described in the COMET Position paper (Salbu et al., in press).

Figure 4: Identification by SEM of a radioactive Pu particle
embedded in the shellstructure of a living snail collected in

the contaminated terrestrial area of Palomares, Spain (R.
Garcia Tenorio, Univ. Seville).

Human food chain modelling
Intro – objectives/research question
The overall objective of this working group was to improve human food chain modelling in agricultural systems
through regional customisation of relevant model parameters, by using novel and advanced statisticalmethods, and through studies of long-term dynamics of soil-to-plant transfer of radionuclides for different
types of soil. Further description and main results for these three topics are given below.
[COMET](D-N°:1.5) – COMET project final report
Dissemination level: PU
Date of issue of this report: 12/07/2017

21/63

Regional customisation
In the “Terrestrial Food Chain and Dose Module” (FDMT) used in the two standard European Decision Support
Systems (DSS) for nuclear emergencies – ARGOS and JRODOS, many of the default parameters represent
German (or Central European) conditions. In the present study, we identified important parameters to update– focusing on Nordic and Mediterranean regions. The most relevant of these parameters could be divided into
four broad groups: (A) Contamination of plants due to direct deposition, (B) animal parameters, (C) humanconsumption habits, and (D) uptake from soil. Due to limited amount of time for this task, the actual updates
performed within COMET were restricted to: (1) parameters of relevance to growing season and harvest
periods of crops and grass, (2) animal feeding practice, and (3) human consumption of foodstuffs. Relevant
data for all three categories were provided for Finland, Norway (three climate zones) and Spain. After regionalcustomisation of models, we also used dry and wet deposition test scenarios to study the effect of parametervalue updates on e.g. time development for activity concentrations (134Cs, 137Cs, 90Sr, and 131I) in foodstuffs andintake doses for different age groups (from small children to adults). For these test we used both FDMT and
the SYMBIOSE simulation platform for performing radiological risk assessments used by IRSN. These casestudies demonstrated that regional customisation may have considerable impact on the model outputs.
Advanced statistics
Hierarchical Bayesian modelling (HBM) was applied to the weathering loss parameter – i.e. the timedependent reduction of radionuclide concentrations in plant foliage due to wind, rain, plant growth, etc.
Weathering loss is an important parameter in accidental situations following foliar interception ofradionuclides. The hierarchical framework incorporates a level of complexity, which enables studying thespecific variations across elements, their physical forms and the different considered plant species. The models
developed here demonstrated the influence of plant species and/or type of radionuclide on weathering,depending on type of data set (i.e. iodine field studies, other radionuclides – laboratory or field studies). Twocase studies on propagation of parametric uncertainty were also performed – one being the hypotheticaldeposition scenario from above (only the dry deposition case), and the other were aimed at leafy vegetables
growing in Fukushima prefecture (for the period April to September 2011). In both cases, interception and theweathering loss were among the most influential parameters on uncertainty. The SYMBIOSE modelling
platform was used in the case studies.
Long-term dynamics of soil-to-plant transfer of radionuclides for different types of soil
In addition to the main activities described above, representatives of our working group performed long-term
experimental studies in Ukraine relevant for Human food chain modelling. In one experiment, soil-to-planttransfer data for less studied 99Tc and trans-uranic elements (241Am, Pu-isotopes) were provided for several
agricultural plants (lettuce, radish, wheat, potatoes). For 99Tc, the importance of soil type and plant species onlong-term time-development in transfer was demonstrated. Another study focussed on peat-bog soils fromthe Rokytne district showing particularly high radiocaesium bioavailability – resulting e.g. in high levels in milk
from cows grazing in these areas. The present study compared root uptake of ‘freshly added’ and ‘old’
Chernobyl radiocaesium using spiny rush (Juncus acutus L.) as model plant. The experiment showed thatequilibrium between ‘freshly added’ and ‘old’ Chernobyl radiocaesium was reached after 1–2 years.

[COMET](D-N°:1.5) – COMET project final report
Dissemination level: PU
Date of issue of this report: 12/07/2017

22/63

Forest modelling
Introduction and objectives
In the COMET work on forest modelling, the main objective was to generate guidance on how to reduce theuncertainties in the modelling of short- and long-term impacts of radioactive contamination in forested areas
through the production of guidance for modelers on topics such as model sensitivity analysis andparameterisation of key processes controlling the transfer of radionuclides, as well as advice on model
parameter requirements. There was also some ongoing development of forest transfer models by theparticipants.
The key research questions requiring the production of appropriate guidance documentation for modelers,
assessors and end-users were: (a) what are key modelling processes that need to be included in a radionuclide
cycling forest model and (b) what are the variables/factors contributing most to the overall uncertainties inforest modelling. Due to the dynamic nature of these processes, emphasis was placed on time‐dependent soil‐
water-atmosphere interactions (as expressed, for example, in the evapotranspiration as an engine for water
fluxes in trees, interception of airborne radionuclides, parametric Kd (Kd= solid/liquid distribution coefficient)approaches to simplify the soil hydrology, etc.) and soil ‐ plant transfers, with forest vegetation selectedaccording to its importance for wildlife and human intakes. The work performed was in full agreement with
Research Lines 1 and 3 of the SRA for Radioecology, namely, (a) to identify and mathematically represent key
processes and (b) to develop transfer and exposure models that incorporate physical, chemical and biologicalinteractions, and enable predictions to be made spatially and temporally.
Improvement of dynamic models
As part of the COMET work on forest modelling, SCK•CEN continued the development of the SVAT prototype
model ECOFOR, which had its origins in the Belgian Research Policy Office project ECORISK but continued to
be developed as part of the activities of this IRA. This model is an example of research, process-based model.
It is currently applied to a Scots pine forest in Mol and focusses on uptake of radionuclides from soil in chronic
situations (such as remobilisation of radionuclides from ground disposal). ECOFOR was presented in theBarcelona ICRER conference in 2014. . In the meantime the model has been used in process sensitivity analysis
studies, and on determining data requirements for models of this type. As such, it provided input for the“parameter wish-list” document and the forest modelling guide.
There was also the development by IRSN of an approach to help decision-making by rapidly estimating theconsequences of an accidental atmospheric fallout, with a special emphasis on the short-term phase (i.e., firstfew months) and hence focusing on modelling the deposition and plant interception process. This too wasused as an example for the aforesaid guidance documentation.
Production of guidance
The COMET forest modelling team began with a successful workshop on the subject of experimentalists andmodelers working together as part of the COMET workshop “Models fit for purpose” in Seville 2016. The
results of this workshop are presented as part of the COMET Deliverable 5.5. The workshop dealt with therequirements for forest models (depending on research or assessment application), model-specific issues,model complexity and data requirement, sensitivity and uncertainty. Based on output from the “Fit for[COMET](D-N°:1.5) – COMET project final report
Dissemination level: PU
Date of issue of this report: 12/07/2017

23/63

purpose” workshop, the forest modelling group could make a practical wish-list of modelling requirements toexperimentalists for three types of forest models which culminated with the production of the Handbook titled‘Guidance on Forest models for contaminated sites’. The Handbook deals with specific aspects related to forestmodel development and application such as how to choose model complexity, how to identify model
requirements depending on the model’s purpose and how to deal practically with the challenges that
inevitably modelling of radionuclides in such an ecosystem poses. The Forest modelling group has submitted
a publication on the handbook to a peer reviewed scientific journal (Diener A. et al, submitted).
Future work
For the future, the most important challenge in European forest modelling post-COMET is to maintainexpertise and modelling capacity in future projects (e.g. CONCERT). On the modelling side, it is proposed touse conceptual models to help design well-targeted field experiments and better models (i.e. following aheuristic approach). As part of model development, more attention should be paid to find out how theinfluence of climate changes on radionuclide cycling in forests can be realistically modelled, as well as
modelling better the plant‐animal pathway, which is currently considered only for specific animals (e.g. wildboar). Kinetic food chain transfer models should be linked to the forest ecosystem (for example transfer togame animals e.g. red deer, moose) to cover this in more detail.
In the laboratory, efforts should be directed to establishing a series of tracer experiments with trees in as close
to field conditions as possible (e.g. mesocosm or lysimeter experiments), exposing them to various
radionuclides to find out how they process them, so as to provide validation points for models. Apart fromradiocaesium, other radionuclides for which there are poor data for forests and associated wild products
should be considered. In the field, effort should focus on developing 'instrumented forests' where water andelement flows in the trees are measured along with rainfall and the water fluxes in the soil. The SCK•CEN
instrumented forest project at a Belgian NORM site under development as part of the EC project ‘TERRITORIES’is an active example of this type of work.
General issues in forest modelling over the last few years have been model transferability, for example the reparameterisation of the available dynamic models for specific conditions (permafrost, subtropical, boreal,etc.). The development of regional parameter databases covering these environments is desirable. Finally, inthe future, it it is on one hand necessary to improve understanding of the processes involved in radionuclidetransfer in forests and hence to focus more on a process-based approach. On the other hand, it is fundamental
to be able to quantify the uncertainty inherent in the models by comparison with high-quality experimental
data.

NORM modelling
Natural background radiation is present in natural environment elsewhere since the formation of Earth and isusually not considered to be harmful for man and wildlife . However, apart from very high background areas,
selective accumulation of natural radionuclides caused by human activity often occurs, potentially leading toenhanced NORM concentrations and increased exposure. Broad industrial sectors deal with NORM (naturally
occurring radioactive materials) during extraction, treatment, production and many of them have not been
regulated in terms of radiation safety to date. The new graded system of authority control requires
assessment of exposure to humans by NORM and to demonstrate that environmental criteria for long-term[COMET](D-N°:1.5) – COMET project final report
Dissemination level: PU
Date of issue of this report: 12/07/2017

24/63

human health protection are met. This brings new challenges to industry operators as well as regulators, anda generic assessment method based on well-justified scientific guidance is needed.
Considering possible interactions of NORM affected industry with environment, the sine qua non conditions
were identified when NORM may influence the environment: the existence of large amounts of depositedwaste and release of contaminated water or air. It was therefore concluded that three scenarios cover the
majority of NORM situations: landfills and water and stack emissions discharges. These three basic exposure
scenarios were analysed in terms of secondary processes determined by the interaction of releases with thereceiving environment. To define appropriate parameters for safety assessment studies, an approach basedon features, events and processes (FEPs) was used. The key processes were then identified for each scenario,
and basic rules for structured assessment were developed independently of a NORM generating industry.
This approach has been applied to assess the impact of radium rich mine water released into a lake
environment. Existing circumstances at the Polish observatory site allowed identification of processes leading
to accumulation of radium in bottom sediments and observation of its further behaviour in a decades’-time
perspective. New data were collected during two-years monitoring campaign and compared with radioactivity
in water and sediments in 1999. The radium-barium co-precipitation process was identified as the main sourceof sediments contamination, however, the radium chemical form resulting from this process is insoluble andnot easy migrate to other environmental compartments, what was proved by low 226Ra and 210Pb transfer towater and biota measured. Comparison of distribution of 226Ra, 228Ra and 210Pb in sediment profiles between
both observation periods show lower than expected concentrations if only considering radioactive decay(Figure 5), which suggests that bio- or mechanical turbation (e.g. local flood) may be responsible for thesignificant 226Ra deficiency observed.

Figure 5. Comparison of radium distribution in bottom sediments, left -1999, right 2015/16.

