EESUS/
Articles/
2609005208
  • Open Access
  • Opinion

Transcending Global Change Biology Disciplinary Boundaries through Ecophysiotoxicology

  • Evgenios Agathokleous 1,2

Received: 27 Mar 2026 | Revised: 03 Sep 2026 | Accepted: 16 Sep 2026 | Published: 24 Sep 2026

Abstract

This paper proposes the unification of ecophysiology and ecotoxicology into a novel research field, ecophysiotoxicology, underpinned by hormesis as a broadly generalizable biological principle through which low-dose stress commonly activates adaptive, compensatory, or protective responses, whereas higher doses cause inhibition or damage. Here, an adaptive response denotes an inducible biological adjustment and is not synonymous with heritable evolutionary adaptation or an unconditional net fitness benefit. The integration combines mechanistic tools from ecophysiology, including stressor-induced molecular, metabolic, and physiological adjustments, with ecological scaling and dose-response tools from ecotoxicology to predict multistressor effects across biological hierarchies. Hormesis provides the new theoretical bridge, placing natural and anthropogenic stressors on a shared dose-dependent continuum, while the two disciplines contribute complementary explanatory and predictive strengths. The synthesis addresses critical gaps in global change biology by incorporating stressor dissimilarity, exposure timing, eco-evolutionary dynamics, and explicit translation from mechanisms to population, community, and ecosystem outcomes. A concise workflow and two applied scenarios show how the proposed field is intended to support testable predictions, strengthen risk assessment, and evaluate priming or resilience-enhancing interventions without assuming that every stimulatory response is beneficial at every biological level.

References 

  • 1.

    Agathokleous, E.; Calabrese, E.J. A global environmental health perspective and optimisation of stress. Sci. Total Environ. 2020, 704, 135263. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.scitotenv.2019.135263.

  • 2.

    Agathokleous, E.; Calabrese, E.J. Hormesis: A general biological principle. Chem. Res. Toxicol. 2022, 35, 547–549. https://doi.org/10.1021/acs.chemrestox.2c00032.

  • 3.

    Calabrese, E.J.; Bachmann, K.A.; Bailer, A.J.; et al. Biological stress response terminology: Integrating the concepts of adaptive response and preconditioning stress within a hormetic dose–response framework. Toxicol. Appl. Pharmacol. 2007, 222, 122–128. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.taap.2007.02.015.

  • 4.

    Erofeeva, E.A. Environmental hormesis: From cell to ecosystem. Curr. Opin. Environ. Sci. Health 2022, 29, 100378. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.coesh.2022.100378.

  • 5.

    Fukushima, S.; Kinoshita, A.; Puatanachokchai, R.; et al. Hormesis and dose–response-mediated mechanisms in carcinogenesis: Evidence for a threshold in carcinogenicity of non-genotoxic carcinogens. Carcinogenesis 2005, 26, 1835–1845. https://doi.org/10.1093/carcin/bgi160.

  • 6.

    Kim, S.A.; Lee, Y.M.; Choi, J.Y.; et al. Evolutionarily adapted hormesis-inducing stressors can be a practical solution to mitigate harmful effects of chronic exposure to low dose chemical mixtures. Environ. Pollut. 2018, 233, 725–734. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.envpol.2017.10.124.

  • 7.

    Schirrmacher, V. Less can be more: The hormesis theory of stress adaptation in the global biosphere and its implications. Biomedicines 2021, 9, 293. https://doi.org/10.3390/biomedicines9030293.

  • 8.

    Sun, T.; Ji, C.; Li, F.; et al. Time is ripe for targeting per- and polyfluoroalkyl substances-induced hormesis: Global aquatic hotspots and implications for ecological risk assessment. Environ. Sci. Technol. 2024, 58, 9314–9327. https://doi.org/10.1021/acs.est.4c00686.

  • 9.

    Sun, T.; Wu, H.; Ji, C.; et al. Unveiling subthreshold hormesis of antibiotics in global waters. Environ. Sci. Technol. 2025, 59, 22212–22226. https://doi.org/10.1021/acs.est.5c09003.

  • 10.

    Meng, S.; Xiong, W.; Jin, X.; et al. Hormetic effects of the pesticide chlorpyrifos counteract the adverse effects of a heat spike both within and across generations in a freshwater rotifer. Environ. Sci. Technol. 2025, 59, 17403–17415. https://doi.org/10.1021/acs.est.5c03006.

  • 11.

    Qin, L.; Sun, X.; Yu, L.; et al. Ecological risk threshold for Pb in Chinese soils. J. Hazard. Mater. 2023, 444, 130418. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jhazmat.2022.130418.

