In a world with climate change and environmental pollution, modern Biology is concerned with organismic susceptibility. At the same time, policy and decision makers seek information about organismic susceptibility. Therefore, information about organismic susceptibility may have far-reaching implications to the entire biosphere that can extend to several forthcoming generations. Here, we review a sample of approximately 200 published peer-reviewed articles dealing with plant response to ground-level ozone to understand how the information about susceptibility is communicated. A fuzzy and often incorrect terminology was used to describe the responsiveness of plants to ozone. Susceptibility was classified too arbitrarily and this was reflected to the approximately 50 descriptive words that were used to characterize susceptibility. The classification of susceptibility was commonly based on calculated probability (p) value. This practice is inappropriate as p values do not provide any basis for effect or susceptibility magnitude. To bridge the gap between science and policy decision making, classification of susceptibility should be done using alternative approaches, such as effect size estimates in conjunction with multivariate ordination statistics.

Ground-level ozone (O₃) pollution can adversely affect human health and vegetation, thus being an important environmental issue nowadays. Ozone biological monitoring (biomonitoring) is a method of O₃ monitoring by observing quantitative changes in living organisms physically present in a specific environment. Here, we provide a concise view of the field of O₃ biomonitoring, along with recent advances that are expected to advance this field in the future. We also recommend that O₃ biomonitoring is included in citizen science initiatives as well as in worldwide curricula of educational institutions. Policy-makers and general public may not understand biomonitoring data; hence, a major challenge is how to communicate the information to the audience in a way that permits the best comprehension.

Hormesis is a fundamental notion in ecotoxicology while competition between organisms is an essential notion in population ecology and species adaptation and evolution. Both sub-disciplines of ecology deal with the response of organisms to abiotic and biotic stresses. In ecotoxicology, the Linear-non-Threshold (LNT), Threshold and Hormetic models are used to describe the dominant responses of a plethora of endpoints to abiotic stress. In population ecology, the logistic, theta-logistic and the Allee effect models are used to describe the growth of populations under different responses to (biotic) stress induced by population density. The per capita rate of population increase (r) measures species fitness. When it is used as endpoint, the responses to population density seem to perfectly correspond to LNT, Threshold and Hormetic responses to abiotic stress, respectively. Our analysis suggests the Allee effect is a hormetic-like response of r to population density, an ultimate biotic stress. This biphasic dose-response model appears across different systems and situations (from molecules to tumor growth to population dynamics), is highly supported by ecological and evolutionary theory, and has important implications in most sub-disciplines of biology as well as in environmental and earth sciences. Joined multi-disciplinary efforts would facilitate the development and application of advanced research approaches for better understanding potential planetary-scale implications.

The nature of the dose-response relationship in the low dose zone and how this concept may be used by regulatory agencies for science-based policy guidance and risk assessment practices are addressed here by using the effects of surface ozone (O₃) on plants as a key example for dynamic ecosystems sustainability. This paper evaluates the current use of the linear non-threshold (LNT) dose-response model for O₃. The LNT model has been typically applied in limited field studies which measured damage from high exposures, and used to estimate responses to lower concentrations. This risk assessment strategy ignores the possibility of biological acclimation to low doses of stressor agents. The upregulation of adaptive responses by low O₃ concentrations typically yields pleiotropic responses, with some induced endpoints displaying hormetic-like biphasic dose-response relationships. Such observations recognize the need for risk assessment flexibility depending upon the endpoints measured, background responses, as well as possible dose-time compensatory responses. Regulatory modeling strategies would be significantly improved by the adoption of the hormetic dose response as a formal/routine risk assessment option based on its substantial support within the literature, capacity to describe the entire dose-response continuum, documented explanatory dose-dependent mechanisms, and flexibility to default to a threshold feature when background responses preclude application of biphasic dose responses.