[COMET](D-N°:1.5) – COMET project final report
Dissemination level: PU
Date of issue of this report: 12/07/2017

25/63

ICRP reference sites – developing alternative transfer models for wildlife
The transfer of radionuclides to wildlife is generally described using the whole-organism concentration ratio.
However, this parameter is highly variable and data are lacking for many organism-element combinations. In
COMET (in collaboration with funded national programmes), we have tested the hypothesis: radionuclides
activity concentrations in (terrestrial) wildlife can be predicted using a taxonomic model which takes out theeffect of site.
At sites in Norway, Spain, Ukraine and the United Kingdom species falling within the ICRP definition ofterrestrial Reference Animals and Plants (RAPs) were sampled and analysed to determine radionuclide andstable element concentrations. The resultant data Cs, Pb, Se, Sr and U have been used to establish Residual
Maximum Likelihood mixed-model (REML) models. REML models were fitted to data using the IBM SPSS
Statistic package with the fixed factor being the ICRP RAP classification (RAPs being defined at the taxonomic
level of family) and the random factor being site. The output of the REML model is the relative values fororganisms taking into account inter-site variation. This enables predictions to be made for organisms for which
no data are available from those for which data are available at a given site:

𝐴𝐴𝐴𝐴𝐴𝐴𝐴𝐴𝑣𝑣𝑣𝑣𝑣𝑣𝑣𝑣 𝑐𝑐𝑐𝑐𝑐𝑐𝑐𝑐𝑐𝑐𝑐𝑐𝑐𝑐𝑐𝑐𝑐𝑐𝑐𝑐𝑐𝑐𝑐𝑐𝑐𝑐 𝑖𝑖𝑖𝑖 𝑠𝑠𝑠𝑠𝑠𝑠𝑠𝑠𝑠𝑠𝑠𝑠𝑠𝑠 𝑥𝑥
𝑅𝑅𝑅𝑅𝑅𝑅𝑅𝑅 𝑎𝑎𝑎𝑎𝑎𝑎𝑎𝑎𝑎𝑎𝑎𝑎𝑎𝑎𝑎𝑎 𝑚𝑚𝑚𝑚𝑚𝑚𝑚𝑚 𝑓𝑓𝑓𝑓𝑓𝑓 𝑠𝑠𝑠𝑠𝑠𝑠𝑠𝑠𝑠𝑠𝑠𝑠𝑠𝑠 𝑥𝑥
× 𝑎𝑎𝑎𝑎𝑎𝑎𝑎𝑎𝑎𝑎𝑎𝑎𝑎𝑎𝑎𝑎 𝑐𝑐𝑐𝑐𝑐𝑐𝑐𝑐𝑐𝑐𝑐𝑐𝑐𝑐𝑐𝑐𝑐𝑐𝑐𝑐𝑐𝑐𝑐𝑐𝑐𝑐 𝑖𝑖𝑖𝑖 𝑠𝑠𝑠𝑠𝑠𝑠𝑠𝑠𝑠𝑠𝑠𝑠𝑠𝑠 𝑦𝑦=
𝑅𝑅𝑅𝑅𝑅𝑅𝑅𝑅 𝑎𝑎𝑎𝑎𝑎𝑎𝑎𝑎𝑎𝑎𝑎𝑎𝑎𝑎𝑎𝑎 𝑚𝑚𝑚𝑚𝑚𝑚𝑚𝑚 𝑓𝑓𝑓𝑓𝑓𝑓 𝑠𝑠𝑠𝑠𝑠𝑠𝑠𝑠𝑠𝑠𝑠𝑠𝑠𝑠 𝑦𝑦

For Cs and Sr there was a clear indication of site effect in the transfer to wildlife, however, this was not obvious
for the other three elements.
In parallel to this work a separate project (http://tree.ceh.ac.uk/) has begun to establish REML models based
upon data within the international wildlife transfer database (WTD) (Copplestone et al. 2013). To date thiswork has established REML models for terrestrial wildlife species at different taxonomic levels for Cs and at
the species level for Sr. The Cs model has been shown to give reasonable predictions; the Sr model has yet to
be tested. Comparing these models with those derived using the Reference Site data here shows does notshow good agreement. This lack of agreement is likely to be the result of the different species included in thetwo models, there is considerable variation between species and the species level model, best describes theWTD data.
The models derived for Se, Pb and U during COMET represent the first application of the REML approach tothese elements. The lack of site effect may reflect little variation between sites for these elements or perhaps
the lower number of data available.
The application of REML modelling as a method of predicting radionuclide transfer has now been suggested
for some time. The models derived here now need to be tested against data not used to establish them.
Though perhaps it would be best first to merge the Reference Site data with the WTD and rerun the models
using the larger database.

Conclusions for WP3
In conclusion, WP3 of COMET has contributed significantly to improve radioecological modelling capacities,
both through model development and through improvement of model parameters. Dynamic modelling
approaches have improved our ability to correctly predict ecosystem transfer and uptake of radionuclide[COMET]
26/63(D-N°:1.5) – COMET project final report
Dissemination level: PU
Date of issue of this report: 12/07/2017

species including particles, as well as to assess the potential exposure of and doses to humans and wildlife,
while fieldwork and experiments have provided data for model parameters, as well as for model validation.
Although the modelling work in COMET WP 3 has made us better equipped to assess the consequences of past
radioactive contamination of the environment, as well as to predict the impact of present and future releases,
all the topical working groups in WP 3 have identified important future challenges that need continued
attention from the radioecological community. The need for continued collaboration between modelers andexperimentalist to continue model improvement focusing on the overall uncertainties and to validate models
has been highlighted by several groups and will require sustained funding for European radioecologicalresearch.

WP4 - Contribution of epigenetic mechanisms in the effects induced by long-term
exposure to radionuclides in the laboratory and field
Evaluating the effects of low dose radiation on organisms is clearly a shared challenge in research on humanand non-human species. It is needed to understand the role of primary mechanisms at the cellular and subcellular level, when organisms are exposed to chronic low-dose radiation, to explain the potential
consequences on physiological functions and health at the individual and population. Within this generalframework, the objective of the Initial Research Activity (IRA) was to increase our understanding of the effects
of chronic low-dose radiation and the possible contribution of epigenetic mechanisms to long-term andtrans/multi-generational effects. Expected outcomes were to provide (i) data to reduce uncertainties inEnvironmental Risk Assessment (ERA), (ii) guidance on how to deal with low dose effects in wildlife protection
regulation, (iii) statement on the relevance and useful of epigenetic biomarkers to assess low dose effects ofradiation on the ecosystem.
Within the IRA, the following key research hypotheses were addressed: (H1): Exposure to gamma-irradiation
results in a changed radiosensitivity (or resistance) within and over generations, (H2): Epigenetic mechanisms
underlie changes in radiosensitivity (or resistance) observed in gamma-irradiated organisms, (H3): Epigenetic
changes observed in gamma irradiated organisms grown under controlled lab-conditions are similar toepigenetic changes observed in areas affected by a nuclear accident.
The approach adopted intended to ensure a common set of core knowledge, experimental data and skills. It
included the choice of common protocols and methods for data acquisition and interpretation for both labconducted experiments and field studies. The IRA was performed via (i) laboratory controlled exposure
experiments to test hypotheses on the role of epigenetic changes in the alteration of physiological functions;this research was conducted on laboratory models (zebrafish, earthworm and plant) with fully sequenced
genome and included species relevant to both ALLIANCE and MELODI; (ii) field studies on autochthonous
species (earthworm, plant and frog) in part similar to the laboratory test species to investigate epigenetic
changes in wildlife within contaminated areas (Chernobyl exclusion zone, Fukushima 100-km area).
As a common approach the total methylation levels (one of the major epigenetic processes) in addition toother markers were measured in order to investigate the effects. For field studies the concentrations ofdifferent radionuclides in organisms and environment sampled were additionally measured for an accuratequantification of individual organisms' absorbed dose of radiation. The main results and conclusion obtained
from the 4 years study are summarised below.
[COMET](D-N°:1.5) – COMET project final report
Dissemination level: PU
Date of issue of this report: 12/07/2017

27/63

Laboratory experiments
Methodology for DNA methylation measurement
DNA methylation using the MS-AFLP method was chosen as the common method to measure total DNA
methylation, since this technique can be applied on a wide range of species, including those without asequenced genome. The use of one common method also increased the possibility to compare results
between species and field sites. However, this method only allows the assessment of modifications inmethylation patterns at the cleavage sites of the two isoschizomers (5’-CCGG-3’). In addition, the MS-AFLP
technique could not be optimised for Arabidopsis thaliana plants, due to a lack of repeatability. Therefore,
other methods were used to complement the MS-AFLP analyses, i.e. UPLC-MS/MS reflecting effects at thewhole genome scale (results shown in paragraphs below). Finally, bisulfite sequencing analysis was used on
zebrafish and Arabidopsis thaliana samples to determine whether specific areas are impacted in the genome.
Relevance of DNA methylation in response to gamma radiation
Although no effects were observed at global DNA methylation in zebrafish, a changed methylation pattern
was observed after exposure to 10 mGy h-1, with an increased methylation at specific loci (Deliverable 4.3,
figure 8). This increased methylation pattern was still present in the third generation of embryos, derived froma radiation exposed ancestral line. On A. thaliana plants two types of experiments were performed. The firstone exposed plants for three consecutive generations to a 14-day exposure of 30-457 mGy h-1 and showed
increased global methylation levels in the first (S1) and second (S2) generation after exposure to gamma
radiation of 457 mGy h-1 (see Deliverable 4.3, figure 16 ; van de Walle, et al. in preparation). In a second
experiment plants were chronically exposed to a low dose rate of 1 mGy h-1 from the moment of imbibition
until seed setting. Although no significant differences in total methylation were found in these chronically
exposed plants, the gene expression of methyltransferases, the enzymes involved in the DNA methylation
process, showed a significant different pattern over time in the exposed compared to control plants indicating
possible de novo methylation induced by the gamma exposure (data not shown, Horemans et al., in
preparation). Bisulfite sequencing was performed on the A. thaliana plants exposed to different gamma levels
for three generations. At this moment the sequencing has been done and data have been processed
statistically but the biological interpretation of the data is still ongoing. Results of this experiment will be
submitted as a paper together with the methylation results (van de Walle et al. in preparation). For
earthworms, the effects on the global methylation status are limited (see Deliverable 4.3, figure 11). This may
be due to the short-term nature of exposure that was used for this species.
The obtained lab results can be taken as a first indication that radiation induces changes in the methylationlevel. However, there is no clear evidence of an increased sensitivity over generations as suggested in the firstand second hypotheses. This can be due to the use of non-clonal organisms which increase the potential for
selection of alleles that may lead to evolution of tolerance in later generations in a multigenerational exposure
experiment. Moreover, in Arabidopsis thaliana plants, an increased capacity for antioxidative enzymes wasobserved in the S1, possibly indicating an increased resistance of those plants to gamma radiation (van deWalle et al. 2016). Further research is needed however to demonstrate a possible correlation with changes in
DNA methylation. Additionally it would also be interesting to study other epigenetic processes such as histone
modification or micro RNA that could be involved in the change of sensitivity over generations.
[COMET](D-N°:1.5) – COMET project final report
Dissemination level: PU
Date of issue of this report: 12/07/2017

28/63

Field studies
Earthworms, tree frogs and Arabidopsis thaliana/Capsella bursa pastoris plants were sampled in the course of2015 and 2016 in both Chernobyl exclusion zone and Fukushima 100-km area. Sampling sites in both areas are
given in Figure 6. here below and in Figure 5 of the deliverable 4.3.
(A)

(B)

Figure 6: Overview of the different sampling spots in the Chernobyl exclusion zone (A) and the Fukushima 100-km area(B) for earthworms, tree frogs and Arabidopsis thaliana/Capsella bursa pastoris plants. In addition, Arabidopsis thaliana
were also sampled near Slavutych as external control site for Chernobyl exclusion zone field study (not visible in thismap).

Dosimetry in Chernobyl exclusion zone and Fukushima 100-km area
The ambient dose rates at the two sites (Chernobyl exclusion zone, Fukushima 100-km area) covered a similar
range: lowest dose rates were ca. 0.1 µGy h-1 and highest dose rates from 12 - 50 µGy h-1, with the exceptionof some earthworm sites at Fukushima 100-km area which were an order of magnitude higher. Total dose
rates (TDR) were calculated with the ERICA tool based on the concentrations of Cs-137, Sr-90, Am-241, Pu238/239/240 (Chernobyl exclusion zone) and Cs-134 and Cs-137 (Fukushima 100-km area) in soil andorganisms sampled (Figures 7 and 8).

[COMET](D-N°:1.5) – COMET project final report
Dissemination level: PU
Date of issue of this report: 12/07/2017

29/63

Figure 7: Relative contribution of radionuclides to the TDR for organisms sampled in Chernobyl exclusion zone.

Figure 8: Relative contribution of radionuclides to the TDR for organisms sampled in Fukushima 100-km area.

TDRs generally agreed quite well with the measured ambient dose rates, except for A. thaliana sampled in
Chernobyl exclusion zone, where the TDR was up to 20 times higher than the ambient dose rate (Figure 9).
This can be related back to the high concentration of Sr-90 in A. thaliana plants compared to the otherorganisms (Figure 7). The relative contribution from internal and external dose, however, varied between sites
and between species. For earthworms, external dose (from Cs-137) dominated at both sites, but wereapproximately a factor of two greater than the soil surface air measurements due to the organism living inrather than on the soil (data not shown). For tree frogs, internal dose (from Sr-90 and Am-241) and external
dose (from Cs-137) were similar at Chernobyl exclusion zone, but internal dose dominated at most sites inFukushima 100-km area (from Cs isotopes) (Data not shown). For the plants, >95% of the total dose was from[COMET](D-N°:1.5) – COMET project final report
Dissemination level: PU
Date of issue of this report: 12/07/2017

30/63

external sources in Fukushima 100-km area, while in Chernobyl exclusion zone, 80% of the dose was due tointernal contributions from Sr-90 (Figure 9).
(A)

(B)

Figure 9: Contribution of internal and external dose rate to the total dose rate for plants sampled in Chernobyl exclusionzone (A) and Fukushima 100-km area (B).