  • 12.

    Sebastiano, M.; Messina, S.; Marasco, V.; et al. Hormesis in ecotoxicological studies: A critical evolutionary perspective. Curr. Opin. Toxicol. 2022, 29, 25–30. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cotox.2022.01.002.

  • 13.

    Sun, H.; Xu, F.; Luo, R.; et al. Data-driven risk assessment of antibiotic mixtures against gram-negative and gram-positive bacteria: QSAR, joint toxic action, and component contribution. Environ. Int. 2025, 202, 109639. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.envint.2025.109639.

  • 14.

    Zhang, H.; Jiang, J.; Wang, H.; et al. Early warning of aquatic ecological risks for trifluoromethanesulfonimide: Oxidative stress-driven adverse outcome pathways and toxicity thresholds. J. Hazard. Mater. 2025, 499, 140246. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jhazmat.2025.140246.

  • 15.

    Erofeeva, E.A. Hormetic effects of abiotic environmental stressors in woody plants in the context of climate change. J. For. Res. 2023, 34, 7–19. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11676-022-01591-1.

  • 16.

    Moustaka, J.; Moustakas, M. ROS generation in the light reactions of photosynthesis triggers acclimation signaling to environmental stress. Photochem 2025, 5, 28. https://doi.org/10.3390/photochem5040028.

  • 17.

    Berry, R.; López-Martínez, G. A dose of experimental hormesis: When mild stress protects and improves animal performance. Comp. Biochem. Physiol. Part A Mol. Integr. Physiol. 2020, 242, 110658. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cbpa.2020.110658.

  • 18.

    Costantini, D.; Metcalfe, N.B.; Monaghan, P. Ecological processes in a hormetic framework. Ecol. Lett. 2010, 13, 1435–1447. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1461-0248.2010.01531.x.

  • 19.

    Sies, H.; Mailloux, R.J.; Jakob, U. Fundamentals of redox regulation in biology. Nat. Rev. Mol. Cell Biol. 2024, 25, 701–719. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41580-024-00730-2. Correction in Nat. Rev. Mol. Cell Biol. 2024, 25, 758.

  • 20.

    Skaperda, Z.; Tekos, F.; Vardakas, P.; et al. Reconceptualization of hormetic responses in the frame of redox toxicology. Int. J. Mol. Sci. 2022, 23, 49. https://doi.org/10.3390/ijms23010049.

  • 21.

    Volkova, P.Y.; Bondarenko, E.V.; Kazakova, E.A. Radiation hormesis in plants. Curr. Opin. Toxicol. 2022, 30, 100334. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cotox.2022.02.007.

  • 22.

    Kong, X.; Xu, B.; Orr, J.A.; et al. Ecosystems have multiple interacting processes that buffer against co-occurring stressors. Trends Ecol. Evol. 2025, 40, 479–488. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tree.2025.03.002.

  • 23.

    Rillig, M.C.; Lehmann, A.; Orr, J.A.; et al. Factors of global change affecting plants act at different levels of the ecological hierarchy. Plant J. 2024, 117, 1781–1785. https://doi.org/10.1111/tpj.16509.

  • 24.

    Rillig, M.C.; Ryo, M.; Lehmann, A.; et al. The role of multiple global change factors in driving soil functions and microbial biodiversity. Science 2019, 366, 886–890. https://doi.org/10.1126/science.aay2832.

  • 25.

    Rillig, M.C.; van der Heijden, M.G.A.; Berdugo, M.; et al. Increasing the number of stressors reduces soil ecosystem services worldwide. Nat. Clim. Chang. 2023, 13, 478–483. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41558-023-01627-2.

  • 26.

    Yang, G.; Ryo, M.; Roy, J.; et al. Multiple anthropogenic pressures eliminate the effects of soil microbial diversity on ecosystem functions in experimental microcosms. Nat. Commun. 2022, 13, 4260. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41467-022-31936-7.

  • 27.

    Bi, M.; Li, H.; Meidl, P.; et al. Number and dissimilarity of global change factors influences soil properties and functions. Nat. Commun. 2024, 15, 8188. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41467-024-52511-2.

  • 28.

    Yan, Z.; Wang, Y.; Li, R.; et al. Increasing chemical stressor diversity impairs survival, reproduction and transcriptomic stability in Folsomia candida. Environ. Chem. Ecotoxicol. 2026, 8, 2722–2733. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.enceco.2026.08.012.

  • 29.