Results from the present study highlighted the importance of considering the internal exposure which was amajor source of radioactive exposure for frogs and A. thaliana plants. In addition, our robust dosimetry data
have allowed us to show that, within-site, levels of individual contamination are highly variable among male
Japanese tree frogs, stressing the fact that exposure of animals to a same ambient dose rate may correspondin fact to highly different TDRs, due both to the inclusion of the internal exposure pathway and the interindividual variability.
DNA methylation on field sampled organisms
Field sample analyses are ongoing and there is currently only a limited amount of methylation data available
for the field sampled organisms limiting the ability to draw robust conclusions. However, within our data aneffect of radiation on total methylation was observed in earthworms from Chernobyl exclusion zone (Figure10) and tree frogs in Fukushima 100-km area (See deliverable 4.3, figure 31). In contrast, no effect wasobserved in plants sampled in Chernobyl exclusion zone nor in Fukushima 100-km area (data not shown).
For plants, the age of the plant is an important factor influencing the DNA methylation level (Zhang et al. 2015,
Ogneva et al. 2016). In fact the first results comparing lab-grown young leaves of Arabidopsis (taken before
flowering) with those sampled in Chernobyl exclusion zone learned that the young leaves had on average 33%
more methylation than the field samples (results not shown, Horemans et al . in preparation). Additional
evidence for a decrease of methylation with development came from the plants chronically exposed in thelab. As age of plants cannot be estimated in field samples different ages conceivably can mask possible
radiation-induced effects which are expected to be only a few % maximally.
In both collected earthworm species (Aporrectodea caliginosa and Octolasion lacteum), site specific patternsof DNA methylation were found. The greatest change in methylation patterning was found for species thatcollected sites with intermediate exposure. For both species, the different in msAFLP patterns is significantly
separated between background and medium contaminated sites on PC1 (see Figures 10a and 10b). In
Octolasion lacteum, this difference is, however, lost between background site and high radiation sites (seeFigure 10b). While observed changes in DNA methylation may indicate a response to radionuclide exposure, a[COMET](D-N°:1.5) – COMET project final report
Dissemination level: PU
Date of issue of this report: 12/07/2017

31/63

caveat is that differences exist in prevailing ecosystem characteristics (e.g. wetland versus garden or forestsites). The potential confounding effects of habitat were clearly shown when the structure of the earthworm
microbiome at different sites was considered in additional conducted work to better understand the driversof methylation difference between samples. When community structure bacteria, fungi and eukaryotes in theearthworm gut microbiome, a clear segregation of sites between background, medium and high exposurelevels sites. These differences are indicative of dietary difference and potentially disease burden forearthworms at different sites. This emphasises how at complex and large-scale polluted sites such as
Chernobyl, cautious interpretation of field data is required before unequivocally ascribing observed effects tosolely exposure. Samples have also been prepared for RNAseq analysis to allow assessment of gene
expression, including for gene genes involved in DNA methylation (Robinson et al., in preparation).
(A)

(B)

Figure 10: Principal co-ordinate analysis of putative methylated alleles identified from a MS-AFLP analysis of DNA
samples for two earthworm species a) Aporrectodea caliginosa (left) and b) Octolasion lacteum (right) from sites within
the Chernobyl exclusion zone. For both species, the different in MS-AFLP patterns is significant separated between
background and sites with radiation levels of >3μGy h-1 on PC1.

Although no effect on methylation was observed in Capsella bursa pastoris plants sampled in Fukushima 100km area, a hypermethylation response was observed in Pinus sylvestris sampled in Chernobyl exclusion zone
(Volkova et al. submitted) which can point to adaptation processes in the exposed plant populations. Taken
together with the effect of dose gradient on methylation in Chernobyl exclusion zone-collected earthworms
and Fukushima 100-km area-collected tree frogs this can be an indication of a hypermethylation response toincreased dose rates in chronically exposed organisms. Anyway, it is important to not only look at the changes
in global DNA methylation, but to look at the effects that the changed methylation can cause. Confirmation ofsuch effects require the use of combined genome wide DNA methylation mapping and transcriptomic
approaches to establish the links between methylation change and expression phenotypes. To this end,
muscles (Tibialis posterior) samples from frogs originating from three different contaminated sites from the
CEZ were subjected to whole genome DNA extraction to prepare DNA sequencing library for the research of
SNPs and structural variant. In parallel whole genome bisulfite sequencing library were produced from thesame samples to search for potential changes in DNA methylation levels. The production of the raw sequencing
data is currently ongoing.

[COMET](D-N°:1.5) – COMET project final report
Dissemination level: PU
Date of issue of this report: 12/07/2017

32/63

From lab to field
Comparing the results from the lab and the field is not straightforward since the dose rates used in the lab
were higher than the dose rates observed in the field. In addition, exposure in the lab is always for a limited
time period (2 weeks for earthworm and Arabidopsis thaliana), while exposure in the field is a longterm/lifetime/multigenerational exposure. To overcome this difference we now have performed a chronic
exposure experiment at 1 mGy h-1 on Arabidopsis thaliana and are setting up experiments using plants comingfrom seeds collected in Chernobyl exclusion zone and Fukushima 100-km area. Finally, in field conditions otherconfounding factors can play a role.

Conclusions and perspectives
Within this part of the project both lab- and field experiments have been performed on different species by
the different partners in order to test the possible contribution to long-term and multi- or transgenerational
effects of mechanisms governing the activation or the repression of the epigenome. More specifically thechange of DNA methylation level after exposure to ionising radiation and its relevance as possible biomarkers
of ionising radiation were addressed.
Results observed on the global DNA methylation level in the different studied species; lab and field conditions
partially support a role of increased methylation in response to radiation which can be associated to anincrease of DNA stability. However, measurement of the global methylation alone is not sensitive enough toshow all biologically relevant differences induced by exposure to low dose rates; as a result differences might
be located in specific sequences of the genome. The use of additional methods like bisulfite sequencing can
improve the resolution to identify and assess specific genes/regulatory regions of interest that are
differentially methylated in response to exposure to ionising radiation.
Methylation might be a key to transferring the response to ionising radiation to the next generation as seenin A. thaliana plants and zebrafish possibly indicating a role of methylation changes in long term adaptation to
gamma radiation. Nevertheless, further experiments like detailed studies of which genome sequences are
specifically methylated under gamma radiation (which will come from the bisulfite sequencing data analysis
for example) will enable testing these hypotheses.
One of the conclusion from this research activities lies in the interpretation of changes in methylation patterns
from field collected samples in relation to the principal driver of effects. These challenges relate mainly to theuse of some autochtonous species, whose genome is scarcely sequenced, and to the influence of confounding
factors (difference in habitat, environmental quality, soil and water chemistry and food availability…) which
may mask the causal response due to ionising radiation exposure alone. Moreover the genetic diversity of
species between isolated local populations sampled on field may lead to markedly different epigenetic
responses to ionising radiation precluding the identification of a clear exposure response relationship. An
opinion on the possible role for epigenetic mechanisms in radiologically-induced responses is written out as astatement paper by the different partners and will be submitted as a full paper in the coming months(Horemans et al to be submitted).
An important step further will be to compare the sensitivity and reliance of DNA methylation as a biomarker
of ionising radiation exposure at environmentally relevant levels, with other epigenetic mechanisms such as[COMET](D-N°:1.5) – COMET project final report
Dissemination level: PU
Date of issue of this report: 12/07/2017

33/63

histone modifications and microRNAs as well as with responses at higher level biological complexity e.g.
changes in growth and reproduction. This integrated approach, as described in the Adverse Outcome Pathway
concept (Groh et al. 2015), would enhance the ecological relevance of molecular biomarkers. To be able tocontinue this very interesting line of research a project proposal named BIOMARKERS (coordinated by IRSN)
on which different partners of COMET-WP4 contribute is now submitted for the second CONCERT call.
Finally, a major strength of this study was the accurate dosimetry. Results obtained within the IRA showedthat the relative contribution from internal and external dose varied between sites and between species. Thus,
omitting the contribution of internal contamination to the exposure, as it is done when considering only theambient dose rate, can lead to underestimations of the actual level of radiation received by the organisms.

WP5 - Knowledge exchange and capacity building
Exchanging knowledge and expertise are an important aspect of our science. Therefore, key objectives of
COMET were to: (i) disseminate COMET activities (via website, social media, newsletters etc.) (ii) facilitate
discussion of topical radioecological issues between researchers and users; (iii) develop training packages tomaintain and enhance professional competence. These activities and outputs are reviewed below.

Dissemination
The Radioecology Exchange (www.radioecology-exchange.org) was created in 2011 under the EU FP7 STAR
Network of Excellence. Subsequently, COMET has built upon this work and the site has become the ‘hub’ forboth projects and European Radioecology. The Radioecology Exchange is the ‘gateway’ for information related
to European (and wider) radioecological research and will be maintained by the European Radioecology
ALLIANCE (www.er-alliance.org) when the COMET project ends. Resources hosted on the site include:
•
•

•
•
•

•
•

The ‘Training and Education Platform’ (see below).
The ‘Virtual Laboratory’ which contains radioecology facts, figures and data. It has links to radioecology
datasets (which are grouped into topic areas: Chernobyl, freshwater, foodstuffs and crops, Fukushima,marine, natural radioactivity, nuclear weapons fallout, reindeer and wildlife), analytical methods,
information about COMET project partner equipment, facilities and sample archives, an overview ofhuman and wildlife assessment tools and links to frequently asked questions on topics related toradioecology.
A ‘Latest News’ blog which is regularly updated with details of upcoming conferences, training courses,
jobs, studentships and COMET project outputs and publications etc..
Information about the SRA for radioecology and the five associated topical roadmaps.
Overview of the Radioecological Observatories which are radioactively contaminated field sites aimed
to provide a focus for joint, long-term, radioecological research. The four sites are: The Upper Silesian
Coal Basin (Poland), the Chernobyl Exclusion Zone (Ukraine), a Belgian NORM (Phosphate industry)site and the Fukushima Radioecological Observatory. The ALLIANCE contact for each site is provided.
Information and outputs from the STAR and COMET workshops (see below).
The ‘Information Exchange’ provides links to radioecology resources such as a catalogue of the outputs
from some EURATOM projects, radiological databases (e.g. Wildlife Transfer Database, FREDERICA and
STOREDB), newsletters from other projects and platforms, an overview of some Fukushima related[COMET](D-N°:1.5) – COMET project final report
Dissemination level: PU
Date of issue of this report: 12/07/2017

34/63

•

research and links to other project websites of interest to radioecology and appropriate internationalorganisations.
Links to social media sites: facebook https://www.facebook.com/radioecology/ and twitter
https://twitter.com/RadioXchange

COMET has produced five newsletters which were distributed via email and which are also available from theRadioecology Exchange website.

Workshops
Recognising the value of bringing together the different communities involved in radiation protection todebate topical issues ensuring better focusing and exploitation of scientific research COMET ran four focussed
workshops. Reports from all four workshops can be found on: http://www.radioecologyexchange.org/content/workshops-0. Key aspects of each workshop are outlined below.
Transgenerational and Epigenetic Mechanisms of Radiation Toxicity at Chronic Doses (Oxford, December 2014)
The workshop focused on the role of epigenetics in (eco)toxicology and radioecology. Discussions
encompassed long-term and transgenerational exposure, in laboratory studies of radiation and chemical
effects, molecular biology relating to epigenetic mechanisms, human and ecological risk assessment andradiological protection.
Discussion groups considered the role of epigenetics in radiobiology and ecotoxicology from both an ecologicaland evolutionary biology viewpoint and also with a focus on mechanistic issues and systems biology. Key issues
were outlined that unified studies across these areas, e.g., how the revolution in understanding of epigenetic
mechanisms has provided a wealth of new methods and tools. To date the major focus has been on DNA
methylation, however, the widespread availability of methods for analysis of miRNAs and histones suggeststhat these should also be a focus of future studies of epigenetic mechanisms relating to radionuclide and otherstressor exposures. Experts in radiobiology and in genetics and systems biology need to work together toaddress hypothesis-driven questions and the meeting was a clear step in this direction. The workshop helped
to focus activities within the transgenerational effects studies of COMET.
13th International Conference on the Biogeochemistry of Trace Elements (ICOBTE) and Fukushima COMET
Workshop (Fukuoka and Fukushima, Japan, July 2015)
During the ICOBTE conference, COMET organised a ‘special symposium’: Understanding and mitigating theenvironmental behaviour of radiocaesium after the Fukushima accident. There were 73 presentations which
focussed on: (i) estimation of radionuclide deposition and redistribution in Japan after the Fukushima accident
and associated external doses; (ii) analytical techniques and speciation studies of radionuclides; (iii) dynamics
of radiocaesium in soil, water, plants and animals; (iv) quantification and modelling of the short- and longterm fate of radiocaesium in agricultural, forest and aquatic ecosystems; (v) impact of radiocaesium on
agriculture and the food chain and associated internal doses; (vi) estimation of radiation doses to, andassociated impact on, biota; (vii) countermeasures and remediation after the Fukushima accident.
Following ICOBTE 2015 there was a COMET workshop held in Fukushima Prefecture. Speakers were selected
to cover a range of topic areas and to summarise the current key findings and issues. The workshop included
Fukushima University and scientists from the local prefecture and national Japanese organisations.
[COMET](D-N°:1.5) – COMET project final report
Dissemination level: PU
Date of issue of this report: 12/07/2017

35/63

Presentations focused on soil, paddy fields, forests and catchments, and marine areas. Evaluation of recently
acquired Fukushima data allow initial identification of where environmental data from post-Chernobyl studies
were applicable and where they were not (this topic area has subsequently been incorporated into the IAEA’s
MODARIA II programme).
Models fit for purpose (Seville, June 2016)
Radioecological models are essential tools for use in assessing environmental impacts and risks fromradionuclides in the environment, or as research tools for developing underpinning process understanding. A
key aspect of this workshop, attended by about 60 scientists, was to improve the interaction between
modellers and experimentalists from different fields of radioecology, since a closer co-operation is expected
to create a better compatibility between model developments and experimental studies. The workshop
initiated this dialogue should lead to closer collaboration and hence to improved quality and robustness ofradioecological models making them more suitable for scientific applications and a broad range of assessment
purposes, bridging to other radiation protection platforms and taking into account their specific user needs.
The output of this workshop has been to some degree implemented in the newly initiated EU CONFIDENCE
and TERRITORIES projects.
Thirty years after the Chernobyl accident: what do we know about the effects of radiation on the environment?
(Chernihiv, August 2016)
April 2016 was the 30th anniversary of the Chernobyl accident. To mark this anniversary, a workshop was held
to discuss what we have learnt from studies of the effects of radiation on the environment in the Chernobyl
Exclusion Zone (CEZ), and what questions still remain. The topic of the workshop was selected because of thelack of consensus on the impacts of radiation on wildlife in the CEZ. A similar debate is beginning to evolvewith respect to observations made within the vicinity of Fukushima. Participants were from regulatoryorganisations, nuclear related industries, an NGO, the media, chemical ecotoxicology and the social sciences
and humanities fields as well as radioecology/radiation protection. Discussion sessions considered: ‘how do
we resolve the anomalies between field and laboratory studies?’ and ‘the implications of Chernobyl (andFukushima) studies for current benchmark dose rates’. The workshop report includes a number ofrecommendations agreed by the participants, key amongst these were: (i) there are a large number of fieldstudies reporting effects at dose rates which appear improbable and cannot be used in the derivation ofbenchmarks values for use in regulatory assessment; (ii) such data should not be dismissed - ‘inconvenient
truths’ need to be acknowledged, not ignored; (iii) data from radiation effects studies need to be made openly
and freely available (a significant step would be made to addressing the disagreement on the magnitude ofeffects due to exposure to ionising radiation observed in the CEZ/Fukushima areas if data were openly
available).
A series of papers from the workshop will be published in a special issue of the Journal of Environmental
Radioactivity (planned for 2018). Inclusion of the media in at the workshop has resulted in a number of articles
in nature/photography publications.

[COMET](D-N°:1.5) – COMET project final report
Dissemination level: PU
Date of issue of this report: 12/07/2017

36/63

Education and Training
The 2014 Strategic Research Agenda for Radioecology identified that the key challenge in Education andTraining (E&T) was “To maintain and develop a skilled workforce in Europe and world-wide, through university
candidates and professionals trained within radioecology” since “Scientific research in radioecology andapplication of that knowledge in the radiation protection of man and the environment requires scientists andworkers with adequate competence and appropriate skills.”
Radioecology is a multidisciplinary science, requiring teachers from many fields, who need to reach out tostudents with a range of backgrounds. Being a relatively small science, teachers and students are widely
scattered geographically, which leads to the need for intensive courses to minimise costs, and/or online
resources. In order to address these needs, COMET has developed an E&T web platform and arranged anumber of courses for students and professionals, drawing on relevant expertise from the partnerorganisations.
More than 30 PhD students and a large number of Masters students have been associated with COMET-related
research and are part of the Radioecology PhD network, which is also open to non-COMET students. The
Radioecology PhD network is an international networking forum aimed primarily at PhD students inradioecology and other relevant nuclear sciences. There is a full list of students, with their research topics andcontact details on the Radioecology Exchange E&T Platform, giving students a forum to make contact witheach other (http://www.radioecology-exchange.org/content/radioecology-phd-network).
Education and Training web platform
Located on the Radioecology Exchange website, COMET has further developed the E&T platform which was
initially set up by the STAR NoE (http://www.radioecology-exchange.org/content/training-education). It
contains information on courses within radioecology ranging from MSc and PhD courses to workshops andprofessional development and also provides links to other E&T platforms, such as those within Radiochemistry,Radiobiology and Radiation Protection (DoReMi, CINCH II, etc.). Information on the Radioecology PhD Networkis also available. The Radioecology PhD network is a virtual forum intended to promote networking andinteraction between students and scientists and the rest of the radioecology community.
MSc and PhD level courses
COMET partners have continued to develop and participate in the European Masters Programme inRadioecology, held at NMBU, Norway, in particular the course modules Radioecology and Environmental
Radioactivity (MSc course, October 2015) and Environmental Radiobiology (PhD course, June 2015), as well as
on separate courses held at individual COMET organisations (e.g. Radiobiology course at SCK•CEN, 2015).
NMBU, Norway have also continued to offer the MSc in Radioecology, a tailored two year MSc programme,
Bologna accredited (120 ECTS), consisting of obligatory and optional stand-alone course modules which areaccepted at all European universities following the Bologna model. This Masters programme is important inpromoting radioecology as an academic discipline and in providing E&T for students and professionals. The
modules were given as intensive courses to make it easier for international students and professionals toattend. A co-tutelle agreement between agreement between the University of Seville (Spain) and Norwegian
University of Life Sciences (NMBU) allows a PhD student to take a joint PhD degree and represents animportant collaborative mechanism.
[COMET]
37/63(D-N°:1.5) – COMET project final report
Dissemination level: PU
Date of issue of this report: 12/07/2017

Education and Training Field Courses
Two new intensive (4 day) field courses were developed, designed and held during COMET, with teachers fromseveral of the COMET partner organisations:• “Naturally occurring radioactive material (NORM) in the environment” (Katowice, Poland, September2015). This course was aimed at both students and professionals, and focused on most aspects ofenvironmental radiation impact and risks associated with enhanced natural radioactivity released fromdifferent NORM industries.
• “Chernobyl fallout in the environment” in Kiev, Ukraine, September 2016. This course was aimed at PhD
and MSc students and focused on the impact and risks associated with enhanced radioactivity in theenvironment due to the Chernobyl accident fallout.
Both courses had more applicants than available places and received very positive feedback from theparticipants. Due to this success, the Chernobyl field course will be organised annually with the next being
held in June 2017. The ALLIANCE intends to take these or similar courses further after the end of COMET.

Figure 11: Participants and lecturers from the Ukrainian field course in front of Chernobyl reactor 4 (Photo: V. Kasparov).

Training and refresher courses
In March 2017 a training course in ‘Radiological Protection of the Environment’ was held at CEH Lancaster, UK.
The course covered aspects of environmental (non-human biota) radiological assessment, including
application of the ERICA tool, radionuclide transfer, dosimetry, effects, benchmarks, dispersion and how tomodel atmospheric noble gases. The course was aimed at students and professionals COMET co-organised a‘young scientists session’ at Radiation Protection Week 2016 and also held two refresher courses at theInternational Conference on Radioecology and Environmental Radioactivity in Barcelona, 2014. The refresher
courses were on a) revisions to the ERICA Tool and b) assessment of noble gases for wildlife, and attracted 3050 scientists. NERC‐CEH also gave a short session entitled ‘Protection of biota: Methodologies and assessment[COMET](D-N°:1.5) – COMET project final report
Dissemination level: PU
Date of issue of this report: 12/07/2017

38/63

tools’ at the 14th Congress of the International Radiation Protection Association, Cape Town, South Africa in
May 2016 as part of their refresher course programme.

The future for knowledge exchange and capacity building with the ALLIANCE
The ALLIANCE are committed to maintain the Radioecology Exchange as a hub for European radioecology.
Sessions and awards to promote knowledge exchange and young scientists will continue to be supported by
the ALLIANCE at the annual Europe and Radiation Protection Weeks and the tri-annual International
Conference on Radioecology and Environmental Radioactivity (ICRER). Support for topical and focussed
workshops, as held by COMET, will be considered.
COMET has engaged in discussions with stakeholders for long-term solutions to maintain the sustainability ofradioecology E&T. Despite progress in some areas, many of the challenges outlined in the 2014 SRA remain.
Future plans within the ALLIANCE (and CONCERT) need to address sustainability options for E&T if
radioecological competence is to be maintained and further developed in Europe.

4.1.4. Impact, main dissemination activities and exploitation of results
WP2 - Joint programming and implementation – Expanding the ALLIANCE
The foundation of COMET launched in 2013 was built on the STAR NoE (Strategic Network for Integrating
Radioecology, EC 7th framework). The integration processes in radioecology and establishment of mechanisms
to ensure long term sustainability under the European Radioecology Alliance (ALLIANCE), which was started inSTAR, continued under COMET. COMET in its turn strengthened the pan-European research initiative on theimpact of radiation on man and the environment by facilitating the integration of radioecological research. In
close association with the ALLIANCE, and based on the Strategic Research Agenda (SRA), COMET developed
innovative mechanisms for joint programming and implementation of radioecological research. To facilitate
and foster future integration under a common federating structure, research activities developed within
COMET were targeted at radioecological research needs identified in the SRA. The COMET Competitive Calllaunched together with OPERRA in 2013 was an essential part of the joint programming with the primary
motivation being to engage the wider scientific communities to address scientific challenges that have been
jointly identified as important by both the radioecology community and low-dose or (post) emergency
communities. In addition, this kind of cascade funding (research calls within the projects) has allowed to react
to quickly emerging needs, such as research related to Fukushima. The SRA was complemented by atransitional roadmap and topical 5-year roadmaps each dealing with specific scientific areas and/or complex
environmental issues. Thus, COMET has fostered integration of radioecological research over time. The
distinction between having a 20-year outlined programme defined through a Strategic Research Agenda (SRA)
and a 5-year programme defined through Roadmaps is useful.
The integration within radioecology has been enhanced by getting a wide variety of organisations tocollaborate in radioecological studies. The actions jointly taken by various European organisations under
COMET have been able to slow down the gradual deterioration of expertise and knowledge in the field ofradioecology. The funding available under COMET has also helped the ALLIANCE develop its structural basis.
The ALLIANCE platform has a solid basis, having expanded from the initial eight founding members to 27
members from 14 countries (Belgium, Croatia, Finland, France, Germany, Greece, Ireland, Kazakhstan,[COMET](D-N°:1.5) – COMET project final report
Dissemination level: PU
Date of issue of this report: 12/07/2017

39/63

Norway, Poland, Portugal, Spain, Sweden and United Kingdom) in 2017. The European project COMET has also
been successful in enhancing collaboration globally. In particular, scientific collaboration has beenstrengthened, e.g. with participation of scientists from the USA, Australia and Japan. Additionally theinteraction with international radiation protection organisations (IRPA, ICRP, NEA, IAEA, IUR, UNSCEAR) has
been enforced as clearly demonstrated by the active high-level representation at the COMET final event.
Although attempts to enhance integration with ecological and other environmental sciences have been madeunder COMET, there is still needs to be progress it further.
Integration with other programmes and platforms involving research and development in health and safetyissues relating to ionising radiations in Europe has been enhanced by COMET. The four platforms (ALLIANCE,MELODI, NERIS and EURADOS) have strengthened their connections. They all signed a joint Memorandum of
understanding in December 2013. COMET partners, together with representatives of other platforms, haveworked for the preparation a successful proposal and establishment of the new project EJP-CONCERT –European Joint Programme for the Integration of the Radiation Protection Research, under H2020. The project
started in June 2015 and launched two calls for research proposals in 2016 and 2017. In the short term thework to promote radioecology will continue under EJP-CONCERT (2015-2020) which aims to develop asustainable structure for promoting and administering joint programming and open research calls in the fieldof radiation protection research for Europe. In the longer term, radioecological research will be facilitated by
the ALLIANCE. However, external funding is required in order to be able to answer emerging research needs.