    Liboureau, P.; de Oliveira, R.M.; Gestinari, L.M.D.S.; et al. Resilience of the red alga Palmaria palmata to anthropogenic environmental changes: Small-scale flask assessment of combined effects of marine heatwaves, hyposalinity, and marine pollution. J. Appl. Phycol. 2026, 38, 2099–2110. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10811-026-03860-6.

  • 30.

    Qin, L.; Wang, L.; Sun, X.; et al. Ecological toxicity (ECx) of Pb and its prediction models in Chinese soils with different physiochemical properties. Sci. Total Environ. 2022, 853, 158769. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.scitotenv.2022.158769.

  • 31.

    Sun, X.; Qin, L.; Wang, L.; et al. Aging factor and its prediction models of chromium ecotoxicity in soils with various properties. Sci. Total Environ. 2022, 847, 157622. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.scitotenv.2022.157622.

  • 32.

    Sun, X.; Qin, L.; Yu, L.; et al. Ecological risk threshold for chromium in Chinese soils and its prediction models. Environ. Res. 2024, 262, 119935. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.envres.2024.119935.

  • 33.

    Xia, J.; Bao, Y.; Gao, Y.; et al. The effects of temperature and sulfamethoxazole on the growth and photosynthetic characteristics of Phaeodactylum tricornutum. Mar. Pollut. Bull. 2024, 200, 116122. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.marpolbul.2024.116122.

  • 34.

    Zhu, Q.L.; Chen, T.H.; Zhan, Q.H.; et al. Transgenerational hormesis of environmentally relevant concentrations of cadmium and zinc in marine medaka Oryzias melastigma subjected to different salinity conditions. Mar. Pollut. Bull. 2026, 222, 118635. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.marpolbul.2025.118635.

  • 35.

    Wu, R.; Agathokleous, E.; Feng, Z. Novel ozone flux metrics incorporating the detoxification process in the apoplast: An application to Chinese winter wheat. Sci. Total Environ. 2021, 767, 144588. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.scitotenv.2020.144588.

  • 36.

    Backhaus, T. Medicines, shaken and stirred: A critical review on the ecotoxicology of pharmaceutical mixtures. Philos. Trans. R. Soc. B Biol. Sci. 2014, 369, 20130585. https://doi.org/10.1098/rstb.2013.0585.

  • 37.

    Schäfer, R.B.; Jackson, M.; Juvigny-Khenafou, N.; et al. Chemical mixtures and multiple stressors: Same but different? Environ. Toxicol. Chem. 2023, 42, 1915–1936. https://doi.org/10.1002/etc.5629.

  • 38.

    Veresoglou, S.D.; Begum, N. Dose–response curves: The next frontier in plant ecology. Trends Plant Sci. 2024, 29, 971–977. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tplants.2024.03.018.

  • 39.

    Yan, Z.; Jin, X.; Feng, C.; et al. Beyond the single-contaminant paradigm: Advancing mixture toxicity and cumulative risk assessment in environmental toxicology. Environ. Sci. Technol. 2025, 59, 10711–10714. https://doi.org/10.1021/acs.est.5c05712.

  • 40.

    Sigmund, G.; Ågerstrand, M.; Antonelli, A.; et al. Addressing chemical pollution in biodiversity research. Glob. Chang. Biol. 2023, 29, 3240–3255. https://doi.org/10.1111/gcb.16689.

  • 41.

    Jeltsch, F.; Roeleke, M.; Abdelfattah, A.; et al. The need for an individual-based global change ecology. Individ.-Based Ecol. 2025, 1, e148200. https://doi.org/10.3897/ibe.1.148200.

  • 42.

    Schulte, P.M. What is environmental stress? Insights from fish living in a variable environment. J. Exp. Biol. 2014, 217, 23–34. https://doi.org/10.1242/jeb.089722.

  • 43.

    Cooke, S.J.; Sack, L.; Franklin, C.E.; et al. What is conservation physiology? Perspectives on an increasingly integrated and essential science. Conserv. Physiol. 2013, 1, cot001. https://doi.org/10.1093/conphys/cot001.

  • 44.

    Handy, R.D.; Depledge, M.H. Physiological responses: Their measurement and use as environmental biomarkers in ecotoxicology. Ecotoxicology 1999, 8, 329–349. https://doi.org/10.1023/a:1008930404461.

  • 45.

    Xu, S.; Gong, S.L.; Zheng, Y.T.; et al. Nanoparticle-induced hormesis in microalgae: Insights from transcriptomics and soft X-ray tomography. Anal. Chem. 2026, 98, 17236–17253. https://doi.org/10.1021/acs.analchem.6c01509.

  • 46.