WP3- Improving / validating radioecological models and field studies
In WP 3 of COMET, significant contributions to improve radioecological modelling capacities have been made,both through model development, experimental and field investigations as well as through improvement ofmodel parameters. Dynamic modelling approaches have improved our ability to correctly predict ecosystemtransfer and uptake of radionuclides, particularly in the early phase after an accident, as well as to assess thepotential exposure of and doses to humans and wildlife. Fieldwork and experiments have provided data formodel parameters, as well as for model validation. In this respect, particle archives and access to time series
data has been particularly valuable for dynamic modelling, and has allowed us to model radionuclide transfer
and uptake in early, intermediate and late phases after radioactive contamination. Furthermore, data fromdifferent regional ecosystems, such as the Mediterranean and Nordic ones, has allowed us to customize
radioecological models with regional parameters, leading to improved accuracy in model predictions. Hence,
the work in COMET WP3 has also been highly relevant for the emergency and post-accident communities.
COMET has contributed significantly towards integration, both within the radioecological community inEurope and internationally, as well as with other scientific disciplines. Institutions from fifteen different
countries participated in WP3, including researchers from countries that have been affected by major nuclear
accidents, such as Ukraine and Japan. This provided opportunities for joint experiments and fieldwork, as wellas access to unique data for model and parameter improvement. COMET also included partners from different
regions in Europe, such as the Mediterranean and Nordic ones, which furthered work towards regionalisationof radioecological models to better suit these ecosystems. COMET fostered interdisciplinary collaboration
through the two projects chosen in the open call, bringing new perspectives as well as new modellingcapabilities into the consortium.
[COMET](D-N°:1.5) – COMET project final report
Dissemination level: PU
Date of issue of this report: 12/07/2017

40/63

Marine modelling
The work conducted by FRAME allowed us to assess the impact of the contamination in the marine systemover several years after the accident, attending to aspects that otherwise would have not been investigatedto this extent. This includes, for instance, the implementation of the modelling of uptake of radionuclides by
biota and the assessment of the radiological impact, as well as the evaluation of the relevance of groundwater
discharge in the continuous inputs of radionuclides. Also, we assessed the presence of radionuclides almost
not investigated, such as 236U and Pu isotopes. Several papers in peer-reviewed journals have already been
published and some others are submitted or in preparation. Also, public presentations at scientificconferences, universities and other venues have been given. Some of the studies are part of one PhD(Castrillejo). Overall, our studies allow to inform the public not versed on radioecology about the actual impactof the accident in the ocean. A scientific paper published in Annual Review of Marine Science was written
aiming to a broad audience in science.
Overall, the marine radioecology research carried out within COMET project has improved the capacity toassess transfer in the marine environment, uptake by organisms and the resulting doses after that event. The
two main achievements of the project are presented. Firstly, important marine processes, such as theinteraction of waterborne radionuclides with suspended particles and sediments or biokinetic uptake andturnover of radionuclides, have been better quantified and mathematically described. Secondly, we havedemonstrated that biokinetic models can better represent radionuclide transfer to biota in non-equilibrium
situations, bringing more realism to predictions, especially when combining physical, chemical and biologicalinteractions that occur in such an open and dynamic environment as the ocean. Thanks to the dynamic
modelling work, COMET has particularly contributed to identify and quantify what processes are most relevant
to explain the marine distribution of radionuclides and their uptake and turnover by organisms. As a result,
we are readier now than we were before Fukushima in terms of having models that can be applied to dynamic
situations.

Particle behaviour
The particle behaviour research performed has allowed important knowledge about the environmental
behavior, impact and risk associated with radioactive particle contamination of different ecosystems.
Environmental behavior has been linked to the source term and release scenario, as the associated particle
characteristics such as composition, particle size, crystalline structure and oxidation state of the carrying
matrix are essential variables influencing ecosystem transfer, biological uptake and potential retention ofparticles with organisms where particles can act as point sources. Microdosimetry and evaluation of internal
uneven distribution of doses and associated effects are still questions to be answered in the future.
The particle characteristics is essential for weathering rates and the remobilization of particle associatedradionuclides such as 90Sr. In this context, a long-term prediction of the increase of the 90Sr activity
concentration in agricultural (grain) and forest (firewood) products has been obtained for territories affectedby the Chernobyl accident. Particle retained in soils represent a delay in the ecosystem transfer. Due toweathering/dissolution, increasing remobilization of 90Sr resulted in increasing uptake in vegetation 20 years
after the accident. The dissolution rate of inert fuel particles in the drained bottom sediments of cooling pondof ChNPP has been evaluated and due to the alkaline sediment water the weathering/dissolution rate is[COMET](D-N°:1.5) – COMET project final report
Dissemination level: PU
Date of issue of this report: 12/07/2017

41/63

estimated to be very low. The studies are essential for a proper evaluation of the doses received by humans,
wildlife and biota in areas affected by radioactive particles, and should be taken into consideration whenenvironmental impact of particle affected ecosystems is assessed.
As history has shown, radioactive particles ranging from submicrons to fragments have been released to theenvironment following all severe nuclear events. When refractory radionuclides are observed in theenvironments, particles should be expected. Thus, particle releases should also be expected for severe eventsoccurring in the future. This underlines the importance to advance our knowledge on radioactive particles, tolink particle characteristics to sources and release scenarios, and to link particle characteristics to ecosystemtransfer, retention within organisms and associated biological effects on which sound environmental
assessments can be made, as presented in this project.
The main results of this project have been and will be disseminated through publication in peer-reviewed
international journals of high impact factor and through their exposition in international conferences devoted
to radioecology, environmental radioactivity and radiation protection. The position paper on radioactive
particles will be published in 2017 (Salbu et al, in press).
In addition, the results of the project are serving also as key information to the on-going IAEA CoordinatedResearch Project “Environmental behavior and Potential Biological Impact of Radioactive Particles”. In this
IAEA CRP, the work performed within COMET concerning radioactive particles has made advances within thefield, and has demonstrated the benefit of close collaboration between the different COMET partners thathave allocated the R&D to the particle issue. Thus, a Particle Roadmap will be prepared for the ALLIANCE.

Human food chain modelling
Particularly the work on regional customisation and Bayesian statistics are highly relevant in relation to
emergency preparedness (and other radiation protection platforms). In parallel to the work performed in
COMET, the topic of regional customisation is also considered within the on-going EURATOM-project“Harmonising Modelling Strategies of European Decision Support Systems for Nuclear Emergencies”(HARMONE) (funded by the Second call of OPERRA) 8. HARMONE is using a slightly different approach,specifying a number of radioecological regions matching biogeographical regions of the European
Environmental Agency. COMET parameter updates have been used within HARMONE. Moreover, the output
from our work and HARMONE constitute the basis for further work within the European Radioecology Alliance,
as described in task 2 of the Human food chain Roadmap. This work is expected to improve predictions on aregional basis and lead to an enhanced ability to plan and predict the effect of remediation.

Forest modelling
The Forest modelling group’s “wish list” for modellers and experimentalists and the Handbook ‘Guidance on
Forest models for contaminated sites’ will contribute to the organisation of future forest modelling work,
because it provides a comprehensive and practical amount of information for using forest models ordeveloping new ones. Each chapter stands on its own and can be consulted independently from the others.

8

https://www.helmholtz-muenchen.de/en/iss/research/work-groups/integrative-modelling/projects/operra-harmone/index.html[COMET](D-N°:1.5) – COMET project final report
Dissemination level: PU
Date of issue of this report: 12/07/2017

42/63

The list of references available is extensive and allows for extended further reading on a specific topic. The
Handbook should be used as a tool to check aspects related to forest models and to look for solutions whenissues arise during modelling activity. Furthermore, it may help the reader to conduct a successful sampling
campaign to collect necessary data for model validation and calibration. The Handbook will be used as
lecturing material at the Master course in radioecology at the NMBU and it will be distributed as a hard-copy.

NORM modelling
Defining basic terms reflecting possible exposure scenarios and combine them with the sequences oftechnological processes applied in NORM generating industry IRA-NORM activities laid the grounds of astrategy to better understand the key processes that result in the release and that influence the environmental
behaviour of naturally occurring radionuclides. This meets the expectation of industry operators as well as
authorities both facing currently the needs of adequate assessment of potential effect of NORM exposed tothe accessible environment. On the other hand, the lack of site and industry (technological process) specificdata has revealed further obstacles in the proper assessment of NORM cases and indicated the need ofcontinue research at multiple NORM sites for more abundant and accurate situation-specific data. However,considering very limited financial support at the European level, the future of NORM oriented radioecologicalresearch is of concern.
Results of IRA NORM were presented during scientific conferences and symposia focused on NORM andenvironmental radioactivity and in scientific articles submitted to high impact scientific journal.

ICRP reference sites – developing alternative transfer models for wildlife
The investigation of alternative transfer models may ultimately be beneficial to human food chain modelling;
the applicability of REML modelling to food crops is currently being evaluated (http://www.ceh.ac.uk/tree).
The work has significantly increased the data available for the ICRP RAPs and will contribute to thedevelopment of the ICRPs RAP framework. There is an on-going collaboration with the ICRP to improvetransfer parameters for the RAPs and future ICRP reports will consider the use of REML models. Whilst notconsidered here the studies have yielded the first terrestrial wildlife CRwo values for some elements (e.g. I, S,
P).
The data generated by the studies described above now needs to be incorporated into the international
wildlife transfer database and used in establishing REML models in combination with the existing WTD dataset.
When considered as a whole, the data from the studies used here give us the ability to begin to look at
relationships between different elements across biota as a potential approach to predicting radionuclide
activity concentrations (i.e. ionomics).

WP4 – Contribution of epigenetics mechanisms in the effect induced by long-term exposure toradionuclides in the laboratory and the field
The research activities performed both at lab- and field level and on different species (earthworms, fish, frogs
and plants) showed limited impact of long term exposure to radiation on the global DNA methylation level.
However, taken together these results hint towards a role of methylation in the multigenerational responseto radiation exposure in both field and lab conditions. These preliminary results encourage further studies tobetter understand the contribution of DNA methylation and other epigenetic mechanisms (like histone[COMET]
43/63(D-N°:1.5) – COMET project final report
Dissemination level: PU
Date of issue of this report: 12/07/2017

modifications and microRNA) in the radiation response and to test their usefulness as biomarkers of radiation
exposure/effects.
These studies also highlighted the need of an accurate quantification of individual organisms’ absorbed doseof radiation including external and internal dose, to improve the risk assessment for both human and wildbiota in chronic exposure conditions like observed e.g. in Chernobyl and Fukushima.
The risk assessment process for chemicals and radionuclides is largely based on using results from short-termbioassays to predict the effects of exposures in the field. The validity of this laboratory to field extrapolationis one of the key uncertainties in risk assessment. In the present study, the comparison of field vs laboratory
has shown that species sampled in the field were more sensitive to radiation than those studied underlaboratory controlled conditions.
Such findings and insights reinstated a conclusion that the international communities have to revise theirapproaches to risk assessment of low dose exposures. The mechanisms that make it possible for the biologicalsystems to successfully exist in the conditions of chronic radiation exposure require further studies to provide
a baseline for the development of new approaches.
In efforts to attribute changes to specific stressor effects, the use of epigenomic approaches in combination
with other measurement, including specific biomarkers and macroscopic responses, would enhance theecological relevance of molecular biomarkers, as described in the Adverse Outcome Pathway concept. Given
the critical need to establish the nature of the effects of prolonged low level exposures, this integrated
approach seems a promising way forward, building as it does on existing site specific and mechanisticknowledge.
The main conclusions of this research activity have been or will be disseminated through publication in peerreviewed international journals and through communications in international conferences devoted toradioecology and ecotoxicology.
Moreover, results from COMET WP4 research activities will be integrated in a project (BIOMARKERS) to
improve the mechanistic understanding and predictability of ionizing radiation effects. This project wasrecently submitted in response to the 2017-CONCERT transnational call for proposals for “radiation protection
research in Europe”.

WP5 - Knowledge exchange and capacity building
For the overall dissemination of the COMET project, to date and into the future, we have developed theRadioecology Exchange Website (http://www.radioecology-exchange.org/). The site will be maintained by the
ALLIANCE into the future and there has been a recent request by the co-ordinator of a proposal to the H2020
programme (via the CONCERT second call) to use the website as their dissemination route. Newsletterspublished by COMET have reached at least 1700 people. Social media (twitter @ RadioXchange and Facebook
https://www.facebook.com/radioecology/) have been used to promote COMET activities and outputs, and to
generally promote radioecology to a wider audience. This will continue into the future as more COMET outputs
are published.
Recognising the value of bringing together the different communities involved in radiation protection todebate topical issues COMET ran four focussed workshops thus ensuring better focusing and exploitation of[COMET](D-N°:1.5) – COMET project final report
Dissemination level: PU
Date of issue of this report: 12/07/2017

44/63

scientific research. Attendees came from a wide range of areas appropriate to the meeting in question
including: ecotoxicologists, local scientists from Japan and former Soviet Union countries, regulators, industry,modellers, social humanities, Non-Governmental Organisations (NGO) and media. In addition to building thescience area in question, the impact of the workshops has included the development of cross-disciplinary
understanding and relationships, with beneficial implications for the newly initiated EU CONCERT projects(CONFIDENCE, TERRITORIES). Media representatives attended the workshop held in the Ukraine (Thirty years
after the Chernobyl accident: what do we know about the effects of radiation on the environment?) resulting
in four articles in a range of publications (BBC Wildlife, BBC Earth, Outdoor Photography and Waitrose
Weekend) reaching relatively large and diverse audiences (e.g. Waitrose Weekend having a readership ofabout 400,000). The workshops held in Japan contributed to an evaluation of recently acquired Fukushima
data being included as a topic area within the IAEA’s MODARIA II programme. The workshop in Seville focusing
on fit for purpose modelling and associated uncertainties will be followed up within the EU CONFIDENCE(though with a focus on process based modelling) and TERRITORIES projects.
A special issue of the Journal of Environmental Radioactivity will be published from the Ukraine workshop(paper submission deadline: August 2017). Papers will include unpublished data from the Ukraine, COMET
studies, views from social humanities field and an NGO and the recommendations of the workshop attendees.
The workshop recommendations included suggestions for improving field studies of radiation effects on
wildlife, publication of ‘no-effect’ studies and that data from radiation effects studies need to be made openly
and freely available. If acted upon significant steps would be made to addressing the disagreement between
researchers on the magnitude of effects due to exposure to ionising radiation being observed in the Chernobyl
Exclusion Zone/Fukushima (an aspect of radioecology which has a high media/public profile).
The COMET consortium reversed the decline in interest in radioecology through education and training,stakeholder participation and integration in support of the radioecological needs of industry, national
authorities, and the public.
As early as 2000, the OECD/Nuclear Energy Agency’s report: “Nuclear Education and Training: Cause forConcern?” stated that many nations were probably training too few scientists to meet the needs of theircurrent and future nuclear industries. The OECD/NEA findings indicated that the European educational skill
base had become fragmented to a point where universities in most countries lacked sufficient staff andequipment to provide education in all, but a few, nuclear areas. Of particular concern to the stakeholders (EUCommission, authorities, industry and professionals) were the significant and persistent needs for postgraduates with skills in radiochemistry, radioecology including environmental modelling, and radiation
protection including radiobiology and dosimetry. These needs were reiterated at a stakeholder workshop heldin 2011 during the EU-STAR project (see STAR Deliverable 6.1).
The Radioecology Education and Training Platform (E&T platform), incorporated on the Radioecology
Exchange website, was initiated within the STAR NoE and further developed under COMET. It is a focal point
for students and professionals interested in radioecology, and presents an overview of intensive educationand training course modules within radioecology. The impact of COMET E&T activities have been to (i)continued to produce radioecology MSc. students via Bologna accredited courses through the European Credit
Transfer and Accumulation System (ECTS) at collaborating universities and institutions (ii) establish the COMET
flagship course module in Experimental Radioecology (iii) offer ECTS accredited PhD. courses (these have also
[COMET](D-N°:1.5) – COMET project final report
Dissemination level: PU
Date of issue of this report: 12/07/2017

45/63

been of value to professional and MSc. students) (iv) sign a co-tutelle agreement between University of Seville,(Spain) and Norwegian University of Life Sciences (NMBU), allowing PhD. students to take a joint degree (v)maintain the Radioecology Research School as a networking forum aimed primarily at PhD. students (vi)continue to provide bespoke training for professionals. The Radioecology E&T platform also provides links toother E&T platforms, such as those within Radiochemistry, Radiobiology and Radiation Protection. This is an
important outreach mechanism as many of the basic course modules within radioecology are also relevant forother nuclear science students, and vice versa.
COMET also ran two field courses, primarily aimed at students with an object of stimulating recruitment in thefield. The Chernobyl field course, with approximately 30 participants from all over the world, was well coveredby newspapers in Kiev. Due to its success, it will be organised annually with the next being planned for June
2017.
The ALLIANCE will continue to support E&T within European Radioecology in the future. Furthermore, theCONCERT funded CONFIDENCE and TERRITORIES projects include E&T activities and will further our efforts.
The only MSc in Radioecology in Europe, organised by NMBU, will continue in the years to come. A challenge
is to establish additional MSc. programmes in Radioecology in Europe as these would probably need externalfunding. The need for competence in radioecology is still valid; more nuclear power stations are underplanning or construction, installations are being decommissioned and problems with waste and NORM will
increase in the future. COMET has laid the foundations to helping Europe have the skills set needed to addressthese issues.

References
Aoyama, M., Hamajima, Y., Inomata, Y., Oka, E.: Recirculation of FNPP1-derived radiocaesium observed in
winter 2015/2016 in coastal regions of Japan. Applied Radiation and Isotopes (2016) DOI:
10.1016/j.apradiso.2016.12.003.
Aoyama, M., Hult, M., Hamajima, Y., Lutter, G., Marissens, G., Stroh, H., Tzika, F.: Tracing radioactivity from
Fukushima in the Northern Pacific Ocean. Applied Radiation and Isotopes 109, 435-440 (2016)
DOI:10.1016/j.apradiso.2015.11.103.
Aoyama, M., Kajino M., Tanaka T. Y., Sekiyama T. T., Tsumune T., Tsubono T., Hamajima Y., Inomata Y., GamoY. (2016). 134Cs and 137Cs in the North Pacific Ocean derived from the March 2011 TEPCO Fukushima Dai-ichi
Nuclear Power Plant accident, Japan: Part Two - Estimation of 134Cs and 137Cs inventories in the North Pacific
Ocean, Journal of Oceanography 72, 1, 67-76 DOI:10.1007/s10872-015-0332-2.
Belharet M., Estournel C. and Charmasson S. (2016). Ecosystem model based-approach for the modelling of
137Cs transfer to marine plankton populations: Application to the Western North Pacific populations after the
Fukushima nuclear power plant accident, Biogeosciences, 13, 499–516.
Buesseler et al. (2015a). Fukushima and its ocean impacts. American Nuclear Society, San Diego Chapter. San
Diego (US), 9 March 2015.
Buesseler et al. (2015b). Fukushima from two sides of the Pacific. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Regional
meeting. Woods Hole Oceanographic Institution, Woods Hole (US), 8 December 2015.
[COMET](D-N°:1.5) – COMET project final report
Dissemination level: PU
Date of issue of this report: 12/07/2017

46/63

Buesseler et al. (2015c). Fukushima- Ocean impacts and public concerns. American Geophysical Union
meeting. San Francisco (US), 14 December 2015.
Buesseler, K.O., Dai, M., Aoyama, M., Benitez‐Nelson, C., Charmasson, S., Higley, K., Maderich, V., Masque, P.,
Morris, P.J., Oughton, D. and Smith, J.N. (2017). Fukushima Daiichi‐derived radionuclides in the Ocean:transport, fate, and impacts. Annual Review of Marine Science, 9, 173-203.
Castrillejo, M., Casacuberta, N., Breier, C.F., Pike, S.M., Masqué, P. and Buesseler, K.O. (2016). Reassessmentof 90Sr, 137Cs and 134Cs in the coast off Japan derived from the Fukushima Dai-ichi nuclear accident.
Environmental Science and Technology, 50 (1), 173-180.
Copplestone, D., Beresford, N.A., Brown, J., Yankovich, T. (2013). An international database of radionuclide
Concentration Ratios for wildlife: development and uses. J. Environ. Radioact. 126, 288-298.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jenvrad.2013.05.007.
Diener A., Hartmann P., Urso L., Vives i Batlle J., Gonze M.A., Calmon P., Steiner M. Approaches to modellingradioactive contaminations in Forests – Overview and guidance. Journal of Environmental Radioactivity(submitted).
Estournel, C., et al. (2012). Assessment of the amount of cesium-137 released into the Pacific Ocean after the
Fukushima accident and analysis of its dispersion in Japanese coastal waters, J. Geophys. Res., 117, C11014,
doi:10.1029/2012JC007933.
Garnier-Laplace, J., Muikku, M., Real, A., Vandenhove, H. (2017). Deliverable 2.4 - Update of the SRA, ECCOMET project - Fission-2012-3.4.1-604794.
Horemans N., Nauts R., Van Hees M., Saenen E., Van Dyck I., Jacobs G., Voorspoels S. Does total methylation
changes are induced in Arabidopsis thaliana and Capsella bursa pastoris plants exposed to enhanced radiationlevels found nuclear accidental affected areas (in preparation).
Horemans N., Van Hees M., Saenen E., Nauts R., Van Dyck I., Jacobs G., Voorspoels S. Concomitant changes inflowering time and de novo methylation induced by chronic exposure of Arabidopsis thaliana to gamma
radiation (in preparation).
Horemans, N. , Adam-Guillermin, C., Saenen E., Rasnaca, I., Kamstra J. , Lecomte C., Spurgeon D. Current
knowledge on the role of epigenetic mechanisms in radiologically long-term responses in the laboratory andfield (in preparation).
Ito, T., Aramaki, T., Kitamura, T., Otosaka, S., Suzuki, T., Togawa, O., Kobayashi, T., Senjyu, T., Chaykovskaya,
E.L., Karasev, E.V., Lishavskaya, T.S., Novichkov, V.P., Tkalin, A.V., Shcherbinin, A.F., Volkov, Y.N. (2003).
Anthropogenic radionuclides in the Japan Sea: their distributions and transport processes. J. Environ. Radioact.
68, 249-267.
Kishi, M.J. et al. (2007). NEMURO - a lower trophic level model for the North Pacific marine ecosystem.
Ecological Modelling, 202, 12-25.
Megrey, B.A., Rose, K.A., Klumb, R.A., Hay, D.E., Werner, F.E., Eslinger, D.L.A and Asmith, S.L. (2007). A
bioenergetlics-based population dynamics model of Pacific herring (Clupea harengus pallasi) coupled to a
[COMET](D-N°:1.5) – COMET project final report
Dissemination level: PU
Date of issue of this report: 12/07/2017

47/63

lower trophic level nutrient-phytoplankton-zooplankton model: Description, calibration, and sensitivity
analysis. Ecological Modelling, 202, 144-164.
Mora, J.C., Muikku, M., Real, A., Beresford, N.A., Masqué, P., Vanhoudt, N., Steiner, M., Skipperud, L., Michalik,
B., Vandenhove, H. and Fevrier, L. (2015). Deliverable 2.2 - Description of the protocols for access andmechanisms for supporting the research in the Radioecological Observatories and other large infrastructures,
EC-COMET project - Fission-2012-3.4.1-604794 (restricted).
Muikku M., Sirkka L., Barnett, C., Beresford, N., Garnier-Laplace, J., Michalik, B., Real, A., Skipperud, L.,
Tsukada, H., Vandenhove, H., Vanhoudt, N., Vidal, M. and Willrodt, C. (2017). Deliverable 2.7 - Blueprint of theEuropean Radioecology ALLIANCE functioning, EC-COMET project - Fission-2012-3.4.1-604794.
Ogneva, Z. V., Dubrovina A. S. and Kiselev K. V. (2016). Age-associated alterations in DNA methylation andexpression of methyltransferase and demethylase genes in Arabidopsis thaliana. Biologia Plantarum 60(4):628-634.
Protsak V.P., Odintsov О.О. (2014). Assessment of forms finding of Chernobyl radionuclides in bottom
sediments of cooling pond of the ChNPP. Nuclear Physics and Atomic Energy, V.15, N.3, p. 259-268.
Robinson, A., Newbold, L. Lahive, E., Oughton, D., Lapied, E., Spurgeon, D.J. Genetic, epigenetic andmicrobiome structure in earthworm populations across sites with different levels of radiation exposure in the
Chernobyl exclusion zone (in preparation).
Salbu, B., Kashparov, V., Lind, O.C., Garcia-Tenorio, R., Johansen, M.P., Child, D.P., Roos, P. and Sancho, C.
Challenges associated with radioactive particles in the environment, Journal of Environmental radioactivity(In press).
Sirkka, L., Muikku, M. and Real, A. (2017). Deliverable 2.3 - Inventory on national research projects related toradioecology, EC-COMET project - Fission-2012-3.4.1-604794 (restricted).
Skipperud, L. (2017). Deliverable 2.6 - Description of training and education coordinated platform, EC-COMET
project - Fission-2012-3.4.1-604794.
van de Walle J., Horemans N., Saenen E., Vandenhove H., Cuypers A. (2015). Transgenerational effects of
gamma radiation in Arabidopsis thaliana. Poster presentation. MELODI Conference: Next Generation Radiation
Protection Research, München, Germany.
van de Walle J., Horemans N., Saenen E., Van Hees M., Wannijn J., Nauts R., Van Gompel A., Fiengo Perez F.,
Vangronsveld J., Cuypers A. Differential adaptations of the phenotype between three generations ofArabidopsis thaliana with a different history of gamma exposure (in preparation).
Vives i Batlle, J. (2016a). Impact of the Fukushima accident on marine biota, five years later. Integrated
environmental assessment and management, 12 (4), 654-658.
Vives i Batlle J, (2016b). Dynamic modelling of radionuclide uptake by marine biota: application to the
Fukushima nuclear power plant accident. Journal of Environmental Radioactivity 151, 502-11.