    Calabrese, E.J. Preconditioning is hormesis part II: How the conditioning dose mediates protection: Dose optimization within temporal and mechanistic frameworks. Pharmacol. Res. 2016, 110, 265–275. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.phrs.2015.12.020.

  • 47.

    MacDonald, M.T.; Mohan, V.R. Chemical seed priming: Molecules and mechanisms for enhancing plant germination, growth, and stress tolerance. Curr. Issues Mol. Biol. 2025, 47, 177. https://doi.org/10.3390/cimb47030177.

  • 48.

    Xu, C.C.Y.; Fugère, V.; Barbosa da Costa, N.; et al. Pre-exposure to stress reduces loss of community and genetic diversity following severe environmental disturbance. Curr. Biol. 2025, 35, 1061–1073.e4. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cub.2025.01.037.

  • 49.

    Gower, J.C. A general coefficient of similarity and some of its properties. Biometrics 1971, 27, 857–871. https://doi.org/10.2307/2528823.

  • 50.

    Agathokleous, E. Environmental hormesis, a fundamental non-monotonic biological phenomenon with implications in ecotoxicology and environmental safety. Ecotoxicol. Environ. Saf. 2018, 148, 1042–1053. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecoenv.2017.12.003.

  • 51.

    Agathokleous, E.; Guedes, R.N.C.; Calabrese, E.J.; et al. Transgenerational hormesis: What do parents sacrifice for their offspring? Curr. Opin. Environ. Sci. Health 2022, 29, 100380. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.coesh.2022.100380.

  • 52.

    Agathokleous, E.; Wang, Q.; Iavicoli, I.; et al. The relevance of hormesis at higher levels of biological organization: Hormesis in microorganisms. Curr. Opin. Toxicol. 2022, 29, 1–9. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cotox.2021.11.001.

  • 53.

    Cutler, G.C.; Amichot, M.; Benelli, G.; et al. Hormesis and insects: Effects and interactions in agroecosystems. Sci. Total Environ. 2022, 825, 153899. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.scitotenv.2022.153899.

  • 54.

    Saitanis, C.J.; Agathokleous, E. Stress response and population dynamics: Is Allee effect hormesis? Sci. Total Environ. 2019, 682, 623–628. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.scitotenv.2019.05.212.

  • 55.

    Rillig, M.C.; Lehmann, A.; Bi, M. Hormesis as a hidden hand in global environmental change? Environ. Sci. Technol. 2025, 59, 2887–2890. https://doi.org/10.1021/acs.est.5c01101.

  • 56.

    Sun, T.; Wu, H.; Calabrese, E.J. Ecohormesis: Reimagining stress adaptation for ecosystem resilience. Environ. Sci. Technol. Lett. 2026, 13, 433–435. https://doi.org/10.1021/acs.estlett.6c00231.

  • 57.

    Bartell, S.M. Are ecosystems hormetic? Hum. Ecol. Risk Assess. Int. J. 2000, 6, 237–243. https://doi.org/10.1080/10807030009380059.

  • 58.

    Ankley, G.T.; Bennett, R.S.; Erickson, R.J.; et al. Adverse outcome pathways: A conceptual framework to support ecotoxicology research and risk assessment. Environ. Toxicol. Chem. 2010, 29, 730–741. https://doi.org/10.1002/etc.34.

  • 59.

    Jager, T.; Albert, C.; Preuss, T.G.; et al. General unified threshold model of survival—A toxicokinetic–toxicodynamic framework for ecotoxicology. Environ. Sci. Technol. 2011, 45, 2529–2540. https://doi.org/10.1021/es103092a.

  • 60.

    Sokolova, I.M. Energy-limited tolerance to stress as a conceptual framework to integrate the effects of multiple stressors. Integr. Comp. Biol. 2013, 53, 597–608. https://doi.org/10.1093/icb/ict028.

  • 61.

    Weltje, L.; vom Saal, F.S.; Oehlmann, J. Reproductive stimulation by low doses of xenoestrogens contrasts with the view of hormesis as an adaptive response. Hum. Exp. Toxicol. 2005, 24, 431–437. https://doi.org/10.1191/0960327105ht551oa.

  • 62.

    Erofeeva, E.A. Environmental hormesis in living systems: The role of hormetic trade-offs. Sci. Total Environ. 2023, 901, 166022. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.scitotenv.2023.166022.

  • 63.

    Gao, Q.; Yang, J.; Wu, J.; et al. New perspectives under heterogeneity: Mechanism of nutrient heterogeneity on Cd-induced hormesis of soil respiration. Front. Microbiol. 2025, 16, 1647658. https://doi.org/10.3389/fmicb.2025.1647658.