[COMET](D-N°:1.5) – COMET project final report
Dissemination level: PU
Date of issue of this report: 12/07/2017

48/63

Zhang, P. Y., Wang J. G., Geng Y. P., Dai J. R., Zhong Y., Chen Z. Z., Zhu K., Wang X. Z. and Chen S. Y. (2015).
MSAP-based analysis of DNA methylation diversity in tobacco exposed to different environments and atdifferent development phases. Biochemical Systematics and Ecology 62: 249-260.

4.1.5. Public website and contact details
More information on the project can be found on the following website:
http://www.radioecology-exchange.org/content/cometContact details of the project coordinatorDr. Ir. Hildegarde Vandenhove
SCK•CEN
Boeretang 200
B-2400 Mol
Belgium
Phone: +32 14 33 28 78
Email: hvandenh@sckcen.be
www.sckcen.be
List of partners
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•

Studiecentrum voor Kernenergie, SCK•CEN, Belgium
Sateilyturvakeskus, STUK, Finland
Norwegian Radiation Protection Authority, NRPA, Norway
Institut de Radioprotection et de Sûreté Nucléaire, IRSN, France
Natural Environment Research Council, NERC, United Kingdom
Centro de Investigaciones Energeticas, Medioambientales y Technologicas, CIEMAT, Spain
Stockholms Universitet, SU, Sweden
Bundesambt für Strahlenschutz, BfS, Germany
Universitetet for Miljo og Biovetenskap, NMBU, Norway
Glowny Instytut Gornictwa, GIG, Poland
State Scientific and Research Institution Chornobyl Center for Nuclear Safety Radioactive Waste andRadioecology, Chornobyl Center, Ukraine,
National University of Life and Environmental Sciences of Ukraine, NUBiP, Ukraine
National University Corporation Fukushima University, FU, Japan
Universitat Autònoma de Barcelona, UAB, Spain
Woods Hole Oceanographic Institution, WHOI, United States
Eidgenösschische Technische Hochschule Zürich, LIP, Switzerland
Tokai University Educational System, TU, Japan
Universidad de Sevilla, USEV, Spain
Danmarks Tekniske Universitet, DTU, Denmark
Australian Nuclear Science and Technology Organisation, ANSTO, Australia[COMET](D-N°:1.5) – COMET project final report
Dissemination level: PU
Date of issue of this report: 12/07/2017

49/63

4.2.

Use and dissemination of foreground

The plan should consist of:Section A
The list with peer review articles, conference proceedings and theses can be consulted on the EC
Participant Portal. The list with other dissemination activities can also be visited at the EC Participant
Portal.

[COMET](D-N°:1.5) – COMET project final report
Dissemination level: PU
Date of issue of this report: 12/07/2017

50/63

Section B (Confidential 9 or public: confidential information to be marked clearly)
Part B1
There are no patents, trademarks, registered designs, etc. related to the FP7 COMET project.
Part B2
Descriptionof
exploitable
foreground

ConfidentialClick on
YES/NO

Generaladvancementof knowledge

Mathematical model“Dynamic
Dose
Assessment
Tool” (DDAT)YESGeneraladvancementof knowledge

Mathematical model“Multi-YES

Type of
Exploitable
Foreground 10

9Foreseen
embargodate
dd/mm/
yyyy
Until
futurepublication

Until
futureExploitableproduct(s) or
measure(s)Use of model
for radiologicalimpactassessment ofmarinereleases on
marine biota
Use of model
for radiologicalimpactSector(s) ofapplication11
Professional,
scientific andtechnical
activities –Scientific
Research andDevelopment(M72.1.9)
Professional,
scientific andtechnical

Timetable,commercial or
any other use

Patents orother IPR
exploitation(licences)

Owner & Other
Beneficiary(s) involved

Ongoing

Intended forscientificpublication

SCK•CEN (owner,
developer)

Ongoing

Intended forscientificpublication

SCK•CEN (owner,
developer)

Note to be confused with the "EU CONFIDENTIAL" classification for some security research projects.

19 A drop down list allows choosing the type of foreground: General advancement of knowledge, Commercial exploitation of R&D results, Exploitation of R&D results via standards,
exploitation of results through EU policies, exploitation of results through (social) innovation.
11 A drop down list allows choosing the type sector (NACE nomenclature) : http://ec.europa.eu/competition/mergers/cases/index/nace_all.html[COMET](D-N°:1.5) – COMET project final report
Dissemination level: PU
Date of issue of this report: 07/07/2017

51/63

Type of
Exploitable
Foreground 10

Generaladvancementof knowledge

Generaladvancementof knowledge

Descriptionof
exploitable
foreground
Analysis
RadiologIcal
aSSessment
cAlculator”(MARISSA)RadioECOlogical FORest
model(ECOFOR)

Mathematical model“Simulation
duTransport etdestransfertsd’Eléments
Radioactifs

ConfidentialClick on
YES/NO

Foreseen
embargodate
dd/mm/
yyyy
publicati
on

YES

Until
futurepublicati
on

YES

Until
operatio
nalityandfuturepublicationExploitableproduct(s) or
measure(s)assessment ofmarinereleases on
marine biota
Use of model
forunderstanding
SVAT (soil,
vegetation,
atmosphere)
processes ofradionuclide
cycling in pine
forests.
Use of model
forradionuclide
dispersion
simulation andradiologicalimpactassessment on
marine biota

Sector(s) ofapplication11
activities –Scientific
Research andDevelopment(M72.1.9)
Professional,
scientific andtechnical
activities –Scientific
Research andDevelopment(M72.1.9)
Professional,
scientific andtechnical
activities –Scientific
Research andDevelopment(M72.1.9)[COMET](D-N°:1.5) – COMET project final report
Dissemination level: PU
Date of issue of this report: 07/07/2017

Timetable,commercial or
any other use

Patents orother IPR
exploitation(licences)

Owner & Other
Beneficiary(s) involved

Ongoing

Intended forscientificpublication

SCK•CEN (owner,
developer)

Ongoing

Intended forscientificpublication

IRSN (owner,
developer)

52/63

Type of
Exploitable
Foreground 10

MSc inRadioecology
Course inExperimental
Radioecology
Chernobyl Field
CourseDescriptionof
exploitable
foregroundeN
Environnem
ent marin)”(STERNE)The only
MSc inradioecolog
y in Europe
Stand-alone
intensivecourse (10ESTC)
Stand-alone
intensivecourseConfidentialClick on
YES/NO

Foreseen
embargodate
dd/mm/
yyyy

Exploitableproduct(s) or
measure(s)Sector(s) ofapplication11

Timetable,commercial or
any other use

Patents orother IPR
exploitation(licences)

Owner & Other
Beneficiary(s) involved

after accidental
marinecontaminationNo

MSc students

Nuclearsciences

AnnualBologna model(120 ESTC)NMBU, Norway

No

Student merits

Nuclearsciences

AnnualBologna model(10 ESTC)NMBU, Norway

No

Student merits

Nuclearsciences

Biannual

Diploma

National University ofEnvironment and Life
Sciences, Kiev, Ukraine
and NMBU, Norway

D-DAT
Purpose: Improved during COMET and used in UNSCEAR Fukushima assessment, D-DAT as presently developed is a 2-compartment marine biota uptake andturnover using dual 1st order kinetics (multicomponent biological half-lives). It also has a 3-layer sediment sub-model with particle scavenging & mixing,
molecular diffusion, pore water mixing and sedimentation, and a simple module for dispersion from regional compartment to far field factorising flushing[COMET](D-N°:1.5) – COMET project final report
Dissemination level: PU
Date of issue of this report: 07/07/2017

53/63

time. It can run 6 radionuclides (90Sr, 129I, 131I, 134Cs, 137Cs, 236U) and 6 biota (pelagic & benthic fish, crustacean, mollusc, algae, plankton). It can perform
calculation of internal & external doses rates to biota with dose conversion coefficients compatible with ERICA dosimetry.
How the foreground might be exploited, when and by whom: To be exploited by the model developers at SCK•CEN as part of ongoing research
IPR exploitable measures taken or intended: Intended as research for scientific publication
Further research necessary, if any: This model is constantly evolving as part of ongoing research to better understand biological transfer mechanisms ofradionuclides for marine biota and the effort will be made in future projects.
Potential/expected impact (quantify where possible): Improving assessment of impact of marine releases to marine biota in non-steady state situations

MARISSA
Purpose: Excel tool for batch dose rate calculations from measured data (biota, water, sediment) which was developed as part of the D-DAT family of codes.
This can be used instead of the ERICA tool when radionuclide concentrations in biota are available from monitoring, the advantage of MARISSA is that it canprocess a large amount of data in batch mode. MARISSA was used to calculate marine biota doses using data from the FRAME cruises.
How the foreground might be exploited, when and by whom: To be exploited by the model developers at SCK•CEN as part of ongoing research
IPR exploitable measures taken or intended: Intended as research for scientific publication
Further research necessary, if any: This model is constantly evolving as part of ongoing research to better understand biological transfer mechanisms ofradionuclides for marine biota and the effort will be made in future projects.
Potential/expected impact (quantify where possible): Improving assessment of impact of marine releases to marine biota in non-steady state situations

ECOFOR
Purpose Pre-existing model improved during COMET, containing a simplified, 1-D soil-groundwater-vegetation model to represent the cycling of water and 5
elements (Cl, Ca, K, Mg and Mn) in a Belgian Scots pine forest. The model contains a multi-layered soil column with simplified representation of the hydrology
using Darcy law and Phillips' law. The vegetation is represented by means of a simplified 4-compartment model (roots, wood, foliage and litter) with simplified
representation of sap flow, translocation and litterfall in relation to different parts of the tree. The water table height is variable according to the balance[COMET](D-N°:1.5) – COMET project final report
Dissemination level: PU
Date of issue of this report: 07/07/2017

54/63

between precipitation, capillary rise, solar radiation, plant uptake and evapotranspiration. The element flux is assumed to follow the water flux in both soil
and the trees, using retardation in soil and experimentally measured selectivity coefficients within the tree.
How the foreground might be exploited, when and by whom: To be exploited by the model developers at SCK•CEN as part of ongoing research
IPR exploitable measures taken or intended: Intended as research for scientific publication
Further research necessary, if any: This model is constantly evolving as part of ongoing research to better understand biological transfer mechanisms ofradionuclides in forests and the effort will be made in future projects.
Potential/expected impact (quantify where possible): Improving process understanding, fundamental research of the cycling of radionuclides in forests in
non-steady state situations.

STERNE
Purpose: The STERNE simulation tool is designed to predict radionuclide dispersion and contamination in seawater and marine species by incorporating spatiotemporal data. 3D hydrodynamic forecasts are used as input data. Direct discharge points or atmospheric deposition source terms can be taken into account.
STERNE calculates Eulerian radionuclide dispersion using advection and diffusion equations established offline from hydrodynamic calculations. A
radioecological model based on dynamic transfer equations is implemented to evaluate activity concentrations in aquatic organisms. Essential radioecologicalparameters (concentration factors and single or multicomponent biological half-lives) have been compiled for main radionuclides and generic marine species(fish, molluscs, crustaceans and algae). Dispersion and transfer calculations are performed simultaneously on a 3D grid. Results can be plotted on maps, withpossible tracking of spatio-temporal evolution.
How the foreground might be exploited, when and by whom: To be exploited by the research and crisis IRSN teams.
IPR exploitable measures taken or intended: Intended as research for scientific publication and operational tool in the IRSN Crisis Centre.
Further research necessary, if any: This model is to be adapted to support hydrodynamic inputs from different models. The biological transfer parametrisation
has to be improved.
Potential/expected impact (quantify where possible): In accidental situations, provide a first assessment of radionuclide dispersion, and related activity timeand space evolution in seawater and biota.

MSc in Radioecology[COMET](D-N°:1.5) – COMET project final report
Dissemination level: PU
Date of issue of this report: 07/07/2017

55/63

The only MSc in Radioecology in Europe is presently organized at NMBU. The education is estimated to 2 yrs (120 ECTS), 60 ECTS education (6 course modules
and 10 ECTS each) and usually 60 ECTS (1 yr) for the research project. According to the plan, four of six ECTS credited courses (10 ECTS each) can be fulfilled
at NMBU, while 2 (10 ECTS each) are optional (at NMBU or elsewhere) and should fit for purpose of the MSc student (related to the research project). Thus,
the students can choose course modules being relevant for their future interest of work (fig. 2). The MSc courses, PhD courses and training courses are given
intensively and open to students from all over the world. Detailed information on the MSc in radioecology is included in the Education and Training pages on
the COMET Radioecology Exchange website.

Course in Experimental Radioecology
The COMET flagship on Experimental Radioecology organised annually in January, is an intensive 3 weeks course module and covers radioactivity in terrestrial
and aquatic environments. A series of international experts are giving the lectures. In addition, laboratory exercises and a semester thesis on a subject selectedby the student (part of their MSc or PhD). The course module follows the Bologna model (10 ESTC), and is implemented in the formal MSC education program.