  • 64.

    Manning, P.; Cutler, G.C. Exposure to low concentrations of pesticide stimulates ecological functioning in the dung beetle Onthophagus nuchicornis. PeerJ 2020, 8, e10359. https://doi.org/10.7717/peerj.10359.

  • 65.

    Li, Y.; Zhang, K.; Chen, J.; et al. Rhizosphere bacteria help to compensate for pesticide-induced stress in plants. Environ. Sci. Technol. 2024, 58, 12542–12553. https://doi.org/10.1021/acs.est.4c04196.

  • 66.

    Song, L.; Tang, S.; Xiang, C.; et al. Modelling and bifurcation analysis of spatiotemporal hormetic effects on pest control. Chaos Solitons Fractals 2023, 177, 114194. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chaos.2023.114194.

  • 67.

    Tang, S.; Feng, X.; Yan, D.; et al. Hormesis and hydra effects revealed by intraspecific overcompensation models and dose–response curves. J. R. Soc. Interface 2025, 22, 20250169. https://doi.org/10.1098/rsif.2025.0169.

  • 68.

    Giesy, J.P. Hormesis—Does it have relevance at the population, community or ecosystem levels of organization? Hum. Exp. Toxicol. 2001, 20, 517–520. https://doi.org/10.1191/096032701718120373.

  • 69.

    Liu, J.; Xiao, M.; Ji, Z.; et al. Aspartame induces hormesis-toxicity switch in microalgal-bacterial granular sludge: Community assembly and functional gene responses. Bioresour. Technol. 2027, 463, 135720. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.biortech.2026.135720.

  • 70.

    Woods, J.L.D.; O’Brien, A.L.; Morris, L.; et al. Low concentrations of copper and zinc affect the abundance, diversity, and structure of macrobenthic communities in an estuarine mudflat. Mar. Ecol. Prog. Ser. 2026, 791, meps15183. https://doi.org/10.3354/meps15183.

  • 71.

    You, X.; Chen, Q.; Kong, L.; et al. Antibiotic stress–induced hormesis in phytoplankton and bacteria through their mutual cooperation. Sci. Adv. 2025, 11, eadv7921. https://doi.org/10.1126/sciadv.adv7921.

  • 72.

    Chávez-Álvarez, K.; del Carmen Rivera-Cruz, M.; Aceves-Navarro, L.A.; et al. Physiological and microbiological hormesis in sedge Eleocharis palustris induced by crude oil in phytoremediation of flooded clay soil. Ecotoxicology 2022, 31, 1241–1253. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10646-022-02583-x.

  • 73.

    Chávez-Álvarez, K.; del Carmen Rivera-Cruz, M.; Hernández-Mendoza, H.; et al. Rhizosphere and growth responses of Eleocharis mutata in soils affected by fresh and weathered crude oil contamination: Hormesis effects, rhizobacterial stimulation and phytoremediation potential. Ecotoxicology 2026, 35, 153. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10646-026-03135-3.

  • 74.

    Cunha, M.L.O.; Oliveira, L.C.A.; Silva, V.M.; et al. Selenium promotes hormesis in physiological, biochemical, and biological nitrogen fixation traits in cowpea plants. Plant Soil 2024, 501, 555–572. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11104-024-06535-8.

  • 75.

    Jakobsen, I.; Murmann, L.M.; Rosendahl, S. Hormetic responses in arbuscular mycorrhizal fungi. Soil Biol. Biochem. 2021, 159, 108299. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.soilbio.2021.108299.

  • 76.

    Li, X.; Yang, M.; Jones, D.L.; et al. Rhizosphere metabolites and microbial communities shape lettuce responses to oxytetracycline stress. J. Agric. Food Chem. 2026, 74, 2586–2598. https://doi.org/10.1021/acs.jafc.5c10653.

  • 77.

    Erofeeva, E.A. Environmental hormesis of non-specific and specific adaptive mechanisms in plants. Sci. Total Environ. 2022, 804, 150059. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.scitotenv.2021.150059.

Share this article:
Download PDF
DOI
10.53941/eesus.2026.100020
Issue
Volume 2, Issue 3
How to Cite
Agathokleous, E. Transcending Global Change Biology Disciplinary Boundaries through Ecophysiotoxicology. Earth: Environmental Sustainability 2026, 2 (3), 290–300. https://doi.org/10.53941/eesus.2026.100020.
RIS
BibTex
Copyright & License
article copyright Image
Copyright (c) 2026 by the authors.
Article Metrics
104
Article Views
0
Citations