Chernobyl Field Course
A COMET Chernobyl field course, organised first time September 2016 with almost 30 mostly international students, is an intensive 14 days course and will
be organized biannually. The course offers expert lectures related to the Chernobyl accident, and on underlying processes influencing the behaviour ofradionuclides in different contaminated ecosystems, including the influence of radioactive particles. The intention of the course is also to allow students toinitiate research work (sampling, analysis) within the Chernobyl exclusion zone. The work can be implemented in their MSc Research project or in their PhD
thesis.

[COMET](D-N°:1.5) – COMET project final report
Dissemination level: PU
Date of issue of this report: 07/07/2017

56/63

4.3 Report on societal implications
Replies to the following questions will assist the Commission to obtain statistics and indicators
on societal and socio-economic issues addressed by projects. The questions are arranged in a
number of key themes. As well as producing certain statistics, the replies will also help identify
those projects that have shown a real engagement with wider societal issues, and thereby
identify interesting approaches to these issues and best practices. The replies for individual
projects will not be made public.

A

General Information (completed automatically when Grant Agreement number is entered.

Grant Agreement Number:
Title of Project:

Name and Title of Coordinator:

B

Ethics604974

COordination and iMplementation of a pan-European
instrumenT for radioecology
Dr. Ir Hildegarde Vandenhove, Director Institute EHS, SCK•CEN

1. Did your project undergo an Ethics Review (and/or Screening)?
•

If Yes: have you described the progress of compliance with the relevant Ethics
Review/Screening Requirements in the frame of the periodic/final project reports?

No

Special Reminder: the progress of compliance with the Ethics Review/Screening Requirements should be
described in the Period/Final Project Reports under the Section 3.2.2 'Work Progress and Achievements'

2.

Please indicate whether your project involved any of the following issues :RESEARCH ON HUMANS• Did the project involve children?
• Did the project involve patients?
• Did the project involve persons not able to give consent?
• Did the project involve adult healthy volunteers?
• Did the project involve Human genetic material?
• Did the project involve Human biological samples?
• Did the project involve Human data collection?
RESEARCH ON HUMAN EMBRYO/FOETUS• Did the project involve Human Embryos?
• Did the project involve Human Foetal Tissue / Cells?
• Did the project involve Human Embryonic Stem Cells (hESCs)?
• Did the project on human Embryonic Stem Cells involve cells in culture?
• Did the project on human Embryonic Stem Cells involve the derivation of cells from Embryos?
PRIVACY• Did the project involve processing of genetic information or personal data (eg. health, sexual
lifestyle, ethnicity, political opinion, religious or philosophical conviction)?

[COMET](D-N°:1.5) – COMET project final report
Dissemination level: PU
Date of issue of this report: 07/07/2017

57/63

No
No
No
No
No
No
No
No
No
No
No
No
No

• Did the project involve tracking the location or observation of people?
RESEARCH ON ANIMALS• Did the project involve research on animals?
• Were those animals transgenic small laboratory animals?
• Were those animals transgenic farm animals?
• Were those animals cloned farm animals?
• Were those animals non-human primates?
RESEARCH INVOLVING DEVELOPING COUNTRIES• Did the project involve the use of local resources (genetic, animal, plant etc)?
• Was the project of benefit to local community (capacity building, access to healthcare, education
etc)?
DUAL USE• Research having direct military use• Research having the potential for terrorist abuse

No
Yes
No
No
No
No
No
No
No

No

C

Workforce Statistics

3.

Workforce statistics for the project: Please indicate in the table below the number of people
who worked on the project (on a headcount basis).

Type of Position

Number of Women

Number of Men

Scientific Coordinator
Work package leaders
Experienced researchers (i.e. PhD holders)
PhD Students
Other

1
5 (4)
41
0
1

0
0 (1)
46
3
3

4.

How many additional researchers (in companies and universities) were recruitedspecifically for this project?

Of which, indicate the number of men:0

[COMET](D-N°:1.5) – COMET project final report
Dissemination level: PU
Date of issue of this report: 07/07/2017

58/63

D Gender Aspects
5.

Did you carry out specific Gender Equality Actions under the project?

6.

Which of the following actions did you carry out and how effective were they?

7.






Design and implement an equal opportunity policy
Set targets to achieve a gender balance in the workforce
Organise conferences and workshops on gender
Actions to improve work-life balance

Other:

Not at alleffective




Very
effective






We have a good gender distribution in radioecology. Expertise is more important
than gender sometimes.

Was there a gender dimension associated with the research content – i.e. wherever people were
the focus of the research as, for example, consumers, users, patients or in trials, was the issue of genderconsidered and addressed?

Yes- please specify



No

E

Synergies with Science Education

8.

Did your project involve working with students and/or school pupils (e.g. open days,
participation in science festivals and events, prizes/competitions or joint projects)?
 Yes- please specify


9.

Yes
No

No

Did the project generate any science education material (e.g. kits, websites, explanatory
booklets, DVDs)?
See WP5 + list with dissemination activities (websites/applications) Yes- please specify


No

F

Interdisciplinarity

10.

Which disciplines (see list below) are involved in your project?
Main discipline 12:1Associated discipline12:
 Associated discipline12:

G

Engaging with Civil society and policy makers

11a

Did your project engage with societal actors beyond the researchcommunity? (if 'No', go to Question 14)




Yes
No

11b If yes, did you engage with citizens (citizens' panels / juries) or organised civil society (NGOs,
patients' groups etc.)?
[COMET](D-N°:1.5) – COMET project final report
Dissemination level: PU
Date of issue of this report: 07/07/2017

59/63






No
Yes- in determining what research should be performed
Yes - in implementing the research
Yes, in communicating /disseminating / using the results of the project

11c In doing so, did your project involve actors whose role is mainly to organise
the dialogue with citizens and organised civil society (e.g. professional
mediator; communication company, science museums)?





Yes
No

12. Did you engage with government / public bodies or policy makers (including internationalorganisations)





No
Yes- in framing the research agenda
Yes - in implementing the research agenda
Yes, in communicating /disseminating / using the results of the project

13a Will the project generate outputs (expertise or scientific advice) which could be used by policy
makers?
 Yes – as a primary objective (please indicate areas below- multiple answers possible) Yes – as a secondary objective (please indicate areas below - multiple answer possible)
 No
13b If Yes, in which fields?
Agriculture
Audiovisual and Media
BudgetCompetition
Consumers
CultureCustoms
Development Economic andMonetary Affairs
Education, Training, Youth
Employment and Social Affairs

EnergyEnlargement
Enterprise
Environment
External Relations
External Trade
Fisheries and Maritime Affairs
Food Safety
Foreign and Security Policy
Fraud
Humanitarian aid



Human rights
Information Society
Institutional affairs
Internal Market
Justice, freedom and security
Public HealthRegional Policy
Research and Innovation
Space
TaxationTransport

12 Insert number from list below (Frascati Manual).

[COMET](D-N°:1.5) – COMET project final report
Dissemination level: PU
Date of issue of this report: 07/07/2017

60/63

13c If Yes, at which level?
 Local / regional levels
 National level
 European level
 International level

H

Use and dissemination

14. How many Articles were published/accepted for publication in peerreviewed journals?

39

To how many of these is open access 13 provided?

6

How many of these are published in open access journals?

6

How many of these are published in open repositories?

0

To how many of these is open access not provided?

33

Please check all applicable reasons for not providing open access: publisher's licensing agreement would not permit publishing in a repository
 no suitable repository available no suitable open access journal available no funds available to publish in an open access journal
 lack of time and resources lack of information on open access other 14: ……………

15.

How many new patent applications (‘priority filings’) have been made?

/16.

Indicate how many of the following Intellectual
Property Rights were applied for (give number ineach box).

Trademark/Registered design

/

Other

/

("Technologically unique": multiple applications for the same invention in different
jurisdictions should be counted as just one application of grant).

17. How many spin-off companies were created / are planned as a direct resultof the project?
Indicate the approximate number of additional jobs in these companies://

18. Please indicate whether your project has a potential impact on employment, in comparison
with the situation before your project:In small & medium-sized enterprises
 Increase in employment, orIn large companies
 Safeguard employment, or Decrease in employment,
 None of the above / not relevant to the project Difficult to estimate / not possible to quantify[COMET](D-N°:1.5) – COMET project final report
Dissemination level: PU
Date of issue of this report: 07/07/2017

61/63

19. For your project partnership please estimate the employment effectresulting directly from your participation in Full Time Equivalent (FTE = one
person working fulltime for a year) jobs:

Indicate figure:

Difficult to estimate / not possible to quantify

IMedia and Communication to the general public

20.

As part of the project, were any of the beneficiaries professionals in communication or media
relations?
 Yes
 No

21.

As part of the project, have any beneficiaries received professional media / communication
training / advice to improve communication with the general public?
 Yes
 No

22

Which of the following have been used to communicate information about your project to thegeneral public, or have resulted from your project?
 Press Release Coverage in specialist press Media briefing
 Coverage in general (non-specialist) press TV coverage / report Coverage in national pressRadio
coverage/
report Coverage in international press
 Brochures /posters / flyers
 Website for the general public / internet
 DVD /Film /Multimedia
 Event targeting general public (festival, conference,
exhibition, science café)

23

In which languages are the information products for the general public produced?


Language of the coordinator
Other language(s)EnglishQuestion F-10: Classification of Scientific Disciplines according to the Frascati Manual 2002 (ProposedStandard Practice for Surveys on Research and Experimental Development, OECD 2002):

FIELDS OF SCIENCE AND TECHNOLOGY1.
1.1

NATURAL SCIENCES
Mathematics and computer sciences [mathematics and other allied fields: computer sciences and otherallied subjects (software development only; hardware development should be classified in theengineering fields)]
Physical sciences (astronomy and space sciences, physics and other allied subjects)
Chemical sciences (chemistry, other allied subjects)

1.2
1.3

13 Open Access is defined as free of charge access for anyone via Internet.

14

For instance: classification for security project.

[COMET](D-N°:1.5) – COMET project final report
Dissemination level: PU
Date of issue of this report: 07/07/2017

62/63

1.4

1.5

2
2.1
2.2
2.3.

3.
3.1
3.2
3.3
4.
4.1
4.2

Earth and related environmental sciences (geology, geophysics, mineralogy, physical geography andother geosciences, meteorology and other atmospheric sciences including climatic research,oceanography, vulcanology, palaeoecology, other allied sciences)
Biological sciences (biology, botany, bacteriology, microbiology, zoology, entomology, genetics,
biochemistry, biophysics, other allied sciences, excluding clinical and veterinary sciences)
ENGINEERING AND TECHNOLOGY
Civil engineering (architecture engineering, building science and engineering, construction engineering,municipal and structural engineering and other allied subjects)
Electrical engineering, electronics [electrical engineering, electronics, communication engineering andsystems, computer engineering (hardware only) and other allied subjects]
Other engineering sciences (such as chemical, aeronautical and space, mechanical, metallurgical andmaterials engineering, and their specialised subdivisions; forest products; applied sciences such as
geodesy, industrial chemistry, etc.; the science and technology of food production; specialised
technologies of interdisciplinary fields, e.g. systems analysis, metallurgy, mining, textile technology
and other applied subjects)
MEDICAL SCIENCES
Basic medicine (anatomy, cytology, physiology, genetics, pharmacy, pharmacology, toxicology,
immunology and immunohaematology, clinical chemistry, clinical microbiology, pathology)
Clinical medicine (anaesthesiology, paediatrics, obstetrics and gynaecology, internal medicine, surgery,
dentistry, neurology, psychiatry, radiology, therapeutics, otorhinolaryngology, ophthalmology)
Health sciences (public health services, social medicine, hygiene, nursing, epidemiology)
AGRICULTURAL SCIENCES
Agriculture, forestry, fisheries and allied sciences (agronomy, animal husbandry, fisheries, forestry,horticulture, other allied subjects)
Veterinary medicine

5.
5.1
5.2
5.3
5.4

SOCIAL SCIENCES
Psychology
Economics
Educational sciences (education and training and other allied subjects)
Other social sciences [anthropology (social and cultural) and ethnology, demography, geography(human, economic and social), town and country planning, management, law, linguistics, politicalsciences, sociology, organisation and methods, miscellaneous social sciences and interdisciplinary ,methodological and historical S1T activities relating to subjects in this group. Physical anthropology,
physical geography and psychophysiology should normally be classified with the natural sciences].

6.
6.1

HUMANITIESHistory (history, prehistory and history, together with auxiliary historical disciplines such asarchaeology, numismatics, palaeography, genealogy, etc.)
Languages and literature (ancient and modern)
Other humanities [philosophy (including the history of science and technology) arts, history of art, art
criticism, painting, sculpture, musicology, dramatic art excluding artistic "research" of any kind,religion, theology, other fields and subjects pertaining to the humanities, methodological, historical andother S1T activities relating to the subjects in this group]

6.2
6.3

[COMET](D-N°:1.5) – COMET project final report
Dissemination level: PU
Date of issue of this report: 07/07/2017

63/63